Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:do they have a progressive view? (Score 2) 336

by Ziest (#46791737) Attached to: Detroit: America's Next Tech Boomtown

The problem with Austin is that it is surrounded by Texas and is at the mercy of the state legislator which, as the late great Molly Ivins would tell you, is one of the most stupid and reactionary in this country. Austin may be groovy and progressive but once you leave the corporate bounds of Austin you are in Texas, set your watch back 150 years.

Comment: Re:do they have a progressive view? (Score 1) 336

by Ziest (#46791691) Attached to: Detroit: America's Next Tech Boomtown

A friend of mine once worked for a company in San Jose, CA. that the owners decided to move to Austin. More than 60% of the company quit rather than live in G*D forsaken Texas. As much as people jump up and down about how much better the tech industry and the living standard is in Texas the fact is that it is damn near impossible to get tech workers to leave California for Texas.

Comment: Re:we must end this jewish problem once and for al (Score 5, Insightful) 168

by Ziest (#46622915) Attached to: NSA Infiltrated RSA Deeper Than Imagined

America today is NOT the country my ancestors fled Eastern Europe for nor is it the country my wife and I grew up in. America is now a country run for the benefit of the wealthy, the privileged and the corporations. The CIA, NSA, FBI, DEA, etc. now exist to keep the powerful in charge and to detect and eliminate any movement that will challenge the status quo. Google "Green is the new Red"

Comment: That may be true .... (Score 1) 285

But the problem with Austin is that it is surrounded by Texas. Traveling in any direction the moment you leave Austin you are waist deep in loud, ignorant, obnoxious assholes. I used to work for a company in Sunnyvale, CA. that announced that it was moving to Austin. They kept going on and on about how cheap housing was and how big a house you could get for the money you were paying in the Bay Area. Even with all that more than half the company quit rather than move to G*D forsaken Texas. The company did move and was out of business within a year.

You could double my salary and I would still never move to Texas.

Comment: Re:Runnin' on Empty... (Score 4, Insightful) 477

by Ziest (#45079135) Attached to: HP CEO Meg Whitman To Employees: No More Telecommuting For You

My objection to this technique has always been that by doing this, you essentially lose the people that have skills and can get jobs, and keep the people who don't have skills and can't get jobs, weakening your company. I'd generally rather choose who to make redundant, even if it costs a bit more, and keep the people who I know are actually productive around.

Correct, mostly. I have seen this happen in a number of companies I have worked out, The mgr starts a round of layoff, either by laying people off of annoying workers until they quit, what also happens is that the smart, talented workers they want to keep read the writing on the wall and leave. The mgt tries to compensate by ramping up the off shore offices but soon discover that it's damn near impossible and really expensive to replace the good people who walked out.

Rinse then repeat.

Comment: Re:Runnin' on Empty... (Score 5, Funny) 477

by Ziest (#45079099) Attached to: HP CEO Meg Whitman To Employees: No More Telecommuting For You

It's 2:00AM, some "very important server" has just gone down.

[Pointy Headed Management]"We have to get this server working or we'll lose millions an hour"

To which I would reply: "I thought you moved all those jobs it India so that we could have a 'Follow the Sun' model and none of us would have to woken out of a sound sleep, Bangalor will take care of it. Well, what happend to that plan?"

Comment: Re:WE HAVE MET THE NME AND THEY ARE NSA (Score 2) 362

by Ziest (#44786423) Attached to: John Gilmore Analyzes NSA Obstruction of Crypto In IPSEC

Correct. Making bigger haystacks, poisoning the well is the key to, if not bring down the NSA, but at least bog them down. If what we have read is correct, that the NSA retains everyting that is encrypted, encrypt everything and generate tons of garbage email that is encrypted, If many set their mail servers to have a catchall address which silently gets tossed into the bit bucket. The idea here is that what ever is the cost to decrypt a message it is not zero.

The other point is that stuffing their databases with garbage will render their databases usless. I'm not sure at what percentage the DB is of no value. Its way more that 10% but under 75%. Where that point is I don't know but lets find out.

Remember: Silly is a state of Mind, Stupid is a way of Life. -- Dave Butler