You want it to change, put up a list of everyone who uses their personal email for work so that the population can vote against them.
I have NEVER and i mean NEVER worked for any company that allows me to use my personal email for work related things. I would like anyone to show me a company that allows for such things.
Here's one data point - I use my Gmail account for work all the time. Yes, my company knows and allows it.
But I'm just a contract archaeologist, I'm not doing anything political, classified, or liable to shake the wall of decorum. If I were involved in something that might turn political, or that involved classified or government monitored operations, or that would scare the horses, I'd take the time to use company email.
No, I'm not gonna give you my RL name, who the fuck are you, voices on the internet?
I call Bullshit on this in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Honolulu, I've taken pictures of Federal buildings in all three with no Police/HS intervention. Maybe you could show me that SOP you say exists, so I can forward it to the appropriate authorities?
I call bullshit on YOU, sir. What defense contractor needs climate scientists? Resource robbers, indistrial idiots, sure, but why do Boeing, Northrup, or General Dynamics want to pay your friends serious money to not care about what they do?
Ah yes, I had Q-Link. Logging on with my Commodore 64 (the machine I did a LOT of my undergraduate papers on), testing my limited social skillz trying to interact successfully with chicks online (I was as complete failure, of course I read Slashdot!). I gave it up when I got into a 4-year college with real internet capability (UCSB, one of the DARPA founders).
I actually bought the (originally Commodore-based) GEOS desktop software for my Tandy PC, so I could access the papers I'd written on the C64. I ended up saving them as text files, and still have them in a folder somewhere. That was my first experience with technological obsolescence (other than the relentless purchase of faster modems and bigger computers).
"When you're learning to drive a car (in the UK) you have "L" plates on your vehicle and can't go on the motorways until you pass a test to prove you're competent to drive on the road. Most people invest a lot of time and money doing this - mainly because they want to own a car and the law forces them to take a driving test. A logical extension is to apply this to computer users."
I fail to see the similarity. Where I live public transportation is not an option, so people get drivers licenses because they NEED them. Computer skills are only USEFUL, and in-depth knowledge seldom rises even that far, if all the user needs is reading their mail and browsing the internet in the same way they browse the TV channels. So licensing everyone to ensure we're all computer professionals overstates the importance of the computers.
All drivers are supposed to be licensed because they get to operate machinery that can kill them and others, something my desktop pc is unlikely to do. If the particular computer does have the chance to kill people (a medical system, for example), then I'm with you for training (and I'm all for making them pay if they do kill someone, just like bad drivers).
In addition, you're happy to levy taxes on others, because you have years of experience. SURE it makes sense to you, you don't have any downside here. Thank you, I'll pay my own training costs if and when it matters, don't bother 'helping' me like this.
Given all that, I'd probably support gradual implementation of the idea, IF it could be done fairly. I think the better plan is to sneak training into classrooms so as to inculcate the concept into future generations, raising them with the idea that OF COURSE people should be properly trained to use their computer, that its the natural and inevitable state. Otherwise, its a big danmed imposition by somebody who doesn't have to pay anything he's suggesting, and as you said, there are many more people out there without the knowledge. Our legislature would follow the numbers (how many truly computer-competent legislators are there?).
Me, I've been a skilled operator, but I'm only a user now that I'm not in a tech field anymore.
"When you're learning to drive a car (in the UK) you have "L" plates on your vehicle and can't go on the motorways until you pass a test to prove you're competent to drive on the road. Most people invest a lot of time and money doing this - mainly because they want to own a car and the law forces them to take a driving test.
A logical extension is to apply this to computer users."
I fail to see the similarity. Where I live public transportation is not an option, so people get drivers licenses because they NEED them.
Computer skills are only USEFUL, and in-depth knowledge seldom rises even that far, if all the user needs is reading their mail and browsing the internet in the same way they browse the TV channels.
So licensing everyone to ensure we're all computer professionals overstates the importance of the computers. All drivers are supposed to be licensed because they get to operate machinery that can kill them and others, something my desktop pc is unlikely to do. If the particular computer does have the chance to kill people (a medical system, for example), then I'm with you for training (and I'm all for making them pay if they do kill someone, just like bad drivers).
In addition, you're happy to levy taxes on others, because you have years of experience. SURE it makes sense to you, you don't have any downside here. Thank you, I'll pay my own training costs if and when it matters, don't bother 'helping' me like this.
Given all that, I'd probably support gradual implementation of the idea, IF it could be done fairly. I think the better plan is to sneak training into classrooms so as to inculcate the concept into future generations, raising them with the idea that OF COURSE people should be properly trained to use their computer, that its the natural and inevitable state.
Otherwise, its a big danmed imposition by somebody who doesn't have to pay anything he's suggesting, and as you said, there are many more people out there without the knowledge. Our legislature would follow the numbers (how many truly computer-competent legislators are there?).
Me, I've been a skilled operator, but I'm only a user now that I'm not in a tech field anymore.
"10 out of 10 for the sound advice but you're forgetting one important factor - the millions of "chumps" running Internet-connected Windows boxes who have enough of a problem locating the power switch, let alone a clean disk to boot from..."
You're also forgetting all the Mac-using chumps too (surely not every Mac user is a computer savant), and all those *nux users set up by their relatives, in fact, bloviating away with this attitude that you're part of the knowledgeable elite just makes you sound like you're just a chump yourself, and a pompous one. Your 20 years buys you some cred, but your sneers just pissed it away.
Plenty of people are computer users, not all are competent operators who understand everything. Calling them chumps doesn't add anything to the discussion, it just makes you look like a smug dork.
"Perhaps their biggest flaw was that, like most idealists, they assumed that people were as deeply passionate about these things as they were. That they cared strongly about injustice and the abuse of power and were willing to act on it."
Oddly enough, a fair amount of the people DID feel that way in the 1770s. But the same sort of dreamers were dead wrong (or hadn't managed to convince the masses) in 1812. Sometimes idealists and the populace share the dream, and sometimes they don't.
A stopped clock is right twice a day, I won't use it as my primary timepiece, but it might remind me to check the time. I still know it's broke, just like your conspiracy rant.
"My friends and countrymen are getting slaughtered in a senseless war in Iraq, North Korea has the bomb and Iran is going to get it, and here Congress is, trying to get around the First Amendment again. Just what is it with these people?"
I'm not sure I follow your argument here.
1)Invading Iraq was senseless because [I'm guessing you think] they didn't have the WMD.
2)North Korea DOES have the bomb and Iran is working on it.
Do you propose we invade North Korea and Iran, or maybe just nuke them? Would that be more sensible than being in Iraq? Or are you throwing the bomb thing in as a handwave that obscures your first (and more credible point) about Americans dying while Congress restricts our rights.
A general purpose lab, in (one of) the center(s) of campus, next to the libraries and near many of the dorms. AFAIK most use it as you describe, for browsing, writing, and printing.
My department has its own student computer rooms, so I only used that computer lab for graphics classes (the prof got licenses to install a set number of systems up with the 3D drafting and graphics software we were using in one of the smaller side-classrooms there, back behind the Macintosh area).
Viewed twice a week over the academic year, I never saw more than a handful (1-5) of students using the Macs, while dozens or more (20-80?) used the PCs every time I was there. Last summer when I went in to set up a new password, they were pulling Macs to put in more Dells.
YMMV, but to me that says people weren't using the Macs. Those machines probably had the software to do what users wanted to do, but were just different enough from a PC that users (including me) were loath to use them.
The spiel I get from Mac fans is "it just works", but that's not exactly true. Each OS has its own idiosyncracies, and when I just want to drop in, pull up a paper, add some changes and print, I do NOT want to learn the little piddly stuff like how to find things, how to open and close things, the workarounds of a one-button as opposed to a 3-button mouse, and so on. No doubt with a little play time, or a walkthrough, these would be absorbed, but they offer just enough of a barrier to walk-up users to keep me on the Dells.
It's not fair, but I'd give a totally different system more slack than an almost-familiar one.
This is absolutely true at my school (a ~40k+ student college) -- they ended up pulling BANKS of Macs out because nobody used them, even though the PC alternatives were Dell mid-range boxen. Macs didn't do what people wanted, and they ignored them , so the Computer Center dumped them.
Oh, bite me. Who realistically expects comic artists to look like models, rock stars (other than Keith Richards) or Movie Stars. Potshots those were not.
And "taking shots at their wives?" Yeesh. Let me go look, I'll bet I can find a stupid picture of your wife, and I KNOW I can find some of me and mine... so posting a picture of Brenna in a wombat suit can't be a terrible crime. ME in such a suit, certainly, but on her, it's just geek cred.
+5 Insightful -- no. +5 knee-jerk hypersensitivity.
No, seriously. People need to stop anthropomorphizing this shit.
Some people want information to be free, though they probably haven't considered all the likely ramifications. The info itself, though, hasn't registered an opinion.
Nah -- as a previously underpaid Big-box bookstore chain worker drone, it offended me to see scammers trying such obvious shit. Lame, lame lame, no pride in their work, most of these shoplifting/price swapping losers. And their whining when confronted -- weak. When it became 'tell me a story' time, they weren't any better than baldoni.
Ripping off my store meant more work for me later come inventory time, so me and my fellow ex-military coworkers always advocated direct and violent action (which our managers, who had a greater appreciation of the legal system, always declined...).
THIS is absolute truth. Spending time around them at work definitely helped me...in fact, I met my wife that way (although, in true geek fashion, I was unawares until SHE approached me...).
For all you slashbots who think the only use for color is photos, you need to stop and ponder the possibility of other uses for printed material before you crap all over my inkjet printer. YOU might not use an inkjet for anything beyond that, but there are plenty of us who do.
If you do paper (cardstock) modeling the inkjet is far superior, because that expensive laser toner CRACKS and flakes off if you score or bend it too much (two things you tend to do when modeling anything more than a flat panel).
Inkjet printers can even print on plastic card and other structural materials (not to be considered with the heated drum of the laser...)
I only wish I could get a good continuous ink system for my HP 842C printer.
A lot of (most?) people buy books because of convenience (they might be slow readers or just not want to haul themselves to a library at all. Heck they might even be obssessives about cleanliness.)
I say WTF? A lot of people buy books because they want their own copies, which they don't have to return, which they can do what they want to.
And they have to haul themselves to the library or to a bookstore for most transactions. Sure, Amazon and other sources sell a lot, but bookstores aren't going away, nor libraries. You need to get yourself out of your comfy chair and outside once in a while to see what real people do. Even slashbots go outside sometimes, come on out and join us.
While I realize its an annoyance to you, when I worked retail selling books, I checked every time, becuase I worked in a holiday destination (Honolulu) and cards do get stolen there.
I looked at the signer, to see how comfortable they were reproducing the signature, then at the signature, to see how close it was. I didn't expect perfect duplication every time, since I don't sign the same every time myself.
Signature checking is no panacea, its another step in reducing CASUAL fraud. Scammers are going to be practiced, and may well get by my eyeball check, but I'll catch the guy who just snagged your wallet at the beach across the street.
As to your attempted pissing away my time because I took an extra 20 seconds to look at your signature, big fat hairy deal. I'm on shift til I'm done, and when my shift ends, I'm gone, with you still there or not.
If you don't care to get it checked, goodie for you. Free check anyway! I check because people get robbed. What's your reasoning -- I'm wasting your time? I waste more time counting your change out, or waiting for your reciept to print than I do watching you sign and looking at the back of your card.
Carping and timewasters don't bother me, I'm got a piss-poor customer service attitude already. I've had customer complaints because they didn't like the way I DIDN'T argue with them. What can YOU do?
Slashdot Mirror
You want it to change, put up a list of everyone who uses their personal email for work so that the population can vote against them.
I have NEVER and i mean NEVER worked for any company that allows me to use my personal email for work related things. I would like anyone to show me a company that allows for such things.
Here's one data point - I use my Gmail account for work all the time. Yes, my company knows and allows it. But I'm just a contract archaeologist, I'm not doing anything political, classified, or liable to shake the wall of decorum. If I were involved in something that might turn political, or that involved classified or government monitored operations, or that would scare the horses, I'd take the time to use company email. No, I'm not gonna give you my RL name, who the fuck are you, voices on the internet?
I call Bullshit on this in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Honolulu, I've taken pictures of Federal buildings in all three with no Police/HS intervention. Maybe you could show me that SOP you say exists, so I can forward it to the appropriate authorities?
You two probably remember when he was 'Farmboy Neal"...
After all the tripe Michael Bay's given us, I'd doubt him if he said the sun comes up in the east.
I call bullshit on YOU, sir. What defense contractor needs climate scientists? Resource robbers, indistrial idiots, sure, but why do Boeing, Northrup, or General Dynamics want to pay your friends serious money to not care about what they do?
Nah, you just weren't funny. Maybe if you had added ninjas or monkeys to your message...
I actually bought the (originally Commodore-based) GEOS desktop software for my Tandy PC, so I could access the papers I'd written on the C64. I ended up saving them as text files, and still have them in a folder somewhere. That was my first experience with technological obsolescence (other than the relentless purchase of faster modems and bigger computers).
I'm a linux noob, but i'm not clear why you'd WANT to boot Linux in this case, other than maybe if you are a multi-OS admin.
Haa-haa.
Damned obnoxious default formatting.
"When you're learning to drive a car (in the UK) you have "L" plates on your vehicle and can't go on the motorways until you pass a test to prove you're competent to drive on the road. Most people invest a lot of time and money doing this - mainly because they want to own a car and the law forces them to take a driving test. A logical extension is to apply this to computer users."
I fail to see the similarity. Where I live public transportation is not an option, so people get drivers licenses because they NEED them. Computer skills are only USEFUL, and in-depth knowledge seldom rises even that far, if all the user needs is reading their mail and browsing the internet in the same way they browse the TV channels. So licensing everyone to ensure we're all computer professionals overstates the importance of the computers.
All drivers are supposed to be licensed because they get to operate machinery that can kill them and others, something my desktop pc is unlikely to do. If the particular computer does have the chance to kill people (a medical system, for example), then I'm with you for training (and I'm all for making them pay if they do kill someone, just like bad drivers).
In addition, you're happy to levy taxes on others, because you have years of experience. SURE it makes sense to you, you don't have any downside here. Thank you, I'll pay my own training costs if and when it matters, don't bother 'helping' me like this.
Given all that, I'd probably support gradual implementation of the idea, IF it could be done fairly. I think the better plan is to sneak training into classrooms so as to inculcate the concept into future generations, raising them with the idea that OF COURSE people should be properly trained to use their computer, that its the natural and inevitable state. Otherwise, its a big danmed imposition by somebody who doesn't have to pay anything he's suggesting, and as you said, there are many more people out there without the knowledge. Our legislature would follow the numbers (how many truly computer-competent legislators are there?).
Me, I've been a skilled operator, but I'm only a user now that I'm not in a tech field anymore.
"When you're learning to drive a car (in the UK) you have "L" plates on your vehicle and can't go on the motorways until you pass a test to prove you're competent to drive on the road. Most people invest a lot of time and money doing this - mainly because they want to own a car and the law forces them to take a driving test. A logical extension is to apply this to computer users." I fail to see the similarity. Where I live public transportation is not an option, so people get drivers licenses because they NEED them. Computer skills are only USEFUL, and in-depth knowledge seldom rises even that far, if all the user needs is reading their mail and browsing the internet in the same way they browse the TV channels. So licensing everyone to ensure we're all computer professionals overstates the importance of the computers. All drivers are supposed to be licensed because they get to operate machinery that can kill them and others, something my desktop pc is unlikely to do. If the particular computer does have the chance to kill people (a medical system, for example), then I'm with you for training (and I'm all for making them pay if they do kill someone, just like bad drivers). In addition, you're happy to levy taxes on others, because you have years of experience. SURE it makes sense to you, you don't have any downside here. Thank you, I'll pay my own training costs if and when it matters, don't bother 'helping' me like this. Given all that, I'd probably support gradual implementation of the idea, IF it could be done fairly. I think the better plan is to sneak training into classrooms so as to inculcate the concept into future generations, raising them with the idea that OF COURSE people should be properly trained to use their computer, that its the natural and inevitable state. Otherwise, its a big danmed imposition by somebody who doesn't have to pay anything he's suggesting, and as you said, there are many more people out there without the knowledge. Our legislature would follow the numbers (how many truly computer-competent legislators are there?). Me, I've been a skilled operator, but I'm only a user now that I'm not in a tech field anymore.
"10 out of 10 for the sound advice but you're forgetting one important factor - the millions of "chumps" running Internet-connected Windows boxes who have enough of a problem locating the power switch, let alone a clean disk to boot from..."
You're also forgetting all the Mac-using chumps too (surely not every Mac user is a computer savant), and all those *nux users set up by their relatives, in fact, bloviating away with this attitude that you're part of the knowledgeable elite just makes you sound like you're just a chump yourself, and a pompous one. Your 20 years buys you some cred, but your sneers just pissed it away.
Plenty of people are computer users, not all are competent operators who understand everything. Calling them chumps doesn't add anything to the discussion, it just makes you look like a smug dork.
"Perhaps their biggest flaw was that, like most idealists, they assumed that people were as deeply passionate about these things as they were. That they cared strongly about injustice and the abuse of power and were willing to act on it."
Oddly enough, a fair amount of the people DID feel that way in the 1770s. But the same sort of dreamers were dead wrong (or hadn't managed to convince the masses) in 1812. Sometimes idealists and the populace share the dream, and sometimes they don't.
A stopped clock is right twice a day, I won't use it as my primary timepiece, but it might remind me to check the time. I still know it's broke, just like your conspiracy rant.
"My friends and countrymen are getting slaughtered in a senseless war in Iraq, North Korea has the bomb and Iran is going to get it, and here Congress is, trying to get around the First Amendment again. Just what is it with these people?" I'm not sure I follow your argument here. 1)Invading Iraq was senseless because [I'm guessing you think] they didn't have the WMD. 2)North Korea DOES have the bomb and Iran is working on it. Do you propose we invade North Korea and Iran, or maybe just nuke them? Would that be more sensible than being in Iraq? Or are you throwing the bomb thing in as a handwave that obscures your first (and more credible point) about Americans dying while Congress restricts our rights.
A general purpose lab, in (one of) the center(s) of campus, next to the libraries and near many of the dorms. AFAIK most use it as you describe, for browsing, writing, and printing. My department has its own student computer rooms, so I only used that computer lab for graphics classes (the prof got licenses to install a set number of systems up with the 3D drafting and graphics software we were using in one of the smaller side-classrooms there, back behind the Macintosh area). Viewed twice a week over the academic year, I never saw more than a handful (1-5) of students using the Macs, while dozens or more (20-80?) used the PCs every time I was there. Last summer when I went in to set up a new password, they were pulling Macs to put in more Dells. YMMV, but to me that says people weren't using the Macs. Those machines probably had the software to do what users wanted to do, but were just different enough from a PC that users (including me) were loath to use them. The spiel I get from Mac fans is "it just works", but that's not exactly true. Each OS has its own idiosyncracies, and when I just want to drop in, pull up a paper, add some changes and print, I do NOT want to learn the little piddly stuff like how to find things, how to open and close things, the workarounds of a one-button as opposed to a 3-button mouse, and so on. No doubt with a little play time, or a walkthrough, these would be absorbed, but they offer just enough of a barrier to walk-up users to keep me on the Dells. It's not fair, but I'd give a totally different system more slack than an almost-familiar one.
This is absolutely true at my school (a ~40k+ student college) -- they ended up pulling BANKS of Macs out because nobody used them, even though the PC alternatives were Dell mid-range boxen. Macs didn't do what people wanted, and they ignored them , so the Computer Center dumped them.
Oh, bite me. Who realistically expects comic artists to look like models, rock stars (other than Keith Richards) or Movie Stars. Potshots those were not. And "taking shots at their wives?" Yeesh. Let me go look, I'll bet I can find a stupid picture of your wife, and I KNOW I can find some of me and mine... so posting a picture of Brenna in a wombat suit can't be a terrible crime. ME in such a suit, certainly, but on her, it's just geek cred. +5 Insightful -- no. +5 knee-jerk hypersensitivity.
No, seriously. People need to stop anthropomorphizing this shit.
Some people want information to be free, though they probably haven't considered all the likely ramifications. The info itself, though, hasn't registered an opinion.Nah -- as a previously underpaid Big-box bookstore chain worker drone, it offended me to see scammers trying such obvious shit. Lame, lame lame, no pride in their work, most of these shoplifting/price swapping losers. And their whining when confronted -- weak. When it became 'tell me a story' time, they weren't any better than baldoni. Ripping off my store meant more work for me later come inventory time, so me and my fellow ex-military coworkers always advocated direct and violent action (which our managers, who had a greater appreciation of the legal system, always declined...).
THIS is absolute truth. Spending time around them at work definitely helped me...in fact, I met my wife that way (although, in true geek fashion, I was unawares until SHE approached me...).
For all you slashbots who think the only use for color is photos, you need to stop and ponder the possibility of other uses for printed material before you crap all over my inkjet printer. YOU might not use an inkjet for anything beyond that, but there are plenty of us who do. If you do paper (cardstock) modeling the inkjet is far superior, because that expensive laser toner CRACKS and flakes off if you score or bend it too much (two things you tend to do when modeling anything more than a flat panel). Inkjet printers can even print on plastic card and other structural materials (not to be considered with the heated drum of the laser...) I only wish I could get a good continuous ink system for my HP 842C printer.
While I realize its an annoyance to you, when I worked retail selling books, I checked every time, becuase I worked in a holiday destination (Honolulu) and cards do get stolen there.
I looked at the signer, to see how comfortable they were reproducing the signature, then at the signature, to see how close it was. I didn't expect perfect duplication every time, since I don't sign the same every time myself.
Signature checking is no panacea, its another step in reducing CASUAL fraud. Scammers are going to be practiced, and may well get by my eyeball check, but I'll catch the guy who just snagged your wallet at the beach across the street.
As to your attempted pissing away my time because I took an extra 20 seconds to look at your signature, big fat hairy deal. I'm on shift til I'm done, and when my shift ends, I'm gone, with you still there or not.
If you don't care to get it checked, goodie for you. Free check anyway! I check because people get robbed. What's your reasoning -- I'm wasting your time? I waste more time counting your change out, or waiting for your reciept to print than I do watching you sign and looking at the back of your card.
Carping and timewasters don't bother me, I'm got a piss-poor customer service attitude already. I've had customer complaints because they didn't like the way I DIDN'T argue with them. What can YOU do?
Yes, they did. But a lot fewer did it.
Try spell checking your own 'asinine' comments...