I wonder if it will still be possible to bullshit your way through the essay questions on the final, or if you will have to actually provide good answers? Would be a tough course if the latter!
7531 posts • joined 12 Feb 2011
I wonder if it will still be possible to bullshit your way through the essay questions on the final, or if you will have to actually provide good answers? Would be a tough course if the latter!
Just because it is contained within a rack or row instead of having tentacles across the whole data center doesn't mean it isn't a SAN. It is more a matter for storage admins as demand for them dims, but arrays, SAN switches and HBAs will still be in demand because those are still used in this Brave New World.
The audience for software that does what SAP does is too small, and the scope of what it does too large for it to be a viable open source project.
Who is going to invest the hundreds of millions it would require to get to the point where you can sign up your first customers, just so you can undercut SAP's pricing and hope they don't figure out a way to respond with some targeted discounts that kill your chances of stealing their customers?
On the one hand, you have Android, which is a security hole masquerading as an operating system for the 90% or so of Android users who see one or two (if that) updates and then get abandoned by the OEM. On the other hand you have automakers, who know as much about writing secure software as they do about 17th century Russian history. Combine the two and they might as well just add a "hack me now" button that posts all the relevant info about your car to the dark web to save hackers five minutes.
Well, 5% of any company's employees are in that company's bottom 5%...
The problem is in assuming they are equally distributed amongst managers, and that the company's worst employees not contributing anything useful. The former is obviously false, the latter is 100% true based on my having consulted with/for HP on several occasions and finding a lot of deadwood they could easily be rid of. Unfortunately when you do cost-cutting layoffs you typically lose more of the good employees who can easily find another job, so the more of those untargeted layoffs you do the greater the percentage of deadwood. That was easy to see in HP from 1999 to 2012 (when I last worked with them)
I always said based on my experience you don't have an 80/20 rule in IT. You have more of a 10/80/10 rule. 10% of the employees do 80% of the work, 80% of the employees do 40% of the work, and 10% of the employees do -20% of the work. It is the ones who make more work for others you want to be rid of. Whether rank and yank is the best way, I don't know, but I do believe that you must have some method for getting rid of those people.
The trick is identifying them - as an outsider, I could do it, but as an insider it would be a lot harder due to friendships protecting the worthless, and bad managers trying to take advantage of that system to get rid of good performers who they dislike, are threatened by, or because they have to get rid of someone and don't want to get rid of their fishing buddy who constantly breaks stuff.
With "leadership" like that, of course it will be totally dysfunctional.
No one goes running outside to see an airplane, but they still show up at airshows to see rare planes or stunts. People will still show up to watch rocket launches in person, but they won't be news.
There are rockets launching every month from Kourou, wherever the Russian launches go from and other places. They never get press unless they blow up, and sometimes not even then. The only reason Musk is is because they're landing the rockets, which is new for now.
Once they have the bugs worked out of the software, landing the rockets is a solved problem and landing the rockets won't garner a mention on the news any longer as they'll be just like any other launch as far as the public is concerned.
It was reported on Nov. 16, after November's patch Tuesday. I don't know what their internal testing cycles look like, but assuming they have an internal patch Tuesday "dogfood" cycle a month ahead of public release, it would have to be found/fixed VERY quickly to make the patch set being tested in December and released in January. If there's any complexity at all, it falls to testing in January and release in February. If testing uncovers problems, then it slips beyond the 90 day window.
Not that I like to defend Microsoft, but I think 90 days is pretty short for making a bug public. Of course Google doesn't care, Android's patching system is so broken it doesn't make any difference if someone finding an Android bug released details the same day or waited a year, most of their userbase won't ever see a patch, and even among those who do a minority actually apply them.
There is no legal standard of what constitutes "craft beer" in the US. Anheuser Busch could call Bud Light a craft beer, and nothing would stop them (except the laughter)
Sorry, but you're 100% wrong. Apple publishes the figures with their quarterly report every three months, so if you bothered to look it up and see how much more they make selling phones than they do from selling services you wouldn't look foolish. In fact they make more PROFIT from selling phones than they make REVENUE from services!
Apple's services revenue is growing, but it won't ever grow enough to outpace their profits from selling phones, unless their phones sales take a massive dive.
Depends on where you make your money. Obviously Apple wants to be in the position they are, and Google wants Android to be in the position it is. All the Android OEMs are the ones who are caught in the middle, competing with each other to the point they all lose money except Samsung, but not getting any of the after sales revenue that Google does.
Not true. Most of the Android phones sold in China don't have any of the Googly bits, just the open source stuff. If you are worried that the open source parts of Android are US, then maybe we should all be worried that Finland is taking over the software world thanks to Linus Torvalds :)
Apple outsold Samsung two years ago, with the iPhone 6 launch. Possibly they might be able to do it again this fall with the iPhone 8, but there are a lot of variables (will they be production limited, will Samsung continue to lose low end share in China & India) In the end beating Samsung by a bit for just one quarter makes nice headlines, but it is meaningless. Samsung easily outsells Apple for the full year.
As for the idea that a more expensive iPhone won't sell, don't be ridiculous. First of all, if there's a new "Pro" grade above Plus, it will be $100 more if Apple follows their typical pattern. Add $200 for the top end storage and it'll be over $1000, but only $100 more than a high end Plus. Apple sold millions of 6, 6s and 7 Pluses at the top memory config for $949, so I doubt an extra $100 will put people off (unless you believe the $1000 barrier is psychologically important) assuming the Pro is enough of a step up.
That's been obvious for a few years now. Microsoft did a 'start over' in mobile that orphaned old devices one too many times, plus pissed off their partners by buying Nokia and making their own devices (sort of like Google is doing with Pixel, but it is easier to get away with once you already have 80% of the market instead of only 2%)
All their phones are high end, whereas Samsung also sells low and mid priced phones. I haven't seen figures for smartphone profits for a few years, last time it was something like Apple making 90%, Samsung making 20%, and everyone else collectively losing money.
Most modern filesystems on flash use TRIM, which erases the blocks as they're deleted, instead of allowing the FTL to manage it and erase them on an as needed basis.
Why do you think that if the messages hit flash they can be read? When you erase flash the contents are gone, you can't recover it.
I think the possibility of exploits against Confide's servers is a much bigger problem. Maybe Russia doesn't need to bother since they already own Trump, but China would want to read it and they have access all kinds of 0-day exploits and ability to take advantage of weaknesses in how encryption is programmed, plus more than enough money to buy off a critical employee or two if they are somehow secure enough that they need the help.
The presidential records act was amended in 2014 to include instant messages among the protected classes of documents that must be preserved. I hope all republicans wanting to put Hillary in jail for using a private email server will feel the same about administration officials using an instant message app with the defining feature that it leaves no paper trail.
But somehow I bet they'll believe it if Pence says he's been assured that no classified information or official business is being conducted using Confide....I'm sure they're only using it to decide where to order lunch :P
Exploiting a random Android user is pretty pointless. What's the gain that you can't get other methods?
Exploiting a particular Android phone, like say an orange president who insists on using his personal phone for tweets and carries it with him everywhere, is a different story entirely. That's easily worth the investment to use one of these bugs to develop a silent exploit that lets you e.g. activate the microphone so you can listen in to conversations taking place near it.
Not only are republicans the party of Lincoln (who WON the civil war and didn't inherit the racists from the southern democrats until LBJ signed the civil rights act in 1964) but trying to apply something that happened literally a century and a half ago to today's politicians is ludicrous - politicians have and have always had a time horizon that never stretches further than the next election.
The issue of backdoored encryption seems to cross party boundaries, there are democrats on each side and republicans on each side. More republicans on the pro backdoor side than democrats, but only because they are the traditional "law and order" party that tends to defer to the wishes of law enforcement. The real battle is convincing law enforcement that the idea is stupid, once they accept that, even an executive order happy orange president won't be able to enact such a terrible idea.
If your house is made of wood, hanging the 10 kwh lithium battery on the outside wall isn't going to prevent it from burning down if Samsung SDI made the batteries.
Or to put it yet another way, being type #2 isn't the guarantee of failure it normally is if you are ALSO type #1.
4228 byte sectors = 8x sectors of 528 bytes. Standard fare for enterprise drives, to provide an extra layer of error correction.
Dunno about the "reversed PCI slot", guess I never heard of that one, but are you trying to claim BSD is a 'standard'? You must be joking. Apple just used it as a layer in their software, just like many companies use Linux in theirs. If you want to look for a modern example of embrace and extend, look at Google's use of Java in Android.
When has Apple ever "embraced and extended" standards? They either follow standards, or go their own way with an Apple only "standard". They don't play 90s Microsoft with them.
I don't think a lot of Trump voters really truly believed he had a solution for getting jobs back like they used to have. I think they liked him because they hadn't heard anyone speak to their problems for a long time. The republican party hasn't cared about working class economic issues for ages, except to pay lip service with "trickle down", and the democrats stopped caring about them after getting creamed repeatedly in the 80s and decided being too liberal was the cause and went to a good ol boy southern democrat named Bill.
I don't think his voters expect Trump to do anything about it so much as they KNEW Hillary wouldn't - her early position in favor of TPP gave Trump these voters on a silver platter. They figured even if Trump didn't actually make their lives better he'd shake things up and piss off the establishment. I think Trump might actually be permanently reversing the republican party direction on free trade - it will be pretty hard for a republican to run as a free trader for fear of Trump giving him the Twitter treatment and handing victory to his primary opponent.
Until Bill Clinton came along and promoted and signed NAFTA over the objections of many traditional democrats, they were the party of trade protectionism, and the republicans were free trade. In not much moer than a generation, they look to switch sides with each other. Almost like when the southern racists that had been with the democrats for a century abandoned them en masse for the republicans after LBJ signed the civil rights act.
The results of the economy will be almost immaterial to Trump in the 2020 election. If things go south, he's going to blame Obama, blame democrats, blame judges, blame members of his own party, blame business leaders, blame immigrants, blame ISIS, blame China, blame Mexico, blame Rosie O'Donnell. Everyone except himself.
The jobs are never coming back. If tariffs force manufacturing to move back into to the US, the new factories will be highly automated, and create few jobs - none of which will be for the displaced rust belt workers who were his most ardent supporters.
Look at the stats, the US is still the second ranked manufacturer in the world, and our manufacturing output is TWICE what it was 30 years ago in constant dollars. But despite that, manufacturing employment peaked in 1979, almost 40 years ago. Fewer workers make more stuff. Trump needs to make robots illegal as part of his
Turn Back the Clock on America Make America Great Again plan if he wants to create jobs for those guys.
Why would Cruz vs Bernie be worse? Cruz may be hated even by most of his own party's establishment, and if you aren't a hardcore conservative you may think his views are terrible, but at least you can't provoke him with a tweet, and he wouldn't think that hiring people off a website for nutjobs to advise him on running on the country is a good idea. You might feel Bernie is worse than Clinton if you don't like hardcore liberals who want to raise taxes to give the money away for free college and rainbows, but with him you wouldn't have to worry about potential investigations and accusations following him around throughout his term, and no one would ever accuse him of being in the pocket of Wall Street or big business.
I think either one would have made a better president than Trump will, or Hillary would have. Too bad we didn't have that choice, and instead of the two party system we had four:
Angry white man party: Trump
Conservatives who claim to have Christian values but don't know what Jesus taught party: Cruz
New world order party: Clinton
1960s hippie dream party: Sanders
Just to add - the reason why that attitude is responsible for terrible choices is that so long as the democrats and republicans feel the choice is only between them, they can run awful candidates and just assume their followers will swallow mouthfuls of shit and not complain because they'll be told and believe that the other side's candidate is even worse.
If a third party candidate was considered a viable alternative, the republicans couldn't run a Manchurian candidate like Trump, and the democrats couldn't run Hillary with her baggage and investigations, because their supporters would have other options. But so long as weak minded fools believe the "a vote for third party is a vote for the EVIL other side" propaganda, you'll see party machine crap like the democrats swinging the primary to Clinton because she "deserved it", not that interloper Sanders, and the republican party only backing away from similarly stealing it from Trump because the alternative was Cruz, who is probably second only to Clinton herself in being hated by the republican party establishment.
I remember seeing exactly the same thing from people unhappy about Obama winning, blaming anyone who voted third party instead of "correctly" for McCain or Romney for Obama being president. And Bush before him.
It is idiots like these people, who always claim "THIS election is the most important in generation", who are responsible for terrible terrible terrible choices such as that between Trump and Clinton. Fuck you guys, I'm going to continue voting third party, not feeling bad about it, and not giving a shit if you think the "wrong" candidate won. In my mind, the wrong candidate won whether it was Trump or Clinton.
If you ask Trump and many of his followers, if it is from any "mainstream" media, it is biased and therefore can't be trusted. Recently I've noticed some of my more conservative friends lumping Fox News into that category. I guess Breitbart is the only "unbiased" source in their mind. If a known purveyor of fake news is seen as the only legitimate outlet for real news, there's not really much chance of a fake news detection bot becoming generally accepted as an arbiter of fake news. Especially when an orange tinpot dictator need only speak out against it and tens of millions of his followers will accept that statement as gospel.
I think maybe you have to simply write off the people on the extremes. The ones who will only trust a source if it agrees with their preconceived biases will never accept an impartial arbiter, even if (especially if) if disagrees with those preconceived biases. It is like trying to talk sense into anti-vaxxers, or people who believe diet soda makers are knowingly poisoning the population, or who think the Moon landings were faked.
The real problem with fake news isn't at the extremes - these people can't have their minds changed no matter what proof is provided. Where it is damaging is in the mainstream middle, where maybe someone who was going to vote for Clinton sees a friend share a story about her being indicted the weekend before the election, and stays home. There will be so many scandals swirling around Trump and his administration by 2020, it will be open season on fake news about Trump in the next election so I think that side will bear the worst of the fake news next time around.
The problem with offshoring all the basic work to low wage countries is that there are fewer entry level jobs in IT. Between outsourcing in general, and moving to the cloud in particular, that's only going to get worse.
Sure, if you are a large company doing your own IT or a managed services provider, it makes sense to have the level one & level two support in cheap places, and hire experienced people locally for the high level work. But those people only exist because they once did lower level work, jobs that are fast disappearing. Not just in the UK, but in the US, and other high wage countries. But what makes sense in isolation does not make sense at all for the entire industry.
I almost wonder if those of us with a lot of IT experience may be like COBOL programmers in the late 90s, and end up highly sought out even past our retirement years due to the shortage of experienced people since there are fewer and fewer coming up below us. Sure, maybe things will have changed too much by then for that to happen, but I'll bet if you would have asked all those mainframe COBOL programmers in the 60s and 70s if their skills would still be relevant in 1999 they would have laughed.
First it saved money to get people out of the offices, because of reduced real estate costs. Somehow now those don't matter (and one of their six "strategic" offices is in Manhattan!) and they claim getting everyone together will save money. It will, but only because a lot of people will quit.
But I'm sure they know that, and want it to happen. Then they can replace the older workers who can't/won't relocate due to family with cheap college graduates willing to relocate, and offshore workers.
No risk, I use a credit card for Paypal - I'd never give them access to my bank account! If I don't get satisfaction from them, I'll have my credit card provider reverse the charge to Paypal. Never had to do that though, I've had nothing but good dealings with Paypal.
Even when I've sold a few things on eBay over the years, no problems. Since they don't have my bank account info the money just gets held as a credit, which I then use for future purchases.
Assuming the price is the same with Paypal as with other payment methods, it isn't your problem if merchants get charged twice as much for using Paypal as using credit cards. I use paypal where available because it eliminates the chance of the merchant being careless with my credit card number and me having to hassle with a getting fraudulent charges canceled and a new card issued (granted the only "hassle" that really exists with this process is that it takes a bit of time for me to memorize the new credit card number)
Of course the risk is that the higher fees will make merchants who currently offer the option for paypal less likely to do so, so you have to go back to using credit cards for those sites, but again that's not my problem, that's paypal's problem.
Not sure what's wrong with Evolution, but why bother with a mail client when webmail is fine for what most people need their mail to do? Having a dedicated client is totally against the cloud first strategy that is becoming more and more prevalent for those wanting to reduce cost.
If there's no momentum behind Evolution and Thunderbird, maybe it is because fewer and fewer people are using a traditional heavyweight client for email these days?
I do admit to being curious why Munich thinks that it would be cheaper to have Windows than Linux. The training cost argument doesn't wash because everyone knew Windows and had to be trained on Linux back in 2004, just like today. Surely the functionality gap between the two was far greater in 2004 than it is today.
It is hard to imagine the TCO of Linux has gone up, which implies they believe the TCO of Windows has gone down. So what's the driver for that? Maybe they felt they needed a relatively more expensive PC to run Windows well than to run Linux well back in 2004, but now the cheapest possible PC will run either well?
Which is my point. You remove the ability for discriminatory pricing, and they'll charge the high prices everywhere. You're not going to win by enforcing this. Better to let them do it, and defeat it via VPNs.
If a copyright holder wants to geolock so discriminatory pricing can be used where certain countries pay more (either because they are richer, or because they are more interested in the content) but providers aren't allowed to do this, what do you think will happen?
Do you really think copyright holders will charge the lower price everywhere? Of course not, they'll charge the higher price everywhere. Since that might hurt their bottom line, if they lose income in the formerly lower priced countries, they might even raise that higher price in hopes of making up for that lost income.
Trump will claim his executive orders are over 4x more efficient than Obama's, needing only 2200/10 = 220 words per report versus Obama's at 3000/3 = 1000 words per report!
I've never had a problem running Linux on my laptops. The first was a Dell I bought in 2001, suspend/resume didn't work on it, but then it didn't work properly when I booted in Windows XP, either. In 2006 I bought a Toshiba, and suspend/resume kinda worked, but not reliably enough to use. I didn't boot Windows on it often enough to know if it had the flaky suspend/resume also. I got a Dell in 2011, and it everything worked perfectly it on it, I'd leave it booted for months and just close the lid. I just replaced it with an HP (17t with Kaby Lake if you're curious) and it works perfectly too.
That's not to say there isn't a little futzing required. I can't remember what I had to do on the first couple, but I remember on the last Dell I had some wireless issues that took a little digging for unreleased patches to resolve, that were handled in the next kernel update a few months later. With the HP 17t I had a really weird problem where wireless simply didn't work, because there was an "acer-wmi" driver being loaded that thought it was wireless and overrode the real wireless. Took a few hours of google research before I tried something that realized that, then it was a simple matter of blacklisting that driver.
I think the keys to my success are:
1) don't buy ones with any weird or cutting edge hardware, like a built in fingerprint reader, and expect it to work
2) Install the version of Fedora (or similar relatively cutting edge distro) released AFTER you buy the laptop, that way it will have a new enough kernel that it has all the drivers you need. If you run some sort of LTS type distro then you'll be too far behind and you'll have problems unless you buy last year's laptop on special
3) get the model with the Intel GPU, not the discrete NVidia/ATI GPU - then you have to deal with either binary drivers or poorly maintained open source drivers
4) get the model with the Intel wireless/bluetooth cards, not third party
Some people can handle it, some can't. I've never had a problem with it, and had management that I never met that managed quite effectively. There have to be clear goals and expectations. People can goof off in a big office just as easily. I've seen people in an office who take a half hour on a restroom break. One minute in the restroom, 29 minutes stopping at half a dozen offices/cubicles along the way.
If I was working with classified material, and had been helping myself to some of it, I'm pretty sure that after Manning and Snowden I'd get nervous that they were going to start cracking down on that sort of thing and stop.
I guess they were cracking down - it only took a bit over three years after Snowden to catch this guy!
And contribute to both sides. Probably because technology companies viewed Clinton more favorably in the first place, and many expected her to win, they had donated to her campaign and probably not so much to Trump's. Donating to the inauguration is a way of making up for that. Probably they wouldn't have donated as much to Clinton's if she'd won, since they'd already curried the necessary favor.
While corporations will complain about stuff that hurts their business, most try to remain apolitical other than that. I think you'll find most back both horses in a typical election (say Obama vs Romney 4 years ago) without any reservation.
You couldn't make something like this up!
It sounds like a combination of direct access to a bittorrent repository, plus they hacked Sky's streaming service so you can watch their stuff for free?
Are you seriously complaining that there is exclusive Netflix content you can't watch because you don't have Netflix? Why should Netflix be required to sell the rights to the competition? The whole idea is to encourage people to subscribe. Same with original Amazon Prime content, original HBO content, and so forth. If Google Music decided to make its own label and signed Lady Gaga, then Spotify and Apple Music subscribers shouldn't expect to be able to listen to her songs on their services. The whole reason they'd be paying her $ridiculous is because they'd hope the exclusive arrangement would cause a bunch of people to sign up.
I do agree with those complaining about all the arrangements for back catalog stuff so I can't say "I want to watch Hitchcock's 'The Birds' and expect to be able to find it whether I have Netflix, Amazon Prime, or other services, like I can 99% of the time if I wanted to listen to some song from the same time period regardless of what music service I have. Missing out on new stuff that's exclusive is one thing, but exclusive rights to stuff that decades old is just stupid and counterproductive.
If they did it over a three year period, it sounds like they had plenty of time to flee the country and disappear. They were too greedy.
Infecting one PC with memory resident malware would allow it to infect other PCs using any random remote exploit combined with an escalation of privileges once aboard the new target.
Then even rebooting won't fix anything, you'll be reinfected by one of the other infected PCs. Even after a patch Tuesday update everything will eventually be reinfected, since not every PC will be rebooted at the same time. Even if the hole being used is patched, or an AV software vendor developed detection for it, the malware could download updates to continue operation (masquerading as what looks like normal web queries to mask the activity)
It written well enough and properly maintained, it could essentially be immortal. What are you going to do, get everyone in the company to shut down every PC all at once? Yeah right!
Much cheaper than paying severance when you fire them, and opens up a lot of positions to hire with new college grads (for contracts that require US based support) and the rest overseas where it is cheaper.
I've been telecommuting almost exclusively for a decade now, there's no way I'd go back to working in an office. Especially if I had to move to some city assigned to me (I'll bet with little cost of living adjustment if someone living in a cheap place gets assigned to NYC or SF)