I know you are kidding, but the scientists who are putting the satellites into orbit are not the same group as the engineers who are designing the satellites in the first place.
We manage our patching process by exception. By that I mean, "bad" patches are held back and everything else goes through. I am responsible for about 1400 VMs running on 60 physical ESX hosts. We have a small subset of VMs that are representative sample of the environment. Those get patched two weeks ahead of time. If nothing goes wrong with those servers, the corresponding patches are pushed into production.
We have an exception for the web tier. Those get patched the weekend after patch Tuesday. They are higher risk due to being public facing.
We have some verbiage in our documentation that states something to the effect of, "We expect that the vendors will properly test and QA their patches before releasing them. We do not have the time to fully vet every patch before deploying it. Therefore we take the following steps to mitigate the potential damage to the environment caused by a bad patch...."
Snapshots are taken of all VMs before patching. That way in case something slips through the cracks, we can quickly roll back to a known good state.
If you need to go toe to toe with the CAB, make them provide you with a business case justification that details the perceived risk(s) and danger of not mitigating the risk. If they cannot do that, they are completely worthless.
Your counter argument then becomes, "Mitigating your perceived risk is going to take xx hours of time. If the risk were to actually occur, we would lose xx hours of time cleaning up."
At the end of the day, if the risk absolutely has to be mitigated and you do not have enough time with all of your other responsibilities, then they need to provide resources. They can do that by either assigning the task to someone else, or hiring a new employee. Ultimately that is your supervisor's call to make the business case for needing more help. All you can do is quantify the time required to comply, and then make your supervisor make a decision on what you will stop doing because you will now be dealing with the new mandate.
Try to understand where the CAB is coming from. They probably have a regulatory requirement, either because of the business that your company is in, or because of the business that your clients are in. They have to prove that they have a functional change management process. It seems like they are just going too far overboard with the process. A change management process just needs to show that people cannot make unauthorized changes to the environment whenever they feel like it. It also needs to show that changes that are made are documented. Potentially destructive changes that could impact application or service available should be discussed, or at the very least, procedures should be developed to mitigate any potential impact of a destructive change.
Meet them half way. Suggest constructive solutions to address their concerns.
In Germany it's considered better to put your indicator on while you're in the fast lane to indicate to the person in front of you that you want to pass them. Flashing your lights is considered rude.
Clogging the passing lane is rude. Flashing your lights makes much more sense than indicating a turn you can't make. If I saw someone indicating a turn they couldn't make behind someone driving too slow I'd assume I was looking at a couple of assholes, not one good driver stuck behind one asshole, because assholes leave their signal on all the time.
I really have little idea how this idea is seen around the world, however. I know that flash to pass is acceptable in the UK and Canada, and it's the standard in most US states including California, where there are the most people, the most vehicles, and the most vehicle miles traveled.
I don't know how his systems work but my PC works like this. I have a big disk with Linux and virtual machines. I have a SSD and a 2.5 HDD of the same capacity for Windows, and I periodically back up the SSD to the HDD. The backup is bootable and if the SSD fails I just get the HDD. All the data gets backed up to a disk on a pogoplug running Debian which is supposed to be on a separate UPS but isn't right now, at least it's not in the same machine. I don't store any big data on the Windows side, so that's only 160GB. The nearby disk is 3TB. I only get 10-18 MB/sec peak to/from that, depending on the client, which is a little poky for USB3 and GigE but within the acceptable range for most purposes. I had another disk hooked up directly to my PC which I mirrored to that network volume, but it died.
There's definitely a lot of people in this thread with no fucking empathy, and this is a technology-related site. Checkmate, Obama! Or something.
my reasoning is actually that all desktop work chairs just suck ass. a 10 dollar one piece plastic chair beats all of them - your ass doesn't sweat, you can lean on them, they don't roll out under you - they don't roll around their axis(this one is particularly annoying because WHO THE FUCK really needs a rotating chair?? that rotation and roller wheels are the worst fucking idea ever. I mea, who the fuck comes up with that idea and thinks it's a good choice for a worker who keeps constantly pushing on buttons on the desk and moving an object around the desk? ? fix problems for the 99% by removing the wheels, rotation and smelling cushion and let the hipsters have the stand up desks).
Well, I use my rotating and rolling chair all the time. Besides the value to sysadmins, which I have found to be significant, it's pretty much mandatory for anyone who has a filing cabinet right next to their desk. I also sweat in plastic chairs, maybe because I am fat. Still, it's true. Actually, I found this to be true way back when I was a child, when I was not fat. That didn't really happen until Jr. high.
The only office chair I know of which is worth one tenth of one shit is the Aeron. It's still one of the most ergonomic chairs around in spite of not actually having been designed to be particularly ergonomic. The goal was to create "the office chair of the future" and obviously in the future, your chair should be fully adjustable. As it turns out, there's many different body types and sizes of human, so full adjustability is what's needed for ergonomics. I literally sit down in this chair when my back hurts. The combination of good posture and good lumbar support is unbeatable. And I bought my Aeron used, so I didn't get completely mauled on the price. And it doesn't have cushions to stink up or make you sweat, either.
If you spend a lot of time sitting in an office chair, you want an Aeron. I don't care how much markup they have. Of all the shit that startups wasted their money on back in the dot-com bubble, the chairs were the least senseless.
To me the point when HL2 shit the bed is when they pulled a Bioshock Infinite and fell in love with a gimmick...the gravity gun. In HL2 the GG was just another weapon, used in a couple of spots but other than those spots it really wasn't required. What did we get for EP 1? Gravitypaloza. By the time I was being forced to shoot basketballs at striders I was just sick of the stupid gravity gun, just as I got sick of infinite shoving that damned skyhook under my nose going "Isn't this neato"? Sure it was, before you BECAME ANNOYING ABOUT IT!!
As for so many games not played? Bundles, simple as that. You can get so many bundles on Steam that you soon end up with dozens of games and you only have so many hours in the day so...there ya go. Between the big Steam sales and Humble Bundles I probably got a good 50 games in a couple months, just not enough time to play them all before the next killer bundle comes along.
Finally as for Steam being "bloated" on OSX.....ever stop to think that OSX simply isn't very well suited as a gaming platform? Because on Windows you are looking at maybe 60Mb (I have Raptr AND Steam running and barely am using 100Mb) and from what I understand the Steam for Linux also runs quite well, which leaves OSX looking as the culprit from where I sit.
No RAID does not allow HDD to perform as SSDs. RAID increases throughput but it does not decrease access time, which in many cases is fare more important than throughput.
RAID doesn't improve first access time, but good RAID improves non-sequential seek times.
Having a seek time of 8ms when you are working with many small files is a huge hit on performance. The seek time of SSDs is well under a millisecond.
Yes, for some workloads it is very important. But for many of those, there's prefetching.
No need to run x86. So why push x86 into the portable space?
Because intel has never figured out ARM. They tried once, and failed. But x86 chips are running on less and less power all the time.
The hustling scammers, the druggies and drunks, the mentially ill, or the real homeless that are down on their luck and actually trying?
All of those people are down on their luck, even the scammers. They were emotionally and/or socially undernourished, and they can't see any better way to live than a lifestyle which will lead to a sad and pathetic retirement, if any. The druggies and drunks are addicts, they're caught in the grip of something they can't get away from. It's not enviable.
Those people are helped by my donations to homeless shelters and to women and children shelters.
I hope your local shelters are actually good places. Often they are staffed with serious assholes. You wouldn't think that was possible. It is.
Well, in Santa Cruz, CA, most of the homeless kids came from homes where they had been actively abused, often sexually. I went to school with some kids who lived in squats. They didn't move out of their houses and onto the streets because of a good home life.
For thousands of years, people have been getting mad at the beggars instead of those who profit from and thus are motivated to maintain the status quo that creates them, and indeed, depends on economic conditions which produce them. After thousands of years of this and nothing working, those who learn the lessons of history are doomed to stand around and watch everyone else repeat it.
The goal of Deinstitutionalization was that instead of being warehoused in huge, remote institutions, mental patients should be returned to communities where, with help, they might achieve some function in society. Unfortunately there was not much funding for the second part
Unfunded mandates are never benevolent. If the idea is that people will get help, but no mechanism for that is in the act, then that idea was constructed to fool fools.
The old appeal to authority works every time. If your doctor is fifteen minutes late for your appointment, suck it up, buttercup. But if you're fifteen minutes late, they just might charge you for the visit and tell you to go home because the doc is seeing another patient right now. Or just banging an assistant. And if you overpay, the IRS might well keep it, but if you underpay your ass is theirs.
Or, you know, if they decide at any time that you might have underpaid once.
it reeks of devaluing, and largely throwing away nearly a century of public infrastructure
What public infrastructure? All that infrastructure is private. That's [part of] the problem.