BearOfaTime

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (2 children)

"Flapmice" hahaha, I'll be stealing that!

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (10 children)

It's a way to filter out people, for good or ill.

Depending on the group/team/organization, physical presence makes a huge difference.

Even though I can work from home at will, I still go to the office a lot, about 60%-70% of my time is there. Physical presence just makes a lot of things easier, and it makes teams more cohesive. I can't imagine spending less time at the office - those random hallway conversations make a world of difference. If you're not there for the convo, they'll tap someone else, not by design or intention, just by that person being in front of them.

Now a call center? Maybe not so much, though I was once on a call center team and the ability to tap a teammate on the shoulder was a big help. Much better than using chat tools. So it really depends on the organization.

And then there's management that need you there to justify their role. That's just a poorly managed company, when senior management permits that (though some of them need their own staff count to justify their roles).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

And RAID hardware and software do too - this can be a problem with some drives (I always forget which ones, WD black? Or is it the reds? I'm almost positive Greens are not recommended for RAID arrays)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

There's anything else? 😁

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

It's not as secure as simply destroying a drive.

And it's not like you're going to reuse the drives internally - if you were, there's no issue - reformat and move on. But that doesn't really happen either - each project has accounting, and it's more effort to adjust the accounting, plus the risk of moving a used drive.

Risk really drives a lot of enterprise stuff. Good way to lose your job is to accept risks, especially ones like this that can be completely mitigated by simply destroying drives. That money has been amortized/allocated already, so it's a much better value than the risk.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Lol.

There's a feature in Kodi to play random stuff from a selection.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I've found the disks hurt my power less than choosing a good motherboard/cpu, and using M2 for the OS drive.

Using it drives up power. At idle, my latest 5-drive setup draws 20 watts, it goes up when I'm copying files to it (usually syncing media files from 2 other local storages).

Compared to my old system which was an ancient gaming rig that drew 120w at idle, with only 2 drives (OS and storage).

I also have a 5 disk NAS running some old drives, it's idle power is so low I've forgotten - maybe 15w? The most it could potentially draw is about 60w, since that's the power supply max - I've seen it draw 45w while rebuilding a disk.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Womp Womp.

I have no sympathy for these companies anymore.

Every time I read about a case, invariably the company is violating some basic security principles.

It's not like real hacking, it's always a little social engineering combined with someone having access to something they shouldn't, or insufficient checks on access and change management.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Some people just love to dictate to others, think they know best.

What I've learned over the years is how wrong I can be in my own ignorance, and adversarialism about my ignorance has never convinced me of anything.

Hard/humbling lessons.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Hahaha, I like it! Gonna start using it... See if I can make it catch on!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

Thanks!

I didn't really think it was, just being funny when I couldn't find the word I wanted.

Heading off to etymonline now...

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (5 children)

Of you're bothering someone it's not because you're confident, it's because you're socially inept.

I say this as someone who was very socially inept for a long time, and today I'd say I'm just not as socially "ept" as some people I admire or as I'd like to be.

Socially "ept" people are first interested in others, not in their own ideas or goals first. Or at least they're damn good at focusing on the needs of others first. I've worked for some people who are incredible at this. Some actually care about other people, others are good at giving people what they need, to get what they want, yet you still walk away feeling good. (That's a very interesting experience).

(Is "ept" a word? I haven't looked up the etymology of "inept" yet).

view more: ‹ prev next ›