I'm sorry, but any pseudoscientific theory of physics that omits Time Cube is one bound to fail peer review at the Journal of Irreproducible Results. Please, slashdot editors! Do your due diligence for once!
And I don't mean a PC inside an updated Apple II enclosure. I think he would be the perfect person to design and sell a new computer targeting the home electronics hobbyist. Something very slow, like ~25Mhz, that could allow one to wire-wrap a daughterboard and just plug it in. Like people used to do in the '70s.
I can confirm this. Apple had no idea I had BCC:d the Consumerist until was published. Then the assistant called me to say he would have preferred I had not included Mr. Jobs' email address. It was a somewhat awkward conversation. Mostly because I realized that what I had done in BCC:ing the Consumerist had no effect on the resolution and will instead cause an unnecessary headache for Apple.
Look, I'm just a customer. I had a problem with a company and got pissed. So I tried to make a stink. But before the stinkbomb went off, the company quickly resolved my problem. And then the Consumerist published the story. I suppose I shouldn't blame the Consumerist, they're just doing their job as journalists.
Actually, he never responded to me at all. I never spoke with him, or had any communication with him at all. I didn't need to. The guy who contacted me called and worked out a resolution over the phone. He was courteous and professional. He just fixed the problem. He did say, however, that Mr. Jobs received the email and asked him to contact me to resolve the complaint.
Apple Corporate is 3000 miles away from me. I have no idea what really went down. *shrug*
Bryon doesn't work for Apple, he's a Ph.D at Utah University (I think - or is he an M.D.?). Whatever. Anyway, he's an oldtime/.er and we've chatted here on and off for years. Nice guy.
As for using my position at MIT for leverage... was that appropriate? Probably not. Did it have an impact on Mr. Jobs' decision to help me? I don't know. Possibly. However, over at the Consumerist, several others have reported doing the same thing when they have serious problems and getting a quick resolution in response. Also here in this Slashdot discussion. My *belief* is, based on those anecdotal reports, that Mr Jobs really does care about customer good will. But I can't "prove" that.
I asked about that. BWJones apparently had no impact on the issue at all. He may well know people at Apple, but the guy who helped me had no idea who Bryon is. Not that I'm ungrateful for his help.
And that Apple II really does work! It's the real thing, you even have to enter the monitor prom and enter the boot loader manually.
I will say that I was never much of a Macintosh customer during the whole MacOS System days. But I did have a NeXTStation on my desk a decade and a half back. And boy was that computer great. That NeXT box was the reason I dumped Linux and bought a Mac when OS X 10.2 got good.
I really wish I hadn't BCC:d the Consumerist now. That was a mistake. I did it because I was angry and didn't expect any kind of resolution from Apple Corporate. I really didn't believe that even if Jobs read his email he would take action to resolve the issue. And now the whole shebang is posted to slashdot. Along with his email address. What a mess.
My situation was extreme. I do NOT recommend emailing Mr. Jobs until fully exhausting the Apple support chain. If you have a problem, ask for a supervisor. If the supervisor can't fix it, ask for "customer relations". Call your local Apple store before sending that email (I did). And finally, after a month of hell, if all else fails, well... do a google search and find his current email address.
But please don't waste the dude's time. I would have the same opinion regardless of the CEO or company.
That long running disaster you speak of is already here. I *want* good public schools. Unfortunately, I can't expect that from my government, regardless of which party is in charge.
Yeah. I've been to Europe a few times (different countries), experienced public health care there, and seen the public University system there. Both are excellent. I can't speak for European grammar schooling, having never experienced it, but if it's anything like the other public institutions, it is probably well run.
Speaking to health care, it is absolutely true that public systems do control spending by rationing services. But, OTOH, so does my HMO. Which is the better service? Well, contrast total health care spending in the US to population, get a 'per capita health care dollar' and compare that to any publicly financed health care system. The Europeans are eating our lunch. It's so much more effective per dollar that it is us -- we USians -- who are uncompetitive per service rendered.
This does not mean that I am a typical political liberal. I am socially very liberal, but on economics I would call myself a democratic moderate. Balance the budget, figure out what you need, what you want, and what you can afford... an make the tough choices. Right now, parliamentary systems appear to be handling that job a good deal better than our constitutional republic.
The traditional family with one wage-earner and one stay-at-home person is not that common any more. Now it's 2 wage earners, or 1 wage earner and an empty seat. Fix that, and maybe you can increase home-schooling.
A href="http://www.yourmoneyoryourlife.org">Your Money or Your Life
However, even if the map creator was home-schooled, it wouldn't have helped. The parents of his friends called authorities.
School district police investigated the report and questioned the student at school and then visited his home. The student's parents gave police permission to search the 12th-grader's room and computer. Simpson said police determined no criminal charges were warranted but that disciplinary action was.
So, police and the local DA decided no crime was committed and did not file criminal charges. Looks like police and the local DA chose NOT to file charges, probably because no crime was committed.
Yup. But sometimes a little pain today prevents metastasis tomorrow. Though at this point, we're so fucked it's like end stage cancer. Might as well just put the US into hospice care.
Yank your kids from public school. Homeschool or send them to a private school of your choice. If enough people do this the whole public education system would collapse and implode. Then we can figure out how to best spend those property tax revenues.
Normally, I would oppose such a suggestion. Were the US run like typical European democratic-socialists the schools would probably be responsibly managed. But with one political party fighting to destroy public education, and the other party in the pocket of the public school bureaucracy, there's no voice left for the kids being ruined by these bullshit political non-events.
I honestly think government can do a good job of providing basic public services. But right now, the US government cannot. At least not until the leaders of our political parties come to some basic consensus on the role of government. Until then, it will be one crazy situation after another as they duke it out. All while citizens and their kids get fucked by the very public institutions that were ostensibly created for their benefit.
Long-term users of mobile phones are significantly more likely to develop a certain type of brain tumour on the side of the head where they hold their handsets, according to new research.
Mobile phone use linked to tumours The results seem to suggest health risks in people who have regularly used mobiles for over 10 years
A large-scale study found that those who had regularly used mobiles for longer than 10 years were almost 40 per cent more likely to develop nervous system tumours called gliomas near to where they hold their phones.
The new research, to be published later this year in the International Journal of Cancer, is the second study to suggest increased risks of specific types of brain tumours in regions close to where mobile phone emissions enter the head.
I have to say, as one of the folks who got a question put to Mr. Harrison that he didn't answer squat. But - I must say - the PS3 is an amazing HD player. I absolutely love watching movies with the thing. OTOH: I also have a 360, and the games are on the 360 at the moment.
Yes. You're absolutely right. And I noticed that a few hours after posting my reply to you and then replied to someone else in this thread to that effect. Here's the link:
I misread the prior posters' comment. He stated that the firings were NOT rare, whereas I read that they WERE rare (I missed the not). If that was you, apologies.
IIRC, Clinton fired every US Attorney save one, who was conducting a criminal investigation into Democrats (so he did not fire to avoid impropriety). Bush I, I believe, kept many US Attorneys on from Reagan. Reagan fired all the US Attorneys from the Carter administration, though he did take a year or so to fire and then confirm every replacement.
"Rare"? I don't think so. It's standard practice to revolve Executive staff during administration turnover. I've already posted this link, but I'll do so again:
Reagan replaced 89 of the 93 U.S. attorneys in his first two years in office. President Clinton had 89 new U.S. attorneys in his first two years, and President Bush had 88 new U.S. attorneys in his first two years.
In a similar vein, the Justice Department recently supplied Congress with a district-by-district listing of U.S. attorneys who served prior to the Bush administration.
The list shows that in 1981, Reagan's first year in office, 71 of 93 districts had new U.S. attorneys. In 1993, Clinton's first year, 80 of 93 districts had new U.S. attorneys.
[...]
Tom Heffelfinger, a former U.S. attorney from Minnesota who served under Bush -- as well as in the elder Bush's administration -- said a White House move to fire a large number of U.S. attorneys was quite different from replacing the appointees of a previous administration.
"In my opinion, it is not comparable," said Heffelfinger, a Republican who resigned voluntarily from his Justice Department post last year.
"When you have a transition between presidents -- especially presidents of different parties -- a U.S. attorney anticipates that you will be replaced in due course. But the unwritten, No. 1 rule at [the Justice Department] is that once you become a U.S. attorney you have to leave politics at the door," he said.
Yes, absolutely. "Serve at the pleasure of the President" is correct.
And it's absolutely correct that why these US Attorneys were fired is still unknown. Because the Bush Administration appears to have used secondary communications channels and deleted communication specifically to avoid his legal responsibilities to collect and archive Presidential records related to Executive activities.
IF those US Attorneys were fired to either promote a partisan prosecution or to stifle a partisan prosecution, then that is a also a clear (though different) violation of the Hatch Act as well. This appears to be document destruction for obstruction of justice, which suggests further criminal activity hidden in the documents.
And you can't see a circumstance in the course of someone's normal duties where it might be difficult for them to figure out whether something is partisan, OR official? Or where it might be both?
To be honest, I'm not an attorney. However, there's a good seventy years of case law to provide precedent for Executive officials....If people are using the gwb43 domain to send email because of the Hatch act, then they're guilty of violating the hatch act...
Just to be clear, firing a US Attorney is not illegal. As the President says: "They are hired at the pleasure of the President." and he's right. The real issue is why they were fired. That is currently unknown, as much of the documentary evidence related to the purge has been illegally deleted. Further, White House staffers knowingly used secondary communications mechanisms (clearly forbidden in the Hatch Act) to conduct Executive business on Federal time, presumably in order to avoid investigation (obstruct justice).
Now, IF the White House fired those US Attorneys for partisan political reasons -- such as to force political prosecutions -- THEN that is yet another felony. And that appears to be exactly what happened, and why.
You did not read the actual words (or the FAQ) of the Hatch Act, did you?
No. The President may NOT engage in partisan politics while on Federal property. The President may NOT use Federal property, or time while on the job, to engage in partisan communications or activities. Further, there is a long list of Federal Agencies which MAY NOT EVER engage in partisan political activities, such as the Justice Department, benched judges, blah blah blah. The FAQ I linked to in my parent post has the full list.
To engage in these political activities while on the job is illegal. To destroy documentary evidence of such is also illegal, both due to it being Obstruction of Justice, and also a violation of the Hatch Act to preserve Federal records.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry, but any pseudoscientific theory of physics that omits Time Cube is one bound to fail peer review at the Journal of Irreproducible Results. Please, slashdot editors! Do your due diligence for once!
And I don't mean a PC inside an updated Apple II enclosure. I think he would be the perfect person to design and sell a new computer targeting the home electronics hobbyist. Something very slow, like ~25Mhz, that could allow one to wire-wrap a daughterboard and just plug it in. Like people used to do in the '70s.
Strictly for fun.
I can confirm this. Apple had no idea I had BCC:d the Consumerist until was published. Then the assistant called me to say he would have preferred I had not included Mr. Jobs' email address. It was a somewhat awkward conversation. Mostly because I realized that what I had done in BCC:ing the Consumerist had no effect on the resolution and will instead cause an unnecessary headache for Apple.
Look, I'm just a customer. I had a problem with a company and got pissed. So I tried to make a stink. But before the stinkbomb went off, the company quickly resolved my problem. And then the Consumerist published the story. I suppose I shouldn't blame the Consumerist, they're just doing their job as journalists.
*sigh*
Wish I'd gotten you on the phone rather than the CSR's who did answer. :)
Actually, he never responded to me at all. I never spoke with him, or had any communication with him at all. I didn't need to. The guy who contacted me called and worked out a resolution over the phone. He was courteous and professional. He just fixed the problem. He did say, however, that Mr. Jobs received the email and asked him to contact me to resolve the complaint.
Apple Corporate is 3000 miles away from me. I have no idea what really went down. *shrug*
Bryon doesn't work for Apple, he's a Ph.D at Utah University (I think - or is he an M.D.?). Whatever. Anyway, he's an oldtime /.er and we've chatted here on and off for years. Nice guy.
As for using my position at MIT for leverage... was that appropriate? Probably not. Did it have an impact on Mr. Jobs' decision to help me? I don't know. Possibly. However, over at the Consumerist, several others have reported doing the same thing when they have serious problems and getting a quick resolution in response. Also here in this Slashdot discussion. My *belief* is, based on those anecdotal reports, that Mr Jobs really does care about customer good will. But I can't "prove" that.
*shrug*
I asked about that. BWJones apparently had no impact on the issue at all. He may well know people at Apple, but the guy who helped me had no idea who Bryon is. Not that I'm ungrateful for his help.
And that Apple II really does work! It's the real thing, you even have to enter the monitor prom and enter the boot loader manually.
I will say that I was never much of a Macintosh customer during the whole MacOS System days. But I did have a NeXTStation on my desk a decade and a half back. And boy was that computer great. That NeXT box was the reason I dumped Linux and bought a Mac when OS X 10.2 got good.
I really wish I hadn't BCC:d the Consumerist now. That was a mistake. I did it because I was angry and didn't expect any kind of resolution from Apple Corporate. I really didn't believe that even if Jobs read his email he would take action to resolve the issue. And now the whole shebang is posted to slashdot. Along with his email address. What a mess.
My situation was extreme. I do NOT recommend emailing Mr. Jobs until fully exhausting the Apple support chain. If you have a problem, ask for a supervisor. If the supervisor can't fix it, ask for "customer relations". Call your local Apple store before sending that email (I did). And finally, after a month of hell, if all else fails, well... do a google search and find his current email address.
But please don't waste the dude's time. I would have the same opinion regardless of the CEO or company.
Oh yeah. Like that'll help. Every violent revolution has had but one outcome: lots of civilian death. It's a *terrible* idea.
We still have a constitutional republic. Use it.
That long running disaster you speak of is already here. I *want* good public schools. Unfortunately, I can't expect that from my government, regardless of which party is in charge.
Yeah. I've been to Europe a few times (different countries), experienced public health care there, and seen the public University system there. Both are excellent. I can't speak for European grammar schooling, having never experienced it, but if it's anything like the other public institutions, it is probably well run.
Speaking to health care, it is absolutely true that public systems do control spending by rationing services. But, OTOH, so does my HMO. Which is the better service? Well, contrast total health care spending in the US to population, get a 'per capita health care dollar' and compare that to any publicly financed health care system. The Europeans are eating our lunch. It's so much more effective per dollar that it is us -- we USians -- who are uncompetitive per service rendered.
This does not mean that I am a typical political liberal. I am socially very liberal, but on economics I would call myself a democratic moderate. Balance the budget, figure out what you need, what you want, and what you can afford... an make the tough choices. Right now, parliamentary systems appear to be handling that job a good deal better than our constitutional republic.
A href="http://www.yourmoneyoryourlife.org">Your Money or Your Life
However, even if the map creator was home-schooled, it wouldn't have helped. The parents of his friends called authorities.
TFA is horribly
So, police and the local DA decided no crime was committed and did not file criminal charges. Looks like police and the local DA chose NOT to file charges, probably because no crime was committed.
Yup. But sometimes a little pain today prevents metastasis tomorrow. Though at this point, we're so fucked it's like end stage cancer. Might as well just put the US into hospice care.
Yank your kids from public school. Homeschool or send them to a private school of your choice. If enough people do this the whole public education system would collapse and implode. Then we can figure out how to best spend those property tax revenues.
Normally, I would oppose such a suggestion. Were the US run like typical European democratic-socialists the schools would probably be responsibly managed. But with one political party fighting to destroy public education, and the other party in the pocket of the public school bureaucracy, there's no voice left for the kids being ruined by these bullshit political non-events.
I honestly think government can do a good job of providing basic public services. But right now, the US government cannot. At least not until the leaders of our political parties come to some basic consensus on the role of government. Until then, it will be one crazy situation after another as they duke it out. All while citizens and their kids get fucked by the very public institutions that were ostensibly created for their benefit.
That's just the fake wood paneling causing too much air friction. Rip that stuff out and you'll get 0.10000100 Gbps, no prob.
I have to say, as one of the folks who got a question put to Mr. Harrison that he didn't answer squat. But - I must say - the PS3 is an amazing HD player. I absolutely love watching movies with the thing. OTOH: I also have a 360, and the games are on the 360 at the moment.
*shrug*
Yes. You're absolutely right. And I noticed that a few hours after posting my reply to you and then replied to someone else in this thread to that effect. Here's the link:
7 10677
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=230577&cid=18
Apologies for the error.
I misread the prior posters' comment. He stated that the firings were NOT rare, whereas I read that they WERE rare (I missed the not). If that was you, apologies.
IIRC, Clinton fired every US Attorney save one, who was conducting a criminal investigation into Democrats (so he did not fire to avoid impropriety). Bush I, I believe, kept many US Attorneys on from Reagan. Reagan fired all the US Attorneys from the Carter administration, though he did take a year or so to fire and then confirm every replacement.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la
Yes, absolutely. "Serve at the pleasure of the President" is correct.
And it's absolutely correct that why these US Attorneys were fired is still unknown. Because the Bush Administration appears to have used secondary communications channels and deleted communication specifically to avoid his legal responsibilities to collect and archive Presidential records related to Executive activities.
IF those US Attorneys were fired to either promote a partisan prosecution or to stifle a partisan prosecution, then that is a also a clear (though different) violation of the Hatch Act as well. This appears to be document destruction for obstruction of justice, which suggests further criminal activity hidden in the documents.
Felonies all around...
And you can't see a circumstance in the course of someone's normal duties where it might be difficult for them to figure out whether something is partisan, OR official? Or where it might be both?
...If people are using the gwb43 domain to send email because of the Hatch act, then they're guilty of violating the hatch act...
To be honest, I'm not an attorney. However, there's a good seventy years of case law to provide precedent for Executive officials.
Yup. Agreed. (sadly)
Heh.
Just to be clear, firing a US Attorney is not illegal. As the President says: "They are hired at the pleasure of the President." and he's right. The real issue is why they were fired. That is currently unknown, as much of the documentary evidence related to the purge has been illegally deleted. Further, White House staffers knowingly used secondary communications mechanisms (clearly forbidden in the Hatch Act) to conduct Executive business on Federal time, presumably in order to avoid investigation (obstruct justice).
Now, IF the White House fired those US Attorneys for partisan political reasons -- such as to force political prosecutions -- THEN that is yet another felony. And that appears to be exactly what happened, and why.
You did not read the actual words (or the FAQ) of the Hatch Act, did you?
No. The President may NOT engage in partisan politics while on Federal property. The President may NOT use Federal property, or time while on the job, to engage in partisan communications or activities. Further, there is a long list of Federal Agencies which MAY NOT EVER engage in partisan political activities, such as the Justice Department, benched judges, blah blah blah. The FAQ I linked to in my parent post has the full list.
To engage in these political activities while on the job is illegal. To destroy documentary evidence of such is also illegal, both due to it being Obstruction of Justice, and also a violation of the Hatch Act to preserve Federal records.