Junk mail subsidizes the post office. Without it, there probably wouldn't be a post office, or stamps would cost a whole lot more than they do. A post office is only cost effective with a certain threshold of volume. If junk mail didn't exists, it would cost more money to send the same non-junk mail.
With electronic spam, the more they send, the more it costs the receiver and the casual users of the system.
The more volume in physical mail, the cheaper it is to send and receive for the casual user.
Okay, a better scenario then is having 20 people elect someone to go get food for the entire group. Even though 2 people said they wanted McDonald's, it's closed for tonight. That's a better scenario.
This presumes that the American public are children minded, and there is some clear thinking adult minded person who should make all the rulte and decisions. That's the theory behind a Monarchy or Dictatorship. That is not the case in America.
A better example would be a car full of adults deciding where to eat lunch, which when there is disagreement, usually results in a discussion, compromise, and final vote, with the driver having veto power.
That's how it happens in our government as well. There is a discussion to see where everyone stands, some compromises are made, and there is a final vote. The President has veto power.
Everythings a conspiracy, isn't it? Sounds like the mind confusing tactics of a Dictator hell bent on denying the facts and explaining them away with fuzzy logic and conspiracy theories.
Also, where do you get off calling everyone stupid. This country was founded on the principle that the public could be trusted to rule themselves. Your comments are proof of the fact that you hate democracy and you hate America.
Whenever you see pro-war rallies, you see Americans wrapped in American flags singing American songs. Whenever you see anti-war protestors you see foreign flags, and hatred for our American leader.
Excuse me for believing in the American vision that a people could rule themselves. Will you please be my dictator?
But what we are really talking about here is all the protestors of the last year that think we shouldn't be attacking Iraq. And they think that just because they are protesting in the streets, and the policy hasn't changed, they are being dealt some great injustice.
So... they start breaking the law, laying in the busy downtown streets of New York with the intention of causing economic hardship to New York. These people are the minority, were allowed to vote in the National elections, and are being dealt no injustice at all. We have an all voluntary military force, where objectors to the war can be relieved of duty after filling out a simple form. And just because 25 people protest somewhere against the war doesn't mean they are representing some underlying unrepresented majority.
The facts remain:
As far as rallys and protests go, those against the war are far less attended than those who support the war. Poll after poll after poll has shown an overwhelming support for the President and the war.
The war protestors are in a clear minority, are being dealt no injustice, and want to circumvent the political process with violence and economic disruption. This should be very illegal. All of these protests you mentioned were heald because there was no other way of correcting an injustice. The law-breaking done by anti-war protestors is the result of a minority wanting to write foreign policy, undermine the current elected government, and force the will of the minority on the rest of the people. That's the difference.
That's right. any time some 'fucktard' blocks traffic, vandalizes property, or causes complete maham, we should turn around and do what they say.
Only in a military dominated dictatorship does the minority make the rules. The United States is a Democratic Republic. We have a process in which to 'listen to the damn people.' It's called elections. That's different from shutting down a city or country until the government does what you want. As long as their is a process in which the majority's voice gets heard, the minority's attempt to change things through violence and disruption is along the same lines of a military enfourcing the rules of a dictator. (less severe granted, but definately in the same direction.)
The majority rules, and the minority has the right to try and change the mines of people. However, it does not have the right to cause mass violence or economic hardship. We the people have already formed a government in which our voices can be heard in non-violent ways. Attempts to undermine this organization with with ways other than voting, working through your representatives, or peaceful non-disruptive protest is an assult on democracy, the will of the people, and the American way and should be dealt with accordingly.
That would be an interesting merger. The reason Sun wants a desktop is because they know the MS is gaining server market share for these reasons:
Executives are familiar with the MS desktop, and they prefer to buy something they know.
Some really cool features of the Microsoft Server are only made available with a Mircrosoft Client (ie, using Explorer to check your Exchange Mail)
Because a ton of people use the MS OS as non-professionals, when they become an IT professional, there is significant less learning curve to work on MS products. (They've already spent years learning the OS on a user level, where they may have never run into a UNIX box.)
Sun doesn't really want to sell desktops. And Apple really doesn't want to sell servers, but thinks they need to in order to compete with MS. That would be a very strategic marriage.
Besides, SUN has always been horrible at creating user friendly interfaces, but builds rock solid hardware and OS. Apple builds great interfaces that are easy to use.
A new company that could use the MS startegies of tieing functionality into have a single propietary OS on the client and server, might actually have a chance at really competing.
Step1) Format and load Windows 95.
Step2) Throw some Sid Meiers Colonization on that bad boy
Step3)...
Step4) Let him play on it for 3 months.
Step5) Got to step 1.
That's why I turned off my land line altogethor. My wife and I have 2 cell phones, and we never get calls. The local telephone companies must make big money off of selling their phone lists. It would be fraudulous to sell a cell phone list, considering the customer is paying for the sales call directly.
If this game is anything like MOO3, I won't touch it. It is sad that some of the graphics in MOO3 are worse than those in MOO2. The only thing that is better in MOO3 is that you can play over tcp/ip. I would have no idea how that works however; since I returned MOO3 cause it sucks so bad. MOO3 has a new kind of copy protection as well. Make our product so horrible that no-one will want to copy it. I'd rather play hot seat MOO2 than online MOO3 any day.
Most of my HTML is a table with some stuff on the top and some stoff on the left. And I have the main body of my page in the bottom right.
Also, I want to be able to do a lot of stuff in the head, like change the title, or create meta information.
Therefore, I create my own stuff each time. I can also change the content-type if I need to. Then I create a before template and after template. The before template is the HTML that sits before my main body and the after template sits after it. I could look for a content or something, but by splitting the page up, I avoid having to search for stuff in the page, which saves some time.
But perl still ends up reading each line of the template in and printing each line of the template out (some lines modified), right?
The general problem with concluding a casual relationship from a correlational study is that it's not objective. the author can create any logic to explain the causal relationship.
ie, take these facts.
There are more computers produced every year.
When computers are on, they create heat.
The Earth is warming every year.
Therefore,
The increased existance of computers is causing global warming.
This may seem insane, but it follows the same logic pattern as this story or any causaality based on a correlational study.
Causality can only be determined with causal expirements.
Actually, using electron scanning microscopes, you can see almost every change to a harddisk. Writing to it 1000 times wouldn't be good enough. That's why hard drives that once held top secret information are melted by the government. (Well, at least the platters are removed and melted.)
I like the idea (presented here, I think on a similar issue) to use camera's to fight the invasion of privacy.
For example, cops run cameras on their dashboard to watch you. Put a camera on your dashboard to watch the cops. This group of any should be able to come up with a cheap technical solution.
There's probably some other ways to fight fire with fire. Like the trash story we saw a week or so ago where the City declared trash was public. They got the government official's trash and displayed.
As private citizens, start our own data warehouse of government officials. Put cameras outside your house to watch the water meter inspector, the trash man, the police, the street cleaners, etc. Just a thought.
It's not always an issue of a server being down. Sometimes, it's an issue of two failed switches, code chages, or a piece of hardware that is inconsistently failing.
Google's customer services are searches. Their application is relatively static and simple. (They have 1 application). Google's business is their webservers.
In other businesses there may be 100's of externally facing applications, and even more internal applications. Code is constantly changing, and there is always activity somewhere. I bet Google doesn't have 3 backup internal mail servers. However, if the mail stops working, the mail admin is getting up at 3 am to fix it.
Hillary Clinton told us Canadians are terrorists. That means your money is drug money. Drugs are bad for kids. Kids are short. Dogs are short. Dogs can't see color. TV is in color. Therefore, Canadians don't need TIVOs.
In our shop, we are on call for 100's of webservers. We aren't responsible for all of them during the day, but 1 lucky guy a week gets to stay awake for the whole group of servers. I imagine that's the way it works in a lot of places. Plus, at any given time there are 1000's of code updates occurring acrossed multiple machines in the middle of the night. Not to mention other maintenance that the oncall may not be called in on until someone created a problem and their maintenance window is quickly coming to a close. Or, perhaps it's a database that isn't responding but the owners of the db can't figure out why, but it's 3 am and you got paged for the website that uses the db not responding.
So until you work somewhere that has more than 2 servers doing file and print sharing for a daytime staff of 12, don't tell me or others they are bad admins for a server not working _multiple_nights in a row. You haven't walked a mile in their shoes. I can safely assume from your ignorant comment that you've never worked with real servers before.
Businesses exists to make money, not to employ people. Every place I have ever worked, I get at least a paragraph about how no-one can make me a contract offer except the President and employment is at will for the employer and employee. I'm sure this is EVERYWHERE, cause I've even seen it on my High School Donatos Pizza application.
Where in the world do employees then get the idea that a company is entitled to give you a job? You knew the conditions of the relationship before you started; why do you honestly think you have room to bitch about them when you get axed?
Also, a lot of people have the idea that it is immoral to fire or lay someone off. Why? Because you expected to work there until it was convenient for you to quite? With the same argument, it is then immmoral for a person to quite or retire from a job. Afterall, the company expected you to work there until they didn't need you any longer.
I'm just an employee of a large insurance company, but I'm a realistic. We have a deal. I give 40 hours, and they send me a check every two weeks. I get certain time off, and some other benefits while I'm working there. It's in writing. If for some reason, they don't need me anymore or they can't afford me, they can lay me off. If for some reason, I find a better opportunity some where else, I can quit. If the company lays me off on good terms (severence package), I may come work for them again. If I leave the company on good terms (2 weeks notice), they may let me work for them again. I UNDERSTAND THE AGREEMENT. Don't read into it or make assumptions beyond this. They don't exists. If you don't like the agreement, find some other way to make money; ie, start your own business.
Think about that... starting your own business. Whatever you are doing, whatever your skills are, you are producing a profit for your company. Use those same skills to produce a profit for yourself. A little easier said than done, and a lot riskier, but it's a different agreement, and you can't get fired or laid off. You also won't get paid for lazy days or weeks or whatever, but it's a different arrangement.
Other possible arrangements include those of thievery, black market sales (ie, drugs), conning, marrying into money, hoping for rich granny to die, winning the lottery, living on the street, moving to a warm place and living on the street, traveling the world teaching english for food and shelter, mooching off your parents-friends-sibblings-etc, selling sex on the street corner (after all, it's my sexy body and i'll do what i want), sueing everbody, or even asking for donations and when refused suing for racial discrimination (it works for jesse jackson), living off of wellfare checks and food stamps, begging for change, begging for change on the internet. Send me $20 and I'll send you pamphlet on these alternative arrangements.
DISCLAIMER I neither advicate or advise doing anything illegal or immoral to make a living.
I had a foster brother that we were scared would kill us at night while we were sleeping. That's kind of scary, but our problem was similar to yours. We needed to keep only him in his room at night, but in case of an emergency, we needed for him to be able to pass through the door to safety. That's what we thought the problem was.
But really, the problem was that we needed to be awake when he left the room to ensure our safety. So my mom and dad bought a sensor that would detect when the door opened. The sensor was on the outside of door and could be turned on and off by the parent. (The sensor is out of reach because of it's height, and because you can't open the door without setting it off.) When the sensor sensed an open door, it set off an alarm that woke everyone in the house up AND the next three houses down. This type of system is available at radio shack for $20.
Result, foster brother learned very quickly that at night he could not open the door without triggering the alarm. And the alarm was loud and annoying. So it was very good in training certain behaviors. (The loud noise is almost like a pain stimulator in modifying behavior).
In short, put a sensor on every door and window in the house, like your standard security system. You can probably do this within your budget if you install it yourself and don't subscribe to a monitoring service. You can even drill the sensors into the door and the door jam to deter tampering when he gets old enough to tamper. You don't need to keep your son in the house, but you do need to know if and when he leaves. With such a system, you will know.
This will require for some adjustments in your living habits. Ie, your other kids won't be able to run in and out of the house (that will save you some heating bills too). They may have to ring the doorbell to come back in from playing, to avoid setting the alarm off, and you may have to get up to temporarly unset the alarm. But they will learn that very quickly as well, as the loud sound is as affective as a pain motivator in modifying behavior. Also, strangers will be safe as well in your house. If a fire breaks out, they can still physically exit your house, although a loud alarm will go off.
Finally, you and your wife can affectively keep the secret code to the alarm safe without burdening your kids with remembering it or protecting it. You can also set the alarm up to simply chime when a door or window is open. Maybe, you can find a system that allows you to set a very loud chime, or you could even place speakers in every room of your house.
I imagine that most people who actually pusure huge wealth actually ENJOY the work, or they'd do something else. I hope they enjoy it, otherwise they have wasted their lives.
Or they enjoy persuing wealth, which is a little bit different from enjoying the work. Maybe why that's why the sims, sim city, and rts's are so well liked. People love to build stuff, and build off of previous successes. This is what happens when you are in the hunt for wealth. The only difference is that video games give you a relatively immediate indications of success, and in real life these indicators of success are years and years down the road.
Most people can't achieve wealth, so they make excuses up to why they don't want it any way. But when I look at your statements, you do want wealth, if it comes quick and without personal sacrifice. That's apparent here...
I am going to work hard enough to pay for the things I would like to do, but not spend my life working
If I gave you 10 million dollars, you could do all the thing you like to do, and not spend another second working. People who seek wealth are after the same thing, though. However, they choose to sacrifice their ability to do things they want to do now but can't because of time and money constraignt, so they can do everything they want later without worrying about time and money.
In short, it annoys me when people say, "I don't want wealth. That's for those shallow stiffs who always worry about money and waste their life persuing it. I'm focusing on what matters."
For me, wealth can give me the following things: the ability to wake up every morning with my wife and do exactly what I want to do, even if that means laying around watching TV for a week or flying to Spain to watch a tomatoe fight. Can I do that now? No. I don't have enough money or time. Can I do that later in life? Yes, if I sacrifice the small things now, like learning about model helicopters racing radio controlled cars. I don't live my life on a week-to-week basis. I live it on a year, 5-year, and 10 year basis, because they only way I will achieve true freedom is through Financial freedom. (You know, that dirty word called wealth which involves having loads of cash in the bank.)
I would listen to your friends and try and visit the real world. When you have loads stored in the bank, you have real freedom, not the tempory kind where you are limited to playing with the things you can afford on a weeks pay.
Slashdot Mirror
Junk mail sucks, and I'd love to see it abolished
Junk mail subsidizes the post office. Without it, there probably wouldn't be a post office, or stamps would cost a whole lot more than they do. A post office is only cost effective with a certain threshold of volume. If junk mail didn't exists, it would cost more money to send the same non-junk mail.
With electronic spam, the more they send, the more it costs the receiver and the casual users of the system.
The more volume in physical mail, the cheaper it is to send and receive for the casual user.
Okay, a better scenario then is having 20 people elect someone to go get food for the entire group. Even though 2 people said they wanted McDonald's, it's closed for tonight. That's a better scenario.
This presumes that the American public are children minded, and there is some clear thinking adult minded person who should make all the rulte and decisions. That's the theory behind a Monarchy or Dictatorship. That is not the case in America.
A better example would be a car full of adults deciding where to eat lunch, which when there is disagreement, usually results in a discussion, compromise, and final vote, with the driver having veto power.
That's how it happens in our government as well. There is a discussion to see where everyone stands, some compromises are made, and there is a final vote. The President has veto power.
Everythings a conspiracy, isn't it? Sounds like the mind confusing tactics of a Dictator hell bent on denying the facts and explaining them away with fuzzy logic and conspiracy theories.
Also, where do you get off calling everyone stupid. This country was founded on the principle that the public could be trusted to rule themselves. Your comments are proof of the fact that you hate democracy and you hate America.
Whenever you see pro-war rallies, you see Americans wrapped in American flags singing American songs. Whenever you see anti-war protestors you see foreign flags, and hatred for our American leader.
Excuse me for believing in the American vision that a people could rule themselves. Will you please be my dictator?
But what we are really talking about here is all the protestors of the last year that think we shouldn't be attacking Iraq. And they think that just because they are protesting in the streets, and the policy hasn't changed, they are being dealt some great injustice.
So... they start breaking the law, laying in the busy downtown streets of New York with the intention of causing economic hardship to New York. These people are the minority, were allowed to vote in the National elections, and are being dealt no injustice at all. We have an all voluntary military force, where objectors to the war can be relieved of duty after filling out a simple form. And just because 25 people protest somewhere against the war doesn't mean they are representing some underlying unrepresented majority.
The facts remain:
As far as rallys and protests go, those against the war are far less attended than those who support the war.
Poll after poll after poll has shown an overwhelming support for the President and the war.
The war protestors are in a clear minority, are being dealt no injustice, and want to circumvent the political process with violence and economic disruption. This should be very illegal. All of these protests you mentioned were heald because there was no other way of correcting an injustice. The law-breaking done by anti-war protestors is the result of a minority wanting to write foreign policy, undermine the current elected government, and force the will of the minority on the rest of the people. That's the difference.
That's right. any time some 'fucktard' blocks traffic, vandalizes property, or causes complete maham, we should turn around and do what they say.
Only in a military dominated dictatorship does the minority make the rules. The United States is a Democratic Republic. We have a process in which to 'listen to the damn people.' It's called elections. That's different from shutting down a city or country until the government does what you want. As long as their is a process in which the majority's voice gets heard, the minority's attempt to change things through violence and disruption is along the same lines of a military enfourcing the rules of a dictator. (less severe granted, but definately in the same direction.)
The majority rules, and the minority has the right to try and change the mines of people. However, it does not have the right to cause mass violence or economic hardship. We the people have already formed a government in which our voices can be heard in non-violent ways. Attempts to undermine this organization with with ways other than voting, working through your representatives, or peaceful non-disruptive protest is an assult on democracy, the will of the people, and the American way and should be dealt with accordingly.
That would be an interesting merger. The reason Sun wants a desktop is because they know the MS is gaining server market share for these reasons:
Executives are familiar with the MS desktop, and they prefer to buy something they know.
Some really cool features of the Microsoft Server are only made available with a Mircrosoft Client (ie, using Explorer to check your Exchange Mail)
Because a ton of people use the MS OS as non-professionals, when they become an IT professional, there is significant less learning curve to work on MS products. (They've already spent years learning the OS on a user level, where they may have never run into a UNIX box.)
Sun doesn't really want to sell desktops. And Apple really doesn't want to sell servers, but thinks they need to in order to compete with MS. That would be a very strategic marriage.
Besides, SUN has always been horrible at creating user friendly interfaces, but builds rock solid hardware and OS. Apple builds great interfaces that are easy to use.
A new company that could use the MS startegies of tieing functionality into have a single propietary OS on the client and server, might actually have a chance at really competing.
Step1) Format and load Windows 95. ...
Step4) Let him play on it for 3 months.
Step5) Got to step 1.
Step2) Throw some Sid Meiers Colonization on that bad boy
Step3)
That's why I turned off my land line altogethor. My wife and I have 2 cell phones, and we never get calls. The local telephone companies must make big money off of selling their phone lists. It would be fraudulous to sell a cell phone list, considering the customer is paying for the sales call directly.
If this game is anything like MOO3, I won't touch it. It is sad that some of the graphics in MOO3 are worse than those in MOO2. The only thing that is better in MOO3 is that you can play over tcp/ip. I would have no idea how that works however; since I returned MOO3 cause it sucks so bad. MOO3 has a new kind of copy protection as well. Make our product so horrible that no-one will want to copy it. I'd rather play hot seat MOO2 than online MOO3 any day.
Oh, I see.
I guess I use a mixture.
Most of my HTML is a table with some stuff on the top and some stoff on the left. And I have the main body of my page in the bottom right.
Also, I want to be able to do a lot of stuff in the head, like change the title, or create meta information.
Therefore, I create my own stuff each time. I can also change the content-type if I need to. Then I create a before template and after template. The before template is the HTML that sits before my main body and the after template sits after it. I could look for a content or something, but by splitting the page up, I avoid having to search for stuff in the page, which saves some time.
But perl still ends up reading each line of the template in and printing each line of the template out (some lines modified), right?
Excuse my ignorance, but how do you get the HTML code back to the user?
The general problem with concluding a casual relationship from a correlational study is that it's not objective. the author can create any logic to explain the causal relationship.
ie, take these facts. There are more computers produced every year.
When computers are on, they create heat.
The Earth is warming every year.
Therefore, The increased existance of computers is causing global warming.
This may seem insane, but it follows the same logic pattern as this story or any causaality based on a correlational study.
Causality can only be determined with causal expirements.
Yeah, because anyone making more money than you is making too much. Especially, if they are making 2 times what you are.
Actually, using electron scanning microscopes, you can see almost every change to a harddisk. Writing to it 1000 times wouldn't be good enough. That's why hard drives that once held top secret information are melted by the government. (Well, at least the platters are removed and melted.)
I like the idea (presented here, I think on a similar issue) to use camera's to fight the invasion of privacy.
For example, cops run cameras on their dashboard to watch you. Put a camera on your dashboard to watch the cops. This group of any should be able to come up with a cheap technical solution.
There's probably some other ways to fight fire with fire. Like the trash story we saw a week or so ago where the City declared trash was public. They got the government official's trash and displayed.
As private citizens, start our own data warehouse of government officials. Put cameras outside your house to watch the water meter inspector, the trash man, the police, the street cleaners, etc. Just a thought.
It's not always an issue of a server being down. Sometimes, it's an issue of two failed switches, code chages, or a piece of hardware that is inconsistently failing.
Google's customer services are searches. Their application is relatively static and simple. (They have 1 application). Google's business is their webservers.
In other businesses there may be 100's of externally facing applications, and even more internal applications. Code is constantly changing, and there is always activity somewhere. I bet Google doesn't have 3 backup internal mail servers. However, if the mail stops working, the mail admin is getting up at 3 am to fix it.
Hillary Clinton told us Canadians are terrorists. That means your money is drug money. Drugs are bad for kids. Kids are short. Dogs are short. Dogs can't see color. TV is in color. Therefore, Canadians don't need TIVOs.
In our shop, we are on call for 100's of webservers. We aren't responsible for all of them during the day, but 1 lucky guy a week gets to stay awake for the whole group of servers. I imagine that's the way it works in a lot of places. Plus, at any given time there are 1000's of code updates occurring acrossed multiple machines in the middle of the night. Not to mention other maintenance that the oncall may not be called in on until someone created a problem and their maintenance window is quickly coming to a close. Or, perhaps it's a database that isn't responding but the owners of the db can't figure out why, but it's 3 am and you got paged for the website that uses the db not responding.
So until you work somewhere that has more than 2 servers doing file and print sharing for a daytime staff of 12, don't tell me or others they are bad admins for a server not working _multiple_nights in a row. You haven't walked a mile in their shoes. I can safely assume from your ignorant comment that you've never worked with real servers before.
Nice sig!
I see. wow. That is tuff.
:-(
It sounds like you need nothing short of a cage
I hope you find a solution.
Businesses exists to make money, not to employ people. Every place I have ever worked, I get at least a paragraph about how no-one can make me a contract offer except the President and employment is at will for the employer and employee. I'm sure this is EVERYWHERE, cause I've even seen it on my High School Donatos Pizza application.
Where in the world do employees then get the idea that a company is entitled to give you a job? You knew the conditions of the relationship before you started; why do you honestly think you have room to bitch about them when you get axed?
Also, a lot of people have the idea that it is immoral to fire or lay someone off. Why? Because you expected to work there until it was convenient for you to quite? With the same argument, it is then immmoral for a person to quite or retire from a job. Afterall, the company expected you to work there until they didn't need you any longer.
I'm just an employee of a large insurance company, but I'm a realistic. We have a deal. I give 40 hours, and they send me a check every two weeks. I get certain time off, and some other benefits while I'm working there. It's in writing. If for some reason, they don't need me anymore or they can't afford me, they can lay me off. If for some reason, I find a better opportunity some where else, I can quit. If the company lays me off on good terms (severence package), I may come work for them again. If I leave the company on good terms (2 weeks notice), they may let me work for them again. I UNDERSTAND THE AGREEMENT. Don't read into it or make assumptions beyond this. They don't exists. If you don't like the agreement, find some other way to make money; ie, start your own business.
Think about that... starting your own business. Whatever you are doing, whatever your skills are, you are producing a profit for your company. Use those same skills to produce a profit for yourself. A little easier said than done, and a lot riskier, but it's a different agreement, and you can't get fired or laid off. You also won't get paid for lazy days or weeks or whatever, but it's a different arrangement.
Other possible arrangements include those of thievery, black market sales (ie, drugs), conning, marrying into money, hoping for rich granny to die, winning the lottery, living on the street, moving to a warm place and living on the street, traveling the world teaching english for food and shelter, mooching off your parents-friends-sibblings-etc, selling sex on the street corner (after all, it's my sexy body and i'll do what i want), sueing everbody, or even asking for donations and when refused suing for racial discrimination (it works for jesse jackson), living off of wellfare checks and food stamps, begging for change, begging for change on the internet. Send me $20 and I'll send you pamphlet on these alternative arrangements.
DISCLAIMER I neither advicate or advise doing anything illegal or immoral to make a living.
I had a foster brother that we were scared would kill us at night while we were sleeping. That's kind of scary, but our problem was similar to yours. We needed to keep only him in his room at night, but in case of an emergency, we needed for him to be able to pass through the door to safety. That's what we thought the problem was.
But really, the problem was that we needed to be awake when he left the room to ensure our safety. So my mom and dad bought a sensor that would detect when the door opened. The sensor was on the outside of door and could be turned on and off by the parent. (The sensor is out of reach because of it's height, and because you can't open the door without setting it off.) When the sensor sensed an open door, it set off an alarm that woke everyone in the house up AND the next three houses down. This type of system is available at radio shack for $20.
Result, foster brother learned very quickly that at night he could not open the door without triggering the alarm. And the alarm was loud and annoying. So it was very good in training certain behaviors. (The loud noise is almost like a pain stimulator in modifying behavior).
In short, put a sensor on every door and window in the house, like your standard security system. You can probably do this within your budget if you install it yourself and don't subscribe to a monitoring service. You can even drill the sensors into the door and the door jam to deter tampering when he gets old enough to tamper. You don't need to keep your son in the house, but you do need to know if and when he leaves. With such a system, you will know.
This will require for some adjustments in your living habits. Ie, your other kids won't be able to run in and out of the house (that will save you some heating bills too). They may have to ring the doorbell to come back in from playing, to avoid setting the alarm off, and you may have to get up to temporarly unset the alarm. But they will learn that very quickly as well, as the loud sound is as affective as a pain motivator in modifying behavior. Also, strangers will be safe as well in your house. If a fire breaks out, they can still physically exit your house, although a loud alarm will go off.
Finally, you and your wife can affectively keep the secret code to the alarm safe without burdening your kids with remembering it or protecting it. You can also set the alarm up to simply chime when a door or window is open. Maybe, you can find a system that allows you to set a very loud chime, or you could even place speakers in every room of your house.
I imagine that most people who actually pusure huge wealth actually ENJOY the work, or they'd do something else. I hope they enjoy it, otherwise they have wasted their lives.
Or they enjoy persuing wealth, which is a little bit different from enjoying the work. Maybe why that's why the sims, sim city, and rts's are so well liked. People love to build stuff, and build off of previous successes. This is what happens when you are in the hunt for wealth. The only difference is that video games give you a relatively immediate indications of success, and in real life these indicators of success are years and years down the road.
Like sewing seeds for later reaping...
Most people can't achieve wealth, so they make excuses up to why they don't want it any way. But when I look at your statements, you do want wealth, if it comes quick and without personal sacrifice. That's apparent here...
I am going to work hard enough to pay for the things I would like to do, but not spend my life working
If I gave you 10 million dollars, you could do all the thing you like to do, and not spend another second working. People who seek wealth are after the same thing, though. However, they choose to sacrifice their ability to do things they want to do now but can't because of time and money constraignt, so they can do everything they want later without worrying about time and money.
In short, it annoys me when people say, "I don't want wealth. That's for those shallow stiffs who always worry about money and waste their life persuing it. I'm focusing on what matters."
For me, wealth can give me the following things: the ability to wake up every morning with my wife and do exactly what I want to do, even if that means laying around watching TV for a week or flying to Spain to watch a tomatoe fight. Can I do that now? No. I don't have enough money or time. Can I do that later in life? Yes, if I sacrifice the small things now, like learning about model helicopters racing radio controlled cars. I don't live my life on a week-to-week basis. I live it on a year, 5-year, and 10 year basis, because they only way I will achieve true freedom is through Financial freedom. (You know, that dirty word called wealth which involves having loads of cash in the bank.)
I would listen to your friends and try and visit the real world. When you have loads stored in the bank, you have real freedom, not the tempory kind where you are limited to playing with the things you can afford on a weeks pay.