It's all the documentation on the system. Because it's not just enough to say "yes, we've secured it", we have to write it down.
It's all paper trails, man.
There are days that I can rarely work up empathy for real people.
Coincidentally, those are the days that I have to drive on the 405. I wonder if there is a connection?
My degree is in Computer Engineering, with some Master's work in Comp Sci...
And these days I mostly work system accreditation. That is, certifying that a given system is secure. I do relatively little of the tech work, but push a lot of paper.
How do you change the default search functionality in Android?
Have you tried Googling for that information?
Are the updates where the hardware requirements have changed so much that you effectively have to buy new hardware. Obviously, not an issue for phones, but annoying as hell on PCs.
Or the company that comes out with an (non-free) upgrade ~every~ year, necessary or not, and immediately stops supporting the previous version. "Yeah, we know about that rare bug. It's fixed in the latest version, which will only cost you $150k, across your user base, to upgrade to."
Aside from lazy reporting, of course...
Is because there have been what conspiracy theoriests are calling an unusual number of banker (though they usually use bankster) suicides and mysterious deaths, since the start of the year.
So they're trying to make this death fit a pattern that may not actually exist.
I'm (sorta) one of those admins.
It's not that local sites are refusing to go along with the data center consolidation, as we have to justify anything that stays here instead of moving to the data center 400 miles away, it's that in a lot of cases the data center people are saying, "You have to move", and then not understanding the reasons why we can't.
Whether or not this lack of understanding is deliberate or not, I'm not sure. We lowered our explanation to about a 6th grade comprehension level, and they finally seemed to get it, at least while they were on site.
"These are the daily and weekly tasks we must perform with this system - you will have to sign an MOU/MOA (Memorandum of Understanding/Agreement) where you will accomplish these tasks how we tell you to." (Often, they didn't have the trained personnel to do it.)
"You will have to provide 24/7/365 uptime, with at least three 9s reliability (yes, I know that's low, but we couldn't justify higher), including the ability to do file level restoration." (They really balked at the file level restoration.)
"You have to have trained support personnel with OS experience." Their response was, "We can upgrade that to
We got to keep most of our stuff, at least so far.
People are supposed to put on the glasses (even if they don't wear glasses) and then also remember to bring three or four handfuls of batteries, and not lose them also? And you also have to remember to charge three or four sets of these tiny things every day?
People did that regularly with several models of cell phones.
But there's also that new battery model, which if it scales well, could solve the entire problem. (http://www.extremetech.com/computing/153614-new-lithium-ion-battery-design-thats-2000-times-more-powerful-recharges-1000-times-faster) Seems like this is something Google should invest in.
Since google has been better at design (lately) than Apple (who came up with craptacular earphone jacks for the latest iPods)
The latest iPod earbuds are the only ones ever made I can stand to wear more than an hour. That includes the custom shaped ones.... I spent a few hundred on a nice set of earbuds but after I got the newer Apple earbuds, the Apple buds are the ones I use on planes simply because I can leave them in. The sounds is not as good but the shape is far, far better.
Apple also apparently understands that most people hate recharging batteries, a fact that seems lost on Slashdot.
I said jacks, not earbuds. The buds themselves are fine; I like them. (Far better than the "stuff into your ear" kind; I can't wear those at all.)
But the (female) jack point in the iPod is fragile and has only one set of contacts, so if there is any significant lateral pressure on the connector, the jackpoint cracks slightly, allowing future pressure moments to cause intermittant disconnections of the plug from the contacts, turning off the sound.
This lateral pressure can easily be applied if you have your iPod in a pocket and are just walking around.
Apple's response to me (other than replacing the iPod) was, "Well, just keep the iPod in your hand; don't put it in your pocket."
Yes and no.
Depending on the location (nation, state, municipality, etc) there are laws about deliberately filming someone. ~Sometimes~ there are legal differences between casual recording (you walking past in the background) and deliberate recording, but sometimes not.
Sure, you're not going to be (normally) busted for filming your friends at the beach and getting some random people in the background, but it's still possible. (IIRC, there was an Australian case very recently about this.)
Since it's, effectively, a pair of glasses, make each of the temples or temple tips be a rechargable battery, with a good enough connector to handle connecting/disconnecting and plugging / unplugging hundreds of times.
Design them so that it won't shut down if even one of the two power sources is present, and ship with two+, allowing people to buy additional. Power temple #L1 is low? Disconnect and plug in power temple #L2. Power temple #R1 is recharged, replace power temple #R2 that are on the glasses.
Since google has been better at design (lately) than Apple (who came up with craptacular earphone jacks for the latest iPods), this should be easy.
An Orwellian world, after all...
It's an Orwellian world, after all...
this: "The Wedge Touch Mouse is an artful product shaped as an angular wedge..."
as this: "The Wedge Touch Mouse is an awful product shaped as an angular wedge..."
Looking at it, it in no way looks like it is designed for comfort of use.
Ok, I'm sure I'm missing something here.
But I don't see where a specific test can't be patented to determine if a gene is present, without patenting the gene.
If someone else comes up with a different way to detect that gene, then they wouldn't be in violation of the patent.