While we all tatter on about whether Moore's Law concerns economical or physical constraints and come up with cure meta-laws concerning predictions to the end of Moore's Law, have any of you really considered what the world will be like after the end of Moore's Law?
Are any of us prepared for Moore's Anarchy which will surely follow?
Why not instead start hiring ironworkers and folks who actually know WTF they're doing in high-up construction techniques? They're still (according to accounts) building the ISS, right?
Maybe because this is the real-world NASA and not a Ben Afflec movie?
Especially unannounced / unapproved updates. Your machine may have been patched while you read this.
Not here. Autoupdate is completely and totally disabled on this machine
Sberbank (Savings Bank of the Russian Federation) is the leader of the Russian banking industry, accounting for over a quarter of national banking assets and remains the largest bank in Russia and Central and Eastern Europe in terms of Tier I capital and assets.
We want to assure our customers and partners that they can continue to rely on SCO products, support and services for their business critical operations
Aside from the lawyers for whom SCO is a source of billable hours, who relies on SCO for any products, support, or services? Are these the same folks looking to George W. for stategic planning? The masses going to Michael Vick for pet care tips? OJ for public relations?
This very topic came up on Dan Savage's advice column, "Savage Love" (see the Onion's AV club site for more details). The best suggestion I saw was from a guy who was hiding porn mags under his mattress as a teenager. Mom found out, and simply replaced them with copies of Good Housekeeping. Best non-lecture ever imparted, no?
Says you. Now whenever I overhear someone talking about having their kitchen redone I leave a wet spot.
Lady to Mechanic: Can you help me to properly operate the seat belts and child safety seats in my car?
Mechanic to Lady: How about you actually raise your child yourself and not rely on technology to do that job for you?
See how silly you sound?
I agree the best path is have the children use a shared family computer set up in a shared space, but that doesn't mean anyone inquiring about technological assistance is a nut job.
A few other folks have said the same thing, and each one deserves to be modded up. Just having the computer in a shared space and using a shared family computer sends the message, if you're worried about the old folks finding out what you're doing, maybe you shouldn't be doing it.
I like this over firewalls and site blockers because it requires some critical thinking--you have the ability to use the computer for any/all purposes, but you also know there's a pretty good chance you'll have to pay the price if you do something you shouldn't. Would you teach your children to drive on an amusement park slot car-type track and then let them loose unsupervised on the freeway?
I also like this because it is low-tech. The IT department for the company should not be the personal IT support for managment. I'm not saying you can't be friendly and offer some advice, but it's nice to avoid that slippery slop if you can. First it's Net Nanny or some such app to control the kid's computer use, then it's cracking Net Nanny when the boss locks herself out of the computer, then it's corporate security paying a little visit to inquire as to why you have password cracking utilities on your computer, then it's sharing space with Milton down in the basement after telling corporate security you spent a day of billable hours working on the boss's personal computer.
I know it hours later, and this'll be at the end of the thread that never gets read, but I just got home to check my XP SP2 machine which has been connected to the internet many times since late August.
The ZDNet guy said his wuapi.dll version was 7.0.something and had screenshots of the event viewer. (Although it I don't think he said which event log--Application, Security, or System)
Anyway, my wuapi.dll version is at 5.4.something and no update event in my logs.
Of course, I've only used windiz for updates and have not updated this machine with Windows Update.
But why would they hire an AMERICAN diamond-in-the-rough, if the Indian diamond -in-the-rough is 1/10th the cost? There's no way to get a foot in the door against absolute advantage.
OK, one employee vs. another with the same skills and 1/10th the cost? Yes, that's rough. It's also fantasy.
First, the cost is not 1/10th.
Second, the increasing shift of industry to countries like India has led to higher standards of living, higher wages, etc. (This is why countries like India are seeing a wave of outsourcing of their own to countries with cheaper wages.)
Third, you still need to supervise your diamond-in-the-rough, you still need project management. And while the internet helps, there is still a real cost for geographical diversity.
Forth, ultimately there are no short cuts to success. You get what you pay for. TANSTAAFL. If the companies business plan is all about saving money through outsourcing, you're better off not getting the job and saving yourself the trouble of going through the lay-offs.
I'm not putting down Indians--they're no worse than Americans. But, in general, they're no better than Americans. Employee costs aside, if the boss can't get the job done with the workers right outside his office, how is he going to manage workers on the other side of the globe?
On the other hand, I'd likely fail your test. I'd be lucky to be able to remember my own name if you asked me to write it down on a whiteboard during an interview.
No, I think he knows what he's testing. And I don't think he's sorry someone like you would get weeded out of the hiring process by such a test.
An interview is not a theoretical exercise in what you have done or what you could do. An interview is a practical exercise in helping to determine what you will do.
If you can't remember your name under the pressure of an interview, how will you perform under a deadline? And keep in mind, companies hire people to do actual stuff, not just make widgets. How would you perform under the pressure of working with bio/medial technology, knowing the loss of a data point on a single device failure may prevent the recall of defective product leading to real people suffering real damages?
I do not doubt any of the accomplishments you list, but to an employer, it's all a big "so what?" Knowledge in your brain is of no use to anyone. It's what comes out of your mouth and from your finger tips that's interesting.
If you happen to have opportunity to wander up the street to Harvard, perhaps we'll show you how real work gets done.;)
But assume that you have a new office, and I wonder whether you have to spend all the money of network connectors, or whether you can just use wireless. In a technical discipline, the answer is most likely no. But say you consider admin staff, or a group of journalists (that prefer to work from Starbucks anyway). I think a WiFi access point could be a lot cheaper than a switch, 10 wires, patch panels, connectors etc.
I'm not as quick to make that assumption. WiFi access points aren't cheaper than ethernet switches. You still need wires and all the infrastructure to connect the access points to your larger network--servers, internet, WANs, etc. On top of that, the client hardware for ethernet is going to cost less than for WiFi.
It's much easier to eavesdrop on WiFi than it is on a wired network.
Not if the WiFi network is configured for reasonable security. Physical access is typically much easier to get than the AES keys.
It's not just about ease of access, it's also about detection. It's very easy to break a window to get into a building, but it is also very easy to detect that type on intrusion. It may be more difficult to crack a WiFi connection, but it also not as obvious when someone is sniffing your packets.
And in any case any security comes down to the weakest link. If that link is physical access, when it comes to the point that I'm in your house standing in front of your computer, how is your security aided by using 802.11n over ethernet? (Other than one less wire for me to unplig before taking your system?)
It seems to me, wireless networking has all the security issues of ethernet and then some.
and if you are a legal paying customer with an actual legit copy of windows, and WGA screws up again like it has in the past?
MS will start bundling activation keys so if your legit windows gets flagged due to an issue with WGA, you'll be able to re-activate with a different key. They'll put 3 to a pack and throw in a ring tone. It'll be called ricenses.
I can get the one song I want, a remix of a song I hated anyhow, some crappy B-side number
If you don't want it, don't buy it. Same with full-length CDs. No, only wanting one song from a CD does not justify illicit downloads anymore than it justifies stealing a physical CD.
With all the options available--CD singles, CD albums, greatest hits collections, "That's What I Call Crap for Your Ears" mixes, online shops with single song downloads, etc.--it is not reasonable to complain that there is no way for you to purchase the music you want.
(FWIW, I have little empathy on the issue perhaps due to out of the many 100s of CDs, cassette tapes, LPs, and 78s I've purchased over the years, in only 1 case did it turn out that the 1 song that prompted the purchase was the only song on the album I liked. Maybe it means I like a better class of musician who is able to come up with more than 1 catchy tune at a time. Maybe it means I have lower standards. Whatever.)
People who balk at paying 99 cents for a song someone how end up paying many times that for just a piece of that same song as a ring tone, so using ring tones to move songs makes sense. The only issue I have is with the name. The thought of someone talking about 'ringles' on their 'blog' makes me want to hit someone in the 'face' with a 'shovel'.
Forget the t-shirts, it should be stamped on every MBA diploma and integrated into every word processor. Finally Clippy has found his purpose!
"It looks you are making a business plan. You do realize no one is obligated to behave in the manner required to make your business profitable, right?"
If things weren't so horribly intrusive and capable of tracking a user's entire internet experience, for the sole purpose of selling you stuff, people wouldn't bitch.
I'm sure there's some fancy latin term for this fallacy, but I'll just call it the War Games defense. (The only winning move is not to play.)
The parent poster is saying if an ad is static text or image--no flash--and doesn't track you past the single page displaying the ad, then it is immoral to block the ad. Interesting.
I say, my stand on blocking ads has nothing to do with the ads. My argument doesn't depend on ads being obtrusive or anything else. I simply say, I control what I download. I choose not to download from certain sources.
You see, I don't get into a debate on types of ads. I don't even really address the issue of ads at all. I just say, I download what I want to download. If I think I'll never have any reason to request data from a domain, I might use a HOSTS file to direct requests for that domain to 0.0.0.0 just to protect myself from any inadvertent requests I may make.
Someone who wants to take the position that there is something wrong with not viewing ads on a web page has to play on my field and explain why the ISP connection and the computer I pay for are obligated to accept someone else's data without my request.
I think of it as taking a magazine and ripping out the ads, then reading it.
Of course the response is, magazine advertising is based on circulation. Presuming you purchased the magazine, your eye balls count even if you rip out the ads.
Web advertising is generally based on ad views or even click through, so if you don't download the ad, you don't count.
Of course the response to the response is, holes in your business model are not my problem. If you can't build a business on providing free content on the web, then don't build a business on providing free content on the web.
This is really a big cirle jerk for all the geeks to go on about flash ads and evil marketing drones and whatever. The interesting conversation is, so what's next?
For example with news, when all the newspapers and old media networks realize there's no money to be made giving away news for free on a web site, what fills that void? Do news sites become subscriber based? Do they just close shop? What happens to aggregators like Google news? Would Google subscribe to wire services to keep news a live as a driver of traffic for other products?
What happens to online communities and sites like/.? When I go to cnn.com I don't care what the other traffic looks like, I just want some news. However, the utility of/. depends on there being a community to provide at least some of the content. Some people pay for/. now. How many would continue to pay for the reduced content on a subscriber-only/.?
In the 50s if you had a problem you were just "funny", if it was too much for the family to handle they'd drop you off at the funny farm and pump you full of drugs.
Tell me more about these funny farms. Do the have conjugal visits?
Slashdot Mirror
While we all tatter on about whether Moore's Law concerns economical or physical constraints and come up with cure meta-laws concerning predictions to the end of Moore's Law, have any of you really considered what the world will be like after the end of Moore's Law?
Are any of us prepared for Moore's Anarchy which will surely follow?
Maybe because this is the real-world NASA and not a Ben Afflec movie?
It is Microsoft, so I won't say 100% sure, but about as sure as I could be.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=296677&cid=20598157
And yet you remember cheking it out of the library twenty years ago. It must have made some impression other than, "this is really stupid."
Wow. That's just...wow.
I appreciate the 'Funny' mods for my snarky comment, but seriously, does this company have any customers left?
I guess you have MS using SCO as a proxy for fighting Linux, but other than that?
Aside from the lawyers for whom SCO is a source of billable hours, who relies on SCO for any products, support, or services? Are these the same folks looking to George W. for stategic planning? The masses going to Michael Vick for pet care tips? OJ for public relations?
Says you. Now whenever I overhear someone talking about having their kitchen redone I leave a wet spot.
I agree the best path is have the children use a shared family computer set up in a shared space, but that doesn't mean anyone inquiring about technological assistance is a nut job.
A few other folks have said the same thing, and each one deserves to be modded up. Just having the computer in a shared space and using a shared family computer sends the message, if you're worried about the old folks finding out what you're doing, maybe you shouldn't be doing it.
I like this over firewalls and site blockers because it requires some critical thinking--you have the ability to use the computer for any/all purposes, but you also know there's a pretty good chance you'll have to pay the price if you do something you shouldn't. Would you teach your children to drive on an amusement park slot car-type track and then let them loose unsupervised on the freeway?
I also like this because it is low-tech. The IT department for the company should not be the personal IT support for managment. I'm not saying you can't be friendly and offer some advice, but it's nice to avoid that slippery slop if you can. First it's Net Nanny or some such app to control the kid's computer use, then it's cracking Net Nanny when the boss locks herself out of the computer, then it's corporate security paying a little visit to inquire as to why you have password cracking utilities on your computer, then it's sharing space with Milton down in the basement after telling corporate security you spent a day of billable hours working on the boss's personal computer.
I know it hours later, and this'll be at the end of the thread that never gets read, but I just got home to check my XP SP2 machine which has been connected to the internet many times since late August.
The ZDNet guy said his wuapi.dll version was 7.0.something and had screenshots of the event viewer. (Although it I don't think he said which event log--Application, Security, or System)
Anyway, my wuapi.dll version is at 5.4.something and no update event in my logs.
Of course, I've only used windiz for updates and have not updated this machine with Windows Update.
FWIW.
Shouldn't that be....oh, I see what you did there.
OK, one employee vs. another with the same skills and 1/10th the cost? Yes, that's rough. It's also fantasy.
First, the cost is not 1/10th.
Second, the increasing shift of industry to countries like India has led to higher standards of living, higher wages, etc. (This is why countries like India are seeing a wave of outsourcing of their own to countries with cheaper wages.)
Third, you still need to supervise your diamond-in-the-rough, you still need project management. And while the internet helps, there is still a real cost for geographical diversity.
Forth, ultimately there are no short cuts to success. You get what you pay for. TANSTAAFL. If the companies business plan is all about saving money through outsourcing, you're better off not getting the job and saving yourself the trouble of going through the lay-offs.
I'm not putting down Indians--they're no worse than Americans. But, in general, they're no better than Americans. Employee costs aside, if the boss can't get the job done with the workers right outside his office, how is he going to manage workers on the other side of the globe?
No, I think he knows what he's testing. And I don't think he's sorry someone like you would get weeded out of the hiring process by such a test.
An interview is not a theoretical exercise in what you have done or what you could do. An interview is a practical exercise in helping to determine what you will do.
If you can't remember your name under the pressure of an interview, how will you perform under a deadline? And keep in mind, companies hire people to do actual stuff, not just make widgets. How would you perform under the pressure of working with bio/medial technology, knowing the loss of a data point on a single device failure may prevent the recall of defective product leading to real people suffering real damages?
I do not doubt any of the accomplishments you list, but to an employer, it's all a big "so what?" Knowledge in your brain is of no use to anyone. It's what comes out of your mouth and from your finger tips that's interesting.
If you happen to have opportunity to wander up the street to Harvard, perhaps we'll show you how real work gets done. ;)
I'm not as quick to make that assumption. WiFi access points aren't cheaper than ethernet switches. You still need wires and all the infrastructure to connect the access points to your larger network--servers, internet, WANs, etc. On top of that, the client hardware for ethernet is going to cost less than for WiFi.
]This UTOPIA you speak of sounds ideal. Does it come with fluffy white bunnies?
No, but it does come with OMFG ponies.
It's not just about ease of access, it's also about detection. It's very easy to break a window to get into a building, but it is also very easy to detect that type on intrusion. It may be more difficult to crack a WiFi connection, but it also not as obvious when someone is sniffing your packets.
And in any case any security comes down to the weakest link. If that link is physical access, when it comes to the point that I'm in your house standing in front of your computer, how is your security aided by using 802.11n over ethernet? (Other than one less wire for me to unplig before taking your system?)
It seems to me, wireless networking has all the security issues of ethernet and then some.
MS will start bundling activation keys so if your legit windows gets flagged due to an issue with WGA, you'll be able to re-activate with a different key. They'll put 3 to a pack and throw in a ring tone. It'll be called ricenses.
If you don't want it, don't buy it. Same with full-length CDs. No, only wanting one song from a CD does not justify illicit downloads anymore than it justifies stealing a physical CD.
With all the options available--CD singles, CD albums, greatest hits collections, "That's What I Call Crap for Your Ears" mixes, online shops with single song downloads, etc.--it is not reasonable to complain that there is no way for you to purchase the music you want.
(FWIW, I have little empathy on the issue perhaps due to out of the many 100s of CDs, cassette tapes, LPs, and 78s I've purchased over the years, in only 1 case did it turn out that the 1 song that prompted the purchase was the only song on the album I liked. Maybe it means I like a better class of musician who is able to come up with more than 1 catchy tune at a time. Maybe it means I have lower standards. Whatever.)
People who balk at paying 99 cents for a song someone how end up paying many times that for just a piece of that same song as a ring tone, so using ring tones to move songs makes sense. The only issue I have is with the name. The thought of someone talking about 'ringles' on their 'blog' makes me want to hit someone in the 'face' with a 'shovel'.
Forget the t-shirts, it should be stamped on every MBA diploma and integrated into every word processor. Finally Clippy has found his purpose!
"It looks you are making a business plan. You do realize no one is obligated to behave in the manner required to make your business profitable, right?"
I'm sure there's some fancy latin term for this fallacy, but I'll just call it the War Games defense. (The only winning move is not to play.)
The parent poster is saying if an ad is static text or image--no flash--and doesn't track you past the single page displaying the ad, then it is immoral to block the ad. Interesting.
I say, my stand on blocking ads has nothing to do with the ads. My argument doesn't depend on ads being obtrusive or anything else. I simply say, I control what I download. I choose not to download from certain sources.
You see, I don't get into a debate on types of ads. I don't even really address the issue of ads at all. I just say, I download what I want to download. If I think I'll never have any reason to request data from a domain, I might use a HOSTS file to direct requests for that domain to 0.0.0.0 just to protect myself from any inadvertent requests I may make.
Someone who wants to take the position that there is something wrong with not viewing ads on a web page has to play on my field and explain why the ISP connection and the computer I pay for are obligated to accept someone else's data without my request.
Of course the response is, magazine advertising is based on circulation. Presuming you purchased the magazine, your eye balls count even if you rip out the ads.
Web advertising is generally based on ad views or even click through, so if you don't download the ad, you don't count.
Of course the response to the response is, holes in your business model are not my problem. If you can't build a business on providing free content on the web, then don't build a business on providing free content on the web.
This is really a big cirle jerk for all the geeks to go on about flash ads and evil marketing drones and whatever. The interesting conversation is, so what's next?
For example with news, when all the newspapers and old media networks realize there's no money to be made giving away news for free on a web site, what fills that void? Do news sites become subscriber based? Do they just close shop? What happens to aggregators like Google news? Would Google subscribe to wire services to keep news a live as a driver of traffic for other products?
What happens to online communities and sites like /.? When I go to cnn.com I don't care what the other traffic looks like, I just want some news. However, the utility of /. depends on there being a community to provide at least some of the content. Some people pay for /. now. How many would continue to pay for the reduced content on a subscriber-only /.?
Or to the Hall of Fame.
Tell me more about these funny farms. Do the have conjugal visits?