Yeah I can see Linux being important, I just didn't think companies put much stock in the certifications themselves, vs. work experience or interviews or other such screening methods. There was a period in the '90s when certs were a big deal, Microsoft's MSCE and Certified Novell Administrator and Cisco's CCNA and whatever, but in the 2000s the certs started being more ignored, at least in my experience, b/c they weren't that reliable a demonstration that the employee was actually any good. Maybe they're back, or the RHEL ones are taken more seriously?
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
the almost-death of Blackberry may help Microsoft somewhat here. Microsoft's strongest market is basically "business", mostly traditional business that isn't "hip" enough to be using Apple products. People who want nice Exchange integration, connections with Office 365, etc. Previously that market was totally sewn up by Blackberry, but as they're collapsing Microsoft might grab some of that market.
Well, the majority of web-facing servers anyway. According to Netcraft, about 30% of servers run Windows/IIS, and just about all the rest run either Apache/Linux or nginx/Linux (plus a few running *BSD, of course).
I can see companies caring about Linux expertise; after all, the vast majority of servers run Linux, so if you're hiring for someone doing devops you probably want them to know their way around Linux. But 44% prefer people with "Linux certification"? I know some companies care about stuff like RHEL certifications, but I didn't think it was that many.
It is depressing how many times people will fall for the same scam over and over again. Already we have heard of new exchanges "safer than ever" and people are lining up to put their money into them on the faint hope that it isn't a scam yet again.
Runnung on a treadmill?!
You say that, but someone already thought of that.
I guess you don't know how the grid actually works. It does NOT involve running wires directly from the generator to some distant location. Again, I don't know that much about how it's set up in the UK, but physics there is the same as in the US. In the US, electricity is often sold across multiple states (easily far enough to reach another country in Europe). even when it's generated with fossil fuels. Since losing money isn't a popular hobby, I would have to say it makes economic sense.
It's a problem in two parts, but what it really comes down to is that when you double click, you don't actually know if data will be viewed or a program will execute. Is it REALLY a surprise to anyone that that's a gamble you will lose sooner or later?
Fundamentally, having the same action mean more than one thing is asking for trouble. There needs to be one action to open and another to execute.
Next, the icons themselves should indicate an executable even if it does not end in
CoeLux hopes to treat seasonal affective disorder, or SAD. Each year, some 10 million Americans, mostly women, find themselves sinking into a heavy malaise during the wintertime. CoeLux hopes its LED bulbs, which create the illusion of infinitely tall, bright blue skies, will help trick the brains of people with SAD, ridding them of their blues."
How does this excess electricity get to non-local consumers? There is significant line loss over long distances and the grid has to have the capacity to carry it.
Given that the grid exists and power is sold on it now, it stands to reason that it can be done in an economically sound manner. Otherwise it wouldn't exist.
While there may be information in this instance we don't have access to, on it's face there is no reason whatsoever to believe the datacenter knew what the customer was storing. They generally don't unless it is specifically pointed out.
Too many of these investigations are way too close to the old witch trial where they toss you in the river and if you drown you're innocent (but dead) and if you float you're a witch so they burn you. It's about as logical as seeing if they weigh the same as a duck.