". . . [spam] will soon constitute a majority of American e-mail; it already makes up 70 per cent of the traffic passing through the servers of America Online, the country's largest internet service provider (ISP)."
(From the article)
I thought Windows Update comprised 60 percent of bandwidth used? Between the two, 130 percent of our bandwidth is used up.
". . . very soon, the Internet should turn into a penny post, with a levy of 1 cent per letter."
I've heard this before. Don't you guys remember the allegations that the US Postal Service demanded the penny tax be levied and given to them? That was some chain letter bunk then; so what is it now?
"The tax moratorium on internet sales has always been supremely unfair, offering, say, Amazon a de facto subsidy against taxpaying local bookstores."
Sounds to me more like the author is really building a case to levy online sale taxes, not e-mail tax. With state governments claiming they are running huge debts because of dropping revenues, this makes sense. California (I'm not from there, so I can only go from what I hear) taxes everything like crazy and still cannot make ends meet. So, I opine the problem is the state governments cannot managed their spending. Seeing my own state nearly quadrupling the per capita tax in the past twenty years (in real dollars), without marked improvement in services provided I'm not convinced its a revenue problem.
I'm against taxation for taxation's sake. But, the more effective way of obtaining the tax is to increase income tax rates on online sales. The net effect is still revenue for the government. It gets through a lot of the potential issues involved in figuring out which state gets the revenue--handling multi-state income tax is more mature than a more ad hoc Internet Sales tax.
IANACPA This has a short-term benefit to the coastal states since they tend to have more online commerce sites--although I assume a fair amount of online sales is also conducted in the same states. However, it also allows competition between states where the middle America states could offer benefits to seduce corporatations--and increase their revenues by winning their incorporation.
It lets our governments tax foreigners--because we all know that corporate income tax is actually borne by the consumer through increased retail prices. More importantly, the taxation would be more noticable to the shareholders of corporations since income tax is an expense, and that sales tax is not.
Additionally, corporations lobby. They have a vested interest in keeping their prices low to keep their revenue coming in. If they are threatened with a higher income tax, again borne by the consumers, then they will lobby to negate or reduce the impact of this tax. They won't care as much about sales tax.
As I recall, the server you're looking at is not the server that actually runs his house. Misterhouse first came to my attention in a Perl Journal back in 2000.
A very good question. I believe that a suitable level of maintenance would need to be established, either by law or precedence. Since the source of my opinion is derived from a rickety old rail line, which to all who witnessed it knew was truely not serviceable except to maintain rights, I would hope that a level set would show that the owner was making a reasonable effort to maintain and not trying to stall its release into the domain.
Okay, so if I put one ounce of pressure on my thumb tip it is the exact same as ten ounces on my thumb--and ends up being tens of tons a year?
I use VI in the console and ALT+Tab my way to various different screens, so I doubt I do 10,000 mouse clicks a day; let alone 2 million a year. So, I suppose, in following their arguement, that I don't walk two kilometers on my hands.
My eyelid blinks once very two seconds, 16 hours a day--or 28800 blinks. That's 10.5 million blinks a year. Again, following their logic, the amount of weight moved is, let's say two grams a blink. Oh, my God, my eyelids lift 21 metric tons! No wonder they hurt looking at their web site!
And, my hands hurt using a damn mouse, so I use a pen pad. Unfortunately, now I have a scribes callous.
What the article did not reveal, and what few of us really know, is who the leader of the Xindi is. Most of the third season will be spent with them slowly unraveling that cold, horrible truth. And, no, Bergman did not name the show after his girlfriend Cindy.
Cindy Lauperwill star as the evil leader of the Xindi--who in reality are just a bunch of girls who want to have fun. At least this time, the ST crew will encounter a race with a cool new name, instead of some rip off of something from Earth's culture (Romulan, Vulcan, Borg, Cindy^H^H^H^H^H etc.).The other neat thing is that the evil leader speaks in song.
She bop--he bop--a--we bop
I bop--you bop--a--they bop
Be bop--be bop--a--lu--she bop
Come on! You know Bergman uses "Star Trek" plot dice. These are two eight-sided dice that establish what plot and which races are involved in a given episode. He then reaches for the shelf and finds an old script for 'research.'
One who repliled to your comment stated that the games you cited are the only ones to withstand the test of time. I disagree. How do we know that a certain game, now derelict, will not become a market sensation in a year or two? There is an old Activision game that I hated even when it was out, but my son loves it. So, for somebody to say, "yes, but the game I'm talking about wouldn't sell so it should be released," ignores the possiblity that it may sell. (This prevents companies from letting its patent become commonly used just so they can turn around and sue all the offenders.)
Additionally, an old game may have new life breathed into it by a re-vamping by a new company. Denying the original company's rights to royalties here would set a dangerous presidence. As an unfortunate consequence, companies must stamp out any violations of their rights just to ensure they have grounds to keep them when it matters most. For this I assume that copyright may be affected by patent law where a company can lose in court if it knowingly does not stop public violations of its patents.
This actually makes me think of my grandfather's old farm. Don't mark me offtopic yet. Wait for me to tie it back in. Some of my grandfather's farm, as he explains it, was taken and given to a railroad company for a right-of-way. The rules were simple, if that rail line did not handle a certain capacity, then the land reverted to my grandfather's ownership--eminent domain. So, forty or fifty years later, once a quarter the rail company would drive a very small train, very, very slowly over nearly unusable tracks--just to keep it. Unfortunately, the rail company's stall tactics outlived my grandfather.
"Eminent domain is the right of the state to take private property for public use." Eminent Domain Defined
How does this tie in? Perhaps we are vainly trying to use an old system (copyright) to apply to a new medium (software). I agree that generations long copyrights (ala Disney) are invalid, but the rights should be of sufficient duration to prevent the media giants from outlasting an author's rights to his work. I mean, if I write the "Great American Novel," with a short copyright term (7 to 14 years), a corporation would just refuse publication until I lost rights--and then publish without having to grant royalties. After all, David Brin's The Postman was published in 1986 and the movie The Postman based on the book came out in 1997. If the copyrights were only seven years long--the original length, then he would not have had any say in the movie--or been able to profit. So, overly long "Disney" copyrights are bad for the public, and overly short ones are bad for the author. Still, this does not speak to my point on software and copyrights.
We seem to agree that when a company, or an owner of software, ceases to maintain said software (i.e., Abandonware), that this software should be released to the public domain. Thus, Windows 3.1 would be public domain simply because Microsoft has abandoned it--as would all the VIC-20 games in our current discusion. This does not fit into our copyright model--I doubt this fits anywhere in Intellectual Property law. However, as my early rail tie-in (pardon the pun) suggests, there is presidence elsewhere. So, I propose that software adopt a new model of Intellectual Eminent Domain.
This model should establish reasonable guidelines for when software is deemed abandoned by its original author. When the software is deemed suitably abandoned, then it becomes public domain. Perhaps age of software could reasonably be part of the criteria used, or perhaps a certain number of years since the software was abandoned or last publically supported. What should also be considered valid is when the software's author or company publically ceases to support that code--such as Microsoft and Windows 3.1.
I believe the product being made public, as opposed to allowing a different private party claim absolute ownership, is better for the public for prevents large software houses (e.g. Microsoft) from gobbling up all the abandoned software and then 'maintaining' it to prevent another from invoking eminent domain. It also allows abandonware sites to make available the software; and allows individuals and organizations the chance to maintain or improve the software. I suppose the question then would be, "at what point does maintenance/enhancement of abandoned code constitute a new product protected by IP rights?"
I suppose this makes it easier for ISO to destandardize JPEG like was rumored previously. My question is, how long from PNG's ISO standardization and full acceptance by the community of browsers (e.g. Mozilla, Opera, IE, etc.) I live in the Unix environment, so I'm not aware of IE has given full transparency to transparent PNGs yet--that's why I'm asking.
Yeah, I think somebody had mod points to burn and just downgraded me to burn them. I had posted my comment and by the time I could get back to the story thread to view my own article it had been down-modded.
"As you can see, there is a lot of activity in the oceans."
You see, this is the kind of scientist we need. A scientist who isn't afraid to praise performance and give credit where it is due. However, we also need a motivational scientist. You know, the sort who will show these findings to trees and grass and ask them:
"why aren't you working harder? Look at the oceans, they're doing their part . . . and they're not even green! You make me sick. Look at December 2002 . . . look at it! You guys weren't doing crap. What was that? Hi-ber-na-tion? What load of bull are you trying to pull? Do you think you've earned a four-month vacation? 'In your genes?''Can't be helped?' I-don't-think-so Mr. Oak. Now, drop and give me 20 while I go find a gene therapist to make you an evergreen.
But, I thought the US Senate was supposed to ratify treaties--not the President. If so, then blaming President Bush ignores US law. I found this article that indirectly brings up this point.
For your reading pleasure, I also cite an article from the opposing viewpoint stating why the treaty is not in the short- or long-term interests of the United States. Additionally, the article futher points to the Senate's perogative in ratification of treaties, stating, "[t]hough the Senate hasn't ratified the treaty . . .."
So, please place blame with the agency responsible. If the US Senate does not ratify a treaty, then it is not valid. Oddly enough, some Geneva Convention articles did not pass the US Senate in the 1950s.
. . . it's certainly the biggest [thing] since writing was invented.
Fortunately, writing is a relatively new invention in the history of the Universe. IIRC, if that History were compacted in a day, then humanity is the last few seconds before midnight. So, writing was invented 'just a second ago.'
"Not a bad bit of [lawsuiting], huh?
You know, sometimes I even amaze myself." [HAN]
"That doesn't sound too hard. Besides, [Microsoft] let us go. It's the only explanation for the ease
of our [lawsuit]." [LEAH]
"Easy... you call that easy?"
"They're [buying us off to sue Open Source later]!"
"Not SCO, sister."
So, before you think that successfully suing Microsoft is proof against future alliance with Microsoft against Open Source, remember Yoda's words:
A [Hacker]'s strength flows from the [Source]. But beware of the dark side. [Fear . . . Uncertainty . . . Doubt]. The dark side of the [Source] are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight. If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny,
consume you it will, as it did [Altair]'s apprentice." [YODA]
"Gates. Is the dark side stronger?" [LUKE]
"No...no...no. Quicker, easier, more seductive."
"But how am I to know the [Open Source] from the bad?
"You will know. When you are calm, at peace. Passive. A [Hacker] uses the [Source] for knowledge and defense, never for attack."
"But tell me why I can't . .."
"(interrupting) No, no, there is no why. Nothing more will I teach you today. Clear your mind of questions. Mmm. Mmmmmm."
From the initial post: "[Schmidt] decided to retire after approximately 31 years of public service and return to the private sector."
Okay, so it appears that he counts his service as Microsoft's Chief of Security towards his public service career. That may sound a bit presumptuous of him, but I think I see a pattern here. There are now five branches to the US Government: Legislative, Executive, Judicial, the Press, and Microsoft. Or, will Microsoft's crack team of lawyers assume responsiblity for the Judicial as a "cost-cutting" measure? That may be that new Constitutional Amendment, dubbed "3.11" I've been hearing so much about.
There is a good chance that a lot of the faxes, emails and other correspondance sent to Arkansas Governor Huckabee will be dismissed out of hand. It is the tendency of elected officials to only listen to their constituents. So, if you are not from Arkansas, he is not obliged to listen.
I first learned of this phenomina when I lived in Northern Virginia and became friends with a Legislative Assistant of a prominent US Senator. He commented that the US Senators always, always, always ignore any communication not sent by a consitutent. He said, "that's why they have their own Senators."
So, if you're not from Arkansas, don't expect to be heard by our Governor.
Being a concerned Arkansas citizen, I contacted the representative who I consider to be the chief co-sponsor of House Bill 2361, the Arkansas 'Super-DCMA' bill that currently before the Governor's desk. He was kind enough to respond in brief although he is not my representative and with the end of this regular session (the second longest in Arkansas' history) must tend to more pressing matters. The summary of the email is an agreement to discuss the bill with me in greater detail soon (I trust him). He also made this one brief comment:
"I think the definition part of the bill is what is giving most folks heart burn. What they need to understand is that to be convicted under this statute you have to knowing and with intent defraud a communication services provider. I believe that strong language narrows the scope [of] the statute tremendously." -- Jeff Wood (D), Rep-Sherwood
If anyone cares to hear the specifics of my future interview, I'll post it on my web site after the interview is held. Granted, the point is rather moot since the bill passed both houses.
Except Microsoft has the cash and Lycoris does not. So, Microsoft can get this into court and spend Lycoris out of business. Victory is pointless when you're unemployed.
Rule #6 of the Rules of Eight: "Justice can be dictated!"
2: The cost of joining a union is paid for by the union members not the non-union employees.
First, I was a wee contractor so my personal knowledge of my rebuttal is limited to heresay. However, I was told by a non-union fellow working for a Federal Government agency that he was obliged to pay union dues. As I recall, they had some squirrelly way of justifying it; something akin to "union efforts helped you get higher pay, so you must pay your dues regardless.
And, if one thinks that unions have an individuals best efforts at heart, one should remember that unions are all about collectiveness. The needs of the one are outweighed by the needs of the many (or the Spock!).
Finally, allow me to caveat that I am not the member of a union--except perhaps a member of the United States of Amerrika; where the men are men, sheep tremble, and everybody is fleecing somebody else.
I believe this is exactly what the original poster had in mind. I think is speaking from the perspective fo Microsoft's Security Office . . . telling indeed.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought Windows Update comprised 60 percent of bandwidth used? Between the two, 130 percent of our bandwidth is used up.
I've heard this before. Don't you guys remember the allegations that the US Postal Service demanded the penny tax be levied and given to them? That was some chain letter bunk then; so what is it now?Sounds to me more like the author is really building a case to levy online sale taxes, not e-mail tax. With state governments claiming they are running huge debts because of dropping revenues, this makes sense. California (I'm not from there, so I can only go from what I hear) taxes everything like crazy and still cannot make ends meet. So, I opine the problem is the state governments cannot managed their spending. Seeing my own state nearly quadrupling the per capita tax in the past twenty years (in real dollars), without marked improvement in services provided I'm not convinced its a revenue problem.
I'm against taxation for taxation's sake. But, the more effective way of obtaining the tax is to increase income tax rates on online sales. The net effect is still revenue for the government. It gets through a lot of the potential issues involved in figuring out which state gets the revenue--handling multi-state income tax is more mature than a more ad hoc Internet Sales tax.
IANACPA This has a short-term benefit to the coastal states since they tend to have more online commerce sites--although I assume a fair amount of online sales is also conducted in the same states. However, it also allows competition between states where the middle America states could offer benefits to seduce corporatations--and increase their revenues by winning their incorporation.
It lets our governments tax foreigners--because we all know that corporate income tax is actually borne by the consumer through increased retail prices. More importantly, the taxation would be more noticable to the shareholders of corporations since income tax is an expense, and that sales tax is not.
Additionally, corporations lobby. They have a vested interest in keeping their prices low to keep their revenue coming in. If they are threatened with a higher income tax, again borne by the consumers, then they will lobby to negate or reduce the impact of this tax. They won't care as much about sales tax.
As I recall, the server you're looking at is not the server that actually runs his house. Misterhouse first came to my attention in a Perl Journal back in 2000.
. . . you need one for both phases of the power in your house . . .
This product seems able to handle your situation, and can be used for more than just the remotes.
A very good question. I believe that a suitable level of maintenance would need to be established, either by law or precedence. Since the source of my opinion is derived from a rickety old rail line, which to all who witnessed it knew was truely not serviceable except to maintain rights, I would hope that a level set would show that the owner was making a reasonable effort to maintain and not trying to stall its release into the domain.
Okay, so if I put one ounce of pressure on my thumb tip it is the exact same as ten ounces on my thumb--and ends up being tens of tons a year?
I use VI in the console and ALT+Tab my way to various different screens, so I doubt I do 10,000 mouse clicks a day; let alone 2 million a year. So, I suppose, in following their arguement, that I don't walk two kilometers on my hands.
My eyelid blinks once very two seconds, 16 hours a day--or 28800 blinks. That's 10.5 million blinks a year. Again, following their logic, the amount of weight moved is, let's say two grams a blink. Oh, my God, my eyelids lift 21 metric tons! No wonder they hurt looking at their web site!
And, my hands hurt using a damn mouse, so I use a pen pad. Unfortunately, now I have a scribes callous.
What the article did not reveal, and what few of us really know, is who the leader of the Xindi is. Most of the third season will be spent with them slowly unraveling that cold, horrible truth. And, no, Bergman did not name the show after his girlfriend Cindy.
Cindy Lauperwill star as the evil leader of the Xindi--who in reality are just a bunch of girls who want to have fun. At least this time, the ST crew will encounter a race with a cool new name, instead of some rip off of something from Earth's culture (Romulan, Vulcan, Borg, Cindy^H^H^H^H^H etc.).The other neat thing is that the evil leader speaks in song.
Translation: "I hope He will understand."
Come on! You know Bergman uses "Star Trek" plot dice. These are two eight-sided dice that establish what plot and which races are involved in a given episode. He then reaches for the shelf and finds an old script for 'research.'
To quote T. Roosevelt, "Exactly!"
One who repliled to your comment stated that the games you cited are the only ones to withstand the test of time. I disagree. How do we know that a certain game, now derelict, will not become a market sensation in a year or two? There is an old Activision game that I hated even when it was out, but my son loves it. So, for somebody to say, "yes, but the game I'm talking about wouldn't sell so it should be released," ignores the possiblity that it may sell. (This prevents companies from letting its patent become commonly used just so they can turn around and sue all the offenders.)
Additionally, an old game may have new life breathed into it by a re-vamping by a new company. Denying the original company's rights to royalties here would set a dangerous presidence. As an unfortunate consequence, companies must stamp out any violations of their rights just to ensure they have grounds to keep them when it matters most. For this I assume that copyright may be affected by patent law where a company can lose in court if it knowingly does not stop public violations of its patents.
This actually makes me think of my grandfather's old farm. Don't mark me offtopic yet. Wait for me to tie it back in. Some of my grandfather's farm, as he explains it, was taken and given to a railroad company for a right-of-way. The rules were simple, if that rail line did not handle a certain capacity, then the land reverted to my grandfather's ownership--eminent domain. So, forty or fifty years later, once a quarter the rail company would drive a very small train, very, very slowly over nearly unusable tracks--just to keep it. Unfortunately, the rail company's stall tactics outlived my grandfather.
"Eminent domain is the right of the state to take private property for public use." Eminent Domain DefinedHow does this tie in? Perhaps we are vainly trying to use an old system (copyright) to apply to a new medium (software). I agree that generations long copyrights (ala Disney) are invalid, but the rights should be of sufficient duration to prevent the media giants from outlasting an author's rights to his work. I mean, if I write the "Great American Novel," with a short copyright term (7 to 14 years), a corporation would just refuse publication until I lost rights--and then publish without having to grant royalties. After all, David Brin's The Postman was published in 1986 and the movie The Postman based on the book came out in 1997. If the copyrights were only seven years long--the original length, then he would not have had any say in the movie--or been able to profit. So, overly long "Disney" copyrights are bad for the public, and overly short ones are bad for the author. Still, this does not speak to my point on software and copyrights.
We seem to agree that when a company, or an owner of software, ceases to maintain said software (i.e., Abandonware), that this software should be released to the public domain. Thus, Windows 3.1 would be public domain simply because Microsoft has abandoned it--as would all the VIC-20 games in our current discusion. This does not fit into our copyright model--I doubt this fits anywhere in Intellectual Property law. However, as my early rail tie-in (pardon the pun) suggests, there is presidence elsewhere. So, I propose that software adopt a new model of Intellectual Eminent Domain.
This model should establish reasonable guidelines for when software is deemed abandoned by its original author. When the software is deemed suitably abandoned, then it becomes public domain. Perhaps age of software could reasonably be part of the criteria used, or perhaps a certain number of years since the software was abandoned or last publically supported. What should also be considered valid is when the software's author or company publically ceases to support that code--such as Microsoft and Windows 3.1.
I believe the product being made public, as opposed to allowing a different private party claim absolute ownership, is better for the public for prevents large software houses (e.g. Microsoft) from gobbling up all the abandoned software and then 'maintaining' it to prevent another from invoking eminent domain. It also allows abandonware sites to make available the software; and allows individuals and organizations the chance to maintain or improve the software. I suppose the question then would be, "at what point does maintenance/enhancement of abandoned code constitute a new product protected by IP rights?"
I suppose this makes it easier for ISO to destandardize JPEG like was rumored previously. My question is, how long from PNG's ISO standardization and full acceptance by the community of browsers (e.g. Mozilla, Opera, IE, etc.) I live in the Unix environment, so I'm not aware of IE has given full transparency to transparent PNGs yet--that's why I'm asking.
Yeah, I think somebody had mod points to burn and just downgraded me to burn them. I had posted my comment and by the time I could get back to the story thread to view my own article it had been down-modded.
Thanks for your support.
"As you can see, there is a lot of activity in the oceans."
You see, this is the kind of scientist we need. A scientist who isn't afraid to praise performance and give credit where it is due. However, we also need a motivational scientist. You know, the sort who will show these findings to trees and grass and ask them:
I always thought the problem with Earth was not fatness or low metabolism. I thought it was just big -boned.
But, I thought the US Senate was supposed to ratify treaties--not the President. If so, then blaming President Bush ignores US law. I found this article that indirectly brings up this point.
For your reading pleasure, I also cite an article from the opposing viewpoint stating why the treaty is not in the short- or long-term interests of the United States. Additionally, the article futher points to the Senate's perogative in ratification of treaties, stating, "[t]hough the Senate hasn't ratified the treaty . . . ."
So, please place blame with the agency responsible. If the US Senate does not ratify a treaty, then it is not valid. Oddly enough, some Geneva Convention articles did not pass the US Senate in the 1950s.
. . . it's certainly the biggest [thing] since writing was invented.
Fortunately, writing is a relatively new invention in the history of the Universe. IIRC, if that History were compacted in a day, then humanity is the last few seconds before midnight. So, writing was invented 'just a second ago.'
May I quote a stable space opera move Star Wars?
So, before you think that successfully suing Microsoft is proof against future alliance with Microsoft against Open Source, remember Yoda's words:
From the initial post: "[Schmidt] decided to retire after approximately 31 years of public service and return to the private sector."
Okay, so it appears that he counts his service as Microsoft's Chief of Security towards his public service career. That may sound a bit presumptuous of him, but I think I see a pattern here. There are now five branches to the US Government: Legislative, Executive, Judicial, the Press, and Microsoft. Or, will Microsoft's crack team of lawyers assume responsiblity for the Judicial as a "cost-cutting" measure? That may be that new Constitutional Amendment, dubbed "3.11" I've been hearing so much about.
I will make sure I bring this up with Herr Representative when I meet with him. :-)
There is a good chance that a lot of the faxes, emails and other correspondance sent to Arkansas Governor Huckabee will be dismissed out of hand. It is the tendency of elected officials to only listen to their constituents. So, if you are not from Arkansas, he is not obliged to listen.
I first learned of this phenomina when I lived in Northern Virginia and became friends with a Legislative Assistant of a prominent US Senator. He commented that the US Senators always, always, always ignore any communication not sent by a consitutent. He said, "that's why they have their own Senators."
So, if you're not from Arkansas, don't expect to be heard by our Governor.
Being a concerned Arkansas citizen, I contacted the representative who I consider to be the chief co-sponsor of House Bill 2361, the Arkansas 'Super-DCMA' bill that currently before the Governor's desk. He was kind enough to respond in brief although he is not my representative and with the end of this regular session (the second longest in Arkansas' history) must tend to more pressing matters. The summary of the email is an agreement to discuss the bill with me in greater detail soon (I trust him). He also made this one brief comment:
If anyone cares to hear the specifics of my future interview, I'll post it on my web site after the interview is held. Granted, the point is rather moot since the bill passed both houses.
So, if I change all the '2's found in this natural number to '6's, then will the voice sound more like Michael Jackson?
Arkansas State Legislature has also passed a state-DCMA, and it awaits the Governor's signature.
Except Microsoft has the cash and Lycoris does not. So, Microsoft can get this into court and spend Lycoris out of business. Victory is pointless when you're unemployed.
Rule #6 of the Rules of Eight: "Justice can be dictated!"
First, I was a wee contractor so my personal knowledge of my rebuttal is limited to heresay. However, I was told by a non-union fellow working for a Federal Government agency that he was obliged to pay union dues. As I recall, they had some squirrelly way of justifying it; something akin to "union efforts helped you get higher pay, so you must pay your dues regardless.
And, if one thinks that unions have an individuals best efforts at heart, one should remember that unions are all about collectiveness. The needs of the one are outweighed by the needs of the many (or the Spock!).
Finally, allow me to caveat that I am not the member of a union--except perhaps a member of the United States of Amerrika; where the men are men, sheep tremble, and everybody is fleecing somebody else.
I believe this is exactly what the original poster had in mind. I think is speaking from the perspective fo Microsoft's Security Office . . . telling indeed.