No, it's not retribution. That would imply getting or demanding something back from the scammers. It may not technically be justice either, but...
From Dictionary.com: Retribution - n. 1.) Something justly (emphasis mine) deserved; recompense. 2.) Something given or demanded in repayment, especially punishment
Quote: Perhaps you should go back to crunching numbers in Lotus 123, reading email with Eudora, browsing the web with Netscape Communicator, and composing documents with WordPerfect, since this time they have all won and have the competition beat.
Your argument might have a little merit if any of those apps were developed by Microsoft. Actually, isn't Microsoft the reason all of those apps were unseated, basically forcing the software companies into ruin or pursuing different industries all together?
Just playing devil's advocate... While I'd love to see MS have any of their apps unseated by a superior and more robust version from a different company, history doesn't bode well for it.
On Showtime, almost this exact situation was the premise for the show "Odyssey 5". Of course some large space entity came to the shuttle and sent them back in time 5 years to figure out what caused the destruction of Earth.
But who's to say it couldn't happen that way?
Anywho, I think the show was canceled after a year, since the plot was always too convoluted and they kept losing track of their real mission objective.
I found it interesting that some outfit called 'Swords and Sorcery Studios' has partnered with Blizzard to put out the Dungeons & Dragons WarCraft RPG too. I'm sure there's a couple of geeks who still get off on spinning 20 sided dice for kicks.
Story is here. NOTE: This is NOT a computer game, its the same D&D we all had a crack at/obsessed over in our teens. Although a video game version would be pretty cool to see in the future.
Hmm... Spears included?
on
Web Zeitgeist
·
· Score: 4, Funny
I would have shlopped Britney in there with the sex searches... There's no way she's number 4 without the slashdot crowd's celebrity nude searches.
"It seems like every biz nowadays is trying to blame some new innovation for loss in profits this quarter intead of realizing that ITS A DEPRESSION (slight though..)"
Technically it's a recession. A depression is what happened in the late 1920's- early 30's, when there looked like there was no hope in sight, and we had wide spread 'deflation'. A recession is a normal turn of the business cycle... I don't think little Bush would have gotten his GOP congress if we were in an actual depression.
Hopefully this won't have a negative affect on another online Pet store: Drs. Foster and Smith's Pet Warehouse. Their website being "www.petwarehouse.com" and this buffoon's being "www.petswarehouse.com".
In my experience, they are a very reliable source for all kinds of supplies, and it would be a shame for people to associate their site with this litigation crazy moron.
This is what happens when marketing is the sole reason for a company's existence. They just get more and more 'creative' in their quest for dollars, with no substance, i.e. anything innovative, to back it up.
After all, history has shown us that this never works, right? Right.........
Oh wait, no they didn't. That was the ISP who had the attrocious ad interface at the bottom of the screen, and claimed 56/53K dialup speeds when it was more like 2400 baud.
The problem with this "free" crap is that there IS NO feasible implementation. The only fluke that made it was network television, but even its becoming so ad-saturated and full of bullshit programming that TV watchers are turning their attention to shows they pay to watch (Sopranos, etc.)
"FOX cable news (one example) has been one of the worst (IMHO). I recently removed all cable news from my TV tuner but for CNN...
I can't stand Fox News, in my opinion they embody all that is wrong with the media today. Every story has a political slant... each "reporter" is just a shock-jock of the talking head circuit. They think by making every story (whether news worthy or not) sensationalistic, that they are fulfilling their jobs as media outlets for the public. And sensationalizing wasn't thrown out the door for the events of Sept. 11th either.
As I remember, they were the first to show stock footage of Palestinians chanting in the streets and burning American flags. I say 'stock' to mean it occured in the early nineties. Most people (including myself) took this as live footage... which just added fuel to the fire.
I could go on and on about Fox, but the real problem lies elsewhere... the target demographic for Shepard Smith, Neil Cavuto, John Gibson, etc. is the same audience that watches soaps and Fox's "When Animals Attack Over and Over and Over Again".
But the truly pathetic problem with this is that, while it might offer a significant deterrent against DoS and other malicious attacks, the fact that Congress is even considering a bill like this, and still haven't introduced something along the same lines for huge Corporate thieving and shananagans, is utterly asenine.
Look at it this way, hacking usually is malicious toward large corporate entities, unless it has to do with stealing personal info such as credit cards, S/N's and the like (which falls under identity theft, and should be getting its own life sentence IMHO soon). These big corporations can easily absorb most attacks (i.e. write off fictitious losses to capital losses, and have the hit go to the stock holders).
But on the other hand, the recent rash (or at least the sudden disclosure) of many corporate scandals basically leaves the stock holders and employees feeling the loss. The actual perpetrators never feel the same loss as someone who no longer has a retirement fund to speak of. So the worst punishment these thieves can receive is some vacation at a minimum security country club. But they have ruined MANY peoples whole lives, yet they have never faced the threat of true consequences.
Now to keep from being completely off topic: So congress has a bill pushed through that will enable hackers to receive a life sentence for their malicious acts. But all that we've heard about cracking down on corporate crime is some fluff regarding the SEC and accounting procedures, and much of the same from George W's podium. (But wait, what was that Harken Energy thingy?)
Seems quite ironic to me considering that the "great economic expansion" of the 90's was just a load of crap ontop of inflated profits. So let's go after those real criminals, Mr. Ashcroft! You just point your finger and we'll tap their phones and ISP to see what kind of mischief they're really getting into.
After all, they never do anything good, do they Yahoo?
From what I gathered from your post, you are actually taking over at a district level, which is good as far as making decisions, but poor for implementing them. I've actually been a School Technology Coordinator at a school here in KY for 2 years now, and I've experienced some of the problems you are encountering.
Most of these problems are handled (at least on paper) at a State level. So implementing the policies at the local level was/is not as difficult as it might be in your situation. So you need to ask these questions:
1.) Where does the funding for your technology equipment and maintenance come from? If its from the State, as in KY, they will already have some firm guidelines, that you can easily start implementing. If teachers and administrators start to balk, you can just politely refer them to such documentation. The problem could have arisen if the actual state-wide policies were not even glanced at by your predecessors, so I'm sure a call to the state Dept. of Education would bring up some type of support for you to start making changes.
2.) How will you implement such changes? These have basically been covered repeatedly in previous posts, but a strictly http proxy server is a huge start. You (your district) should have complete control over this type of function, especially since filtering obscene material in public schools is one of the few places where its really important.
If going the state route doesn't yield any results, I'm sure bringing this to the attention of district administrators would easily raise their eyebrows. An effective approach would be listing possible "dangers" that students could easily encounter on the internet without some sort of central control. Most school board members are rather conservative, and would err on the side of giving your technology department more control rather than less.
While none of what I said adresses the huge problem of bandwidth hogging, the actual effects of such policy changes give ample room to filter for "band-width appropriate" material.
Because every yahoo with some "family values" agenda to push will be demanding filtering and God knows what else on these "public" pipes.
VERY good point. I was humming along here thinking that subsidized systems were actually starting to make sense when I read this. I can't believe I didn't think of the impact that religious and moral fanatics would have on such a public "property". Censorship would run rampant, municipal governments would bow to religious lobbyists, and skies would fall.
But seriously, this would probably be the least debated issue with starting these types of municipal run bandwidth backbones, yet would end up being the most influential part of the users' access to the Internet/Intranet/etc. So it looks like taking the slow road with private enterprise is still the only option for the spread of Broadband.
Slashdot Mirror
Duhh... what other zeitgeist could they be referring to?
No, it's not retribution. That would imply getting or demanding something back from the scammers. It may not technically be justice either, but...
From Dictionary.com:
Retribution - n.
1.) Something justly (emphasis mine) deserved; recompense.
2.) Something given or demanded in repayment, especially punishment
Quote: Perhaps you should go back to crunching numbers in Lotus 123, reading email with Eudora, browsing the web with Netscape Communicator, and composing documents with WordPerfect, since this time they have all won and have the competition beat.
Your argument might have a little merit if any of those apps were developed by Microsoft. Actually, isn't Microsoft the reason all of those apps were unseated, basically forcing the software companies into ruin or pursuing different industries all together?
Just playing devil's advocate... While I'd love to see MS have any of their apps unseated by a superior and more robust version from a different company, history doesn't bode well for it.
On Showtime, almost this exact situation was the premise for the show "Odyssey 5". Of course some large space entity came to the shuttle and sent them back in time 5 years to figure out what caused the destruction of Earth.
But who's to say it couldn't happen that way?
Anywho, I think the show was canceled after a year, since the plot was always too convoluted and they kept losing track of their real mission objective.
Be sure to take the space out of the word 'technology' if you just cut and paste the link. Its a lot funnier if you do.
I found it interesting that some outfit called 'Swords and Sorcery Studios' has partnered with Blizzard to put out the Dungeons & Dragons WarCraft RPG too. I'm sure there's a couple of geeks who still get off on spinning 20 sided dice for kicks.
Story is here. NOTE: This is NOT a computer game, its the same D&D we all had a crack at/obsessed over in our teens. Although a video game version would be pretty cool to see in the future.
I would have shlopped Britney in there with the sex searches... There's no way she's number 4 without the slashdot crowd's celebrity nude searches.
"It seems like every biz nowadays is trying to blame some new innovation for loss in profits this quarter intead of realizing that ITS A DEPRESSION (slight though..)"
Technically it's a recession. A depression is what happened in the late 1920's- early 30's, when there looked like there was no hope in sight, and we had wide spread 'deflation'. A recession is a normal turn of the business cycle... I don't think little Bush would have gotten his GOP congress if we were in an actual depression.
Ok, NOW mod me Off-Topic...
Hopefully this won't have a negative affect on another online Pet store: Drs. Foster and Smith's Pet Warehouse. Their website being "www.petwarehouse.com" and this buffoon's being "www.petswarehouse.com".
In my experience, they are a very reliable source for all kinds of supplies, and it would be a shame for people to associate their site with this litigation crazy moron.
This is what happens when marketing is the sole reason for a company's existence. They just get more and more 'creative' in their quest for dollars, with no substance, i.e. anything innovative, to back it up.
After all, history has shown us that this never works, right? Right.........
Most people with proficiency in Linux hopefully aren't dumb enough to use AOL.
Most people with proficiency in AOL have no idea what Linux is.
Oh wait, no they didn't. That was the ISP who had the attrocious ad interface at the bottom of the screen, and claimed 56/53K dialup speeds when it was more like 2400 baud.
The problem with this "free" crap is that there IS NO feasible implementation. The only fluke that made it was network television, but even its becoming so ad-saturated and full of bullshit programming that TV watchers are turning their attention to shows they pay to watch (Sopranos, etc.)
advertising revenue = supplemental revenue
"FOX cable news (one example) has been one of the worst (IMHO). I recently removed all cable news from my TV tuner but for CNN...
I can't stand Fox News, in my opinion they embody all that is wrong with the media today. Every story has a political slant... each "reporter" is just a shock-jock of the talking head circuit. They think by making every story (whether news worthy or not) sensationalistic, that they are fulfilling their jobs as media outlets for the public. And sensationalizing wasn't thrown out the door for the events of Sept. 11th either.
As I remember, they were the first to show stock footage of Palestinians chanting in the streets and burning American flags. I say 'stock' to mean it occured in the early nineties. Most people (including myself) took this as live footage... which just added fuel to the fire.
I could go on and on about Fox, but the real problem lies elsewhere... the target demographic for Shepard Smith, Neil Cavuto, John Gibson, etc. is the same audience that watches soaps and Fox's "When Animals Attack Over and Over and Over Again".
But the truly pathetic problem with this is that, while it might offer a significant deterrent against DoS and other malicious attacks, the fact that Congress is even considering a bill like this, and still haven't introduced something along the same lines for huge Corporate thieving and shananagans, is utterly asenine.
Look at it this way, hacking usually is malicious toward large corporate entities, unless it has to do with stealing personal info such as credit cards, S/N's and the like (which falls under identity theft, and should be getting its own life sentence IMHO soon). These big corporations can easily absorb most attacks (i.e. write off fictitious losses to capital losses, and have the hit go to the stock holders).
But on the other hand, the recent rash (or at least the sudden disclosure) of many corporate scandals basically leaves the stock holders and employees feeling the loss. The actual perpetrators never feel the same loss as someone who no longer has a retirement fund to speak of. So the worst punishment these thieves can receive is some vacation at a minimum security country club. But they have ruined MANY peoples whole lives, yet they have never faced the threat of true consequences.
Now to keep from being completely off topic: So congress has a bill pushed through that will enable hackers to receive a life sentence for their malicious acts. But all that we've heard about cracking down on corporate crime is some fluff regarding the SEC and accounting procedures, and much of the same from George W's podium. (But wait, what was that Harken Energy thingy?)
Seems quite ironic to me considering that the "great economic expansion" of the 90's was just a load of crap ontop of inflated profits. So let's go after those real criminals, Mr. Ashcroft! You just point your finger and we'll tap their phones and ISP to see what kind of mischief they're really getting into.
After all, they never do anything good, do they Yahoo?
From what I gathered from your post, you are actually taking over at a district level, which is good as far as making decisions, but poor for implementing them. I've actually been a School Technology Coordinator at a school here in KY for 2 years now, and I've experienced some of the problems you are encountering.
Most of these problems are handled (at least on paper) at a State level. So implementing the policies at the local level was/is not as difficult as it might be in your situation. So you need to ask these questions:
1.) Where does the funding for your technology equipment and maintenance come from? If its from the State, as in KY, they will already have some firm guidelines, that you can easily start implementing. If teachers and administrators start to balk, you can just politely refer them to such documentation. The problem could have arisen if the actual state-wide policies were not even glanced at by your predecessors, so I'm sure a call to the state Dept. of Education would bring up some type of support for you to start making changes.
2.) How will you implement such changes? These have basically been covered repeatedly in previous posts, but a strictly http proxy server is a huge start. You (your district) should have complete control over this type of function, especially since filtering obscene material in public schools is one of the few places where its really important.
If going the state route doesn't yield any results, I'm sure bringing this to the attention of district administrators would easily raise their eyebrows. An effective approach would be listing possible "dangers" that students could easily encounter on the internet without some sort of central control. Most school board members are rather conservative, and would err on the side of giving your technology department more control rather than less.
While none of what I said adresses the huge problem of bandwidth hogging, the actual effects of such policy changes give ample room to filter for "band-width appropriate" material.
Because every yahoo with some "family values" agenda to push will be demanding filtering and God knows what else on these "public" pipes.
VERY good point. I was humming along here thinking that subsidized systems were actually starting to make sense when I read this. I can't believe I didn't think of the impact that religious and moral fanatics would have on such a public "property". Censorship would run rampant, municipal governments would bow to religious lobbyists, and skies would fall.
But seriously, this would probably be the least debated issue with starting these types of municipal run bandwidth backbones, yet would end up being the most influential part of the users' access to the Internet/Intranet/etc. So it looks like taking the slow road with private enterprise is still the only option for the spread of Broadband.