I’ve just been using Edge when Firefox wont open a site. It’s installed by default and it’s just Chrome under the hood so it works. Plus, after Google’s new hostility to ad blocking I refuse to use any Chrome based browser as my default so one is as good as the other to me. They’re all just a temporary tool until I go back to using the only real web browser that I can, Mozilla Firefox.
They set zscaler so that if I don’t access an internal service for an unknown number of months, it means I don’t need it “for my daily work”, so they block it. If I want to access it again I need to open a ticket. There is no way to know what they closed and when they’ll close something.
In 1 months since this policy is active, I already have opened tickets to access test databases, k8s control plane, quality control dashboards, tableau server…
Zscaler is one of the worst products I’ve had the displeasure to interact with. They implemented it at my old job and it said that my home Internet connection was insecure to connect to the VPN. Cyber Sec guys couldn’t figure out the issue because the logs were SO helpful.
Took working with their support to find that it has somehow identified my nonstandard address spacing on my LAN to be insecure for some reason.
I kept my work laptop on a separate vlan for obvious reasons.
Pretty sure it’s some misapplied heuristics for previously identified bad clients, but that should only trigger an alert (with details!) in most cases and not block you if it’s not also paired with any known malicious activity
I’m going off memory from early 2021. But it was my private IP on the laptop using a Class B private address according to their support team. I was flabbergasted. Maybe they just expected every remote worker to use Class C or something. Who knows?
I’ve been using it for a few months now and it’s great. Firefox is my main browser but a chromium based one is good to have. Wonder why it asks for my password every now and then but think it’s likely auto update stuff.
Removed admin access for all developers without warning and without a means for us to install software. We got access back in the form of a secondary admin account a few days later, it was just annoying until then.
I had the same problem once. Every time I needed to be an admin, I had to send an email to an outsourced guy in another country, and wait one hour for an answer with a temporary password.
With WSL and Linux, I needed to be admin 3 or 4 times per day. I CCed my boss for every request. When he saw that I was waiting and doing nothing for 4 hours every day, he sent them an angry email and I got my admin account back.
The stupid restriction was meant for managers and sales people who didn’t need an admin account. It was annoying for developers.
I worked at a big name health insurance company that did the same. You would have to give them an email, wait a week, then give them a call to get them to do anything. You could not install anything yourself, it was always a person that remote into your computer. After a month, I still didn’t have visual studio installed when they wanted me to work on some .Net. Then they installed the wrong version of Visual Studio. So the whole process had to be restarted.
I got a new job within 3 months and just noped out.
Ours is terrible for making security policy that will impact technical solution options in a vacuum with a few select higher level IT folks and no one sorts out the process to using the new “secure” way first. Ending up in finding out something you thought would be a day or 2 task ends up being a weeks long odyssey to define new processes and technical approaches. Or sometimes just out right abandoning the work because the headache isn’t worth it.
Ours does this too. Except they stick to their guns and we end up having to just work around the new impediment they’ve created for months until it happens to inconvenience someone with enough pull to make them change it.
I’m curious, were they ever that stereotypical “shh” environment that movies claimed they were? Because no public library in my lifetime was ever like that (just smaller school libraries), but I can’t go back very far. Most libraries I’ve been to have multiple areas or floors, some which are quiet and others which are allowed to be noisy.
They were “shh” back in the day, but with time they have become more of a place for activity for the community. When I was a kid in the 80s and early 90s they were definitely more strict with keeping quiet, especially in the reading halls. Library history is actually quite interesting, and the whole development of the library as a key element in building and supporting democracy and community, is worth looking into.
Stick with reputable news sites. Reuters is my gold standard. Along with AP News. They tend to be some of the least bias sources out there and do their due diligence when it comes to reporting.
It’s worth noting that a lot of the news coverage may come across as pro-isreal and anti-palestinian but that’s because a lot of the news is “Isreal claims this” and “An IDF statement that” the sources themselves are biased.
Also keep in mind that this is an active war. There will be a lot of wrong information as media reports the best information available, it’s not the media having a bias, it’s just the fog of war as things rapidly develop.
I’m aware of that, and some of the current claims are probably subject to change in the future. I just browsed through reuters, and they seem unbiased. While my local news refers to hamas as “radical islamic terror organisation Hamas”, reuters just uses “hamas”.
Right. It’s all about media literacy. Once you start picking up on loaded language like “Radical Islamic terror organisation Hamas” it starts becoming pretty evident what the biases are. That’s not to say the news they are reporting is false, just that it is going to take some extra work on your part to filter out all of the bullshit. Like you mentioned, the Common name of the government of Gaza is “Hamas” calling it anything else is an attempt to appeal to emotion to prime you to think about it a certain way. Like calling the Israeli government “zionists” it’s ment to sway to to something, not give you news.
Obviously, with the fact that the Palestinians have been opressed for decades, which led for organisations like the Hamas to arrise, there’s no good guys / bad guys in this situation.
While this might be true, it’s all about the context. They make it seem like the Israelis are targeting the “bad guys” and should be allowed to do so. But they don’t mention the unrightful suffering and death of Palestinian civilians at all.
You now what I mean? If they call the Hamas a radical islamic terror organization (which I’m fine with), why don’t they also call the Israelis a radical zionist terror organization?
What I want to read is, if the Hamas fucked up, then let me know about it, also, if the Israelis fucked up, I want to know about that too.
Good journalists will never make their own opinion on the matter known outside the comment/opinion/analysis pages.
Not: Man eats a delicious red apple
Not: Man eats a red apple and says it's delicious.
But: Man says he ate a red apple and claims it is delicious.
Or in some cases: Footage appears to show many saying he ate a red apple and claiming it was delicious.
If the journalist didn't see it with their own eyes, they won't state that it's a fact.
It's annoying how intertwined opinion and journalism have become, but it isn't a journalist's job to do anything more than report on what they saw, read or heard.
Unfortunately journalism has been in decline for so long now, that many people don't know the difference between good and poor journalism. So when a good journalist simply reports on what someone said, they wrongly think the journalist is agreeing with them, instead of simply reporting on what they heard the person say.
Good journalism isn't someone shouting about how angry something makes them, even if you agree with them. Good journalism is the equivalent of a court stenographer or someone who subtitles movies for the deaf.
Why is man “claiming” the apple is delicious? Is he in the pocket of Big Apple, and it really isn’t delicious? Or is the report from Fox Apple and they’re trying to cast aspersions on the man and his “claims”?
but that’s because a lot of the news is “Isreal claims this” and “An IDF statement that” the sources themselves are biased
It’s also important to keep in mind that when you read “Gaza health ministry claims”, in reality it’s the same as “Hamas’ health ministry claims” since Hamas has been ruling that area since 2006 and tortured the Palestinian opposition ever since (amnesty.org/…/gaza-palestinians-tortured-summaril… ). Same thing with claims by Al Jazeera since Qatar hosts Hamas’ leadership and funds their lavish lifestyles there so it wouldn’t be right for them to suggest in their own newspaper that they’re hosting terrorists, thus their news will rarely be critical of Hamas.
What’s the solution? There are a few choices you could make. You could cherrypick pro-Palestinian sources like Al Jazeera, Middle East Eye or Electronic Intifada and automatically dismiss whatever Israel says as disinformation and it could make you feel good about yourself as it’s very easy to oversimplify the conflict as just one big high-tech state abusing poor people fighting back with stones. You could also do the same cherrypicking for a pro-Israel position. Or you could dismiss any pro-Palestinian or pro-Israel source and only listen to news sources that provide a “balanced” account of the events (Associated Press is indeed very good). Or, much better but will require more thinking on your part: you read all of them and you dismiss none of them.
A pro-Palestinian position is (for now) anti-Hamas and pro-Abbas, supports the removal from Hamas from power, supports Israeli action against Hamas, but decries the limitations of aid or the blockades from Egypt/Jordan/etc against even short-term refugees.
Palestine would currently be a country, for the first time in human history, if Hamas did not exist.
A 2 state solution was offered multiple times and was denied because Palestinian leadership had a hard line of Israel not existing.
When a 2 state solution became politically viable in Palestinian territory, Hamas seized power and refused further elections
Just because I don’t know if you want clarity on the whole thing, Palestine as never been a country. It was part of Jordan and Egypt before being lost in the 6 Day War, and part of a chain of empires before that. There was no unified Palestinian identity prior to 1967.
To my knowledge the closest state to the 2 state solution was an offer to Arafat after the Camp David negotiations. He didn’t take the offer, but I don’t know why. But that was in 2000, before Hamas seized power in 2005. That was why I asked.
Abbas moving toward the 2 state solution was what led to the Hamas takeover, and violent skirmishes between the PA and Hamas. Specifically their issues were the more secular state the PA favors and that they don’t believe Israel should exist
So the ideal solution would be a 2-state+1-cage solution, where the cage is for Hamas and Netanyahu together with his Ultra Orthodox faction, where they can fight each other to death, while Israel and Palestine negotiate on a peace treaty.
Yeah definitely. But, they’re a charitable organization focused solely on that and not on political outcomes so I give them some leeway. It’s not like they hide their intent.
Why would you tip someone who just rang you up? Tipping is for exceptional service rendered, not for pushing a button on a screen and handing you something. This whole over-tipping bullshit was started by the credit card point of sale machine businesses, because they reap greater profits. If everyone makes tips, then no one makes tips. The only winner is Square Cash.
Access to change production systems was limited to a single team, which was tasked with doing all deploys by hand, for an engineering organisation of 50+ people. Quickly becoming overloaded, they limited deploy frequency to five deploys per day, organisation-wide.
Here in Portugal the IT guys at the National Health Service recently blocked access to the Medical Doctor’s Union website from inside the national health service intranet.
The doctors are currently refusing to work any more overtime than the annual mandatory maximum of 150h so there are all sorts of problems in the national health service at the moment, mainly with hospitals having to close down emergency services to walk-in patients (this being AskLemmy, I’ll refrain from diving into the politics of it) so the whole things smells of something more than a mere mistake.
Anyways, this has got to be one of the dumbest abuses of firewalling “dangerous” websites I’ve seen in a long while.
asklemmy
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.