Run 3 Cat5(e or 6. whatever) and 2 RG6 in each bundle. Use a switch in your core (do you game? Who wants collisions?) and a good router/firewall on the edge. The wireless network is for PDA's and tablets; make sure you enable WEP and shut down broadcast of the ESSID. Set up a Linux content server and hack your Tivo.
Folks that resist installing wireless LAN tend to be quite shocked when somebody runs a survey and turns up tons of AP's. You do have WLAN in your office; you just don't know it.
Controlling rogue AP's is the number one reason to deploy an enterprise WLAN infrastructure. Securing them is not nearly as hard as most people think.
It's still a good place to work (not that we haven't had to endure market forces like everyone else.) We still give money to charity. It's not paradise, but it doesn't suck either.
I've been there for more than 5 years, so consider me biased:-)
I maintain systems for my parents (one local, one 1,500 miles away), inlaws, friends, etc... It's pretty easy. All you do is patch the snot out of things when you install, carefully instruct them on the basics, and add one proviso:
"I'll be happy to work on your computer anytime if you bring it over to my house."
I have a fully stocked "lab" at the house and plenty of time to play. Amazingly enough, my inlaws will drag the computers all the way in when things go wrong. Not a bad deal.
... if we can perform surgery via telerobotics, why wouldn't we be able to perform, say, guided experiments in space?
This is precisely what we need to do, and how most science is/has been performed in space. It's just that the telerobitics mechanisms are highly specialized (think Hubble). The space station is nice and all, but replace those people with a few general purpose robots and some fast links -- and ship the experiments up in modular form in an unmaned vehicle. Naw: not glamorous enough.
Another program that is worth looking at is NOMAD, run out of the Robotics Institute affiliated with Carnege Mellon University. See http://www.cmu.edu/home/news/nomadr.html The first time we tried it we were running it through a GEO link to South America. Worked really well.
I worked at a large American space agency in a prior life -- doing network engineering. One of the, err, "project managers" tried to set a requirement for scientists to be able to access their experiments on the space station via AOL!. After we picked outselves off of the floor laughing we realized he was serious. Wow. It took 3 weeks for us to explain why it was such a bad idea.
Yes, Diamonds will burn in a fire. So no, they aren't forever.
The best thing to do is ask her what she wants. Then get it (If you can afford it). Weddings are for ladies and the ring is part of the "show off" factor. Just life, I guess.
My wife and I shopped aroung until we found a ring she wanted. I'm glad we did -- she is happy with her ring. That's all that really matters.
Don't forget to get them to put a "Marine Cut" on your ring (and hers if she wants it); have them cut 1/3 the way thru the ring so it will break before your finger does. Saved my Dad a finger.
(Offer not valid in some states of mind. Please see dealer for details. Content of this posting are not the opinions of the electrons that delivered it)
I work in the telecom/IT area; some of the best people I know don't have degrees at all.
That said, I don't think they would have been able to rise so high in a non "bubble" environment. A degree is a good idea these days. I recommend electrical engineering. It gives you a good overview of physics, you get to learn what the hardware is really doing, and you have to know how to program anyway. I know lots of EE's that work in programming, business and marketing, etc...
It's a very flexible degree in the "high tech" areas. I went from being a technician to being a network engineer while getting my degree. I've done stints in technical marketing, design engineering (systems level), and now I'm in business development. It's a blast!
The only job security today is the ability to get another job. Get a degree that's flexible, then follow your interests. It works for me. (Your Mileage May Vary. Please see dealer for details. Offer not valid in some dimensions)
...and we get more bang for the buck out of the military than we've ever gotten out of NASA. I contracted to NASA for a year -- and saw things that made my dumbest military experiences look positively intelligent. Some of the contractors know what they are doing (this is why most of the shuttles don't blow up), but the civil servants are clueless. Remove NASA, and give the mission to the military, NSF, and DARPA -- you might actually have a moon base now if they'd eliminated NASA a decade ago.
Try working for NASA before you advocate for a better budget for them -- it will open your eyes.
David -- this is a fascinating rant, but you miss the point entirely: one side will provide the means for you to join the rich (like maybe help fund the large R&D effort for the cold war that led to our present economic boom), and the other side will do all it can to prevent you from getting rich (by taxing the shit out of you if you exceed the median, playing devisive politics to split the nation, etc... Ted Kennedy does not seek peers.) Still, I can't believe that either side will make a whole lot of difference in the end. Most people don't care. Clinton will be remembered as a good president because he didn't break anything, not because he did anything.
I'm sure you don't like the Republicans as much as I distrust the Democrats, but I'd urge you to look at both sides of the wealth equation. It's not as skewed as you make it out to be.
I had a Nokia 6160 and now I have a Motorola StarTac Digital.
Both good phones, but for different reasons.
The Nokia has really good battery life, great features, was easy to use, and has good sound quality. However, it is sort of bulky (it doesn't fit into a pocket well) and lacks a vibrate feature so you can wear the thing in a meeting. This can be corrected by buying a battery with a vibrator in it, but still...
I bought the StarTac because I wanted something smaller, and my brothers really love it. It's a good phone; and it can be easily tucked into a pocket. The battery life is pretty good (but not as good as the Nokia), and the vibrate feature is built in. However, this phone has less features that the Nokia. Ths sound quality is pretty good, but the phone is not as comfortable to hold. It also feels more flimsy.
Both phones work on TDMA digital systems and do analog as well. Both cost about $200. Both have plenty of after-market "hands-free" kits, batteries, and other accessories. Get the Nokia if you want features and battery life, get the StarTac if you want to put it into a pocket.
Re:Open Source Space Engineering
on
On to Mars
·
· Score: 1
That is exactly what NASA did with the Mars Observer. They used a propulsion system that was designed for Near Earth Orbit CIA satellites.
Boom.
The problem is that the spacecraft design can vary quite a bit depending on where you are going. In a way, it is already open source. Most of what you need to know about space craft design can be found in physics and aerospace engineering textbooks.
However, the devil is in the details. Having the design information isn't quite enough.
On the other hand, have a look at the satellites that the Ham's keep sending up, the Oscar series. Pretty open source. And they work. Hmmm...
No serious space until NASA is gone!
on
On to Mars
·
· Score: 1
Um, have you ever noticed how often the Russians have been visiting NASA's space station?
Right.
I worked as a contractor to NASA for a year, and I supported the Planetfest convention in Pasadena last year as a corporate sponsor (we brought the network). I've been in contact with most aspects of NASA -- from infrastructure to mission scientists. My overall impression of the current space program is that they could screw up a wet dream. The NASA that got us the moon no longer exists, and it would take a great deal of work and money to rebuild it.
To what end?
Get a couple of big companies interested in the moon and you'll get a moon base pretty quickly. We already have significant private investment in LEO and GEO (low and geosync earth orbit). In a way, the earth orbit sector is already heavily commercialized. Find a reason to get onto the moon, and you'll get a bunch of stuff there as well.
Mars is the problem.
The problem with Mars is that there is no there there. The compelling reason of getting mankind off of this rock could also be met with a few Terra-Solar Lagrange space habitats, and it might not cost us as much to build these habitats on the moon as it would take to build a major moon base.
What is it that we need on Mars, besides a rock to sit on and maybe some atmosphere to process?
I know that sounds silly, but really it depends on your context. If you're a record-label executive, Cher might be quite a bit more important than BP. In fact, in most places other than the Open Source Community, BP isn't very important at all.
A valid point, but it might be good to consider this: which star is rising, and which star is falling?
Open Source has the potential to change the way we use the most impressive communications network ever invented. Yes, it seems trite to keep beating the drum of "it's the Internet, stupid". However, the rules are being changed. By us. Bruce Perens can advocate that Debian users go out and use MP3's and write free software to play it -- done already, although not as a mandate. Does Cher have to pay attention to this? As an artist, yes. Does Bruce have to give a rat's behind about which person Cher is dating right now? Who cares?
That record company executive is likely more interested in what new internet based technology (like MP3, or something else that Open Source might come up with) will be undercutting his business, than what Cher is up to. In that way, we, and BP by our designation, have more impact on his life than most of his artists do. Hmm, indeed.
I believe that the critical issue is whether you have a job or a career. A job is something you do to get money to do something else, and a career is something that you love to do (or are at least committed to).
Hourly wages are best for a job. Management will think twice about overtime, and will pay dearly if they request it. However, keeping track of the time is horribly tedious (ever do a timesheet for NASA? Ouch!) Also, the rewards for exceptional output are more... indexed, and less attractive.
I prefer my present compensation scheme for my career. I am salaried, so I have the flexibility to schedule my time as I wish. I get bonuses if I complete large projects. I don't have to keep track of time that I spend configuring networks, or reading Slashdot for new ideas (a practice my supervisor has learned to love ). If I really work my tail off, I get a bonus and some comp time. I also get really great stock options. But, nothing is guaranteed. It all comes down to how well I market myself, and how much my boss cares. It is almost as much work as filling out a time sheet, but the reward is much greater.
It's great.
(The worst possible situation is to be salaried and a gov. contractor that still has to turn in a timesheet -- the numbers must always add up, no matter what you did. Those were the longest weeks I've ever had.)
Um, not entirely true. The important thing is that they are willing to learn, not that they know it. My wife asks a ton of questions about what I do and why I am doing it, and has become quite good at decrypting "geek speak". She does call the computer the "other woman" and the "Beige Bitch" at times, but always with a smile and a sigh.
She's also taught me more than I ever thought I'd know about finance and accounting -- and I actually found it interesting. If the learning is two way, the relationship might make it. We are all changing all the time, so every day I rediscover what a wonderful person I married.
Conversation is the true secret, and I am baffled as to why more people don't know about it. If you start interacting with a potential S.O. and you look up 4 hours later and ask, "Have we been talking that long?" you are onto something. It doesn't matter what you were talking about -- coding or sex or the best way to finish a bookshelf -- as long as you are both interested. My happy marriage is just a continuation of that first long conversation I had with her. 6 years and one kid, and going strong.
Slashdot Mirror
Run 3 Cat5(e or 6. whatever) and 2 RG6 in each bundle. Use a switch in your core (do you game? Who wants collisions?) and a good router/firewall on the edge. The wireless network is for PDA's and tablets; make sure you enable WEP and shut down broadcast of the ESSID. Set up a Linux content server and hack your Tivo.
Now you have a real network.
Remember: a Sawzall is your friend!
Folks that resist installing wireless LAN tend to be quite shocked when somebody runs a survey and turns up tons of AP's. You do have WLAN in your office; you just don't know it.
Controlling rogue AP's is the number one reason to deploy an enterprise WLAN infrastructure. Securing them is not nearly as hard as most people think.
It's still a good place to work (not that we haven't had to endure market forces like everyone else.) We still give money to charity. It's not paradise, but it doesn't suck either.
:-)
I've been there for more than 5 years, so consider me biased
-- Loudog
-- Stamp out phase jitter!
I maintain systems for my parents (one local, one 1,500 miles away), inlaws, friends, etc... It's pretty easy. All you do is patch the snot out of things when you install, carefully instruct them on the basics, and add one proviso:
"I'll be happy to work on your computer anytime if you bring it over to my house."
I have a fully stocked "lab" at the house and plenty of time to play. Amazingly enough, my inlaws will drag the computers all the way in when things go wrong. Not a bad deal.
This is precisely what we need to do, and how most science is/has been performed in space. It's just that the telerobitics mechanisms are highly specialized (think Hubble). The space station is nice and all, but replace those people with a few general purpose robots and some fast links -- and ship the experiments up in modular form in an unmaned vehicle. Naw: not glamorous enough.
Another program that is worth looking at is NOMAD, run out of the Robotics Institute affiliated with Carnege Mellon University. See http://www.cmu.edu/home/news/nomadr.html The first time we tried it we were running it through a GEO link to South America. Worked really well.
I worked at a large American space agency in a prior life -- doing network engineering. One of the, err, "project managers" tried to set a requirement for scientists to be able to access their experiments on the space station via AOL!. After we picked outselves off of the floor laughing we realized he was serious. Wow. It took 3 weeks for us to explain why it was such a bad idea.
Yes, Diamonds will burn in a fire. So no, they aren't forever.
The best thing to do is ask her what she wants. Then get it (If you can afford it). Weddings are for ladies and the ring is part of the "show off" factor. Just life, I guess.
My wife and I shopped aroung until we found a ring she wanted. I'm glad we did -- she is happy with her ring. That's all that really matters.
Don't forget to get them to put a "Marine Cut" on your ring (and hers if she wants it); have them cut 1/3 the way thru the ring so it will break before your finger does. Saved my Dad a finger.
(Offer not valid in some states of mind. Please see dealer for details. Content of this posting are not the opinions of the electrons that delivered it)
I work in the telecom/IT area; some of the best people I know don't have degrees at all.
That said, I don't think they would have been able to rise so high in a non "bubble" environment. A degree is a good idea these days. I recommend electrical engineering. It gives you a good overview of physics, you get to learn what the hardware is really doing, and you have to know how to program anyway. I know lots of EE's that work in programming, business and marketing, etc...
It's a very flexible degree in the "high tech" areas. I went from being a technician to being a network engineer while getting my degree. I've done stints in technical marketing, design engineering (systems level), and now I'm in business development. It's a blast!
The only job security today is the ability to get another job. Get a degree that's flexible, then follow your interests. It works for me. (Your Mileage May Vary. Please see dealer for details. Offer not valid in some dimensions)
-- Lou
-- "Stamp out phase jitter"
...and we get more bang for the buck out of the military than we've ever gotten out of NASA. I contracted to NASA for a year -- and saw things that made my dumbest military experiences look positively intelligent. Some of the contractors know what they are doing (this is why most of the shuttles don't blow up), but the civil servants are clueless. Remove NASA, and give the mission to the military, NSF, and DARPA -- you might actually have a moon base now if they'd eliminated NASA a decade ago.
Try working for NASA before you advocate for a better budget for them -- it will open your eyes.
David -- this is a fascinating rant, but you miss the point entirely: one side will provide the means for you to join the rich (like maybe help fund the large R&D effort for the cold war that led to our present economic boom), and the other side will do all it can to prevent you from getting rich (by taxing the shit out of you if you exceed the median, playing devisive politics to split the nation, etc... Ted Kennedy does not seek peers.) Still, I can't believe that either side will make a whole lot of difference in the end. Most people don't care. Clinton will be remembered as a good president because he didn't break anything, not because he did anything.
I'm sure you don't like the Republicans as much as I distrust the Democrats, but I'd urge you to look at both sides of the wealth equation. It's not as skewed as you make it out to be.
I had a Nokia 6160 and now I have a Motorola
StarTac Digital.
Both good phones, but for different reasons.
The Nokia has really good battery life, great features, was easy to use, and has good sound quality. However, it is sort of bulky (it doesn't fit into a pocket well) and lacks a vibrate feature so you can wear the thing in a meeting. This can be corrected by buying a battery with a vibrator in it, but still...
I bought the StarTac because I wanted something smaller, and my brothers really love it. It's a good phone; and it can be easily tucked into a pocket. The battery life is pretty good (but not as good as the Nokia), and the vibrate feature is built in. However, this phone has less features that the Nokia. Ths sound quality is pretty good, but the phone is not as comfortable to hold. It also feels more flimsy.
Both phones work on TDMA digital systems and do analog as well. Both cost about $200. Both have plenty of after-market "hands-free" kits, batteries, and other accessories. Get the Nokia if you want features and battery life, get the StarTac if you want to put it into a pocket.
That is exactly what NASA did with the Mars Observer. They used a propulsion system that was designed for Near Earth Orbit CIA satellites.
Boom.
The problem is that the spacecraft design can vary quite a bit depending on where you are going. In a way, it is already open source. Most of what you need to know about space craft design can be found in physics and aerospace engineering textbooks.
However, the devil is in the details. Having the design information isn't quite enough.
On the other hand, have a look at the satellites that the Ham's keep sending up, the Oscar series. Pretty open source. And they work. Hmmm...
Um, have you ever noticed how often the Russians
have been visiting NASA's space station?
Right.
I worked as a contractor to NASA for a year, and I supported the Planetfest convention in Pasadena last year as a corporate sponsor (we brought the network). I've been in contact with most aspects of NASA -- from infrastructure to mission scientists. My overall impression of the current space program is that they could screw up a wet dream. The NASA that got us the moon no longer exists, and it would take a great deal of work and money to rebuild it.
To what end?
Get a couple of big companies interested in the moon and you'll get a moon base pretty quickly.
We already have significant private investment in LEO and GEO (low and geosync earth orbit). In a way, the earth orbit sector is already heavily commercialized. Find a reason to get onto the moon, and you'll get a bunch of stuff there as well.
Mars is the problem.
The problem with Mars is that there is no there there. The compelling reason of getting mankind off of this rock could also be met with a few Terra-Solar Lagrange space habitats, and it might not cost us as much to build these habitats on the moon as it would take to build a major moon base.
What is it that we need on Mars, besides a rock to sit on and maybe some atmosphere to process?
I know that sounds silly, but really it depends on your context. If you're a record-label executive, Cher might be quite a bit more
important than BP. In fact, in most places other than the Open Source Community, BP isn't very important at all.
A valid point, but it might be good to consider this: which star is rising, and which star is falling?
Open Source has the potential to change the way we use the most impressive communications network ever invented. Yes, it seems trite to keep beating the drum of "it's the Internet, stupid". However, the rules are being changed. By us. Bruce Perens can advocate that Debian users go out and use MP3's and write free software to play it -- done already, although not as a mandate. Does Cher have to pay attention to this? As an artist, yes. Does Bruce have to give a rat's behind about which person Cher is dating right now? Who cares?
That record company executive is likely more interested in what new internet based technology (like MP3, or something else that Open Source might come up with) will be undercutting his business, than what Cher is up to. In that way, we, and BP by our designation, have more impact on his life than most of his artists do. Hmm, indeed.
I believe that the critical issue is whether you have a job or a career. A job is something you do to get money to do something else, and a career is something that you love to do (or are at least committed to).
Hourly wages are best for a job. Management will think twice about overtime, and will pay dearly if they request it. However, keeping track of the time is horribly tedious (ever do a timesheet for NASA? Ouch!) Also, the rewards for exceptional output are more... indexed, and less attractive.
I prefer my present compensation scheme for my career. I am salaried, so I have the flexibility to schedule my time as I wish. I get bonuses if I complete large projects. I don't have to keep track of time that I spend configuring networks, or reading Slashdot for new ideas (a practice my supervisor has learned to love ). If I really work my tail off, I get a bonus and some comp time. I also get really great stock options. But, nothing is guaranteed. It all comes down to how well I market myself, and how much my boss cares. It is almost as much work as filling out a time sheet, but the reward is much greater.
It's great.
(The worst possible situation is to be salaried and a gov. contractor that still has to turn in a timesheet -- the numbers must always add up, no matter what you did. Those were the longest weeks I've ever had.)
I use an 8 port model at work every day, and have not had a single problem. Great switch, and I might even spend my own money on one :-)
I think that BB actually re-brands Rose switches, so I might try one of those on my next server farm.
Worth the money.
Um, not entirely true.
The important thing is that they are willing to learn, not that they know it. My wife asks a ton of questions about what I do and why I am doing it, and has become quite good at decrypting "geek speak". She does call the computer the "other woman" and the "Beige Bitch" at times, but always with a smile and a sigh.
She's also taught me more than I ever thought I'd know about finance and accounting -- and I actually found it interesting. If the learning is two way, the relationship might make it. We are all changing all the time, so every day I rediscover what a wonderful person I married.
Conversation is the true secret, and I am baffled as to why more people don't know about it. If you start interacting with a potential S.O. and you look up 4 hours later and ask, "Have we been talking that long?" you are onto something. It doesn't matter what you were talking about -- coding or sex or the best way to finish a bookshelf -- as long as you are both interested. My happy marriage is just a continuation of that first long conversation I had with her.
6 years and one kid, and going strong.