Then we need to examine potential reasons how this *could* work. For example, it would be interesting if we ever got to the point that there was no cell towers, but only wifi. Or only state-sanctioned cell towers and wifi.
Companies don't want you to own your software anymore, and they want to limit your ability to move to another solution provider. Why wouldn't they plan take it further in other domains, or the government to do the same?
The irony is we don't actually know hard numbers because it's not formally reported. And who knows if the the rate of reporting is different between tech and non-tech (or by job type).
Hell, sometimes you see complaints that sexism in IT in Silicon Valley is worse than elsewhere, but we don't know what the rates are for that either. How would someone who worked in Silicon Valley all their life know what sexism is like in New York?
All we know is the women reporting this in SV are consistently saying it's a big problem.
Women don't report it because they get shut down or ignored. Do you know any women in IT well enough where they would tell you what they've encountered, and have you actually asked them and listened?
Lovely Google ad yesterday for hot women who are "guaranteed to contact you first". Was something vaguely adverstising as a "bride" site. I guess female prostitution is ok. Should women leave Slashdot?
It's not just "someone read the emails". It also gives them an easy & trusted avenue to deploy malware and trojans to the target and all their contacts.
We keep hearing how people like don't like either candidate. Solution is elect Hilary, indict her, and then VP becomes President. Problems solved for everyone.
That's the closest to "elect a third candidate" that is actually possible.
Your television is not a general purpose computation device.
This is like arguing a cell phone isn't a computer, about ten years ago. It's well on its way to getting there. Our "SmartTV"s even get updates, but I'm sure it's all for the users' benefit, yes?
You might be missing the some of the contexts of why someone tagged it as offensive.
I'm not offended by the sight of cleavage. However, I am awfully tired of the multitudes of "click-baitty whorification of women" teaser ads, and reporting them as "offensive" seems like the best option out of the few I am given. Yeah, I'd like to see fewer of those posts, and yeah, I find them offensive, especially here.
Some people probably also tag all ads as "offensive" because the existence of ads or the amount of them pisses them off.
I agree, but I'd say those are rare. We have so many "Mordac" problems more due to perception and lack of accountability.
At my last job, we didn't have dev servers, never mind someone in security. Several services were lacking in failover because there only was one machine, which would typically be 1-4 years behind in patches and updates. We had 1/3 of the IT staff that other comparable organizations would have. I left last year, and they still haven't replaced me. Most of us on the team were capable of doing a lot better - if only we had had the resources and were allowed to do what we do best.
The IT manager was treated like Mordac of IT services because forcing their computers to have passwords and not being able to install any crapware they felt like was "preventing them from doing their work". The token argument when people weren't getting their way was "But I NEED this". I NEED to install some sketchy tool I found on the internet. I NEED to install this cute bubbly font I found for free on the internet (well the web page said it was free and it didn't cost me anything, so that means it's legit, right?). What do you mean you won't help me with this personal project that has nothing to do with the business? I NEED dropbox because how can I back up my stuff if I don't... no, no, I'm not interested in listening in how stuff is backed up already, I would much prefer to store sensitive data wherever and copy it to my non-password protected malware-infected devices at home. YOU'RE PREVENTING ME FROM DOING MY JOB! WAAAAAAA!
If crying to the other IT members separately doesn't work, then they cry to upper management.
Every IT person who is just trying to do their job is a Mordac to a large group of people. Ignorance or unwillingness to learn the tools of a job is no excuse for sabotaging it or blaming others, and we need to call bullshit on it.
There's been a big focus on security recently that if users are doing the wrong thing, then it's actually the security team's responsibility to make sure that you find a way to make it easy for people to do the right thing. It's a step in the right direction. But there are still some basic standards where we need to say "It's a basic requirement of the job. It's 2016. Get over it, or go a job that's not in an office environment."
To me, this is more indicative of a bigger problem that needs to be fixed.
Either an IT person becomes an IT manager with no management training, or a Management person becomes an IT manager with no IT training. Head honchos above this position typically don't have IT training.
All below that are (mostly) skilled technical people, who aren't allowed to use their technical expertise to solve a technical problem because the people above them are either incapable of understanding, or let the ego of their own position prevent people from doing their job. This leaves IT people both not allowed to do their work AND getting the blame when it goes wrong.
If accountants were constantly told to not follow basic accounting principles, how do you think that would go over?
How do we get business and managers to start taking us seriously?
Universities typically own large groupings of public IPs as they were the first places to have them. It's a legacy thing.
If this happened 20 years ago, it wouldn't be as surprising. The fact that many devices are STILL public now is disturbing. The problem is either political, or a result of poor planning.
Realistically, it's all relative. I wish there was less shady stuff all around, but when I have a choice between evil and less evil, I'm going to pick less evil - and perhaps question whether I need to make the choice (or purchase) at all.
For example, kids are in slaves in mines for the minerals used in your cell phone. How do you realistically fight back? Maybe you do your research for which companies have a better track record? Maybe you buy a cell phone every 4 years instead of two? Maybe you do something more? Or maybe you don't buy a cell phone at all and lord it over everyone you encounter and alienate everyone in turn. Many people don't care enough and pretend the problem either doesn't exist or are fatalistic andpretend there is nothing they can do.
Sony has a hell of a lot to answer for, and it's all in recent memory. Choosing a lesser evil and being vocal about it is at least something.
Slashdot Mirror
Then we need to examine potential reasons how this *could* work. For example, it would be interesting if we ever got to the point that there was no cell towers, but only wifi. Or only state-sanctioned cell towers and wifi.
Companies don't want you to own your software anymore, and they want to limit your ability to move to another solution provider. Why wouldn't they plan take it further in other domains, or the government to do the same?
The irony is we don't actually know hard numbers because it's not formally reported. And who knows if the the rate of reporting is different between tech and non-tech (or by job type).
Hell, sometimes you see complaints that sexism in IT in Silicon Valley is worse than elsewhere, but we don't know what the rates are for that either. How would someone who worked in Silicon Valley all their life know what sexism is like in New York?
All we know is the women reporting this in SV are consistently saying it's a big problem.
Women don't report it because they get shut down or ignored. Do you know any women in IT well enough where they would tell you what they've encountered, and have you actually asked them and listened?
"So, why do you always write these strong women characters?"
"Because you're still asking me that question."
Lovely Google ad yesterday for hot women who are "guaranteed to contact you first". Was something vaguely adverstising as a "bride" site. I guess female prostitution is ok. Should women leave Slashdot?
The EFF disagrees with you. Journalists, both high-profile and not, have been specifically targeted with exploit kits for some time.
The usual reason is goverments want to uncover who protected sources are.
It's not just "someone read the emails". It also gives them an easy & trusted avenue to deploy malware and trojans to the target and all their contacts.
Please?
Move to Canada. Or move back, rather. Welcome home.
... you can try Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid for some light reading
We keep hearing how people like don't like either candidate. Solution is elect Hilary, indict her, and then VP becomes President. Problems solved for everyone.
That's the closest to "elect a third candidate" that is actually possible.
Your television is not a general purpose computation device.
This is like arguing a cell phone isn't a computer, about ten years ago. It's well on its way to getting there. Our "SmartTV"s even get updates, but I'm sure it's all for the users' benefit, yes?
This was actually an unintended PSA about not getting your "news" from Facebook. But that will quickly be forgotten.
Yeah, they gave up the rights to say that three years ago. Which means now they have essentially nothing differentiating them from their competitors.
I really liked the hub separation, but now you can't say "I'm buying a BB10-style device for security reasons".
They had a series of boneheaded moves that was bringing their demise, but this was truly the last nail in the coffin.
I used to get work done. Then a whole bunch of middle managers with no UI training discovered the entire ITIL framework.
I work more for the system than it works for me.
I've heard the current sentiment described as "tyranny of the minority".
You might be missing the some of the contexts of why someone tagged it as offensive.
I'm not offended by the sight of cleavage. However, I am awfully tired of the multitudes of "click-baitty whorification of women" teaser ads, and reporting them as "offensive" seems like the best option out of the few I am given. Yeah, I'd like to see fewer of those posts, and yeah, I find them offensive, especially here.
Some people probably also tag all ads as "offensive" because the existence of ads or the amount of them pisses them off.
I agree, but I'd say those are rare. We have so many "Mordac" problems more due to perception and lack of accountability.
At my last job, we didn't have dev servers, never mind someone in security. Several services were lacking in failover because there only was one machine, which would typically be 1-4 years behind in patches and updates. We had 1/3 of the IT staff that other comparable organizations would have. I left last year, and they still haven't replaced me. Most of us on the team were capable of doing a lot better - if only we had had the resources and were allowed to do what we do best.
The IT manager was treated like Mordac of IT services because forcing their computers to have passwords and not being able to install any crapware they felt like was "preventing them from doing their work". The token argument when people weren't getting their way was "But I NEED this". I NEED to install some sketchy tool I found on the internet. I NEED to install this cute bubbly font I found for free on the internet (well the web page said it was free and it didn't cost me anything, so that means it's legit, right?). What do you mean you won't help me with this personal project that has nothing to do with the business? I NEED dropbox because how can I back up my stuff if I don't... no, no, I'm not interested in listening in how stuff is backed up already, I would much prefer to store sensitive data wherever and copy it to my non-password protected malware-infected devices at home. YOU'RE PREVENTING ME FROM DOING MY JOB! WAAAAAAA!
If crying to the other IT members separately doesn't work, then they cry to upper management.
Every IT person who is just trying to do their job is a Mordac to a large group of people. Ignorance or unwillingness to learn the tools of a job is no excuse for sabotaging it or blaming others, and we need to call bullshit on it.
There's been a big focus on security recently that if users are doing the wrong thing, then it's actually the security team's responsibility to make sure that you find a way to make it easy for people to do the right thing. It's a step in the right direction. But there are still some basic standards where we need to say "It's a basic requirement of the job. It's 2016. Get over it, or go a job that's not in an office environment."
I'm always blown away by how much work it is to do this with IT. Do they tell accountants to not use basic accounting principles and resources?
(Well. Maybe sometimes they do.)
Or if they were, the Very Important Prof had a hissy fit, and a manager with no IT background told someone how it would be done.
To me, this is more indicative of a bigger problem that needs to be fixed.
Either an IT person becomes an IT manager with no management training, or a Management person becomes an IT manager with no IT training. Head honchos above this position typically don't have IT training.
All below that are (mostly) skilled technical people, who aren't allowed to use their technical expertise to solve a technical problem because the people above them are either incapable of understanding, or let the ego of their own position prevent people from doing their job. This leaves IT people both not allowed to do their work AND getting the blame when it goes wrong.
If accountants were constantly told to not follow basic accounting principles, how do you think that would go over?
How do we get business and managers to start taking us seriously?
Universities typically own large groupings of public IPs as they were the first places to have them. It's a legacy thing.
If this happened 20 years ago, it wouldn't be as surprising. The fact that many devices are STILL public now is disturbing. The problem is either political, or a result of poor planning.
To bring this important legal question into the public eye?
The companies are charging an additional $3-$7 / month on top of it for the box.
You know, I've seen Canadian shows on Netflix. And for the most part, the ones that make it there are good. Let cable hang.
Realistically, it's all relative. I wish there was less shady stuff all around, but when I have a choice between evil and less evil, I'm going to pick less evil - and perhaps question whether I need to make the choice (or purchase) at all.
For example, kids are in slaves in mines for the minerals used in your cell phone. How do you realistically fight back? Maybe you do your research for which companies have a better track record? Maybe you buy a cell phone every 4 years instead of two? Maybe you do something more? Or maybe you don't buy a cell phone at all and lord it over everyone you encounter and alienate everyone in turn. Many people don't care enough and pretend the problem either doesn't exist or are fatalistic andpretend there is nothing they can do.
Sony has a hell of a lot to answer for, and it's all in recent memory. Choosing a lesser evil and being vocal about it is at least something.