True, but being dickwads makes you dickwads. Try tact, understanding, facilitation, and education instead of insulting, berating, and denigrating people simply because they don't have as high an understanding of your specialty.
You make this much harder on yourself than it needs to be.
Taken aback = surprised. Is it so bad that he was surprised?
Chances are that the guy didn't see an issue with it. That's why he posted here, after all. He encountered something he didn't expect and sought advice on the matter.
You seem to have read the request for input as condescending, pompous, and arrogant.
I did not see it as that.
I read it as, "Hey guys, I know what I'm doing (computer-wise), but I'm not sure if IT should have constant access to it. What do you think?"
Yet instead of giving the guy a normal answer ("This may not be HIPPA compliant... as much as you may hate it, you have to follow IT's rules on their network...") , you felt the need to attack him. Why? Because he's not a system administrator by employ?
Of all things, *your* post came off as pompous, arrogant, and condescending.
When I was beta testing DC Universe Online, every new batch of testers to be allowed in had a hand full of people who would invariably complain: "If you don't add X, Y, and Z, you'll never be able to beat WoW!" or "Clicking in your own combo moves is ANNOYING! Where's the auto-attack?"
While DCUO labeled itself as an Action MMO (heavier on the action), that MMO(rpg) label still carried with it some pretty hefty preconceived notions regarding game mechanics and even story progression. It was the basis of a massive amount of discussion which, in my opinion, would have been better used as testing the beta instead of arm-chair developing.
Oh, please don't call it "faith" on your part. It stops being faith when you have "reason to trust". Faith and belief are blind. Trust is skeptical and can change.
When you see a paper from Scientist Barnaby from Oxford University and a conflicting paper from the Jesus Now! Journal of Anthropology, your bias against faith-based science may come out and you may, thus, immediately assume that the Oxford paper is more likely to be correct. But that's not faith in Oxford University on your part. You *trust* Oxford because of your knowledge and experience of the academic standards held there are significantly greater than the Jesus Now! That experience, logic, help you to form hypothesis. It's quick, it's decisive, and its prejudicial, but it's not faith.
Just the same, if you research Catholicism and find that they're miracles are most believable, that they're interpretation of dead sea scrolls are most accurate, and as a result, you decide to worship God in the Catholic tradition as a means to prevent fiery damnation and to increase the probability of an eternal state of grace, you're still not being faithful. You're hedging a bet.
Faith is the complete absence of the need of probably- or genuinely-correct information. It is belief without reason or NEED for reason.
http://www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics "More than 500 million active users 50% of our active users log on to Facebook in any given day Average user has 130 friends People spend over 700 billion minutes per month on Facebook"
That means each "user" spends an average of 15 minutes per month on face book. Or just over 27 seconds per day.
"More than 200 million active users currently accessing Facebook through their mobile devices. "
So, if they're always on, how much does that skew minutes and thus average active usership?
Unless those 50 words are not actually spoken and those 30 slides aren't packed with words.
In the world of PowerPoint presentations, you have to remember that those presentations are almost always requested by those in the audience as *notes*. If there's not enough information on those slides, then those will be bad notes. If there's not enough slides to fully describe your topic, then, again, they're bad notes.
Indeed! There are many mathematically-inclined career routes that require very strong understandings of subjects up through trigonometry but *don't* necessarily require college degrees. (Whether it's entirely realistic that these careers can be easily obtained without the Bachelor's Degree stamp of approval is another subject.)
"Algebra II is the leading predictor of college and work success"
This is not precisely true. The most accurate statement is "The taking (and passing) of math levels beyond Algebra I (and maybe Geometry) is the leading predictor of college and work success." There's nothing about Algebra II as a subject that would innately give humans an edge in college or life success. It's going above and beyond the minimum requirements that's good for the student.
Moreover, a student going above and beyond the minimum may be more than a sign of innate mathematical competence. It may be a symptom of certain school, peer, or family pressures-- all of which combine in the "culture of education" which is a fantastic predictor of being accepted into 4-year institutions of higher education.
Proprietary parts, proprietary software, proprietary vendor shops and an Apple-specific software vendor environment... How is that a "secret" to their success? That's the most obvious component of their business plans-- reduce costs by keeping as much as possible in house. That way, when they *do* charge above competitor prices, it's just outright increased profits.
There was one episode where the Stig drove a Koenigsegg around the track. It was squirrely around the corners and actually veered off into a tire wall. They said that if there was a spoiler on it, it wouldn't have had that problem.
So did Koenigsegg sue? No. They know that Top Gear is 50% fun and 50% PR, so they took the car back to the shop, slapped a spoiler on it, and sent it back. How cool is that?
What Tesla should have done is say, "Thanks for giving our car a good thrashing. We're working on some modifications to improve track performance and we'll send you that car when it's ready." And then actually do so. That way, Clarkson has no choice to say, at the very worst, "Tesla may make eco-cars, but they're a hell of a lot of fun and I think they may be on to something..."
This is a complex problem. Allow me to cite just *some* of the facets.
Improve education -- This can mean: 1. Improve scores on standardized tests -- Important to politicians 2. Improve grades in class -- Important to the student's future 3. Increase curiosity in subject -- Important to the student's lifelong education and passion for the subject for the future. 4. Decrease hesitation to subject -- Important for the student's interest in the subject NOW.
Questions about the advanced degree: 1. What is the teacher's BA major? (Directly related to subject, Loosely related to subject, Not related to subject) 2. In what subject is the advanced degree? 3. From what school is the advanced degree earned? 4. From what TYPE of school is the advanced degree earned? (Brick and mortar, distance learning) 5. What type of attendance is required for the advanced degree? (Day/Night, Classes per week) 6. How are the classes required for the advanced degree graded?
In effect, was the degree "granted" because a certain set of requirements were met or was the degree EARNED? A ton of teachers have night-class and distance-learning advanced degrees. Those are worth squat beyond kicking up pay a bit. But there are real academic programs out there that improve a person's understanding of a subject sufficient so that the person can teach the subject better. Or, if the advanced degree is in teaching, so that the teaching habits can be improved upon.
His "identify great teachers and emulate them" initiative is not what I'm talking about. All he wants to do is what everyone has been doing for years in and out of education: "Best Practices". And he even makes the same error in assumptions: "To flip the curve, we have to identify great teachers, find out what makes them so effective and transfer those skills to others so more students can enjoy top teachers and high achievement."
Transfer those skills to others? WTF? That's not how education works! There's no transferring, they're no pouring, there's no manufacturing! It's experience. It's outlook. It's life and passion and the seeking intrinsic reward.
Bill is a fan of business. He looks at things like a businessman does. Find gains, duplicate gains. Find expenses, justify or cut expenses. He thinks he can document the amazing personality traits of great teachers and duplicate them in less-great teachers. That's not how people work!
He also thinks advanced degrees don't increase student performance because of the oft-cited "statistic", "Another standard feature of school budgets is a bump in pay for advanced degrees. Such raises have almost no impact on achievement, but every year they cost $15 billion that would help students more if spent in other ways."
But does he separate MAs gained via online or night courses affects teachers versus MAs that require full-time education? Does he go into how the extra education makes the job of teaching easier on the teacher thus extending the "employment expectancy" of that employee?
Bill doesn't understand that great teachers are typically great people with a passion for education PRIOR to actually getting credentialed. Just as it is nearly impossible to take a bad 11th grader and prepare him for college, you can't just duplicate best practices and think the world will end up fantastic. You have to start at ground level:
1. Invest in streamlining the teacher education and certification process so that we don't lose these aspiring and idealist teachers to the many distractions of life. You have to capture them while they care! Don't touch the education part of it... just work on the system. 2. Give grants to fix school facilities. 3. Give grants to hire REAL teachers. (Not temporary, substitute, or TFA. People who expect to stay in their schools for more than 3 years.) 4. Understand that you're dealing with people, not machines. "Duplicating practices" is not realistic. The best you can do is find some of these amazing teachers and have THEM teach new teachers. You'll ruin it if you try to make their art into a worksheet assignment module consigned to a 10-week night-class seminar.
Bill, you don't understand education. You didn't take the time to understand children, teenagers, sociology, social psychology, pedagogy, performance/theater, linguistics, or any other field necessary to comprehend what a teacher is and just spend your time and money looking for a silver bullet cure to any ailments.
First, Bill tried to give away millions to students to pay for their college education. Of course, it came in the form of competitive scholarships so those who were already destined to receive a bunch of money (because of a strong educational history and innate brilliance) simply got more. This made no change.
Then came the funding of techno-super schools. But they were neither in areas in need of improvement nor were the schools any cheaper (more expensive, obviously) to run. Another failure.
Bill, if you want to make a change, do this: Create a system for the development of teachers. Not super-teachers or techno-teachers-- just teachers. At the moment there is no hub for potential teachers to go to that catalogs all the credential or master's programs. There's no easier step-by-step guide for the process in California. Everyone just quotes a vague order of things.
Also, if you don't want to help the creation of teachers (and hell, give grants to pay for their wages!), then try just funding the modest renovation of crap-hole schools and class rooms in low-income neighborhoods.
If you want to make a change, help the poor. It's that easy.
Just to put this all into perspective for those claiming doom and gloom regarding nuclear power --
How many oil disasters have there been in the past decade? (Spills, refinery fires, etc.) How many people died? How many in Japan due to the quake? How old were the facilities?
How many coal disasters have there been in the last decade? How many people died? How many in coal disasters in Japan due to the quake? How old were the facilities?
How many nuclear disasters were there? How old were the facilities?
Right... so when we look at nuclear power, it's still the safest. They're built with the most oversight, foresight, and regulation AND it took the largest earthquake in recorded Japanese history to damage the 40 year old reactor-- which still likely won't go into meltdown. And there's been plenty of time to evacuate everyone just in case it does.
Do we get ANY of that luxury with oil or coal?
(Note: I use oil, coal, and nuclear energy in this comparison because they are the energy sources that can be created just about anywhere. Geothermal, wind, water, and solar require very specific placements.)
I normally don't agree with seemingly simplistic "thread-ender" comments like this, but... I agree. These over-reaching EULAs and "privacy" agreements have been part of digital life for *decades* now. There's nothing new under the sun except that companies are more and more able to capitalize off the warnings now.
I genuinely understand ignorance of new users, but anyone who has been clicking through installations or creating identities on whatever sites for a year or more should already know what this article is talking about.
Because that DNA will then be on record. I know law enforcement agencies (and prosecutors, for that matter) well enough to refrain from giving them any biological information wherever possible.
If I'm on trial and rationality and other evidence seems insufficient, then I'll give them a drop of blood... But I'd rather go to trial first than be part of the masses shuffled through blood-letting under suspicion so someone (anyone) can build a database of citizenry DNA.
I keep my business-related conversations to my dept. account. I keep my university conversations to my university account. I keep my personal conversations in my gmail account or through instant messengers.
Keep the spheres separate and life will be easier.
Nope. Secular Humanist, Moral Relativist, and Deontological Preference Utilitarian.
In other words, I don't choose a religion or a religious morality to determine how I should act (though I have nothing against faith). Instead, I've come to logical and ethical conclusions that require me, duty-bound, to help preserve and advance the preferences of others around me while reducing frustration and pain. It's why education is my passion.
Admittedly, it's very similar to Buddhism... just without the requirement for belief in the supernatural.
As the guy who receives these infected and mistreated computers in my large circle of friends, family, and co-workers (and then combinations thereof), I have to say: If you have a problem fixing any computer, just don't fix it.
I've gotten such severely infected systems that I spend the greater part of my weekend cleaning said infections and uninstalling malware only to pop in a couple spare sticks of RAM or an old video card (where there was once only on-board video). Why? Because I like the people around me and I like to make sure the quality of life is good... if not better than what it was. Seriously. I care about my friends and coworkers and friends of coworkers and coworkers of friends. If they need help and I can help them, I'm going to do it.
Just remember to do a full write-up of all the actions you did:
--Quote the number of infections --Install as much free/open-source alternatives to their malware-ridden pirated software as possible --List the names of the software and describe what they do --List some "best practices" for real-world computer usage. --Let them know that you do this so their lives can be easier and so they have to spend less money now and in the future.
Put that write-up on the desktop and give a mini-presentation to the owner before they retake the computer. They'll appreciate the education, they'll appreciate the free utility and any upgrades you surprise them with, once they understand the effort involved in the service a friend provides for free, they'll appreciate/you/.
Proprietary hardware and software doesn't hurt. And then there's the guarantee of loyalty-purchases as opposed to the PC market which is mostly of the "let's see who is genuinely better" type of scrutiny.
Add in the massive premium that comes with minor increases in product (+$100 for +16GB of SSD or +$130 for 3G WITH a contract) and the likelihood that those who already loyally buy apple will likely want a maxed out iPad (admittedly pure speculation on my part) and you'll get some decent money on return.
With Apple and the iCulture, there's not much risk in the research, design, and release of a product. With everyone else, it's all risk. Every bit of it.
Slashdot Mirror
True, but being dickwads makes you dickwads. Try tact, understanding, facilitation, and education instead of insulting, berating, and denigrating people simply because they don't have as high an understanding of your specialty.
You make this much harder on yourself than it needs to be.
Taken aback = surprised. Is it so bad that he was surprised?
Chances are that the guy didn't see an issue with it. That's why he posted here, after all. He encountered something he didn't expect and sought advice on the matter.
What's so bad about that?
You seem to have read the request for input as condescending, pompous, and arrogant.
I did not see it as that.
I read it as, "Hey guys, I know what I'm doing (computer-wise), but I'm not sure if IT should have constant access to it. What do you think?"
Yet instead of giving the guy a normal answer ("This may not be HIPPA compliant... as much as you may hate it, you have to follow IT's rules on their network...") , you felt the need to attack him. Why? Because he's not a system administrator by employ?
Of all things, *your* post came off as pompous, arrogant, and condescending.
When I was beta testing DC Universe Online, every new batch of testers to be allowed in had a hand full of people who would invariably complain: "If you don't add X, Y, and Z, you'll never be able to beat WoW!" or "Clicking in your own combo moves is ANNOYING! Where's the auto-attack?"
While DCUO labeled itself as an Action MMO (heavier on the action), that MMO(rpg) label still carried with it some pretty hefty preconceived notions regarding game mechanics and even story progression. It was the basis of a massive amount of discussion which, in my opinion, would have been better used as testing the beta instead of arm-chair developing.
"I can't imagine a situation where hairy-nosed wombats would be in some way crucial to the human species."
That's due to the lack of imagination, not due to the lack of crucial connection.
Oh, please don't call it "faith" on your part. It stops being faith when you have "reason to trust". Faith and belief are blind. Trust is skeptical and can change.
When you see a paper from Scientist Barnaby from Oxford University and a conflicting paper from the Jesus Now! Journal of Anthropology, your bias against faith-based science may come out and you may, thus, immediately assume that the Oxford paper is more likely to be correct. But that's not faith in Oxford University on your part. You *trust* Oxford because of your knowledge and experience of the academic standards held there are significantly greater than the Jesus Now! That experience, logic, help you to form hypothesis. It's quick, it's decisive, and its prejudicial, but it's not faith.
Just the same, if you research Catholicism and find that they're miracles are most believable, that they're interpretation of dead sea scrolls are most accurate, and as a result, you decide to worship God in the Catholic tradition as a means to prevent fiery damnation and to increase the probability of an eternal state of grace, you're still not being faithful. You're hedging a bet.
Faith is the complete absence of the need of probably- or genuinely-correct information. It is belief without reason or NEED for reason.
http://www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics
"More than 500 million active users
50% of our active users log on to Facebook in any given day
Average user has 130 friends
People spend over 700 billion minutes per month on Facebook"
That means each "user" spends an average of 15 minutes per month on face book. Or just over 27 seconds per day.
"More than 200 million active users currently accessing Facebook through their mobile devices. "
So, if they're always on, how much does that skew minutes and thus average active usership?
Unless those 50 words are not actually spoken and those 30 slides aren't packed with words.
In the world of PowerPoint presentations, you have to remember that those presentations are almost always requested by those in the audience as *notes*. If there's not enough information on those slides, then those will be bad notes. If there's not enough slides to fully describe your topic, then, again, they're bad notes.
Indeed! There are many mathematically-inclined career routes that require very strong understandings of subjects up through trigonometry but *don't* necessarily require college degrees. (Whether it's entirely realistic that these careers can be easily obtained without the Bachelor's Degree stamp of approval is another subject.)
"Algebra II is the leading predictor of college and work success"
This is not precisely true. The most accurate statement is "The taking (and passing) of math levels beyond Algebra I (and maybe Geometry) is the leading predictor of college and work success." There's nothing about Algebra II as a subject that would innately give humans an edge in college or life success. It's going above and beyond the minimum requirements that's good for the student.
Moreover, a student going above and beyond the minimum may be more than a sign of innate mathematical competence. It may be a symptom of certain school, peer, or family pressures-- all of which combine in the "culture of education" which is a fantastic predictor of being accepted into 4-year institutions of higher education.
Proprietary parts, proprietary software, proprietary vendor shops and an Apple-specific software vendor environment... How is that a "secret" to their success? That's the most obvious component of their business plans-- reduce costs by keeping as much as possible in house. That way, when they *do* charge above competitor prices, it's just outright increased profits.
There was one episode where the Stig drove a Koenigsegg around the track. It was squirrely around the corners and actually veered off into a tire wall. They said that if there was a spoiler on it, it wouldn't have had that problem.
So did Koenigsegg sue? No. They know that Top Gear is 50% fun and 50% PR, so they took the car back to the shop, slapped a spoiler on it, and sent it back. How cool is that?
What Tesla should have done is say, "Thanks for giving our car a good thrashing. We're working on some modifications to improve track performance and we'll send you that car when it's ready." And then actually do so. That way, Clarkson has no choice to say, at the very worst, "Tesla may make eco-cars, but they're a hell of a lot of fun and I think they may be on to something..."
This is a complex problem. Allow me to cite just *some* of the facets.
Improve education -- This can mean:
1. Improve scores on standardized tests -- Important to politicians
2. Improve grades in class -- Important to the student's future
3. Increase curiosity in subject -- Important to the student's lifelong education and passion for the subject for the future.
4. Decrease hesitation to subject -- Important for the student's interest in the subject NOW.
Questions about the advanced degree:
1. What is the teacher's BA major?
(Directly related to subject, Loosely related to subject, Not related to subject)
2. In what subject is the advanced degree?
3. From what school is the advanced degree earned?
4. From what TYPE of school is the advanced degree earned?
(Brick and mortar, distance learning)
5. What type of attendance is required for the advanced degree?
(Day/Night, Classes per week)
6. How are the classes required for the advanced degree graded?
In effect, was the degree "granted" because a certain set of requirements were met or was the degree EARNED? A ton of teachers have night-class and distance-learning advanced degrees. Those are worth squat beyond kicking up pay a bit. But there are real academic programs out there that improve a person's understanding of a subject sufficient so that the person can teach the subject better. Or, if the advanced degree is in teaching, so that the teaching habits can be improved upon.
His "identify great teachers and emulate them" initiative is not what I'm talking about. All he wants to do is what everyone has been doing for years in and out of education: "Best Practices". And he even makes the same error in assumptions: "To flip the curve, we have to identify great teachers, find out what makes them so effective and transfer those skills to others so more students can enjoy top teachers and high achievement."
Transfer those skills to others? WTF? That's not how education works! There's no transferring, they're no pouring, there's no manufacturing! It's experience. It's outlook. It's life and passion and the seeking intrinsic reward.
Bill is a fan of business. He looks at things like a businessman does. Find gains, duplicate gains. Find expenses, justify or cut expenses. He thinks he can document the amazing personality traits of great teachers and duplicate them in less-great teachers. That's not how people work!
He also thinks advanced degrees don't increase student performance because of the oft-cited "statistic", "Another standard feature of school budgets is a bump in pay for advanced degrees. Such raises have almost no impact on achievement, but every year they cost $15 billion that would help students more if spent in other ways."
But does he separate MAs gained via online or night courses affects teachers versus MAs that require full-time education? Does he go into how the extra education makes the job of teaching easier on the teacher thus extending the "employment expectancy" of that employee?
Bill doesn't understand that great teachers are typically great people with a passion for education PRIOR to actually getting credentialed. Just as it is nearly impossible to take a bad 11th grader and prepare him for college, you can't just duplicate best practices and think the world will end up fantastic. You have to start at ground level:
1. Invest in streamlining the teacher education and certification process so that we don't lose these aspiring and idealist teachers to the many distractions of life. You have to capture them while they care! Don't touch the education part of it... just work on the system.
2. Give grants to fix school facilities.
3. Give grants to hire REAL teachers. (Not temporary, substitute, or TFA. People who expect to stay in their schools for more than 3 years.)
4. Understand that you're dealing with people, not machines. "Duplicating practices" is not realistic. The best you can do is find some of these amazing teachers and have THEM teach new teachers. You'll ruin it if you try to make their art into a worksheet assignment module consigned to a 10-week night-class seminar.
Bill, you don't understand education. You didn't take the time to understand children, teenagers, sociology, social psychology, pedagogy, performance/theater, linguistics, or any other field necessary to comprehend what a teacher is and just spend your time and money looking for a silver bullet cure to any ailments.
First, Bill tried to give away millions to students to pay for their college education. Of course, it came in the form of competitive scholarships so those who were already destined to receive a bunch of money (because of a strong educational history and innate brilliance) simply got more. This made no change.
Then came the funding of techno-super schools. But they were neither in areas in need of improvement nor were the schools any cheaper (more expensive, obviously) to run. Another failure.
Bill, if you want to make a change, do this:
Create a system for the development of teachers. Not super-teachers or techno-teachers-- just teachers. At the moment there is no hub for potential teachers to go to that catalogs all the credential or master's programs. There's no easier step-by-step guide for the process in California. Everyone just quotes a vague order of things.
Also, if you don't want to help the creation of teachers (and hell, give grants to pay for their wages!), then try just funding the modest renovation of crap-hole schools and class rooms in low-income neighborhoods.
If you want to make a change, help the poor. It's that easy.
Just to put this all into perspective for those claiming doom and gloom regarding nuclear power --
How many oil disasters have there been in the past decade? (Spills, refinery fires, etc.)
How many people died?
How many in Japan due to the quake?
How old were the facilities?
How many coal disasters have there been in the last decade?
How many people died?
How many in coal disasters in Japan due to the quake?
How old were the facilities?
How many nuclear disasters were there? How old were the facilities?
Right... so when we look at nuclear power, it's still the safest. They're built with the most oversight, foresight, and regulation AND it took the largest earthquake in recorded Japanese history to damage the 40 year old reactor-- which still likely won't go into meltdown. And there's been plenty of time to evacuate everyone just in case it does.
Do we get ANY of that luxury with oil or coal?
(Note: I use oil, coal, and nuclear energy in this comparison because they are the energy sources that can be created just about anywhere. Geothermal, wind, water, and solar require very specific placements.)
I normally don't agree with seemingly simplistic "thread-ender" comments like this, but... I agree. These over-reaching EULAs and "privacy" agreements have been part of digital life for *decades* now. There's nothing new under the sun except that companies are more and more able to capitalize off the warnings now.
I genuinely understand ignorance of new users, but anyone who has been clicking through installations or creating identities on whatever sites for a year or more should already know what this article is talking about.
No. And that gives reason for us not to trust them with DNA.
Because that DNA will then be on record. I know law enforcement agencies (and prosecutors, for that matter) well enough to refrain from giving them any biological information wherever possible.
If I'm on trial and rationality and other evidence seems insufficient, then I'll give them a drop of blood... But I'd rather go to trial first than be part of the masses shuffled through blood-letting under suspicion so someone (anyone) can build a database of citizenry DNA.
Yep. Outlook for business. Webmail clients (separate) for other accounts.
Unfortunately, that's the nature of beast. If the issue is keeping things separate within a single system, then maybe you just need separate systems.
Remove the ability for the human to make the error.
I keep my business-related conversations to my dept. account. I keep my university conversations to my university account. I keep my personal conversations in my gmail account or through instant messengers.
Keep the spheres separate and life will be easier.
Nope. Secular Humanist, Moral Relativist, and Deontological Preference Utilitarian.
In other words, I don't choose a religion or a religious morality to determine how I should act (though I have nothing against faith). Instead, I've come to logical and ethical conclusions that require me, duty-bound, to help preserve and advance the preferences of others around me while reducing frustration and pain. It's why education is my passion.
Admittedly, it's very similar to Buddhism... just without the requirement for belief in the supernatural.
As the guy who receives these infected and mistreated computers in my large circle of friends, family, and co-workers (and then combinations thereof), I have to say: If you have a problem fixing any computer, just don't fix it.
I've gotten such severely infected systems that I spend the greater part of my weekend cleaning said infections and uninstalling malware only to pop in a couple spare sticks of RAM or an old video card (where there was once only on-board video). Why? Because I like the people around me and I like to make sure the quality of life is good... if not better than what it was. Seriously. I care about my friends and coworkers and friends of coworkers and coworkers of friends. If they need help and I can help them, I'm going to do it.
Just remember to do a full write-up of all the actions you did:
--Quote the number of infections
--Install as much free/open-source alternatives to their malware-ridden pirated software as possible
--List the names of the software and describe what they do
--List some "best practices" for real-world computer usage.
--Let them know that you do this so their lives can be easier and so they have to spend less money now and in the future.
Put that write-up on the desktop and give a mini-presentation to the owner before they retake the computer. They'll appreciate the education, they'll appreciate the free utility and any upgrades you surprise them with, once they understand the effort involved in the service a friend provides for free, they'll appreciate /you/.
Proprietary hardware and software doesn't hurt. And then there's the guarantee of loyalty-purchases as opposed to the PC market which is mostly of the "let's see who is genuinely better" type of scrutiny.
Add in the massive premium that comes with minor increases in product (+$100 for +16GB of SSD or +$130 for 3G WITH a contract) and the likelihood that those who already loyally buy apple will likely want a maxed out iPad (admittedly pure speculation on my part) and you'll get some decent money on return.
With Apple and the iCulture, there's not much risk in the research, design, and release of a product. With everyone else, it's all risk. Every bit of it.