Re: @jason 7
I fight for what's right, not what's convenient.
6175 posts • joined 31 May 2010
I fight for what's right, not what's convenient.
That would be the "cloud first" raining down upon you, mate.
Cloud first, mobile first.
Customers, partners, developers and staff last.
Where would you like your privacy renditioned to today?
Spoken like someone who has never had to actually use the soul-draining horror that is System Center. System Center anything really. It's all crap. Some more crap than others, but goddamn is it a bucket of terrible crap.
Microsoft: forget the war on drugs, there's the war on usability to fight!
scalability, HA, failover, 3rd-party plug-in integration
Every major hypervisor has these. has had these for ages.
The things VMware has that other hypervisors don't (like FT, wan vMotion, etc) are still pretty niche. There are reasons why VMware is still dominant. Basic functionality isn't one of them.
Coho's offering is really quite interesting. A little bit niche, but if your needs fall into that niche I they seem to do a fine job there.
But who will stand against the Borg then?
Are you kidding me? I'm (mostly) a transhumanist. Cut my brain out and implant it in a 40 foot tall spider robot body, please and thank you. Fuck this weak and pathetic flesh bag. It's stupid and I hate it.
I get the impression that you feel your species is essentially lacking and ought be curtailed.
No...I think that we're a superpredator that has largely overwhelmed the ecological niche it evolved to fill. We've compensated with technology for a while, but now we're at the point where that technology is making us largely redundant. That's opening us up for a self-imposed Matthusean catastrophe wherein socially and culturally we have no room for the "extra" people who are no longer needed to provide cheap labour for the rich and powerful.
I am not arguing ethics about this. I am arguing pragmatism. Those in power aren't going to suddenly find a use for the milled masses. They aren't going to invest in training those milled masses, and the cost of training is such that you need to be gainfully employed just to obtain it today anyways.
The skills floor is skyrocketing and the number of skilled workers required dropping. Meanwhile, we just can't stop having fucking babies. We're overpopulating. Not because of what we theoretically could sustain, but because of what we pragmatically and realistically will choose to sustain, based on 10,000 years of recorded human history.
Maybe we are guilty of a crime? Do we have Original Sin upon our heads?
No...that's absurd. That's for religious fuzzy wuzzies or really extreme eco-freaks. That said, we are functionally immune to anything excepting gross evolutionary pressures. if you're born with a handful of really awful conditions you're probably not going to reproduce. Anyone else, however, can. You don't even need to find a long-term mate these days. It can be done as a straight up financial transaction, if you choose.
The end result is that a bunch of fairly bad genes are being passed on. Me, for example. I have a bit of genetic fuckery that means I cannot feel thirst. Instead, I feel an overwhelming (and sometimes unstoppable) craving for carbohydrates. Carbs tend to make me dehydrated, which causes a nasty cycle.
I can, for example, be in the middle of making pasta, telling myself (out loud or in my head) over and over "I shouldn't make pasta, I don't need pasta, I'm fat enough, thanks, I need water, water will solve this" and be entirely unable to use my conscious mind to override my body's actions.
I am also somnambulent. Video exists of me, dead asleep, getting up and just eating bread. Because my body can't tell it needs water.
That's not okay. That's a really bad bit of genetics. There are some others, but you know what, I'm doing humanity a favour by not passing that shit on.
Now, I know, some genetics that appear to be negative can convey benefits. For example, immunity to a plague we haven't encountered yet. That said, our technology is marching on such that the dubious potential genetic benefits of some generally pretty awful genetic traits are less and less relevant.
While I don't look at the "ethics" of how we are inevitably going to treat our "surplus" poor and undereducated, I do think that there is some ethics to examining the genetic inheritance that we might personally pass on to the next generation.
"The people" have fuck all power in the real world to affect how the rich and powerful treat the "surplus" population. Whatever your ethical views (and frankly, I'm not Randian at all in my own personal ethics,) moralizing about how we will treat those people is pointless. They will suffer by the billions, at best eeking out marginal lives living on handouts.
Yes, I know, the optimistic (and, IMNSHO, crazy) believe in the fairy tale that robots and technological advancements will be a "tide that lifts all boats". I do not. There isn't a lot of evidence for that. As our ability to produce increases so does the concentration of wealth.
We don't look set to actually do anything about inequality beyond providing the means for the poorest to eek out those marginal, hand-out lives, and we are decreasing the opportunity for individual self advancement in our societies.
So regardless of one's ethical or moral beliefs I think the pragmatic approach to dealing with human nature is to stop and ultimately reverse the total human population growth. I am not advocating the extinction of humanity, but its reduction over time to levels that allow human nature to allow everyone to leave reasonably comfortably. This has nothing to do with what's possible. it has everything to do with what is.
From an ethical standpoint I think an additional reason to reduce our population is simply that some of what we are - our genetics - needs to end. Normally evolution would take care of this for us, but we've largely cut that out of the equation. If humanity is going to use artificial means to bypass evolution we need to use artificial means to make rational choices about genetic propagation.
That isn't a call for eugenics. It's a call for personal responsibility regarding genetic propagation. We have the technology to choose whether or not we reproduce. Ethically, morally, I feel that means we have a duty to educate ourselves about the consequences of reproduction and make rational choices about whether or not we should reproduce.
Just because our ancestors uses baby spam to overwhelm the planet doesn't mean we should. Humans need to be managed sustainably. Just like any other animal species on the planet.
We just happen to be the only species capable of doing that management consciously. There is nothing ethically or morally wrong with doing so. In fact, in my opinion, doing so is our duty as sentient beings.
I have a stadium's worth of ancestors, every one of which did not have your attitude
A pity. Look at the results.
And? So what? Human nature means that even if we produce enough food for 10 Billion people we don't and won't redistribute it to those who need it.
Besides, life is about more than mere survival. Being kept alive with no purpose, no hope, no chance of ever being more than another mouth to feed is not being alive. There's an essential piece of humanity to being needed, being wanted. That's something that our radically surplus population are having an increasingly hard time with today; in our fully automated future there is even less room for them.
What's the point of yet more children or grandchildren? Especially from poor regions? It's somehow a good thing to bring yet more people into the world that we can't feed and who won't have jobs because everyone has been replaced by a shell script or a robot?
If the only hope for that child is to be labour that's just slightly less expensive than that provided by a robot you've consigned that person to a miserable existence. Better to have fewer offspring who can be properly cared for. Or none at all. What makes your genes worth passing on, hmm?
(For the record, I've opted out of procreation in part because my genes are terrible but mostly because there are too damned meany people already.)
Maybe they're busy getting their marketing department ready for the big VMworld push? It's about that time of year.
The ability to have an answer for every need doesn't mean it all has to be sold as one go. It means that they have to have an answer for everything and the ability to sell it all at once, if that's what the customer wants.
Customers shouldn't have to bring in 3 or more vendors to solve all the various pieces of the puzzle for a given solution. Especially a solution like VDI which is almost always deployed in isolation as its own product.
If you only want to buy one part of the solution, you should have that ability. But the sales guy should be able to sell you everything you might possibly need to make any aspect of that solution go, and the sales engineer should be an experienced expert able to answer in detail why you might need or want any given component. Ideally they should also be good enough to architect you a solution based on your expressed needs.
If you are such an expert that you can personally mix and match without needing pre-sales support, congratulations! You're among a select few! But the vast majority of sysadmins don't even know what application virtualization is, let alone user experience management. To say noting of being able to actually discuss the issues related to the implementation of either!
Tech is so big. So mind boggling, overwhelming big. No one person can be an expert in anything but a small fraction of it. So yeah: vendors that can sell as pieces or as stacks are required. To fill the gaps in our knowledge with their solutions.
That's what we ****ing pay them for, after all.
...you want me to fuilty guilty and/or ashamed that you are upset because I told you the truth. And you're calling me the prick?
Dude: narcissistic personality disorder. I think you has it.
I tell ya what, wow.
We're really going to have to agree to disagree here, mate. Having used both products, I'm confident LWL is superior to Immidio. It's a little rough around the edges, but the latest releases absolutely have been increasing in quality, and they provide a broader array of capabilities than Immidio.
Now, nothing is absolute. There are things to like about Immidio that LWL could learn from. overall though, I stick by what I wrote: LWL was the better choice, and VMware flubbed it.
You are, of course, welcome to your own view. The ability to mix and match solutions to meet one's needs is what makes IT so powerful.
Deeply sorry the truth offends you. Actually...no I'm not.
Clearly, you've never actually used the thing. Or, more to the point, LWL's competitors.
ProfileUnity is actually quite good, multiply so if you actually know how to use it.
Spoken like a true Tory. Clinging to the fantasy of the continued relevance of socially conservative ideals, are you? Well, when you move on from the past, drop me a post card.
The NDP benefited because they aren't cowards whoa re afraid of Harper saying mean things about them and willing to betray the Canadian people in order to get a percentage point or two in the polls.
Trudeau, however, is a coward and a traitor. At least Harper is openly against the Canadian people. Trudeau tries to hide his duplicity. Harper's a monster, but I actually have less respect for Harper than I do Trudeau. Never thought I'd see that day. But Trudeau just keeps finding a way to throw the Canadian people under the bus and demand we worship him for it.
How about no.
Trevor is way over inflating how much the average Canadian cares about the election and the issues surrounding it
The only Canadians who matter are those who turn up to vote. They are generally the ones discussing the politics. As for the rest, quite literally, who cares? They are essentially "unpeople" as far as determining the fate of our nation is concerned. And they're unpeople by choice.
Sadly, the Libertarian Party also seem to be strongly socially conservative. But hey, if you guys want to - and can - siphon off some of Harper's support then by all means, please do!
The Liberals are splitting the right and the left. Lots of conservatives want nothing to do with Harper. It's pretty much the only reason they're still in the race at all, given how much of the Liberal base has gone over to the NDP.
That's what the Conservative party of Alberta said.
Right before we turfed them.
The Global Corporate Congress would like a word with you, citizen...
NDP are Canada's left-wing party. That said, they've moved more towards the center (by Canadian standards) as they started to have a real shot at the crown. They are not as populist as the Pirate or Green parties, but they do stand more for the people than the corporations.
The NDP got elected in Alberta (which has had 43 consecutive years of Conservative government!) on a mandate of moving from flat taxes to progressive taxation, increasing oil royalties, increasing corporate taxes on large organizations, rooting out government corruption and cronyism, balancing the budget (which should be possible in Alberta, of all places!) and spending rationally on infrastructure instead of vanity projects.
The NDP federally are running a very similar campaign, though there are some important differences. For example, federally, we already have progressive taxation, and the federal government doesn't control resource royalties.
It's worth noting that it really boils down to your take on "privacy before profits."
As I see it, lockdown events are acceptable life lessons. Data exfiltration events are not. If you properly invest in mitigation, lockdown events should be relatively rare. If you don't invest in automated incident response data exfiltration is inevitable.
Yes, there are life-critical systems in the world. These should be designed so that data exflitration is impossible because they simply don't have access to compromisable data. They should also have redundancies such that if a compromise is detected services are flipped over to a backup system designed by a completely separate provider so that the same vulnerabilities cannot be exploited.
In every other scenario, a lockdown event is absolutely preferable to a data exfiltration event. At least, as long as you believe in the principle of privacy before profits.
If you don't, then none of this really means anything and you're entirely likely to accept a perpetually compromised datacenter. You'll treat data exfiltration events that become generally known as life lessons and otherwise not care.
If the previous sentence describes you or your employ you are part of the problem and I really do hope you aren't in business all that long. In fact, I hope that legislation is enacted in your jurisdiction that drives you out of business for having that attitude.
A service lockdown is an acceptable life lesson. Data exfiltration is not. That's really all there is to it.
If the attacker is able to compromise your datacenter enough to trigger an isolation event, isn't that exactly the sort of reason you should be locking things down? Better that you take the services offline than that you allow the compromise to spread or that you allow personally identifiable information to be extracted from the DC.
Humans are slow. Too slow.
By all means, have the decisions of the automated software reviewed by a human after they have taken effect, but do not sit around and wait for some human to wake up, have a shower, have some coffee, get to work, shoot the shit, look at the problem and make a decision. Even if you have a 24/7 staffed security NOC, humans are still too slow. Security compromises can spread faster than humans can react, and the number of malicious actors working to increase the speed of compromise spread is far - far - greater than the number of analysts. Or their reaction times.
If you want to put a hold on notifying police or customers, maybe that's a reasonable business decision. But automated isolation of compromised systems and services needs to be automatic. Gathering forensic information needs to be automatic. getting information wrapped up into a bundle so that if the analyst pulls the trigger for sending to the cops it is all ready to go needs to be automatic.
Humans are just too damned slow. The only time they really should be involved here is when making decisions about hot to interface with other humans, and in doing post-event analysis to ensure that the automatics didn't isolate a system/service as a false positive.
But you'll never convince me that we should simply wait around for a human being to decide if a compromise if valid before locking down threats in our datacenters. The threat landscape has just evolved beyond what humans can handle, even in 24/7 real time.
Having talked to many of the startups (stealth and non), I'd say they know a hell of a lto more than the basics. But that's personal opinion from having talked to them. I recommend bringing yoru own experts to talk to the startup of your choice.
The "Service Pack" being all the privacy stealing crap, forced updates that Microsoft won't explain and a newfound complete lack of reason to trust Microsoft with your personal or professional data?
That's a hell of a Service Pack, mate.
About as much as a ham radio operator after an earthquake.
When did Japan start building ICBMs? How does that square with their treaty obligations? Given the crazy nationalistic ultra right-wing warcrimes-denying halfwits in charge of japan, I am not remotely okay with this.
These provide some basic info for the layman. The best info, however, will be found by searching Google Scholar for articles related to astrophysics classification. Look at dark matter concentration as a means of classification specifically, it's rather interesting.
It's about density and stellar population. Globular clusters are really densely packed, despite not having a black hole larger than a few stellar masses. They also tend to be metal poor stars and are much, much, much older.
These dwarf galaxylets are likely to be small stellar nurseries ejected from the Milky Way during a previous collision and are hence metal rich and pretty new. Previous discoveries of similar objects have shown them to be not all that densely packed and roughly in line with the age of the stars in the host galaxy.
Some speculate that these represent stellar nurseries that formed around black holes of a few stellar masses and remained gravitationally bound as their location within the galactic disk was perturbed. As such, when they were ejected they stayed together. By staying together they retained enough gravity (collectively) that they didn't achieve galactic escape velocity but were simply pulled into a wider orbit.
It is probably better not to view these as dwarf galaxies in the traditional sense as they don't have supermassive black holes and aren't remnants of larger galaxies that experienced a collision event. They are - for lack of a better term - larger objects in the Kuiper belt of the Milky Way. Part of it as much as Eris, Haumea, Makemake and Sedna are part of Sol's Kuiper belt, which is a part of our solar system.
There is no hard edge to the galaxy. it doesn't just stop at some arbitrary point. The number of systems and gases peter out with distance, but within the very low density fringed agglomerations appear. These are typically material kicked out from the main body, but there is still enough low density stuff out there - gases, rogue planets, individual systems, etc - that it can keep small clusters of stars young.
I hope that explains how these objects are (most of them, anyways,) likely to be different from the old, dense globular clusters that orbit much farther out.
He wouldn't be able because his patches would be rejected because Linux has to stay a 1970s OS and never enter the XXI century
May you catch systemd and suffer greatly
I honestly don't know. I haven't checked the bleeding edge stuff in a few months. Been busy migrating everything away from RHEL since RHEL7 is such shit. Learning Slack and Debian in real depth takes time.
Microsoft's horrific approach to VDI is the reason I started to loathe their business practices in the first place. it is what led me to question them and the more answers I found to to my questions the less trust in Microsoft I was able to maintain.
Microsoft's views on LDI licensing are abhorrent. Putting the whole "Microsoft were late to the invasion of your privacy party but when they showed up they brought their A game" thing to one side...just for how they fuck us all on VDI licensing alone, I hope Microsoft fail. A pox on the houses of each and every one of them who had even the most tangential thing to do with this clusterfuck of halfwittery.
LTSP over the WAN is a lot like grinding off your genitals with an acid covered cheese grater while you're on fire and in hell. And fuck, that's just the shitty connectivity of the login, let alone trying to use the smegling thing!
Sorry mate, but Linux needs to get Weland/Weston front and center, with its freerdp server, and get all the bugs shaken out before it can compete with Microsoft on this.
Not a heck of a lot of Google in my CyanogenMod, mate. And all the tracking's off by default. And it works just fine if I don't add a Google account.
Trevor , I thought you made your living by providing maintenance for windows users, does this mean that you are moving full time to Linux systems and completely giving up on windows ?
Actually, I've mostly quit IT. While I keep a few clients around (I'm back down to around 25), this is mostly to keep my hand in the craft and have some form of legitimacy to what I write. I honestly don't think I do more than break even with any of them anymore. I make my money writing.
A few clients will probably still have Windows. The large ones that - to be frank - have other sysadmins to handle the day-to-day stuff. 80%+ of what I'm called in on today that is sysadmin related would be classified as either "datacenter architecture" or "something went kaboom and nobody else can fix it".
For the most part this actually does leave me working with non-Windows products. Linux (increasingly Debian as clients move away from RHEL thanks to the shitpile that is RHEL 7) on the server side and OSX (seriously, I've seen a crazy uptick in the past month, what gives?) on the desktop side.
Now, OSX is not joy to work with - securing this is proving to be a monumental pain in the ass - but I'm getting the hang of it.
For me, I've gone back to Windows 7. I think there is still Windows 10 on my little conference portable, but to be 100% honest I need to sent that back to Lenovo with a big "WTF this shitty plastic shell is disintegrating put a new one on" sticker anyways. I suspect they'll reset it to the Win 7 pro it shipped with, as they always seem to do OS resets when I send things in and don't want them to do so.
I have said multiple times that the only thing keeping me from really adopting Linux for all non-gaming roles was that the remote access protocols are a bucket of flaming hamster poo. This is still true, but the end of this miserableness is in sight. Weyland/Weston have built the freerdp server in directly, so we can finally use a protocol that actually works over crappy WAN links. That, and SPICE seems to have evolved to be almost not crap!
LibreOffice 5 is a huge step forward in usability for me, while Office 2013 has been a huge step backwards. (I have yet to try Office 2016.) Thunderbird is a bucket of shite, but if I can kick the exchange addiction, it just might do. Zentyal looks promising as a means to boot exchange out the door.
SAMBA 4 has finally reached "usable", and I no longer need Windows Server-based domain controllers for most things. I'm still waiting for a usable UI to configure SAMBA shares, but I live in hope.
Meanwhile LizardFS has provided a good scale out storage option for those looking to build additive storage filers with a single global namespace. Bye, bye DFSR, don't let the door hit you on the way out! And I don't even have to wait for Storage Replica, because I just don't need it anymore.
Scale Computing has taught me that KVM is just fine, thanks. And if I don't want to keep using Scale, I've found both OpenNebula and Proxmox are okay too. Nodeweaver is willing to sell me all-open-source hyperconverged (including OpenNebula-based managment) as a software-only item I can install on my own systems for next to nothing. That's fine too.
To be 100% honest, Outlook was the thing that was keeping me on Windows for so long. Not Outlook is a bloated piece of crap that crashed all the goddamned time, I have to use gsyncit in order to sync with my gmail, and that plug-in conflicts with my scheduleonce.com connector too often for my liking.
The calendar appears to be almost completely non-deterministic, even without the plug-ins and Exchange support for Android is best described as rubbish. Outlook means Office, and I am getting mightily sick of defanging Office's attempts to be "helpful" with each new install. No, I don't want you make fancy formatting decisions at the end of a pragraph, Office, I want <CR><LR> when I hit enter and not a goddamned thing more. And frak off with the smart quotes!
I basically want Office 2003. That was the thing that made me love Windows. It kicked everything else's ass in terms of productivity. Unfortunately, now Office 2003 isn't supported by Office 365, or newer exchange servers and is basically dead.
LIbreOffice comes in "portable" and I can run that right out of Dropbox. No taming the beast with each install. Bloody marvelous. Firefox and Chrome take my settings with them, so they're not a problem. Pretty much everything of importance is in Sync. Everything that's not important is in Dropbox.
What else do I use? Oh, yeah, Trillian. Trillian is cool, but there are a squillion great Linux alternatives. Oh, wait, nevermind, I can get that on Linux too. Skype. Skype goes on my phone, but there's Skype for Linux too. Ummm...ummm.....
Yeah, that's about it. There's lots of other things I use, but they all either have direct Linux ports, are browser-delivered, or have "good enough" Linux-based stuff. Or they are so infrequently used they work just fine as a VM-based item.
That leaves video games. I don't play often, but I have a diverse library. I hate controllers so that rules out consoles. This leaves me building Windows gaming rigs every 5 or 6 years. I'm okay with that. I'll pay Microsoft their pound of flesh in order to play my games.
Once Windows 7 can't be had, I'll move to Windows 10. When I do, I'll lock that SOB down and firewall it off from the rest of the network and treat it like the a toxic digital piracy-thieving piece of shit that it is.
But Windows for primary stuff? No. I just don't see the reason to do anymore.
Look, I'm lazy. I really, really, really, really, really, really, really lazy. I don't want to move off Windows 7. I'm comfortable here and life is simple. But the end is nigh. Windows 7 is going to get Windows XPed, and sooner rather than later.
The problem is, Windows 7 users have nowhere to go. In terms of software you mostly control, it's the end of the line. Now everything Microsoft is all cloud enabled, privacy-stealing bilge pumped from the abandoned mines at Redmond.
I either have to give up on any notion of privacy or control over my own data whatsoever or I have to learn to suck it up and deal with the clusterfuck that is Linux UIs. According to my own principles, the latter is preferable.
So yeah, I'm out. Windows 7 until I can't go any more. And as for clients, I won't take any new Windows clients. The existing ones I am going to try to get away from supporting Windows on the endpoint at all. Windows Server I might keep supporting, but mostly as a vessel for running legacy Win32 apps.
I don't like it, but the choices available are a Giant Douche and a Turd Sandwich. Which do you pick?
If the product is free, you are the product being sold.
Of course, even if you pay for, you're still going to be sold.
You know what? Fuck it, I'm out.
I can't speak to the other offices, but here at Reg North productivity means "git 'er done". Make of that what you will.
I don't think it's an unfair comment. A rubber dick with a wig on it is a more acceptable productivity platform than Windows 8. If the bar for "success" is "we hate this less than Windows 8" then your measurement of success is pretty skewed.
The real question is "do we prefer it to Windows 7"? So far, every non-nerd I've talked to says no. The nerds seem 50/50 split. Those who believe novel has intrinsic value love Windows 10. Those who believe new things need to prove they are worth more than old things tend to stick with Windows 7.
From this I conclude that Windows 10 is - for the most part - "good enough" to people who don't care about privacy or control of their OS. It is not, however compelling enough to pull users away from Windows 7 in any great numbers.
Perhaps this is why trickery and skullduggery is being employed to nudge - or force - users off of Windows 7?
Either way, I am not making a pretty penny doing rollbacks from Windows 10 to Windows 7 and configuring the systems to block the Windows 10 download. Let's hope that revenue stream doesn't dry up for a while, as it pays well for easy work.
Canada already has a professional association for iT. I am working for increased legal recognition.
Taking a stand doesn't mean you'll win. But for it to work not everyone who takes a stand has to win. Even a small percentage winning some of the time can begin to change things, and make security the new normal. That can start to make those who don't provide security for their products seem a worse deal.
Persistence is required. And a diversity of people willing to take a stand in a diversity of situations. But the attempt is not irrelevant simply because not all will succeed in all situations all of the time.
The market has failed to produce solutions thus far. Why do you feel it is rational to cling to a belief this will somehow change? There are very, very few examples in human history of markets self-regulating, especially in a manner good for the population at large.
There are an unlimited number of examples in which markets have failed to self regulate. Belief that markets will self regulate, in defiance of all historical evidence to the contrary, is faith as irrational as any religion.
Civilisations such as the Assyrians and the Greco-Roman civilisation and the Mayan civilisation were not good places to live in if you were, say, a slave, poor, etc
First off, it's worth noting the difference between "citizen" and "not citizen" in these cultures. Even the poor were treated a heck of a lot better than any non-citizen. And, to be perfectly frank, for a lot of the existence of those cultures non-citizens did okay. Not great, but far - far - better than non-citizens in contemporary cultures.
But the cultures you mentioned existed for long periods of time. How people were treated varied. And towards the end of each civilization we see the treatment of people at large degenerating. Slaves are treated more harshly. The poor are treated as non-citizens. Eventually, only the very rich seem to enjoy any rights at all.
Empires have fallen because when conquerors came they found an eager fifth column in an oppressed populace. That is where civilizations end. Hence, in my analysis, a culture it no longer "civilized" when the populace becomes so stratified that the majority are oppressed enough to actively work against the culture as a whole.
Those who pay history no mind will repeat its most egregious errors.
To be fair, most western nations seem pretty keen on getting rid of "innocent unless proven guilty", so I'm not sure why anyone would trust any western government if they made their living trading in governmental secrets.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone."
Prime Minister of the UK.
I would expect that a man "man up" and that a woman "woman up". The exhortation need not be gender determined, nor involve gender roles. It refers to the difference between a "man" and a "boy": namely that adults are required to accept certain levels of responsibility, especially social responsibility, as a matter of course.
It has nothing to do with bravery. It has everything to do with meeting the obligations of adulthood. And yes, sometimes those obligations require sacrifice - even of one's own life - for the greater good.
"Adult up" would be a possible gender non-determinative, though most people seem to prefer "(wo)man up" when gender is unknown. In this case, gender is known, so Assange needs to man the fuck up.
Nice to see Wikibon more or less in line with my own thoughts on the matter. All companies having a "Tier 0" flash tier by 2020 that handles potentially up to 50% of workloads that would normally be considered "Tier 1". By 2025ish the whole of Tier 1 moved to Flash (or a post-flash technology).
I think it's possible we'll be able to build enough foundries to handle that.
It's where people start saying stupid things like "nearline storage will be replaced by flash" or "Tier 1 will be all flash within the next [insert very short timeframe here]" that I start getting tetchy. No, we damned well don't have the fab capacity for either of those scenarios.
I don't think nearline storage will ever be replaced by flash. It will probably take a post-flash technology to do the job. Meanwhile, Tier 0 applications will be on post-flash technologies by the time we've moved "all" Tier 1 applications to flash (2025ish).
Tier 2 and lower applications will still likely be on hybrid storage for a long time to come.