Home

IT consumerization mythbusters: The BYOD policy edition

24.05.13

In reality, you will probably see more mobile devices hitting the network, and as a result, you now have a number of new. BYOD myth No. 2: BYOD improves a company's overall security posture Think that BYOD can improve a company's security posture since there won't be as many mobile. BYOD myth No. 4: BYOD is all about productivity When attempting to sell a BYOD policy, folks claim that they can improve user productivity by. allowing users to choose devices with which they have a high degree of comfort. BYOD myth No. 3: With BYOD, IT is freed up to perform other tasks Do you think that by jettisoning dozens, hundreds or even thousands of corporate-owned mobile. BYOD myth No. 1: Companies automatically save money with BYOD For some, the compelling driver behind a. BYOD policy is the hope of reducing corporate costs. BYOD myth No. 5: CIOs can safely ignore BYOD A BYOD policy isn't necessarily easy to implement and support. probably be replaced with a mobile device management solution that supports the BYOD program. management software tools to cope with "hostile" devices -- smartphones that are not owned or. controlled by the organization and pose a potential security threat. Myth busted: IT time spent on supporting mobile devices may slightly shift in focus, but. company, bring their own device to the office, and use it for work purposes, companies might be. starting to buy into the myth that they save costs associated with all. Taking steps to prevent virus outbreaks that could originate on mobile devices. Making sure that users are following corporate BYOD policy regarding the security of devices. Perhaps promises were made to "bring your own device" (BYOD) without CIOs realizing the repercussions. Myth busted: Allowing employees to bring their own devices will add major security. users, handling support calls for corporate-owned devices, and dealing with monthly billing from. Making sure that the devices, each with its own connection to the Internet, are not used to. steal corporate data. require mobile.   There's only one problem: Bring your own device and IT. consumerization are happening with or without you. of prevailing bring-your-own-device myths. own laptops and tablet devices to employees getting tired of carrying two smartphones -- one. corporate stipends to employees for the personal use of cellular devices. cellular providers, they'll now be helping users provision their personal devices for use in the. They'll be handling support calls for personally-owned devices and be dealing.  After all, once the users own the devices and the associated. But the promise of bring your own device is easier. that come with bring-your-own-device initiatives. same users complain that they can't get their work done because of a draconian BYOD policy. Myth busted: At best, BYOD is a break-even proposition. Why would companies take on BYOD when it has no clear benefit for the organization. staffs for the BYOD wave before it hits -- and it will hit. As users eschew devices provided by the. mindset that you will simply wait for the BYOD fad to pass and that all smartphones will go away,. employees -- and the program is more about employee comfort and happiness than it is about. I'm seeing a lot of CIOs struggle with their BYOD policies.   That said, if productivity plummets as a result of BYOD, I'm certain that it. would be rolled back. company may have purchased thousands of devices and carried bulk plans, individuals don't generally.   Some companies have instituted BYOD program as an option for. there will be no time savings with the introduction of a BYOD policy. increased productivity may be an actual outcome in some programs, in most cases productivity will. Although your IT staff may no longer have to worry about provisioning individual devices for. The IT consumerization revolution is upon us. It takes many forms, from users wanting to use their. devices and their associated services -- such as BlackBerry. Myth busted: For many, IT consumerization is going to happen. Myth busted: While productivity gains may be a hope, they shouldn't be counted on as a. guaranteed outcome. people identify with their devices , which have become an extension of themselves. devices running around the office. Make sure you understand all these smartphone myths. business apps , the corporation simply washes its hands of the costs and goes on its way, right. Although the company may see a reduction in their direct costs related to all smartphone. Ensuring that corporate data remain safe on all smartphones. cellular providers, CIOs will start accumulating new expenses. smartphone users. In some businesses IT consumerization may never happen (i. e. super-secure organizations that are. You'll doom your IT staff to saying "No" to users, while those. for work and one for personal use. servers -- your IT staff will be freed up to work on a multitude of other business facing. However, CIOs in most organizations should begin to prepare their.   As a CIO, you may take the. Companies will need to spend dollars accommodating the new challenges.

Source: TechTarget

How the war on terror changed translation in government

24.05.13

As part of this shift, the government has had a more urgent need to access and understand content in a number of different languages to maintain effective global intelligence. Through computer-assisted translation , computers were assisting humans in new and effective ways, using data resources like translation memory and terminology databases in order to speed up the work of translators. s new translation load, which covered all forms of information, from graffiti to cell phone conversations to email communications, overwhelmed the capabilities of individual human translators. Rather than distributing their knowledge into translation memory databases as they do today, translators physically wrote interpretations of words and phrases and then that passed onto others, who wrote up a summary of the translated content. Though not as visible to everyday people as the enhanced airport security checks, government translation has significantly evolved during the past decade, propelled by intelligence efforts and supported by new translation technologies. Enterprise machine translation was equipped with useful technologies that enabled quick translation in bulk. This need has coincided with a major explosion of the use of new communication technologies like cell phones and Internet. By contracting with and purchasing technologies initiated in the private sector, the government was able to re-build its translation process into an always-on, efficient process that incorporated machines and humans. Information from around the globe needed to be efficiently translated so that agencies could make fast, informed decisions. Yet as a 2002 Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security report uncovered , at this time pre-9/11 agencies did not have  the manpower and capabilities to translate all of the information that came their way to monitor these groups. Humans would share information with machines in order to build up their translation memory, enabling computers to be more accurate. Through this combination of machine and human translation, the government can now better address the modern terrorist threat. Translation has gone from a function done by specialists to one that relies on the widespread use of computer intelligence and human-machine communications. Companies like BBN, a think tank around language and language processing using computational models, became mainstays for ongoing translation. Machines are capable of translating in bulk the river of information that flows into the United States intelligence system every day. Today, technology is moving in the direction of machines growing smarter, with computers doing the bulk of the translating while humans work on higher-level, more nuanced material. The Right Tools for the Job. In order to communicate quickly and effectively, enterprises adopted a combination of machine and human translators. Government agencies had to scale up their translation capabilities, and in doing so they turned to the private sector. s combination of machine and human translation is a much more viable weapon for the job of intelligence. For consumers, TSA security checks and the presence of the National Guard at major events are continuing reminders of the increased level of government attention and effort toward national security. As late as the nineties various agencies within the government were still using this translation approach even as globalization was re-defining old paradigms. Agencies targeted specific individuals for surveillance and translated only that information which they deemed most important. For some history on the topic, prior to the war on terror, government translation was compartmentalized. Yet translating all information that might pose a threat to US security was a daunting task. BBN, now Raytheon BBN, would monitor and translate continuous news broadcast by Al Jazeera. Independent language specialists were hired to translate conversations, documents and other information. Government terrorism specialist John Rollins has described modern terrorism as &ldquo. All types of incoming intelligence and news became fair game for translation. Putting data into a queue to be translated by select individuals with institutional knowledge was far too time consuming and represented too much of a risk. Pre-9/11 Translation. The Resurgence of Machine Translation. In this way, agencies have been able to quickly decide which data is actionable, rather than putting some information on the back burner based on prior assumptions. With this sequence in place, agencies can enable the right people to make actionable decisions on incoming information.

Source: Computerworld (blog)