02 Apr 2004
Why PHBs Fear Linux

When I worked at the Trader, back in the '80's, the ironclad rule we had for new hires was to throw out any graduates of computer science programs - they learned mainframe stuff back then, and every one we wasted time interviewing was simply aghast that we were using PC's tied together with some "network operating system" (Novell) that they'd never heard of. They simply weren't up to speed in the currrent enviroment.

Of course, that situation changed over the years, and todays CS grads are generally competent in modern enviroments, if not in "real world" coding practices. Schools tend to be like that: a few years behind the times.

Apparently, however, business schools have not gotten beyond, say 1990, in the IT enviroment area. That's way out of date. Considering the security problems in Microsoft products, this bit of "mis-schooling" could prove to have disasterous consequences.

Paul Murphy over at LinuxInsider examines the role IT text books play in business school curriculums and the misconceptions and misinformation that they present to students. If you've ever wondered why your PHB just doesn't get it when it comes to UNIX and Linux, this article is for you.

(link) [Slashdot]

00:00 /Technology | 0 comments | permanent link

Programmers told to put security over creativity

Good grief - I can't wait until programmers have to be "certified" by Microsoft in order to write code! What are these people smoking?

The proposal likely means that future software programmers would have to pay to gain the credentials necessary to work for companies that make the most popular applications.

I predict that if this goes thru, the only secure applications will be "unpopular" ones, most likely open sourced.

"un-certified" coders are not the problem - management methodology is the problem, and until that;s changed to reflect how things operate in the real world, we'll continue to have massive security holes in the most "popular" apps.

Certification, education, strict development models and limited legislation are needed to make programs more secure, says a report from security firms and software makers.

(link) [CNET News.com]

00:00 /Technology | 0 comments | permanent link

British Chicken-Warmed Nuke

April Fools gag? Could be, but it deserves a mention here even if it is dreamt up silliness.

During the Cold War, British researchers developed a nuclear landmine, kept operational during cold conditions by packing it full of live chickens.

(link) [Slashdot]

00:00 /Humor | 0 comments | permanent link

Tech heavyweights explain how to destroy the Internet

Michael Copps, FCC Commissioner, actually has some common sense, as well as an understanding of history:

The Internet must remain device and technology neutral, and open, Copps warned. To illustrate, he pointed out that 35 years ago the phone company restricted the devices that could be attached and confined them to its own kit, using the excuse of ensuring quality of service. And then the FCC created a right of attachment, allowing consumers to hook up any device to the network so long as it caused no harm, and spawned dramatic growth in scores of industries.

Cerf, Lessig, et al warn US legislators

(link) [The Register]

00:00 /Politics | 0 comments | permanent link