Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Less concerned about war, more about retaliation (Score 2) 415

I'm less concerned about going to 'troops-on-the-ground' war with Iran than I am having this Stuxnet-a-la-Flame end back up in the United States lap that cripples some of our infrastructure. Obama has cracked the egg on remote warfare with this cyber-terrorism code slingers and the uber ramp up of drone usage from the end of the Bush era.

FTFA, our officials should have a good check on the premise that cyber warfare's shock value of implementation is very unexciting. It's different when you have physical assets to move around the globe vs. telling a someone to sling code and infiltrate an infrstructure such as an Iranian nuclear facility. You don't see the benefits or out-of-controllness in chunks, it's all or nothing once it's in place.

Comment Don't guess... do some analysis (Score 2) 464

Although most things are no brainers like you mentioned in your post, I'd say my best advice is: Don't guess and do analysis. Clearly you invested into virtualization for a reason and not just because you convinced your boss it was the 'trendy' thing to do. I'm glad to see you're not picking random systems because some poser sys-admin who makes bullshit conjectures said it was a good idea.

On the Windows side, there's plenty of tools to use to gauge virtualization candidacy; I've mostly used perfmon and cross-referenced it with my current performance on VMFS storage luns and what CPU/memory resources I have to spare in what resource pools are available. Linux (which is my primary line of expertise), IMHO, is much easier to gauge. You've got sar, iostat, vmstat (heck the whole sysstat pkg for that matter), not to mention if are a GUI trending fanboi, you've got xymon, nagios, cacti, big brother, etc. to graphically trend performance with nice rrd-tool graphs.

Also, my other factor is your line of business, where your datacenter is and annual budget towards technology update/refresh.

Comment Re:Who does this really help or benefit? (Score 1) 133

150 bucks buys a lot of potatos, if you don't know it you never were shoe stringing it as a student

Right. What would I know about shoe-stringing. I'm surprised you left your 'woe-is-me' story out of this post. I really am. $150 today is two tanks of gas for commuting and eating out with the wife and kids once a week. Shoe-stringing or not, it doesn't go as far as it used to and everyone has that expense, white collar or not.

the biggest racket is when the professor makes a separate business from his position by hocking books - either for straight up cash, booze or goodwill from someone who arranged him some weed and a bj.

You must have went to a tech school or some half-ass community college where they call half-ass knock-off professionals 'step-in night professors'. No one professor I know in any decent state school or Big 10 college did that. ever. period. Baseless.

wtf do we even need books for in an age when the professor could(if he could be bothered to take time from boozing and scheming for grants)

You sound bitter. Perhaps you should have read that $150 Algebra book more, got a PhD and have become a professor. Sounds like 'the dream life'; booze and free money.

Comment Re:Who does this really help or benefit? (Score 1) 133

Must be pretty normal for you to just come on slashdot to be a douche-troll, argue-for-the-sake-of-arguing moron? I find it insulting to quote myself, you can re-read parent. I said it would have potential to fly for gen-ed. But what about outside of that?

Great caveman-checkbook-foolery math, "Lets take 100 people x $150 and make a BIG number to post about". How about this for reality math for just one of those 100 'mystery' people you mentioned:

* $150 - Cost of one ged-ed book

* Maybe 8 gen-ed books at maximum for open book substitute ($150 x 8 = $1200 in book savings over two semesters)

* Total Cost for a 4 year (lets be honest, most ppl do 5 years now) decent school, all on student loans = $38,000

WOW! Maybe a 3% savings on your total school bill? Who cares. Any student with half a drive can go get a part-time job at McDonalds for $12 minimum and put a bigger dent in that school bill than waiting for the openbook miracle to save them some $$$.

So what was your argument again? I thought so, Will Hunting.

Comment Who does this really help or benefit? (Score 2) 133

This is a great concept, but who does this benefit in the end? I know quiet a few professors that I took classes from that the very books we used in 'their' classes were one's they 1) either knew a close colleague in their field that reviewed it or provided input into it (see liner notes for their names) or 2) endorsed or provided input on the writing or content of it themselves. Outside of that, there's always going to be that uber passionate professor that isn't going to like the quality, content or organization of the open textbooks they have to choose from and opt to still pick the book of their choice for the benefit of their students and curriculum.

So let's say this flies for gen-ed courses, which is totally could. I don't see it working at all for actual studies or specific majors with changing content or new adoptive technologies.

Hoping on the student loan bandwagon a second, let's say even half of a students book moved to an openly available one, it still wouldn't make a dent in reducing costs for the student in any manner of impact. I also thought my university's bookstore thoroughly enjoyed raping student's pocket books on the re-re-re-reselling of used books at a dirt cheap by-back tactic. Either way, if I see the fee or cost difference falling right back into the student's lap as some 'new' fee line-item.

Comment Pointless Censorship (Score 1) 198

The obviousness oozes out of this article... for starters, who uses MS IM anymore? FB and gtalk have pretty much squeezed those out with mass appeal unless you have a multi-client and are holding onto it for legacy reasons. Secondly, much like anything else that has made national headlines for 'the solicitation and is a hub of means to access of copyrighted material' should probably be abandoned and use something else people.

Comment Bay, You need to Chill (Score 1) 481

WTF is it with Hollywood becoming the most unoriginal and rising as the pinnacle of butchery lately with re-makes, re-takes and spin-offs of original shows or movies? Who gives a hell what Bay's writers are doing to add complexity to the TMNT; it'll be a complete massacre, and in the end, Vanilla Ice can hold his head a little higher since this TMNT production will take his place on the suck-it-all podium in TMNT II: Secret of the Ooze.

Comment Four proven WFH steps that never fail (Score 3, Insightful) 480

Where work-from-home at my place of work has become highly scrutinized because of people using it as a free vacation day, I've never ever had a problem with it at all. I think there's some prerequisites to this advice, though. Firstly, if you haven't proven yourself at work already as a reliable person that doesn't have to be micro-managed, or managers have an wishy-washy feeling about your 'work' character, then ignore my advice, because it's just going to be an epic fail or a bit harder when you start out.

1) Be available when you're suppose to: For shit's sake, I see so many of my co-workers who are 'suppose' to be available during core hours, who, when they WFH, cannot be reached by inner-office instant message, e-mail or phone, don't call into the meetings they are suppose to. I repeat, you do not want to be one of those people. It makes you look bad and it will catch up with you sooner than you think.

2) Set realistic daily work goals: Myself, I accomplish more at home because I'm not being fucked with or getting cube drive-by's, but that doesn't mean I don't kill myself in the process because I am more productive. Test the waters for the first day and see what you get done. At times, I've gotten what I needed to get accomplished in 5-6 hours and I called it a day. There's nothing wrong with that if you're showing production and results.

3) Have what you need to succeed: I have a very nice VPN solution, so I can rely on my own personal computing environment that I'm comfortable with (and also mirrors what I have at work with my desktop). But if you are issued a work laptop that they only allow you to connect into 'their' network with, then get what you need to 'feel' that comfortable productivity. I've never been at a place that wouldn't pay for a wireless keyboard/mouse set or get me a decent enough laptop to take home. Also, if you have books, paperwork, materials, bring that shit home. Don't think that you can get to everything 'digitally' because rarely does that play in your favor.

4) DONT abuse it: I always laughed in my younger, insubordinate and rebellious years when I'd hear "WFH is a privilege, not a right" and now that I'm a bit wiser, that's 110% the truth. I'm just like any other person, I have the TV on sometimes or stereo going, or use my lunch break to go to the hardware store quick for something. See it as your work trusting you do be independent but still a very reliable asset that they depend on. There's no reason to be uptight, you're at home, but don't be a douche and not do a thing get paid for it. It makes you complacent and lazy, and IMHO, that'll see you right out the door in time.

Comment Humanity should be ashamed by 'Fracking' (Score 0) 297

This is going to be a pretty strong opinion without a lot of facts (but a lot of feelings towards humanity, morality and nature) but why, as a nation, are we even letting 'fracking' exist to fatten pockets of Oil companies and politicians to piggy bag loop holes onto ? I don't need to be a 'fracking' expert to know a handful of things:

A) Pumping unknown chemicals into the ground that pollute water sources is a bad idea, B) Causing earthquakes in the mid-west where should not be feel-able earthquakes is not a good thing at all, what-so-ever, C) The uncanny health deterioration and after-effects of water pollution on animals and humans, not to mention 'poisoning the well' with natural gas so you can start potable and stream water on fire is (there's a theme here) not good at all, period. D) Contamination from fracking water just being dumped out on the land and seeps back into our habitats, bad. E) The pollutants from the refining process that has makes places in Wyoming have worse air pollution than L.A., horrible. May the list go on...

Why do we all need a 'study' to come out to tell this is bad? I'm ashamed of the greed that our country has consumed itself in that we'll destroy anything, for what? The Almighty Dollar.

Comment Re:Censor science reports to prevent Terrorism? (Score 1) 273

It is like withholding information on how to produce high quality steel because it will be used to make very sharp swords, or nuclear energy and research is bad and information about it should be restricted because such knowledge is involved in producing bombs.

I was onboard until your argument produced holes in it. I agree with what I quoted, but tell me the benefit of making a deadly flu virus that doesn't spread over it's natural means? That doesn't provide a barrier to improve anything in my world. If anything someone funded it to do just that: Have scientific evidence for a terrorism report. Should we censor ourselves from providing information like this? Totally.

There are many other ways to massage a scientist's ego than let them do a dog-and-pony show to prove their funding was actually used for something. I don't think it advantageous to share things like this at all.

Comment Better change the slogan soon then! (Score 3, Insightful) 230

I mostly visit slashdot as an avenue for tech/science/nerd news, and an occasional giggle at flame wars. The growing trend of 'Ask Slashdot' posts I've never had a problem with; what is a problem is the growing rate of redundancy/frequency in question posts versus actual news, no one moderating the train wreck of flame wars and the shear lack of aptitude from the question poser in terms of topic worth.

'Ask Slashdot' used to be an infrequent-but-jolt-of-freshness into daily reading, now it's just being used WAY to often with poor content abandonment IMHO. I see more posts saying "Didn't we just discuss this last week?" followed by a link to a slashdot URL showing the evidence.

All cynicism aside, I'm not for it and I'm sure as hell hoping the next administrative post to slashdot isn't "We're changing our slogan to 'Slashdot: Regurgitated Tech Commentary and Questions. No News. Stuff that doesn't matter".

Comment Re:We are getting one (Score 4, Insightful) 381

$200 isn't that bad for a little net portal.

While I agree 100% with that, how many times over are you going to spend that kind of money to find the 'shining light' that holds it's weight against the iPad before ultimately spending enough of your own money on sub-par devices that you could outright owned an iPad?

No, I'm not a Apple fan boi, but the iPad is a pretty fantastic device. Nothing can touch it right now and I think what gets all of us as end-point consumers is everyone's marketing bullshit lately to get into the tablet market and make a quick, almighty dollar off all of us.

I think the e-Reader should remain an e-Reader. Period. Perhaps the slight reach to make it enough to casually surf the internet and check e-mail I can live with, but that's where B&N and Amazon are making their mistake IMHO: Taking something and making it something it's not. Let's not forget the iPad was a touch-screen computing device with 'e-Reader and multi-media capabilities' not the other way around.

Slashdot Top Deals

6.023 x 10 to the 23rd power alligator pears = Avocado's number