Posts by Michael J Welker Jr 13 publicly visible posts • joined 11 Mar 2008
to tell the difference between those who actually support end user systems, and those who just use them.
As stated, AV scans, software updates, security patching, backups...ALL of these activities happen after hours. Multiply that by 5000 workstations, and wake on lan really isn't an option (not to mention it wouldn't work with randomized backup windows).
They took away our green screens, and now complain we're not green enough...At least my jacket is!
Mike
I coded in the late 70's - mid 80's, did networking and systems support in the late 80's, and moved to system (infrastructure) engineering in the early 90's. I've played with TRS80s, C64, PC Jr.s, S/360s, VMS, SunOS, HP-UX, AIX, every flavor of Windows, and played with Linux since 1995. I've designed LAN, CAN, MAN, and WAN solutions, including firewalls, VPNs, and PKI solutions.
I'm currently the Chief Architect. My role is to guide and coordinate the technology plan, and develop solutions to fill customer need, with the support of four engineering teams. A good architect, of which I hope I'm one, oversees the 'big picture'. Coordinating the efforts of the entire IT staff to a focused result.
That said, IT titles are so abused and misconstrued it can take months to find a real "systems engineer".
Mike
Mine the slick, lacquered one, nothing to get hung up on.
"It's easy to be a big-hitter when you're playing around with a massive economy and several hundred million people"
Perhaps you should take the time to become a 'big-hitter', then tell me how easy it is. We have states bigger than many countries, and the population management to go with it. If you'll reveal which country you're from, I'm sure we can review examples of the US 'stepping up'. There's more to it than just wedging people into a welfare state.
Perhaps you could also elaborate as to the "30-year-long Babylonian atrocity" you refer to so I might reply?
@Robert Heffernan
"If thats not a realistic vision of a utopian society, I don't know what is!" I'm afraid it isn't, at least not from my perspective.
Who's going to convince Pol Pot (or any of the others) to surrender their weapons? Or do they just become 'magically enlightened' when the rest of the world does?
To quote an outstanding man, who lead this nation to the fall of Europe's greatest threat:
Our military strength is a prerequisite to peace, but let it be clear we maintain this strength in the hope it will never be used, for the ultimate determinant in the struggle that's now going on in the world will not be bombs and rockets but a test of wills and ideas, a trial of spiritual resolve, the values we hold, the beliefs we cherish, the ideals to which we are dedicated. - Ronald Reagan
@Steen Hive
When it comes to charitable support, Mr Heffernan's arguement was much more relevent than yours. Are you stating that Luxembourg contributes more annually than the US? Or are you dividing it per capita? Do you include services as well as funding? How about food, manpower, etc? What nation does every other look to in times of crisis? While I'm missing the exact reference at the moment, a Canadian editorial piece about 5-6 years ago covered it well. The US is a easy target in times of peace and prosperity, yet when times are hard, we're generally the first to step up to the plate.
We could argue this all day, but perhaps we're going at it the wrong way. What percentage does each of your nations spend on their military?
Have either of you looked at how much U.S.A. (and it's citizens) contributes to charity and research? How about your own nation?
Look to your own affairs first. The US, and it's citizens, are the most charitable on the planet. We're the ones you look to in times of trouble. It's easy to 'bash' someone when you don't need them, but if history tells us anything, it's that you'll need us again. Fortunately for you, we'll be there, and we won't hold your current haughtiness against you.
No, we generally don't agree with government programs and subsidies. We believe in freedom and individual choice.
THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!! is the rant/excuse of fascists everywhere.
How about we think of the childrens future, where everything is regulated and monitored because we can't trust individuals to think for themselves. Heaven forbid we punish people for things they've done that actually harm others, we'll stop'em at the door with unending regulations bursting with minutia.
When they took away the right to defend yourself, you supported them "for the good of the children/people".
When they harassed male educators and men who enjoy helping youngsters grow, you supported them "for the good of the children".
When they decided it was criminal to say anything others might take offense to, you supported them "for the good of the individual".
When they decided men and women should be asexual in any sort of non-relationship environment, you supported them "for the good of the gender".
Guess what! It's your turn!
Perhaps you should consider supporting the rights of others, even if you disagree with their life choices, so they can be there to support your rights.
Mike, the gun tooting, plain talking, child mentoring supporter of individual freedoms.
Paris, because she also cares little for the needs of others until the problem comes home to roost.
And these teachers, who are afraid of email or texting, are grooming our children? If you're afraid of videos showing up on YouTube, maybe you shouldn't be doing whatever it is you're afraid others will see?
I'm not saying the kids are behaving well, but come on teachers...Grow Up!
The 'Internet' was created by US citizen Vinton Cerf in 1973.
Paul Mockapetris invented the Domain Name system in 1983.
ARPANET, the predecessor to the Internet and it's original foundation traces it's roots back to the `50s.
Sir Timothy John Berners-Lee invented what might be more aptly described as web browsing. The process of serving web pages from servers to clients. Which has nothing to do with the topic at hand, the ownership of domain names, but is just a service/process running on top of the Internet.
The Internet and DNS both predate his development by a significant period and are US creations.
Finally, the US is founded on immigration. Claiming discoveries because a person was born in your country and CHOOSE TO LEAVE is pretty shaky. AGB moved to the US five years before patenting the telephone. He had left GB (to Canada) a year before. He emigrated to this country, and choose to stay until his demise. So, discovered here, by someone who choose to move here and stay here. I'd say that makes it a US invention.
Mike
@Oliver Magee
"You seem to be missing the point that a EU compamy providing internet gambling services is not an illegal activity in europe!!!"
Correct, an EU company providing internet gambling for EU citizens is not an illegal activity. An EU company doing business in the US however is subject to US regulations, just as a US company doing business in the EU is subject to theirs.
@TimNevins
Possibly, but then it wouldn't be the child's arsenal, nor the governments fault/responsibility, it would be the parents.
@The Other Steve
"Assuming you are using it as a noun" - Actually, if you re-read the sentence, I'm using it as an adjective.
"Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism"
American Heritage Dictionary
Generally speaking, in the US, the liberal vision is one of big government or the "nanny state".
@PT
Actually, classifying someone's bias as liberal in today's US politics would generally put them in the category you've described.
@James Dean Kirby
Both of my children received .22 cal., single shot rifles for their eighth birthdays. Both are trained in firearm safety. And neither has access to any firearms in our home without an adult (locks are wonderful things). Neither has access to an arsenal without parental/adult involvement, which places the onus on the adults.
To save the rants, I believe in individual responsibility. I'm a strict constitutionalist, with libitarian leanings. I believe in firearm ownership for personal protection, and personal liability/responsibility for anything an individual might do to others. I believe in national rights. I don't believe the US has any rights to tell others what may be allowed or posted online, only the right to control the transactions that occur in the US (which US citizens should control/influence/complain about). I can't sell firearms to Canadians or Brits, why would they have the right to sell gambling in the US in violation of my countries laws?
Mike
S,
What liberal or uninformed bias!
No twelve year old can amass his own 'arsenal' without an adult. It requires a 'live' transaction face to face.
Online gambling on the other hand is easily done 'on the down low', allowing easy access to kids.
I don't agree with the ban, but for now providing gambling services, outside of a few zones, is illegal in the US. It's not just EU entities, nor is it extending the rights or authority of the US outside it's borders. DOJ is prosecuting those who violated US law by providing gambling services to US citizens. It's no different than going after those who sell drugs or weapons to criminals (except for the violent severity of the crime).
Mike
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
