It seems we both see the pros and cons. There is no easy solution - someone is going to get burnt, no matter what. Eventually, somehow, Joe Sixpack is going to have to assume responsibility for his machines - either voluntarily, or by legal mandate. Voluntarily would be best of course, but I have little faith in human nature.
"what if" is an acceptable lead to hypothesizing about how things COULD BE. And, you answer the question, appropriately, I would say.
Incidentally, your answer seems to be in line with the article cited in the OP: as enforcement measures become less tolerable, circumvention becomes more common.
Let's wait to see what comes of the top secret treaty being hammered out in Washington and other capitals around the world. We may well see dramatic increases in the use of circumvention within the next couple years.;)
Uh - did you read the REST of my post? My point is, this is an ongoing battle between distributors and society at large. Given free reign, the distributors would make things as bad as I paint them, or worse.
Which side of the fence are you on? If you have a point, make it.
"The solution is obvious (albeit ugly). Punish the user."
Agreed, in principle. Failure to take appropriate steps to secure you machines should result in liability of some sort.
How to enact such a policy, though? Do we fine the owner of every machine that belongs to a botnet? How much, $100, $1,000? Plus a court order that their machines be disconnected from the internet when not in actual use, AND prove to the court that an effective countermeasure has been instituted to prevent future instances?
Sometimes, the idea of licensing doesn't seem so bad. PROVE that you are competent to run a machine, and meet minimum standards before you can connect your machine to the internet.
That one certainly won't fly though - people are to used to chaos and anarchy. Voters never vote for responsibility, they would rather find someone to blame.
ME: Ya twit, you've been browsing half the porn sites on the web, and downloading EVERYTHING - here are the logs. Here are 50 sites that have made various black lists because of malware. And you have NO security policy or applications.
TWIT: Don't tell my Mama! Can you just fix it?
ME: Of course, I can "fix" it, but YOU have to "fix" the way you browse the internet. Let me install apps x, y, and z, along with an antivirus, and I'll fix the hosts file, and download some black lists.
TWIT: Will I still be able to download my porn? I really like these sites, L, M, N, O, P.
ME: No, those sites are all in the black lists - those are the sites that infected your computer!
TWIT: Oh, well, don't bother - just kill the viruses and give me back my computer.
Seriously, that isn't word for word, but it reflects real conversations that I've had in real life. Go figure.........
Cool - you can mock ten seconds. What if it were ten minutes? And the DVD forced you to watch those ten minutes. Circumventing those ten minutes of instructive warning from the FBI/MPAA becomes illegal. Fast forwarding is disabled, and finding a way to enable fast forward past the warning makes you liable for a ten year prison sentence.
At what point would you revolt?
The whole point of the controversy is, "rights holders" are infringing on the rights of users, in the name of "rights enforcement". Without the activists, pirates, and lawyers, what do you think the state of "enforcement" would be today? Had Sony gotten away with their rootkits, how long do you think it would have taken for all the other "rights holders" to pull similar tricks? Your computer could be "phoning home" to as many as 100 corporate websites continuously to report on your activities.
Given free reign, the various copyright and patent trolls would have declared that you can't own a computer, DVD player, MP3 player, or even a telephone by now. You could only lease anything capable of reading digital media, constantly monitored, and subject to recall if you break any TOS imposed by the *iaa's of the world.
No, I don't have that much experience in enterprise. However, I'm quite aware that incompetence scales quite well to all sizes of companies and institutions. The concepts are the same, no matter what size.
Reliance on an untested software, as opposed to any number of people who get the job done, is most definitely a sign of incompetence. You may replace the word "software" with almost any other term, and the concept is the same.
As for incompetence scaling well to any size corporation - look at Wall Street, General Motors, and Chrysler. Ford seems to be pulling it's collective head out of their collective asses at the 11th hour, or they would be on the list as well. Only time will tell if that last minute shot of oxygen into their collective heads will save them.....
In effect, Scientology is a corporation. They employ countless people, and assign them various missions. COS assigns x number of people to make sure the Wiki only has favorable entries about the COS. Wikipedia's goal is to accumulate knowledge, and make it available to people - knowledge that is as accurate and unbiased as possible. Keywords, being "as possible". No one expects the knowledge to be totally accurate and/or totally unbiased.
Can you, or can you not, see a conflict arising between these two goals?
In the event of a conflict, the question is, does the Wiki have the right to determine how thier property is used, or does the COS have that right?
I am quite certain that other individuals and groups try to pull similar stunts. Various people have been banned from the Wiki in the past, for flagrant acts of misconduct. Assorted causes are probably getting away with similar violations simply because they haven't been caught. But, in the end, Wiki owns those pages, and they have the right to control the manner in which they are used. If/when the Wikipedians uncover concerted efforts to undermine thier work, I expect that similar actions will be taken.
I probably spent 2 1/2 hours last night following link after link, trying to understand what was going on in this and similar cases. The events leading up to this little drama really are a flagrant abuse of the TOS, not to mention an abuse of power on the part of COS. (Note - abuse of POWER, not authority - COS has no authority on the Wiki)
"They probably had to reduce their planning department to save costs, and couldn't get the job done without software."
Obviously, the software didn't do the job. If, as you claim, they laid people off IN ANTICIPATION that the untested software could replace people, that only proves my charge of incompetence.
And, it really doesn't take a genius to schedule people to make a garbage run. Even in a moderately large city (500,000 to 1 million) all it takes is one idiot savant, or two to three normal people. I mean, WM doesn't put tens of thousands of people in the field in a city that size!!
The entire scenario reeks of incompetence, no matter how much someone may wish to justify reliance on software. BEFORE you rely on software, you MUST have someone who understands the software. No matter HOW GOOD the software, you must have a backup plan. Fail to have alternative plans, and you fail hard. Ask anyone with a military background.
Crap, they could have hired one drill sergeant to make personnel assignments. Most of them qualify as idiot savants, after all.
Having read the article, the Wikipedia has identified sites that robotically edit the wiki pages to suit the Scientologist's agenda. Yes, of course those people responsible can find proxies and new addresses to edit from. But, if there are 5, 10, or 50 people with multiple accounts who sit all day watching for edits that they don't like, they will become apparent as their bot-like behaviour shifts to new IP's. And, they can be shut down again, and again, ad nauseum.
I don't think the Wikipedia intends to put a ban on all edits that might favor this "church", just to stop the corporate style attack on the pages. If I'm wrong, and they really intend to ban all edits favoring the "church", well - more power to them. It will cost them a lot more than a few banned IP's. They better get some help from Anonymous or 4chan, or someone like them that is willing to sabatoge Scientology machines and networks.
From the article: "ERP (enterprise resource planning) project"
Meaning, the management is unsure of what resources they have, and/or what resources they need, and/or how the resources should be used. Resources which might include personnel, fleet, plant and equipment, or not.
Bottom line - if management doesn't know what they have, or how to use it, they can't possibly program a software to manage all of it for them.
Next to the bottom line - the company failed in their stated goal of making software do the job, and they failed in management after the software failed.
Incompetent. (there, I spelled it right this time, find something else to (sic))
I'm pretty sure that I see "incompetence" stamped all over this. On BOTH sides. WM is so impompetent, that they need software to manage their company. Software is no replacement for managerial skills. SAP would have us believe that they are so incompetent that they only ever produced ONE COPY of a presentation software, with no backups. And, they've lost it.
The judge needs to have all parties flogged and thrown in the frigging DUNGEON. Feed them watery gruel for a year, let them out, and see if they are ready to proceed with a trial.
Ask any politician - a hundred million for a TLD is a bargain. Stop whimpering, will ya? You should realize by now that your purpose in life is to supply money for politicians to waste. Just stop whimpering, get with the program, and PRODUCE MORE MONEY!!
That might not be entirely fair. I mean, it's their JOB to be suspicious, and to look for potential trouble. They get a guy with no fingerprints, they have to wonder about it. How would slashdot resolve the issue? Just take the guy's word that he has no fingerprints, because he has cancer? I don't think I would. Accept his prescription as evidence? Nahhh, terrorists have access to doctors and drugs after all. I think that I would want to view his medical record, or call the hospital that has been treating him. If he has no medical record, and if I can't call the hospital, I would DEFINITELY call a supervisor in to decide.
His appearance might help persuade me, but people go to great lengths, including plastic surgery, to disguise themselves.
The guy cleared customs in 4 hours? I'll admit, it was a hassle. One he could have probably avoided with a little forethought. NOTE TO SELF: If I become a physical wreck, I should have it well documented before trying to cross any border checks anywhere.
I don't think I can match that, but I have a sliderule somewhere in the attic thats at least 40 years old. Great little computer, and surprisingly fast once you get used to it.
Slashdot requires you to wait longer between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment.
It's been 17 seconds since you hit 'reply'.
Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally reuse a form. Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the site administrator.
So, what do I need to do, type really really slow?
The data contained in GoDaddy.com, Inc.'s WHOIS database, while believed by the company to be reliable, is provided "as is" with no guarantee or warranties regarding its accuracy. This information is provided for the sole purpose of assisting you in obtaining information about domain name registration records. Any use of this data for any other purpose is expressly forbidden without the prior written permission of GoDaddy.com, Inc. By submitting an inquiry, you agree to these terms of usage and limitations of warranty. In particular, you agree not to use this data to allow, enable, or otherwise make possible, dissemination or collection of this data, in part or in its entirety, for any purpose, such as the transmission of unsolicited advertising and solicitations of any kind, including spam. You further agree not to use this data to enable high volume, automated or robotic electronic processes designed to collect or compile this data for any purpose, including mining this data for your own personal or commercial purposes.
Please note: the registrant of the domain name is specified in the "registrant" field. In most cases, GoDaddy.com, Inc. is not the registrant of domain names listed in this database.
Registrant: Michael Sharp 12932 SE Kent-Kangley Rd. Box 238 Kent, Washington 98030 United States
Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com) Domain Name: ITSBETTERWITHWINDOWS.COM Created on: 05-Dec-08 Expires on: 05-Dec-09 Last Updated on: 05-Dec-08
Administrative Contact: Sharp, Michael rdcpro@hotmail.com 12932 SE Kent-Kangley Rd. Box 238 Kent, Washington 98030 United States (877) 788-8066
Technical Contact: Sharp, Michael rdcpro@hotmail.com 12932 SE Kent-Kangley Rd. Box 238 Kent, Washington 98030 United States (877) 788-8066
Domain servers in listed order: NS61.DOMAINCONTROL.COM NS62.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
The government efficiently collects all the data possible, assembles it together, and leaves it sitting around where outsiders can steal it. It sure reduces the workload for the criminals!! Hey, crooks have rights too!!
Seriously - every one of these big brother data collection efforts is a sign that the politicos have their heads up their arses. It doesn't do the good guys any good, and it does the criminals no harm.
OSHA regulations are mindlessly adhered to by mindless automatons. The individual worker should have a choice, subject to change according to conditions. I will give you a specific instance, you consider it.
It's a warm summer day, after a rain. The sun is beating down on a construction site. A worker is sweltering in his mandatory hardhat, steeltoed boots, long sleeved shirt, and long pants. He needs to chisel away a bit of concrete to get at the steel plate where he is weld some studs. His glasses are fogging terribly, so he wipes them with anti-fog wipes. It helps, marginally, but his vision is so poor that he hits himself with the hammer. His solution is to push the glasses up out of his way. Some safety cretin comes along, and warns him that he will be FIRED for not wearing his glasses properly. Worker puts the glasses on properly, tries again to chisel away the concrete, and smashes his hand.
You tell me - is my bitching about insurance crap just a rant, or not?
It is the right of every individual to decide what risk is right for him. If you put your faith in the insurance companies, that's find - that doesn't require anyone else to live according to insurance company decisions.
I COULD rant all day about the insurance industry. Are you aware that the speed limits are largely imposed by insurance industry interference, in flagrant disregard of the 85th percentile rule used by traffic engineers? Are you aware that about half of all the radar units in use in the USA were donated by insurance companies, either directly or indirectly?
Who do you think runs this country, anyway? It sure isn't you or me. Follow the money. Insurance has more money at their disposal than anyone, except maybe the defense industry.
Assuming this actually improves SOME people's internet (yeah, I know, big assumption) it means a bit less than diddly squat to many Americans. I can't GET reliable cell service. If I walk out in the yard, and hold the phone at an awkward angle, pointing the antenna *just so* the tower in Texarkana finally makes a connection.
I'd rather see AT&T do something USEFUL. Expand the existing infrastructure, so that rural America can enjoy simple MB speed connections on the internet. And, reduce the rates, so that rural Americans can AFFORD a 1 MB connection. Just because the city boys with union jobs can afford $75/month service, doesn't mean everyone in Backwoods Nowhere has that kind of money.
Slashdot Mirror
I said "Sometimes," you said "I'm torn."
It seems we both see the pros and cons. There is no easy solution - someone is going to get burnt, no matter what. Eventually, somehow, Joe Sixpack is going to have to assume responsibility for his machines - either voluntarily, or by legal mandate. Voluntarily would be best of course, but I have little faith in human nature.
"what if" is an acceptable lead to hypothesizing about how things COULD BE. And, you answer the question, appropriately, I would say.
Incidentally, your answer seems to be in line with the article cited in the OP: as enforcement measures become less tolerable, circumvention becomes more common.
Let's wait to see what comes of the top secret treaty being hammered out in Washington and other capitals around the world. We may well see dramatic increases in the use of circumvention within the next couple years. ;)
Uh - did you read the REST of my post? My point is, this is an ongoing battle between distributors and society at large. Given free reign, the distributors would make things as bad as I paint them, or worse.
Which side of the fence are you on? If you have a point, make it.
"The solution is obvious (albeit ugly). Punish the user."
Agreed, in principle. Failure to take appropriate steps to secure you machines should result in liability of some sort.
How to enact such a policy, though? Do we fine the owner of every machine that belongs to a botnet? How much, $100, $1,000? Plus a court order that their machines be disconnected from the internet when not in actual use, AND prove to the court that an effective countermeasure has been instituted to prevent future instances?
Sometimes, the idea of licensing doesn't seem so bad. PROVE that you are competent to run a machine, and meet minimum standards before you can connect your machine to the internet.
That one certainly won't fly though - people are to used to chaos and anarchy. Voters never vote for responsibility, they would rather find someone to blame.
Yes, exactly.
ME: Ya twit, you've been browsing half the porn sites on the web, and downloading EVERYTHING - here are the logs. Here are 50 sites that have made various black lists because of malware. And you have NO security policy or applications.
TWIT: Don't tell my Mama! Can you just fix it?
ME: Of course, I can "fix" it, but YOU have to "fix" the way you browse the internet. Let me install apps x, y, and z, along with an antivirus, and I'll fix the hosts file, and download some black lists.
TWIT: Will I still be able to download my porn? I really like these sites, L, M, N, O, P.
ME: No, those sites are all in the black lists - those are the sites that infected your computer!
TWIT: Oh, well, don't bother - just kill the viruses and give me back my computer.
Seriously, that isn't word for word, but it reflects real conversations that I've had in real life. Go figure.........
Cool - you can mock ten seconds. What if it were ten minutes? And the DVD forced you to watch those ten minutes. Circumventing those ten minutes of instructive warning from the FBI/MPAA becomes illegal. Fast forwarding is disabled, and finding a way to enable fast forward past the warning makes you liable for a ten year prison sentence.
At what point would you revolt?
The whole point of the controversy is, "rights holders" are infringing on the rights of users, in the name of "rights enforcement". Without the activists, pirates, and lawyers, what do you think the state of "enforcement" would be today? Had Sony gotten away with their rootkits, how long do you think it would have taken for all the other "rights holders" to pull similar tricks? Your computer could be "phoning home" to as many as 100 corporate websites continuously to report on your activities.
Given free reign, the various copyright and patent trolls would have declared that you can't own a computer, DVD player, MP3 player, or even a telephone by now. You could only lease anything capable of reading digital media, constantly monitored, and subject to recall if you break any TOS imposed by the *iaa's of the world.
No, I don't have that much experience in enterprise. However, I'm quite aware that incompetence scales quite well to all sizes of companies and institutions. The concepts are the same, no matter what size.
Reliance on an untested software, as opposed to any number of people who get the job done, is most definitely a sign of incompetence. You may replace the word "software" with almost any other term, and the concept is the same.
As for incompetence scaling well to any size corporation - look at Wall Street, General Motors, and Chrysler. Ford seems to be pulling it's collective head out of their collective asses at the 11th hour, or they would be on the list as well. Only time will tell if that last minute shot of oxygen into their collective heads will save them.....
In effect, Scientology is a corporation. They employ countless people, and assign them various missions. COS assigns x number of people to make sure the Wiki only has favorable entries about the COS. Wikipedia's goal is to accumulate knowledge, and make it available to people - knowledge that is as accurate and unbiased as possible. Keywords, being "as possible". No one expects the knowledge to be totally accurate and/or totally unbiased.
Can you, or can you not, see a conflict arising between these two goals?
In the event of a conflict, the question is, does the Wiki have the right to determine how thier property is used, or does the COS have that right?
I am quite certain that other individuals and groups try to pull similar stunts. Various people have been banned from the Wiki in the past, for flagrant acts of misconduct. Assorted causes are probably getting away with similar violations simply because they haven't been caught. But, in the end, Wiki owns those pages, and they have the right to control the manner in which they are used. If/when the Wikipedians uncover concerted efforts to undermine thier work, I expect that similar actions will be taken.
I probably spent 2 1/2 hours last night following link after link, trying to understand what was going on in this and similar cases. The events leading up to this little drama really are a flagrant abuse of the TOS, not to mention an abuse of power on the part of COS. (Note - abuse of POWER, not authority - COS has no authority on the Wiki)
"They probably had to reduce their planning department to save costs, and couldn't get the job done without software."
Obviously, the software didn't do the job. If, as you claim, they laid people off IN ANTICIPATION that the untested software could replace people, that only proves my charge of incompetence.
And, it really doesn't take a genius to schedule people to make a garbage run. Even in a moderately large city (500,000 to 1 million) all it takes is one idiot savant, or two to three normal people. I mean, WM doesn't put tens of thousands of people in the field in a city that size!!
The entire scenario reeks of incompetence, no matter how much someone may wish to justify reliance on software. BEFORE you rely on software, you MUST have someone who understands the software. No matter HOW GOOD the software, you must have a backup plan. Fail to have alternative plans, and you fail hard. Ask anyone with a military background.
Crap, they could have hired one drill sergeant to make personnel assignments. Most of them qualify as idiot savants, after all.
Having read the article, the Wikipedia has identified sites that robotically edit the wiki pages to suit the Scientologist's agenda. Yes, of course those people responsible can find proxies and new addresses to edit from. But, if there are 5, 10, or 50 people with multiple accounts who sit all day watching for edits that they don't like, they will become apparent as their bot-like behaviour shifts to new IP's. And, they can be shut down again, and again, ad nauseum.
I don't think the Wikipedia intends to put a ban on all edits that might favor this "church", just to stop the corporate style attack on the pages. If I'm wrong, and they really intend to ban all edits favoring the "church", well - more power to them. It will cost them a lot more than a few banned IP's. They better get some help from Anonymous or 4chan, or someone like them that is willing to sabatoge Scientology machines and networks.
From the article: "ERP (enterprise resource planning) project"
Meaning, the management is unsure of what resources they have, and/or what resources they need, and/or how the resources should be used. Resources which might include personnel, fleet, plant and equipment, or not.
Bottom line - if management doesn't know what they have, or how to use it, they can't possibly program a software to manage all of it for them.
Next to the bottom line - the company failed in their stated goal of making software do the job, and they failed in management after the software failed.
Incompetent. (there, I spelled it right this time, find something else to (sic))
Never heard of nimp before. Being brave, I had to look. Just tell everyone it's goatse with a different skin, along with browser hijack.
Oddly - I visited from a Linux desktop, but the Windows VM alarmed about a virus attack.... hmmmmm I'm sure glad I didn't go there FROM Windows.
You use safe search? You must be part of that Australian censorship cult........
No indignity is to big, or to small, for our loyal subjects - err, CITIZENS!
I'm pretty sure that I see "incompetence" stamped all over this. On BOTH sides. WM is so impompetent, that they need software to manage their company. Software is no replacement for managerial skills. SAP would have us believe that they are so incompetent that they only ever produced ONE COPY of a presentation software, with no backups. And, they've lost it.
The judge needs to have all parties flogged and thrown in the frigging DUNGEON. Feed them watery gruel for a year, let them out, and see if they are ready to proceed with a trial.
Ask any politician - a hundred million for a TLD is a bargain. Stop whimpering, will ya? You should realize by now that your purpose in life is to supply money for politicians to waste. Just stop whimpering, get with the program, and PRODUCE MORE MONEY!!
It's bad enough to bring Hitler into every discussion. At least people KNOW who Hitler was. The conversation has REALLY hit bottom when it's Godwin'd!
That might not be entirely fair. I mean, it's their JOB to be suspicious, and to look for potential trouble. They get a guy with no fingerprints, they have to wonder about it. How would slashdot resolve the issue? Just take the guy's word that he has no fingerprints, because he has cancer? I don't think I would. Accept his prescription as evidence? Nahhh, terrorists have access to doctors and drugs after all. I think that I would want to view his medical record, or call the hospital that has been treating him. If he has no medical record, and if I can't call the hospital, I would DEFINITELY call a supervisor in to decide.
His appearance might help persuade me, but people go to great lengths, including plastic surgery, to disguise themselves.
The guy cleared customs in 4 hours? I'll admit, it was a hassle. One he could have probably avoided with a little forethought. NOTE TO SELF: If I become a physical wreck, I should have it well documented before trying to cross any border checks anywhere.
I don't think I can match that, but I have a sliderule somewhere in the attic thats at least 40 years old. Great little computer, and surprisingly fast once you get used to it.
Again?
Slashdot requires you to wait longer between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment.
It's been 17 seconds since you hit 'reply'.
Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally reuse a form. Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the site administrator.
So, what do I need to do, type really really slow?
The data contained in GoDaddy.com, Inc.'s WHOIS database,
while believed by the company to be reliable, is provided "as is"
with no guarantee or warranties regarding its accuracy. This
information is provided for the sole purpose of assisting you
in obtaining information about domain name registration records.
Any use of this data for any other purpose is expressly forbidden without the prior written
permission of GoDaddy.com, Inc. By submitting an inquiry,
you agree to these terms of usage and limitations of warranty. In particular,
you agree not to use this data to allow, enable, or otherwise make possible,
dissemination or collection of this data, in part or in its entirety, for any
purpose, such as the transmission of unsolicited advertising and
solicitations of any kind, including spam. You further agree
not to use this data to enable high volume, automated or robotic electronic
processes designed to collect or compile this data for any purpose,
including mining this data for your own personal or commercial purposes.
Please note: the registrant of the domain name is specified
in the "registrant" field. In most cases, GoDaddy.com, Inc.
is not the registrant of domain names listed in this database.
Registrant:
Michael Sharp
12932 SE Kent-Kangley Rd.
Box 238
Kent, Washington 98030
United States
Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: ITSBETTERWITHWINDOWS.COM
Created on: 05-Dec-08
Expires on: 05-Dec-09
Last Updated on: 05-Dec-08
Administrative Contact:
Sharp, Michael rdcpro@hotmail.com
12932 SE Kent-Kangley Rd.
Box 238
Kent, Washington 98030
United States
(877) 788-8066
Technical Contact:
Sharp, Michael rdcpro@hotmail.com
12932 SE Kent-Kangley Rd.
Box 238
Kent, Washington 98030
United States
(877) 788-8066
Domain servers in listed order:
NS61.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
NS62.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Registry Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Registry Status: clientRenewProhibited
Registry Status: clientTransferProhibited
Registry Status: clientUpdateProhibited
The government efficiently collects all the data possible, assembles it together, and leaves it sitting around where outsiders can steal it. It sure reduces the workload for the criminals!! Hey, crooks have rights too!!
Seriously - every one of these big brother data collection efforts is a sign that the politicos have their heads up their arses. It doesn't do the good guys any good, and it does the criminals no harm.
OSHA regulations are mindlessly adhered to by mindless automatons. The individual worker should have a choice, subject to change according to conditions. I will give you a specific instance, you consider it.
It's a warm summer day, after a rain. The sun is beating down on a construction site. A worker is sweltering in his mandatory hardhat, steeltoed boots, long sleeved shirt, and long pants. He needs to chisel away a bit of concrete to get at the steel plate where he is weld some studs. His glasses are fogging terribly, so he wipes them with anti-fog wipes. It helps, marginally, but his vision is so poor that he hits himself with the hammer. His solution is to push the glasses up out of his way. Some safety cretin comes along, and warns him that he will be FIRED for not wearing his glasses properly. Worker puts the glasses on properly, tries again to chisel away the concrete, and smashes his hand.
You tell me - is my bitching about insurance crap just a rant, or not?
It is the right of every individual to decide what risk is right for him. If you put your faith in the insurance companies, that's find - that doesn't require anyone else to live according to insurance company decisions.
I COULD rant all day about the insurance industry. Are you aware that the speed limits are largely imposed by insurance industry interference, in flagrant disregard of the 85th percentile rule used by traffic engineers? Are you aware that about half of all the radar units in use in the USA were donated by insurance companies, either directly or indirectly?
Who do you think runs this country, anyway? It sure isn't you or me. Follow the money. Insurance has more money at their disposal than anyone, except maybe the defense industry.
Assuming this actually improves SOME people's internet (yeah, I know, big assumption) it means a bit less than diddly squat to many Americans. I can't GET reliable cell service. If I walk out in the yard, and hold the phone at an awkward angle, pointing the antenna *just so* the tower in Texarkana finally makes a connection.
I'd rather see AT&T do something USEFUL. Expand the existing infrastructure, so that rural America can enjoy simple MB speed connections on the internet. And, reduce the rates, so that rural Americans can AFFORD a 1 MB connection. Just because the city boys with union jobs can afford $75/month service, doesn't mean everyone in Backwoods Nowhere has that kind of money.
I had this nightmare, in which we experienced a severe shortage of irrelevant proprietary boxes designed for trivial purposes. THANK MICROSOFT!!!