Slashdot Mirror
Disconnected
Are you a cultural isolate? According to Disconnected: Haves and Have Nots in the Information Age, by William Wresch, "isolates" comprise between 27% and 50% of the members of most corporate and private organizations.
"Many individuals," he writes, "have tenuous connections to the organizations they work for. They want no more to do with that organization than their job, or their paycheck, requires. They don't show up at the company picnic, read the company newsletter, or tune in to the company grapevine."
Wresch suggests that this is so because despite the explosion in new information technologies, most companies don't know how to get their employees to communicate with one another. He says it's impossible to imagine any Japanese organization reporting 7% alienated employees, much less 50%. U.S. organizations not only have huge numbers of isolated employees but still manage to survive and prosper.
Wresch cites Lucasfilms which discovered through internal research that there was almost no horizontal communication between editors, cinematographers, and artists, to which it responded by carefully restructuring its softball teams so that no team could have more than one person from the same department.
Curiously, Wresch portrays "isolates" as problem employees in need of curing. (I consider myself an isolate. I am quite happy to belong to an organization, but have no interest in showing up at the company picnic, reading the company newsletter, or wiring into the company grapevine. Nor do I want to join the company softball team (the idea of a Slashdot softball team is pretty amusing) to make me more social or communal. Working alone, or from something of a distance seems to me as valid a choice as being the kind of rah-rah team players the Disney Corporation breeds and encourages.)
But Disconnected is still a thoughtful, provocative study of a world in which there are vast and growing disparities between what people know and how they know it. His portrayals of information realities in other parts of the world are startling, an information context most Americans are losing touch with. He writes of "information exiles" whose culture or geography keep them disconnected from the information age. He also reminds us that our own techno-rich culture is still, in many ways, an anomaly in the world. He contrasts the way information moves around in the info-rich West with the way information moves (or doesn't) in Namibia, where he spent some time working and researching.
What will happen to the disconnected of the information age, he wonders? "As subsistence farming and handicrafts persisted through the industrial age, will the disconnected carry on, barely feeding themselves, producing the primitive and quaint for middle-class coffee tables? Early indications are that the disconnected will fare far worse than their predecessors in previous revolutions. The gap between the rich and the poor, the knowing and the ignorant, will be larger, the room along the margins far smaller."
Disconnected is a reminder that our own information experiences -- especially those in America, Asia and Western Europe -- aren't yet remotely typical of the world, where laborers often stand on street corners for hours, even days,waiting to hear some news about possible jobs. And even in our own hi-tech cultures, there are curious disparities between information haves and have-nots. Wresch, a computing professor at the University of Wisconsin, also raises a number of useful ideas about closing the information divide, from community computing centers to the conversion of civic and public affairs offices to electronic centers of information dissemination.
"Cultures of isolation aren't the only problems of personal information channels," he writes. "Since these channels are largely invisible, they can be filled with myths, lies, and hatreds. Few outsiders even know what is being said, nor do they have opportunities to correct even the most egregious errors. Yet error-prone or not, these are channels that supply much of the world's information."
You might not always agree with Wresch's conclusions, and he raises many more questions than solutions, but "Disconnected" is an interesting book (the writing isn't great but workable) which looks at information technology from an original perspective, especially for a computing academic. The book tells some uncomfortable truths about information and technology, and as happy as we are to play with our information-scarfing new toys and tools, it's an important reality check. Wresch essentially is writing about the forgotten people in the Information Revolution, the info-refugees and exiles, the people who fall between the cracks, unable or unwilling to use technology to collect information in an accessible or beneficial way.
Purchase this book at ThinkGeek.
Seriously, IBM went to India and upgraded the technology there from 13th century to 19th century. They currently have connections in Africa, where they flaunt their servers by leaving them out in the barren savannah. IBM is becoming the Red Cross of the Internet.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
Or people who can't use a browser?
I'm confused here, first Katz talks about people who don't want to play software, then he talks about information have nots.
You can have a rich social life without playing softball on the company team. For instance, I correspond about my interests with people all over the world, and every few years I actually meet one of my correspondents in the flesh.
And just last weekend I talked to a woman while buying donuts, I'm hardly a social malcontent just because I don't play softball.
And I know how to use a browser, because that's how I meet my friends, in the chat rooms.
Thsi review made my head hurt.
d to the i to the e please
Sorry boss, but I have a life, and it isn't my job. I know the folks who keep up with the grape vine in my department, and I talk to them just enough to figgure out what is going on here. Those who work with me closely know where I'm the expert, and I know the experts I normally work with. I know that this product must do something useful, but it doesn't matter, my job is to make sure the fans are running, and if not warn the customers. I don't need to know anything about what the customer would buy this box for. I know mky co-workers are smart people and will see their part works, and the grapevine people are watching over the whole thing to make sure I can spend my time working with fans (and many related things), not worring about how I will affect them.
There are only so many man-months in my life, and If I had to personally know everyone on this project The number avaiable for me to concentrate on fans is greatly reduced.
I like to fish. I like enjoy creating a program. I don't enjoy talking to many people or meeting new people. I know folks who do enjoy that type of work, and so I let them be my connection to the rest of the company. It works good for all of us.
Fortunatly my boss knows that I work to feed and shelter me. We would both be retired if we didn't have to eat and have warm cloths on our backs. We both have friends who do not work in the same building as us. We both know that we spend about half our waking hours at work already.
PS, for those who don't get the subtilties of english, pppbbbbt is the closest I can come in words to sticking my tongue out at those who think I should live according to what they think is important.
Coming just in time for XMas..."Save JonKatz" (for Win95/98 and Nintendo)
In this exciting computer game adventure, JonKatz is trapped in the socialist-devout readings section of the University of Wisconsin library, forced to write book reviews from nearsited, geek-angst drivel.
Do you help JonKatz excape to the Christian reading room for the salvation of his soul, or seek the Objectivist section for the restoration of his mind? Or let him rot as he reads of hatred for Western civilization and professes the superiority of the uneducated rice-paddy masses.
Only your guidance and your quick reactions gives Katz any hope!
Sure to be an arcade classic. In stores soon.
Couple of issues... 1) Isolationism is not necessarily a "disease" in need of "curing" (read corporate brainwashing). I can pick my friends but I can't pick my co-workers, many of which are complete assholes who you wouldn't even slow down for in a crosswalk. Do I really need to be "cured" of not wanting to associate with assholes? 2) There is a huge difference between information and knowledge. I'm not sure I agree that the isolated Namibian tribesman posesses less knowledge than the corporate secretary/bimbo with high-speed internet access. Information yes, but knowledge no.
You're using her as bait, Master!
Cisco "Are you ready" commercials to the contrary, the big IT revolution isn't really that large a deal, folks. True, it's provided some interesting effects on American and European capital markets and employment numbers, but it's still "57 channels and nothing on". As to "isolates", I wonder what constitutes the guy's system of measurement? Has he ever been to a company picnic? Why must a place of work become some sort of Walton's episode, anyway? We just work with these people. One can understand the fraternity system as a drinking-buddy support system during college, but in general, corporate attempts at fostering social atmosphere seem forced and unnatural.
Perhaps the high workloads, and the stress as a result from that, could qualify as a reason for that. The 24 hour economy forces people to work harder and harder, and limits employees to socialize during working hours; you only have time to work (as hard as you can). So when the day is done, what would you rather do: go have a party with co-workers, or go home to your family (or on your own) or go to friends? I know that I would rather spend some time on my own, than spending some more hours in a work-related environment. Because what do people mostly talk about on after-hour company events: yes, work! And for not really being interested in the company (not reading the company magazine): by being forced to work harder, and thereby increasing stresslevels, the employee is more and more alienated from the company; so he/she will be more reluctant to now more about the company.
How to make a sig
without having an idea
I do like the idea of a slashdot softball team. I'll play left field.
So there I was. Naked. In a refrigerator. With a potroast on my knees. Smokin a cigar. That's when it got REALLY weird.
Now that was funny, you should get moderated up !
If I do not want to be part of the corporate culture(i.e. going to the picnic) I should not be thought of as alienated. I DO have a life and I want to have friends I do not see every day. But I am in the IT field.
Many peoples jobs are not able to be performed in an isolated environment for those workers alienation can seriously impact their work and spill over in to thier private life(go postal).
In the end it boils down to a matter of choice. I like to be isolated to work but sometimes I do the Company thing.
"Technology lies on the leading edge of life" Rush
No one in their right mind should consider a 7014, a 942 or a V2 `400 20th century technology.
The previous poster had it right.
.sig: Now legally binding!
"If you're not into sports (e.g. softball), there's something wrong with you! Go Big Red!"
;-)
The University of Wisconsin (and Madison, and Wisconsin, and the Midwest in general) is pathologically sports-obsessed. That kind of thinking is one of the reasons I left town. Now I'm a couple blocks off the campus of MIT. The only time MIT goes to the Rose Bowl is when CalTech hacks the scoreboard, in which case MIT gets creamed.
I haven't been to a company picnic in my life. I don't play softball. I don't roam the halls of the office desperately looking for someone to gossip with.
So frickin' what????
The author portrays "isolates" as a problem in his book most likely because he's a management weenie whose life is defined by their job. Mine isn't -- for me my job is strictly a business transaction. I work, they pay me. Period. If you want me at the picnic, pay me to show up. I don't work to make friends, I already have friends.
I wonder if in his book the author ever attempts to justify the assumption that being an "isolate" is a bad thing. I highly doubt it.
Not all "isolates" are isolated by choice. I happen to live in a very small town because of my SO's occupation. I telecommute as a software developer and have a near-constant flow of emails and periodic phone communication with the main office, but I don't take part in staff meetings, much less social events.
Locally, I have no peer group because chicken farmers (at least the ones I know) don't write code. There are people to socialize with, but I have zero face time with /. types.
I guess I qualify for this broad generalization, but the stereotype doesn't necessarily address the cause.
There is no such person, William Wresch, at UW-Madison, nor at UW-Milwaukee. Since Jon Katz doesn't give us the full information, it is possible that he is mistaken...
Also, the book was written in 96 - I wonder why Katz doesn't discuss if it is still relevant today...
...is it available for linux?
---
I am the dot in slashdot.org
"Many individuals," he writes, "have tenuous connections to the organizations they work for. They want no more to do with that organization than their job, or their paycheck, requires. They don't show up at the company picnic, read the company newsletter, or tune in to the company grapevine." Wresch suggests that this is so because despite the explosion in new information technologies, most companies don't know how to get their employees to communicate with one another.
...SNIP
Early indications are that the disconnected will fare far worse than their predecessors in previous revolutions. The gap between the rich and the poor, the knowing and the ignorant, will be larger, the room along the margins far smaller."
Without having read the book, from Katz' review it sounds like the Wresch confuses "cultural isolates" with ignorance. Sure, channels of information will be different between social groups, but that doesn't mean one group of information is any less valuable than another.
I'm not sure whether this is just Katz' spin or the author's opinion, but I'm really getting tired of reading about the poor technilliterates. Almost every non-technical person feels like they don't know enough about computers. However, almost all of them know enough to do what they need to do with computers. We still need people to build roads, design buildings, make coffee tables, airplanes, etc. Not everyone needs to be a programmer. Sure, some of these skills require some basic computer skills, but people learn what they need to learn to do these things. Most people studying aerodynamics are not going to have any trouble learning CAD. Someone with the talent to write the next great work of literature will figure out Abiword (or whatever) without too much trouble.
The problem is not with "technical literacy". The problem is with education in general. Teaching people to read is far more important than teaching them to use computers, and is a far more difficult thing to learn. People who can read well can teach themselves all they need to know about computers, which may very well be nothing.
include $sig;
1;
One of the irritating things that I see is that the whole culture of software design seems to be putting emphasis on the fact that data can be communicated in the least without the *quality* of the data that is being transacted.
I had an internet connection at my home for a little while with freewwweb and thought it was rather nice. No more having to dick around with floppies just to get a program broken up into disk sized chunks. No more being forced to wait for a computer to borrow. In fact it was incredibly nice.
Then the bastards decided to sell out and screw their clients. I faithfully went to their portal every day and they still went down the sewer in the end.
What irritates me is that a company is funding the development of network infrastructure and connectivity when people who live in the USA are still without net access. It's kind of like dealing with African refuges when we have homeless, poor, and disadvantaged right here at home.
And I doubt that IBM was solely responsible for upgrading the technology of India. I think that the period that India was a British colony had something more to do with it becomming a better and more influential world power and going from 13th to 19th century technology.
Oh and computers as we know them were invented in roughly the last quarter of the *20th* century not the 19th, Babages difference engine dosn't count.
Respond to s
The US is one of the few countries where everyone wants to drive great distances to experience events, pay lots of money to get in, and then leave before it is even over just so they can beat the traffic. If given a chance to be disconnected from society, co-workers, whoever, most of us will choose to do so.
"sigs are for losers"
-Mark Gordon
Having read "Disconnected" for a class in college, I'd say it basically makes obvious the rift that exists between the rich, technically inclined, and "fortunate" people who live in the "information age". The author uses wonderfully horrible cyber-cliches and tries to say that in the third world, peoples lives aren't so fancy.
Most of it didn't really hit home with me. It's obvious that a large portion of the world remains unconnected and lives a simpler life, and that many of them may not be aware that a network like the internet even exists.
The book basically takes the division of classes to the next level, going beyond the advantage those with technical knowledge have above the less-educated, and taking it to a global area with comparisons to villages in Africa. There are more cars in the state of New Jersey than all of Africa.
Don't differences like this make it obvious enough? For the geek reader, this book gets a 4/10
You were the fist poerson to graciously point out my error and point me to the correct definition of comprise.
for this some mod modded you as redundant?
You lost kharma because some mod doesn't understand numbers?
Boo. hiss.
Corporate culture doesn't WANT you to have a rich social life. Corporate culture wants you to "hive-in" to the company "family." If the only people you regularly associate with are also your coworkers, it helps to blur
the lines between job/home until you suddenly don't mind working 10+ hours of overtime a week, because you're still just hanging out with your buddies.
Maybe it's a culture thing but none of my family ever worked in an office. The one difference is that when work ended my dad always returned home. He was never the type to hand around the job gossiping or being something that the company wanted him to be.
My grandfather was more like a person who enjoyed social aspects of his job. He spent long hours doing his job but it was more of love for his job and the ability to get work he enjoyed done. In this aspect he was more aloof.
Of course you want dedicated workers but I doubt in the real world anybody expects to be forcing you to do more and more work. Besides at least in the United States you get paid 150% of your normal salary if you in fact do work any over time. In this respect they *don't* want you to work any more time than normal.
Respond to s
I can only wonder what they and places similar would do about those of us who would rather avoid softball (and other "but everybody likes x" activities).
Probably something about 'not a team a player' or other such dreck. Am I an 'isolate'? Perhaps. But let's get cause and effect straight first shall we? Maybe the 'popular' things are the same things I'd sooner visit a dentist than get involved in. (I have finally gotten my coworkers trained enough to not bother me with their "fun" things I find nauseating or painful.. took long enough too).
About apparent isolation the first question should be "Is it real?" and follow that with "And if so, is it a problem?" and only after finding 'yes' as an answer to both questions should a treatment be sought -- and of that it must be asked "Will this help, or it will cause resentment?" Just becuase some simpleton believes "everybody likes X" doesn't make it the case. (Quick: Does every geek like Star Wars? Does every male watch the Superbowl?)
I'm just tired of being seen as a nail by imbeciles that only have hammers.
I don't subscribe to RMS's GNUtopian vision.
So far, every company that I've worked for has had a "downsizing" (or "reorganization" or "resource action" -- my favorite -- or whatever euphamistic label they want to attach to firing people). Given that, and the prospect that similar actions will continue, some find it pointless to become attached to people with whom they work.
Now, compound the above with the increase in hours worked per week. (Note: people in other countries may work more hours, but if you're used to working 40 hours a week and now work 50, you have less free time.) If your available free time is less, do you want to use it playing softball with the people you're already spending more time with? ("Gee, Chuck, I know you've just worked 70 hours a week for the last month, but I'm disappointed you skipped the picnic the company so generously arranged for us.")
Companies have for a long time shown less loyalty to employees than in the past. This is changing, now, because it's a "seller's market" for hi-tech employees. My feeling -- too little, too f**king late.
What does the Namibian tribesman actually posess that would be of any value to a person engaged in something that is done in the modern world.
Personally Namabian tribesmen only have access to the information and knowledge of their peers. They spend their entire lives alone with their thoughts and live a substince life where basic animal urges rule the roost so to speak. As much as I want to have to constantly worry about where my next meal is comming from of what will happen to my life if the next season dosn't bring good rain I really don't.
The life of a farmer/herder/hunter&gatherer is a crappy one that not many people like. Farmers usually spend almost all their time working and worrying from sunup to sundown. I personally knew of a professor who was raised on a farm not to mention my own dad and basically you work from sun-up to sun-down until you are dead on your feet. It's not fun.
The inexact colloquial term you are looking for is "street smarts" which I do not equate with either information or knowledge.
Respond to s
Pot and kettle anyone?
Abashed the Devil stood,
And felt how awful goodness is
pronoblem
There may be more cars in New jersey than the whole of Africa. However, there are more Mercedes-Benz dealerships in Africa than in New Jersey.
They may not buy many, but damn! They've got taste!
.sig: Now legally binding!
The main focus of the essay was on being disconnected and the previous poster was mentioning lack of network/computer connectivity for individuals in India. The post is based on these topics.
Respond to s
Wresch was the chair of the CIS Dept. at UW - Stevens Point up until '96 or 97', maybe 98'. Somewhere around there. The UW system has quite a few campuses around the state. I think it is safe to assume they left out the Stevens Point part because if wouldn't sound as prestigious.
Oh yeah, not everyone at the UW is obsessed with athletics. Somebody must have gotten picked last for playground kickball quite a bit to get a chip on their shoulder that big!
What are the isolates isolated from anyway? From what someone outside of their circle deems important. Do remote tribal people feel isolated? I would imagine that they feel far more connected with one another than those of us who are connected only through the ether. Aren't we all to some extent isolated (or insulated perhaps) from most of the rest of the world? By the definition (as I understood it) of this author, most of our leaders are isolates, depending on a cadre of 'connected' individuals to sort through the flotsam and jetsam of the information cesspool to locate the important information -- the kind of stuff one needs in order to make an informed decision.
I know, some of you will say, "I don't want to be dependant on others for my information. I do my own research." The fact is we who are 'connected' don't do our own research for most things. We cruise around the net looking for information that is provided by others and then we decide which information is valid and which is not (usually based upon our own mental filters rather than the validity of the data -- discounting sources here and accepting others that validate what we already believe).
--
As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.
Holy Shit? A Beowulf cluser of Jon Katzes? Wouldn't having such a large mass of stupid so close together cause Jon to colapse in on himself, thus causing a singularity of stupid. This 'Black Hole of Ignorance' would quickly start sucking in all clueful posts, leaving SlashDot full of retarded posts.
No replies made to AC posts. Please log in.
Katz cites a range of "27%-50%", but from my own experience, it's really more like "40%-60%". I was hired by one of the smaller Fortune 500 companies to do some consulting on company morale, and that's the range I came up with, but it's interesting what methodology I had to use.
You see, you can't do regular survey work when looking for these data -- employees either don't bother to fill them out, or they do fill them out but lie, hoping to kiss up to management or simply not jeopardize their jobs.
You might think you could just measure attendance at these events. But people do have good reasons for not coming, like busy personal lives or kids to drive to soccer games, etc. And measuring attendance at alcohol-laced cocktail parties on Fridays doesn't help either, since most people do stop by on their way out, for a quick beer if nothing else.
So, we had to come up with a unique methodology to implement. And I bet you'll never guess what we used: bathroom breaks. We installed cameras in the ir-activation mechanisms on those automatic toilets the company had installed two years previously, and we cross-matched bathroom-goers with the company facebook. It turns out, so-called "corporate isolates" are more likely to take frequent bathroom breaks, where they can escape the banter of coworkers (and decrease productivity at the same time). Like I said, the range came out to about "40%-60%", and needless to say, management was not pleased.
An interesting footnote, though, was the number of managers who also fit the profile according to our methodology. You'd think they'd be more likely to interact with others, being managers and all, but you'd be mistaken.
They showed an African tribesman holding a sign for IBM. Surely this author is mistaken :)
Uhhhhhhm I'm sorry: precisely *what* makes you believe that you, as a resident of the USA, in some manner have a 'right' to connectivity, such that a company devoting resources to connectivity outside the US is an
infringement on you?
Because a bunch of Indian peseants aren't the focus of society or industry for Americans to worry about when there are massive social problems right here at home. I say if the Indian people want access make them pay through the nose for it like we did in the early days of the internet. We shouldn't be bailing out another country and leave our own with slaves.
Go out and buy a freakin' phone line and a modem. If you have a decent job, get DSL or a leased line. Don't complain in a public forum because other countries in the world are getting basic 8-year-old comms
technology developed?
Check and double check. I have one land line and a 2400 baud modem. And I run linux. There should be not problem right? Wrong the rather stupid ISPs like Juno don't seem to get it through their head that they screwed me as a loyal customer when freewwweb closed. Linux was supported by them and worked extremely well. The the idiots take and "extent" the ppp protocol that is the mainstay for real communication and prevent anyone from using it. And they have the gall never to release a linux port despite need by a large number of people to have such a port done.
There is *NO* way anyone with a rational mind can argue that an american has any right to connectivity. You have what you pay for / invest time, energy and smarts in learning to use. That's life.
As long as the internet and it's inherent use are a prerequisite for doing *anything* and it becomes such a major issue and such you really do need it.
Take recent versions of windows. It's almost impossible to actually use some apps (like Word 2000) without registering first via an online connection first. Then windows "needs" to update itself via some form of online manner and also needs access. Not to mention to numbers of collegiate classes that are now going online for the interaction and using the web as a medium to turn solutions to problems (physics comes to mind). So yes I think that with all the emphasis on net connectivity and the fact that it's becomming a freebie option for almost all the net you *cannot* justify to me that it isn't a right. It's just simply baffling why people ignore linux with regard to the use of free ISPs. How damn hard is it to simply port your damn code to something that would give you more eyeballs. And don't give me the worn out excuse that linux makes it trivial to prevent seeing ads. You can program linux to prevent access without seeing ads. And you can bypass the ads on windows as well with a little bit of cleaver programming knowledge.
Respond to s
Based on this kind of reporting, it's a wonder that any of the book's stats are reliable.
So what if less Japanese feel "disconnected" than Americans? That in itself says very little, since there's a significant difference culturally beyond the confines of corporate life. A rough analogy would be:
"It's considered possible that a far greater percentage of Star Wars fans are familiar with Jabba the Hut than an equivalent group of Gone With the Wind buffs."
Japanese culture has a much stronger bias toward group membership, whereas the US is much more concerned with individuality as an ideal. This goes for school, social interaction and any number of other aspects of daily life. But I wouldn't say that this differeence is the some reason why more Americans feel disconnected, nor would I say that the different percentage proves anything beyond the author's proven ability to type the numbers "7" and 50".
The fact that the author uses meaningless stats like these to support what seems to be a pretty empty concept in the first place indicates that this is more an effort to sell books than to actually say something worth listening to.
Seriously wrong. India kicked IBM out of the country in the mainframe era because IBM wouldn't go for local ownership. As a result, computing in India skipped the mainframe era; for a long time DEC was the dominant vendor.
The ability to function in isolation is dependent upon the tasks you do and how they fit into the whole. In particular if the overall task can be partitioned into well defined subtasks or jobs.
The classic example is the Shaker barn raising. While the people are working together, they are essentially autonomous. People get together with a pile of wood in the morning and at the end of the day they end up with a barn. They've done so many of these things anybody can simply see the next thing to be done that he is capable of. When this kind of structure works, it is perfect because there is no wasted time put into management or meetings. So -- routine performance of easily partitioned tasks of moderate complexity work well in the autonomous mode.
On the other hand, consider the Bletchley park scenario. While each cryptanalyst works alone on a particular message, they may call in others with a special knack, and need to meet to develop and share new methods. Extremely difficult creative work then requires give and take and considerable interaction with coworkers.
Now consider the job of processing insurance claims. It is very routine, predictable, with measurable success metrics; on the other hand change does happen occaisionally and procedures must be altered. This is an environment tailor made for hierarchy (i.e. bureaucracy).
Now look at your own organization. It probably has elements of all three of these models, and perhaps others.
From a purely functional standpoint, different tasks require that organizations different social structures. Most require that people know each other and communicate on a regular basis. What goes on around the water cooler is often more important than appears. I once talked to a groupware expert who was working on a job for a large insurance company. New top management had looked at the org chart and identified a layer of management with no identifiable purpose. Using B-school logic, they eliminated it, only to find out that layer dealt with tasks having to do with vital interdepartmental coordination.
It's nice to have friends at work too. Many if not most people are happier being part of a team than being an anonymous productive factor.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
If everybody had a DSL connexion and could write Perl poems and everybody had stock options worth gajillions, who'd be making our bean burritos and Dr. Pepper???
The Divine Creatrix in a Mortal Shell that stays Crunchy in Milk
The House Between - Original Sci-Fi Series
Excuse me: American corporations do not DESERVE to be our communities.
All human beings have to a greater or lesser extent a hunger for community. It is an itch we all need to scratch, regardless of whether we are introverts or extroverts.
But just because we desire and enjoy and possibly even need it, does not make us stupid. And just as, even though thirsty we are smart enough not to drink poisoned water, many of us are clever enough not to try to sate our appetite for human connection on the poisonous pseudo-culture in the workplace!
In Western culture, there is this idea of not mixing business and pleasure. This isn't just some archaic uptightness -- it's a self-defense mechanism for employees. (See Miss Manners, of all authors, for technical explication.)
Community exterts tremendous power over its members. Your employer already controls your entire financial situation (and possibly your relationship with your doctor, and day care for your kids, etc.) The business/pleasure dichotomy keeps the business world from seizing the power of community, too.
Or put it another way, if the time you could have spent growing friendships outside of your place of employment you spend socializing with your co-workers.... if you try to leave that job, precisely whom do you know to network with to get a job somewhere else? If pissing off the boss means everyone you hang out with no longer wants to risk being seen with you, how often will you stick your neck out?
Of course corporations want more community in the work place -- they'd love for every time an employee thinks about quitting, they also think "but then I'd have to leave all my friends!" They want hostages!
And trust them (and apparently the author of this book) to deliberately confuse community with communications. Communications, boy-os, is something that starts from the top, and implies little about emotional interactions. Yah don't have to like each other to talk to each other about work. (That's called "Professionalism", BTW.) Community is completely about emotional relationships.
Yeah, corporate america keeps looking for ways to manipulate its workers into submission. Now it's community. Last year it was "family", and, get this, religion.
Companies don't deserve that kind of power over us. And we are not defective for refusing to grant it them!- ---
------------------------------------------
-*- Any technology indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced -*-
Once you learn to ignore people proximate to you,
this disconnection starts.
I think this is a problem with our culture, brought on especially in population centers. It's been growing ever since transportation/communication advances gave us the luxury of being able to ignore the people around us (that is, those who live close or are otherwise in proximity to us) during the day. Why be neighborly when you can go/talk anywhere? So you learn to be personally disproximate. Then you start at work...
An example of the neighbor thing: the other day, my girlfriend and I dropped by her old apartment, to see if some mail had come there for her. When we got there, there was a guy wandering around inside with a flashlight. No lights on. Very strange. She knocked on the door anyway, and the guy was very short with her. We became suspicious, and even more so when he finally turned on a light, because that meant he _could_ have had the light on the whole time. We waffled about what to do, and then finally decided to knock on the doors of the two neighboring apartments and see if they knew who their new neighbors were and if it matched the description of who my gf saw. Did they know their neighbors? Of course not. Heck, they wouldn't even answer the door at first, they were wrapped up enough in what was on TV, and they didn't even open the door when they did come to it (I am not a threatening looking person, either).
We get far too good at ignoring those around us.
Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.
There is also the fact that the male to female ratio here is about 1:10. Most of the watercooler discussions are of no interest to me and can easily move into territory I don't want to go to.
Insanity is the last line of defence for the master diplomat. But you have to lay the groundwork early.
Wot? steam engines, lead piping, and the Velocipede?
Go IBM! That's one company with it's finger on the pulse.
~ppppppppö
I think it's because most of us work for our company to live not live to work for our company. I enjoy my work, the company I work for has good working conditions - but let's face it, I really don't want to spend any more time there than necessary - especially doing sports that I find boring!
Management does occasionally forget that, and you get the "not a team player" etc. comments. However, with the difficulty in hiring people in our industry at the moment, it's easy to remind management you work here to live, not live to work here - by reminding them you can quit if they make you work any more unpaid overtime.
Now if we had a bowling team in our department, yes - I would do that, but that's because it's something I enjoy and I can drink beer whilst doing it ;-)
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
That's what I associate that with.
Respond to s
I think the reason geeks are 'disconnected' is because they're much more preocupied with other stuff, like the program they started at home, or the book they're reading, or how the hell does a PAUSE frame work on a full-duplex network?
The information technology field has more than enough information to keep one busy for a lifetime, and geeks who develop that uncontrollable thirst for knowledge try to gain as much as possible without waisting time.
So why go to the company picnic and waste 10 minutes reading newsletters when you could read man pages, books and write code instead?
That's the reason I'm disconnected. And I think I speak for quite a few people. It's not something bad. In fact, developing this interest in computers and everything related to them is the best thing that's ever happened to me...
--------------
--------------
$_='hfflbwfsbhfzp vs';s/(^.{4})(.{7 })(.+$)/$3 $2 $1/
In some ways, you a very, very right. I love singing, and remember joining a choir my first year of college. They insisted that we have lots of socials and that we have "bonding" meetings periodically. Eventually, another guy in the group and I took to calling it the "choir cult." And I've worked for places where activities were likewise (though in a lesser degree) an attempt to create an ersatz sense of community/loyalty/warm fuzzy feelings.
But I've also worked for places that actually had this feeling. They never demanded that work become your life, that they became your whole community, and they mostly did they cool activities because they thought it would be fun (OK, the trip to see "Bugs Life" was professional review of what was happening in the field, but everything else was for fun).
I recently read a book called "In His Steps" by Charles Shelton. I think it's the origin of the phrase "What would Jesus do?" Now, before you non-christians mock me off slashdot, hold up: the book is really about a group of people who reexamine their ethics and take them very seriously in ALL areas of their life. That's a powerful thing. The reason I bring this up is that in the book some of the people reexamine their ethics in the workplace. They notice their neighbor. Some of those people run businesses. This doesn't necessarily result in everybody being best friends, but it does result in people being treated better and more fairly. A better place to work. Businesses SHOULD pay attention to the human factor of relationships. People don't have to get up in the middle of quarterly reviews and say "I LOVE you, man" -- that's suspect anyway. But having some social contact with people at work and remembering that they're human beings is almost always a good idea.
Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.
You seem to be under the impression that American corporations need to operate under some sort of socialistic principles. I'm sorry, but that doesnt compute. No corporation owes you anything - unless you work for it, and then all it owes you is a paycheck. This is capitalism 101.
The reason IBM is in India and improving the technology there is out of pure self-interest. It can tap into the highly skilled cheap labour force to offload projects to India. How the heck can IBM do this if the telcommunications and the computing infrastructure arent upto the task? There is no socialistic motive here, and if IBM chooses to ignore the "massive social problems right here at home" while doing stuff in India, you'll just have to deal with it, wont you?
There is no such thing as luck. Luck is nothing but an absence of bad luck.
Actually you're right, all 40,000 students at UW-Madison, all 5,000,000 residents of Wisconsin, and the millions more from the Midwest are all "pathologically sports-obsessed." Way to make a stereotype pal. That sounds just like someone who lives a couple of blocks off the campus of MIT.
Sincerely,
A Typical UW-Madison Student
>Oh yeah, not everyone at the UW is obsessed with
>athletics. Somebody must have gotten picked last >for playground kickball quite a bit to get a chip
>on their shoulder that big!
That describes me pretty well. Beyond that, if you're a guy in Madison, and you're not a jock, it's next to impossible to get a date. And I refused to lower myself to that level. I'd rather leave town.
I think a lot of people will find my situation to be very common to theirs... No one else does what I do in this company. I'm either in the server room or my office debugging this or tweaking that. The major diff between me and everyone else is that I always have something to do. I'm usually so entrenched in my work that I hardly notice what happens around me socially. If no one would bother me all day I'd get by saying all of 10 words to 5 people on the way to the coffee machine and back. They're all really cool people but they are still "users". This isn't a professional caste system but a matter of priority. They have all day to process checks and fill in the blanks. I'm the one who has to have this research completed by then and be ready to implement that while fixing a BSOD'd server.
BOSTON SUCKS!
Hmmm well you actually can prevent IBM from giving *any* aid to india quite easily. Basically make sure that IBM cannot conduct international trade with India on order of the federal government. India can become a rouge nation and all problems are solved.
Respond to s
For some reason I'd have never thought that the campus in my hometown would ever get mentioned on /. Call me crazy. :P
;-)
The state of Wisconsin does have quite a few Public University campuses... Let's see, my favorite is UW-Madison, a place I spent 4 great years studying to be an EE _as_well_as_ rooting on Ron Dayne and the rest of the Badgers.
Then there's all the UW State Schools-> UW-Stevens Point, UW-LaCrosse, UW-Milwaukee, UW-Eau Claire, Stout, Superior, Green Bay, Whitewater, Park Side, Platteville, (is that all?) and that doesn't even include the numerous UW Centers around the state. Many apologies to the campuses I've forgotten.
1. anti fraternization rules: most companies have some sort of anti fraternization policy (IE: don't date coworkers). Due to our equal opportunity laws, a large number of your coworkers are of the opposite sex, socializing with your coworkers puts you in danger of meeting someone you click with leaving you with the dilemma of violating company policy or suffering in silence.
2. sexual harassment: in this day and age, simply talking to the opposite sex can be considered sexual harassment, best not to.
3. why make enemies: if you socialize with your coworkers, you are bound to find at least one person who doesn't like you, and given the nature of the universe, they will immediately be promoted to be your boss.
4. nothing in common: face it, everyone outside your department is a complete loser, what would you talk about.
I dunno why anyone is surprised at there being this kind of disparity. Even though computers and their associated services have come down drmatically in price, the toll to get on the Internet makes it largely the domain of middle class folks. Add in the knowledge toll to function there, and your average working class or lower person is gonna say the heck with it. They have too many other things to worry about. Get things down to the price of say a vcr and add in true plug and play set up, then this will change. Before we see the information access gap disappear the undlerlying tech has got to become as ubiquitous as cable tv and about as easy to use. This is happening pretty fast, so I'd expect to see a cultural change on Internet again in the next few of years identical to the one when AOL and others companies started providing easy Internet access. In the meantime, you see an Internet population that is pretty well educated and pretty affulent all things considered. So we have a gap today, but I doubt its going to be there for too much longer as the devices and services become cheaper and easier to use.
The real gap is in how people use the access to information. Lots of us here use the Internet as social medium, a place to collaborate on projects be they technical, artistic, political or whatever. We also use the Internet as the world's greatest reference collection. We're very well informed because we know the information is out there and how to look for it. Now, lets look at them. For someone neither technical savvy nor educated will the Internet be anything more than mall? That's where there real gap is going to be: In the ablity of people to use their access to information effectively.
As for the rest of the world: It looks as though those nations that are doing the hard work to achieve political and economic stablity will be able to build the necessary infrastructure for Internet access. The more important gap as the developing world emerges from a century political turmoil will be in what the stable governments allow their citizens to see. Take China for instance. Five years ago the Internet barely existed there. Now, its becoming more and more common in the cities, but the government restricts what the citizens can see. Whether or not their policy is effective I leave to another discussion(read I don't know). We're going to see a drastic difference in the way different geographical regions use the Internet. What will this mean in practical terms? Who knows. Its really too soon to say. In my opinion the gap is not going to be about technology and development, but in cultural and political views about information and ideas. Either way, this sounds like a good book to read.
In terms of the other issues about isolation at work. What the heck cares? In America we've never identified as strongly with an employer as say the Japanese have. We identify with professions. "I am programmer." "I am a geek." "I am a plumber." What we do is much more important than who we do it for. Companies that are effective and successful at their business find ways to get their people to talk to one and other independent of social activities. They don't leave such things to chance or the mercenary attitude of the worker. A justified attitude I might add given the lack of loyalty companies demostrate to their workers, but that's a whole other issue.
I'm not sure what it is about Jon Katz that would make him explicitly, or even implicitly, socialist or Marxist. Marx was a strong humanist who believed that matching people with meaningful work would free people's abilities to create art, music, and an overall joyful & just society, which is quite different from the assertion of the author of this book, to which Katz seems sympathetic, that people should spend more time at jobs which are only semi-meaningful.
Ayn Rand was certainly a prolific writer, but I'm not sure that reading what she wrote would save anyone's mind, even if she did advocate for personal responsibility, which is always healthy. Saving people's minds is more what professional psychological help is for, donch'a think? Dogma has never made me more sane.
--Danka, who likes kids, but wouldn't want to eat one
Hmmm...
Yup. I remember being forced to take those sociology courses. After all, you really need those courses in order to become a well rounded systems engineer, right? Geez....One of the things that really bugged me about those classes was the flawed statistical drivel that was touted as gospel. But anyway, I digress...
The book basically takes the division of classes to the next level... Yeah, ok, sounds again like something from Sociology 101! What does the author propose to span this rift and break down these "class barriers"? Should this be similar to Pol Pot's idea except in reverse: we march everyone out of the fields and place them in cyber-gulags? (Sorry, one of my Soc instructors had the odd opinion that Pol Pot's original idea was sound but the implementation was flawed! Talk about yer... oops, again I digress!) What will we eat? Soylent Green?
Anyway, but back to the original topic: in regards to human interaction, I see electronically based information as an isolating factor. When was the last time you walked down to the corner store to buy the newspaper? (For me, only on Sundays... mostly for the sales/coupons, comics and TV guide sections of the paper... been a long time since I read the paper in-depth for news!)
BTW: the only people from work with whom I socialise after business hours are those who would have become my friends had I met them elsewhere. I don't work for a social club, and therefore, should not have to socialise at or with work!
-dean
-----------------------
-dean
-----------------------
hey, well, its just my $0.02us
I went to UW Madison, my impression was that people were a lot more into beer and punk rock bands in dirty basements than sports.
Of course, that was probably just the people I hung out with... God I miss those days.
"Free your mind and your ass will follow"
You know, the real problem with books (and theories, and newspaper articles) which "address" the social ramifications of the 'net is that they usually try to compress multiple orthagonal axes into one simple either/or statement.
Consider:
Techno-philic vs. Techno-phobic
Whether or not you are inclined to use the tech. An issue of psychology.
Whether you have access, or not. This is a financial issue.
Whether you need more solitude or more socializing. Both are equally healthy and valid psychological make ups.
Whether you're in one or not, independent of how you feel about them. An issue of fact, not opinion.
Whether you're getting your personal quota of relationships in your life. An issue of personal opinion.
Whether you are socializing in the meat world. A subjective judgement of quantity.
Whether or not you are any good at it. A subjective judgement of quality.
A personal policy decision.
All of these are completely distinct. But pundits keep trying to squash them into a single dichotomy. That's where we get absurdities like "Does net use make people more socially isolated?" to which the answer can only be "mu!"
Where do I fit into their little equation? An introvert (needs little socialization) who is technophilic (likes computers) and net-using (a technology-have), a community member (strong sense of belonging), relationship rich (not needy of more relationships), and highly socially active and adept in meat space (out with people most nights of the week), and unwilling to socialize at work (a cultural choice)?
What of the smart but extroverted coder who has the misfortune to live in a technical backwater, where most of the other geeks have moved away; hungry for more socialization, but unable to meet physicially with peers or find an accepting community in the real world, and unable to fit-in at work but gives it a shot?
What of the technophobic deaf person using a borrowed computer to connect to the net at 14.4baud, because, despite not wanting to have to deal with the technology, it is the only way to really interact on an equal footing with the hearies?
There is no room in their impoverished models for our personal realities, which is why those models so piss us off.
----------------------------------------------
-*- Any technology indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced -*-
I think (IMHO) that these should be kept seperate unless deemed necessary, I don't think this is alienation, I think this is respect for not "dumping" on your co-workers and also not letting your life interfere with your work, now if I can figure how to do the opposite I will be a step ahead :)
Team spirit is in working together to achieve the result necessary to do the work and do it correctly, not in wasting your Saturday playing softball with the same people that you see all week. Just my $.02...
If we don't make light of everything, we are just stumbling in the dark - Blank
I am still here and just last week three of my friends bands played in dirty basement, with a lot of beer. Not much has changed. :) I am still enjoying it too.
If we don't make light of everything, we are just stumbling in the dark - Blank
I think that's already happened. Case in point, how about my post;-).
Bite my yammer.
Ok, so the book is kinda stupid IMHO, but we're still the Rose Bowl champs!
Butchers make the bestest meat; sugar sugar sugar beet!
"It's" is not the posessive form of "it". "It's" is a contraction of "it is".
One snide comment deserves another, don't you think?
People,
Who don't need people,
Are the happiest people,
in the world...
[/singing]
Sorry, couldn't help myself...
*whup* "Get along, little electrons. Heeyah!"
U of Wisconsin's plan for addressing isolation
Who'd have thought that people's behavior, and what they want to do, is ultimately more important than whether you buy them a nifty technology? Um, just about everyone....
Millions of years ago, single-celled organisms decided to start communicating. They ended up creating humans.
Those single-celled organisms which decided, for whatever reasons, not to communicate with other cells? They're still single cells, and are essentially insignificant.
What does this say about those humans who decide, for whatever reasons, not to communicate with other humans?
The Internet really is the "infrastructure" of the new organism, just like our nerve pathways and blood streams were the infrastructure required in order for us to come to be.
(I realize this has little to do with the "corporate isolates" that were mentioned in the book; as the company I work for has grown, I've found that it's just not as much fun going to those picnics and events. The people are different, many of them are strangers -- it's basically the same as going to a bar, just that we all have stock options. The above is more about being isolated from the most efficient communications channels.)
--
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
Many of the posts here that I'm seeing seem to focus on individuals' right not to attend the company picnic or softball game. Jon only mentioned that in passing, and I think these posts are missing the point. The point is, many employees are isolated while they're ON the job. I've seen many like this. People who pay no attention to what anyone else is doing; don't know about company policies, procedures, or events; take no initiative to drive their own performance and must constantly be told what to do by superiors. These individuals have no interest in achieving any personal excellence, and information isolation is but one symtom of the problem. They come to work, do as little as possible, take no pride in their work, and then whine that they don't make enough money and the company doesn't treat them right. But, of course, they drive a $35,000 pickup truck to work. They should thank their lucky stars that they managed to fool the interviewers into thinking they were worth hiring. I've dealt with people who only read their email once a week (maybe) when the company policy was to check it at least twice a day. Since meetings were scheduled via email, we would have to take time to coddle these individuals and make sure they knew about the meeting. That's just one of many examples. Ask these same individuals 5 minutes after the meeting what was talked about, and they can't even tell you -- their minds were off in la la land (probably thinking about their Harley or something). Again, they're lucky they have jobs at all, because if we knew then what we know now, we would not have hired them.
----
"Oh, bother," said Pooh, as he hid Piglet's mangled corpse.
This book seems to be about two completely different topics -- isolates and the truelly disconnected. I will address the first topic.
At companies I have worked for the isolates were often the most productive people. They may not have chatted a lot or gone to company social events -- but day after day they got things done. The super involved people are often so focused on being involved that they end up getting a lot less work done.
On the other hand isolation can be taken to such an extreme that it hurts productivity. There are people who won't communicate with people they work with even when it is important to do so. I have seen that extreme but the majority of isolates do care about their jobs and communicate as much as is necessary to get work done.
IM-not so-HO, IBM went to India for the same reason HP, Motorola and now Microsoft went there- to tap into its technical manpower and/or its huge market. Businesses do not operate on altruistic motives, at least not in the real world.
This book seems assumes that every person living in the developing world would achieve prosperity and happiness if only he or she could have that nice DSL connection. Let's face it the real issue here is more fundamental than just access to information -- it is poverty.
If you don't have decent roads, a working sewer system, unpolluted water to drink, and enough food -- then access to information isn't your primary problem. If you don't have the rule of law and a relatively un-corrupt government then you really don't have a chance.
These are the sorts of problems that many developing countries had before the Internet was an issue. To focus on information and to suggest that access to information is somehow a primary cause of the gap between rich and poor, is to have no sense of history.
Your methodology was measuring bathroom breaks? The only thing that measures is who takes a lot of bathroom breaks -- it says nothing else about the person in question.
Isolates might just be the ones who, while others are chatting, are actually getting work done. While you were taking pictures of people in the bathroom, the isolates were probably getting work done.
But again you were kidding I am sure??
You've made some excellent points. If you are competent at your job you will communicate as needed to get the work done. Someone who neglects to communicate with coworkers about important work issues is simply incompetent.
To suggest that they must have extensive emotional ties with coworkers -- a feeling of community -- in order to be competent is simply wrong. Of course, corporations would love you to feel the sort of loyalty toward them that you do towards family and friends. They are trying to make you feel like the company is your family, not merely your livelihood. They want to harness that emotional power.
--
This is not my sandwich.
Whatever happend to the 4 day work week concept?
Capt. Ron
crazy dynamite monkey
Well to make my point a little better check out what kind of betrayal the game industry has engaged in with regard to their offerings. The first 2 quake games were in fact meant to be played alone. Then comes along Quake III and you have basically no plot just a lot of (in my opnion) worthless, hard difficult play that requires access to the net to accomplish. Secondly upgrading my kernel is almost next to impossible without net access also ever tried to get a cvs tree without net access and nothing but user mode access to NT machines and win 95 machines? Try adding to the fact that you only have floppies to work with and that makes your position become even more tenuous. Buying things also leaps to mind. To order many things it's almost imperative to get them on the internet unless you wish to hunt down each and every merchant through a very expensive and time consuming process of long distance calling and then you most likely have to leave you house and travel for hundreds of miles to get what you need. Updates to software products are almost never more put out on any other media than the internet no adays. Weather information that is up the second cannot be obtained without internet connections. Try getting masses of radr data mailed to your house dosn't work. n fact the application that the NWS uses to get the data *requires* a T-1 to work at all without failing. For christ's sake you have a great number of people getting network access as something taken out of their taxes (remember the little story of the entire german town that has net access). I object strenuously to any attempt to basically help others without having the thing yourself. Am I bitter? Hell yeah. Am I resentful? Hell yeah!! Would I find some means to stiff worthless arrgant class system supporters like Juno I woulds do it in a second. I probably am charged in fact for the maintaince of some internet related thing or another through Federal/State income taxes and I don't even have access to those databases. What gets me is that there are some things that are basically necessary for a good life and the internet is one of them. Without the large scale access to the internet the computr world was shitty. Roll back the clock to the 1980's when everything was 30x more expensive and you paid by the minute to access some services and computers were a hell of a lot worse. Most people can't conceive that open source software really was around before something like 3-4 years ago because there was almost nothing that was being done. Why? Well because almost no one had a computer and even fewer people had an IP address to spare. I don't even want to think how miserable a time people had with computers then (I never got into the computer world until basically ~1994 or so). You what would be the easiest thing to do? Simply complete the connection from the local office of the telco to the homes so that they are all equiped with all digital connections that are always on and then simply hav ethem act like a DSL like and you can have voice/internet access. Hell I would go out and get the cable myself and string it myself and dig the street up myself with my own tools if I had to to get it to work. The problem is people see the average person as a threat to their established social order. What suddently happens when every person can run the slash code on their computer at home and compete with slashdot for their type of services? What happens when web hosting no longer is really that all important because you can run any damn thing you want on your computer? In short what happens when their is no longer a monopoly anymore on the technology? As much as I hate to see suffering in the world I care even less to see the suffering in my own life. Truth be told I hate living where I have to live and hate living with small minded fools who seem to thing that their entire world is what they see on any given day. I hate to spend thousands of dollars on books to supplement a worthless library and I hate the lack of information. I also fervently hate the association with every stinking aspect of human life associated with some stupid business. The government guarateees freedom, safety, and in fact a great many thing business operation and it's associated world are to be left to bean counters and other fools in business schools. Technology should be above stupid irrevelencies of business and the like. I trained to be a CS major not an accounting major. And I doubt that many other people actualy trained as business majors and write code. Business is a place where you work not a way of life by any means. Also I have no money to travel to far flung corners of the globe. Speak 10+ languages and have any opportunity to see almost anything beyone roughly a 100 mile radious of my home town. What is a tremendous farce is that you have work and you have the fruits of work. If you work all the time you consequently have little time to devote to your little toys that you working buys and then you are to tired at the end of the day to care. So what do I say to India? Well they can go f*ck off and get their own access, kill themselves off by picking fights with Packistan and try to find the spiritual enlightenment that has been so elusive for them for the last 8,000-10,000 years. The attitude at slashdot that the internet is not important is laughable to me because you all pony up far more money each month than I would ever dream of paying for connecting permanent connections to your houses and never have to wory about access evermore. Oh even if I did manage to get broadband and get it paid for and still wasn't dead tired from working 2 jobs to pay for it I still cannot connect linux to the damn thing. US west/Qwest dosn't support linux for their software and hardware, I don't see where I can run servers
Respond to s
...because it's "Kalahari", not "Kalihari".
- Ravn
- Peter Ravn Rasmussen
Antibodies? The average life and quality of a tribesman is abysmally low.
Respond to s