I'm not claiming that all the rich are bad. There are plenty of selfish bastards who are poor and middle income as well. Look at the people who take advantage of the welfare system and ruin it for those who really need it. Look at the assholes who think that just because they have a bigger car they have more of a "right of way" than other people. I'm specifically refering to the jerks at all levels who don't work to make the world a better place. That is everyone's duty. As far as the definition of a better world, I'm certain you and I disagree and no matter how you weigh it, we will eventually clash. It's the reason why I don't believe that there is any "healing" that can be done as George W. Bush and John Kerry called for. How can you bring together people who want such vastly different things? It's not possible even with compromises. Compromises make no one happy.
Ahhh the diesase of pointless competition. Some of us don't care about what the neighbors are doing because the neighbors aren't doing anything worthwhile.
It doesn't sound like you are violently disagreeing with me. But it does sound like you are what I would term, "one of the afflicted". You only think about yourself, which is socially irresponsible. It is that kind of thinking that makes what I do harder. I don't see why we can't meet in the middle somewhere. There are those of us who believe that doing good for others is the right thing to do. I'll also point out that you have made another error in judgement. I'm not talking about people being happy or sad. I'm talking about people being equipped with the same tools to use to their own benefit in order to guarantee a base level of opportunity for everyone. The perverted capitlist system we live in is not doing that. It's throwing up financial roadblocks and it's getting worse. Sure there will be people who don't take advantage of those opportunities that are provided by people like me, but isn't it better that those opportunities exist? If people like you aren't kept in check by people like me, those opportunities would vanish. (For the record, I work for a public library, but I'm not a librarian)
Once you get over a certain number of investors, enough of them will be in it just for the money that the business cannot behave ethically
This is the flaw that lies within capitlism. It is the reason that I argue that capitalism is failing for the same exact reason that communism did: human greed. The only thing that capitalism has over communism is better PR and "beads and trinkets" to hand to the natives.;P
Don't be a fool. Typical of the American mindset is the inability to find a middle ground and to instantly polarize to one extreme side or the other. I didn't say that businesses should die and everything should be left up to the individual. What I said is that we should all be equipped (intellectually) to use our skills instead of letting them dull through slavish reliance on consumer goods and services. There is so much potential in all of us to do more, but we don't explore that.
Talk about "trite arguments". I'm actually a pretty happy guy for the most part. I'm more concerned about others who aren't so happy. I want to help them get the free and equal access that they deserve. No... make that the free and equal access that is their birthright. That's what life is all about: thinking of others who need your help. Once someone finds a good place in their life, they *should* try to help others do the same. I practice what I preach. But you would have no understanding of that, would you?
On the topic of fear, I have to say I am not afraid of life (as most neocons tend to be). The world isn't scary if you're smart enough to deal with it and understand it. I do that quite well thank you. I'm not afraid of terrorists in my backyard, or crazed burglars who want to rape my loved ones and kill me. I 'm not afraid of people because they have a different skin color or non-christian religious beliefs. And like you said, as long as my freedoms aren't being messed with (the freedom to voice this opinion which you would like to silence, for one) and as long as me or my decendants are not being taxed into oblivion (by a record deficit created by the biggest idiot in US history to wage a stupid mess of a "war"), then my life is my own.
Don't like what I'm saying? Then ask yourself why it bothers you. Where do you fit in? Who are you to tell me to essentially "shut up"? Your volley.
...when you've got private garden paths?:) I use OpenVPN to build my own private network between friends and family. It's getting easier to do, it's encrypted, and it's sweet as hell once you have it up and running. Just imagine having a virtual network cable between your house and your friends and families homes and you've got the idea. It works on *nix, Windows and Mac OS X. Give it a try.
I know what capitalism is. What I'm saying is to find the middle ground between capitalism and socialism. A nice combo would work out much better than what we have in the US now.
Could be good... could be bad
on
The Media in 2014
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
One of my favorite quotes from the Blade Runner is "Replicants are like any other technology. They're either a benefit or a hazard". Replace "replicants" with "media convergence" and we have a good cautionary phrase to keep in mind.
Way back before there were books (pre-Gutenberg), reading was only for the rich. More importantly, information, communication and news were for the rich. If we don't watch it, the balance could tip that way again. Taking into account that computers have the potential to be used as a benefit or a hazard to mankind, we really should look at these sorts of things with a very cautious eye.
There are plenty of people here on Slashdot and in the real world who feel that access to information (be it movies, music, news, source code, what have you) should be limited to those who can afford it. Anyone who can't is obviously a failure at life and doesn't deserve access. These are people who want to see public libraries disappear. They are people who want to see open source/free softwaer die off or be made illegal. They don't believe it is their responsibility to help others. But the question arises... why do these people feel this way?
I think there are two distinct groups. The first group (much smaller in size, with a lot of money and therefore with much more to lose) are the people who own and profit from systems that are counter to the spirit of free and equal access for all. These are people who feel that they have the right to make as much profit from their inventions/productions/IP with no concern for fairness (ie, there is a point where you've made enough money and you can stop). These people have let the worst traits of humanity overtake them: greed and selfishness. They believe they are entitled to much more than their efforts are worth simply because they are somehow "better" than everyone else and "know more" than everyone else.
The second group are people who believe that if they support this kind of system, that they have a chance at eventually becoming just like the people mentioned in the first group. What a thing to aspire to! Can you imagine actually WANTING to be the kind of person who restricts and controls others based on money? Personally, I think it's some kind of sickness. The problem with this second group is that they have no understanding of how the deck is stacked heavily against them. They might be given a token "success" in a local sort of way, but that has far less value than either doing something that helps others in the world (free/open source software, FREE public libraries, volunteer work, etc...) or doing something personal for your family (building your own furniture, growing your own food, etc...).
The sad thing about the second group is that they are largely failures. Failed business ventures, money lost on investments that they don't understand that were managed by people who DON'T want to help them. These things are unavoidable if you approach life with the goal of getting rich. It is far better to approach your life with the view that you want to enrich your mind and the minds of those around you.
Money should take a back seat since intellect leads to adaptability and adaptability means you can live comfortably no matter what the circumstances. The key is in knowledge and intelligence, not money. I believe this is the message that we should be drumming into people's heads. But it's been drowned out by the ever bleating cry of the modern "capitalist" who puts the value of money above all else. How else can you explain the worship of the stupid? Pro wrestlers are heroes? George W. Bush is an intelligent man? Criminals who have a second occupation as musicians are idols? Reality television that bears no resemblance to reality?
Intelligence and access to knowledge are only problems to the people in group one mentioned above. They fear the concept of an informed and intelligent consumer/public. They are scared shitless of the idea that some people may awaken from their stupor an
You jerks are all the same. Did I ever say I support socialism or communism? That's what you imply by talking about "societies that forbid competition". Can't you find some middle ground between ass licking your capitalist masters and being fucked in the ass by power hungry totalitarians? Capitalism is fine and dandy as long as we remember that the customers come first, the employees (the ones who do the actual work) come second and management and share holders come dead last.
Attitudes like that result in the problems we have on Earth. It's better to stop competing and start co-operating. Otherwise you are a useless ass. Hmm... you ARE a useless ass, aren't you?
I noticed that their only complaints about the Barracuda Spam Firewall were the use of a non encrypted web administration interface and it's early LDAP integration. Let's be real about this. What kind of moron does remote (ie. not within your network or over an encrypted VPN) administration with a web browser over the internet? If YOU do this kind of thing, look for another line of work. Whenever I do any remote admin, I do it over a secure connection only. This could be VPN, a point-to-point private link, within the network (from my office to the computer room) on a private VLAN or even over an SSH link with tunneling. So the protocol that a web admin interface uses shouldn't matter if it's not accesible to the public in any way.
As far as their LDAP complaint... it's a relatively new feature and hasn't been given time to have the edges smoothed. I can understand that complaint, but ther rest seem invalid to me. I use the Barracuda and it "just works".
You're right. Motivation is the key. After having spent that last decade or so focusing on computers (mostly in the free/open source world) I've kind of dropped the ball on my electronics hobby. I have a ton of project ideas that I'd like to do, but haven't gotten off the ground with one. This article was certainly a motivator. Must get my soldering iron out...
Then you've got bigger problems than printing. I still don't get why people keep bring up "Stompers" when it's obvious that *IF YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING* you don't need a stomper. You just print directly onto your CD-R with your Epson printer. As in:
1. Put the disc into the sheet feed 2. Submt your print image 3. Watch disc pop out with beautiful color logo 4. Be amazed at how relatively inexpensive this is compared to getting it silk screened
I think only trend humping morons and bleeding edgers are going to buy this thing.
I agree with this post.;P For the most part anyway. I'm a Linux user and have migrated some of my family to Linux with a custom designed install that made the transition pretty painless. However, one of the things that I've noticed that repeatedly comes up is the difficulty in explaining the difference between local and remote applications, let alone web applications. My folks, for example, think that Google is a program. It took a while for my dad to realize that Google would work on his Linux box. Once he did, I figured that the difference between a web site and an application sunk in.
But recently while talking to him, I found out that he is still a little concerned that some of the Windows programs he likes won't run on his Linux box. Programs like: Amazon.com, cnn.com, and the program that his bank provides (yet another web app). So, the difference between local apps and web apps still isn't understood. I think this is true of a lot of users. To them, the pictures are all happening on their machines and there really isn't an easy way to distinguish between local and remote. Compound this with local web apps (I set up a recipe and address book database for them on their Linux server) that are internally accessible and the confusion grows.
So there are still plent of problems to get around with users and no platform is pulling this off well yet.
Good job. Liken us Linux users to Buffalo Bob fom Silence of the Lambs. The basement connection is one thing, but I take offense at the serial killer connection.
Oh really? I suppose the definition of market failure is that it didn't sell well with the masses? I beg to differ. The Alpha sold well in the market it was targetted at: big iron shops. The government, banks, hell... even the public library I work for all used the Alpha for most of the previous decade. It would only be considered a market failure if you value volume of sales over actual profit. It sold well in the right markets, and it pulled in a pretty penny. Just as it should be. But the idiots who counted lots of PC sales as "market success" had their heads up their asses and failed to see what a jewel they had. Now we have the VHS of 64-bit: AMD Opteron. Some people just don't "get it".
Re:Priorities, priorities
on
GTK 2.6.0 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Asshole mods. Actually, I think the monkey got it right. This kind of news IS "stuff that matters". After all, why else would anyone be reading Slashdot other than the articles about computer related (with a free/open bent) technologies and software? If you aren't reading for that reason, then you're in the wrong place. That's why I've devoted my JEs to discussing technology/software/asking linux related questions, etc... Oh yeah, and the occasional dig at Slashdot and trolling.
I think they are going to need to have a CGotomy before they can ever make decent science fiction films. One of the biggest downfalls of SciFi films (the genre) today is the over reliance on CG and action. SciFi was meant to be a thinking man's fiction. Today, it's just non-stop action movies set in the future, in space and with a lot of CG (a lot of it crappy). Whatever happened to the story? Oh yeah, I forgot that most people don't pay attention to plot anymore. This is exactly why the last two Matrix movies sucked. The first movie actually had a bit more plot than usual which is what made it stand out. They really missed the boat with the Architect thread. They also had an implication in the second film about matrices within matrices, but they just completely dropped it in the third movie. And then the ending of the series? A temporary truce? WTF?! Sorry, but SciFi films these days stink to high heaven. There used to be a time when people actually focused on science and culture in SciFi films and still managed to tell a good story too. Not anymore. Now it's just lots of action, FX and way overused CG. I didn't even see the Earthsea series, but I imagein it suffered from the same symptoms of crap SciFi/Fantasy. On another topic... didn't Leguin aslo write the more famous "A Wrinkle in Time"?
In rare instances. But that gets away from the point I am making. IF Microsoft controlled the hardware for a standard PC in the same way that Apple does with Macs, you'd have a more stable system. (Security is a different story) But since the hardware for a PC is so insanely varied, there is no way that you can get stability from a Windows box unless you know what you are doing. I can put together a Windows based system that is rock solid for a particular set of tasks if I wanted to, but I'm not the average user. So getting back to my original point:
More Options = less stable Fewer Options = more stable
True. But I don't think that's who they're after. I think they're after the home user. Home users are the ones who tend to have the most problems with their browsers. In a corporate environment using IE that's well managed it's unlikely this will have much of an effect even if the PHB starts asking about it. I do think they should have taken out a one page ad in NYT and then used the rest of the money to publish an ad in the TV Guide as that is what most idi... errr... home users who aren't too "up-to-speed" on computers read the most.;P
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not claiming that all the rich are bad. There are plenty of selfish bastards who are poor and middle income as well. Look at the people who take advantage of the welfare system and ruin it for those who really need it. Look at the assholes who think that just because they have a bigger car they have more of a "right of way" than other people. I'm specifically refering to the jerks at all levels who don't work to make the world a better place. That is everyone's duty. As far as the definition of a better world, I'm certain you and I disagree and no matter how you weigh it, we will eventually clash. It's the reason why I don't believe that there is any "healing" that can be done as George W. Bush and John Kerry called for. How can you bring together people who want such vastly different things? It's not possible even with compromises. Compromises make no one happy.
Sounds more like YOU love the cock. I mean, after all, he's not the one making "mmmmmm" sounds, you are.
;P
(I know I missed an In Soviet Russia opportunity in there somewhere)
Ahhh the diesase of pointless competition. Some of us don't care about what the neighbors are doing because the neighbors aren't doing anything worthwhile.
It doesn't sound like you are violently disagreeing with me. But it does sound like you are what I would term, "one of the afflicted". You only think about yourself, which is socially irresponsible. It is that kind of thinking that makes what I do harder. I don't see why we can't meet in the middle somewhere. There are those of us who believe that doing good for others is the right thing to do. I'll also point out that you have made another error in judgement. I'm not talking about people being happy or sad. I'm talking about people being equipped with the same tools to use to their own benefit in order to guarantee a base level of opportunity for everyone. The perverted capitlist system we live in is not doing that. It's throwing up financial roadblocks and it's getting worse. Sure there will be people who don't take advantage of those opportunities that are provided by people like me, but isn't it better that those opportunities exist? If people like you aren't kept in check by people like me, those opportunities would vanish. (For the record, I work for a public library, but I'm not a librarian)
This is the flaw that lies within capitlism. It is the reason that I argue that capitalism is failing for the same exact reason that communism did: human greed. The only thing that capitalism has over communism is better PR and "beads and trinkets" to hand to the natives. ;P
Did you pop down from the Pocanoes or just come in from vaudville via time machine? ;P
Don't be a fool. Typical of the American mindset is the inability to find a middle ground and to instantly polarize to one extreme side or the other. I didn't say that businesses should die and everything should be left up to the individual. What I said is that we should all be equipped (intellectually) to use our skills instead of letting them dull through slavish reliance on consumer goods and services. There is so much potential in all of us to do more, but we don't explore that.
Talk about "trite arguments". I'm actually a pretty happy guy for the most part. I'm more concerned about others who aren't so happy. I want to help them get the free and equal access that they deserve. No... make that the free and equal access that is their birthright. That's what life is all about: thinking of others who need your help. Once someone finds a good place in their life, they *should* try to help others do the same. I practice what I preach. But you would have no understanding of that, would you?
On the topic of fear, I have to say I am not afraid of life (as most neocons tend to be). The world isn't scary if you're smart enough to deal with it and understand it. I do that quite well thank you. I'm not afraid of terrorists in my backyard, or crazed burglars who want to rape my loved ones and kill me. I 'm not afraid of people because they have a different skin color or non-christian religious beliefs. And like you said, as long as my freedoms aren't being messed with (the freedom to voice this opinion which you would like to silence, for one) and as long as me or my decendants are not being taxed into oblivion (by a record deficit created by the biggest idiot in US history to wage a stupid mess of a "war"), then my life is my own.
Don't like what I'm saying? Then ask yourself why it bothers you. Where do you fit in? Who are you to tell me to essentially "shut up"? Your volley.
...when you've got private garden paths? :) I use OpenVPN to build my own private network between friends and family. It's getting easier to do, it's encrypted, and it's sweet as hell once you have it up and running. Just imagine having a virtual network cable between your house and your friends and families homes and you've got the idea. It works on *nix, Windows and Mac OS X. Give it a try.
Hi useless ass. :)
I know what capitalism is. What I'm saying is to find the middle ground between capitalism and socialism. A nice combo would work out much better than what we have in the US now.
One of my favorite quotes from the Blade Runner is "Replicants are like any other technology. They're either a benefit or a hazard". Replace "replicants" with "media convergence" and we have a good cautionary phrase to keep in mind.
Way back before there were books (pre-Gutenberg), reading was only for the rich. More importantly, information, communication and news were for the rich. If we don't watch it, the balance could tip that way again. Taking into account that computers have the potential to be used as a benefit or a hazard to mankind, we really should look at these sorts of things with a very cautious eye.
There are plenty of people here on Slashdot and in the real world who feel that access to information (be it movies, music, news, source code, what have you) should be limited to those who can afford it. Anyone who can't is obviously a failure at life and doesn't deserve access. These are people who want to see public libraries disappear. They are people who want to see open source/free softwaer die off or be made illegal. They don't believe it is their responsibility to help others. But the question arises... why do these people feel this way?
I think there are two distinct groups. The first group (much smaller in size, with a lot of money and therefore with much more to lose) are the people who own and profit from systems that are counter to the spirit of free and equal access for all. These are people who feel that they have the right to make as much profit from their inventions/productions/IP with no concern for fairness (ie, there is a point where you've made enough money and you can stop). These people have let the worst traits of humanity overtake them: greed and selfishness. They believe they are entitled to much more than their efforts are worth simply because they are somehow "better" than everyone else and "know more" than everyone else.
The second group are people who believe that if they support this kind of system, that they have a chance at eventually becoming just like the people mentioned in the first group. What a thing to aspire to! Can you imagine actually WANTING to be the kind of person who restricts and controls others based on money? Personally, I think it's some kind of sickness. The problem with this second group is that they have no understanding of how the deck is stacked heavily against them. They might be given a token "success" in a local sort of way, but that has far less value than either doing something that helps others in the world (free/open source software, FREE public libraries, volunteer work, etc...) or doing something personal for your family (building your own furniture, growing your own food, etc...).
The sad thing about the second group is that they are largely failures. Failed business ventures, money lost on investments that they don't understand that were managed by people who DON'T want to help them. These things are unavoidable if you approach life with the goal of getting rich. It is far better to approach your life with the view that you want to enrich your mind and the minds of those around you.
Money should take a back seat since intellect leads to adaptability and adaptability means you can live comfortably no matter what the circumstances. The key is in knowledge and intelligence, not money. I believe this is the message that we should be drumming into people's heads. But it's been drowned out by the ever bleating cry of the modern "capitalist" who puts the value of money above all else. How else can you explain the worship of the stupid? Pro wrestlers are heroes? George W. Bush is an intelligent man? Criminals who have a second occupation as musicians are idols? Reality television that bears no resemblance to reality?
Intelligence and access to knowledge are only problems to the people in group one mentioned above. They fear the concept of an informed and intelligent consumer/public. They are scared shitless of the idea that some people may awaken from their stupor an
You jerks are all the same. Did I ever say I support socialism or communism? That's what you imply by talking about "societies that forbid competition". Can't you find some middle ground between ass licking your capitalist masters and being fucked in the ass by power hungry totalitarians? Capitalism is fine and dandy as long as we remember that the customers come first, the employees (the ones who do the actual work) come second and management and share holders come dead last.
Attitudes like that result in the problems we have on Earth. It's better to stop competing and start co-operating. Otherwise you are a useless ass. Hmm... you ARE a useless ass, aren't you?
Life is not a competition. That is all.
I noticed that their only complaints about the Barracuda Spam Firewall were the use of a non encrypted web administration interface and it's early LDAP integration. Let's be real about this. What kind of moron does remote (ie. not within your network or over an encrypted VPN) administration with a web browser over the internet? If YOU do this kind of thing, look for another line of work. Whenever I do any remote admin, I do it over a secure connection only. This could be VPN, a point-to-point private link, within the network (from my office to the computer room) on a private VLAN or even over an SSH link with tunneling. So the protocol that a web admin interface uses shouldn't matter if it's not accesible to the public in any way.
As far as their LDAP complaint... it's a relatively new feature and hasn't been given time to have the edges smoothed. I can understand that complaint, but ther rest seem invalid to me. I use the Barracuda and it "just works".
You're right. Motivation is the key. After having spent that last decade or so focusing on computers (mostly in the free/open source world) I've kind of dropped the ball on my electronics hobby. I have a ton of project ideas that I'd like to do, but haven't gotten off the ground with one. This article was certainly a motivator. Must get my soldering iron out...
Then you've got bigger problems than printing. I still don't get why people keep bring up "Stompers" when it's obvious that *IF YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING* you don't need a stomper. You just print directly onto your CD-R with your Epson printer. As in:
1. Put the disc into the sheet feed
2. Submt your print image
3. Watch disc pop out with beautiful color logo
4. Be amazed at how relatively inexpensive this is compared to getting it silk screened
I think only trend humping morons and bleeding edgers are going to buy this thing.
I agree with this post. ;P For the most part anyway. I'm a Linux user and have migrated some of my family to Linux with a custom designed install that made the transition pretty painless. However, one of the things that I've noticed that repeatedly comes up is the difficulty in explaining the difference between local and remote applications, let alone web applications. My folks, for example, think that Google is a program. It took a while for my dad to realize that Google would work on his Linux box. Once he did, I figured that the difference between a web site and an application sunk in.
But recently while talking to him, I found out that he is still a little concerned that some of the Windows programs he likes won't run on his Linux box. Programs like: Amazon.com, cnn.com, and the program that his bank provides (yet another web app). So, the difference between local apps and web apps still isn't understood. I think this is true of a lot of users. To them, the pictures are all happening on their machines and there really isn't an easy way to distinguish between local and remote. Compound this with local web apps (I set up a recipe and address book database for them on their Linux server) that are internally accessible and the confusion grows.
So there are still plent of problems to get around with users and no platform is pulling this off well yet.
Whoops... I forgot to append the ':P' to my original post. It was meant to be funny , not serious.
Good job. Liken us Linux users to Buffalo Bob fom Silence of the Lambs. The basement connection is one thing, but I take offense at the serial killer connection.
Oh really? I suppose the definition of market failure is that it didn't sell well with the masses? I beg to differ. The Alpha sold well in the market it was targetted at: big iron shops. The government, banks, hell... even the public library I work for all used the Alpha for most of the previous decade. It would only be considered a market failure if you value volume of sales over actual profit. It sold well in the right markets, and it pulled in a pretty penny. Just as it should be. But the idiots who counted lots of PC sales as "market success" had their heads up their asses and failed to see what a jewel they had. Now we have the VHS of 64-bit: AMD Opteron. Some people just don't "get it".
Asshole mods. Actually, I think the monkey got it right. This kind of news IS "stuff that matters". After all, why else would anyone be reading Slashdot other than the articles about computer related (with a free/open bent) technologies and software? If you aren't reading for that reason, then you're in the wrong place. That's why I've devoted my JEs to discussing technology/software/asking linux related questions, etc... Oh yeah, and the occasional dig at Slashdot and trolling.
I think they are going to need to have a CGotomy before they can ever make decent science fiction films. One of the biggest downfalls of SciFi films (the genre) today is the over reliance on CG and action. SciFi was meant to be a thinking man's fiction. Today, it's just non-stop action movies set in the future, in space and with a lot of CG (a lot of it crappy). Whatever happened to the story? Oh yeah, I forgot that most people don't pay attention to plot anymore. This is exactly why the last two Matrix movies sucked. The first movie actually had a bit more plot than usual which is what made it stand out. They really missed the boat with the Architect thread. They also had an implication in the second film about matrices within matrices, but they just completely dropped it in the third movie. And then the ending of the series? A temporary truce? WTF?! Sorry, but SciFi films these days stink to high heaven. There used to be a time when people actually focused on science and culture in SciFi films and still managed to tell a good story too. Not anymore. Now it's just lots of action, FX and way overused CG. I didn't even see the Earthsea series, but I imagein it suffered from the same symptoms of crap SciFi/Fantasy. On another topic... didn't Leguin aslo write the more famous "A Wrinkle in Time"?
In rare instances. But that gets away from the point I am making. IF Microsoft controlled the hardware for a standard PC in the same way that Apple does with Macs, you'd have a more stable system. (Security is a different story) But since the hardware for a PC is so insanely varied, there is no way that you can get stability from a Windows box unless you know what you are doing. I can put together a Windows based system that is rock solid for a particular set of tasks if I wanted to, but I'm not the average user. So getting back to my original point:
More Options = less stable
Fewer Options = more stable
End of story
True. But I don't think that's who they're after. I think they're after the home user. Home users are the ones who tend to have the most problems with their browsers. In a corporate environment using IE that's well managed it's unlikely this will have much of an effect even if the PHB starts asking about it. I do think they should have taken out a one page ad in NYT and then used the rest of the money to publish an ad in the TV Guide as that is what most idi... errr... home users who aren't too "up-to-speed" on computers read the most. ;P