I got a friend request once from some generic profile, supposedly for an organization related to where I'm located. Looked at it, and I couldn't tell who they were or how they might have been related to me in any way. Did these clowns think I was going to friend them? Hell, I don't want some of the friends I already have, so I'm certainly not going to add more that I can't even identify.
I had wondered about the ownership of these companies. I pretty much suspected that Etisalat was either state-owned or at least owned by people closely connected to the state, but I wasn't sure about Du. They seem to be a bit more progressive than Etisalat, so I had wondered if they were under different ownership. Not so much, I suppose.
Just my opinion, but I think that, at some point, telecom will need to be liberalized or economic development is going to stall. People in Europe, Asia, and North America can make international calls for next to nothing now, and I think that this cheap calling has come to be expected, and if the UAE wants to more closely integrate into that trade arena, the cost of calling and getting Internet access has got to come down. I can certainly understand the current structure if the federal government gets much of its cash from telecom, but maybe that funding needs to change. Not that I can speak authoritatively on this, since the United States has some really terrible funding disparities, especially when you get down to the state and local level. Still, basing a federal budget on telecom seems like a bad idea, especially when having low phone and data rates seems to be a prerequisite for a modern economy.
From personal experience trying to help a friend who lives in Dubai, I think that more effort goes into blocking VoIP, and that's because Etisilat and du know that they couldn't charge the rates they do for international calling if people had VoIP as an alternative. We can argue all day about the morality of blocking porn and that maybe a better solution is to allow parents to police content by offering them filtering software that they can choose to install, but, with VoIP, it's all about the money. The UAE has a modern telecom infrastructure with lots of expats who want to call home, and Etisilat and du can make boatloads of money if they offered reasonable rates. Instead, they play this game, which forces people to spend money on VPN's so they can call out. And I'll bet that many do it just to stick it to the telecoms that make their lives so hard.
Coming from someone who had responsibility for a small corporate network in a former job, I have to agree. Yes, we had an Internet use policy. It was pretty broad, and I knew that people violated it every single day. But, you know what? I had my hands full making sure the computers and network didn't melt down on a daily basis, so, as long as no one was doing anything that made my job harder, I didn't care. Sure, I had to do an e-mail investigation once to determine if a staff member was doing something inappropriate, and I was asked by a supervisor if there was anything set up to monitor whether an employee was surfing FB excessively, and I responded appropriately to both requests, but, as I said, as long as employees weren't doing anything that could either harm our infrastructure or get the organization in legal trouble, I left them alone.
I suspect the same is true in this case. The government wants porn blocked, so the IT guys block some porn. But they aren't stupid. They know damn well that it's ineffective, but, as long as they don't feel pressure to do more, why should they? No one wants to go out of their way to be more of an asshole than is demanded by their superiors (well, almost no one), and that's why these holes are there. Now, where you do see more extensive blocking is with VoIP traffic, and that's because Etisilat sees it as a direct threat to its profits. Blocking VoIP, I'd wager, is a lot higher on their priority list.
Look, you need to be practical here. There's a good reason control rooms like the one in 24 don't exist in the real world: they don't work. Forget the video wall and just make sure that your employees have access to what they need on their own workstations. You want this thing to be functional in a crisis situation, right? Then that means that the facility may need to run on backup power, and a bunch of huge monitors are going to use a lot of that power. Not to mention that that expensive video wall is going to quickly become a white elephant, and then something on it is going to fail. At that point, management is going to know the whole thing was pointless, and they aren't going to want to shell out more money to repair it.
If you want this to work, then focus more on getting your employees comfortable and functional furniture. Dual-monitor systems work well for displaying critical information, provided that you get desks big enough to accommodate them and other needed equipment. As for employee comfort, make sure they have an adequate break area that includes a large fridge, microwave, sink, water cooler, and table. If you don't want visitors to see it, just use partitions to hide it. And if you feel the need to make it look "cool", then get everything in black and/or stainless steel. And if you want to give them something fun to do, then throw in some old arcade games. If management is worried about these being a big time-waster, then make them run on tokens, and give each employee a certain number of them per day, week, etc.
The thing is, you want a facility that will actually be useful to you. Build that, and you will have made a good investment, and, believe me, clients will take more notice of that than of something that looks good but isn't functional.
No, but Darl claimed that he stole the whole dead/alive cat thing from SCO. Darl said that being either dead or alive is a binary concept, and since computers are binary devices, and since SCO writes computer software, then the whole concept of binary is their intellectual property, so Schrodinger owes them around $10 quadrillion. SCO is also suing every cat in the world, both living and dead, claiming that, as a result of Schrodinger's blatant IP violations, all cats are required to purchase licenses from SCO in order to exist. Darl also considered suing rats, mice, and other assorted vermin on the theory that SCO's IP umbrella extended to them because of their close predator-prey relationship with cats, but the whole thing fell apart when he realized that he fell into that category of vermin and therefore would be in the awkward position of suing himself. He wasn't opposed to doing this, but the lawyers weren't sure how they'd get paid, since Darl would be both the winner and loser in such a case, so they refused to go forward.
Oh, I know they had nothing, but there may be some incriminating evidence that shows they knew they had nothing, or maybe it would show that they were being sponsored by a large, well known software company that we can all name.
I'd buy any computers and hard drives I could find, then check to see if any data is left on them. If it appeared the drives were wiped, I'd go over them with data recovery software. You never know what interesting tidbits one might find on those things.
At worst, you'd get some hardware. At best, you might find some extremely incriminating evidence. It likely wouldn't hold up in a court of law, but can you imagine the PR damage it could do to certain companies if it ended up online?
And even if all you end up with is a bunch of random data, save it as an image file and post it online for people to download and try to decipher. It could provide countless hours of entertainment for years to come.
Doing this might also provide a bit of insurance against any vultures buying the contested IP and carrying on with this shakedown scheme. No matter what might be on those drives, they could never know for sure how damaging the info might be, so it may give them pause, lest some bombshell appear at some point down the road. They'd essentially have a big black box floating around out there that contains either nothing at all or information that could prove disastrous to them, and that black box is constantly being picked at by folks trying to unlock it. Would you want to risk a bunch of money pursuing shaky legal claims with that uncertainty out there?
There are two scenarios where you would use a VoIP provider over a phone: if you are out of the country and want to use wi-fi to call home, and if you want to make international calls at rates lower than your carrier charges. Actually, there might be one more. You might want to have the VoIP setup act as a second line with its own phone number. That's a service that cell companies should have offered years ago but somehow never got around to doing, for reasons I've never entirely understood.
I can't comment on the WDTV, since I don't own one, but why are you switching the network cable? Get yourself a cheap switch at Newegg and be done with that hassle.
Not to go offtopic, but if they're offering them for free, take as many as they'll give you. There are many schools, libraries, and nonprofits that would kill for a donated computer, even an older one. Or find a needy family and donate it to them. That's what a friend of mine did with an extra laptop he had, and they were most appreciative.
When netbooks came on the scene, they were dirt cheap. Sure, they could do less than a notebook, but, again, they were dirt cheap, they were small, and battery life was good. Just what you needed for Web browsing and light productivity work. Oh yeah, and they were dirt cheap, easily several hundred less than most notebooks except that once-in-a-blue-moon sale you might run across.
However, this didn't last. Companies started cramming more and more into these things, which drove the price up. In and of itself, that might have been OK, but notebook prices started coming down, and they offered more features. They were bigger, but you could do more with them, and I really believe that a significantly lower price is what drove netbook sales, not merely their size. So, people could spend maybe $250-$300 for a netbook, or, if they caught a sale, they could spend $350 for a basic notebook, which offered much more bang for the buck. That's what killed netbook sales, IMHO.
Excellent idea! If you file the claim, the scammers have to file a reply, or they lose by default. Since people like this are bottom feeders who move from one scam to another, I seriously doubt they'll want to expose themselves by filing a response. Like cockroaches exposed to a light, they'll scurry away.
Just an off-the-wall idea here, but check to see how to report this site to Mozilla and Microsoft to get it into their blacklist of phishing/scam sites. If I got something from a site, and, upon trying to visit it, my browser's filter warned me about it, I might suspect something fishy is going on.
Doing this is by no means a complete solution, but it could get you part of the way there.
While I disagree with most everything Rupert Murdoch says, I think he's at least partly on to something with the iPad as a newspaper replacement. OK, let's ignore the fact that it's terribly overpriced for this function, but he is right in that many people would like something that's lightweight and portable. Build a device like that and make it cheap, and you may have a winner on your hands. People would be able to sit on a bus or train and read the publication of their choice, be it a traditional newspaper or a blog, whatever they like. Sure, a laptop can easily do that, but show me a device that costs $49.99 that can do it. And at that price point, a modest subsidy from a newspaper could bring the price down to a point where it's almost a disposable item. That's the goal. Figure out how to make one of those, and you'll make a mint.
First, if you're running XP, know that its standalone user account types are horrible. Administrators can do anything, while limited users often can't do enough, and some programs don't function correctly with this account type. I hate to say it, but this is one of those cases where Vista was an improvement. Its standard user accounts are just about right, so if you have the option to upgrade to Windows 7 (or even Vista), consider it. There are certainly downsides, especially where older hardware is concerned, but better non-administrative accounts are a reason to think about it.
If you don't want to do that, then filtering is your next step. First, shore up the browser by making sure its anti-phishing filters are turned on. Another level of filtering/user advising can be performed by McAfee SiteAdvisor (http://www.siteadvisor.com). Its main benefit is that it will place advisory icons next to search engine results, indicating the site's risk. Show these to your users, and teach them what they mean. If you're running Firefox, install AdBlock Plus. That will filter out malware coming in through infected ad servers.
Next, you can use OpenDNS as a DNS filtering solution. This will let you block sites that folks shouldn't be visiting at work...MySpace, Facebook...did I mention MySpace and Facebook.
Next, consider whether or not you need your users to have Flash, since it is yet another avenue for infection. Unfortunately, some sites rely on it for basic functionality, so there may be some reason to leave it in, but if you do, MySpace and Facebook (especially MySpace) should be blocked.
Finally, look at your e-mail, since I'd be willing to bet that malware is coming in by that route. What anti-spam measures is your mail server running? If you aren't sure how well they're working, take a look at the mail your users are receiving daily. And, just in case you aren't doing this, make damn sure users know that their work addresses shouldn't be receiving personal mail, no exceptions. Let the pictures of kittens, puppies, and dancing babies go somewhere else. Put the fear of God in them if nothing else works. Their work addresses are for work, no exceptions.
You're going to have to fight this battle on an ongoing basis, but you can win if you stay aware of what users are doing and restrict the dangerous stuff.
If Google wants to reduce the wireless carriers to dumb pipes, then it needs a network of its own. Otherwise, the carriers will simply block VoIP over their networks or, simpler yet, refuse to sell data service without a voice plan. However, if there's a competitor to the existing carriers, then customers will presumably flock to it, forcing the established players to change the way they sell service.
I realize that building a nationwide network will cost a small fortune and take time, but that's what it's going to take. Either that, or Google could buy one or more existing networks. Sprint, perhaps? Or what about snapping up Cricket and MetroPCS?
Yes, there is a safe place. You vent to your friends and family, who will know you and know what you do and don't mean. If you walk up to me and say you're thinking of killing someone, what am I supposed to think? I don't know you, so I have to take your words at face value. If I walk into my office bathroom and see a statement like hers written on the wall, I'm sure as hell going to take it at face value. Facebook is no different, except that many more folks can potentially see those words.
I am a huge proponent of freedom of speech, but even that has its limits. By all accounts, this woman made some very threatening comments. Had she killed anyone? No, but the statements she made were specific enough and graphic enough that a reasonable person might think she had the intention of carrying them out. If I walk up to you and tell you that I'm thinking of chopping your head off and making it the centerpiece of my Christmas dinner, you might have a good reason to suspect I might do that, and I would be arrested for threatening to kill you.
Freedom of speech is not an absolute, and it never has been. Making threats and inciting violence have always been prosecuted, even in the heyday of the Internet. I was there then, and you could still get prosecuted if you made such statements, either online or in person.
Look, I don't know your situation, but you need to consider the future. Are you topped out in terms of salary in your current position? Also, what is your salary if you take the promotion, and where does that job's salary top out? And how old are you?
You may be thinking that your current salary is fine, but, as you get older and take on more responsibilities, that paycheck starts to look really inadequate. And I know you really love IT, but now you will have a chance to learn a whole new set of skills, skills that will look good on a resume should you end up hating the new job. You may end up finding a new employer that needs someone with both IT and management skills.
Not meaning to be politically correct, but do you know what a gimp is? Do you not realize how insulting that term can be?
It's all about marketing. You don't want to have to defend a name to someone before they even consider adopting a product. If your audience is limited and specialized, that's one thing, but if you want to appeal to a wider group, you have to be aware of these things.
But it isn't about making profits; it's about growth, specifically, growth that meets or exceeds expectations. That's why profitable companies can see their stock crash. If profits are up, say, 3% or, God forbid, flat, and investors had expected them to be up 5%, then there is obviously a terrible management problem at the company, so these investors will either dump the stock or demand a management shakeup.
Long gone are the days when it was enough to earn a steady profit or be happy with moderate growth. Investors want spectacular growth, and if they don't get it, they'll pull their money out and look for a company they think will bring them a faster return. It's also why pump-and-dump scams work so well. Ideally, people would look carefully at a company and its business plan before they invest, but in the current investor mindset, a skyrocketing stock price is all that matters. Get in, ride the roller coaster as it goes up, up, up, try to anticipate the peak, then get out as the stock peaks, right before the crash. It's also why management often does things that aren't good for the company in the long term. Since investors are only interested in the stock price right now, managers have to live for today, since their asses will be gone if things look bad, even if the downturn is only short-term. So what if the current strategy will ultimately harm the company? That won't happen for a while, so the future managers can worry about that.
Slashdot Mirror
I got a friend request once from some generic profile, supposedly for an organization related to where I'm located. Looked at it, and I couldn't tell who they were or how they might have been related to me in any way. Did these clowns think I was going to friend them? Hell, I don't want some of the friends I already have, so I'm certainly not going to add more that I can't even identify.
I had wondered about the ownership of these companies. I pretty much suspected that Etisalat was either state-owned or at least owned by people closely connected to the state, but I wasn't sure about Du. They seem to be a bit more progressive than Etisalat, so I had wondered if they were under different ownership. Not so much, I suppose.
Just my opinion, but I think that, at some point, telecom will need to be liberalized or economic development is going to stall. People in Europe, Asia, and North America can make international calls for next to nothing now, and I think that this cheap calling has come to be expected, and if the UAE wants to more closely integrate into that trade arena, the cost of calling and getting Internet access has got to come down. I can certainly understand the current structure if the federal government gets much of its cash from telecom, but maybe that funding needs to change. Not that I can speak authoritatively on this, since the United States has some really terrible funding disparities, especially when you get down to the state and local level. Still, basing a federal budget on telecom seems like a bad idea, especially when having low phone and data rates seems to be a prerequisite for a modern economy.
Does that trick work with Skype's site?
From personal experience trying to help a friend who lives in Dubai, I think that more effort goes into blocking VoIP, and that's because Etisilat and du know that they couldn't charge the rates they do for international calling if people had VoIP as an alternative. We can argue all day about the morality of blocking porn and that maybe a better solution is to allow parents to police content by offering them filtering software that they can choose to install, but, with VoIP, it's all about the money. The UAE has a modern telecom infrastructure with lots of expats who want to call home, and Etisilat and du can make boatloads of money if they offered reasonable rates. Instead, they play this game, which forces people to spend money on VPN's so they can call out. And I'll bet that many do it just to stick it to the telecoms that make their lives so hard.
Coming from someone who had responsibility for a small corporate network in a former job, I have to agree. Yes, we had an Internet use policy. It was pretty broad, and I knew that people violated it every single day. But, you know what? I had my hands full making sure the computers and network didn't melt down on a daily basis, so, as long as no one was doing anything that made my job harder, I didn't care. Sure, I had to do an e-mail investigation once to determine if a staff member was doing something inappropriate, and I was asked by a supervisor if there was anything set up to monitor whether an employee was surfing FB excessively, and I responded appropriately to both requests, but, as I said, as long as employees weren't doing anything that could either harm our infrastructure or get the organization in legal trouble, I left them alone.
I suspect the same is true in this case. The government wants porn blocked, so the IT guys block some porn. But they aren't stupid. They know damn well that it's ineffective, but, as long as they don't feel pressure to do more, why should they? No one wants to go out of their way to be more of an asshole than is demanded by their superiors (well, almost no one), and that's why these holes are there. Now, where you do see more extensive blocking is with VoIP traffic, and that's because Etisilat sees it as a direct threat to its profits. Blocking VoIP, I'd wager, is a lot higher on their priority list.
Look, you need to be practical here. There's a good reason control rooms like the one in 24 don't exist in the real world: they don't work. Forget the video wall and just make sure that your employees have access to what they need on their own workstations. You want this thing to be functional in a crisis situation, right? Then that means that the facility may need to run on backup power, and a bunch of huge monitors are going to use a lot of that power. Not to mention that that expensive video wall is going to quickly become a white elephant, and then something on it is going to fail. At that point, management is going to know the whole thing was pointless, and they aren't going to want to shell out more money to repair it.
If you want this to work, then focus more on getting your employees comfortable and functional furniture. Dual-monitor systems work well for displaying critical information, provided that you get desks big enough to accommodate them and other needed equipment. As for employee comfort, make sure they have an adequate break area that includes a large fridge, microwave, sink, water cooler, and table. If you don't want visitors to see it, just use partitions to hide it. And if you feel the need to make it look "cool", then get everything in black and/or stainless steel. And if you want to give them something fun to do, then throw in some old arcade games. If management is worried about these being a big time-waster, then make them run on tokens, and give each employee a certain number of them per day, week, etc.
The thing is, you want a facility that will actually be useful to you. Build that, and you will have made a good investment, and, believe me, clients will take more notice of that than of something that looks good but isn't functional.
No, but Darl claimed that he stole the whole dead/alive cat thing from SCO. Darl said that being either dead or alive is a binary concept, and since computers are binary devices, and since SCO writes computer software, then the whole concept of binary is their intellectual property, so Schrodinger owes them around $10 quadrillion. SCO is also suing every cat in the world, both living and dead, claiming that, as a result of Schrodinger's blatant IP violations, all cats are required to purchase licenses from SCO in order to exist. Darl also considered suing rats, mice, and other assorted vermin on the theory that SCO's IP umbrella extended to them because of their close predator-prey relationship with cats, but the whole thing fell apart when he realized that he fell into that category of vermin and therefore would be in the awkward position of suing himself. He wasn't opposed to doing this, but the lawyers weren't sure how they'd get paid, since Darl would be both the winner and loser in such a case, so they refused to go forward.
Oh, I know they had nothing, but there may be some incriminating evidence that shows they knew they had nothing, or maybe it would show that they were being sponsored by a large, well known software company that we can all name.
I'd buy any computers and hard drives I could find, then check to see if any data is left on them. If it appeared the drives were wiped, I'd go over them with data recovery software. You never know what interesting tidbits one might find on those things.
At worst, you'd get some hardware. At best, you might find some extremely incriminating evidence. It likely wouldn't hold up in a court of law, but can you imagine the PR damage it could do to certain companies if it ended up online?
And even if all you end up with is a bunch of random data, save it as an image file and post it online for people to download and try to decipher. It could provide countless hours of entertainment for years to come.
Doing this might also provide a bit of insurance against any vultures buying the contested IP and carrying on with this shakedown scheme. No matter what might be on those drives, they could never know for sure how damaging the info might be, so it may give them pause, lest some bombshell appear at some point down the road. They'd essentially have a big black box floating around out there that contains either nothing at all or information that could prove disastrous to them, and that black box is constantly being picked at by folks trying to unlock it. Would you want to risk a bunch of money pursuing shaky legal claims with that uncertainty out there?
Of course they will. It's about the only thing they have that the vultures might want.
There are two scenarios where you would use a VoIP provider over a phone: if you are out of the country and want to use wi-fi to call home, and if you want to make international calls at rates lower than your carrier charges. Actually, there might be one more. You might want to have the VoIP setup act as a second line with its own phone number. That's a service that cell companies should have offered years ago but somehow never got around to doing, for reasons I've never entirely understood.
I can't comment on the WDTV, since I don't own one, but why are you switching the network cable? Get yourself a cheap switch at Newegg and be done with that hassle.
Not to go offtopic, but if they're offering them for free, take as many as they'll give you. There are many schools, libraries, and nonprofits that would kill for a donated computer, even an older one. Or find a needy family and donate it to them. That's what a friend of mine did with an extra laptop he had, and they were most appreciative.
...with help from notebooks.
When netbooks came on the scene, they were dirt cheap. Sure, they could do less than a notebook, but, again, they were dirt cheap, they were small, and battery life was good. Just what you needed for Web browsing and light productivity work. Oh yeah, and they were dirt cheap, easily several hundred less than most notebooks except that once-in-a-blue-moon sale you might run across.
However, this didn't last. Companies started cramming more and more into these things, which drove the price up. In and of itself, that might have been OK, but notebook prices started coming down, and they offered more features. They were bigger, but you could do more with them, and I really believe that a significantly lower price is what drove netbook sales, not merely their size. So, people could spend maybe $250-$300 for a netbook, or, if they caught a sale, they could spend $350 for a basic notebook, which offered much more bang for the buck. That's what killed netbook sales, IMHO.
Excellent idea! If you file the claim, the scammers have to file a reply, or they lose by default. Since people like this are bottom feeders who move from one scam to another, I seriously doubt they'll want to expose themselves by filing a response. Like cockroaches exposed to a light, they'll scurry away.
Just an off-the-wall idea here, but check to see how to report this site to Mozilla and Microsoft to get it into their blacklist of phishing/scam sites. If I got something from a site, and, upon trying to visit it, my browser's filter warned me about it, I might suspect something fishy is going on.
Doing this is by no means a complete solution, but it could get you part of the way there.
While I disagree with most everything Rupert Murdoch says, I think he's at least partly on to something with the iPad as a newspaper replacement. OK, let's ignore the fact that it's terribly overpriced for this function, but he is right in that many people would like something that's lightweight and portable. Build a device like that and make it cheap, and you may have a winner on your hands. People would be able to sit on a bus or train and read the publication of their choice, be it a traditional newspaper or a blog, whatever they like. Sure, a laptop can easily do that, but show me a device that costs $49.99 that can do it. And at that price point, a modest subsidy from a newspaper could bring the price down to a point where it's almost a disposable item. That's the goal. Figure out how to make one of those, and you'll make a mint.
Here's what I'd do.
First, if you're running XP, know that its standalone user account types are horrible. Administrators can do anything, while limited users often can't do enough, and some programs don't function correctly with this account type. I hate to say it, but this is one of those cases where Vista was an improvement. Its standard user accounts are just about right, so if you have the option to upgrade to Windows 7 (or even Vista), consider it. There are certainly downsides, especially where older hardware is concerned, but better non-administrative accounts are a reason to think about it.
If you don't want to do that, then filtering is your next step. First, shore up the browser by making sure its anti-phishing filters are turned on. Another level of filtering/user advising can be performed by McAfee SiteAdvisor (http://www.siteadvisor.com). Its main benefit is that it will place advisory icons next to search engine results, indicating the site's risk. Show these to your users, and teach them what they mean. If you're running Firefox, install AdBlock Plus. That will filter out malware coming in through infected ad servers.
Next, you can use OpenDNS as a DNS filtering solution. This will let you block sites that folks shouldn't be visiting at work...MySpace, Facebook...did I mention MySpace and Facebook.
Next, consider whether or not you need your users to have Flash, since it is yet another avenue for infection. Unfortunately, some sites rely on it for basic functionality, so there may be some reason to leave it in, but if you do, MySpace and Facebook (especially MySpace) should be blocked.
Finally, look at your e-mail, since I'd be willing to bet that malware is coming in by that route. What anti-spam measures is your mail server running? If you aren't sure how well they're working, take a look at the mail your users are receiving daily. And, just in case you aren't doing this, make damn sure users know that their work addresses shouldn't be receiving personal mail, no exceptions. Let the pictures of kittens, puppies, and dancing babies go somewhere else. Put the fear of God in them if nothing else works. Their work addresses are for work, no exceptions.
You're going to have to fight this battle on an ongoing basis, but you can win if you stay aware of what users are doing and restrict the dangerous stuff.
If Google wants to reduce the wireless carriers to dumb pipes, then it needs a network of its own. Otherwise, the carriers will simply block VoIP over their networks or, simpler yet, refuse to sell data service without a voice plan. However, if there's a competitor to the existing carriers, then customers will presumably flock to it, forcing the established players to change the way they sell service.
I realize that building a nationwide network will cost a small fortune and take time, but that's what it's going to take. Either that, or Google could buy one or more existing networks. Sprint, perhaps? Or what about snapping up Cricket and MetroPCS?
Yes, there is a safe place. You vent to your friends and family, who will know you and know what you do and don't mean. If you walk up to me and say you're thinking of killing someone, what am I supposed to think? I don't know you, so I have to take your words at face value. If I walk into my office bathroom and see a statement like hers written on the wall, I'm sure as hell going to take it at face value. Facebook is no different, except that many more folks can potentially see those words.
If she needed people "to fucking keep out of her business", then she shouldn't have posted a threat in a very public place.
I am a huge proponent of freedom of speech, but even that has its limits. By all accounts, this woman made some very threatening comments. Had she killed anyone? No, but the statements she made were specific enough and graphic enough that a reasonable person might think she had the intention of carrying them out. If I walk up to you and tell you that I'm thinking of chopping your head off and making it the centerpiece of my Christmas dinner, you might have a good reason to suspect I might do that, and I would be arrested for threatening to kill you.
Freedom of speech is not an absolute, and it never has been. Making threats and inciting violence have always been prosecuted, even in the heyday of the Internet. I was there then, and you could still get prosecuted if you made such statements, either online or in person.
Look, I don't know your situation, but you need to consider the future. Are you topped out in terms of salary in your current position? Also, what is your salary if you take the promotion, and where does that job's salary top out? And how old are you?
You may be thinking that your current salary is fine, but, as you get older and take on more responsibilities, that paycheck starts to look really inadequate. And I know you really love IT, but now you will have a chance to learn a whole new set of skills, skills that will look good on a resume should you end up hating the new job. You may end up finding a new employer that needs someone with both IT and management skills.
Not meaning to be politically correct, but do you know what a gimp is? Do you not realize how insulting that term can be?
It's all about marketing. You don't want to have to defend a name to someone before they even consider adopting a product. If your audience is limited and specialized, that's one thing, but if you want to appeal to a wider group, you have to be aware of these things.
But it isn't about making profits; it's about growth, specifically, growth that meets or exceeds expectations. That's why profitable companies can see their stock crash. If profits are up, say, 3% or, God forbid, flat, and investors had expected them to be up 5%, then there is obviously a terrible management problem at the company, so these investors will either dump the stock or demand a management shakeup.
Long gone are the days when it was enough to earn a steady profit or be happy with moderate growth. Investors want spectacular growth, and if they don't get it, they'll pull their money out and look for a company they think will bring them a faster return. It's also why pump-and-dump scams work so well. Ideally, people would look carefully at a company and its business plan before they invest, but in the current investor mindset, a skyrocketing stock price is all that matters. Get in, ride the roller coaster as it goes up, up, up, try to anticipate the peak, then get out as the stock peaks, right before the crash. It's also why management often does things that aren't good for the company in the long term. Since investors are only interested in the stock price right now, managers have to live for today, since their asses will be gone if things look bad, even if the downturn is only short-term. So what if the current strategy will ultimately harm the company? That won't happen for a while, so the future managers can worry about that.