After dealing with many email outages in the course of a short time, I learned to always write down the first time I was unable to get email. If I could not get email 2 hours later, I called the 888 number, and stayed on until I got credit for no email.
Sometimes, techs would tell me that I could only get credit for a complete outage, not an email outage. Other times, I was told that I could get credit only for an email outage that would last longer than two complete days. In each case, I asked to speak to a supervisor.
It helped to have the documentation on hand, and to list the pings/traceroutes I had done. When they gave me beef about having two nodes up, I mentioned that we had paid for them, and I was calling for email service - not support of the nodes. I explained that we were perfectly capable of supporting two nodes. (We never never never never mention that both machines are dual boot - one is Mac/LinuxPPC, while the other is Windoze/RedHatLinux)
After many times of getting credits, but having to prove myself many times, I finally asked about a credit policy. I explained that I had been given many different answers on when I was eligible for a credit.
To my surprise, I received the following information in my email. First there was a reprint of the service agreement I had signed (a draconian piece of work, but understandable), and then the information that
This is the service agreement for customers of AT&T @Home. There is no
printed policy for credits to a customer's account due to outages in the
customer's service.
In other words, there may be secret policies, but they are not official, as far as the customers are concerned. This is important.
The Credit policy appears to be The squeaky wheel gets greased. Do yourself a favor. Document stuff, and then squeak loud and long.
The agreement calls for minimum annual license fees over a period of ten (10) years
in excess of $100 Million through a combination of cash and equity.
How long is Digital:Convergence going to last before going into Chapter 11?
If NeoMedia has also issued Digital:Convergence warrants to purchase 1.4 Million
shares of NeoMedia stock., does that mean that NeoMedia is also worthless?
I don't plan on putting any of my money in either of these stocks, and it doesn't even have anything to do with the intrinsic immorality of these offerings.
elocution e-locution Peculiar expression that results from use of
spelling and grammar checkers
email e-mail Electronic mail [Distinguishing itself from
every other term on this list, the
unhyphenated version has no natural meaning
whatever, but spelling checkers might suggest
Emile or Ismail.]
emend e-mend To make a hex or binary patch
emerge e-merge To combine different input streams
There is a lot more, and it's all funny. If you don't know who Peter Neumann is, go to his page, and learn about the guy who has been talking about security risks since before you were born, and has been doing it well.
Although glue and borax make good bouncy slime, borax and Polyvinyl Alcohol make even better slime.
The best consumer product containing polyvinlyl alcohol is laundry blueing - Mrs. Smith's bluing works great in the states. Other Excellent recipes for slime exist and are not hard to find.
Glue and PVA also work well.
Another fun slime is made from 5 parts cornstarch to 1-2 parts water, by volume. This one is very slimy, but becomes rigid under abrupt pressure.
From a chemistry teacher's standpoint, even hard-wheat flour (bread flour) is great stuff. Take bread flour, add water, and stir. Watch the lovely gluten threads intermingle as the starch becomes slimy. Add more water for more slime, or keep stirring for more gluten and bounce.
There have been some cool articles on polymers and slimes at Science News and ACS, but that hagfish was news to me. Oooooh!
Kandel's translation of The Cyberiad is one of the best translations I have ever read. I had difficulty trying to figure out what he had put in to translate the humor ("Sampson, shorn, sulks silently...") and the darkness.
Since I read neither Russian nor Polish, I asked my husband to read the Russian, and a friend to read the Polish, and then the English. It was as good a translation as I thought! Hooray!
Kandel also has published work of his own., including In Between Dragons, a fable of the worlds that books create, and Captain Jack Zodiac, one of the best pastiches of both space opera and post-apocalyptic fiction. Sadly, both are out of print.
If you read Lem in English, you owe much of the texture to Kandel. He edited the recent Nebula Awards Showcase 2000 book with Gregory Benford and Michelle Brook. Read as much of Lem as you wish, but remember the translator.
Oh, yeah. That other really good translation. Ann Rice's Interview with a Vampire reads much better in French. If you can snatch up a copy of Entretien avec un Vampire, grab it!
How about The Mechanical Universe? If you missed it the first time around, Real-player clips are available here. If nothing else, look for the early-eighties animation; stay for the fun of it.
Or how about Powers of Ten? (Both the rough sketch, with the cool relativity clock, and the final in color, with SEM photos, instead of drawings, are great.)
For a change, consider Why Man Creates. This thing did win the Academy, and it deserved it. Darned funny, trenchant, moving, and scary.
If you want to go further back, how about all the Bell Science films, including Hemo the Magnificent. Darned patronizing in places, but they got many of us kidniks started in science.
And then there's the film that got away... My husband remembers the one he saw at the University of Wisconsin, Madison in 1978 or 1979. His pupils still dilate as he laughs about the use of student volunteers to model ADP/ATP cycles, complete with CO2 fire extinguishers to show energy being given off. Titles gratefully accepted.
Usage expands to overwhelm available bandwidth, plus 62%.
This reason for a ban already exists at some small colleges.
I did database training for Librarians and IT folk of nearby colleges (not universities) and to a person they despise censorship with the true passion of good librarians. To a person, they had either relegated Napster to the no-hit list, or to the wee hours. The wee hours ban was made total for the two weeks prior to mid-terms and finals.
Not because they wanted to protect the minds of the little students from Napster's corrupting influence, but because other students were unable to do assigned research, thanks to the bandwidth hogging of Napster. Needless to say, the students weren't happy.
I finally suggested that they speak to the students about infrastructure costs. I also suggested that they ask the students to do an economic analysis of napster usage the same way they would do an economic analysis of a polluting industry: in both cases, the entity using or creating the service is not always the one paying the hidden price.
Napster is free only if you do not take into account the infrastructure costs necessary to support Napster. The people benefitting from the service are not the people who made the judgements about placing the infrastructure, nor are they the ones who have to make a *%$(&#$ new budget to add bandwidth to support the service.
I sound like a broken record, but I urge you to look at hidden costs before you tout something as free. TANSTAAFL!
said
Gartner Group analyst Ken McGee
Both articles are dependent on quotes from McGee, and unattributed "other analysts" who disagree.
This looks strongly like a press release for the Gartner Group, rather than actual information from AT&T.
I have a close relative who helps stock analysts improve their performance. In all cases, working on unattributed data gives poor performance.
If McGee is working from known sources within AT&T, either heads will roll, or folks within AT&T are doing a little dance, because their trial balloon has such good publicity.
In either case, it's pretty silly journalism for remarks from one analyst to turn into two breaking-news articles. These would have better been two-paragraph speculative pieces.
While I don't agree with Katz, the idea that Passionate arguments are always
the best for getting to the bottom of things, why else do you think public debates have always been so
popular and successful? is a fallacy. Passion=informed(look at debates on abortion with misinformation on both sides.) popular=worthwhile (WWF Smackdown)
While flamewars are able to show the emotions, often, they do not cover the issues in both an informed and an informative way.
DUMFSK, you say its! instead of Mr. Katz: You don't need an apostrophe when you write "Thus e-mail isn't taken as seriously as flaming, it's
evolution as studied or appreciated. " Mr. Katz, please learn the difference between the possesive its, and the contraction it's.
Flaming can discourage free speech, as even the not-so timid are tired of flamers tracking them down and spewing righteous nonsense.
Yes, I have been informed and amused by flamewars. No, I don't consider them the bastion of freedom - just an illustration of it.
More on the cupidity and gullibility and general strangness of Computer Human Interaction can be found at the Risks Archive. If nothing else, the fifteen-year-old definitions of Horse vs. Virus vs. Worm are interesting.
The ACM forum on risks, the usenet risks forum (comp.risks) and others have been talking about this for years. I always go to the back page of Communications of the ACM for a hair-raising chuckle. Unfortunately, recently the columns have been self-serving ads.
If you haven't recognized that people are the weakest link, where have you been?
It's a bad idea to have
people with clear political ties reviewing a system
under political scrutiny
Representative Armey, of course, has no political ties.
Get real. Above a certain level, everyone has political ties, even if it's only departmental politics.
The big question is the integrity of the reviewers and the review process. So far, there has been nothing I've seen to give me confidence in the simple scientific integrity of the review process. Political ties are a red herring. The big question is whether this is truly an independent review.
This is a time for CS departments to do two things.
Make sure that all students have done an internship with local or regional employers. This gives them a chance to get a sponsoring employer when it is time for green cards/H1B visas.
Have a counselor experienced in INS hoorah. Other/. topics have explored the inequities of the system. Other posts have done a good job of trolling about racism and isolationism.
There is no good way to get a work permit in the US without a sponsoring employer. See the rules on H-1B visas and stuff on becoming a lawful resident.
The major difficulty is that green cards are granted by country. Once your country has used up its number of green cards - you're up a creek. The other major difficulty is that immigration is usually by family status, rather than by educational status or training..
Again, if you want students to have a sponsoring employer after graduation, you must work on outside employment issues at all times after the second term of school.
Push internships.
Push work experience.
And, because employers are funny about accents in anybody who has customer contact, even regional U.S. accents, push practical classes in colloquial English.
The best things in life may be free, but they are no longer freely available, under the law.
Really, the stuff I need is the stuff I already have. I don't need things, I want information - music, literature, art, ideas.
What I want is for the DCMA to be stirred and shaken. Information, the only item which makes the Internet massively useful, is under a horrible moritorium if the DCMA is strictly enforced. My love and I are giving each other presents to the Electronic Frontier Foundation. We want to earmark our money toward education of legislators about the implications of the DCMA.
Lend your mom and e-book? Not legal.
View a DVD on a LINUX box? Not legal.
Review a product with benchmarks? Not legal.
Give negative information about a patented product? Not legal
The things that make life enjoyable will be harder to come by this year and next year unless we work on them.
Don't just give your darlin' a game, or program, or a music CD, or a DVD, or an e-book; give them the right to use it, lend it, borrow it, quote from it, and review it.
The interview covered SUSE, and OSX, but did not cover the most credible alternative now available for english-speaking folk on the Mac, namely Yellow Dog.
We had a dreadful time getting PPC to work on our Mac, but yellow dog runs like a charm.
I am wondering whether the interviewer was being kind, or had only done a portion of their homework.
Even filtering advocates should be appalled at the actual practices of the industry. See peacefire.org for
more analysis of filtering software.
Don't forget the wonderful censorware.org site. This is what we recommend to parents. Peacefire has more of a "how dare they lock me out!" mentality.
Censorware has a "Look what doesn't work to protect your children" mentality.
In either case, my husband and I ended up getting a Sunday editorial spot in our local paper on the school library and censorware issue. (It doesn't carry editorials past day one, so there is no link to place here.) This is a case where the technologically literate need to do a few simple things to fight censorware.
Write letters to the editor of all local papers. Include facts. Hammer on the facts. Hammer on pages that do get banned, and pages that slip through. censorware.org's review of bess contains excellent ammunition.
When discussing censorware with the community, make sure your language and affect are similar to that of a Baptist Sunday School teacher. Show deep concern, explain that these things don't work, express dismay at this abrogation of parental and community responsibility, and do it without frothing at the mouth.
Do not use ad hominem arguments. (What would you expect coming from an ignorant slob like that?) Instead, be the voice of sweet reason and responsibility. Explain the wonders that can no longer be seen. Blocks flesh tones? No more Sistine Chapel Ceiling. Uses keywords? No more Testicular cancer. Uses algorithms? No more information on the Brotherhood of Flagellants. If all else fails, use
Indignation. How dare anyone decide what your child gets to see? Who appointed them the ultimate decider of your child's upbringing? What standards shall be used?
Bring up community standards. Communities are changing so rapidly that the demographic standards obscenity have changed. In many cultures, the pictures of astronauts in shorts at NASA is offensive to modesty. In other cultures, the human body is something to be celebrated. Shall I assume that the female breast is taboo, as in Baptist Illinois, or shall I be like the folk on Pago Pago and forbid the display of female thighs, and the discussion of bodily function between father and son?
Finally, if necessary, in public debate, ask how much time they spend watching TV with children, reading the books their children read, and providing other outlets. Remind the audience that the Internet has never been a substitute for parenting. Remind the audience of the evils of using the public library as a babysitter. If parents do not trust their own children, have them watch their children, rather than forcing us to do it for them.
And
what we're finding is, people are interesting, diverse and peculiar. They are constantly looking for new things
that are of interest to them.
Yep. That's it in a nutshell. I'm interesting, your diverse, and he's peculiar.
Ohhh! He meant that people are attracted to an interesting, diverse, and peculiar mix of web sites. Why didn't he say so?
There's one small problem in the phrasing of the license: "Identical"
This means that if Joe MCSE decides to re-image some OEM boxes, and re-images them in a manner both different from the OEM boxes and the rest of the network boxes, either Joe's company is in license violation, or someone needs to cough up the moola.
This is one case where it's difficult to enforce a license. You have an X seat license for X users. You hire more workers and buy OEM boxes w/Win2K.
You want to give them a newer better configuration with the original software? Too bad. This looks as though the license change is publicised as a customer relations thing, but is actually an enforcibility thing. Show the license, show the number of new OEM boxes, you're fine, as long as they all have the same installation.
I work in an academic situation where we reimage all the time. This license appears to remove one major financial pain, and exchanges it for a finicking pain.
He's covered the free stuff vs. Free speech fairly well, but nobody has discussed the "free of" idea. Most existing media creators would love to be free of a new media that is either competition for their product or a new investment that they would have to make.
This doesn't make them right. It just makes them scared.
This still doesn't make theft right in any way, shape, or form. Because I want it! is a great whine, and a wonderful excuse to say why one would steal what is not available without theft, but it still does not make the theft right.
I'd really like to be free of more of this discussion. If you want to know where that definition of free comes from, read 1984.
Two years ago, I nearly spiked a piece of mail with the heading "I Won!!!!!" I thought it was another piece of &*%^$# spam.
I'm glad I looked at the sender a second time. It was biljon, aka William Johnson, and he had just won the award for best novella. (And we will drink a fish together - darn good story.)
I will only quote a short bit, so he doesn't sue my shirt off.
> They had the main presentation screen, and two huge (20' by 20')
> projection screens so people could see what was going on. They
> announce the nominees for novelette, and I turn to Greg and tell him
> how cool this all is. A portable camera crew is pointing down our
> aisle, and I figure Stephan is down that way.
>
> Connie Willis is announcing (big-time author), I'm just grinning
> because this is so, so cool, and:
>
> SHE ANNOUNCES MY NAME
>
> Greg and Gay still laugh about my expression. I was completely,
> totally, shocked. They were pounding me on my back and congratulating
> me and I could not even remember to breathe. Finally, I stagger to my
> feet and head for the stage. The steps are just a single flight of
> nothing special (six steps? Seven?) and my legs are shaking so hard I
> have to grip both railings.
>
> I get up there, Connie gives me a hug and congratulates me, and turns
> me to the podium to say some words.
It is so cool to see this joy shared with everybody, instead of the folks whose email can be remembered off the top of their heads.
Great Goin, Guy!
Slashdot Mirror
Sometimes, techs would tell me that I could only get credit for a complete outage, not an email outage. Other times, I was told that I could get credit only for an email outage that would last longer than two complete days. In each case, I asked to speak to a supervisor.
It helped to have the documentation on hand, and to list the pings/traceroutes I had done. When they gave me beef about having two nodes up, I mentioned that we had paid for them, and I was calling for email service - not support of the nodes. I explained that we were perfectly capable of supporting two nodes. (We never never never never mention that both machines are dual boot - one is Mac/LinuxPPC, while the other is Windoze/RedHatLinux)
After many times of getting credits, but having to prove myself many times, I finally asked about a credit policy. I explained that I had been given many different answers on when I was eligible for a credit.
To my surprise, I received the following information in my email. First there was a reprint of the service agreement I had signed (a draconian piece of work, but understandable), and then the information that
In other words, there may be secret policies, but they are not official, as far as the customers are concerned. This is important.
The Credit policy appears to be The squeaky wheel gets greased. Do yourself a favor. Document stuff, and then squeak loud and long.
- How long is Digital:Convergence going to last before going into Chapter 11?
- If NeoMedia has also issued Digital:Convergence warrants to purchase 1.4 Million
shares of NeoMedia stock., does that mean that NeoMedia is also worthless?
I don't plan on putting any of my money in either of these stocks, and it doesn't even have anything to do with the intrinsic immorality of these offerings.There is a lot more, and it's all funny. If you don't know who Peter Neumann is, go to his page, and learn about the guy who has been talking about security risks since before you were born, and has been doing it well.
Other Excellent recipes for slime exist and are not hard to find.
There have been some cool articles on polymers and slimes at Science News and ACS, but that hagfish was news to me. Oooooh!
Since I read neither Russian nor Polish, I asked my husband to read the Russian, and a friend to read the Polish, and then the English. It was as good a translation as I thought! Hooray!
Kandel also has published work of his own., including In Between Dragons, a fable of the worlds that books create, and Captain Jack Zodiac, one of the best pastiches of both space opera and post-apocalyptic fiction. Sadly, both are out of print.
If you read Lem in English, you owe much of the texture to Kandel. He edited the recent Nebula Awards Showcase 2000 book with Gregory Benford and Michelle Brook. Read as much of Lem as you wish, but remember the translator.
Oh, yeah. That other really good translation. Ann Rice's Interview with a Vampire reads much better in French. If you can snatch up a copy of Entretien avec un Vampire, grab it!
How about The Mechanical Universe? If you missed it the first time around, Real-player clips are available here. If nothing else, look for the early-eighties animation; stay for the fun of it.
Or how about Powers of Ten? (Both the rough sketch, with the cool relativity clock, and the final in color, with SEM photos, instead of drawings, are great.)
For a change, consider Why Man Creates. This thing did win the Academy, and it deserved it. Darned funny, trenchant, moving, and scary.
If you want to go further back, how about all the Bell Science films, including Hemo the Magnificent. Darned patronizing in places, but they got many of us kidniks started in science.
And then there's the film that got away... My husband remembers the one he saw at the University of Wisconsin, Madison in 1978 or 1979. His pupils still dilate as he laughs about the use of student volunteers to model ADP/ATP cycles, complete with CO2 fire extinguishers to show energy being given off. Titles gratefully accepted.
This reason for a ban already exists at some small colleges.
I did database training for Librarians and IT folk of nearby colleges (not universities) and to a person they despise censorship with the true passion of good librarians. To a person, they had either relegated Napster to the no-hit list, or to the wee hours. The wee hours ban was made total for the two weeks prior to mid-terms and finals.
Not because they wanted to protect the minds of the little students from Napster's corrupting influence, but because other students were unable to do assigned research, thanks to the bandwidth hogging of Napster. Needless to say, the students weren't happy.
I finally suggested that they speak to the students about infrastructure costs. I also suggested that they ask the students to do an economic analysis of napster usage the same way they would do an economic analysis of a polluting industry: in both cases, the entity using or creating the service is not always the one paying the hidden price.
Napster is free only if you do not take into account the infrastructure costs necessary to support Napster. The people benefitting from the service are not the people who made the judgements about placing the infrastructure, nor are they the ones who have to make a *%$(&#$ new budget to add bandwidth to support the service.
I sound like a broken record, but I urge you to look at hidden costs before you tout something as free. TANSTAAFL!
Both articles are dependent on quotes from McGee, and unattributed "other analysts" who disagree.
This looks strongly like a press release for the Gartner Group, rather than actual information from AT&T.
I have a close relative who helps stock analysts improve their performance. In all cases, working on unattributed data gives poor performance.
If McGee is working from known sources within AT&T, either heads will roll, or folks within AT&T are doing a little dance, because their trial balloon has such good publicity.
In either case, it's pretty silly journalism for remarks from one analyst to turn into two breaking-news articles. These would have better been two-paragraph speculative pieces.
While I don't agree with Katz, the idea that Passionate arguments are always the best for getting to the bottom of things, why else do you think public debates have always been so popular and successful? is a fallacy.
Passion=informed(look at debates on abortion with misinformation on both sides.)
popular=worthwhile (WWF Smackdown)
While flamewars are able to show the emotions, often, they do not cover the issues in both an informed and an informative way.
DUMFSK, you say its! instead of
Mr. Katz: You don't need an apostrophe when you write " Thus e-mail isn't taken as seriously as flaming, it's evolution as studied or appreciated. " Mr. Katz, please learn the difference between the possesive its, and the contraction it's.
Flaming can discourage free speech, as even the not-so timid are tired of flamers tracking them down and spewing righteous nonsense.
Yes, I have been informed and amused by flamewars. No, I don't consider them the bastion of freedom - just an illustration of it.
Even Science Friday doesn't do this...
The ACM forum on risks, the usenet risks forum (comp.risks) and others have been talking about this for years. I always go to the back page of Communications of the ACM for a hair-raising chuckle. Unfortunately, recently the columns have been self-serving ads.
If you haven't recognized that people are the weakest link, where have you been?
A way for me to just watch the commercials on the SuperBowl!!
Representative Armey, of course, has no political ties.
Get real. Above a certain level, everyone has political ties, even if it's only departmental politics.
The big question is the integrity of the reviewers and the review process. So far, there has been nothing I've seen to give me confidence in the simple scientific integrity of the review process. Political ties are a red herring. The big question is whether this is truly an independent review.
My sources say No.
- Make sure that all students have done an internship with local or regional employers. This gives them a chance to get a sponsoring employer when it is time for green cards/H1B visas.
- Have a counselor experienced in INS hoorah. Other
/. topics have explored the inequities of the system. Other posts have done a good job of trolling about racism and isolationism.
There is no good way to get a work permit in the US without a sponsoring employer. See the rules on H-1B visas and stuff on becoming a lawful resident.The major difficulty is that green cards are granted by country. Once your country has used up its number of green cards - you're up a creek. The other major difficulty is that immigration is usually by family status, rather than by educational status or training..
Again, if you want students to have a sponsoring employer after graduation, you must work on outside employment issues at all times after the second term of school.
I prefer Chandrasekhar's version, Newton's principia for the common reader. Surprise! It was a Christmas present from my handsome hubby.
We also have a facing pages latin/english version, but it is missing essential publication information.
Really, the stuff I need is the stuff I already have. I don't need things, I want information - music, literature, art, ideas.
What I want is for the DCMA to be stirred and shaken. Information, the only item which makes the Internet massively useful, is under a horrible moritorium if the DCMA is strictly enforced. My love and I are giving each other presents to the Electronic Frontier Foundation. We want to earmark our money toward education of legislators about the implications of the DCMA.
- Lend your mom and e-book? Not legal.
- View a DVD on a LINUX box? Not legal.
- Review a product with benchmarks? Not legal.
- Give negative information about a patented product? Not legal
The things that make life enjoyable will be harder to come by this year and next year unless we work on them.Don't just give your darlin' a game, or program, or a music CD, or a DVD, or an e-book; give them the right to use it, lend it, borrow it, quote from it, and review it.
We had a dreadful time getting PPC to work on our Mac, but yellow dog runs like a charm.
I am wondering whether the interviewer was being kind, or had only done a portion of their homework.
C'mon. Do I really place my One True E-mail as my /. email?
As for the problem of simply banning any word or text string, no matter how innocuous, Alexander Pope had the best word in his Essay on Criticism
I have used this with great effect when combined with the latest follies from automated censorware.
Don't forget the wonderful censorware.org site. This is what we recommend to parents. Peacefire has more of a "how dare they lock me out!" mentality.
Censorware has a "Look what doesn't work to protect your children" mentality.
In either case, my husband and I ended up getting a Sunday editorial spot in our local paper on the school library and censorware issue. (It doesn't carry editorials past day one, so there is no link to place here.) This is a case where the technologically literate need to do a few simple things to fight censorware.
- Write letters to the editor of all local papers. Include facts. Hammer on the facts. Hammer on pages that do get banned, and pages that slip through. censorware.org's review of bess contains excellent ammunition.
- When discussing censorware with the community, make sure your language and affect are similar to that of a Baptist Sunday School teacher. Show deep concern, explain that these things don't work, express dismay at this abrogation of parental and community responsibility, and do it without frothing at the mouth.
- Do not use ad hominem arguments. (What would you expect coming from an ignorant slob like that?) Instead, be the voice of sweet reason and responsibility. Explain the wonders that can no longer be seen. Blocks flesh tones? No more Sistine Chapel Ceiling. Uses keywords? No more Testicular cancer. Uses algorithms? No more information on the Brotherhood of Flagellants. If all else fails, use
- Indignation. How dare anyone decide what your child gets to see? Who appointed them the ultimate decider of your child's upbringing? What standards shall be used?
- Bring up community standards. Communities are changing so rapidly that the demographic standards obscenity have changed. In many cultures, the pictures of astronauts in shorts at NASA is offensive to modesty. In other cultures, the human body is something to be celebrated. Shall I assume that the female breast is taboo, as in Baptist Illinois, or shall I be like the folk on Pago Pago and forbid the display of female thighs, and the discussion of bodily function between father and son?
- Finally, if necessary, in public debate, ask how much time they spend watching TV with children, reading the books their children read, and providing other outlets. Remind the audience that the Internet has never been a substitute for parenting. Remind the audience of the evils of using the public library as a babysitter. If parents do not trust their own children, have them watch their children, rather than forcing us to do it for them.
Laughter is always your best weapon. Use it well.And what we're finding is, people are interesting, diverse and peculiar. They are constantly looking for new things that are of interest to them. Yep. That's it in a nutshell. I'm interesting, your diverse, and he's peculiar. Ohhh! He meant that people are attracted to an interesting, diverse, and peculiar mix of web sites. Why didn't he say so?
This means that if Joe MCSE decides to re-image some OEM boxes, and re-images them in a manner both different from the OEM boxes and the rest of the network boxes, either Joe's company is in license violation, or someone needs to cough up the moola.
This is one case where it's difficult to enforce a license. You have an X seat license for X users. You hire more workers and buy OEM boxes w/Win2K.
You want to give them a newer better configuration with the original software? Too bad. This looks as though the license change is publicised as a customer relations thing, but is actually an enforcibility thing. Show the license, show the number of new OEM boxes, you're fine, as long as they all have the same installation. I work in an academic situation where we reimage all the time. This license appears to remove one major financial pain, and exchanges it for a finicking pain.
This doesn't make them right. It just makes them scared.
This still doesn't make theft right in any way, shape, or form. Because I want it! is a great whine, and a wonderful excuse to say why one would steal what is not available without theft, but it still does not make the theft right.
I'd really like to be free of more of this discussion. If you want to know where that definition of free comes from, read 1984.