No. When I first started using the term 'rootkit', a rootkit implemented an exploit to enable you to acquire root access.
The point of the rootkit was that it allowed a relatively inexperienced attacker to automate exploitation of vulnerabilities.
Maybe you use the term a different way; that makes neither of us inherently right. It certainly doesn't mean the article mis-used the term any more than either of us.
A given rootkit may well do more than that, and evading detection would be a great value-added extra, but making a running process harder to detect is not the core feature of a rootkit.
Even if the jargon file says it is.
What problems with the internet?
on
Tier One ISPs Dying
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
I haven't had any problems with 'net access today.
My web based email has been fine, the usual news sites I access have been available, wikipedia and dictionary.com were both around, a couple of message boards and special interest sites have responded ok.
Email hasn't been disrupted for me either. I haven't tried anything other than email and http, but I use other protocols rather less.
Maybe some people in America are having problems. Welcome to the world, it's great out here.
That's odd. I use Windows XP at home and have no spyware at all installed. Maybe you're doing something wrong?
I do however have cygwin, giving me access to 90% of the unix commands I ever use, I have all the software I need, all of it legally acquired, none of it paid for (other than the OS), and I can install and play the games I like (which are the only software I _do_ pay for).
Windows sucked mightily in the past. There's a lot that could be done to improve it now. However, it meets my needs better than the alternatives sufficiently for me to specify it when I bought a new box earlier this year. Heck, it's the only non-gaming software I'm currently prepared to pay money for - and that scares me..
Re:It's meant to counter supercavitation torpedoes
on
Sonic Torpedo Defense
·
· Score: 1
>> That "advertising" involves knowingly injecting faulty data
Injecting seems strong - they're not actually pushing the data, merely allowing it to be pulled.
And they have a very solid case for stating that the data is not faulty. Indeed, as copyright owners they are in the best position to provide data that accurately meets the claims advertised by the torrent.
I'm not trying to defend corporate vigilantism. If they initiate a connection to your computer and damage or destroy data on it, then demand criminal proceedings and civil redress.
However, if you connect to their computer asking for data that represents something they hold copyright on, whatever they send you is by default the correct data. If you can't use it, then seek civil redress for breach of contract - you do have a contract with them, don't you? You have given them something tangible in return for their valuable data? You have given them cause to act in good faith on this data transfer?
If the answer to any of those questions is 'yes' then I'm sure they'll be delighted to assist you in interpreting the data they provide. Try asking.
Until then, they've done nothing wrong. Campaign to get the law changed, to get suitable restraints on ownership of IP, to make BitTorrent a legally binding contract. But don't accuse them of tampering with your computer.
>> What on earth does producing a live album have to do with what I stated? It's an ALBUM! I'm talking about live performance in person or over the Net.
Whoa. You want musicians to earn money from live performance only?
My time is too constrained to book out an hour or two to listen to a concert. Worse still, U2 aren't prepared to play for 16 hours today, which is how long it's going to take me to get through the Rattle 'n' Hum CD because I'm being distracted by work all the time so I'm listening for ten minutes at a time.
Time shifting is worth paying for. And if I'm paying to time-shift a performance, maybe I want to get the engineered studio performance.
A live album is no different to an Internet based live performance, except that I'm in control of it, not the server. And it's still not as good as the studio recorded albums. And Muse just aren't going to come round to my house to play at 4am while I'm gaming unless I pay them substantially more money than I actually have.
>> If they want to just sit back and produce studio albums, they'd better come up with a business model that get them paid without live performance, because the existing one doesn't work without coercion from the law.
Oddly enough, there's a business model that works as follows: - produce studio album - mass produce large number of CDs - sell those CDs in retail outlets (on and offline) - buy new guitar and blue smarties
That business model does not need coercion from the law. A lot of people make a lot of money from following it. Maybe it's starting to earn them less money, due to alternative distribution mechanisms; nonetheless it still works.
Your position is, frankly, ludicrous. People can, do and will make money producing studio recordings. They may or may not make more money through live performance. Don't demand they follow one approach or the other. Choose instead how to spend your money.
Ironically Muse aren't benefitting from my CD purchases now as I'm buying second-hand as a direct result of the P2P related legal games being played by the music industry. Then again, they're not making money from my through live performance. They are making money through broadcast of their music on radio and television, through use of their music as background to sporting events, etc. Oddly enough, it's all studio music that is used for these things - not the live performance.
Then again, I first encountered Muse on a television music channel, so it was something they earn money from that generated my interest, and back then I did buy CDs new. So they have earned income that way from me. Oh look - a studio recording earned them money with no legal coercion. Crikey, that might be a viable business model.
Bullshit. Total utter bullshit. Stop spouting such nonsense.
In Great Britain all handguns were made illegal following the "Dunblane Massacre". Immediately following that ban gun crime went up by 40% (see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1440764.stm). So using GB as an example of "lower gun crime rates" where there are "draconian laws" is an outright lie.
Further to that, Canada has a massive number of firearms available to the general populace. It also has a far lower murder rate than the US.
If you want greater restrictions on the availability, storage, use and control of firearms, great. I don't have a problem with that. But do check out the basics before making up facts.
As for banning video game sales to children: Create an independent body (equivalent to the MPAA - but independent) that gives each game a rating, and sell the games based on those ratings. GTA stops being available to 10 year olds, Mario is rated "too crap to sell" and everybody is happy.
~Cederic
Re:It's meant to counter supercavitation torpedoes
on
Sonic Torpedo Defense
·
· Score: 1
>>> that particular weapon wasn't suited to non-nuclear use because it can't steer well inside it's bubble and it's so noisy it can't home on a target.
Sure, because missing by 50 yards makes a nuke useless.
While I don't have a SonyEricsson myself (I'm using a Treo at the moment) I know a few people who do have the earlier versions of this phone.
They love it. It's great. It does what it's meant to do, looks just fine, doesn't go wrong, doesn't break.
I'm going to look seriously at this thing, because although the Treo is great as a PDA, it's somewhat lacking as a phone, and this meets my key criteria of phone/pda/wifi/qwerty keyboard all on one device. I have limited pocket space, and this meets the need.
Or maybe some bands can't be bothered with the stress, boredom, physicality of touring. Maybe they don't like having to perform live. Maybe they play music that doesn't translate well to a live environment. Maybe they don't want to take the risk of booking a large venue.
Maybe they should be able to earn a living from the work they put into recording, mixing and producing their albums.
Heck, Muse are the brightest new rock band around at the moment. They've released a live album. It's just not as good as their three studio albums. There's no way they can use studio recordings as a loss leader for the live performance, as they'll just end up making a loss.
That doesn't mean I wont go and see them live. There's a different dynamic when you _attend_ a live performance. But on the CD recording, that isn't there. And without it, the carefully produced and tuned sound of the studio albums wins out.
It's not hacking. They're advertising that you can download data from them. If you choose to do so then they'll provide data to you.
That the data isn't what you expect is unfortunate. There's a quality gap but that's not illegal.
They're not connecting to you and pushing data at you. They're not attempting to subvert your PC. They're not executing code anywhere other than their own servers. They're doing very little wrong.
They are declining to play nicely and follow the protocol you're attempting to use. That's a reputation issue, and one that needs to be resolved. But there's nothing that says they have to play nicely, and implement the protocol properly. So don't expect them to, and don't accuse them of illegal actions when they don't.
If they attempt a form of vigilante justice that does transgress the law, then I'll join calls for them to be prosecuted. Merely giving you data that isn't what you wanted isn't a transgression, and can thus not be prosecuted.
Heck, to take a thoroughly corporate view, they own copyright on 'Rome', so surely they're the people that can specify which data _should_ be provided through a torrent to give you the copy that they want to share. They're actually doing you a favour and giving you the official copy and not some encoded fascimile provided by an unreliable source.
People are just being picky in wanting the unreliable version because it's more likely to let them watch the program in question. Ironic really.
>> Incidentally, is it just me or does it seem odd that they're targeting Word BEFORE Exchange?
Before, or concurrently? GMail takes on half of exchange, just the calendar side to go..
>> I used Corel Wordperfect for Java, man. It wasn't a usable tool.
That's odd. I used Windows 3.0. It wasn't a usable tool.
Don't draw conclusions from 7 year old technology. Not in this industry.
I agree though - it'll be great to see what Google can do to improve the UI of basic Office apps, and it'll definitely challenge the responsiveness of AJAX apps (if they use that technology).
>> Now, if you don't believe in God, what in the hell are you reading the Bible for? There is absolutely nothing in the Bible for an athiest or a Heathen, save the possibility of finding God.
Same reason I read stories about King Arthur, or Robin Hood, or Beowulf, or the ancient Greek gods. Never let religious dogma get in the way of a good work of fiction.
Of course, Homer was a far more accomplished wordsmith than most of the authors of the bible. Or maybe their linguistic brilliance has been lost in translation.
>> Please, for the love of God, don't you believe they have anything to do with the content or teachings of the Bible, either
Please, don't you believe the content or teachings of the Bible either.
Lets face it, the bible is merely a collection of myths, legends and fables. Anybody attempting to use it as the basis for religion has clear problems - as demonstrated by various major world religions.
It's no use pleading with anybody to do something "for the love of god" when you don't specify which god, or why we might want to think it could possibly exist.
These are all fair points. That's why the architecture must be carefully managed.
However, in practice, you will have different functionality being provided by different teams. You will often have functionality provided by different COTS systems.
If they all focus on provided services according to a document SOA architecture, that makes re-use of those services and integration into other services considerably simpler.
It wont solve the issues you've raised - but it'll solve a lot of others.
Sure, SOA has flaws. It's also just a simple term describing the current industry best-approach to handling complex enterprise environments.
>> For instance, directly coupled database to webpage data-linking, including the ability to manipulate date with next to no programming. Please tell me how this can be done
wtf? ASP.net's primary market is commercial website development. People serving that market really should not be directly coupling web pages to the underlying data.
Have you heard of MVC? Of Front-Controller? Of de-coupled code? Of maintainability?
ASP.net may well be the dogs bollocks, but that's no excuse to use it to write bollocks code.
Without commenting whether the article was, shall we say, sponsored by a certain software company, TCO _is_ exceedingly important to a company.
In my job I recommend software purchases for my firm. We're a big company and I'm currently looking at introducing a new piece of software that'll cost us an 8 digit sum _each year_ in support and licence costs alone.
It'll replace part of another mainframe system we're running. As that system is in place, and we own and maintain it, we could extend its functionality to match the third-party COTS software. Or we could spend a lot of money building interfaces between the two, and that humungous annual licence/support cost.
Although as an architect skillsets, delivery timescales, business opoortunity and risk are all factors, in a cost-conscious organisation we also must take into account the relative costs of the systems.
That's where TCO comes in. Frankly, I don't give a shit what the OS licence costs are. They'd have to be hitting five figure sums per box per year to even hit the radar. Compared to the cost of an IBM mainframe, Oracle licences, this third party COTS software, support and development staff, our in-house hosting costs, our external hosting costs, management overhead, implementation and deployment costs..
When you're getting in something like SAP you need to understand TCO. It can (and often is) a "bet your business" decision. You don't need to be sponsored by any third party to know that.
It's because basic network administration is so easy that the good IT staff move on to more difficult things.
The more advanced network administration is so hard that very few people can do it, and so those few are snapped up at high salaries by the few companies that can afford them.
I know some great IT administrators. They've all moved into IT architecture or started their own businesses - it's the only way to continue improving salary levels.
Pay these people what they're worth, and you'll find them. Pay them what you think someone with your networking skills is worth and anybody capable of doing that will be doing your job instead.
That's odd. You mean I imagined the police before July 7th?
You mean keeping someones DNA on file permanently didn't happen before September 2001?
You mean arresting someone, stealing their personal belongings, imprisoning them overnight and searching their home will help prevent terrorism?
Dream on.
I haven't turned on my country. It's because I haven't turned on my country that I do not support the current anti-terror legislation, I do not support the heavy-handed policing we're suffering, I do not agree with the hysteria drummed up by politicians intent on expanding their own power.
If you do support these things, then get the fuck out of my country.
I get paid to think. So give me the time to think.
If I'm waiting all the time for my computer to do things, because its disks are slower, its memory inadequate, the CPU fully utilised, I'm not being productive. I think, and then I act. The quicker that action completes, the sooner I can get back to thinking.
If my screen is large, I can do more on it. I can fit larger diagrams, when documenting designs and architectures. I can fit a larger block of text onscreen, which means I can see more of the code I'm changing, which allows me to take into account far more context about that code, and I write better code.
If my desk is spacious then I can leave several tools and papers close to hand. I have ERDs, API specs, technical books, plain empty paper, a casio calculator, drinks, toys, phone all within easy reach.
This isn't overkill. This isn't about being cool. This is about $2000 worth of expenditure to maximise the productivity of a $90k/year employee.
Does this mean I can't get work done on an old, slow laptop while stuck on a train? Of course I can work there. I just wont work as well.
Give me kit that helps me do my job well. Give me the cash I deserve too.
Slashdot Mirror
No. When I first started using the term 'rootkit', a rootkit implemented an exploit to enable you to acquire root access.
The point of the rootkit was that it allowed a relatively inexperienced attacker to automate exploitation of vulnerabilities.
Maybe you use the term a different way; that makes neither of us inherently right. It certainly doesn't mean the article mis-used the term any more than either of us.
Rootkits get you root.
That's pretty much it.
A given rootkit may well do more than that, and evading detection would be a great value-added extra, but making a running process harder to detect is not the core feature of a rootkit.
Even if the jargon file says it is.
I haven't had any problems with 'net access today.
My web based email has been fine, the usual news sites I access have been available, wikipedia and dictionary.com were both around, a couple of message boards and special interest sites have responded ok.
Email hasn't been disrupted for me either. I haven't tried anything other than email and http, but I use other protocols rather less.
Maybe some people in America are having problems. Welcome to the world, it's great out here.
That's odd. I use Windows XP at home and have no spyware at all installed. Maybe you're doing something wrong?
I do however have cygwin, giving me access to 90% of the unix commands I ever use, I have all the software I need, all of it legally acquired, none of it paid for (other than the OS), and I can install and play the games I like (which are the only software I _do_ pay for).
Windows sucked mightily in the past. There's a lot that could be done to improve it now. However, it meets my needs better than the alternatives sufficiently for me to specify it when I bought a new box earlier this year. Heck, it's the only non-gaming software I'm currently prepared to pay money for - and that scares me..
Hmm. Who put the word 'non' in there?
More accurately, why didn't I read it. Doh.
>> That "advertising" involves knowingly injecting faulty data
Injecting seems strong - they're not actually pushing the data, merely allowing it to be pulled.
And they have a very solid case for stating that the data is not faulty. Indeed, as copyright owners they are in the best position to provide data that accurately meets the claims advertised by the torrent.
I'm not trying to defend corporate vigilantism. If they initiate a connection to your computer and damage or destroy data on it, then demand criminal proceedings and civil redress.
However, if you connect to their computer asking for data that represents something they hold copyright on, whatever they send you is by default the correct data. If you can't use it, then seek civil redress for breach of contract - you do have a contract with them, don't you? You have given them something tangible in return for their valuable data? You have given them cause to act in good faith on this data transfer?
If the answer to any of those questions is 'yes' then I'm sure they'll be delighted to assist you in interpreting the data they provide. Try asking.
Until then, they've done nothing wrong. Campaign to get the law changed, to get suitable restraints on ownership of IP, to make BitTorrent a legally binding contract. But don't accuse them of tampering with your computer.
>> What on earth does producing a live album have to do with what I stated? It's an ALBUM! I'm talking about live performance in person or over the Net.
Whoa. You want musicians to earn money from live performance only?
My time is too constrained to book out an hour or two to listen to a concert. Worse still, U2 aren't prepared to play for 16 hours today, which is how long it's going to take me to get through the Rattle 'n' Hum CD because I'm being distracted by work all the time so I'm listening for ten minutes at a time.
Time shifting is worth paying for. And if I'm paying to time-shift a performance, maybe I want to get the engineered studio performance.
A live album is no different to an Internet based live performance, except that I'm in control of it, not the server. And it's still not as good as the studio recorded albums. And Muse just aren't going to come round to my house to play at 4am while I'm gaming unless I pay them substantially more money than I actually have.
>> If they want to just sit back and produce studio albums, they'd better come up with a business model that get them paid without live performance, because the existing one doesn't work without coercion from the law.
Oddly enough, there's a business model that works as follows:
- produce studio album
- mass produce large number of CDs
- sell those CDs in retail outlets (on and offline)
- buy new guitar and blue smarties
That business model does not need coercion from the law. A lot of people make a lot of money from following it. Maybe it's starting to earn them less money, due to alternative distribution mechanisms; nonetheless it still works.
Your position is, frankly, ludicrous. People can, do and will make money producing studio recordings. They may or may not make more money through live performance. Don't demand they follow one approach or the other. Choose instead how to spend your money.
Ironically Muse aren't benefitting from my CD purchases now as I'm buying second-hand as a direct result of the P2P related legal games being played by the music industry. Then again, they're not making money from my through live performance. They are making money through broadcast of their music on radio and television, through use of their music as background to sporting events, etc. Oddly enough, it's all studio music that is used for these things - not the live performance.
Then again, I first encountered Muse on a television music channel, so it was something they earn money from that generated my interest, and back then I did buy CDs new. So they have earned income that way from me. Oh look - a studio recording earned them money with no legal coercion. Crikey, that might be a viable business model.
Sounds like he went wrong by trying to run on the motorcycle, not ride it..
Bullshit. Total utter bullshit. Stop spouting such nonsense.
In Great Britain all handguns were made illegal following the "Dunblane Massacre". Immediately following that ban gun crime went up by 40% (see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1440764.stm). So using GB as an example of "lower gun crime rates" where there are "draconian laws" is an outright lie.
Further to that, Canada has a massive number of firearms available to the general populace. It also has a far lower murder rate than the US.
If you want greater restrictions on the availability, storage, use and control of firearms, great. I don't have a problem with that. But do check out the basics before making up facts.
As for banning video game sales to children: Create an independent body (equivalent to the MPAA - but independent) that gives each game a rating, and sell the games based on those ratings. GTA stops being available to 10 year olds, Mario is rated "too crap to sell" and everybody is happy.
~Cederic
>>> that particular weapon wasn't suited to non-nuclear use because it can't steer well inside it's bubble and it's so noisy it can't home on a target.
Sure, because missing by 50 yards makes a nuke useless.
While I don't have a SonyEricsson myself (I'm using a Treo at the moment) I know a few people who do have the earlier versions of this phone.
They love it. It's great. It does what it's meant to do, looks just fine, doesn't go wrong, doesn't break.
I'm going to look seriously at this thing, because although the Treo is great as a PDA, it's somewhat lacking as a phone, and this meets my key criteria of phone/pda/wifi/qwerty keyboard all on one device. I have limited pocket space, and this meets the need.
>> Want to buy a PDA that's compatible with your memory sticks? Sorry, Sony got out of that market.
That's a comical statement to make replying to a Slashdot article about a new.... Sony PDA. Which takes memory sticks.
Or maybe some bands can't be bothered with the stress, boredom, physicality of touring. Maybe they don't like having to perform live. Maybe they play music that doesn't translate well to a live environment. Maybe they don't want to take the risk of booking a large venue.
Maybe they should be able to earn a living from the work they put into recording, mixing and producing their albums.
Heck, Muse are the brightest new rock band around at the moment. They've released a live album. It's just not as good as their three studio albums. There's no way they can use studio recordings as a loss leader for the live performance, as they'll just end up making a loss.
That doesn't mean I wont go and see them live. There's a different dynamic when you _attend_ a live performance. But on the CD recording, that isn't there. And without it, the carefully produced and tuned sound of the studio albums wins out.
It's not hacking. They're advertising that you can download data from them. If you choose to do so then they'll provide data to you.
That the data isn't what you expect is unfortunate. There's a quality gap but that's not illegal.
They're not connecting to you and pushing data at you. They're not attempting to subvert your PC. They're not executing code anywhere other than their own servers. They're doing very little wrong.
They are declining to play nicely and follow the protocol you're attempting to use. That's a reputation issue, and one that needs to be resolved. But there's nothing that says they have to play nicely, and implement the protocol properly. So don't expect them to, and don't accuse them of illegal actions when they don't.
If they attempt a form of vigilante justice that does transgress the law, then I'll join calls for them to be prosecuted. Merely giving you data that isn't what you wanted isn't a transgression, and can thus not be prosecuted.
Heck, to take a thoroughly corporate view, they own copyright on 'Rome', so surely they're the people that can specify which data _should_ be provided through a torrent to give you the copy that they want to share. They're actually doing you a favour and giving you the official copy and not some encoded fascimile provided by an unreliable source.
People are just being picky in wanting the unreliable version because it's more likely to let them watch the program in question. Ironic really.
That's odd. I don't see the US invading Saudi Arabia to free their women.
>> Incidentally, is it just me or does it seem odd that they're targeting Word BEFORE Exchange?
Before, or concurrently? GMail takes on half of exchange, just the calendar side to go..
>> I used Corel Wordperfect for Java, man. It wasn't a usable tool.
That's odd. I used Windows 3.0. It wasn't a usable tool.
Don't draw conclusions from 7 year old technology. Not in this industry.
I agree though - it'll be great to see what Google can do to improve the UI of basic Office apps, and it'll definitely challenge the responsiveness of AJAX apps (if they use that technology).
Printing could be fun too..
>> Now, if you don't believe in God, what in the hell are you reading the Bible for? There is absolutely nothing in the Bible for an athiest or a Heathen, save the possibility of finding God.
Same reason I read stories about King Arthur, or Robin Hood, or Beowulf, or the ancient Greek gods. Never let religious dogma get in the way of a good work of fiction.
Of course, Homer was a far more accomplished wordsmith than most of the authors of the bible. Or maybe their linguistic brilliance has been lost in translation.
>> Please, for the love of God, don't you believe they have anything to do with the content or teachings of the Bible, either
Please, don't you believe the content or teachings of the Bible either.
Lets face it, the bible is merely a collection of myths, legends and fables. Anybody attempting to use it as the basis for religion has clear problems - as demonstrated by various major world religions.
It's no use pleading with anybody to do something "for the love of god" when you don't specify which god, or why we might want to think it could possibly exist.
These are all fair points. That's why the architecture must be carefully managed.
However, in practice, you will have different functionality being provided by different teams. You will often have functionality provided by different COTS systems.
If they all focus on provided services according to a document SOA architecture, that makes re-use of those services and integration into other services considerably simpler.
It wont solve the issues you've raised - but it'll solve a lot of others.
Sure, SOA has flaws. It's also just a simple term describing the current industry best-approach to handling complex enterprise environments.
>> For instance, directly coupled database to webpage data-linking, including the ability to manipulate date with next to no programming. Please tell me how this can be done
wtf? ASP.net's primary market is commercial website development. People serving that market really should not be directly coupling web pages to the underlying data.
Have you heard of MVC? Of Front-Controller? Of de-coupled code? Of maintainability?
ASP.net may well be the dogs bollocks, but that's no excuse to use it to write bollocks code.
Without commenting whether the article was, shall we say, sponsored by a certain software company, TCO _is_ exceedingly important to a company.
In my job I recommend software purchases for my firm. We're a big company and I'm currently looking at introducing a new piece of software that'll cost us an 8 digit sum _each year_ in support and licence costs alone.
It'll replace part of another mainframe system we're running. As that system is in place, and we own and maintain it, we could extend its functionality to match the third-party COTS software. Or we could spend a lot of money building interfaces between the two, and that humungous annual licence/support cost.
Although as an architect skillsets, delivery timescales, business opoortunity and risk are all factors, in a cost-conscious organisation we also must take into account the relative costs of the systems.
That's where TCO comes in. Frankly, I don't give a shit what the OS licence costs are. They'd have to be hitting five figure sums per box per year to even hit the radar. Compared to the cost of an IBM mainframe, Oracle licences, this third party COTS software, support and development staff, our in-house hosting costs, our external hosting costs, management overhead, implementation and deployment costs..
When you're getting in something like SAP you need to understand TCO. It can (and often is) a "bet your business" decision. You don't need to be sponsored by any third party to know that.
It's because basic network administration is so easy that the good IT staff move on to more difficult things.
The more advanced network administration is so hard that very few people can do it, and so those few are snapped up at high salaries by the few companies that can afford them.
I know some great IT administrators. They've all moved into IT architecture or started their own businesses - it's the only way to continue improving salary levels.
Pay these people what they're worth, and you'll find them. Pay them what you think someone with your networking skills is worth and anybody capable of doing that will be doing your job instead.
That's odd. You mean I imagined the police before July 7th?
You mean keeping someones DNA on file permanently didn't happen before September 2001?
You mean arresting someone, stealing their personal belongings, imprisoning them overnight and searching their home will help prevent terrorism?
Dream on.
I haven't turned on my country. It's because I haven't turned on my country that I do not support the current anti-terror legislation, I do not support the heavy-handed policing we're suffering, I do not agree with the hysteria drummed up by politicians intent on expanding their own power.
If you do support these things, then get the fuck out of my country.
>> Humanity cannot destry earth, as in the 8,000 mile sphere of iron and rock.
Of course we can. We just don't _want_ to.
I'm not saying it'd be easy. And it may take some time. And you'd need to define 'destroy'. But yeah, it can be done.
I get paid to think. So give me the time to think.
If I'm waiting all the time for my computer to do things, because its disks are slower, its memory inadequate, the CPU fully utilised, I'm not being productive. I think, and then I act. The quicker that action completes, the sooner I can get back to thinking.
If my screen is large, I can do more on it. I can fit larger diagrams, when documenting designs and architectures. I can fit a larger block of text onscreen, which means I can see more of the code I'm changing, which allows me to take into account far more context about that code, and I write better code.
If my desk is spacious then I can leave several tools and papers close to hand. I have ERDs, API specs, technical books, plain empty paper, a casio calculator, drinks, toys, phone all within easy reach.
This isn't overkill. This isn't about being cool. This is about $2000 worth of expenditure to maximise the productivity of a $90k/year employee.
Does this mean I can't get work done on an old, slow laptop while stuck on a train? Of course I can work there. I just wont work as well.
Give me kit that helps me do my job well. Give me the cash I deserve too.