I'm pretty clear how the current legal system works, and I am certain you are mistaken about it. Since Feist, the Supreme Court has made clear that uncopyrighted facts and uncopyrighted works are unprotectable by mere sweat of the brow. You can't protect non-trade secret data without copyright. You can't, I can't, and the people who sell scanned copies can't.
Why do you pay them? Because you want them, and you don't have them. That's all there is to it.
That is all well and good, but you did not address the fact that these companies will sue you if you take a file you bought from them and then resell it by undercutting their price. If you want to give a discourse on why the legal system enables them to do this, I am all ears.
But the point I exhibited in my link, is that SCO is willing to just confiscate the work of others. I think this is the proper battlefield. If SCO is willing to steal the IP of others, it explains why they accuse everyone else of doing it too. I did not try to justify the current system. I see problems with the way it is implemented. I also see the hypocrisy in SCO behaviour. If you can see this hypocrisy, there is no need for you to be pedantic about my choice of words.
Nothing I said suggests that I want it both ways. Perhaps you need to reread what I wrote. I am just using the current existing framework as a starting point.
Too many of us have fought too hard for your rights for too long to see you piss it away with ridiculous Jackboot suggestions that the --omigosh are you really suggesting this?????-- use of scanned-in public documents without consent of the scanner is a "misuse?"
Stupid. S-t-u-p-i-d. Stupid policy. The worst argument we could be making. Awful. Dumb. Makes us the hypocrites dumb. Makes us trivially marginalized dumb. Lose the war dumb.
Make the argument, if you like, suggesting that you think it is "misuse" to distribute or redistribute scanned public documents. I will fight you tooth and nail, even if I have to defend the likes of SCO.
I am not pissing anything away. You may think the existing framework is S-t-u-p-i-d but it does exist. I did not attempt to justify the system, I just acknowledge it as a given starting point. There are commercial entities that scan in these documents and sell them. How do they charge for this? The existing framework gives them an ownership interest. If you do not think Groklaw is entitled to that same interest, I suggest you review the way the current legal system works!
You should proudly point out they are beginning to appreciate our virtues, not suggest that they are doing the same thing they accuse us of doing.
That is one way of looking at it. You seem to want to give them credit for decency that I doubt exists. I suggest an alternative explanation exists. Instead of pointing out that they are doing what they accuse us of, I ask if they make up these accusations because their value system accepts this behaviour. I think this is the battlefield that counts. Do they believe it is appropriate to misuse the work of others? The Creative Commons License that Groklaw applies to it's material requires attribution. SCO is using copies without that attribution!
I would recommend taking another minute to sign the Thank You for the previous effort to kill these patents. It requires you to validate your email address to give the petition more weight.
NewEgg may be nice when things go right but when things go wrong they're idiots. I've found that's the case with quite a few companies.
This probably goes for most companies. I bought a new Motherboard, CPU, and memory combination from some bozos I found using Pricewatch. Their ratings seemed good but I had a lousy experience with them. Maybe they are nice when things go right as you suggest. Since things went wrong on my order, I found out they have several web sites for collecting orders. Infinity PC, PC Ontime, and One-Click PC all seem to be the same guys. With bad BBB ratings, they look like crooks hiding behind multiple identities.
After dealing with them, I was glad to go back to NewEgg. I now have a working system again. I had a RMA with NewEgg a few years ago that went very smooth. NewEgg may not be perfect, but believe me when I tell you there are much worse vendors out there!
I cannot speak about the fundamentals of heat issues, but I do remember something Grace Hopper said about working on the farm. She talked about the limits of using bigger and better horses to pull the plow. The obvious solution was to use a team of horses.
She was a lady ahead of her times. Aside from her finding the first true computer bug (which was a Gypsy Moth according to my memory;-) and handing out nanoseconds, she promoted multi-processing. Looks like we are just beginning to understand her wisdom.
Perhaps my personal situation adds a large bias, but it irks me that everyone's bemoaning the lack of qualified professionals. There's nobody with enough linux experience in the workplace, they say. There's not enough people with real experience in embedded systems who want to live in the midwet, they say.
I basically agree with you. I wish I still had the link that analysed the supposed shortage a few years ago. To paraphrase the conclusion, the employers effectively wanted to find a new Lamborghini for under $10K and complained about their inability to find such a deal. With my personal bias, 20+ years programming experience and active OSS development for the last five years, I do not see the shortage of qualified personnel. After my unemployment expired, I have been focused on my BSEE studies so the system does not even register me as available for this so-called shortage.
Maybe companies should focus on training and employee development rather than let a position go unfilled for lack of candidates with 3+ years exp?
These positions do not really go 'unfilled' in the tradional sense. While doing their search, the employer leans on the existing staff to fill in the gaps. For years, I was that underpaid minion who got the job done while 'qualified professionals' came through the revolving door. This is one of the reasons it irks me to see complaints about this so-called shortage. Even with 20+ years experience I rarely get a call although an hour's drive puts me almost anywhere in Los Angeles. I know I limit myself because I have roots in this community. But I suspect there are plenty of professionals like who stay under the radar while they look for that Lamborghini.
Does he not realize that Linux runs on embedded systems.
That seems to be only the tip of the iceberg of where his reasoning falls short. I got a personal reply from him today when I sent a message expressing my concerns. He seems to be one genuinely deluded individual. He acknowledged that Dennis Ritchie response on Groklaw and does not see anything 'incorrect, wrong or invalid' about the way he is presenting the material.
Besides all the email he responded to today, he had time to put forth the garbage being exposed here. He tries to take the high moral ground and talk about 'trust' but it looks more like a hatchet job.
To write Samizdat, I worked with (and quoted) many individuals directly or indirectly familiar with Linux development. AdTI will continue to interview people within the open source profession about open source. It would be skewed and bias to only quote people that are anti-Linux or anti-open source. I have done this for years, and will continue to do so, regardless of what a source thinks of my theories.
It seems like he enjoys playing word games as evidenced by his need to talk about "Hybrid source code" which is a term they invented. His described purpose for writing this book is to suggest a better way for the legal community, the science community, the business community, and government to get along.
If he is sincere in wanting to get along better maybe Slashdot could send him the 10 highest moderated questions.
Let's hypothetically assume that this compromise is the result of a malicious attack by either an immature script-kiddie/cracker or an evil conspiracy from the corporate software world.
How does this change the fact that Debian is just not good enough, and has compromised thousands of machines across the globe?
Interesting logic you use here. First you say Let's hypothetically assume and then you conclude the fact that Debian is just not good enough. I hope this observation is not deemed a screaming denial or hissy fit, but you are way out of line. I have access to a lot more data than I have seen here, but I still recommend people wait before they jump to conclusions. The announcement confirms someone gained access to machines that was inappropriate. If you have more information than that, then you should publish it. Otherwise, I would suggest you shut your trap!
When I tell them I'm unemployed, they hang up or back away quickly, terrified of infection by the job-loss virus.
He hit the nail on the head there. Even though the Do Not Call list is being tied up in the courts, I am regularly answering the phone again. I used to screen all calls through the answering machine, but I find it enjoyable to tell them I am unemployed. They used to call and waste my time, but it seems like they are inflicting it on themselves now.
We both talked for years about trying to lose some weight. As you will have guessed from the preceding paragraph, we're finally doing it.
Wish I had this benefit too! I have been riding the bicycle to most of the classes I am taking with this newfound time. I did lose a few pounds the first semester, but the extra weight I gained last holiday season is still with me.
You should live by your own advice. You wanted me to talk about something I know and I provided specific details. We had plenty of Octanes in the lab too, but there was no need to upgrade my workstation. The simulations ran on the Onyx machines. I have never bought a console machine and have no vested interest in the PS2 or any of it's competitors. The only claim I have made is that the Sony graphics chip had noteworthy performance. You obviously remember the time frame and Sony was releasing specs before their consoles hit the market. We had many water cooler type conversations about what Sony was doing and how this might affect the high end market. As usual, specs about raw performance are one thing and overall system implementation may tell a completely different story.
Since you are just a kid you get a second chance
I hope this magnanimous gesture of yours helps you sleep at night. You do not know me and therefor you should follow your own advice. Perhaps I was too general with the initial post but I have been plenty specific since then. I may be a kid, but it's more likely that you need to grow up.
My apologies if it burst your bubble because I was not specific enough. One person thought a Voodoo chip was being used and the person who started the thread was asking if Sony used their own GPUs. I deliberately referred to the Emotion Engine that way to avoid further confusion in case these guys actually went to the link I provided.
As far as what I know, I was working with an SGI Indigo II High Impact workstation when Sony released their chip. My fellow engineers had quite a few conversations about the raw performance and what we had bought from SGI. Maybe I should be specific and tell you that many of the Nvidia engineers started at SGI?
My BSEE studies enable me to talk at the transistor level if you prefer. Maybe you want to talk about Miller capacitance and compensating for it. Maybe you draw small signal models for everything you work with. I prefer to look at the big picture every now and then. I remembered that link because it showed a systems level view of how the PS2 works it's magic. Super fast chips are a waste if bottlenecks elsewhere in the system starve your application.
I would want to be anonymous too if I were just speculating without engaging the brain. The GPU they use is called the emotion engine. It is quite impressive and the raw performance (in terms like polygons per second;-) has been noteworthy.
The premise is wrong. Looks like neither of you read the explanation.
(For the ptrace bug, a root-shell exploit was available on 17 March 2003, and a working fix was not available on linux-kernel until the following week. Evidence found on the machine indicates that gnuftp was cracked during that week.)
This indicates that a patch was not available yet.
Thanks for the new email address. He probably misses all that spam being returned to him.
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
----- Transcript of session follows ----- 451... rxpoint.com: Name server timeout Message could not be delivered for 5 days Message will be deleted from queue
Unfortunately it's not JUST showing someone you're better, it's "marketing" too. That's pretty hard in the case of Linux, because you can't use the name "Linux" anywhere - it's trademarked by Linus.
Sorry if this seems rude, but it sounds like someone crying 'sour grapes.' Do a little research and you can easily find news group discussions about the profiteer who wanted to charge people to use the name Linux. The parent post is correct about your opportunity to fork a better implementation. It's a good thing my moderation points elapsed. I would have been looking for a crybaby option;-)
the developers tend to listen only to their smartest customers
What's wrong with that? Low signal-to-noise ratio is a fundamental problem everywhere in life. When a customer pays money this buys them attention. If they are not paying money, they should not expect my attention. I may choose to listen to them as a common courtesy but my time is better spent seeking someone I can learn from. If someone is smart, I am more inclined to listen to them.
Looks like I should add another email address to my SPAMMERS list. They like to dish the stuff out but complain when people return it. They are clueless leeches who are abusing the system and it is easy to call their bluff. I got an email after I started forwarding the SPAM QUEEN this junk. Their complaining made much more sense when her mailbox clogged up a few days later and I got the following response:
The original message was received at Sun, 17 Nov 2002 14:00:27 -0500 from root@localhost
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- steve
(reason: can't create (user) output file)
(expanded from: <info@dataresourceconsulting.com>) <laura@datares ourceconsulting.com>
(reason: can't create (user) output file)
----- Transcript of session follows ----- procmail: Lock failure on "/var/spool/mail/steve.lock" procmail: Quota exceeded while writing "/var/spool/mail/steve" 550 5.0.0 steve... Can't create output procmail: Lock failure on "/var/spool/mail/laura.lock" procmail: Quota exceeded while writing "/var/spool/mail/laura" 550 5.0.0 <laura@dataresourceconsulting.com>... Can't create output
I send copies of my spam to uce@ftc.gov anyway so I added Laura@dataresourceconsulting.com to the list. Looks like they dislike this stuff as most people do. Notice this reply I just got: Steve Blom wrote:
> Dear Richard, > > Just so you know, you are not on any of our lists and none of the offers you are forwarding came from us. > > We do not send this kind of typical stuff. The reporter misquoted Laura out of context and sensationalized it. We deal only with legitimate opt in people and lists. > > I have it set so that any further email from you is deleted from the server, with the exception of the above subject line in the message. Please keep in mind that we are not like you are thinking. All email is not the same, and we are not responsible for every email that hits your inbox. > > We are actually behind a national "do not email" list which you can find at http://www.donotemaillist.com/ which will take you off of ALL mailings from many legitimate email marketers, including us. We wash all our mailings against this list. Legitamate marketers do not want to send mail to people who don't want to recieve it. > > This will not stop all the illegal mail, the porn, and the herbal viagra and stuff that you get from the illegal guys but it is something. > > Best regards, > > Steve
I am surprised no one mentioned this one yet. How many of us learned the word grok because of it? The freedom a programmer enjoys can be exhibited by the error messages. I have a vague memory of checking the uid and sending the message What are you doing Rueben? but it may have never made it into the code;-)
The Dryden home page highlights this project. My last contract position was out there. Aside from some management issues (typical incompetent PHBs), there are a lot of smart engineers solving difficult problems there. It has been previously described as a geek playground. I still rank it as the best environment I ever worked in although the culture is slowly changing:(
they killed off shows that you had to think ( gasp ) to enjoy.
I must not be wasting as much time on TV as I thought I was. I enjoyed a few episodes of The Pretender, but I do not recall even hearing about the other show. Of course, I do describe the time as vegetating in front of the tube;-)
Here's a new method. You tape a piece of paper on it that says "You can NOT SEE ME!." When someone ignores the paper, you send your lawyers to sue them.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm pretty clear how the current legal system works, and I am certain you are mistaken about it. Since Feist, the Supreme Court has made clear that uncopyrighted facts and uncopyrighted works are unprotectable by mere sweat of the brow. You can't protect non-trade secret data without copyright. You can't, I can't, and the people who sell scanned copies can't.
Why do you pay them? Because you want them, and you don't have them. That's all there is to it.
That is all well and good, but you did not address the fact that these companies will sue you if you take a file you bought from them and then resell it by undercutting their price. If you want to give a discourse on why the legal system enables them to do this, I am all ears.
But the point I exhibited in my link, is that SCO is willing to just confiscate the work of others. I think this is the proper battlefield. If SCO is willing to steal the IP of others, it explains why they accuse everyone else of doing it too. I did not try to justify the current system. I see problems with the way it is implemented. I also see the hypocrisy in SCO behaviour. If you can see this hypocrisy, there is no need for you to be pedantic about my choice of words.
Nothing I said suggests that I want it both ways. Perhaps you need to reread what I wrote. I am just using the current existing framework as a starting point.
Too many of us have fought too hard for your rights for too long to see you piss it away with ridiculous Jackboot suggestions that the --omigosh are you really suggesting this?????-- use of scanned-in public documents without consent of the scanner is a "misuse?"
Stupid. S-t-u-p-i-d. Stupid policy. The worst argument we could be making. Awful. Dumb. Makes us the hypocrites dumb. Makes us trivially marginalized dumb. Lose the war dumb.
Make the argument, if you like, suggesting that you think it is "misuse" to distribute or redistribute scanned public documents. I will fight you tooth and nail, even if I have to defend the likes of SCO.
I am not pissing anything away. You may think the existing framework is S-t-u-p-i-d but it does exist. I did not attempt to justify the system, I just acknowledge it as a given starting point. There are commercial entities that scan in these documents and sell them. How do they charge for this? The existing framework gives them an ownership interest. If you do not think Groklaw is entitled to that same interest, I suggest you review the way the current legal system works!
That is one way of looking at it. You seem to want to give them credit for decency that I doubt exists. I suggest an alternative explanation exists. Instead of pointing out that they are doing what they accuse us of, I ask if they make up these accusations because their value system accepts this behaviour. I think this is the battlefield that counts. Do they believe it is appropriate to misuse the work of others? The Creative Commons License that Groklaw applies to it's material requires attribution. SCO is using copies without that attribution!
I would recommend taking another minute to sign the Thank You for the previous effort to kill these patents. It requires you to validate your email address to give the petition more weight.
This probably goes for most companies. I bought a new Motherboard, CPU, and memory combination from some bozos I found using Pricewatch. Their ratings seemed good but I had a lousy experience with them. Maybe they are nice when things go right as you suggest. Since things went wrong on my order, I found out they have several web sites for collecting orders. Infinity PC, PC Ontime, and One-Click PC all seem to be the same guys. With bad BBB ratings, they look like crooks hiding behind multiple identities.
After dealing with them, I was glad to go back to NewEgg. I now have a working system again. I had a RMA with NewEgg a few years ago that went very smooth. NewEgg may not be perfect, but believe me when I tell you there are much worse vendors out there!
She was a lady ahead of her times. Aside from her finding the first true computer bug (which was a Gypsy Moth according to my memory ;-) and handing out nanoseconds, she promoted multi-processing. Looks like we are just beginning to understand her wisdom.
I basically agree with you. I wish I still had the link that analysed the supposed shortage a few years ago. To paraphrase the conclusion, the employers effectively wanted to find a new Lamborghini for under $10K and complained about their inability to find such a deal. With my personal bias, 20+ years programming experience and active OSS development for the last five years, I do not see the shortage of qualified personnel. After my unemployment expired, I have been focused on my BSEE studies so the system does not even register me as available for this so-called shortage.
Maybe companies should focus on training and employee development rather than let a position go unfilled for lack of candidates with 3+ years exp?
These positions do not really go 'unfilled' in the tradional sense. While doing their search, the employer leans on the existing staff to fill in the gaps. For years, I was that underpaid minion who got the job done while 'qualified professionals' came through the revolving door. This is one of the reasons it irks me to see complaints about this so-called shortage. Even with 20+ years experience I rarely get a call although an hour's drive puts me almost anywhere in Los Angeles. I know I limit myself because I have roots in this community. But I suspect there are plenty of professionals like who stay under the radar while they look for that Lamborghini.
That seems to be only the tip of the iceberg of where his reasoning falls short. I got a personal reply from him today when I sent a message expressing my concerns. He seems to be one genuinely deluded individual. He acknowledged that Dennis Ritchie response on Groklaw and does not see anything 'incorrect, wrong or invalid' about the way he is presenting the material.
Besides all the email he responded to today, he had time to put forth the garbage being exposed here. He tries to take the high moral ground and talk about 'trust' but it looks more like a hatchet job.
To write Samizdat, I worked with (and quoted) many individuals directly or indirectly familiar with Linux development. AdTI will continue to interview people within the open source profession about open source. It would be skewed and bias to only quote people that are anti-Linux or anti-open source. I have done this for years, and will continue to do so, regardless of what a source thinks of my theories.
It seems like he enjoys playing word games as evidenced by his need to talk about "Hybrid source code" which is a term they invented. His described purpose for writing this book is to suggest a better way for the legal community, the science community, the business community, and government to get along.
If he is sincere in wanting to get along better maybe Slashdot could send him the 10 highest moderated questions.
How does this change the fact that Debian is just not good enough, and has compromised thousands of machines across the globe?
Interesting logic you use here. First you say Let's hypothetically assume and then you conclude the fact that Debian is just not good enough. I hope this observation is not deemed a screaming denial or hissy fit, but you are way out of line. I have access to a lot more data than I have seen here, but I still recommend people wait before they jump to conclusions. The announcement confirms someone gained access to machines that was inappropriate. If you have more information than that, then you should publish it. Otherwise, I would suggest you shut your trap!
He hit the nail on the head there. Even though the Do Not Call list is being tied up in the courts, I am regularly answering the phone again. I used to screen all calls through the answering machine, but I find it enjoyable to tell them I am unemployed. They used to call and waste my time, but it seems like they are inflicting it on themselves now.
We both talked for years about trying to lose some weight. As you will have guessed from the preceding paragraph, we're finally doing it.
Wish I had this benefit too! I have been riding the bicycle to most of the classes I am taking with this newfound time. I did lose a few pounds the first semester, but the extra weight I gained last holiday season is still with me.
The obvious conclusion: If you make something idiot-proof, a better idiot will come along.
You should live by your own advice. You wanted me to talk about something I know and I provided specific details. We had plenty of Octanes in the lab too, but there was no need to upgrade my workstation. The simulations ran on the Onyx machines. I have never bought a console machine and have no vested interest in the PS2 or any of it's competitors. The only claim I have made is that the Sony graphics chip had noteworthy performance. You obviously remember the time frame and Sony was releasing specs before their consoles hit the market. We had many water cooler type conversations about what Sony was doing and how this might affect the high end market. As usual, specs about raw performance are one thing and overall system implementation may tell a completely different story.
Since you are just a kid you get a second chance
I hope this magnanimous gesture of yours helps you sleep at night. You do not know me and therefor you should follow your own advice. Perhaps I was too general with the initial post but I have been plenty specific since then. I may be a kid, but it's more likely that you need to grow up.
As far as what I know , I was working with an SGI Indigo II High Impact workstation when Sony released their chip. My fellow engineers had quite a few conversations about the raw performance and what we had bought from SGI. Maybe I should be specific and tell you that many of the Nvidia engineers started at SGI?
My BSEE studies enable me to talk at the transistor level if you prefer. Maybe you want to talk about Miller capacitance and compensating for it. Maybe you draw small signal models for everything you work with. I prefer to look at the big picture every now and then. I remembered that link because it showed a systems level view of how the PS2 works it's magic. Super fast chips are a waste if bottlenecks elsewhere in the system starve your application.
Good lord, any other comments ;-)
I would want to be anonymous too if I were just speculating without engaging the brain. The GPU they use is called the emotion engine. It is quite impressive and the raw performance (in terms like polygons per second ;-) has been noteworthy.
The premise is wrong. Looks like neither of you read the explanation.
(For the ptrace bug, a root-shell exploit was available on 17 March 2003, and a working fix was not available on linux-kernel until the following week. Evidence found on the machine indicates that gnuftp was cracked during that week.)
This indicates that a patch was not available yet.
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
----- Transcript of session follows -----
451
Message could not be delivered for 5 days
Message will be deleted from queue
T'is even better to just not be a fool!
Sorry if this seems rude, but it sounds like someone crying 'sour grapes.' Do a little research and you can easily find news group discussions about the profiteer who wanted to charge people to use the name Linux. The parent post is correct about your opportunity to fork a better implementation. It's a good thing my moderation points elapsed. I would have been looking for a crybaby option ;-)
What's wrong with that? Low signal-to-noise ratio is a fundamental problem everywhere in life. When a customer pays money this buys them attention. If they are not paying money, they should not expect my attention. I may choose to listen to them as a common courtesy but my time is better spent seeking someone I can learn from. If someone is smart, I am more inclined to listen to them.
Looks like I should add another email address to my SPAMMERS list. They like to dish the stuff out but complain when people return it. They are clueless leeches who are abusing the system and it is easy to call their bluff. I got an email after I started forwarding the SPAM QUEEN this junk. Their complaining made much more sense when her mailbox clogged up a few days later and I got the following response:
s ourceconsulting.com>
The original message was received at Sun, 17 Nov 2002 14:00:27 -0500
from root@localhost
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
steve
(reason: can't create (user) output file)
(expanded from: <info@dataresourceconsulting.com>)
<laura@datare
(reason: can't create (user) output file)
----- Transcript of session follows -----
procmail: Lock failure on "/var/spool/mail/steve.lock"
procmail: Quota exceeded while writing "/var/spool/mail/steve"
550 5.0.0 steve... Can't create output
procmail: Lock failure on "/var/spool/mail/laura.lock"
procmail: Quota exceeded while writing "/var/spool/mail/laura"
550 5.0.0 <laura@dataresourceconsulting.com>... Can't create output
I send copies of my spam to uce@ftc.gov anyway so I added Laura@dataresourceconsulting.com to the list. Looks like they dislike this stuff as most people do. Notice this reply I just got:
Steve Blom wrote:
> Dear Richard,
>
> Just so you know, you are not on any of our lists and none of the offers you are forwarding came from us.
>
> We do not send this kind of typical stuff. The reporter misquoted Laura out of context and sensationalized it. We deal only with legitimate opt in people and lists.
>
> I have it set so that any further email from you is deleted from the server, with the exception of the above subject line in the message. Please keep in mind that we are not like you are thinking. All email is not the same, and we are not responsible for every email that hits your inbox.
>
> We are actually behind a national "do not email" list which you can find at http://www.donotemaillist.com/ which will take you off of ALL mailings from many legitimate email marketers, including us. We wash all our mailings against this list. Legitamate marketers do not want to send mail to people who don't want to recieve it.
>
> This will not stop all the illegal mail, the porn, and the herbal viagra and stuff that you get from the illegal guys but it is something.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Steve
I am surprised no one mentioned this one yet. How many of us learned the word grok because of it? The freedom a programmer enjoys can be exhibited by the error messages. I have a vague memory of checking the uid and sending the message What are you doing Rueben? but it may have never made it into the code ;-)
The Dryden home page highlights this project. My last contract position was out there. Aside from some management issues (typical incompetent PHBs), there are a lot of smart engineers solving difficult problems there. It has been previously described as a geek playground. I still rank it as the best environment I ever worked in although the culture is slowly changing :(
I must not be wasting as much time on TV as I thought I was. I enjoyed a few episodes of The Pretender, but I do not recall even hearing about the other show. Of course, I do describe the time as vegetating in front of the tube ;-)
Here's a new method. You tape a piece of paper on it that says "You can NOT SEE ME!." When someone ignores the paper, you send your lawyers to sue them.