Well, the three legs of the triangle are reduce, reuse, recycle.
reduce: use less materials and packaging when making something reuse: the computer's old for what you're doing, so you give it to your cousin recyle: it's too old for your cousin now, so they have it recycled.
When it's recycled, they may dissassemble it for parts that can still be re-used. The rest is recycled.
The big thing we (as a modern society) should be focusing on is improving the design of things so they use fewer resources throughout its life-cycle. Some places have enacted legislation to help this - recycle "fees" paid up-front, forbidding the casual disposal of things like monitors and batteries, etc.
"Lead Free Design" is big these days. If the computer can be built with no lead in the first place, that's lead that never has to be dealt with later on in the product life cycle.
Look for places like Freegeek.org, in Portland. They work hard to take old computers and make "new" ones out of them, while recycling the remaining materials in environmentally sensitive ways.
Such rediculous spelling. While it can be definately said that the instances of rediculous spelling must certainly be finate, it actually feels infinate!
I have to say, though, that most windows shops I've been in mean a lot more tedious work without ever being "done"... kind of like climbing a sand-dune and the sand just keeps sliding down underneath you.
Again, it comes down to the IT Department Full Employment Act. Adopting Linux allows organizations to increase their IT efficiency without requiring the IT department to increase ITS efficiency. It takes just as many nerds to support 100 Linux boxes as 100 Windows boxes, yet Linux boxes are cheaper and can support more users. The organization is better off while the IT department is unscathed and unchallenged.
It's funny that you quote that. At my last job, we made the opposite change. Went from about 100 linux boxes/x-terminals to a 100 windows boxes. There were two of us techs, and our workload increased significantly. We no longer had time to work on "fun" projects that people wanted - web access to e-mail, trying new products, etc. We spent all of our time patching OSs, fighting viruses, and reinstalling hosed systems. Sure, we still used the same two techs, but I finally quit from the tedium of the job. It was no longer fun.
I think it all depends on what you want your IT people doing. Use windows, and they'll spend a lot of time fixing windows boxes. Use unix/linux, and there's a good chance that you'll be able to assign interesting projects that improve everyone's effectiveness and efficiency.
This is a perfect example of a disruptive technology. Sure, OSS takes jobs from Microsoft, but it adds jobs elsewhere in the economy - everywhere someomone wants to develop something that needs an OS but doesn't want to pay MS for it.
Buggy whip makers were put out of work by the automobile. But the smart buggy whip makers turned to making sex toys. Sex always sells!
That would be great! People seem pretty bitter around April 16th, and I imagine there would be a lot more turn-out, especially for candidates who promise (for what that's really worth) to lower taxes and cut waste.
Of course it makes perfect sense that elections are more than half a year after tax day, with plenty of holidays to dull memories before the next tax day. Happy dumb people are easy to hoodwink.
I heard recently that the IRS spends somewhere between $0.40 and $0.50 for each $1.00 they collect. I'll bet Citibank has a better ratio than that, and they don't have the option of sending armed IRS agents to your house to collect!
How do you tell what chapter a resolution falls under? I don't have one in front of me, but it seems they don't put the chapter they fall under on the resolution itself.
I guess the really sad thing is that maybe in another 20 to 50 years (sooner maybe?) there will be a two-state solution that won't be so different from the one proposed in 1947 under resolution 181. The really sad part about it is the 50+ years of suffering, death, fear, and pain that has been inflicted and endured by both sides.
There are really only 5 possible long-term outcomes:
1) All the Palestinians are exterminated by the Israelis 2) All the Israelis are exterminated by the Palestinians 3) Both Palestinians and Israelis are exterminated by each other 4) Somehow, the Israelis and Palestinians find a way to live together in a single state 5) Somehow, the Israelis and Palestinians find a way to live side-by-side in two countries
#1 and #2 are only good for the extremists, and will probably invite enemies from around the world. #3 is bad for both parties. #4 and #5 seem like the only "liveable" solutions, and they'll probably come about when both sides are tired of all the pointless killing and destruction.
I will admit I don't know what you mean by Chapter VII resolutions.
Many argue that Israel is in violation of Resolution 242, and likewise, 338 since (among other things) it calls to abiding by 242.
The resolution below seems to indicate the Security Council's belief that Israel is not acting in a proper manner as the occupying power.
I'm not an expert, and I'm not saying that all other parties are blameless. But it seems to me that Israel does not always adhere to UN resolutions, because I do know that Israel has not ceased its settlement activities. Israel also continues to use mass-punishment, which is forbidden by the Geneva Conventions, which are re-asserted in this resolution.
U.N. Security Council Emergency Resolution 10/6
The General Assembly,
Reaffirming the resolutions of its tenth emergency special session, namely, ES-10/2 of 25 April 1997, ES-10/3 of 15 July 1997, ES-10/4 of 13 November 1997 and ES-10/5 of 17 March 1998,
Determined to uphold the purposes and principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, international humanitarian law and all other instruments of international law, as well as relevant General Assembly and Security Council resolutions,
Reiterating the permanent responsibility of the United Nations towards the question of Palestine until it is solved in all its aspects,
Aware that Israel, the occupying Power, has not heeded the demands made in the resolutions of the tenth emergency special session and that it continues to carry out illegal actions in Occupied East Jerusalem and the rest of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, in particular settlement activity, including the construction of the new Israeli settlement at Jebel Abu Ghneim, the building of other new settlements and the expansion of existing settlements, the construction of bypass roads and the confiscation of lands,
Reaffirming that all illegal Israeli actions in Occupied East Jerusalem and the rest of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, especially settlement activities and the practical results thereof, remain contrary to international law and cannot be recognized, irrespective of the passage of time,
Expressing its appreciation to the Government of Switzerland, in its capacity as depositary of the four Geneva Conventions, 1/ and to the International Committee of the Red Cross for their efforts to uphold the integrity of the Conventions,
Increasingly concerned about the persistent violations by Israel, the occupying Power, of the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, 2/
Conscious of the serious dangers arising from persistent violations and grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention and the responsibilities arising therefrom,
Aware of the upcoming fiftieth anniversary of the four Geneva Conventions, which is an occasion for renewed determination to promote international humanitarian law further and to reaffirm the undertaking by the High Contracting Parties to respect and to ensure respect for the Conventions in all circumstances in accordance with common article 1,
Taking note of the measure taken by the Government of Switzerland to organize a meeting between the Palestinian and Israeli sides, in the presence of the International Committee of the Red Cross, which was held at Geneva from 9 to 11 June 1998 and was aimed at examining ways to contribute to the effective application of the Fourth Geneva Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, and expressing disappointment that Israeli violations of the Convention continued unabated in spite of such a measure,
Taking note also of the meeting of experts of the High Contracting Parties, convened from 27 to 29 October 1998 at the invitation of the Government of Switzerland, in its capacity as the depositary of the Convention, on general problems concerning the Convention, in
How about the French and their escepade into Africa last summer? Oh wait, we don't talk about that one...
I think that eventually, the people the Middle East, Africa, and Asia will get tired of the manipulation, duplicitous dealings, and attempts at empire by former colonizers and current empire-builders. When that happens, it will be a big wake-up call to the white Europeans (and their American progeny). Al-Qa'ida may be on the fringe now, but maybe these billions of down-trodden people will finally get fed up and see their bombings and attacks today as analogous to the Tea Party of the American Insurrectionists.
I'm an American, but I have to admit that it is not healthy for my country to be the sole super-power that it is. Such power on a global scale will certainly be a magnet to corrupt politicians and idealogues. It will also most likely corrupt even the most un-corrupt people that find themselves in such seats of power. It will be a better day when the US has to share the world stage with all the other actors. It will then be able to focus on making itself better, rather than trying to change the rest of the world.
Spread the blame where it belongs, good sir. British and French colonialism have ruined more lives and caused so much conflict that the US pales in comparison.
I have to agree with you there. It seems none of the permanent members of the security council really belong there. Except, maybe, to make sure that nobody else cuts in on their business!
Even worse, the US, Russia, and China have permanent seats on that council. More lives have been destroyed and more economic damage has been done by those three than probably all the other terrorist nations/groups/people combined.
That explains everything... Clearly, they are using a quantum-based computer. If you try to read the data to copy it, it gets changed. Can't fault them for trying to use the newest technology, I suppose.
It's very obvious; giving straight out cash is tacky. Frankly, it doesn't take much thought into just giving someone a wad of cash (or a check, etc.). Alternatively, giving someone a gift card at least puts some thought into their particular likes/interests.
Who says it's tacky? If it's a cultural thing, it's dumb, like a country going gaga over Britney Spears or the Beatles.
A nice card, with cash/check, and a note that says, "spend this on a vacation/computer game/book/cd/dvd/textbooks that you like" takes just as much thought as buying a GC for the same activity, yet gives the recipient much more freedom. EG, I'm a tech enthusiast, but I really don't like Best Buy - they're overpriced and don't have a good selection. If I got a card for them I now have to spend more for something I probably wouldn't buy in the first place. Forcing me to do that, now THAT's tacky!
I prefer the cash, and then I send a thank you telling the person how I spent it. Likewise, if I can't find something "special" to give someone, then sure, I'll give them cash.
I guess my question is, "what is the benefit of expensing options over the current way of doing things?"
It sounds like some people are having trouble accurate valuing companies because they may have large amounts of options sitting out there that could have a volitile effect on the value of the company.
Maybe a better idea would be to require reporting of the numbers and strike-prices of the options the company has issued as part of the financial reporting. I don't know if this information is already in the required financial reports, so maybe my point is moot.
It seems what is lacking is accurate information about the options a company has issued and because of this, analysts have greater difficulty assessing the value and riskiness of a company.
It seems there is a lot of "black magic" and discretion in determining the amount to be expensed with options. I'd prefer to see numbers that have less chance of being gamed by people trying to paint a prettier-than-reality picture of their company.
This points out another problem. The corporate board should have looked at such a big decision and asked questions like, "how will this impact us in 5 years?"
Unfortunately, many boards these days have the CEO of the company as the chair of the board. In fact, many large corps I've looked at have a large number of the top management as board members. This clearly leads to agency conflicts as the board is really no longer in a position to oversee the management and assure that their actions are truly in the long-term best interest of the company.
In security, there's no perfection, anything that gives you an advantage may be a wise choice.
Suppose most people used locks on their doors that require the old skeleton keys. They're pretty easy to pick. Now, if there are guys out there picking locks and causing problems, then it might be smart to switch to a newer kind of lock. Sure, that newer lock is still pickable, but it takes more skill and probably better tools. You're not perfectly safe, but you're safer than most of the other people.
The browser issue is similar. There are probably unknown exploits in Mozilla, Opera, et al, but for now, they are harder to exploit because they are unknown. I KNOW that using IE makes me insecure and can compromise my computer. So, use mozilla for my normal browsing, and save IE for sites that I NEED to access that don't work with others (like my i-notes based company e-mail).
In a way, this is security through obscurity, which can provide a false sense of security, but at least I've put a lock on my door and I'm not leaving my door wide open.
Maybe some kind of spring-loaded rigging could be set up where if the tension between the ground and the kite gets too low that it actuates and lets a parachute deploy. Maybe it could even cut the kite loose to keep the kite and chute from interfering with each other.
A lot of larger cities also have temp agencies that hire out tech people. This can be a great way to:
1) make some money while looking for a perm job 2) meet other people in the industry (networking) 3) get experience on systems you may not have
Some companies like to hire from their temp pools. They get to test-drive you and know if you'll really fit. But you're also getting to test-drive them.
"I don't trust you and your computer with unfettered access to the University Network(property)."
They'll also say that internet access is not a right, but rather a privelige, and if you want that privelige, you'll abide by their terms.
My school used to post "hogs" lists of people who printed too much or used to much disk space. Maybe social pressure could help, with an "infected" list put up that shows who's computers have been infected and disconnected.
Is this very different than running X over a compressed ssh connection?
I'm guessing that ssh only compresses the data, not considering what it is, and that NX can compress the X data because it knows that it's looking at things going on in a gui and can make shorthand for different things.
Where I come from, the land where 8 1/2 x 11 still rules, many places no longer accept resumes except through their online application system. If you're lucky, you can attach a PDF or DOC, but all too-often, it's a crappy text-only-paste-it-in-the-webform that you get to do.
I got my last job by faxing my cover letter and resume. I also wrote short fax-cover.. a "meta-cover" with about a 3 sentence summary of my "real" cover letter.
The clincher was that I said in that fax-cover that a hard-copy would follow in the mail. The fact that it did was a big factor with my boss.
Every piece of your communication should be working to get you an interview.
Slashdot Mirror
I think people say "NIC Card" because it's hard to say "NI Card" without sounding like part of a Monty Python skit.
Well, the three legs of the triangle are reduce, reuse, recycle.
reduce: use less materials and packaging when making something
reuse: the computer's old for what you're doing, so you give it to your cousin
recyle: it's too old for your cousin now, so they have it recycled.
When it's recycled, they may dissassemble it for parts that can still be re-used. The rest is recycled.
The big thing we (as a modern society) should be focusing on is improving the design of things so they use fewer resources throughout its life-cycle. Some places have enacted legislation to help this - recycle "fees" paid up-front, forbidding the casual disposal of things like monitors and batteries, etc.
"Lead Free Design" is big these days. If the computer can be built with no lead in the first place, that's lead that never has to be dealt with later on in the product life cycle.
Look for places like Freegeek.org, in Portland. They work hard to take old computers and make "new" ones out of them, while recycling the remaining materials in environmentally sensitive ways.
Such rediculous spelling. While it can be definately said that the instances of rediculous spelling must certainly be finate, it actually feels infinate!
When was the last time you "rediculed" someone? The word is ridiculous!
I definately rediculed someone for saying the universe is infinate, when everyone knows its finate.
You should write a book!
I have to say, though, that most windows shops I've been in mean a lot more tedious work without ever being "done"... kind of like climbing a sand-dune and the sand just keeps sliding down underneath you.
Again, it comes down to the IT Department Full Employment Act. Adopting Linux allows organizations to increase their IT efficiency without requiring the IT department to increase ITS efficiency. It takes just as many nerds to support 100 Linux boxes as 100 Windows boxes, yet Linux boxes are cheaper and can support more users. The organization is better off while the IT department is unscathed and unchallenged.
It's funny that you quote that. At my last job, we made the opposite change. Went from about 100 linux boxes/x-terminals to a 100 windows boxes. There were two of us techs, and our workload increased significantly. We no longer had time to work on "fun" projects that people wanted - web access to e-mail, trying new products, etc. We spent all of our time patching OSs, fighting viruses, and reinstalling hosed systems. Sure, we still used the same two techs, but I finally quit from the tedium of the job. It was no longer fun.
I think it all depends on what you want your IT people doing. Use windows, and they'll spend a lot of time fixing windows boxes. Use unix/linux, and there's a good chance that you'll be able to assign interesting projects that improve everyone's effectiveness and efficiency.
This is a perfect example of a disruptive technology. Sure, OSS takes jobs from Microsoft, but it adds jobs elsewhere in the economy - everywhere someomone wants to develop something that needs an OS but doesn't want to pay MS for it.
Buggy whip makers were put out of work by the automobile. But the smart buggy whip makers turned to making sex toys. Sex always sells!
That would be great! People seem pretty bitter around April 16th, and I imagine there would be a lot more turn-out, especially for candidates who promise (for what that's really worth) to lower taxes and cut waste.
Of course it makes perfect sense that elections are more than half a year after tax day, with plenty of holidays to dull memories before the next tax day. Happy dumb people are easy to hoodwink.
I heard recently that the IRS spends somewhere between $0.40 and $0.50 for each $1.00 they collect. I'll bet Citibank has a better ratio than that, and they don't have the option of sending armed IRS agents to your house to collect!
Thanks!
How do you tell what chapter a resolution falls under? I don't have one in front of me, but it seems they don't put the chapter they fall under on the resolution itself.
I guess the really sad thing is that maybe in another 20 to 50 years (sooner maybe?) there will be a two-state solution that won't be so different from the one proposed in 1947 under resolution 181. The really sad part about it is the 50+ years of suffering, death, fear, and pain that has been inflicted and endured by both sides.
There are really only 5 possible long-term outcomes:
1) All the Palestinians are exterminated by the Israelis
2) All the Israelis are exterminated by the Palestinians
3) Both Palestinians and Israelis are exterminated by each other
4) Somehow, the Israelis and Palestinians find a way to live together in a single state
5) Somehow, the Israelis and Palestinians find a way to live side-by-side in two countries
#1 and #2 are only good for the extremists, and will probably invite enemies from around the world. #3 is bad for both parties. #4 and #5 seem like the only "liveable" solutions, and they'll probably come about when both sides are tired of all the pointless killing and destruction.
I hope, anyway.
I will admit I don't know what you mean by Chapter VII resolutions.
Many argue that Israel is in violation of Resolution 242, and likewise, 338 since (among other things) it calls to abiding by 242.
The resolution below seems to indicate the Security Council's belief that Israel is not acting in a proper manner as the occupying power.
I'm not an expert, and I'm not saying that all other parties are blameless. But it seems to me that Israel does not always adhere to UN resolutions, because I do know that Israel has not ceased its settlement activities. Israel also continues to use mass-punishment, which is forbidden by the Geneva Conventions, which are re-asserted in this resolution.
U.N. Security Council Emergency Resolution 10/6
The General Assembly,
Reaffirming the resolutions of its tenth emergency special session, namely, ES-10/2 of 25 April 1997, ES-10/3 of 15 July 1997, ES-10/4 of 13 November 1997 and ES-10/5 of 17 March 1998,
Determined to uphold the purposes and principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, international humanitarian law and all other instruments of international law, as well as relevant General Assembly and Security Council resolutions,
Reiterating the permanent responsibility of the United Nations towards the question of Palestine until it is solved in all its aspects,
Aware that Israel, the occupying Power, has not heeded the demands made in the resolutions of the tenth emergency special session and that it continues to carry out illegal actions in Occupied East Jerusalem and the rest of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, in particular settlement activity, including the construction of the new Israeli settlement at Jebel Abu Ghneim, the building of other new settlements and the expansion of existing settlements, the construction of bypass roads and the confiscation of lands,
Reaffirming that all illegal Israeli actions in Occupied East Jerusalem and the rest of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, especially settlement activities and the practical results thereof, remain contrary to international law and cannot be recognized, irrespective of the passage of time,
Expressing its appreciation to the Government of Switzerland, in its capacity as depositary of the four Geneva Conventions, 1/ and to the International Committee of the Red Cross for their efforts to uphold the integrity of the Conventions,
Increasingly concerned about the persistent violations by Israel, the occupying Power, of the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, 2/
Conscious of the serious dangers arising from persistent violations and grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention and the responsibilities arising therefrom,
Aware of the upcoming fiftieth anniversary of the four Geneva Conventions, which is an occasion for renewed determination to promote international humanitarian law further and to reaffirm the undertaking by the High Contracting Parties to respect and to ensure respect for the Conventions in all circumstances in accordance with common article 1,
Taking note of the measure taken by the Government of Switzerland to organize a meeting between the Palestinian and Israeli sides, in the presence of the International Committee of the Red Cross, which was held at Geneva from 9 to 11 June 1998 and was aimed at examining ways to contribute to the effective application of the Fourth Geneva Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, and expressing disappointment that Israeli violations of the Convention continued unabated in spite of such a measure,
Taking note also of the meeting of experts of the High Contracting Parties, convened from 27 to 29 October 1998 at the invitation of the Government of Switzerland, in its capacity as the depositary of the Convention, on general problems concerning the Convention, in
How about the French and their escepade into Africa last summer? Oh wait, we don't talk about that one...
I think that eventually, the people the Middle East, Africa, and Asia will get tired of the manipulation, duplicitous dealings, and attempts at empire by former colonizers and current empire-builders. When that happens, it will be a big wake-up call to the white Europeans (and their American progeny). Al-Qa'ida may be on the fringe now, but maybe these billions of down-trodden people will finally get fed up and see their bombings and attacks today as analogous to the Tea Party of the American Insurrectionists.
I'm an American, but I have to admit that it is not healthy for my country to be the sole super-power that it is. Such power on a global scale will certainly be a magnet to corrupt politicians and idealogues. It will also most likely corrupt even the most un-corrupt people that find themselves in such seats of power. It will be a better day when the US has to share the world stage with all the other actors. It will then be able to focus on making itself better, rather than trying to change the rest of the world.
Spread the blame where it belongs, good sir. British and French colonialism have ruined more lives and caused so much conflict that the US pales in comparison.
I have to agree with you there. It seems none of the permanent members of the security council really belong there. Except, maybe, to make sure that nobody else cuts in on their business!
Even worse, the US, Russia, and China have permanent seats on that council. More lives have been destroyed and more economic damage has been done by those three than probably all the other terrorist nations/groups/people combined.
Once the last resisting country (USA) adheres to the UN resolutions as well I think there's a good chance for this to work as well.
There's more than one. I can think of Israel off the top of my head.
That explains everything... Clearly, they are using a quantum-based computer. If you try to read the data to copy it, it gets changed. Can't fault them for trying to use the newest technology, I suppose.
It's very obvious; giving straight out cash is tacky. Frankly, it doesn't take much thought into just giving someone a wad of cash (or a check, etc.). Alternatively, giving someone a gift card at least puts some thought into their particular likes/interests.
Who says it's tacky? If it's a cultural thing, it's dumb, like a country going gaga over Britney Spears or the Beatles.
A nice card, with cash/check, and a note that says, "spend this on a vacation/computer game/book/cd/dvd/textbooks that you like" takes just as much thought as buying a GC for the same activity, yet gives the recipient much more freedom. EG, I'm a tech enthusiast, but I really don't like Best Buy - they're overpriced and don't have a good selection. If I got a card for them I now have to spend more for something I probably wouldn't buy in the first place. Forcing me to do that, now THAT's tacky!
I prefer the cash, and then I send a thank you telling the person how I spent it. Likewise, if I can't find something "special" to give someone, then sure, I'll give them cash.
I guess my question is, "what is the benefit of expensing options over the current way of doing things?"
It sounds like some people are having trouble accurate valuing companies because they may have large amounts of options sitting out there that could have a volitile effect on the value of the company.
Maybe a better idea would be to require reporting of the numbers and strike-prices of the options the company has issued as part of the financial reporting. I don't know if this information is already in the required financial reports, so maybe my point is moot.
It seems what is lacking is accurate information about the options a company has issued and because of this, analysts have greater difficulty assessing the value and riskiness of a company.
It seems there is a lot of "black magic" and discretion in determining the amount to be expensed with options. I'd prefer to see numbers that have less chance of being gamed by people trying to paint a prettier-than-reality picture of their company.
This points out another problem. The corporate board should have looked at such a big decision and asked questions like, "how will this impact us in 5 years?"
Unfortunately, many boards these days have the CEO of the company as the chair of the board. In fact, many large corps I've looked at have a large number of the top management as board members. This clearly leads to agency conflicts as the board is really no longer in a position to oversee the management and assure that their actions are truly in the long-term best interest of the company.
In security, there's no perfection, anything that gives you an advantage may be a wise choice.
Suppose most people used locks on their doors that require the old skeleton keys. They're pretty easy to pick. Now, if there are guys out there picking locks and causing problems, then it might be smart to switch to a newer kind of lock. Sure, that newer lock is still pickable, but it takes more skill and probably better tools. You're not perfectly safe, but you're safer than most of the other people.
The browser issue is similar. There are probably unknown exploits in Mozilla, Opera, et al, but for now, they are harder to exploit because they are unknown. I KNOW that using IE makes me insecure and can compromise my computer. So, use mozilla for my normal browsing, and save IE for sites that I NEED to access that don't work with others (like my i-notes based company e-mail).
In a way, this is security through obscurity, which can provide a false sense of security, but at least I've put a lock on my door and I'm not leaving my door wide open.
Maybe some kind of spring-loaded rigging could be set up where if the tension between the ground and the kite gets too low that it actuates and lets a parachute deploy. Maybe it could even cut the kite loose to keep the kite and chute from interfering with each other.
A lot of larger cities also have temp agencies that hire out tech people. This can be a great way to:
1) make some money while looking for a perm job
2) meet other people in the industry (networking)
3) get experience on systems you may not have
Some companies like to hire from their temp pools. They get to test-drive you and know if you'll really fit. But you're also getting to test-drive them.
I will start by saying I agree with you.
But they'll just say the same thing:
"I don't trust you and your computer with unfettered access to the University Network(property)."
They'll also say that internet access is not a right, but rather a privelige, and if you want that privelige, you'll abide by their terms.
My school used to post "hogs" lists of people who printed too much or used to much disk space. Maybe social pressure could help, with an "infected" list put up that shows who's computers have been infected and disconnected.
Is this very different than running X over a compressed ssh connection?
I'm guessing that ssh only compresses the data, not considering what it is, and that NX can compress the X data because it knows that it's looking at things going on in a gui and can make shorthand for different things.
Where I come from, the land where 8 1/2 x 11 still rules, many places no longer accept resumes except through their online application system. If you're lucky, you can attach a PDF or DOC, but all too-often, it's a crappy text-only-paste-it-in-the-webform that you get to do.
I got my last job by faxing my cover letter and resume. I also wrote short fax-cover.. a "meta-cover" with about a 3 sentence summary of my "real" cover letter.
The clincher was that I said in that fax-cover that a hard-copy would follow in the mail. The fact that it did was a big factor with my boss.
Every piece of your communication should be working to get you an interview.