I like McGyver's they get things done, they do whatever needs to be done in whatever way it can be done given the resources available and sometimes the solutions are just damn genius! Sometimes.
Mostly though, they are short sighted work arounds leaving increasingly bigger messes for Mc Gyver's boss's to sort out.. unfortunately, they are also trying to be McGyver.
We do need McGyver's in this world. The problem is, most all people are being McGyver's.
We need more people to be patient and consiencious observers of life who test their ideas and come up with theories. People who look forward to whats comming next and design for the future and to be built upon, not just always working in the space of Now.
Now is important (for sure), Now is when things get done, now is when things happen! It seems people today equate "progress" with "happening now". That is to say: people don't want to plan things out today and build tommorow, they want to start work right away. This is possibly an admirable trate, but without planning and understanding whats being built and its need we soon end up in the "then" needing a lot more "now".
Society does not support people to work for a better future, but it does support those in the now.
We need a mix, we need to encourage the genius McGyver's into places where they can help the world but managed so they don't just put off a bigger disaster in the future. We need to somehow train the other MyGyver's (the ones building a poor solution in the now for an even worse problem in the future) to be something "other" but which fits with their ability.
Now, my observation. The reason there are so many McGyver's is that business and government rewards that type of behavior and rewards genius and fool hardy with some level of equality (as much as anything is equal in societies built from a history of slavery and opression).
Whats needed is a clear reward, placed in the future, for following a Engineering path. One that a person can see building day by day and one which they can observe the conciquences of returning to be a McGyver.
I'd like to see more "scolarships", more "government funding" in such a way that it makes sense to do things right (not just to do things "profitable" which is certainly not equating to right). Actually when it comes down to it, this is the core of the problem... "profit" in terms of money does not equal "profit" in terms of society and people. It infact means the opposite.
Lets make "profit" in money to "profit" society.
Thursday, 10 March 2011
Tuesday, 8 February 2011
Do No Reply type emails should be banned.
With the ever rising tide of "phishing" scams why is it that major players are still using "do not reply" email addresses. It seems to me this is basicly saying f**k off to the consumer, your not important enough for us to listen to you but we still want you f**king money now hand it over (even though its worded in the nicest tones possible).
I am making a policy. I am going to generally not deal with any company which emails me anything in the form of a "do not reply to this address" email (that is, anyone I'm not already dealing with *sigh*. I guess you can't change some things).
Say NO to do not reply!
I am making a policy. I am going to generally not deal with any company which emails me anything in the form of a "do not reply to this address" email (that is, anyone I'm not already dealing with *sigh*. I guess you can't change some things).
Say NO to do not reply!
Thursday, 20 January 2011
Microsoft Visual Studio 2010 - less good for hardcore coders
In my last position I worked extensively with Microsoft Visual Studio 2010 and generally found it to be a good system. Until receiently...
The short version:
When running in debug mode the system changes pointer values at runtime.
This mostly will go unnoticed because the debugging IDE reports the correct values and even does the correct maths. So if you try doing the following:
((size_t)(&FunctionOne)) - ((size_t)(&FunctionTwo))
If you look at the result in the debugging IDE you might get (real example):
((size_t)(0x011ee0e0)) - ((size_t)(&0x011ee050)) = 0x00000090
However, if you try an apply this in your running code you get instead:
((size_t)(0x011d132f)) - ((size_t)(0x011d137a)) = 0xffffffb5
Whats majorly annoying is:
The short version:
When running in debug mode the system changes pointer values at runtime.
This mostly will go unnoticed because the debugging IDE reports the correct values and even does the correct maths. So if you try doing the following:
((size_t)(&FunctionOne)) - ((size_t)(&FunctionTwo))
If you look at the result in the debugging IDE you might get (real example):
((size_t)(0x011ee0e0)) - ((size_t)(&0x011ee050)) = 0x00000090
However, if you try an apply this in your running code you get instead:
((size_t)(0x011d132f)) - ((size_t)(0x011d137a)) = 0xffffffb5
Now, I get what its trying to do here (at least I think I might) its actually adding a call stub to the functions which probably adds a bunch of debug checks to try and help out a poor developer.
Whats majorly annoying is:
- It does not translate the addresses consistantly! So (like in the above example) addresses which where previously ordered top to bottom are transposed to the opposite effective order.
- If you attempted to perform an in memory transfer of this functions data you would copy garbage (or at least not the function proper).
- Maths carried out on pointers is completely meaningless (e.g. deriving the length by the difference between two pointers is not possible, though arguably this is bad practice anyway).
- Confusing because the IDE reports the correct values, addresses and maths (e.g. results in IDE will not match results of performing exact same math in code).
Saturday, 15 January 2011
Left feeling very negatively towards Disney and Pixar
First off, I think these two companies are great. Producing some fabulous stuff.
What I am left spitting bricks over is their damn, up their own arse self advertising at the beginning of their DVD's.
Firstly, I've bought your damn movie, don't force me to watch promotions of your other movies! >.<
Secondly, and this is the biggest annoyance, I got the Toy Story collection as a Christmas present and on every damn DVD theres a spoiler for the third movie and on the second DVD its PART OF THE INTRO TO THE DVD!
Oh my god! F**king annoying.
So, my "Arse Company of the Day award" suprisingly goes to Pixar and Disney DVD division.
What I am left spitting bricks over is their damn, up their own arse self advertising at the beginning of their DVD's.
Firstly, I've bought your damn movie, don't force me to watch promotions of your other movies! >.<
Secondly, and this is the biggest annoyance, I got the Toy Story collection as a Christmas present and on every damn DVD theres a spoiler for the third movie and on the second DVD its PART OF THE INTRO TO THE DVD!
Oh my god! F**king annoying.
So, my "Arse Company of the Day award" suprisingly goes to Pixar and Disney DVD division.
Thursday, 30 December 2010
Microsoft Outsource to China
Why should I care? I would feel the same way, but, for Windows Update!
When I worked for an UK Internet Technology Company, whilst working there there where a great number of unsolicited connections comming from Chinese and South African IP addresses.
Investigation into this traffic proved the traffic to be Hacker Activity and specifically Brute Force attempts to gain access to one of the Companies SQL servers.
In my time I have rarely seen attacks comming from English or Ammerican IP addresses. Those countries are probably just too well regulated and locked down and people have much easier ways of making money (aquiring information?).
So basicly the solution was historically to block incomming connections from any unknown Chineese IP addresses (which makes perfect sense, all the companies I've worked for have been UK, Ammerica or NZ based and have little business ties to China).
Until I reciently discovered that Microsoft seem to have distributed Windows Update world wide. Now, your friendly regional updates are sourced (or might be sourced) from China Seems crazy? Its happend to me (I thought I had a virus... maybe I do?). It just seems to be that Windows Update wants to download its latest batch of updates from China.
Just incase there is someone out there why might be able to say "hey, yup.. its a virus" and maybe I'm misjudging Microsoft? Heres the IP address(s) in question:
213.199.149.103
213.199.149.104
Registered to : Beijing Urban Network Co.,Ltd
Being accessed when I run Windows Update for Windows Vista Ulitimate.
Hey maybe its just got f'ed up and can't recognise where my IP is and thinks I'm in China.. I'm open to possibilities?
When I worked for an UK Internet Technology Company, whilst working there there where a great number of unsolicited connections comming from Chinese and South African IP addresses.
Investigation into this traffic proved the traffic to be Hacker Activity and specifically Brute Force attempts to gain access to one of the Companies SQL servers.
In my time I have rarely seen attacks comming from English or Ammerican IP addresses. Those countries are probably just too well regulated and locked down and people have much easier ways of making money (aquiring information?).
So basicly the solution was historically to block incomming connections from any unknown Chineese IP addresses (which makes perfect sense, all the companies I've worked for have been UK, Ammerica or NZ based and have little business ties to China).
Until I reciently discovered that Microsoft seem to have distributed Windows Update world wide. Now, your friendly regional updates are sourced (or might be sourced) from China Seems crazy? Its happend to me (I thought I had a virus... maybe I do?). It just seems to be that Windows Update wants to download its latest batch of updates from China.
Just incase there is someone out there why might be able to say "hey, yup.. its a virus" and maybe I'm misjudging Microsoft? Heres the IP address(s) in question:
213.199.149.103
213.199.149.104
Registered to : Beijing Urban Network Co.,Ltd
Being accessed when I run Windows Update for Windows Vista Ulitimate.
Hey maybe its just got f'ed up and can't recognise where my IP is and thinks I'm in China.. I'm open to possibilities?
Monday, 20 December 2010
Thats just Charming!
Oh my god!
Whoever wrote the later series of Charmed (4th Season onward) completely runined the character of Phobe :(.
The love whole story between a Demon and a Good Witch (Cole and Phoebe) is/was timeless (and should have ended in a win for the power of love.. should of). In the first, second and even third seasons it was explored so vividly and so well (with love conquering all against great odds). The up's and down's, the mistakes and the forgiveness.
Then, the Seer arrives and maniplulates the couple (which was not in of itself a bad direction for the plot). Love then proceeds to fly out the window and the whole series decends into a pointless re-living of earlier events (and in essence basic story concepts of Cole plotting subitly) and attempts to turn Cole back into the evil character he once was. Though at each stage its the actions of Pheobe that turns Cole more and more evil (whilst she is excused of her own evil and making cole feel he can be nothing but).
All the charm went out of Charmed!
Pheobe and Page's characters are made to appear to be total sluts going from one seemingly loveless bedding to the next (though some small amount of effection is always involved) and all the witches are painted as blameless and good no matter what they do whilst a Demon (who infact often behaves far better than any of the witches, is evil).
It left me feeling I should be getting in touch with my inner demon as the Demon sets a better example than the girls. Maybe its a bitter writer trying to say its better to be demonic than good O_o but this is hardly a moral to live by, nor one I would support.
Just to be clear, I don't think theres anything wrong with a strong female character, but its hardly strong sleeping with a range of men (who all want to sleep with the girl) and the character keeping moving on to the next. To many "males" of this world its their idea of the ideal girl i'm sure *rolls eyes*.
At least Pipers character remained strong and thats probably the only thing compeling me to keep watching (as I need something I can relate to / sympathise with). Piper stays true to love without ceasing to be faithful and loving to her partner.
The whole Cole-Pheobe love story was so complelling and filled with the best and sometimes the most challenging aspects of true love.
Only eventually to paint true love as pointless and evil in the later episodes.
"Pheobe has become the architypal loveless slut" would be a fair quote for the seasons past season 3.
Which is such a shame because Phoebes started out as a powerfull woman living by her own rules. Which didn't initially mean a lack of love. She started out as strong and independent, willfull and loving. I am not sure what she became but it wasn't the original Phoebe. Maybe its more realistic and thats why I don't like it... I guess that could be fair to say.
Whoever wrote the later series of Charmed (4th Season onward) completely runined the character of Phobe :(.
The love whole story between a Demon and a Good Witch (Cole and Phoebe) is/was timeless (and should have ended in a win for the power of love.. should of). In the first, second and even third seasons it was explored so vividly and so well (with love conquering all against great odds). The up's and down's, the mistakes and the forgiveness.
Then, the Seer arrives and maniplulates the couple (which was not in of itself a bad direction for the plot). Love then proceeds to fly out the window and the whole series decends into a pointless re-living of earlier events (and in essence basic story concepts of Cole plotting subitly) and attempts to turn Cole back into the evil character he once was. Though at each stage its the actions of Pheobe that turns Cole more and more evil (whilst she is excused of her own evil and making cole feel he can be nothing but).
All the charm went out of Charmed!
Pheobe and Page's characters are made to appear to be total sluts going from one seemingly loveless bedding to the next (though some small amount of effection is always involved) and all the witches are painted as blameless and good no matter what they do whilst a Demon (who infact often behaves far better than any of the witches, is evil).
It left me feeling I should be getting in touch with my inner demon as the Demon sets a better example than the girls. Maybe its a bitter writer trying to say its better to be demonic than good O_o but this is hardly a moral to live by, nor one I would support.
Just to be clear, I don't think theres anything wrong with a strong female character, but its hardly strong sleeping with a range of men (who all want to sleep with the girl) and the character keeping moving on to the next. To many "males" of this world its their idea of the ideal girl i'm sure *rolls eyes*.
At least Pipers character remained strong and thats probably the only thing compeling me to keep watching (as I need something I can relate to / sympathise with). Piper stays true to love without ceasing to be faithful and loving to her partner.
The whole Cole-Pheobe love story was so complelling and filled with the best and sometimes the most challenging aspects of true love.
Only eventually to paint true love as pointless and evil in the later episodes.
"Pheobe has become the architypal loveless slut" would be a fair quote for the seasons past season 3.
Which is such a shame because Phoebes started out as a powerfull woman living by her own rules. Which didn't initially mean a lack of love. She started out as strong and independent, willfull and loving. I am not sure what she became but it wasn't the original Phoebe. Maybe its more realistic and thats why I don't like it... I guess that could be fair to say.
Tuesday, 7 December 2010
Recommendations to increase your personal privacy
I am very concerned with my pesonal privacy. What I decide to search for is my very own business and noone elses. Only these days everyone wants to make it their business.
This is largely something unavoidable. Though there are ways to prevent unintended breaches of privacy.
Google is a great search engine, but, it completely invades your privacy as much as the law will allow.
Whenever you use a modern browser with Google the site stores all the unique information about your browser (there can be valid reasons for doing this, there is no requirement to do so for a search service except to support user tracking for its ad's, and, hence, tracking of you as an individual). Sure its not tied to your name but I don't like it at all. Secondly, when using modern browsers, everything you type into the search box gets sent to google immidiately (to provide you with an as you type search, if your feeling generous to google). Again, this is crap, many a time I've accidently typed a private URL into their search box only to curse as it was already too late.
So, for a solution I recommend the following:
Add http://www.google.co.uk/ to your restricted websites. You will still be able to use the search facility but Google will now only receive information after you have accepted a prompt to transmit it and furthur no google related browser scripted components will run.
Google have made their own bed on this one and I fully recommend to everyone to do this!
Google became great by respecting the public and providing clean and simple search results. Now Google is big business and feels little need to respect the public beyond the minimum necessary to keep us using their service. Given that this is their attitude, I say your going to get the minimum necessary information from ME to use YOUR service.
The end.
This is largely something unavoidable. Though there are ways to prevent unintended breaches of privacy.
Google is a great search engine, but, it completely invades your privacy as much as the law will allow.
Whenever you use a modern browser with Google the site stores all the unique information about your browser (there can be valid reasons for doing this, there is no requirement to do so for a search service except to support user tracking for its ad's, and, hence, tracking of you as an individual). Sure its not tied to your name but I don't like it at all. Secondly, when using modern browsers, everything you type into the search box gets sent to google immidiately (to provide you with an as you type search, if your feeling generous to google). Again, this is crap, many a time I've accidently typed a private URL into their search box only to curse as it was already too late.
So, for a solution I recommend the following:
Add http://www.google.co.uk/ to your restricted websites. You will still be able to use the search facility but Google will now only receive information after you have accepted a prompt to transmit it and furthur no google related browser scripted components will run.
Google have made their own bed on this one and I fully recommend to everyone to do this!
Google became great by respecting the public and providing clean and simple search results. Now Google is big business and feels little need to respect the public beyond the minimum necessary to keep us using their service. Given that this is their attitude, I say your going to get the minimum necessary information from ME to use YOUR service.
The end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)