You're consenting to such monitoring/searches in exchange for use of the university's computing resources. You don't have to consent, but you also don't get to use the network.
Really, that's a terrible analogy.
Except that, if it's a state school, they're using a lot of my tax money (in addition to my tuition) to provide that resource. And I'm sure that even if it's not a state school there are still public funds involved. It's not "theirs".
You want university provided high speed internet - abide by their rules. If you don't - go pay for a wireless data plan.
I want university provided internet because I'm paying through the ass for tuition (and getting very little ROI these days it seems). At least I would if I was a student (it's been a few years).
I'm asking if a place that is supposed to be about intellectual freedom is capable of meeting their goals without trampling on the privacy of others.
I can't see justifying giving the university access to private machines. Especially with the attitude of most college admins I know. But I understand the overall goal, and was wondering - why can't an IDS/IPS do this? I mean you make people register their MACs, use 802.1x for DHCP, run snort or something, and if something wonky is detected you block 'em and make them contact you.
I'm one of the evil characters involved with running a college campus network.
And I'm sure, using your logic, you'd be happy to allow the police the search your home, at any time, without a warrant. Right? I mean if you're doing nothing wrong you have nothing to hide.
With regard to papers submitted to the Site, You hereby grant iParadigms a non-exclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, world-wide, irrevocable license to reproduce, transmit, display, disclose, archive and otherwise use in connection with its Services any paper You submit to the Site whether or not originally submitted in connection with a specific class. This license shall survive the termination of the User Agreement. Any cessation of use of the Site shall not result in the termination of any license You grant herein to iParadigms.
That's pretty messed up. I wonder if you can hand in a paper in shrink-wrap with your own EULA.
Here's an idea: Let's throw out years of proven engineering in favor of an architecture that has yet hit silicon. That way we can fire our engineers and pocket the change. What could possibly go wrong?
You must have been there...Belluzzobub, is that you?
Itanium did one thing well...it killed a lot of other chips. The threat of it killed MIPS post-R12K plans - and the Alpha, and PA-RISC architectures as well.
I remember how SGI kept the team around that was going to work on their next-gen processor while they were negotiating with Intel. These guys had no work - they just played a lot of foosball in good old Building 40 (yeah, Google, you weren't nearly cool enough to build that campus). Then once SGI had sold it's soul they axed the project (and the team). That was a sad day...
I think if a company wants to force someone not to work in their area of expertise for a year then they should be forced to compensate that person for a year. They should match Apple's compensation and benefits and the guy doesn't have to work. That seems fair.
The sensor is great. The integration with the iPod is cool. The fact that Nike only makes one width of shoe (and that their "medium" is pretty much a narrow) means I can't have this technology? Hmmm...maybe we should get some sort of ADA-for-tech law passed so that you can hack something to make it work for you if it doesn't work as sold...
If they're truly breaking things, this means your network is so poorly designed that they are even capable of it. Wrong answer. A rogue AP can easily bork your wireless network no matter how well designed. That's how radios work. A rogue DHCP server can really hurt your users (at least on that VLAN) - that's how DHCP works. I've seen both happen from the same box. No real way to design around it (unless you get to do cool things like 802.1x with certs *and* passwords but most companies won't go that far).
"Enterprise IT" policies are almost always to make IT's life easier at the expense of the end user. No, they are set up to allow the company to meet it's requirements - ones that you may not understand. Until you sit through a 404 audit or other similar even you have no idea.
This was a company registered and monitored by the SEC. I was trained in SOX compliance. Since at no time did any of us use IM to communicate with a client, and our messages were encrypted, we remained in full compliance. And you could PROVE that to the auditors, right?
weight issues have a large psychological component to them Yes, issues that should be addressed by a licensed therapist (working with your PCP) or a psychiatrist. However such care is expensive and often not covered. So while insurance will be happy to spend over $100,000 on surgery to treat a symptom they won't help me treat the actual disease.
It blows my mind. Let's say that you do the following things: meet with a trainer once a week (obviously working out more than that, but just with the trainer 1x), and meet with a pshrink. The trainer is probably $60/session (when bought in groups), and pshrink - I dunno, lets call him $150. Say you meet with them once a week, 50 weeks a year, for 2 years. That's $21,000. That's less than the surgeon's fee for doing gastric bypass. It would be more cost effective and you'd end up healthier. But no, the insurance company would rather cut me up.
And the fact that it is usually a mental disease is why just brusquely saying it's about thermodynamics doesn't help. It just causes more negative emotions which feed in to the loop. I mean do you really think attacking the self-esteem of someone who already has self-esteem issues is going to help the problem? No.
The first thing is a mental change - one that people must realize that they are in control and that the situation they are in is within their control. There are many that would disagree with you. The first thing you're supposed to realize in a "12-step program" is that you're powerless over whatever your problem is. Personally I hate 12-step programs but there ya go. At least they try and address the true cause of of the issue for which the substance abuse (even if it's food) is just a symptom.
I'm against any sort of surgical procedure to lose weight. It doesn't address the problems the people have and the lifestyle changes that they need to make. You're original assumption is that the medical field wasn't helping people lose weight. At the end of the day change and motivation must come from within. Even a motivational psychologist can only take someone so far. Like the alcoholic or the drug abuser, they are the ones that must first decide to change and go from there. And there is where the lack of help comes in. It's not a motivation issue for a lot of people, myself included. If someone truly has an eating disorder then they often eat as a way to self-medicate and avoid dealing with feelings. It usually has been going on for a long time - most people will start this behavior very young, well before they have other options (like alcohol or other drugs). So assistance in learning to cope without food is what is needed and what can't be found. They were willing to rip my intestines apart - hell, I had a surgeon say it was the only way I'd ever lose weight - and when I asked how that was going to change my emotional outlook on life they just didn't understand the question.
So while I'm fighting tooth and nail to deal with my issues I'm finding very little help from either the medical community and especially from the health providers/insurance companies. I found very few specialists in eating disorders and all of them said they had no experience dealing with men. Even if I found one I doubt I could afford it. Insurance is happy to cut my intestines open but jeebus forbid you have a mental health issue.
Yes, some people have severe eating disorders. Are you trying to say that every person who is overweight has a severe eating disorder? I would argue that's simply not true. Not every one, but many. I know I do. Which is why your initial suggestions were so completely less than helpful.
Then go talk to someone! You're trying to blame being overweight on poor medical care which is a crock. You have all the tools to change your situation. Will it require personal work? Yes! The question you have to ask yourself is do you really want to lose weight? If you don't, fine. But don't go blaming doctors or anyone else but yourself. And hurtful? How is pointing out the truth hurtful? The truth is something you need to hear, since it sounds like you want to blame everyone else but yourself for your weight problem. First of all, you have NFI what my situation is, how my weight I've lost (hint: it's in 3 digits). You're just sitting there, judgemental as fuck, getting off on looking down on fatties. And that's fine - it makes you no different that a lot of people. As for telling the truth, let me ask you this: if you're diagnosed with a terminal illness do you want your doctor to come in and tell you "Fuck, you screwed. Get out of here - I only help those that might make it"? He's being truthful, yes. Helpful? No. Plus, I doubt you'd have the balls to talk that way to my face.
So back to your suggestion - which makes my original point for me. An insurance company will be happy to pay over $200,000 to rework the plumbing on a fat person. Will they lose weight? Probably. Will they keep it off? Maybe. Will they be happier? Unlikely. A lot of people I know who have had the procedure and have lost weight but if they were not just simply overeating then they still have the same old problems. They're healthier, but not happier. I suppose that's an improvement, but if mental health was any sort of priority in this country I bet they could have lost the weight without the surgery.
I've gotta hit the shower since I just got back from the gym (*gasp* - yes, I work out 5x a week? OMGWTFBBQ!!1!) but meanwhile, why don't you go find a teenage girl with anorexia and tell her to stop being a whiny bitch and eat a sandwich already? Let me know how that "truth" works for you.
Short of serious medical problems, losing weight is mostly a solved problem. Curing alcoholism: stop drinking Curing drug addiction (not counting detox): stop using
Uhm, yeah, it's that simple. Many people, my self included, often eat based on emotion - and it's not a simple thing to control. Even LMB knows it, as one of her characters has the same problem. If you don't recall you might want reread Mirror DanceA Civil Campaign.
Pointing at behaviors rooted in defense mechanisms and emotional coping schemes, or any other mental health issue for that matter, and just saying "Do this!" or "Don't do that!" is more destructive than helpful. It sounds just as stupid as "Just Say No!" You may think you're so smart and tough by pointing out what you think is obvious but it's actually hurtful. It helps to enforce a negative feedback loop. So unless, in addition to being an engineer, you also have either and MD or PhD in psych then please STFU.
So what other advice do you want? Do you need a doctor to come to your house and throw out all your cookies? Do you need a doctor to shop with you and buy veggies instead of ice cream? Do you need a doctor to pick you up and take you to the gym? Losing weight is a simple formula. Eat less and exercise. The problem is that most people can't handle the mental challenge of eating less or the discipline of exercising daily. Your compassion is staggering. I hope you never need help from anyone because you clearly don't deserve any...
I'm not in the "medical profession," but I am an engineer, so that qualifies me to give the following advice. Eat Less. Exercise More. You definitely won't gain weight, and most likely you'll lose weight. No one needs more than thermodynamics to lose weight. Beyond that, it's just a question of will power. And I'm sure you'd also walk up to that homeless guy you passed on the way to work and say "Get a job."
It's not that simple and condescending "advice" like that is more harmful than useful. But it's a good example of what a unhelpful and arrogant doctor would say.
Very little "good" help available (Doctors throwing pills, diets selling useless books, but nobody wants to give good advice except perhaps Paul Mckenna and a couple of others) Amen, brother. All the doctors and/or insurance companies want to do is point you at a surgeon to cut up your intestines. Very very few people in the medical profession want to help the obese.
When I was looking at Yahoo news today I saw no less than 3 articles in the Technology section about the BSA. Seems like they're tricking the news services into running free scare-tactics PR for them.
Microsoft has already done this. They have identified the problem that caused the general hardware failure (insufficient heat dissipation and weak solder) and retooled their assembly line to fix it. Any hardware failures you hear about are older xboxes. Not true. On the official xbox forums there are plenty of reports brand new boxes still dying.
I think it's time to find the houses of the RIAA executives, hack their wireless, and share from them. Capture the data and send it to the RIAA and say "Hey, please sue them."
Slashdot Mirror
You're consenting to such monitoring/searches in exchange for use of the university's computing resources. You don't have to consent, but you also don't get to use the network.
Really, that's a terrible analogy.
Except that, if it's a state school, they're using a lot of my tax money (in addition to my tuition) to provide that resource. And I'm sure that even if it's not a state school there are still public funds involved. It's not "theirs".
You want university provided high speed internet - abide by their rules. If you don't - go pay for a wireless data plan.
I want university provided internet because I'm paying through the ass for tuition (and getting very little ROI these days it seems). At least I would if I was a student (it's been a few years).
I'm asking if a place that is supposed to be about intellectual freedom is capable of meeting their goals without trampling on the privacy of others.
I can't see justifying giving the university access to private machines. Especially with the attitude of most college admins I know. But I understand the overall goal, and was wondering - why can't an IDS/IPS do this? I mean you make people register their MACs, use 802.1x for DHCP, run snort or something, and if something wonky is detected you block 'em and make them contact you.
I'm one of the evil characters involved with running a college campus network.
And I'm sure, using your logic, you'd be happy to allow the police the search your home, at any time, without a warrant. Right? I mean if you're doing nothing wrong you have nothing to hide.
With regard to papers submitted to the Site, You hereby grant iParadigms a non-exclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, world-wide, irrevocable license to reproduce, transmit, display, disclose, archive and otherwise use in connection with its Services any paper You submit to the Site whether or not originally submitted in connection with a specific class. This license shall survive the termination of the User Agreement. Any cessation of use of the Site shall not result in the termination of any license You grant herein to iParadigms.
That's pretty messed up. I wonder if you can hand in a paper in shrink-wrap with your own EULA.
I'd be tempted to put something on the paper like "By accepting this submission you are agreeing to a license that "
Or even better - shrink wrap the paper and put this on a sticker outside.
Here's an idea: Let's throw out years of proven engineering in favor of an architecture that has yet hit silicon. That way we can fire our engineers and pocket the change. What could possibly go wrong?
You must have been there...Belluzzobub, is that you?
Itanium did one thing well...it killed a lot of other chips. The threat of it killed MIPS post-R12K plans - and the Alpha, and PA-RISC architectures as well.
I remember how SGI kept the team around that was going to work on their next-gen processor while they were negotiating with Intel. These guys had no work - they just played a lot of foosball in good old Building 40 (yeah, Google, you weren't nearly cool enough to build that campus). Then once SGI had sold it's soul they axed the project (and the team). That was a sad day...
Were either offer as valuable as his offer from Apple? Including stock options? That's why I said "match Apple's compensation".
I think if a company wants to force someone not to work in their area of expertise for a year then they should be forced to compensate that person for a year. They should match Apple's compensation and benefits and the guy doesn't have to work. That seems fair.
The sensor is great. The integration with the iPod is cool. The fact that Nike only makes one width of shoe (and that their "medium" is pretty much a narrow) means I can't have this technology? Hmmm...maybe we should get some sort of ADA-for-tech law passed so that you can hack something to make it work for you if it doesn't work as sold...
Ok, could you prove it to the SEC then? They might have taken an interest in SOX.
In other words violating the company's security policy is a fire-worthy offense, no matter what safeguards you take.
I didn't think so.
Not that I'm a fan of Microsoft...but if M$ was a European company do you think the EU would go after them so hard? I think not.
It blows my mind. Let's say that you do the following things: meet with a trainer once a week (obviously working out more than that, but just with the trainer 1x), and meet with a pshrink. The trainer is probably $60/session (when bought in groups), and pshrink - I dunno, lets call him $150. Say you meet with them once a week, 50 weeks a year, for 2 years. That's $21,000. That's less than the surgeon's fee for doing gastric bypass. It would be more cost effective and you'd end up healthier. But no, the insurance company would rather cut me up.
And the fact that it is usually a mental disease is why just brusquely saying it's about thermodynamics doesn't help. It just causes more negative emotions which feed in to the loop. I mean do you really think attacking the self-esteem of someone who already has self-esteem issues is going to help the problem? No.
So while I'm fighting tooth and nail to deal with my issues I'm finding very little help from either the medical community and especially from the health providers/insurance companies. I found very few specialists in eating disorders and all of them said they had no experience dealing with men. Even if I found one I doubt I could afford it. Insurance is happy to cut my intestines open but jeebus forbid you have a mental health issue. Yes, some people have severe eating disorders. Are you trying to say that every person who is overweight has a severe eating disorder? I would argue that's simply not true. Not every one, but many. I know I do. Which is why your initial suggestions were so completely less than helpful.
So back to your suggestion - which makes my original point for me. An insurance company will be happy to pay over $200,000 to rework the plumbing on a fat person. Will they lose weight? Probably. Will they keep it off? Maybe. Will they be happier? Unlikely. A lot of people I know who have had the procedure and have lost weight but if they were not just simply overeating then they still have the same old problems. They're healthier, but not happier. I suppose that's an improvement, but if mental health was any sort of priority in this country I bet they could have lost the weight without the surgery.
I've gotta hit the shower since I just got back from the gym (*gasp* - yes, I work out 5x a week? OMGWTFBBQ!!1!) but meanwhile, why don't you go find a teenage girl with anorexia and tell her to stop being a whiny bitch and eat a sandwich already? Let me know how that "truth" works for you.
Curing drug addiction (not counting detox): stop using
Uhm, yeah, it's that simple. Many people, my self included, often eat based on emotion - and it's not a simple thing to control. Even LMB knows it, as one of her characters has the same problem. If you don't recall you might want reread Mirror DanceA Civil Campaign.
Pointing at behaviors rooted in defense mechanisms and emotional coping schemes, or any other mental health issue for that matter, and just saying "Do this!" or "Don't do that!" is more destructive than helpful. It sounds just as stupid as "Just Say No!" You may think you're so smart and tough by pointing out what you think is obvious but it's actually hurtful. It helps to enforce a negative feedback loop. So unless, in addition to being an engineer, you also have either and MD or PhD in psych then please STFU.
It's not that simple and condescending "advice" like that is more harmful than useful. But it's a good example of what a unhelpful and arrogant doctor would say.
When I was looking at Yahoo news today I saw no less than 3 articles in the Technology section about the BSA. Seems like they're tricking the news services into running free scare-tactics PR for them.
I think it's time to find the houses of the RIAA executives, hack their wireless, and share from them. Capture the data and send it to the RIAA and say "Hey, please sue them."