Since the OLPC is running a FOSS OS core, and Intel is part of the OLPC now, I guess this leaves Windows out in the cold.
Not that I mind that or anything, but I find it interesting - after all, Intel and MSFT had teamed up to build the OLPC former competitor, yes?
As for AMD, I suspect that they and Intel will have to put their differences aside (w/o all the sniping commentary from AMD over a charity team-up announcement, at least as shown on the CNET version of TFA... man, that was just tacky).
Software isn't like Cable TV, Phone, or similar home services. After all, I don't put my personal data into any of those, and I certainly don't use them to store my own files.
Really? You don't communicate sensitive personal information over the telephone?
Perhaps I should clarify a bit: The phone conversation and/or service doesn't store the personal data spoken into the phone. Given the ephemeral nature of a phone call, and the fact that personal info given out over the course of my call isn't being stored anywhere by the phone vendor (barring wiretaps and other extreme cases), it isn't like Software at all. I also know exactly who gets that information (be it an individual or a corporation), because like the majority of the human race, I don't buy anything from telemarketers. A thin client OTOH means that all of my files and the data they contain will most likely get stored on someone else's hard drives.
If I (or the phone company) shut off the phone service, I've lost nothing save the ability to place a phone call with that vendor, and they have nothing sensitive of my data aside from common billing information. If a thin client relationship ends (by me or them), the vendor has all of my data, and I've lost the ability to use any of it which hasn't been backed up locally. Coupled with proprietary formats and lock-in measures, even with local copies of said data I may not be able to access them at all.
Big diff between choosing a phone company or a TV content provider, and choosing an "Application Service Provider"... only one of these has the ability to really hose-up my life through either malice or neglect.
If you think that's cool, wait'll you see how fast malware can spread without all those long-haul router and network hindrances, on client machines that are (by then) operating 24/7.
It's enough to make the likes of Symantec turn white and faint from exhaustion in trying to keep up.
These are similar to what killed the whole idea back when MSFT first touted it.
Software isn't like Cable TV, Phone, or similar home services. After all, I don't put my personal data into any of those, and I certainly don't use them to store my own files. If Joe Sixpack misses the 'rent' on his thin client, he's screwed... hard. Even if his files were stored locally, he'd have a very hard time opening media files which can only be opened by the thin client (yes, I can see MSFT --or someone else-- doing that very easily to produce a literal lock-in).
A thin client would certainly free up the average user from routine tasks... but what if the user prefers to use, say IrfanView for managing and viewing his/her image files, instead of whatever the vendor has provided (prolly the MS default image viewer)? I sincerely doubt that the vendor is going to let said user simply install whatever he/she wants, since it would become a logistical nightmare to support on the back end.
There's still too much room for abuse... on all sides. It removes consumer choice from the equation entirely, unless consumers can organize en masse and simply shift to a friendlier provider. Boycotts of that size, especially with personal data and files at stake, will be infinitely harder to organize and execute. Even regular ones today are tough enough to pull off.
Technically, I think it's damned fine. VM's for corporate users saves a ton of cash in hardware. OTOH, those corporations aren't as willing to trust their secrets and business on VM servers that they don't own. Users have very similar reasons.
Don't get me wrong, I can see it happening on some levels... but I just don't see any mass shift towards it (what... you think Joe Sixpack wants his vendor to keep his tax records --or conversely, his pr0n collection-- and not have them within immediate and total control?)
"Software as a Service" died back in 2000... why does MSFT keep insisting on bringing it back up?
Sure, the growth of virtualization might make some aspects more palatable, but others (like, you know, "control") are simply not going to be ameliorated by repackaging.
It's almost like MSFT has been on a re-run kick lately... Software-as-Service, Tablets (okay, "tables" now), etc...
It would be damned interesting to see MSFT come up with a new idea that folks actually like, instead of chasing others' successes (e.g. with xbox and Zune and IE, to varying degrees of success), or trying to rehash their failed ones.
While we don't have any vials handy full of Martian dust, can't at least some of this be within the parameters of Spirit and Opportunity? They have the cameras, (IIRC) rudimentary chemical analysis equipment, and likely enough instrumentation to get us at least some of the data we need as per size, quantity... the rest can be extrapolated fairly easily, save for the biological potentials (at least in that the question "are there germs in there?" probably won't be answered immediately...)
IIRC, the Mars rovers were originally (at least in concept, before budgetary reality set in) designed to drag back a sample or two. Why not build a mission that, you know, does what the original plans intended them to do in that regard? If nothing else, get up something with better instrumentation; Viking 1 and 2 were supposed to have the tools to answer nearly all of the questions, though they had been found to be flawed in many respects and hampered by things which today's tech has a better chance of overcoming.
Dunno... just sounds too easy to dismiss in light of all the ungodly extrapolation that we are capable of from mere astronomy, let alone what we can bring to bear with instruments on the ground there right now.
...and here I thought it was just the ashes of all those kittens Apple cremates daily, after using them to make sacrifice to Steve Jobs. They have to hide the remains somewhere (that pile is getting awfully big back behind the Cupertino offices...) What better place to stash kitten ash than in consumer products that seem to be flying off the shelves. It is also well known that kitten ash is a vital component in making sure that LCD screens shine brighter while reducing battery draw. How, you ask? Well, since all kittens are innocent, and their cute little souls remain attached to their earthly remains for some time, the cremated kitten tends to glow quite a bit when in the presence of an electrical field, due to electromagnetic reaction against the lingering kitten soul.
It's cheaper than the standard backlighting, easier on your battery, environmentally friendly, and is super quiet (except for the occasional barely-discernible "mew!" at startup). Now if it weren't for all those damned moralists out there, I could have one of those 25" LCD's that're augmented by kitten ash that the State Department refuses to import! Sure, color calibration is a bitch (cats are somewhat color-blind), but once it's all set up, you get a peaceful soft glow that is very easy on the wattage.
(seriously though - I think it's prolly the battery contents, which could be reacting with either a metal or some other subtstance in the iPhone's makeup.).
(...and yes, I own and use a Mac @ home).
(...and yes, I have two cats living @ home with me. Whether they fear me or I fear them - I leave up to you to decide).
I know you were shooting for funny, but --IIRC-- his big thing was using the power of the mind (through ESP) to modify objects w/o directly touching or manipulating them, not prophesy or prediction.
I thought he (and ESP) pretty much dwindled in popularity to Art Bell's Show* and maybe a few paranormal conventions here and there.
* before anyone screams, yes I know Mr. Bell has recently retired (again) and no I'm not bagging on it - AAMOF I fall asleep to it once in awhile... call it a guilty pleasure.
But there comes a point, I think, where you have to stop reciting the old excuses.
Agreed, if we weren't speaking of historical context. Back then, to Joe Sixpack, the alternatives (yes, including Linux) were far less desirable. Now that Windows is entrenched, it has to be dislodged before Linux can get anywhere. For the desktop, Ubuntu is kicking arse, but it still has some polish needed, more interoperability with what's out there, and it has that Windows entrenchment thing to overcome.
Where the street price for the Windows OS is the same as the price for a "fully loaded" Linux distro and Windows remains the OS of choice - it is not a Troll to ask "Why?"
Nope - not a troll at all, though the reasons why are familiar enough with a little thought: familiarity, entrenchment... not exactly something that really required deep thinking. The heavy thinking lies in how to change those two factors.
How much you help others is directly under your control. Also, don't pretent things don't go wrong on Linux, because they do.
Prolly a troll, but I'll bite...
Notice I said "more time" up there, not "all the time".;)
More likely, it will mean more profit for your employer.
True enough, but then the barrier to entry for this biz raises up from "point-n-click-paper-tiger-with-an-MCSE" to "someone who actually has somewhat of a operating clue". Think 'incidental', not 'direct'.
This isn't 1998 anymore, you can stop with the "my computer is crashing everyday" crap.
If you don't have to reboot your Windows servers at least once a month, you aren't applying patches in anything approaching a timely manner. If anything goes wrong with it and you have to do more than superficial changes, you get to reboot it (and in previous incarnations, even slight network changes required a kick-over). The corp Windows XP machines reboot (on average) once a week from patches, both internal and external (which I have no control over, so kindly point the finger elsewhere in that case).
Notice how I never mentioned BSOD's, or anysuch. Those, while less frequent than 1998, still occur on occasion - but they are mere dressing to the assertion.
watching Symantec go Chapter 11 would be delicious
You realize the first viruses and worms exploited Unix right? What makes you think Linux is any more or less immune?
Yep - but have you seen any lately that can spread beyond a dozen discrete machines at most, let alone seen one running in the wild?
Symantec didn't make their wad of dough off of preventing *nix malware, did they?
Actually, considering real-world results? Linux as an OS, while not (or ever) perfectly immune, is by appearance and proof far more immune to malware than Windows overall.
Who says they aren't? For $400 I can get a Windows server, Sql Server, Exchange Server + Outlook licenses, ISA, and Sharepoint. That's not a bad deal at all. I can get the same functionality for a grand total of $0.00 in licensing and software fees - and I get more uptime and better efficiency out of the deal, and no forced upgrades or recurring fees on the software side. Setting either solution up costs about the same.
That said, price actually isn't what I was getting at - MSFT is ignoring their customer base by way of increasing bloat and wasted cycles, as well as charging a mountain of cash for very little improvement with Windows' new iteration (that being Vista). I won't have to even mention MSFT treating their own customer base like default criminals: WGA, DRM, PlaysForSure...
A clumsy delivery, but there is one valid question in there.
As for why I care (dunno ab't the oth3r guy)? Well...
it means spending more time on the phone with relatives and friends talking about stuff that doesn't involve the phrase: "Oh, hey, while you're here, can you help me? my computer has been acting up lately..."
at work, less money shoveled at MSFT licensing and other useless costs means more cash that can be put towards my salary.
less downtime @ work too.
watching Symantec go Chapter 11 would be delicious
seeing MSFT actually pay attention to the average and small customers again would be pretty cool
Just a short list; I'm sure others can happily add to it.
I do think its unfair that they get a "cost of living adjustment" for software and medicine, yet we have to compete for techie jobs on our own cost of living. They get the best of both worlds.
So, what does the average Chinese working type pay in taxes to support those 'adjustments'? Cost of living is also relative... I could, for instance, work remotely from, say, Mississippi, and probably (not certainly - probably) enjoy a lower cost of living than some guy living in downtown Beijing.
Not refuting your statement entirely, but IMHO it seems too simple, and there are other factors that seem to be missing which may mitigate your complaint somewhat.
* Umm, what anti-piracy measures? Any fool could (and did) copy MSDOS and Windows 3.x onto a handful of floppies, with all the skill that it takes to use the xcopy command.
* Back then, Linux was about as friendly to the average user as a dominatrix on a meth jag; this had more to do with hardware drivers (or rather, lack thereof) than anything else.
* The other x86 GUI-based alternatives for the typical home user were... OS/2 (insert sarcastic mention of how developers 'loved' writing for it), Geos (well, if you used a Commodore), and, umm... not much else, unless you wanted to lay down some serious dough and buy a Macintosh.
Ease of copying coupled with an interface that really didn't require much in the way of brainpower was what gave Windows its boost.
True, but to some otherwise crime-free and record-less nutjob whose goal is to scream "Allahu Akhbar!" right before he and his rented truck goes 'splodey?
Really, how many people can identify a car's year just at a glance?
A year or two apart? Prolly not. But, say, a 2004 Jeep Wrangler TJ vs. a 1994 Jeep Wrangler YJ vs. a 1984 Jeep CJ-7? Sure, they're all Jeeps, they have pretty much the same wheelbase, rough shape, size, etc, but it's still pretty easy to tell 'em apart.
You laid out a very well-reasoned argument. I actually agree with a lot of it.
That said, there is a precedent from which we can (at least partially) check to see if it is actually effective at its stated goals... does anyone know of (non-propagandized to either pro/con) stats to see how effective these critters are at reducing crime in London?
I sincerely hope that somebody in NYC at least looked, and not just plopped out this pronouncement as some sort of public exclamation that "we're doing something about it!"
Otherwise, if they turn out to not be effective (or not enough to justify the expense), then the benefits side of the balance ends up just that much lighter, no?
The CCTV's could be construed as such (and man that's an ugly thought...)
BUT - from the looks of things, the license plate readers are there as a check to see if the drivers had paid their little extra tax for the privilege of putting along on the streets of Manhattan.
I almost expected to see it hit this side of the Atlantic sometime, but I'm still kind of surprised; figured that the CCTV's were another 10 years off.
Only time will tell if it actually does anything to increase general safety or not (does anyone have any crime stats showing the diff before/after CCTV in London, BTW?)
I hope you never apply for any sysadmin position anywhere, until/unless you lose that kind of attitude.
Quick question? Would anyone seriously go into an interview and say those things? Everyone has dark secrets or disturbing beliefs.
...and HR departments are pretty good at Googling, hunting down previous employers, etc. While at lower levels it prolly won't be anywhere as extensive, at higher levels it can get pretty deep. My last position was with a DoD contractor - that included a full Single-Scope Background Investigation. They had almost my entire Internet posting history and their analysis of what they considered to be the interesting bits and bobs of it - stuff I had long forgotten, and much of it posted when I had thought myself completely anonymized (Deja News/Google Groups and Archive dot Org prolly helped 'em greatly - these were in my younger, slightly more mischievous days).
Granted that such things are special cases, but corporations are getting more and more curious about one's past, and as one rises up the ladder, they like to dig deeper.
Deep down. You've thought horrible things too. Things you can't believe that crossed your mind.
Lots of sick and evil things have crossed my mind. I can also admit that I did a dumb thing or two when I started in this biz. That said, I also know full well that when it comes to my clientèle and customers, some things are sacrosanct - including the safeguarding of their privacy, and maintaining discretion.
Turning customer machines into some sort of personal Pirate Bay is well outside the realm of "a moment of human weakness". FFS, it's like comparing a 5mph-over-the-limit speeder on the freeway to a drunk driver out on a bender.:/
tftp is common in many embedded devices... during development, it's where the test OS images come from. During production, it's often how updated images and patches can be called from the computer (or in the iPhone's case, downloaded). the early days of Familiar Linux (which ran on an iPaq) used PPP simulated over a serial line to shovel image files to the PDA.
It can be usefu on its ownl, but to be really useful, you use it to call down a modified image which has a more versatile shell (ash comes to mind, and I know that has a BSD and prolly a Darwin port...)
Last time I checked it (ab't 2005 or so), it was damned impressive with running the mainline MSFT apps. I even managed to get it to run a Win32 port of DAZ|Studio on top of SuSE 8.something (DAZ|Studio is a 3D/CG compositing and rendering app that I was part of at the time). Now doing that was kind of pushing it (then again, D|S used standard Linux-loving stuff such as OpenGL and Qt), but you can get Crossover Office to do the job easily enough.
Slashdot Mirror
Since the OLPC is running a FOSS OS core, and Intel is part of the OLPC now, I guess this leaves Windows out in the cold.
Not that I mind that or anything, but I find it interesting - after all, Intel and MSFT had teamed up to build the OLPC former competitor, yes?
As for AMD, I suspect that they and Intel will have to put their differences aside (w/o all the sniping commentary from AMD over a charity team-up announcement, at least as shown on the CNET version of TFA... man, that was just tacky).
Really? You don't communicate sensitive personal information over the telephone?
Perhaps I should clarify a bit: The phone conversation and/or service doesn't store the personal data spoken into the phone. Given the ephemeral nature of a phone call, and the fact that personal info given out over the course of my call isn't being stored anywhere by the phone vendor (barring wiretaps and other extreme cases), it isn't like Software at all. I also know exactly who gets that information (be it an individual or a corporation), because like the majority of the human race, I don't buy anything from telemarketers. A thin client OTOH means that all of my files and the data they contain will most likely get stored on someone else's hard drives.
If I (or the phone company) shut off the phone service, I've lost nothing save the ability to place a phone call with that vendor, and they have nothing sensitive of my data aside from common billing information. If a thin client relationship ends (by me or them), the vendor has all of my data, and I've lost the ability to use any of it which hasn't been backed up locally. Coupled with proprietary formats and lock-in measures, even with local copies of said data I may not be able to access them at all.
Big diff between choosing a phone company or a TV content provider, and choosing an "Application Service Provider"... only one of these has the ability to really hose-up my life through either malice or neglect.
It's enough to make the likes of Symantec turn white and faint from exhaustion in trying to keep up.
Software isn't like Cable TV, Phone, or similar home services. After all, I don't put my personal data into any of those, and I certainly don't use them to store my own files. If Joe Sixpack misses the 'rent' on his thin client, he's screwed... hard. Even if his files were stored locally, he'd have a very hard time opening media files which can only be opened by the thin client (yes, I can see MSFT --or someone else-- doing that very easily to produce a literal lock-in).
A thin client would certainly free up the average user from routine tasks... but what if the user prefers to use, say IrfanView for managing and viewing his/her image files, instead of whatever the vendor has provided (prolly the MS default image viewer)? I sincerely doubt that the vendor is going to let said user simply install whatever he/she wants, since it would become a logistical nightmare to support on the back end.
There's still too much room for abuse... on all sides. It removes consumer choice from the equation entirely, unless consumers can organize en masse and simply shift to a friendlier provider. Boycotts of that size, especially with personal data and files at stake, will be infinitely harder to organize and execute. Even regular ones today are tough enough to pull off.
Technically, I think it's damned fine. VM's for corporate users saves a ton of cash in hardware. OTOH, those corporations aren't as willing to trust their secrets and business on VM servers that they don't own. Users have very similar reasons.
Don't get me wrong, I can see it happening on some levels... but I just don't see any mass shift towards it (what... you think Joe Sixpack wants his vendor to keep his tax records --or conversely, his pr0n collection-- and not have them within immediate and total control?)
Sure, the growth of virtualization might make some aspects more palatable, but others (like, you know, "control") are simply not going to be ameliorated by repackaging.
It's almost like MSFT has been on a re-run kick lately... Software-as-Service, Tablets (okay, "tables" now), etc...
It would be damned interesting to see MSFT come up with a new idea that folks actually like, instead of chasing others' successes (e.g. with xbox and Zune and IE, to varying degrees of success), or trying to rehash their failed ones.
IIRC, the Mars rovers were originally (at least in concept, before budgetary reality set in) designed to drag back a sample or two. Why not build a mission that, you know, does what the original plans intended them to do in that regard? If nothing else, get up something with better instrumentation; Viking 1 and 2 were supposed to have the tools to answer nearly all of the questions, though they had been found to be flawed in many respects and hampered by things which today's tech has a better chance of overcoming.
Dunno... just sounds too easy to dismiss in light of all the ungodly extrapolation that we are capable of from mere astronomy, let alone what we can bring to bear with instruments on the ground there right now.
It's cheaper than the standard backlighting, easier on your battery, environmentally friendly, and is super quiet (except for the occasional barely-discernible "mew!" at startup). Now if it weren't for all those damned moralists out there, I could have one of those 25" LCD's that're augmented by kitten ash that the State Department refuses to import! Sure, color calibration is a bitch (cats are somewhat color-blind), but once it's all set up, you get a peaceful soft glow that is very easy on the wattage.
(seriously though - I think it's prolly the battery contents, which could be reacting with either a metal or some other subtstance in the iPhone's makeup.).
(...and yes, I own and use a Mac @ home).
(...and yes, I have two cats living @ home with me. Whether they fear me or I fear them - I leave up to you to decide).
I thought he (and ESP) pretty much dwindled in popularity to Art Bell's Show* and maybe a few paranormal conventions here and there.
* before anyone screams, yes I know Mr. Bell has recently retired (again) and no I'm not bagging on it - AAMOF I fall asleep to it once in awhile... call it a guilty pleasure.
Agreed, if we weren't speaking of historical context. Back then, to Joe Sixpack, the alternatives (yes, including Linux) were far less desirable. Now that Windows is entrenched, it has to be dislodged before Linux can get anywhere. For the desktop, Ubuntu is kicking arse, but it still has some polish needed, more interoperability with what's out there, and it has that Windows entrenchment thing to overcome.
Where the street price for the Windows OS is the same as the price for a "fully loaded" Linux distro and Windows remains the OS of choice - it is not a Troll to ask "Why?"
Nope - not a troll at all, though the reasons why are familiar enough with a little thought: familiarity, entrenchment... not exactly something that really required deep thinking. The heavy thinking lies in how to change those two factors.
Prolly a troll, but I'll bite...
Notice I said "more time" up there, not "all the time". ;)
More likely, it will mean more profit for your employer.True enough, but then the barrier to entry for this biz raises up from "point-n-click-paper-tiger-with-an-MCSE" to "someone who actually has somewhat of a operating clue". Think 'incidental', not 'direct'.
This isn't 1998 anymore, you can stop with the "my computer is crashing everyday" crap.If you don't have to reboot your Windows servers at least once a month, you aren't applying patches in anything approaching a timely manner. If anything goes wrong with it and you have to do more than superficial changes, you get to reboot it (and in previous incarnations, even slight network changes required a kick-over). The corp Windows XP machines reboot (on average) once a week from patches, both internal and external (which I have no control over, so kindly point the finger elsewhere in that case).
Notice how I never mentioned BSOD's, or anysuch. Those, while less frequent than 1998, still occur on occasion - but they are mere dressing to the assertion.
watching Symantec go Chapter 11 would be deliciousYou realize the first viruses and worms exploited Unix right? What makes you think Linux is any more or less immune?
- Yep - but have you seen any lately that can spread beyond a dozen discrete machines at most, let alone seen one running in the wild?
- Symantec didn't make their wad of dough off of preventing *nix malware, did they?
- Actually, considering real-world results? Linux as an OS, while not (or ever) perfectly immune, is by appearance and proof far more immune to malware than Windows overall.
Who says they aren't? For $400 I can get a Windows server, Sql Server, Exchange Server + Outlook licenses, ISA, and Sharepoint. That's not a bad deal at all. I can get the same functionality for a grand total of $0.00 in licensing and software fees - and I get more uptime and better efficiency out of the deal, and no forced upgrades or recurring fees on the software side. Setting either solution up costs about the same.That said, price actually isn't what I was getting at - MSFT is ignoring their customer base by way of increasing bloat and wasted cycles, as well as charging a mountain of cash for very little improvement with Windows' new iteration (that being Vista). I won't have to even mention MSFT treating their own customer base like default criminals: WGA, DRM, PlaysForSure...
As for why I care (dunno ab't the oth3r guy)? Well...
Just a short list; I'm sure others can happily add to it.
HTH,
So, what does the average Chinese working type pay in taxes to support those 'adjustments'? Cost of living is also relative... I could, for instance, work remotely from, say, Mississippi, and probably (not certainly - probably) enjoy a lower cost of living than some guy living in downtown Beijing.
Not refuting your statement entirely, but IMHO it seems too simple, and there are other factors that seem to be missing which may mitigate your complaint somewhat.
* Back then, Linux was about as friendly to the average user as a dominatrix on a meth jag; this had more to do with hardware drivers (or rather, lack thereof) than anything else.
* The other x86 GUI-based alternatives for the typical home user were... OS/2 (insert sarcastic mention of how developers 'loved' writing for it), Geos (well, if you used a Commodore), and, umm... not much else, unless you wanted to lay down some serious dough and buy a Macintosh.
Ease of copying coupled with an interface that really didn't require much in the way of brainpower was what gave Windows its boost.
A year or two apart? Prolly not. But, say, a 2004 Jeep Wrangler TJ vs. a 1994 Jeep Wrangler YJ vs. a 1984 Jeep CJ-7? Sure, they're all Jeeps, they have pretty much the same wheelbase, rough shape, size, etc, but it's still pretty easy to tell 'em apart.
That said, there is a precedent from which we can (at least partially) check to see if it is actually effective at its stated goals... does anyone know of (non-propagandized to either pro/con) stats to see how effective these critters are at reducing crime in London?
I sincerely hope that somebody in NYC at least looked, and not just plopped out this pronouncement as some sort of public exclamation that "we're doing something about it!"
Otherwise, if they turn out to not be effective (or not enough to justify the expense), then the benefits side of the balance ends up just that much lighter, no?
BUT - from the looks of things, the license plate readers are there as a check to see if the drivers had paid their little extra tax for the privilege of putting along on the streets of Manhattan.
I almost expected to see it hit this side of the Atlantic sometime, but I'm still kind of surprised; figured that the CCTV's were another 10 years off.
Only time will tell if it actually does anything to increase general safety or not (does anyone have any crime stats showing the diff before/after CCTV in London, BTW?)
They may not... but someone as big as Qwest just might ;)
Quick question? Would anyone seriously go into an interview and say those things? Everyone has dark secrets or disturbing beliefs.
Granted that such things are special cases, but corporations are getting more and more curious about one's past, and as one rises up the ladder, they like to dig deeper.
Deep down. You've thought horrible things too. Things you can't believe that crossed your mind.Lots of sick and evil things have crossed my mind. I can also admit that I did a dumb thing or two when I started in this biz. That said, I also know full well that when it comes to my clientèle and customers, some things are sacrosanct - including the safeguarding of their privacy, and maintaining discretion.
Turning customer machines into some sort of personal Pirate Bay is well outside the realm of "a moment of human weakness". FFS, it's like comparing a 5mph-over-the-limit speeder on the freeway to a drunk driver out on a bender. :/
It can be usefu on its ownl, but to be really useful, you use it to call down a modified image which has a more versatile shell (ash comes to mind, and I know that has a BSD and prolly a Darwin port...)
As usual, YMMV.