|
"Management" is a broad category. In my experience it's the wankers who promise things to customers, not knowing or caring that the schedule will be unrealistic. Bonuses often incentivize them to do this, so that's part of the problem.
modified 17-Mar-20 21:08pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder how is called discipline of doing right things the right way
|
|
|
|
|
|
True. In the workplace, the right thing can rarely be done by following an approved process.
|
|
|
|
|
Time and time again I see the discussion of Microsoft’s level of investment in VB.NET framed around the same faulty assumption: it’s just too darned expensive and impractical for Microsoft to support two .NET languages How to create (or destroy) a dev community
And even if VB isn't your favourite language, I think it's still a great read as it applies to other "off the narrow path" technologies and languages that may fall off the support trains.
|
|
|
|
|
How he managed to write that without swearing is beyond me.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: it’s just too darned expensive and impractical for Microsoft to support two .NET languages
I guess this is the reason why F# will never be as big for .NET community as Scala for Java community.
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't the author saying this is a faulty assumption?
> Time and time again I see the discussion of Microsoft’s level of investment in VB.NET framed around the same faulty assumption: it’s just too darned expensive and impractical for Microsoft to support two .NET languages (ignoring the fact that they actually make three); it would take an army of developers and content writers at great expense nearly duplicating all effort across the ecosystem at worst or perhaps 10-30% of the (Developer Tools) division resources at best. Today I want to put that misconception to rest.
If I understand correctly, the author is arguing precisely that it is not too expensive or impractical for Microsoft to support two .NET languages, or even three .NET languages. If there was enough interest in F#, Microsoft could make it as big as Scala.
|
|
|
|
|
I think you've understood it correctly. Just in case I was not challenging the faultiness of this assumption anywhere in my post. Just ranting a bit that F# is underestimated too 
|
|
|
|
|
Some commercial password managers may be vulnerable to cyber-attack by fake apps, new research suggests. We can't have nice things, we can't even have irritating things
Thanks, security "researchers"
|
|
|
|
|
I still think that the best is to have them written down in a post it below your keyboard.
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Not Post-It, attached to the monitor? Dang. I guess I need a security upgrade.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
I go for an algorithmic solution that might very well be publicised. My passords are composed of three parts: Where, who, and security.
The "where" part is a modified version of the resource name. Eg. for FB (if I had an account there), it might be A**book (asterisk used here only to avoid censorship). "Who" might be my login name at a**book. "Security" is one of a small handful of unlikely terms to be known to brute force attackers, like relative's names with national characters, not used for the last hundred years.
I have got a standard series of misspellings/transformatons - obviously, I do not spell the names of my old relatives "correctly". The three parts usually make a 15-20 character password, too long for brute force.
So I use different passwords on different sites (the "where" part). I use different passwords on sites where I access different accounts (the "who" part). And even if you manage to crack my password at one social site (with a simple "security" part), it won't give you any access to my bank account (which is also protected by a OTP chip).
I have few problems remembering my passords. For encrypted documents on my PC which I haven't accessed for months, I might have to try a couple of times (mostly with with various upper/lower-casing alternatives). Yet, I see my current scheme as far more secure than any password manager.
|
|
|
|
|
I do similar.
Problem is... my family mostly not.
So I have done our own system.
File container encrypted, difficult to find, a bit camouflage and a very strong password.
In the file container, their document with the passwords to copy paste.
In my case I don't even write the password to copy paste, I write a description that only means something for me, so I can remember the concrete content of the 3 parts.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
in 2020, we should be post-password.
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, biometrics would probably work in most cases BUT they don't work very well when you want to share an encrypted file with someone else.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
It is a pity that Kerberos did not succeed on the web. It obviosly wouldn't relieve us from having to log in in the morning, but the dozens of later logins through the day could have been avoided. It would have given several other benefits as well.
The tragedy of Kerberos, although devevloped in a *nix environmen (at MIT)l, is that Microsoft said: That seems to be a good technology! Then the Open Source world retracted in horror: Then WE certainly is not going to use it! So even if Kerberos was on its way in, it was brutally kicked out, because the dog had sniffed on the feet of The Enemy. That is a pity, because it was a nice and well behaved dog.
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive study looks at the most attacked web technologies of the last decade. And 55% of all websites...
|
|
|
|
|
Pity C# stats weren't included in the article.
I'm not willing to give the report writers information they would need to spam me to read the source. (OTOH the probably fake address reportspam@ftc.gov is getting a link to it addressed keyboardmash.)
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
False positive cybersecurity alerts are on the rise, increasing the stress and information overload shouldered by security experts. Are you sure?
Yes, another lazy one on my part. Feel free to write a suggestion below.
|
|
|
|
|
Better than more than a quarter being false negatives!
What a bunch of whiners. A 26% false positive rate seems reasonable for this and shouldn't cause undue stress. And security is a big industry, so where's all the vaunted "machine learning" and AI?
|
|
|
|
|
I hate falsies.
There should be laws against improper use of silicon.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Now, you can stay in touch with your team, triage issues, and even merge code, right from your mobile device, anywhere. Now you can break the build with your phone
|
|
|
|
|
Why is it that whenever the word "mobile" turns up in a planning discussion, the term "YAGNI" flies out of the window and disappears into infinity?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
If you’re interested in tech, you’ve likely heard about the race to develop quantum computers. Yes and no
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
