AI my friend....AI

 

and for those breathlessly waiting for the final re-write your dreams our answered....

While all your submissions were carefully reviewed....THEY SUCKED (just kidding)


Out with the old:

"The traditional Intrusion Detection System may find that the system it was developed to augment and assist with network security, the firewall, may in fact incorporate the IDS technology into its own functionality, thus eliminating the need for a separate intrusion detection system. "

In with the new:

"The traditional IDS may find itself replaced or absorbed by preceding technology. Ironically, the firewall, which the IDS was designed to augment and assist with network security, may in fact incorporate the IDS technology into its own functionality, thus eliminating the need for a separate intrusion detection system."

My wife says it still sucks but at this point it is due in 8 hours and I still have to build my power point presentation

 

I would suggest that you allow your wife to write it while you do the ironing but, I'm afraid you'd use way too much starch.

 

Glad you finally saw the light Vader, way to wordy with unnessasary verbage and phrases. Just listen to your wife.

 

It is best to get your point across in clear, concise sentences.
Pretend you are a speechwriter for President Bush.
The Press would rip him to shreds with that much convoluted logic.

"My fellow 'Mericans,
We live in difficult and changing times.
I am your terr'r warrior, President.
I have an obligation and the Constitutional authority to protect the 'Merican people.
The capabilities of the Intrusion Detection System are redundant...at best.[GRIN HERE]
Based on the latest intelligence, our current firewall strategery is sufficient to provide a cohesive defense of our Borders.
[WORK EYEBROWS FRANTICALLY ON ALL WORDS > 2 SYLLABLES]
I have explained all of this to seven or eight members of the Senate.
God Bless 'Merica.

 

I think the re-write is tons better.

 

I was watching Jon stewart the other night....guy is a trip he had a clip of Bush describing diplomacy...it cracked me up...something like:

"Diplomacy - its when we all sit down and talk about things....ya know...diplomacy"

 

definitely. I am glad you have your wife to watch over you.

 

GWB, "There have been many false accusations in the media about the current administration lacking in diplomacy.
This is just not true. Colin Powell had five or six and while he is no longer with us, I still have a standing requirememt that everbody on my staff be graduated from someplace."

 

(Kobi™ shakes head in disbelief and wonders why he is even going to read past that point)


First off Bucko, you spelled "sentence" incorrectly.

Alright, let's see what you wrote:

Your revised version is almost as bad. It's hard to believe, but you actually ADDED more words to an overly complicated and gramatically incorrect sentence. Be that as it may.

You ask if it either make sense and I suppose they do if you understand what all that stuff is about. Is it well written? (a completely different question) - No. But then, neither is this response.

Now before we proceed, this is where the Gods-O-Gramar™ cue Kobi™ to say "Periods are your friend."

OK, now that that is out of the way -

I have some questions:

Is "Intrusion Detection System" a brand name or something like that? Why the capitalization?

Also, the way it's worded, you're saying that the IDS itself may find that it was developed to augment and assist with the network stuff. Good Lord! Is it self-aware?!?!?! Wasn't it Dyson who warned us this stuff would eventually happen? Whatever.

I know what you want to say, but ultimately you could sum it up like this:

"The firewall may incorporate IDS technology."

That ultimately is what it amounts to. However, and this is one of the problems with writing BS for business, the "Official Style" used in business writing (also true of school papers) is all about making something simple as complicated as possible. Why say something in one sentence when you can say it in five? (Sort of like this long winded reply!) Sure, I understand, you want to establish a bunch of other stuff, but ultimately it all comes down to "A may already have B in it." But to say it in five or more sentences, or in run on sentences with lots of commas, demonstrates that you're saying something important, something you spent a lot of effort on. In other words, how you say something is much more important than what you say. If you can sum it up in four words, then it must not be important - right? This is especially true in the field of psychology, but don't get me started.

If you want to add more, how about:

"The firewall may already incorporate IDS, thereby making any additional IDS systems redundant."

(By the way, "thereby", "therefore", and other words of that nature give users of the Official Style a major hard-on. So if you must write that way, then throw words like that around with great abandon!)

If you must use official style, maybe this:

"Traditional intrusion detection systems were developed to augment firewalls. However, modern firewalls usually incorporate IDS technology thereby eliminating the need for a separate system."

(And even that is an ugly sentence as far as redundancy is concerned. But, how clever is it to write a redundant sentence about something that is redundant ?!?!?! You could claim that writing it this way is a creative, artistic example of the system redundancy itself.) (Wonder how many times I can write redundant in the same paragraph?) See? It never ends!!!!

Actually, this is written for gearheads, right? They don't talk like the average Joe. So you might want to consider something like this:

"Ok, like, you know how the old firewalls were about a effective as a sieve? Well, like, some code-dude came up with an Intrusion Detection System kind of thing that totally zapped anything that didn't belong, like those creepy robot things in The Matrix; anyway, but like the firewalls-of-today like are totally what firewalls are supposed to be like, so they keep everything out, unless it's designed for Windoze, because, like, Windoze is totally like an accident looking for a place to happen, so like, firewalls can totally not need some third party IDS thing because it's totally already there. Got it? Cool."

Carry on.

 

And by the way . . . it's "Kobi" not Kobe.

Geez . . . .

 

Holy mackeral, first Dzervit returns, then Kobi. The end may be near! Welcome back and your input was great. I just did not have the strength to tackle the monumental task of redoing Vader's mess.

 

Dude, you have to atleast throw in one "nuclar". Dub-ya is such a dork!

 

um....wow....um....ok.....um thanks....

talk about being served humble pie....

I think I just got slapped around like Mattineer. Thankfully I am quite stubborn and hard headed with an ego that matches so I can take it.

I have to say I agree with say it in four words bit...however my early papers were constantly critiqued for not "torquing up the language". Simplicity while effective isnt what they want. Who knows why. I will incorporate your suggestions of therefore and thereby because they do seem to love them.

I misspelled "sentence"...I have been chastised repeatedly but additional flogging never hurts....so thanks.

I had ESPN on at the time and must have had the Laker on my mind.

The capitalization is not in the original sentence I spelled out IDS and left it capitalized to make the acronym recognizable for my fellow f150ers...

My humble appologies and undying thanks....

Now do I have to cite you as a source for a sentance to avoid plagarism?

Hmmmmm??

 

aye you too?

mea culpa!