Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Massive conspiracy (Score 2) 465

by Simulant (#47259683) Attached to: IRS Lost Emails of 6 More Employees Under Investigation

Having worked in government IT for a bit, I'd say their story is entirely plausible and not entirely unreasonable. How many years of backups should they be required to keep? But hey, don't worry. Congress shall pass laws mandating backups and we will spend millions on tapes to be used once until
subpoenaed.

"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence"

In any case this is some petty, inconsequential, political bullshit we are talking about. Did the extra scrutiny result in anything? Anything at all?

Comment: Re:Whats the alternative? (Score 5, Insightful) 433

by Simulant (#47065277) Attached to: U.S. Drone Attack Strategy Against Al-Qaeda May Be Wrong
IMHO,

Ultimately this is a culture war and will only be won over the long term. For starters we could push back against Saudi Arabia instead of coddling them. I don't see how anyone can expect to win a war against Islamic fundamentalist terror when the spiritual center of Islam is controlled by fundamentalists with unlimited funds from oil sales. We also need to promote a more equitable distribution of wealth, world wide. Poverty breeds violence, ignorance, and fundamentalists of many stripes.

We could quit behaving like hypocrites, ignoring blatant and obscene human rights abuses by our Islamic dictatorship "allies" because it's profitable in the short term.

We could quit pissing our pants at the thought of terrorism, accept that it may occasionally happen (as it always has), and carry on instead of over reacting. Islamic fundamentalist terrorism has never represented the existential threat to western society that some would have us believe. It may be a thorn in our side for quite some time but the pain and damage it inflicts is entirely absorbable.

We should quit using this pathetic war on terror as an excuse to destroy ourselves.

+ - The true cost of Microsoft->

Submitted by Simulant
Simulant (528590) writes "A recent blog post on Microsoft's Volume Licensing Website attempts to clarify just what requires a CAL (Client Access License). The answer appears to be more or less everything on your network if you have Windows servers doing network basics like DNS & DHCP. According to MS, not only do all your network printers and other gear need CALs, but also your e-commerce customers, once they've authenticated to any software running on Windows.

The ridiculous CAL situation has never gotten the outrage it deserves with most of us being ignorant or in denial. With more and more MS audits happening these days perhaps we can spread the word."

Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:And the question of the day is... (Score 2) 327

Absolutely. For example Microsoft's misguided decisions to do things like hide file extensions by default and obscure the way files are organized with with My Documents, symlinks, and .ini files which hide true directory names have been counter productive in my experience. These decisions only serve to assist a limited subset of users who never venture beyond routine computer use and totally screws them over when they do.

Comment: Re:And the question of the day is... (Score 1) 327

There's got to be some acceptable balance between ease of use and NOT keeping users ignorant.
What constitutes ease of use for my mother is not necessarily the same as ease of use for my kids. It seems to me that we should be designing software that will teach our kids useful skills while not deliberately obfuscating the way technology works rather than for a previous generation who may never need or want to know what's really happening.

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Working...