More interesting though might be a labor claim that Best Buy might have against these employees
I read about this a couple of months ago but in the context of employees suing Best Buy because they were suffering PTSD due to the nature of the images they were being compelled to view on their customers' computers and their medical plan didn't cover it.
Thanks for posting the links. I didn't know the old version was still available until I read this story. What a cluttered mess the current version is. It wouldn't be so bad if there was a choice to de-clutter the map, but if there is I haven't found it.
human accomplices only need to be tricked into helping
Or they may be perfectly willing to help. The Daniel Suarez novel Daemon illustrates quite nicely how humans might be pressed in to service by a super intelligence. I highly recommend it.
But what does it have to do with my phones capability to record a call?
If you can hear it, you can record it.
I record most of my calls. At work I use a Nexxtech telephone recorder similar to this this. I plug the 3.5 mm jack in to my Tascam DR-07 digital recorder. When I place or receive a call I just press record then log the call details along with the file name when it ends.
If a call comes in on my cell that I want to record I ask the caller to wait while I put them on speakerphone then use the Tascam's built in mics to record the conversation.
If you don't have a stand-alone recorder, a laptop with built-in mic and/or audio input and something like Audacity will do nicely as well.
If your phone lacks the ability to record conversations, either because it doesn't have speakerphone capabilities or can not work with a device like the one I linked to above, I would replace the phone. Cordless phones can be problematic as they emit rf that can be picked up by the recorder but a cordless with speakerphone either on the base station or handset should work with a digital recorder with built-in mics.
The biggest challenge with recording calls is keeping track of all them so you can find the relevant one in the future. I hacked together a simple PHP/MySQL application I host on my personal site that I use to log calls but a spreadsheet works well too. It's also helpful to begin recordings with whatever detail you can provide prior to dialling or answering. That way you just have to listen to the first few seconds of your recording to find out what the call is about.
If the laws where you live prevent you from recording a conversation you are participating in I would say you have significantly bigger problems than your phone's hardware capabilities.
I keep written notes of meetings, I keep my old notebooks, I keep a (semi) daily journal, I archive emails, appointment calendars and task lists as well as text messages and all other forms of written communications. I see no reason why I should not be able to record any conversation I am part of. If a person asks me to not share what was talked about with others, the existence of a recording has no relevance to that. If I can remember it, there is a record.
As far as calls with companies go, I can't remember the last time a call to or from a business or government agency didn't include the disclaimer that "for quality control and training purposes, this call may be monitored or recorded." I always reply that it most certainly is.
In general I don't record personal calls with friends or my wife, since it's unlikely I will need a record of those calls in the future. But they *are* being recorded, of that I have no doubt. All calls are recorded by various agencies and companies. I have no control over that. What I can do is keep my own record of my calls, just in case the need ever arises for me to know what exactly was said.
As long as you take reasonable precautions to safeguard these recordings - as you would your written communications - I can not see why there would be a problem with it.
Downside : a normal coffee brew process generates 6-12 cups of Joe.
I guess we could all switch to a press... but that's a bit messy and requires a stand alone heating method (I've not the space to keep a proper tea kettle on my office desk)
I've been using single cup coffee makers like this Black & Decker Brew 'n Go for years. No mess, no fuss, just pour a cup full of fresh water from your cup in to the reservoir, add a couple scoops of fresh ground coffee to the filter basket and hit the go button.
You get a fresh cup of coffee without the waste of those empty "pods," and no DRM to boot.
With the general definition of the PC market being something you can install Windows/DOS on or WinTel compatible
Where did you get that idea? A personal computer is just that, a small, affordable computer that is operated directly by the end user. Neither Windows or an Intel processor are required.
They will in fact need reports such as this to recognize the reality that all us IT workers have known for years.
Yeah, right. Senior management will never read a report titled "Senior managers are the worst information security offenders" on a site called net-security.org, any more than they would read a report at motherjones.com about the disparity between the wages of regular employees and executives.
I block ads too, but it's a bit of a non sequitur to say that there is no need to support the sites you visit because you pay your ISP for access to the Internet. It's not like you ISP is passing any of that money along to the producers of the content on the sites you visit.
I pay taxes to local governments responsible for maintaining our roads. That doesn't mean GM owes me a car.
You, sir, should read the next paragraph in the Wikipedia article you linked to:
A customer may or may not also be a consumer, but the two notions are distinct, even though the terms are commonly confused. A customer purchases goods;
That would be advertisers paying money to Facebook in exchange for your data so they can target ads at you
a consumer uses them.
That would be you clicking Like on that Miley Cyrus video, generating the data (the product) that the advertisers are willing to pay Facebook for.
An ultimate customer may be a consumer as well, but just as equally may have purchased items for someone else to consume.
That would be the advertisers (the customer) providing the revenue Facebook requires to provide the service to you (the consumer).
I already covered this in my previous comment, but maybe I failed to make myself clear. Yes, Facebook users exchange their data for the use of the service, but their data in and of itself is of minimal value to Facebook. Sure, it may give them opportunities to expand their user-base, for example. Especially if you are willing to allow them to harvest the contacts in your email client.
It is the advertisers who value you data, and are willing to exchange money for it. That provides the revenue Facebook needs to keep operating.
You are providing a resource to Facebook in return for the use of their service, which they then refine and sell to their customers. It's no different than the farmer who grows the potatoes that McDonald's turns in to french fries, except the farmer is probably being paid in cash rather than cat videos.
Is the farmer the customer?
Here's a better analogy, and it even has a car in it:
I'm a high school kid and my dad runs a used car lot. I come in after school and on weekends and wash cars on the lot so they will be more appealing to my dad's customers. He doesn't pay me, because I'm his kid and he's a cheapskate, but in exchange for my efforts he occasionally lets me drive one of the cars from the lot.
So I'm giving something that is of limited value on it's own, but increases my dad's ability to generate revenue for his car lot so it can stay in business, and in return receive the use of some of the company's assets.
Now substitute washing cars with clicking Like buttons, and using cars from the lot with using the site, and you begin to get the picture. The fact that I exchanged a bit of labour for the occasional use of a car from the lot does not make me the customer. I'm more like a supplier, or a sub-trade even.
But I'm sure I'm not changing your mind about anything, if you've even bothered to read this far. If you want to think of yourself as Facebook's customer, go right ahead. But your use of their site on its own generates no revenue, and without revenue a company isn't viable. In my book the actor providing the revenue is the customer. They are the ones my business will cater to.
Having someone wash the cars on my lot is great, and might even help my business, but without cash-paying customers my business will fail.
Users restarting their machines to get around the virus scan is an issue for their supervisor to address. Hammering them with back-to-back scans only increases their frustration and the likelihood that they will continue to look for ways to defeat the process.
Battles between IT and users are common, and we've had to lock down some of the machines at my company to stop bad behavior, but it really sounds like things have progressed to the point where your IT department is simply being obstinate. Yes, it's important that the scans complete, but if your users can not do their jobs for six or seven hours of every week, pretty soon there will be no point in scanning the machines. You'll be out of business.
Most people in my office don't even come in on Tuesdays anymore because that's virus scan day. It starts a 1AM and nothing on your machine will work until at least 3PM
If it is actually taking 14 hours to complete a virus scan, I would be looking for other issues with the hardware. Seriously, 14 hours? We use McAfee VirusScan Enterprise where I work, and most full system scans complete within an hour or so. If you weren't exaggerating, your security group must be truly incompetent as that is beyond acceptable.
As a workaround, depending on your office hours you could begin the scans at 6:00 PM instead of 1:00 AM, so they would be finished by 8:00 the following morning. That won't solve the mystery as to why your scans are taking so long, but at least the people in your office could start coming in on Tuesdays again.
Company have multiple types of customers. Hint: Facebook's users ARE customers.
Accepting for the moment that company (sic) have multiple types of customers, the most important "type" would be the one who is paying the bills. And that certainly isn't the user.
Honestly, read a book or something. The idea that the consumers of online services are the product, not the customer, is neither new or particularly controversial. You could argue, and I suppose you are, that the user is paying for the services received by providing personal information in exchange for the service, but that would make them more like a supplier of raw material (their "likes," their social connections etc) that is then processed and re-sold to advertisers who use that information target ads at the users.
The ultimate customer is the purchaser of those ads, regardless of whether you feel you received something of value in exchange for the information you provided.
Just because they aren't buying anything doesn't mean they aren't customers. You have a lot to learn about business
My business provides services to clients on behalf of other businesses. We work hard to ensure that the consumers of those services are happy and never forget how important they are to the viability of our business, but they are not customers, they are clients. Our customers are the businesses who pay us to provide those services to their customers, our clients.
If you can provide examples of businesses that remained viable despite their customers not buying anything, then I will defer to your obviously superior business knowledge.
That is some world-class hipsterism, right there. I tip my hat to you.
The twenty and thirty-something crowd where I work got a real kick out of your "hipster" comment. Yeah, I guess I'll have to get a fedora and some skinny jeans.
That was my thought. The only countries who have attempted something on the scale of what the NSA is alleging are (allegedely) the United States and Isreal, who (allegedely) unleashed Stuxnet on the world.
And I agree with the poster above - why would China wish to cripple the economy of one of the largest customers of its goods.
Slashdot Mirror
I read about this a couple of months ago but in the context of employees suing Best Buy because they were suffering PTSD due to the nature of the images they were being compelled to view on their customers' computers and their medical plan didn't cover it.
Thanks for posting the links. I didn't know the old version was still available until I read this story. What a cluttered mess the current version is. It wouldn't be so bad if there was a choice to de-clutter the map, but if there is I haven't found it.
Or they may be perfectly willing to help. The Daniel Suarez novel Daemon illustrates quite nicely how humans might be pressed in to service by a super intelligence. I highly recommend it.
If you can hear it, you can record it.
I record most of my calls. At work I use a Nexxtech telephone recorder similar to this this. I plug the 3.5 mm jack in to my Tascam DR-07 digital recorder. When I place or receive a call I just press record then log the call details along with the file name when it ends.
If a call comes in on my cell that I want to record I ask the caller to wait while I put them on speakerphone then use the Tascam's built in mics to record the conversation.
If you don't have a stand-alone recorder, a laptop with built-in mic and/or audio input and something like Audacity will do nicely as well.
If your phone lacks the ability to record conversations, either because it doesn't have speakerphone capabilities or can not work with a device like the one I linked to above, I would replace the phone. Cordless phones can be problematic as they emit rf that can be picked up by the recorder but a cordless with speakerphone either on the base station or handset should work with a digital recorder with built-in mics.
The biggest challenge with recording calls is keeping track of all them so you can find the relevant one in the future. I hacked together a simple PHP/MySQL application I host on my personal site that I use to log calls but a spreadsheet works well too. It's also helpful to begin recordings with whatever detail you can provide prior to dialling or answering. That way you just have to listen to the first few seconds of your recording to find out what the call is about.
If the laws where you live prevent you from recording a conversation you are participating in I would say you have significantly bigger problems than your phone's hardware capabilities.
I keep written notes of meetings, I keep my old notebooks, I keep a (semi) daily journal, I archive emails, appointment calendars and task lists as well as text messages and all other forms of written communications. I see no reason why I should not be able to record any conversation I am part of. If a person asks me to not share what was talked about with others, the existence of a recording has no relevance to that. If I can remember it, there is a record.
As far as calls with companies go, I can't remember the last time a call to or from a business or government agency didn't include the disclaimer that "for quality control and training purposes, this call may be monitored or recorded." I always reply that it most certainly is.
In general I don't record personal calls with friends or my wife, since it's unlikely I will need a record of those calls in the future. But they *are* being recorded, of that I have no doubt. All calls are recorded by various agencies and companies. I have no control over that. What I can do is keep my own record of my calls, just in case the need ever arises for me to know what exactly was said.
As long as you take reasonable precautions to safeguard these recordings - as you would your written communications - I can not see why there would be a problem with it.
It is, they can and do.
So Russia should stop shuttling US astronauts to and from ISS?
On the assumption you're not trolling, I believe he was referring to these.
I think you would need to do things the other way around. Once you're dead, you would not then be able to see the medical bills.
I've been using single cup coffee makers like this Black & Decker Brew 'n Go for years. No mess, no fuss, just pour a cup full of fresh water from your cup in to the reservoir, add a couple scoops of fresh ground coffee to the filter basket and hit the go button.
You get a fresh cup of coffee without the waste of those empty "pods," and no DRM to boot.
Yeah, you're probably right about that.
Where did you get that idea? A personal computer is just that, a small, affordable computer that is operated directly by the end user. Neither Windows or an Intel processor are required.
Which is it: a piece of shit, or a piece of the road? Your comment makes no sense.
OT, but wow, they sell houses for $300k where you live? I would have trouble finding a one-bedroom condo for $300k in my neck of the woods.
Yeah, right. Senior management will never read a report titled "Senior managers are the worst information security offenders" on a site called net-security.org, any more than they would read a report at motherjones.com about the disparity between the wages of regular employees and executives.
I block ads too, but it's a bit of a non sequitur to say that there is no need to support the sites you visit because you pay your ISP for access to the Internet. It's not like you ISP is passing any of that money along to the producers of the content on the sites you visit.
I pay taxes to local governments responsible for maintaining our roads. That doesn't mean GM owes me a car.
A very insightful comment. Thanks.
You, sir, should read the next paragraph in the Wikipedia article you linked to:
That would be advertisers paying money to Facebook in exchange for your data so they can target ads at you
That would be you clicking Like on that Miley Cyrus video, generating the data (the product) that the advertisers are willing to pay Facebook for.
That would be the advertisers (the customer) providing the revenue Facebook requires to provide the service to you (the consumer).
I already covered this in my previous comment, but maybe I failed to make myself clear. Yes, Facebook users exchange their data for the use of the service, but their data in and of itself is of minimal value to Facebook. Sure, it may give them opportunities to expand their user-base, for example. Especially if you are willing to allow them to harvest the contacts in your email client.
It is the advertisers who value you data, and are willing to exchange money for it. That provides the revenue Facebook needs to keep operating.
You are providing a resource to Facebook in return for the use of their service, which they then refine and sell to their customers. It's no different than the farmer who grows the potatoes that McDonald's turns in to french fries, except the farmer is probably being paid in cash rather than cat videos.
Is the farmer the customer?
Here's a better analogy, and it even has a car in it:
I'm a high school kid and my dad runs a used car lot. I come in after school and on weekends and wash cars on the lot so they will be more appealing to my dad's customers. He doesn't pay me, because I'm his kid and he's a cheapskate, but in exchange for my efforts he occasionally lets me drive one of the cars from the lot.
So I'm giving something that is of limited value on it's own, but increases my dad's ability to generate revenue for his car lot so it can stay in business, and in return receive the use of some of the company's assets.
Now substitute washing cars with clicking Like buttons, and using cars from the lot with using the site, and you begin to get the picture. The fact that I exchanged a bit of labour for the occasional use of a car from the lot does not make me the customer. I'm more like a supplier, or a sub-trade even.
But I'm sure I'm not changing your mind about anything, if you've even bothered to read this far. If you want to think of yourself as Facebook's customer, go right ahead. But your use of their site on its own generates no revenue, and without revenue a company isn't viable. In my book the actor providing the revenue is the customer. They are the ones my business will cater to.
Having someone wash the cars on my lot is great, and might even help my business, but without cash-paying customers my business will fail.
Wow, I can understand your frustration.
Users restarting their machines to get around the virus scan is an issue for their supervisor to address. Hammering them with back-to-back scans only increases their frustration and the likelihood that they will continue to look for ways to defeat the process.
Battles between IT and users are common, and we've had to lock down some of the machines at my company to stop bad behavior, but it really sounds like things have progressed to the point where your IT department is simply being obstinate. Yes, it's important that the scans complete, but if your users can not do their jobs for six or seven hours of every week, pretty soon there will be no point in scanning the machines. You'll be out of business.
If it is actually taking 14 hours to complete a virus scan, I would be looking for other issues with the hardware. Seriously, 14 hours? We use McAfee VirusScan Enterprise where I work, and most full system scans complete within an hour or so. If you weren't exaggerating, your security group must be truly incompetent as that is beyond acceptable.
As a workaround, depending on your office hours you could begin the scans at 6:00 PM instead of 1:00 AM, so they would be finished by 8:00 the following morning. That won't solve the mystery as to why your scans are taking so long, but at least the people in your office could start coming in on Tuesdays again.
Accepting for the moment that company (sic) have multiple types of customers, the most important "type" would be the one who is paying the bills. And that certainly isn't the user.
Honestly, read a book or something. The idea that the consumers of online services are the product, not the customer, is neither new or particularly controversial. You could argue, and I suppose you are, that the user is paying for the services received by providing personal information in exchange for the service, but that would make them more like a supplier of raw material (their "likes," their social connections etc) that is then processed and re-sold to advertisers who use that information target ads at the users.
The ultimate customer is the purchaser of those ads, regardless of whether you feel you received something of value in exchange for the information you provided.
My business provides services to clients on behalf of other businesses. We work hard to ensure that the consumers of those services are happy and never forget how important they are to the viability of our business, but they are not customers, they are clients. Our customers are the businesses who pay us to provide those services to their customers, our clients.
If you can provide examples of businesses that remained viable despite their customers not buying anything, then I will defer to your obviously superior business knowledge.
Not only that, Lanier seems to be confused about who Facebook's customer is. Hint: it's not the user.
The twenty and thirty-something crowd where I work got a real kick out of your "hipster" comment. Yeah, I guess I'll have to get a fedora and some skinny jeans.
Probably. It says he hosts "On Air with Ryan Seacrest, a popular morning radio show on KIIS-FM."
Apparently he's a celebrity. Wikipedia says he's a radio personality and hosts a show called American Idol.
I had to look it up too.
That was my thought. The only countries who have attempted something on the scale of what the NSA is alleging are (allegedely) the United States and Isreal, who (allegedely) unleashed Stuxnet on the world.
And I agree with the poster above - why would China wish to cripple the economy of one of the largest customers of its goods.
This isn't passing the smell test.