Same thing here, he hardly admits any bias. He is part of Fox News, telling us all the truth that the "liberal media" won't show. Fair & Balanced, but not really.:P
Bill Moyers, Dan Rather, Bill Bradley even Walter Cronkite, all "News" Anchors/reporters all, all LEFT wing.
They were often their network's "News" guys. The problem is that they just wouldn't admit it, and tried to hide behind "unbiased" and "objective" reporting. Hardly "fair" and not "Biased".
What makes "Fox" news more "Fair" and "Balanced" is that they don't hide the political leanings of their guests on the commentary shows. Additionally, they will report things that the other media outlets won't, like the examples I listed earlier.
Personally I read the BBC and The New York Times online and my local paper.
I was just pointing out that neither the OP nor I was saying Fox News was evil
can be assumed to to take the climate-denialist position on everything.
Murdoch's news shows almost always lean right, this is fact.
This statement, which is stupid (assuming anything is stupid) on face value, but also shows the person who wrote it has a particular political bent, namely that anyone that disagrees with AGW thesis is a tool of the right.
I often snicker at "leans right" type comments, because quite frankly, I don't see them as being "right" on the "News" portion of the show. Hanity, Beck and even O'Reilly are commentary, not News, which is where the Liberals typically complain.
News is news. What is covered often bent left or right(mostly left on most news programs), but is regardless, news.
I don't have a problem with "left leaning" news any more than "right leaning" news, because I'm able to decipher between the "news" and the "slant".
The problem I have is the hypocrisy of the left and right, when they get caught making the slant the news, and the news the slant.
Dan Rather, in his ignoring the GWB Air National Guard document forgery even after it was shown to be a forgery, it clearly one of the more stark examples of the left's forgiveness of Fraud in reporting, when it suits them.
Hanity, almost on a daily basis is a good example of the same thing on the right. BOTH sides do it.
The difference, Hanity is admittedly a "conservative", while Dan Rather keeps trying to foist his "independance" and "objectiveness" in journalism.
Lets just call a spade a spade, and be done with it. Why can't the left just admit they are left leaning and keep reporting? Because ultimately there is no such thing as "unbiased news".
Why do you think that most news organizations don't report much on the ACORN scandals? Why do you think that the Washington post assigned 12 fact checkers to Palin's new book, while not assigning even one to cover BHO's at that time?
Political bent is found in all sorts of areas, you just have to open your eyes to see how and what news is covered, and compare.
Obligatory Google is awesome thread of the week....
Google has become so awesome that even the best and brightest aren't good enough to work there. The Google campus is vacant and empty, everyone gone home after being let go for failing to be awesome enough. And yet, money magically keeps rolling in... to whom though? Nobody.
This was apparent in the latest recruitment meeting at my alma mater where a Google server was given 30 minutes to recruit an auditorium full of computer science majors. Well, the Microsoft, HP, Oracle, etc reps gave long speeches and only gave the Google server five minutes to give its speech. It rolled down one end of the stage and leaned over the crowd, silent. It rolled down the other end of the stage and leaned over the crowd, silent. It spent the next few minutes in a monolithic standstill while the whole room waited on bated breath, edge of their seats, dying to know what awesome numbers were being computed and crunched inside the career giver.
The server turned around and shot a laser out at the curtain behind it... burning in binary these words, "I scanned everyone's DNA in this room and decided it was not worth my time as only 0.1483 of you are worthy of working for Google."
Let me tell you, I have never seen a recruitment booth so full of applicants.
In related news, Microsoft tried to duplicate what the Google server did in this recent episode. Here is what the last dying witness had written, in his own blood....
"Beware of the Blue Screen of Death"
Video tape of the even shows the Microsoft server stalking back and forth across the stage, obviously scanning the audience with various colored lights. First green, then yellow then red. Finally the server started to speak in that creepy monotone computer generated voice, "I've scanned everyone in this room...".
That is when it happened, a bright blue light came filling the whole auditorium. The computer continued saying "... and found everyone here is qualified to work for Microsoft. We will seek to assimilate you" as the laser shot out, hitting everyone and killing them instantly.
In one of the last frames of the video, you can make out the poor guy who left the message, behind the trashcan in the corner, just after the laser sliced his left arm and right leg, writing out his last message.
(The WSJ, owned by Rupert Murdoch, also owner of Fox News, can be assumed to to take the climate-denialist position on everything.)
I guess you never watch the Simpsons, Family Guy or any of the other shows on Murdoch's other "channel" (also called Fox) which routinely make fun of everything right of center, including Fox News.
Yeah, what I thought. Rupert Murdoch is evil, because of Fox News, but Rupert Murdoch is cool because of Fox.
You're wrong. All organizations built on "Trust" are inherently broken. Just look at all the corruption in Political Parties and systems. I dare say, the whole concept of Parties and Politics in general is based on the whole "Trust and Power" model you claim. It isn't just "religious", it can be applied elsewhere.
I do agree that Religious organizations are a part of the problem, but I believe it has more to do with "trust and power", and isn't limited to or by anything else. And that explains why I'm a Libertarian, because I see the problem, not just where symptoms are.
Man cannot rule himself, what makes you think he can rule other men.
you don't generally tell children that CEOs are trusted authority figures who deserve their respect and obedience.
"Trust me" - Every Politician
Just to let you know, I'm one of those "religious" type people. I don't tell people to trust any man. In fact, I tell people to trust no man. All men fail at some point.
In fact, I would tell you that my faith actually makes the case that you can't trust men. But what do I know, I'm a religious nutjob.
If there was a finite supply of spammers, and a limited amount of money to be made from spamming, then a hit man might have some impact. However since neither of those are true, you have proposed nothing more than a panicky, feel-good solution. You might as well propose rounding them up and putting them on a spaceship with a course for the sun.
There is a limited supply of spammers. The number is somewhere around 6.5 Billion, but it is limited. It is actually probably much less than this, since most people in the world still don't have computers, and most people who do have computers don't have the skills to spam, and most of the people who do have the skills to spam, won't.
Suddenly the problem is more manageable than you think.
At no point did I propose actually dealing with the spammers directly, as you are trying to do.
No, you simply wring your hands and make excuses as to why you can't deal with them. Allowing them free reign to continue to spam, without any consequences, from places you won't go to. Yup, that sure is a solution.
You are wrong on that account as well. Many spammers are the leaders of companies (which send spam) and network with many other capitalists (some of whom pay for them to send out spam on their behalf). They may be many things but antisocial is not one of them. And they are sending spam from places where it is legal to do so; they don't see themselves above the law, they just don't agree with US law.
Um, this is where you are wrong. Spammers don't use their own equipment to spam, or else RBLs would work. They steal other people's equipment and services to send their spam. In the old days, they used Open Relays to send their spam, and when those closed, they made spambots.
I've argued since then, that what they were doing is "theft of services", same as plugging in an extension cord to the electrical socket I have outside my house. Just because it is there, isn't locked up, doesn't mean anyone can use it.
So you propose then to spend money to break laws in other countries in order to make yourself more content about what people in other countries are doing that affects you? I'm glad people at your level of crazy aren't in charge of our country. Your idea is about as reasonable as the suggestion that executing Bernie Madoff would end the recession.
So, you propose that you allow another country to dictate the economic harm caused by people within their country to go.... without.... any consequences? I'm sorry, but that is actually legitimate reason to go to war (unlike fake WMD claims).
If Russia thinks that it is all giggles and grins or worse, is incapable of dealing with the problem, then why shouldn't we deal with it for them? Because they might not like it?
Lawless countries who don't care about their neighbors welfare aren't worthy of consideration. But by all means, bend over and take it, if you like. Don't Fuck with me, I don't like it.
You can usually make the case for MOST government regulations of businesses. Laws aren't for the lawful, but for the unlawful. Wherever the line is drawn, there will always be people who skirt around at that edge.
If laws and regulations move too far away from the edge, the laws themselves become the end of, not the means of, compliance. Everyone becomes a lawbreaker, and there is no room for discretion.
You can see this in all the zero tolerance laws in place. Zero tolerance laws do not stop anything, and just make more people criminals, like little boys coming to kindergarten with a camping fork, knife, spoon gadget getting expelled because he brought a knife to school. Zero Tolerance! No excuses! He Broke the LAW!!!!
I've written on this before. I call it the "There ought to be a law" syndrome. Everytime someone says "there ought to be a law", someone needs to ask a simple question "WHY?". WHY is it that the existing laws aren't applicable? How will this new law break the necessary shades of gray around the edges? Asshats live there, we all agree. Changing this isn't going to change the asshats.
Sometimes the only thing that will change the asshats is a good old fashion asswhooping.
You're mistaken. My response is not due to Panic, but rather having to deal with the consequences of hosed computers that have been rooted by bots.
The economic damage caused by said bots and rootkits is HUGE.
In the US Constitution, we have the ability to issue letters of marque, which can be used to fight this economic piracy. All we need to do is issue a couple of these letters of marque and let the bastards die a miserable horrible death at the hands of soldiers of fortune.
And no, I'm not kidding. You cannot deal rationally with people like these, because they use it against you. The only choice is to use last ditch efforts to stop them. This is not by choice, but necessity.
You cannot deal with anti social people using normal means. They are anti social because they don't think the rules apply to them, and will use the rules they want against you.
So, let them hide in foreign countries all they want, we'll just send someone after them there. If the other country doesn't like it, then they have to do something about it or STFU.
Actually, the moment they change the terms of service, the original contract is NULL and VOID. They changed the terms, now you can re-negotiate the payment.
Just send them a email saying "I accept the New AUP terms and agree to adjust my payment to $0 immediately for the duration of this change in service level. Receiving this email constitutes acceptance of the new terms by both parties."
If they can change the terms arbitrarily, then so can you. Make it hurt. Stupid should hurt.
Spam is not an economic problem, it is a social problem. However the solution isn't economic or social. The solution is socialogical; it is threat of pain and/or death.
The risk/reward structure is so far out of whack that there is no disincentive affecting the choice.
As previously mentioned, 250,000 unlawful computer access felonies is huge number, and that is what we should be looking at. Nothing short of public flogging/caning/torture or even execution will stop the asshats from being asshats.
That removes or at lease reduces the economic incentive by introducing life threatening consequences. And anyone willing to risk that, deserves exactly what they get.
People who oppose Corporal or Capital Punishment don't understand its purpose. It is supposed to be a deterrent. It doesn't always succeed in every case, but nothing does.
Stupid should hurt. If you cane the bastard this time, the next guy will consider that as a consequence, and think twice. As long as there is no real consequence (fake fines that will never be applied aren't a consequence), then there is no deterrence.
As for the responders to spam, stupid should hurt as well. I suggest that the Government setup fake blue pill shops all over the place, and bilk the stupid people out of as much money as they can, and pay for the new Healthcare system with stupid people's money, and not mine.
Just enroll the idiots in the latest "free sample" scam (Enzyte) crap we see all the time. At least then, the money will go to something more useful (subject to debate), and we'll have all the money we need to do "HealthCare" right!/sarcasm
Having both a degree in Busineess Admin, and having worked in IT for over 25 years, I can assure you, you are dead on.
The problem isn't just with Administration, though a lions share of it is, the problem also lies with IT departments not understanding business at all.
This is where a CIO or CTO or both are needed as bridges between IT and Business services (accountants, finance, records etc).
Yes, IT is often "magic wand" stuff, and what we can do is sometimes amazing.
The whole problem is, you have people who are not really "technical" (doctors, nurses, staff) being required to use highly technical and often complicated computer systems, that are difficult even for trained people to use correctly.
What usually happens is either you're good at the Tech, or you're good at patient care. Guess who keeps their job or promoted when the time comes?
This affects patient care in ways nobody really can understand, unless you're actually skilled in both. The geeky nurse ends up sitting clicking away at the mouse and keyboard, filling in all the data points, and looks great from Business Services, but patients aren't actually getting the care they need.
What I don't understand, is why there aren't computer terminals in every room, with touch screens or nurses walking around with PDA type devices with check boxes to check off as they make their rounds.
The main screens for these need to follow KISS, so that anyone can read, and check things. They shouldn't be designed for every off case, and all options available at all times.
The inefficiencies of modern info systems always astound me, often making more work than they save. They should save time, and be more accurate most of the time than not. Any system that fails on both accounts is a failure, regardless how much data is collected.
You can get ground meat called hamburger, or you can get ground round, or ground sirloin or some other ground steak.
The difference in the final product is worth it.
People who don't know, or don't care get what they deserve. Life is too short to eat bad meat, drink bad beer, drink bad wine, eat spoiled/processed vegetables.
There is a difference between homemade and homegrown food verses what you can buy in a can. My wife's homemade spaghetti sauce is way better than Ragu.
I can't imagine "Genuine Faux Meat" to be better in any form it might take.
And I don't care what a bunch of sanctimonious PETA freaks say, keep your hands off my food.
I've actually seen one of these clauses invoked in a local business here. The hostile buyout offer was submitted and the guy responding gladly took the terms of the offer, as opportunity to buy out the originator.
The problem was, the originator of the offer tried to change his mind on the deal, and tried to renegotiate the buy/sell price and sued, to raise the price.
While the suit was in court, proceeded to try to destroy the business and all the various partnerships that were built up over the course. About halfway through the courts, the second guy realizing the sabotage was starting to work, accepted the "re-negotiated" price, in court.
That is when the first guy accused the second guy of sabotaging the business and rejected the price, and resorted back to a new lower than original price, whereby the second guy promptly agreed to buy at that price.
The courts, seeing through the scam at that point sealed the deal at the new lower price, and called the lawyers to draw up the papers at that price.
It was hell for my friend at the time, but it is kind of funny now. The asshole screwed himself, in what we now refer to as "autoanalcoitus".
Here's the key for me. The guy works 40 hours / wk in the office. THAT is what he is paid to do. That is what the EMPLOYER contracts for. This is what the article says.
... only paid by the hour instead of on salary, with no benefits.
If he is being paid, by the hour, for 40 hours (also mentioned in the article) then that is ALL he is contracted for.
He should submit bills for at least the time he works when called. I would bill at a rate of 1.5 or 2.0 times the normal pay rate. If they want to play nickel and dime, just play back.
Once they go that route, then they are beholden to a whole new set of employment rules. I'd just let the boss person know that they will be getting billed at the going rate for any off hours support/work calls.
I'd also suggest that the contractor let them know that if this is not acceptable, then they need to prioritize the work when he gets in on the next day.
Of Course in this economy, one can just be happy to have a job, and shut up and not say anything. However, if you know the systems and designs and whatnot for the website well, then being "fired" for not being on call is a risk I would be willing to make, especially if it is a steep learning curve to learn how / why things are setup the way they are. Finding good help is not easy, even with all the unemployed out there.
I realize that most websites run some version or another of "adverts", but generally speaking, most of those sites are marginal value to start. The sites I frequent usually use text ads, and not the flash (pun intended) graphical ads on some of the more questionable sites.
In fact, I dare say, that if I see lots of flashy or ads that are obtrusive in nature, I discount the nature of the site and tend to leave quicker.
One of the things that pisses me off to no end, are third party ads that are spewing crap/malware to driveby web browsing.
I don't personally get infecgted by them, because I run all the latest anti-malware defenses (adblock, noscript, firefox etc). But I'm in IT, and I see way too many machines compromized by the lastest "Antivirus 2010" styple crap/malware all the time.
Websites that house such malware should be blacklisted. Screw them if they can't make a living without using dubious adverts.
You obviously don't know many "right wingers" or "left wingers", only your versions in your head.
Most of the left wingers I know of, jet around the world in private airplanes, drive SUVs, live in big expensive mansions and generally do everything they tell others not to do, namely people like all the Hollywood Actors and Al Gore. All their extravagance and huge carbon footprint is ignored by other left wingers because they "fight for the cause". I call them Hypocrites.
Most of the so-called "right wing" people I know, support conservation efforts, to preserve things. The largest private reserves are not owned or managed by "left wing groups" like Sierra Club or other such groups, they are owned by... *GASP* hunting groups like Ducks Unlimited.
Most of the people around here are called "conservatives", and generally speaking tend to live within their means.
And the bastard GWB is a prime example of someone who built a sustainable building for a home in Texas, but since he is a "shill" for "Big Oil" and all the "Evil" thereof, his efforts are ignored by the AGW folks.
In summary, so-called right wingers are "conservative" and this also applies to natural resources, while left wingers are "progressive" and tend to think they know how progress is, and they know better than everyone else.
So you see, it all depends on how you look at things. I'm sure you don't see it this way either.
Yes! Which lead to less taxes being taken in, and thus added to the current fiasco.
What most people don't realize is that taxes are, almost by definition, a break in the economic system, which tries to route around the break.
You can see this in places like NewYork, which is seeing a massive exodus of the well-to-do who are avoiding the taxes by leaving the state. The states surrounding New York that have lower tax rates, are starting to see improvement in tax revenues because of this.
The problem we have are people who only see $$$ and don't ever consider that people will route around taxes.
California Sales Taxes are high enough that it is often cheaper to buy something in another state, and have it shipped to CA, than it is to buy it locally. The idiots in Sacramento (and DC for that matter) clearly don't understand what "unintended consequences" really are of the policies and taxes that they legislate.
The only way to fix the problem is to get a massive voter information campaign going, letting people know that raising Taxes are not the solution to budgetary problems, cutting spending is.
What we need is for some judge to declare the legislative branch non-functional, and appoint a committee that axes through all the crap programs that don't do anything other than garner votes and employs friends and relatives of those in power.
Frankly I don't understand this. Cuoldn't California just lay people off, and cut their costs for 2010?
Well silly, don't you know that most politicians steal from Peter to buy Paul's vote? If they had to cut, you know, spending and stuff, then they would not be able to live off the public dole for their entire lives.
The only way to get this situation fixed, is the stop voting for people promising things like free healthcare, welfare and benefits for people who are perfectly capable of otherwise having a job and earning money.
And stop taxing people into leaving California for other less regressive tax states, like Texas.
In this budget crisis, it is interesting to see the states in the biggest mess financially are the ones with the highest taxes.
But the liberal progressives scream bloody murder every time their pet government project is cut. They just don't get it.
And the wimpy conservatives are unable to counter the "grandma on dog food" crap that the liberal progressives love to spew.
Next time you hear "Think of the Children" crap, whether it is from an (R) [porn/crime] or (D) [starving/homeless], tell them to STFU and address the real problems, and not politically expedient anecdotal cases.
Slashdot Mirror
I would have closed the ticket with a two word note: 1D10T error
They made a movie about this ...
Bill Moyers, Dan Rather, Bill Bradley even Walter Cronkite, all "News" Anchors/reporters all, all LEFT wing.
They were often their network's "News" guys. The problem is that they just wouldn't admit it, and tried to hide behind "unbiased" and "objective" reporting. Hardly "fair" and not "Biased".
What makes "Fox" news more "Fair" and "Balanced" is that they don't hide the political leanings of their guests on the commentary shows. Additionally, they will report things that the other media outlets won't, like the examples I listed earlier.
I was just pointing out that neither the OP nor I was saying Fox News was evil
Yup. Gotcha.
This statement, which is stupid (assuming anything is stupid) on face value, but also shows the person who wrote it has a particular political bent, namely that anyone that disagrees with AGW thesis is a tool of the right.
I often snicker at "leans right" type comments, because quite frankly, I don't see them as being "right" on the "News" portion of the show. Hanity, Beck and even O'Reilly are commentary, not News, which is where the Liberals typically complain.
News is news. What is covered often bent left or right(mostly left on most news programs), but is regardless, news.
I don't have a problem with "left leaning" news any more than "right leaning" news, because I'm able to decipher between the "news" and the "slant".
The problem I have is the hypocrisy of the left and right, when they get caught making the slant the news, and the news the slant.
Dan Rather, in his ignoring the GWB Air National Guard document forgery even after it was shown to be a forgery, it clearly one of the more stark examples of the left's forgiveness of Fraud in reporting, when it suits them.
Hanity, almost on a daily basis is a good example of the same thing on the right. BOTH sides do it.
The difference, Hanity is admittedly a "conservative", while Dan Rather keeps trying to foist his "independance" and "objectiveness" in journalism.
Lets just call a spade a spade, and be done with it. Why can't the left just admit they are left leaning and keep reporting? Because ultimately there is no such thing as "unbiased news".
Why do you think that most news organizations don't report much on the ACORN scandals? Why do you think that the Washington post assigned 12 fact checkers to Palin's new book, while not assigning even one to cover BHO's at that time?
Political bent is found in all sorts of areas, you just have to open your eyes to see how and what news is covered, and compare.
There is enough hypocrisy on both sides.
Obligatory Google is awesome thread of the week....
Google has become so awesome that even the best and brightest aren't good enough to work there. The Google campus is vacant and empty, everyone gone home after being let go for failing to be awesome enough. And yet, money magically keeps rolling in ... to whom though? Nobody.
This was apparent in the latest recruitment meeting at my alma mater where a Google server was given 30 minutes to recruit an auditorium full of computer science majors. Well, the Microsoft, HP, Oracle, etc reps gave long speeches and only gave the Google server five minutes to give its speech. It rolled down one end of the stage and leaned over the crowd, silent. It rolled down the other end of the stage and leaned over the crowd, silent. It spent the next few minutes in a monolithic standstill while the whole room waited on bated breath, edge of their seats, dying to know what awesome numbers were being computed and crunched inside the career giver.
The server turned around and shot a laser out at the curtain behind it ... burning in binary these words, "I scanned everyone's DNA in this room and decided it was not worth my time as only 0.1483 of you are worthy of working for Google."
Let me tell you, I have never seen a recruitment booth so full of applicants.
In related news, Microsoft tried to duplicate what the Google server did in this recent episode. Here is what the last dying witness had written, in his own blood ....
"Beware of the Blue Screen of Death"
Video tape of the even shows the Microsoft server stalking back and forth across the stage, obviously scanning the audience with various colored lights. First green, then yellow then red. Finally the server started to speak in that creepy monotone computer generated voice, "I've scanned everyone in this room ...".
That is when it happened, a bright blue light came filling the whole auditorium. The computer continued saying "... and found everyone here is qualified to work for Microsoft. We will seek to assimilate you" as the laser shot out, hitting everyone and killing them instantly.
In one of the last frames of the video, you can make out the poor guy who left the message, behind the trashcan in the corner, just after the laser sliced his left arm and right leg, writing out his last message.
"Beware of the Blue Screen of Death"
Actually, it is probably more like .... Law vs Law, who ever wins, we lose!
I guess you never watch the Simpsons, Family Guy or any of the other shows on Murdoch's other "channel" (also called Fox) which routinely make fun of everything right of center, including Fox News.
Yeah, what I thought. Rupert Murdoch is evil, because of Fox News, but Rupert Murdoch is cool because of Fox.
Let me know when your head starts to explode.
192GB is going to be the minimum needed to run Win 8, so it will have to address more than that ;)
You're wrong. All organizations built on "Trust" are inherently broken. Just look at all the corruption in Political Parties and systems. I dare say, the whole concept of Parties and Politics in general is based on the whole "Trust and Power" model you claim. It isn't just "religious", it can be applied elsewhere.
I do agree that Religious organizations are a part of the problem, but I believe it has more to do with "trust and power", and isn't limited to or by anything else. And that explains why I'm a Libertarian, because I see the problem, not just where symptoms are.
Man cannot rule himself, what makes you think he can rule other men.
"Trust me" - Every Politician
Just to let you know, I'm one of those "religious" type people. I don't tell people to trust any man. In fact, I tell people to trust no man. All men fail at some point.
In fact, I would tell you that my faith actually makes the case that you can't trust men. But what do I know, I'm a religious nutjob.
FSM
It is cruelty to withhold spaghetti.
But that is my opinion.
There is a limited supply of spammers. The number is somewhere around 6.5 Billion, but it is limited. It is actually probably much less than this, since most people in the world still don't have computers, and most people who do have computers don't have the skills to spam, and most of the people who do have the skills to spam, won't.
Suddenly the problem is more manageable than you think.
No, you simply wring your hands and make excuses as to why you can't deal with them. Allowing them free reign to continue to spam, without any consequences, from places you won't go to. Yup, that sure is a solution.
Um, this is where you are wrong. Spammers don't use their own equipment to spam, or else RBLs would work. They steal other people's equipment and services to send their spam. In the old days, they used Open Relays to send their spam, and when those closed, they made spambots.
I've argued since then, that what they were doing is "theft of services", same as plugging in an extension cord to the electrical socket I have outside my house. Just because it is there, isn't locked up, doesn't mean anyone can use it.
So, you propose that you allow another country to dictate the economic harm caused by people within their country to go .... without .... any consequences? I'm sorry, but that is actually legitimate reason to go to war (unlike fake WMD claims).
If Russia thinks that it is all giggles and grins or worse, is incapable of dealing with the problem, then why shouldn't we deal with it for them? Because they might not like it?
Lawless countries who don't care about their neighbors welfare aren't worthy of consideration. But by all means, bend over and take it, if you like. Don't Fuck with me, I don't like it.
You can usually make the case for MOST government regulations of businesses. Laws aren't for the lawful, but for the unlawful. Wherever the line is drawn, there will always be people who skirt around at that edge.
If laws and regulations move too far away from the edge, the laws themselves become the end of, not the means of, compliance. Everyone becomes a lawbreaker, and there is no room for discretion.
You can see this in all the zero tolerance laws in place. Zero tolerance laws do not stop anything, and just make more people criminals, like little boys coming to kindergarten with a camping fork, knife, spoon gadget getting expelled because he brought a knife to school. Zero Tolerance! No excuses! He Broke the LAW!!!!
I've written on this before. I call it the "There ought to be a law" syndrome. Everytime someone says "there ought to be a law", someone needs to ask a simple question "WHY?". WHY is it that the existing laws aren't applicable? How will this new law break the necessary shades of gray around the edges? Asshats live there, we all agree. Changing this isn't going to change the asshats.
Sometimes the only thing that will change the asshats is a good old fashion asswhooping.
You're mistaken. My response is not due to Panic, but rather having to deal with the consequences of hosed computers that have been rooted by bots.
The economic damage caused by said bots and rootkits is HUGE.
In the US Constitution, we have the ability to issue letters of marque, which can be used to fight this economic piracy. All we need to do is issue a couple of these letters of marque and let the bastards die a miserable horrible death at the hands of soldiers of fortune.
And no, I'm not kidding. You cannot deal rationally with people like these, because they use it against you. The only choice is to use last ditch efforts to stop them. This is not by choice, but necessity.
You cannot deal with anti social people using normal means. They are anti social because they don't think the rules apply to them, and will use the rules they want against you.
So, let them hide in foreign countries all they want, we'll just send someone after them there. If the other country doesn't like it, then they have to do something about it or STFU.
Actually, the moment they change the terms of service, the original contract is NULL and VOID. They changed the terms, now you can re-negotiate the payment.
Just send them a email saying "I accept the New AUP terms and agree to adjust my payment to $0 immediately for the duration of this change in service level. Receiving this email constitutes acceptance of the new terms by both parties."
If they can change the terms arbitrarily, then so can you. Make it hurt. Stupid should hurt.
Spam is not an economic problem, it is a social problem. However the solution isn't economic or social. The solution is socialogical; it is threat of pain and/or death.
The risk/reward structure is so far out of whack that there is no disincentive affecting the choice.
As previously mentioned, 250,000 unlawful computer access felonies is huge number, and that is what we should be looking at. Nothing short of public flogging/caning/torture or even execution will stop the asshats from being asshats.
That removes or at lease reduces the economic incentive by introducing life threatening consequences. And anyone willing to risk that, deserves exactly what they get.
People who oppose Corporal or Capital Punishment don't understand its purpose. It is supposed to be a deterrent. It doesn't always succeed in every case, but nothing does.
Stupid should hurt. If you cane the bastard this time, the next guy will consider that as a consequence, and think twice. As long as there is no real consequence (fake fines that will never be applied aren't a consequence), then there is no deterrence.
As for the responders to spam, stupid should hurt as well. I suggest that the Government setup fake blue pill shops all over the place, and bilk the stupid people out of as much money as they can, and pay for the new Healthcare system with stupid people's money, and not mine.
Just enroll the idiots in the latest "free sample" scam (Enzyte) crap we see all the time. At least then, the money will go to something more useful (subject to debate), and we'll have all the money we need to do "HealthCare" right! /sarcasm
Having both a degree in Busineess Admin, and having worked in IT for over 25 years, I can assure you, you are dead on.
The problem isn't just with Administration, though a lions share of it is, the problem also lies with IT departments not understanding business at all.
This is where a CIO or CTO or both are needed as bridges between IT and Business services (accountants, finance, records etc).
Yes, IT is often "magic wand" stuff, and what we can do is sometimes amazing.
The whole problem is, you have people who are not really "technical" (doctors, nurses, staff) being required to use highly technical and often complicated computer systems, that are difficult even for trained people to use correctly.
What usually happens is either you're good at the Tech, or you're good at patient care. Guess who keeps their job or promoted when the time comes?
This affects patient care in ways nobody really can understand, unless you're actually skilled in both. The geeky nurse ends up sitting clicking away at the mouse and keyboard, filling in all the data points, and looks great from Business Services, but patients aren't actually getting the care they need.
What I don't understand, is why there aren't computer terminals in every room, with touch screens or nurses walking around with PDA type devices with check boxes to check off as they make their rounds.
The main screens for these need to follow KISS, so that anyone can read, and check things. They shouldn't be designed for every off case, and all options available at all times.
The inefficiencies of modern info systems always astound me, often making more work than they save. They should save time, and be more accurate most of the time than not. Any system that fails on both accounts is a failure, regardless how much data is collected.
You can get ground meat called hamburger, or you can get ground round, or ground sirloin or some other ground steak.
The difference in the final product is worth it.
People who don't know, or don't care get what they deserve. Life is too short to eat bad meat, drink bad beer, drink bad wine, eat spoiled/processed vegetables.
There is a difference between homemade and homegrown food verses what you can buy in a can. My wife's homemade spaghetti sauce is way better than Ragu.
I can't imagine "Genuine Faux Meat" to be better in any form it might take.
And I don't care what a bunch of sanctimonious PETA freaks say, keep your hands off my food.
I've actually seen one of these clauses invoked in a local business here. The hostile buyout offer was submitted and the guy responding gladly took the terms of the offer, as opportunity to buy out the originator.
The problem was, the originator of the offer tried to change his mind on the deal, and tried to renegotiate the buy/sell price and sued, to raise the price.
While the suit was in court, proceeded to try to destroy the business and all the various partnerships that were built up over the course. About halfway through the courts, the second guy realizing the sabotage was starting to work, accepted the "re-negotiated" price, in court.
That is when the first guy accused the second guy of sabotaging the business and rejected the price, and resorted back to a new lower than original price, whereby the second guy promptly agreed to buy at that price.
The courts, seeing through the scam at that point sealed the deal at the new lower price, and called the lawyers to draw up the papers at that price.
It was hell for my friend at the time, but it is kind of funny now. The asshole screwed himself, in what we now refer to as "autoanalcoitus".
Here's the key for me. The guy works 40 hours / wk in the office. THAT is what he is paid to do. That is what the EMPLOYER contracts for. This is what the article says.
If he is being paid, by the hour, for 40 hours (also mentioned in the article) then that is ALL he is contracted for.
He should submit bills for at least the time he works when called. I would bill at a rate of 1.5 or 2.0 times the normal pay rate. If they want to play nickel and dime, just play back.
Once they go that route, then they are beholden to a whole new set of employment rules. I'd just let the boss person know that they will be getting billed at the going rate for any off hours support/work calls.
I'd also suggest that the contractor let them know that if this is not acceptable, then they need to prioritize the work when he gets in on the next day.
Of Course in this economy, one can just be happy to have a job, and shut up and not say anything. However, if you know the systems and designs and whatnot for the website well, then being "fired" for not being on call is a risk I would be willing to make, especially if it is a steep learning curve to learn how / why things are setup the way they are. Finding good help is not easy, even with all the unemployed out there.
I realize that most websites run some version or another of "adverts", but generally speaking, most of those sites are marginal value to start. The sites I frequent usually use text ads, and not the flash (pun intended) graphical ads on some of the more questionable sites.
In fact, I dare say, that if I see lots of flashy or ads that are obtrusive in nature, I discount the nature of the site and tend to leave quicker.
One of the things that pisses me off to no end, are third party ads that are spewing crap/malware to driveby web browsing.
I don't personally get infecgted by them, because I run all the latest anti-malware defenses (adblock, noscript, firefox etc). But I'm in IT, and I see way too many machines compromized by the lastest "Antivirus 2010" styple crap/malware all the time.
Websites that house such malware should be blacklisted. Screw them if they can't make a living without using dubious adverts.
You obviously don't know many "right wingers" or "left wingers", only your versions in your head.
Most of the left wingers I know of, jet around the world in private airplanes, drive SUVs, live in big expensive mansions and generally do everything they tell others not to do, namely people like all the Hollywood Actors and Al Gore. All their extravagance and huge carbon footprint is ignored by other left wingers because they "fight for the cause". I call them Hypocrites.
Most of the so-called "right wing" people I know, support conservation efforts, to preserve things. The largest private reserves are not owned or managed by "left wing groups" like Sierra Club or other such groups, they are owned by ... *GASP* hunting groups like Ducks Unlimited.
Most of the people around here are called "conservatives", and generally speaking tend to live within their means.
And the bastard GWB is a prime example of someone who built a sustainable building for a home in Texas, but since he is a "shill" for "Big Oil" and all the "Evil" thereof, his efforts are ignored by the AGW folks.
In summary, so-called right wingers are "conservative" and this also applies to natural resources, while left wingers are "progressive" and tend to think they know how progress is, and they know better than everyone else.
So you see, it all depends on how you look at things. I'm sure you don't see it this way either.
Evil! Heretic!
Nothing instills fear in the FSM like a well equipped "bow-mounted spaghetti twirling fork".
What were you thinking???!!!!
Yes! Which lead to less taxes being taken in, and thus added to the current fiasco.
What most people don't realize is that taxes are, almost by definition, a break in the economic system, which tries to route around the break.
You can see this in places like NewYork, which is seeing a massive exodus of the well-to-do who are avoiding the taxes by leaving the state. The states surrounding New York that have lower tax rates, are starting to see improvement in tax revenues because of this.
The problem we have are people who only see $$$ and don't ever consider that people will route around taxes.
California Sales Taxes are high enough that it is often cheaper to buy something in another state, and have it shipped to CA, than it is to buy it locally. The idiots in Sacramento (and DC for that matter) clearly don't understand what "unintended consequences" really are of the policies and taxes that they legislate.
The only way to fix the problem is to get a massive voter information campaign going, letting people know that raising Taxes are not the solution to budgetary problems, cutting spending is.
What we need is for some judge to declare the legislative branch non-functional, and appoint a committee that axes through all the crap programs that don't do anything other than garner votes and employs friends and relatives of those in power.
Well silly, don't you know that most politicians steal from Peter to buy Paul's vote? If they had to cut, you know, spending and stuff, then they would not be able to live off the public dole for their entire lives.
The only way to get this situation fixed, is the stop voting for people promising things like free healthcare, welfare and benefits for people who are perfectly capable of otherwise having a job and earning money.
And stop taxing people into leaving California for other less regressive tax states, like Texas.
In this budget crisis, it is interesting to see the states in the biggest mess financially are the ones with the highest taxes.
But the liberal progressives scream bloody murder every time their pet government project is cut. They just don't get it.
And the wimpy conservatives are unable to counter the "grandma on dog food" crap that the liberal progressives love to spew.
Next time you hear "Think of the Children" crap, whether it is from an (R) [porn/crime] or (D) [starving/homeless], tell them to STFU and address the real problems, and not politically expedient anecdotal cases.