Yeah, I was just picking on the XP box rather than the watching "nature documentaries" bit because, well... It was a joke to pick on the XP box, because the average HR person would be more interested in nature of the documentaries and whether you would be likely to do that on work time (people do, amazingly enough).

I'm happy to agree that you don't really (or don't realise that you do) look down on other services. Certainly posing => posting changes the nature of your post significantly!

Anyway, I think we've done the topic to death now...

"And if I were a recruiter, I'd probably consider having extensive profiles online a negative quality -- indicative of spending too much time posing and not enough actually working."

(and don't worry - I didn't go into the bit with your really disgusting habits like running unpatched Windows XP)

Maybe a recruiter wouldn't check Slashdot - maybe they would. But you sure look like you spend a bunch of time on here from the frequency of comments - and yet you were dissing other people who spend "too much time posing on the internet". That's what the "for shame" was about, the elitism of dismissing people who "pose" by using a social network which you obviously look down upon.

So says the athiest who had a hangover on New Year's Day and doesn't speak English as a first language and likes Torchwood and uses the word Fuck and develops Android Apps but is looking for something else.

And I've only read the first two pages of the comments you've posted to Slashdot while logged in.

Pot/kettle. Looks like you have a plenty extensive online profile on a site which is pretty much one of the oldest social networks of your "tribe" (nerds) and you look down on non-nerds who do the same thing but on other sites. For shame.

Yeah, and those soldiers who go to war so the people back home can live in peace. What's with that?

Seems to me it means Linus understands tradeoffs in security and isn't willing to throw extra CPU time at a very narrow theoretical hole (sha1 gets broken without sha2 being broken as well)

If I didn't need more throughput than a single CPU can provide, I'd still be on OpenVPN for everything. It's easier to configure, significantly easier to manage, and rock fricking solid in the face of network unreliability - none of which I can say for IPSEC.

What the serious fuck?

You've described non-technical management there... presuming that you're allowing said non-technical management to tell you what you should be putting the effort into, and micromangaing your design.

If you don't have the soft skills to understand where and why the things you code fits in to the greater scheme of things, you're building grand castles in the air. Whoopdy-yay.

Maybe we're talking at cross purposes. I don't necessarily mean "become a great sales droid" or "learn to seduce investors". I mean learn how to talk to the people who do and understand where they're coming from, so you can see how your work fits in, and know what to do and how to do it.

Otherwise you'll never be valuable for anything other than small, well scoped tasks that someone else can spec out for you.

(maybe substitute "the RIGHT things" => "worthwhile things")

Yeah, because no tech job is every about working with other people.

Smart
Gets things done

That's a nice couple of points, but it's missing the most important. Gets the RIGHT things done. You find out what the right things are through soft skills. Technically right is worthless if you don't have a sales channel for it, or the whole problem you're trying to solve could be avoided by doing something else somewhere else.

I did, and I've passed the user's contact details on to the engineers at Apple so they can talk to them directly. I've also re-enabled the account, and I'm just keeping an eye on the server that the user is on and moving some other users off so we can afford the disk space for a bit.

Distributed fuckup very possible. Any one hosting provider can roll out a breaking change to their entire system, or have a handy single point of failure, or be 0wned on a central command host with acces to everything...

Sorry, I'm not quite sure where you're getting your information about what Mail.App does. I'm getting mine from the server telemetry logs where the client first identifies itself as:

"name" "Mac OS X Mail" "version" "7.0 (1816)"

And then proceeds to issue a COPY command:

UID COPY 3360991:3361069 "INBOX.Junk Mail"

See the "COPY" in there. I am the author of the blog post, and I think my credentials in this particular case trump yours, even if you're the author of Mail.App.

It appears to only be that one user so far - I've seen a few isolated "copy into same folder and expunge the old ones" in the logs (now that I log that) but not enough to be a pattern.

Oh, there are plenty of new RFCs coming out all the time. The most interesting bugs in mail clients tend to be trying to support new RFCs and not getting it right.

We de-duplicate on COPY, so there was only one copy of each email on disk. We don't de-dulplicate metadata though, because it's usually so small, and generally in the cache file of a different folder, where de-duplication isn't possible.