The end of one thing, the beginning of another.

I finished the Security+ book, and I think it left me with more questions than answers.  At the moment, I’m questioning how to do a lot of things.  Network baseline analysis is the primary one of those.  At the moment, I’m doing some preliminary reading.  Sure, there are a lot of books out there that say “this should be done”.  None of them discuss how to do network baseline analysis.  I think the best answer I’ve seen so far “there isn’t a standard”.  Which sounds pretty normal with network security.  And that’s why network security is, as a general rule, very splotchy.

With Security+ being finished, it’s off to learning physics VIA a collection of books written by Benjamin Crowell.  Part of me wants to write a long, drawn out blog post describing in detail how I can believe in both science and God at the same time.  But I’m not.  The answer is pretty simple: most of life is not an either/or selection.  Despite simplistic arguments against, it is entirely possible to believe in both at the same time.  The two are not mutually exclusive.  Sorry folks, I can believe in both at the same time.

I’ve touched on the false idea of mutual exclusivity before.   I can’t remember the post, but it’s the argument of people who want to lead you down paths that are only valid if the two items discussed in the beginning really are mutually exclusive.  For the most part, there are very few mutually exclusive items in the world.  I guess in the end, you have to question the assumptions people push at you, and assume everyone has an agenda.  Despite the best arguments, the truth is not the real agenda.

I think Andy Andrews put it best:  People often think logically to the wrong conclusions. 

Really, there was an entire book about that subject.  It was pretty interesting.