No, the best tech people are the ones that solve the problems that their business needs solved. Sometimes that comes from the guy who knows the technology, and sometimes that comes from the folks who understand the problem.
And when you're really lucky, you get both parts of the equation from the same people
The uber-coder's code works the first time - it sits there silently and invisibly working.
Meanwhile, everyone is looking at the hard work and long hours being put in by the guy who's code needs lots of help. He gets the notice, not the guy who did it right.
That kinda presumes that the unit tests are good, doesn't it? Which means that somewhere, somehow, somebody has to know what problem they are trying to solve.
Defining 'good enough' is really tough. I've seen perfectionists get bogged down, but even more often, I've seen folks that invoke the 'it's good enough' mantra as a cover for sloppiness and incompetence.
Umm, that was definitely Leonard Cohen singing. They used the version from Various Positions , which was released in 1984. It was very heavily edited - not just verses were cut out, but they even removed individual phrases, making it a bit choppy.
Cohen is not a gifted singer. However, he does have a wonderful musicality, but it takes a while to hear it. In short bits he isn't great (but I don't think "really sucked" is a very accurate critique).
Liability can be an interesting thing. When you don't do anything unusual, you don't take any extra responsibility.
Let's say you're a theater manager that isn't blocking cell phone signals deliberately (like now, presumably)
So far, this is bad luck, but not negligence. You never made any promises about how fast they can contact emergency services.
Now, let's suppose that you set up a cell phone blocker. Essentially, you are now saying that you MUST go through the staff to call 911 - you have no other options. You have now made an implicit promise.
With this change, the chain of events described above is a disaster
Yep, people had heart attacks before - and they died. Now we have paramedics, automated defibrillators, cell phones, and other tools. So let's try a few scenarios:
Yeah, that's a good argument
But the two networks are not 'fully isolated'. Routing from one to the other may involve an ISP or two, but it can be done. So your work systems will still need to be protected from the risks that your home machine poses.
The only risk factor you've affected is the bandwidth between the two systems - as security trade-offs go, that doesn't seem to be worth the effort.
Now, if separating broadband connections also gives you some tax deductions and billing simplicity, then it might be worthwhile
Remote access should only be used in case of dire need
You have got to be kidding
Life is a healthy respect for mother nature laced with greed.