I'm sure that was from the marketing dept, just like how you pointed out everything is now lo carb/no trans fat and my personal favorite Xtreme.
i need an Xtreme computer. i do lots of Xtreme programming so i need plenty of computing power when getting wicked air. perhaps you have seen my work in the latest mountain dew commercial?
There are also too many flavors of ice cream. I mean, with the hundreds of flavors around, how can businesses buying ice cream for their employees ever narrow it to just a few flavors that their employees will likely approve of? The choice is just too difficult.
i agree, in fact, i would say that there are too many restaurants in general. do we really need to distinguish between mexican and cuban food? do we really need different pizza chains? don't get me started on burger chains. why can't we all just be happy with mcdonald's and domino's and move on? if you want to get exotic, just go eat at taco bell. why do we need food from all of these different places like india? how am i supposed to choose what's right for myself and my family?
.
there really are too many choices. i don't have time to think for myself, let alone research and experiment to figure out what works for me. there should just be just one or two things to eat all the time. my vote is for chicken wings and beer.
i am afraid that if all of this "choice" might spread to other areas, like music or television. there really needs to be some sort of law passed.
why not run a VM with Windows (to analyze) on a box running Linux? I'd be very interested if someone manages to do the feat of creating a piece of malware that manages to break out of the sandbox and then run on a machine with a completely different operating system.
you are right, the point of using virtualization is to isolate applications from one another and the host operating system, but that is not the only security feature provided by virtualization.
the article fails to mention that most virtualization packages let you take snapshots of a running system and move machines to and from different physical hosts.
the worst hypothetical case would be for malware to break out of the VM and infect the host, causing the host to infect other VMs. malware would have to break out of the compromised VM, break into the host, and then break back into the other VMs running on the host... now my brain hurts:-(
even if this "doomsday scenario" were to come to pass the damage done could be mitigated thanks to virtualization. once a VM was determined to be infected, you could stop it in place and check your host. if the host is determined to be infected, you could stop all your other VMs and migrate them to an alternate host which is known to be malware free. any infected hosts could be restored from non-infected snapshots as soon as the files were copied to the proper location.
If you wanna throw another stick between the malware's feet, run the VM on a non-i386 architecture. If someone manages to break out of THAT and manages to hijack my machine, he really earned it and should get it.
i think that emulating one chip architecture while running on another would impact performance significantly. i used to use kju to run a win2k machine on my mac G5 tower and the machine worked but it was hella slow. winXP on an intel based macbook pro was significantly faster.
Simply because you are being even worse than the government or media at overusing the word terrorist. For fuck sake people, everyone you dislike is NOT a terrorist. There's nothing wrong with being pissed at the government, especially our current one, but calling them terrorists is the height of stupidity and is to buy in to the very crap they are selling.
If the thought of calculus makes you wince, do the world a favor and stay the hell out of anything having to do with computers.
contrary to what your math teacher told you in the 80's, you don't need algebra or above to do most modern computing tasks, even IT. CS of course, is another story. i am sure there has to be something in the IT field that requires serious math other than coding, scripting, and determining IP subnets, but nothing readily comes to mind.
in fact, aside from the logic needed to troubleshoot problems and feeling smarter than the people that you support, there isn't much need for advanced math in the IT field. sure, you need good math skills to be a world class IT cowboy, but for most of us 9to5 cogs in the corporate IT machine, advanced math is superfluous.
if algorithms make your heart beat faster, then go for cs.
if the thought of calculus makes you wince, go for IT.
regardless of the actual presence of math in either field, a CS curriculum will be much heavier on math *stuff*.
another option that is emerging in some colleges in the US are "media" programs that focus on content for the web. these are creative programs that focus on the web with opportunities to focus on design, graphics, writing, or A/V production for delivery to the web.
That said, if you want to do a mish mosh of just about anything you want to look at a smaller company that has a small IT team or maybe a start-up but start-ups eventually grow (or die) and you might find your self having to pick a role. Your other option here could also be contract work, it's a great way to do varying things provided you're only landed quick contracts.
those are the two options that have served me best in the past... just make sure that your interpersonal skills are up to task. small companies and contract positions require work with diverse groups of people who may or may not be very technical. if you can't make friends and build a rapport with your customers/teammates super fast, you will be lugging around and installing PCs for the rest of your career. if you have the grips to stick with contracting in spite of the perpetual job searching, you can go into consulting at some point.
another option is to work as a lab rat or QA for a software company. gigs like that are hard to land anywhere but the west coast, but if you have decent systems AND scripting/coding skills you can put yourself in a unique position as the goto guy for everyone else. most testers i have worked with are dev wannabes and want to quickly grow up to be real devs. the QA teams in the shops i have worked for had a fair amount of turnover. being dedicated to life in the lab can land you in charge of said lab before too long.
I hope the FCC is given the freedom to do it's job for a change.
judging by it's behavior in the last two years, i would say the FCC's job is to be the Telcos' bitch. thus far, they have had plenty of freedom to do their job and they doing it well.
The benefits of a a free and open Internet far outweigh the inefficiencies of working with a basically unmanaged network.
you mean the benefits to the consumer. this in no way benefits AT&T. if the internet was just a big dumb pipe then anyone could get into the internet service business by simply connecting lines to backbones, which would be disastrous for AT&T.
a wide open, data-centric, unmanaged network might be perfect for network applications, but it would be a killing blow to the profit margins currently enjoyed by the industry. a complex and over managed network is far more profitable and far less likely to foster competition, and is therefore more far more desirable to the likes of AT&T.
he question is: How do we decide what traffic is more important on the Internet?
the answer is simple: the highest bidder has the most important traffic. if you want your traffic to be important, outbid the highest bidder.
Who pays? Who pays more?
again, very simple: everyone. everyone will pay. then they will pay more. after all, they own the net.
The point of the Internet is to have a network where anything is possible.
that may be, but the point of internet service is to make as much profit as possible while taking as little risk as possible, and investing as little capital as possible.
net neutrality is a symptom of competition. there is very little competition in the telco and cableco industries so there is very little net neutrality. if there were sufficient competition in the market, net neutrality would not be a debate, it would be a fact of life.
I for one dual boot so for purposes of this attempt at a survey am I half of a linux user? I use several devices with embedded Linux distros so am I 80% Linux user? Does the device need to be capable of browsing to a webpage or (as is cliche on/.) does it just have to run Linux?
rather than count a person as a "linux user" or a "windows user" i suggest we adopt an OS usage classification system similar to the kinsey scale. in your case you would be a 3:-)
who else remembers Wordperfect, Wordstar, etc. The good old days when you do everything with a keyboard, and keyboard commands.
didn't word perfect have a plastic overlay thing to show you what all the keys did? wasn't all the keyboard stuff because wordperfect originated in DOS before the mouse as a mandatory component?
Unless they were to know otherwise, the pictures and iTunes music was not 'stolen'. That is a very bad and overly false assumption to make.
all media stored on a PC is stolen, just ask the movie and music industries. if the media weren't stolen, it wouldn't be stored on a PC since the rightful owner would have the proprietary physical format and a receipt showing that the full retail price was paid.
You also know that, while it should never be used alone, security through obscurity is a valid practice to make hackers jobs more difficult?
in the military, an infantry fighting position is supposed to be both covered and concealed... meaning that you shouldn't be able to find the position to attack it and if it were attacked, it should physically protect the people inside. concealment is not cover. cover is not concealment.
the thing about cover and concealment (like security and obscurity) is that while concealment (obscurity) can let you avoid detection, and the resulting contact with the enemy, cover (security) is what will save you in the event of detection. once your concealment is gone, it's gone for good and you have to rely on cover and cover alone. obviously, it is more efficient to avoid detection, but it is safer to be secured against attack.
fortunately, obscurity and security are not mutually exclusive. something can be BOTH secret AND secure.
So what you're really saying is, "Government is returning to its roots" and that is correct.
government censorship and copyright go hand in hand.
copyright originally started as a government sponsored censorship program as the excerpt from this article states:
The first copyright law was a 1556 censorship statute in England. It granted the Company of Stationers, a London guild, exclusive rights to own and run printing presses. Company members registered books under their own name, not the author's name, and these registrations could be transferred or sold only to other Company members. In exchange for their government-granted monopoly on the book trade, the Stationers aided the government's censors, by controlling what was printed, and by searching out illegal presses and books -- they even had the right to burn unauthorized books and destroy presses. They were, in effect, a private, for-profit information police force.
so, in the UK, the government granting copyright terms in order to censor the works is a return to the roots of copyright.
that's the spirit! for maximum irony we need a fairly anti-science group who opposes the idea that temperatures change, then have the opposition group change tactics in order to be considered more scientific. hillarity ensues when someone comes forward and says the laws of thermodynamics "are more like guidelines than actual laws.":-):-)
now that is interesting. all of the propaganda that i have seen about intelligent design (which i will admit is not much) is that it is a change in stance to be more scientific.
it's a bit specious to claim that if a science doesn't change its theories, it must somehow be suspect.
i didn't claim that it was suspect, i claimed that it was ironic. i think that if a group opposes the idea that animals change over long periods of time, but then over time changes it's thinking, while another group that supports the idea of animals changing but does not actually change is rather ironic.
the expected outcome would be that a person who opposes the idea of change would not change, while the person who supports the idea of change would change. at least, that's the outcome that i would expect. when the actual outcome is the opposite of what is expected, that is irony.
when both the explanations can't tell me really what where there before everything existed...I can't say one of them is more believable than the other one...With no explanation and both starting with a hypothesis, which one is more 'scientific'?
while i am a firm believer in evolution, i find it rather ironic that the creationists' ideas have evolved into intelligent design, but the evolutionists' ideas have not evolved into anything new.
as new evidence comes to light, the scientific argument should change over time to adapt to the information available. in other words, evolution should evolve the way that creationism has.
if you know what you're looking for. Most people that I know - even "computer literate" ones, have almost no idea how to pick search terms in a way that will get them the information that they need quickly. Yes, they know how to use boolean operators, quotes and the other ways that you can tune queries, but if they don't know exactly what they're looking for to start with, they're pretty much lost.
i agree, i find myself posting to technical forums with "i want to do this but don't know what it's called." type questions from time to time. i am perfectly capable of researching a given technology or technique, i just need a little bit of insight (or terminology) to get me pointed in the right direction.
google isn't going to be friendly to you if your cearch criteria is a little anecdote about how you have arrived in the predicament that you currently find yourself in.
i am not sure if a librarian could help me in that situation or not (seeing as how a forum is the ideal tool for that situation), but until you can use a drawing on a whiteboard as your search criteria, i am not sure that you can take humans out of the equation for those sorts of problems.
Slashdot Mirror
i need an Xtreme computer. i do lots of Xtreme programming so i need plenty of computing power when getting wicked air. perhaps you have seen my work in the latest mountain dew commercial?
i agree, in fact, i would say that there are too many restaurants in general. do we really need to distinguish between mexican and cuban food? do we really need different pizza chains? don't get me started on burger chains. why can't we all just be happy with mcdonald's and domino's and move on? if you want to get exotic, just go eat at taco bell. why do we need food from all of these different places like india? how am i supposed to choose what's right for myself and my family?
.there really are too many choices. i don't have time to think for myself, let alone research and experiment to figure out what works for me. there should just be just one or two things to eat all the time. my vote is for chicken wings and beer.
i am afraid that if all of this "choice" might spread to other areas, like music or television. there really needs to be some sort of law passed.
aren't haikus supposed to end with a question?
when i wrote them for english class in highschool i ended them all with "hey man, where's my dog?"
you are right, the point of using virtualization is to isolate applications from one another and the host operating system, but that is not the only security feature provided by virtualization.
the article fails to mention that most virtualization packages let you take snapshots of a running system and move machines to and from different physical hosts.
the worst hypothetical case would be for malware to break out of the VM and infect the host, causing the host to infect other VMs. malware would have to break out of the compromised VM, break into the host, and then break back into the other VMs running on the host... now my brain hurts :-(
even if this "doomsday scenario" were to come to pass the damage done could be mitigated thanks to virtualization. once a VM was determined to be infected, you could stop it in place and check your host. if the host is determined to be infected, you could stop all your other VMs and migrate them to an alternate host which is known to be malware free. any infected hosts could be restored from non-infected snapshots as soon as the files were copied to the proper location.
i think that emulating one chip architecture while running on another would impact performance significantly. i used to use kju to run a win2k machine on my mac G5 tower and the machine worked but it was hella slow. winXP on an intel based macbook pro was significantly faster.
stop being such a terrorist.
contrary to what your math teacher told you in the 80's, you don't need algebra or above to do most modern computing tasks, even IT. CS of course, is another story. i am sure there has to be something in the IT field that requires serious math other than coding, scripting, and determining IP subnets, but nothing readily comes to mind.
in fact, aside from the logic needed to troubleshoot problems and feeling smarter than the people that you support, there isn't much need for advanced math in the IT field. sure, you need good math skills to be a world class IT cowboy, but for most of us 9to5 cogs in the corporate IT machine, advanced math is superfluous.
if algorithms make your heart beat faster, then go for cs.
if the thought of calculus makes you wince, go for IT.
regardless of the actual presence of math in either field, a CS curriculum will be much heavier on math *stuff*.
another option that is emerging in some colleges in the US are "media" programs that focus on content for the web. these are creative programs that focus on the web with opportunities to focus on design, graphics, writing, or A/V production for delivery to the web.
those are the two options that have served me best in the past... just make sure that your interpersonal skills are up to task. small companies and contract positions require work with diverse groups of people who may or may not be very technical. if you can't make friends and build a rapport with your customers/teammates super fast, you will be lugging around and installing PCs for the rest of your career. if you have the grips to stick with contracting in spite of the perpetual job searching, you can go into consulting at some point.
another option is to work as a lab rat or QA for a software company. gigs like that are hard to land anywhere but the west coast, but if you have decent systems AND scripting/coding skills you can put yourself in a unique position as the goto guy for everyone else. most testers i have worked with are dev wannabes and want to quickly grow up to be real devs. the QA teams in the shops i have worked for had a fair amount of turnover. being dedicated to life in the lab can land you in charge of said lab before too long.
judging by it's behavior in the last two years, i would say the FCC's job is to be the Telcos' bitch. thus far, they have had plenty of freedom to do their job and they doing it well.
*looks over shoulder at opteron box running VMWare server*
my friend and i were wondering the same thing.
christian people don't enjoy it. they feel guilty afterwards.
you mean the benefits to the consumer. this in no way benefits AT&T. if the internet was just a big dumb pipe then anyone could get into the internet service business by simply connecting lines to backbones, which would be disastrous for AT&T.
a wide open, data-centric, unmanaged network might be perfect for network applications, but it would be a killing blow to the profit margins currently enjoyed by the industry. a complex and over managed network is far more profitable and far less likely to foster competition, and is therefore more far more desirable to the likes of AT&T.
the answer is simple: the highest bidder has the most important traffic. if you want your traffic to be important, outbid the highest bidder.
again, very simple: everyone. everyone will pay. then they will pay more. after all, they own the net.
that may be, but the point of internet service is to make as much profit as possible while taking as little risk as possible, and investing as little capital as possible.
net neutrality is a symptom of competition. there is very little competition in the telco and cableco industries so there is very little net neutrality. if there were sufficient competition in the market, net neutrality would not be a debate, it would be a fact of life.
rather than count a person as a "linux user" or a "windows user" i suggest we adopt an OS usage classification system similar to the kinsey scale. in your case you would be a 3 :-)
didn't word perfect have a plastic overlay thing to show you what all the keys did? wasn't all the keyboard stuff because wordperfect originated in DOS before the mouse as a mandatory component?
all media stored on a PC is stolen, just ask the movie and music industries. if the media weren't stolen, it wouldn't be stored on a PC since the rightful owner would have the proprietary physical format and a receipt showing that the full retail price was paid.
so many that some comics have created their own expo.
wow. i had no idea.
in the military, an infantry fighting position is supposed to be both covered and concealed... meaning that you shouldn't be able to find the position to attack it and if it were attacked, it should physically protect the people inside. concealment is not cover. cover is not concealment.
the thing about cover and concealment (like security and obscurity) is that while concealment (obscurity) can let you avoid detection, and the resulting contact with the enemy, cover (security) is what will save you in the event of detection. once your concealment is gone, it's gone for good and you have to rely on cover and cover alone. obviously, it is more efficient to avoid detection, but it is safer to be secured against attack.
fortunately, obscurity and security are not mutually exclusive. something can be BOTH secret AND secure.
We're the United States Government! We don't deal with that sort of thing.
government censorship and copyright go hand in hand.
copyright originally started as a government sponsored censorship program as the excerpt from this article states:
so, in the UK, the government granting copyright terms in order to censor the works is a return to the roots of copyright.
that's the spirit! for maximum irony we need a fairly anti-science group who opposes the idea that temperatures change, then have the opposition group change tactics in order to be considered more scientific. hillarity ensues when someone comes forward and says the laws of thermodynamics "are more like guidelines than actual laws." :-) :-)
now that is interesting. all of the propaganda that i have seen about intelligent design (which i will admit is not much) is that it is a change in stance to be more scientific.
i didn't claim that it was suspect, i claimed that it was ironic. i think that if a group opposes the idea that animals change over long periods of time, but then over time changes it's thinking, while another group that supports the idea of animals changing but does not actually change is rather ironic.
the expected outcome would be that a person who opposes the idea of change would not change, while the person who supports the idea of change would change. at least, that's the outcome that i would expect. when the actual outcome is the opposite of what is expected, that is irony.
while i am a firm believer in evolution, i find it rather ironic that the creationists' ideas have evolved into intelligent design, but the evolutionists' ideas have not evolved into anything new.
as new evidence comes to light, the scientific argument should change over time to adapt to the information available. in other words, evolution should evolve the way that creationism has.
i agree, i find myself posting to technical forums with "i want to do this but don't know what it's called." type questions from time to time. i am perfectly capable of researching a given technology or technique, i just need a little bit of insight (or terminology) to get me pointed in the right direction.
google isn't going to be friendly to you if your cearch criteria is a little anecdote about how you have arrived in the predicament that you currently find yourself in.
i am not sure if a librarian could help me in that situation or not (seeing as how a forum is the ideal tool for that situation), but until you can use a drawing on a whiteboard as your search criteria, i am not sure that you can take humans out of the equation for those sorts of problems.