My response to this would be that the tag changes the organization from which the mail is percieved to have come from without telling me first. Although 95% of the internet may not care, the 5% that write software and routing mail may have a problem with it.
Think of it like putting ingredients on a box. Most people would DEMAND to high-hell that they be told what's in a particular food item but when's the last time you looked at what ingredients were in a can of soup? Now admittedly you can argue what's the big deal and maybe it's not a big deal since only 1% of the population that buys the can of soup would actually read it. Would it hurt them? Probably not. But it's important that they be given the opportunity to know if something is different or special in there.
In all honesty, if they were upfront with it, it wouldn't matter. Spell it out in the license agreement and let those who are "picky" about what they want have the opportunity to opt out...those who don't care go ahead and join.
Besides which how does the area code change the functionality? It still makes the phone calls, you just punch more numbers in...
Man,
If I still had any moderator points, you'd get them all. That's a GREAT IDEA!. This way, the low paying lawyer gets his fee. The high-paying lawyer gets his fee too and can't complain that people won't pay him for his time.
A big company could still take the risk but they wouldn't be able to do it over and over again. And anyone who decides to do a frivolous lawsuit and loses has to pay double!
I think the real issues here are obvious. There may in fact be some "grey" area as to what they do or do not do for you as an ISP. The BIG thing is that "they did it behind your back..."
Without properly notifying their users what they were going to do, they leave themselves open to abuse of service. Imagine the phone company decides to change all the area codes in one district from 347 to 342 because they "needed" to expand the area. Now technically, they are allowed to do that; it's understood that the use of phones have increased over the years and maybe some people do need to be moved over to the new area code. But the important thing is that "THEY TELL PEOPLE!"
No one needs to listen but it is essential for a business to notify users. If a user has been forewarned, he indeed has the option to leave the ISP but at least he is given advanced notice so that he can make arrangements to leave without having to have his/her business arrangement changed.
Seeing as how I worked at an academic institute for several years myself...I understand the desire to keep it open. Academically, we want to encourage free expression and not limit students/faculty from using the Internet for what it was intended for.
Ultimately though, you as a sysadmin has the responsibility to maintain the reliabilty and stability of the network. People WILL ALWAYS complain about how slow the network is just like people WILL ALWAYS complain about traffic, even if it delays them by a few minutes. What people will NOT accept is if there is the network is down for prolonged periods of time or if a road stays closed for an inordinate amount of time.
I would recommend placing a firewall to monitor the amount of traffic (Linux for example is a great tool and you only need an old computer and two NIC cards). Analyze what ports are causing congestation and block them. If users start to complain, state that the cost of the network bandwidth is more important unless they can give a VALID justification to keep those ports open. If they can give a VALID justification to keep it open, then USE the justification to increase the bandwidth as a whole. Faculty/Staff who are told that they need to allocate their "precious" budgets to help pay for the bandwidth upgrades will cause one of two things to happen:
1.) They seriously need it, and therefore are forced to accept the reality they have to pay for the additional bandwidth. You get the additional funding and everyone's happy.
2.) They decide they don't need it QUITE so badly that they're willing to lose a portion of their budget and they can't give a valid complaint because they're not willing to help pay for the expense that they are accruing on the system.
Either way, they get off your back and start to take responsibility for using the system and not abusing the system. (IE-similar to how the photocopiers at my college were being abused until the teacher were forced to use an account ID and password to track their spending. If they went over a certain limit, it came out of their budget....funny how all of a sudden, people started paying attention to how much photocopying they were doing and less paper got recycled!)
It's a harsh reality but people will continue to abuse a system so long as they think they are anonymous. When they realize that they can be held accountable, that's when they stop abusing it.
It's interesting to note how much of what he says can inflame people. The facts are that 1.) No person ever signed a contract that says they have to watch commercials. (Legally, none of us ever signed or had a verbal "agreement" to watch commercials.) 2.) The amount of money spent on programs by commercials is irrelevant to the public. If john q. Business man pores money into advertisements and theirs no return then he is taking a risk and is suffering the consequences of the "risk". Equally, if he spends money in the stock market, he is again "taking a risk." 3.) From a functional point of view there is NO difference between a vcr and a pvr. If a vcr is permitted then a pvr should equally be permitted. 4.) On top of that Turner reserves the right to NOT accept business from companies such as DirectTV which provide and support PVR units such as the integrated DirectTV and TIVO unit. Yet instead, you go to Best Buy and there in Big Ads are all the Turner channels on DirectTV. Why? Because they want the money. 5.) Ultimately, its an issue of money. They just expect to get more revenue from TV ads then they do now.
So here's the BIG THOUGHT OF THE DAY. I wonder if he is making such a critical CLAIM just so that they GET more PUBLICITY and encourage people to buy TIVO's? After all PVR sales are really not doing that great and maybe this is a way to PROMOTE them. (ie-...by saying they're bad..people will want to buy more of them.)
I gotta ask this...did ANYONE ELSE notice that if you click on the "What costs goes into making a CD" that it takes you to 3 different links and ends in a final webpage of 10 PARAGRAPHS...that STILL DOESNT ANSWER THE QUESTION????? I read it all the way through...yes...the Cost of making CD's have gone down...yes...the cost of advertising has gone up...yes...there's lots of factors involved in producing a CD...but NOWHERE is there an estimate or rough guess on how much it costs to make a CD. Anyone out there know the REAL ANSWER?
Take back the network?? Hell U can have it...there's enuff problems out there to worry about then to consider if the user wants to take back "their computer". I have always had one rule at my work place. "U want access...U got it..but I'm not responsible for your computer anymore...PERIOD"...U screw it up...U MUST BE SMART ENUFF TO DEAL WITH IT!....ONe or two people do it..and they end up being fine...then they realize that I expect them to update their own darn computers, deal with any hardware problems..etc...and realize that they GOT A LOT MORE then they bargained for. EXACTLY why we manage it...the goal of the sysadmin is to make things simpler for the user, not the other way around. When users come to us for help, I make arrangements to purchase what they need and help set it up with them. If they don't come to me then they have assumed responsibility and I won't worry about it. The truth is People DONT want to deal with the computers ALL THE TIME. A person may drive a car every day of their adult life but that doesn't qualify him as a mechanic. If he screws around with the engine...does he blame the mechanic? Only if he's an idiot...On the other hand, I've been working as a sysadmin for years and I've seen every stupid thing done in the world...I've done a few and I've seen other sysadmin do it as well...but any mistake is ALWAYS the fault of the sysadmin....I can't begin to list the number of times...I've heard.."Oh the system is down..you gotta do something!" in which case I go upstairs and immediately turn back on the UPS because they kicked it off with their feet...Seriously though...what you say would have merit..but only in the sense that a good driver should also be a good mechanic, and frankly most drivers are too busy driving to be the mechanic as well.... As for the comment about "arcane knowledge of networking", what's so arcane about it? How many thousands of textbooks document IPX, Appletalk, TCP/IP, NETBEUI,EIGRP, to death? How many FAQS, RTFM's, PDF files, are on the net discussing these topics? Make it easier? In what sense? Don't people realize that making things easier only makes things more complicated? U may understand how a CPU works, but can you build one? Can any human build one? Why? Because it's too complicated! But it's simple right? Basic principle of physics: The more complicated a system is, the greater the entropy. Meaning: More complicated systems break down more often!
Slashdot Mirror
My response to this would be that the tag changes the organization from which the mail is percieved to have come from without telling me first. Although 95% of the internet may not care, the 5% that write software and routing mail may have a problem with it.
Think of it like putting ingredients on a box. Most people would DEMAND to high-hell that they be told what's in a particular food item but when's the last time you looked at what ingredients were in a can of soup? Now admittedly you can argue what's the big deal and maybe it's not a big deal since only 1% of the population that buys the can of soup would actually read it. Would it hurt them? Probably not. But it's important that they be given the opportunity to know if something is different or special in there.
In all honesty, if they were upfront with it, it wouldn't matter. Spell it out in the license agreement and let those who are "picky" about what they want have the opportunity to opt out...those who don't care go ahead and join.
Besides which how does the area code change the functionality? It still makes the phone calls, you just punch more numbers in...
Man,
If I still had any moderator points, you'd get them all. That's a GREAT IDEA!. This way, the low paying lawyer gets his fee. The high-paying lawyer gets his fee too and can't complain that people won't pay him for his time.
A big company could still take the risk but they wouldn't be able to do it over and over again. And anyone who decides to do a frivolous lawsuit and loses has to pay double!
How beautiful is THAT!
I think the real issues here are obvious. There may in fact be some "grey" area as to what they do or do not do for you as an ISP. The BIG thing is that "they did it behind your back..."
Without properly notifying their users what they were going to do, they leave themselves open to abuse of service. Imagine the phone company decides to change all the area codes in one district from 347 to 342 because they "needed" to expand the area. Now technically, they are allowed to do that; it's understood that the use of phones have increased over the years and maybe some people do need to be moved over to the new area code. But the important thing is that "THEY TELL PEOPLE!"
No one needs to listen but it is essential for a business to notify users. If a user has been forewarned, he indeed has the option to leave the ISP but at least he is given advanced notice so that he can make arrangements to leave without having to have his/her business arrangement changed.
Seeing as how I worked at an academic institute for several years myself...I understand the desire to keep it open. Academically, we want to encourage free expression and not limit students/faculty from using the Internet for what it was intended for.
Ultimately though, you as a sysadmin has the responsibility to maintain the reliabilty and stability of the network. People WILL ALWAYS complain about how slow the network is just like people WILL ALWAYS complain about traffic, even if it delays them by a few minutes. What people will NOT accept is if there is the network is down for prolonged periods of time or if a road stays closed for an inordinate amount of time.
I would recommend placing a firewall to monitor the amount of traffic (Linux for example is a great tool and you only need an old computer and two NIC cards). Analyze what ports are causing congestation and block them. If users start to complain, state that the cost of the network bandwidth is more important unless they can give a VALID justification to keep those ports open. If they can give a VALID justification to keep it open, then USE the justification to increase the bandwidth as a whole. Faculty/Staff who are told that they need to allocate their "precious" budgets to help pay for the bandwidth upgrades will cause one of two things to happen:
1.) They seriously need it, and therefore are forced to accept the reality they have to pay for the additional bandwidth. You get the additional funding and everyone's happy.
2.) They decide they don't need it QUITE so badly that they're willing to lose a portion of their budget and they can't give a valid complaint because they're not willing to help pay for the expense that they are accruing on the system.
Either way, they get off your back and start to take responsibility for using the system and not abusing the system. (IE-similar to how the photocopiers at my college were being abused until the teacher were forced to use an account ID and password to track their spending. If they went over a certain limit, it came out of their budget....funny how all of a sudden, people started paying attention to how much photocopying they were doing and less paper got recycled!)
It's a harsh reality but people will continue to abuse a system so long as they think they are anonymous. When they realize that they can be held accountable, that's when they stop abusing it.
It's interesting to note how much of what he says can inflame people. The facts are that
1.) No person ever signed a contract that says they have to watch commercials. (Legally, none of us ever signed or had a verbal "agreement" to watch commercials.)
2.) The amount of money spent on programs by commercials is irrelevant to the public. If john q. Business man pores money into advertisements and theirs no return then he is taking a risk and is suffering the consequences of the "risk". Equally, if he spends money in the stock market, he is again "taking a risk."
3.) From a functional point of view there is NO difference between a vcr and a pvr. If a vcr is permitted then a pvr should equally be permitted.
4.) On top of that Turner reserves the right to NOT accept business from companies such as DirectTV which provide and support PVR units such as the integrated DirectTV and TIVO unit. Yet instead, you go to Best Buy and there in Big Ads are all the Turner channels on DirectTV. Why?
Because they want the money.
5.) Ultimately, its an issue of money. They just expect to get more revenue from TV ads then they do now.
So here's the BIG THOUGHT OF THE DAY. I wonder if he is making such a critical CLAIM just so that they GET more PUBLICITY and encourage people to buy TIVO's? After all PVR sales are really not doing that great and maybe this is a way to PROMOTE them. (ie-...by saying they're bad..people will want to buy more of them.)
I gotta ask this...did ANYONE ELSE notice that if you click on the "What costs goes into making a CD" that it takes you to 3 different links and ends in a final webpage of 10 PARAGRAPHS...that STILL DOESNT ANSWER THE QUESTION????? I read it all the way through...yes...the Cost of making CD's have gone down...yes...the cost of advertising has gone up...yes...there's lots of factors involved in producing a CD...but NOWHERE is there an estimate or rough guess on how much it costs to make a CD. Anyone out there know the REAL ANSWER?
Take back the network?? Hell U can have it...there's enuff problems out there to worry about then to consider if the user wants to take back "their computer". I have always had one rule at my work place. "U want access...U got it..but I'm not responsible for your computer anymore...PERIOD"...U screw it up...U MUST BE SMART ENUFF TO DEAL WITH IT!....ONe or two people do it..and they end up being fine...then they realize that I expect them to update their own darn computers, deal with any hardware problems..etc...and realize that they GOT A LOT MORE then they bargained for. EXACTLY why we manage it...the goal of the sysadmin is to make things simpler for the user, not the other way around. When users come to us for help, I make arrangements to purchase what they need and help set it up with them. If they don't come to me then they have assumed responsibility and I won't worry about it. The truth is People DONT want to deal with the computers ALL THE TIME. A person may drive a car every day of their adult life but that doesn't qualify him as a mechanic. If he screws around with the engine...does he blame the mechanic? Only if he's an idiot...On the other hand, I've been working as a sysadmin for years and I've seen every stupid thing done in the world...I've done a few and I've seen other sysadmin do it as well...but any mistake is ALWAYS the fault of the sysadmin....I can't begin to list the number of times...I've heard.."Oh the system is down..you gotta do something!" in which case I go upstairs and immediately turn back on the UPS because they kicked it off with their feet...Seriously though...what you say would have merit..but only in the sense that a good driver should also be a good mechanic, and frankly most drivers are too busy driving to be the mechanic as well.... As for the comment about "arcane knowledge of networking", what's so arcane about it? How many thousands of textbooks document IPX, Appletalk, TCP/IP, NETBEUI,EIGRP, to death? How many FAQS, RTFM's, PDF files, are on the net discussing these topics? Make it easier? In what sense? Don't people realize that making things easier only makes things more complicated? U may understand how a CPU works, but can you build one? Can any human build one? Why? Because it's too complicated! But it's simple right? Basic principle of physics: The more complicated a system is, the greater the entropy. Meaning: More complicated systems break down more often!