Seriously. Why try to change the nature of the Internet? You're just going to lose, and look foolish on the way out.
How does he imagine his ideas working, anyway? Does he think people are actually going to cough up an identifier every single time they visit his site?
It's a fond memory actually from growing up in the 80's. When I was young brat my dad would bring those home with him to look them over. He'd also bring left over print outs for us to draw on. I remember they had a strange smell. He also brought home old punch cards for the same purpose.
Ah, yes, I remember those times well as I look at the alternating stripes on the uniform dad wears at the federal pen, where he's currently serving 5-10 for corporate espionage. . .
Even the fact that there are laws in place in some countries that require certain standards doesn't motivate (most) clients into paying the extra 5% to have an accessible website
Not a flame, I'm genuinely curious; but people actually charge extra to create an accessible site? Wouldn't an accessible site be simpler to create?
In addition to the many problems cited by the parent, I'd like to point out that anything that doesn't work in a cross-browser environment is a problem.
I work with a non-profit that gets two grants from the DHR, both of which are managed by a local office nearby. Both grants have a reporting requirement, and both report mechanisms are web based applications - standard pump and dump data entry, with a Crystal Reports pretty viewer.
One mechanism demands IE 6.0 only - the application won't load or run under anything else - and utilizes a lot of ActiveX settings that Microsoft itself recommends being disabled. The developer is inflexible and insists that his preferred method of operation is not about to change anytime soon.
The other mechanism demands IE 7.0 - the application will load, but will rarely run in anything else. There's some effort at cross browser compatibility - the Crystal Reports app supports four methods of output: Java, DHTML, Advanced DHTML, and ActiveX. Unfortunately, its a crap shoot as to which output method will work, and when. One week, Java's the way to go; the next DHTML is the only way to go. I've never managed to get the ActiveX control to work.
So, when it comes time to submit reports for these grants, I have to use two machines to do the data entry and printing. One is a downgraded Win2K box with ridiculously low Internet security settings, and the other a WinXP machine with a fairly standard config.
Here's the kicker: the DHR office keeps all it's IT staff on one floor, and the web developers sit in one corner of that floor, occupying about 600 square feet of space. They receive their paycheck from the same guy, they eat in the same cafeteria, they piss in the same restroom. These two guys are literally close enough together to spit on each other, and they still cannot get their respective applications to run on anything other than their own personal favorite browser platforms. I can't figure out if this is a supervisory cock-up, or if the intra-office political boundaries are ultra rigid, or if the whole damn organization is just hopeless. Most days, I lean toward the latter.
Off topic (kinda), but this reminded me of the time one of my users deleted some of his MS Office directories so he could copy the full Sonic the Hedgehog Dreamcast CD to his hard drive. They were quite disappointed to learn that neither Sonic, or MS Word would run . . .
"Enterprise IT" policies are almost always to make IT's life easier at the expense of the end user. Now who was supposed to be supporting whom?
People could try communication.
If someone thinks their access is too restrictive, there's nothing stopping them from talking to IT to see if they can find a better way. If IT refuses to respond, or is handcuffed by a company policy, then the argument needs to go to upper management, and the policy can be reviewed. If satisfaction proves still elusive, then either go a level higher, or acclimate to the restrictions at hand - someone important obviously feels they are necessary.
Ignoring the communication stage and going it alone is just plain abuse.
Until we see some legislation regulating security for data brokers we'll never see the end of identity theft.
The funny thing about data brokerages: I can't recall ever hearing a legitimate argument for having them in the first place.
"You know, Doris, what this country really needs a is a vast corporate entity collecting everyone's personal data for sale at a profit without our knowledge. Only then will we know true happiness and freedom."
The whole industry was set up without voluntary customer involvement and its high effing time the customers demanded a say in how their information is managed, or profited from. That's the real identity theft.
Then how about anyone who is for the department of education, welfare, etc pay more in taxes to support those programs?
Gladly. This country needs more education.
Education produces smart citizens. Smart citizens are good for the economy (smart consumers don't start dot com or housing bubbles), good for business (intelligent employees streamline processes and reduce overhead), but above all they are good for the country. Like it or not, reputation matters - would you rather the U.S. be known as a nation of idiots, or would you rather we be respected as a nation of intelligence and honour?
As for welfare, you can't call yourself a Christian nation if you don't believe in helping your fellow man. See: Luke 4:18-19, 18:18-30, 14:13 Matthew 19:16-30, 25:31-46, Mark 8:1-13, 6:30-44, 10:17-31 (or just read the Bible). We're a so-called "Christian" country, that cherry picks the Old Testament and ignores the teachings of Christ (at least until the indictments come down - when that happens, Jesus is suddenly the man).
So, yes. I'd gladly pay more taxes to improve the lot of my fellow men, women and children. I'd even go so far as to suggest that maybe, just maybe, we should consider spending far less on defense. The money we save there could go to education and social security - programs that improve our lives as opposed to destroying others. And the best part is: we wouldn't even have to raise taxes.
Nothing gets rid of the mud quicker than an intellectual "car wash". The more people become aware of sites like Media Matters and Fact Check, the less likely they'll be to buy into the bullshit.
So part of the legacy of the Bush Administration is a blueprint for obstruction of justice.
Nice to know we can do away with the formality of this:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
After all, the Constitution is "just a goddamned piece of paper".
It's not in any way shocking to learn that people are apathetic. If you ask them whether they want a secretive government, most people will say no. But if you use an objective metric it's very easy to conclude that those same people really don't care that strongly one way or the other.
Nobody cares until its their business being snooped.
So the lesson here is use an emotional metric. Ask them why they spent three hours on the phone with their mistress/lover discussing whether or not "this feels wrong", or, why they felt a need to buy a 50 count box of Preparation H at the Kroger on the corner of West and Spring the other day, or, why they felt a need to withdraw $1000 dollars from their checking account on a Friday night at around 11:53 P.M. and who was that woman standing next to them at the ATM on 5th and Pine?
Ask these kinds of questions, explaining that all the information came from readily available sources, and I guarantee you'll see some outrage.
I'd like to see these people eat a big pile of USDA Grade A beef - but with flexible standards that the stores are allowed to define as to what "USDA Grade A" actually means.
Well . . . there's goes my desire for a cheeseburger . . .
They aren't thinking of the students if they teach fairy tales.
Seriously:
Professor: "Today, we're going to cover the basics of evolution..."
Student: "I'm sorry professor, but I'm afraid that I don't ascribe to that "theory" and refuse to participate any further. I know that intelligent design is the way of the Lord!"
Professor: "Good luck with that GPA, junior..."
These kids are screwed when and if they reach the higher stages of education.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd try employee house visits.
Seriously. Why try to change the nature of the Internet? You're just going to lose, and look foolish on the way out.
How does he imagine his ideas working, anyway? Does he think people are actually going to cough up an identifier every single time they visit his site?
He should stick to news.
Ah, yes, I remember those times well as I look at the alternating stripes on the uniform dad wears at the federal pen, where he's currently serving 5-10 for corporate espionage. . .
;-)
Then we get ponies.
Does this explain "Bob"? I didn't think it rained that much in Redmond.
[looks around office]
[shudders]
I can wait. Believe me . . . I can wait . . .
Not a flame, I'm genuinely curious; but people actually charge extra to create an accessible site? Wouldn't an accessible site be simpler to create?
I work with a non-profit that gets two grants from the DHR, both of which are managed by a local office nearby. Both grants have a reporting requirement, and both report mechanisms are web based applications - standard pump and dump data entry, with a Crystal Reports pretty viewer.
One mechanism demands IE 6.0 only - the application won't load or run under anything else - and utilizes a lot of ActiveX settings that Microsoft itself recommends being disabled. The developer is inflexible and insists that his preferred method of operation is not about to change anytime soon.
The other mechanism demands IE 7.0 - the application will load, but will rarely run in anything else. There's some effort at cross browser compatibility - the Crystal Reports app supports four methods of output: Java, DHTML, Advanced DHTML, and ActiveX. Unfortunately, its a crap shoot as to which output method will work, and when. One week, Java's the way to go; the next DHTML is the only way to go. I've never managed to get the ActiveX control to work.
So, when it comes time to submit reports for these grants, I have to use two machines to do the data entry and printing. One is a downgraded Win2K box with ridiculously low Internet security settings, and the other a WinXP machine with a fairly standard config.
Here's the kicker: the DHR office keeps all it's IT staff on one floor, and the web developers sit in one corner of that floor, occupying about 600 square feet of space. They receive their paycheck from the same guy, they eat in the same cafeteria, they piss in the same restroom. These two guys are literally close enough together to spit on each other, and they still cannot get their respective applications to run on anything other than their own personal favorite browser platforms. I can't figure out if this is a supervisory cock-up, or if the intra-office political boundaries are ultra rigid, or if the whole damn organization is just hopeless. Most days, I lean toward the latter.
Off topic (kinda), but this reminded me of the time one of my users deleted some of his MS Office directories so he could copy the full Sonic the Hedgehog Dreamcast CD to his hard drive. They were quite disappointed to learn that neither Sonic, or MS Word would run . . .
People could try communication.
If someone thinks their access is too restrictive, there's nothing stopping them from talking to IT to see if they can find a better way. If IT refuses to respond, or is handcuffed by a company policy, then the argument needs to go to upper management, and the policy can be reviewed. If satisfaction proves still elusive, then either go a level higher, or acclimate to the restrictions at hand - someone important obviously feels they are necessary.
Ignoring the communication stage and going it alone is just plain abuse.
The funny thing about data brokerages: I can't recall ever hearing a legitimate argument for having them in the first place.
"You know, Doris, what this country really needs a is a vast corporate entity collecting everyone's personal data for sale at a profit without our knowledge. Only then will we know true happiness and freedom."
The whole industry was set up without voluntary customer involvement and its high effing time the customers demanded a say in how their information is managed, or profited from. That's the real identity theft.
Gladly. This country needs more education.
Education produces smart citizens. Smart citizens are good for the economy (smart consumers don't start dot com or housing bubbles), good for business (intelligent employees streamline processes and reduce overhead), but above all they are good for the country. Like it or not, reputation matters - would you rather the U.S. be known as a nation of idiots, or would you rather we be respected as a nation of intelligence and honour?
As for welfare, you can't call yourself a Christian nation if you don't believe in helping your fellow man. See: Luke 4:18-19, 18:18-30, 14:13 Matthew 19:16-30, 25:31-46, Mark 8:1-13, 6:30-44, 10:17-31 (or just read the Bible). We're a so-called "Christian" country, that cherry picks the Old Testament and ignores the teachings of Christ (at least until the indictments come down - when that happens, Jesus is suddenly the man).
So, yes. I'd gladly pay more taxes to improve the lot of my fellow men, women and children. I'd even go so far as to suggest that maybe, just maybe, we should consider spending far less on defense. The money we save there could go to education and social security - programs that improve our lives as opposed to destroying others. And the best part is: we wouldn't even have to raise taxes.
But what if someone else kills you because they believed the lies?
Don't forget, Zell Miller still has a standing invitation to Chris Matthews for a duel. Perhaps this could be the opening bout?
Nothing gets rid of the mud quicker than an intellectual "car wash". The more people become aware of sites like Media Matters and Fact Check, the less likely they'll be to buy into the bullshit.
Carry a crowbar.
Nice to know we can do away with the formality of this:
After all, the Constitution is "just a goddamned piece of paper".
Farewell, Arthur, and thanks for teaching us to dream about a better future.
Awful or no, somebody will most certainly be getting screwed.
Why do you have locks on your doors?
Why does your company have passwords on the computers?
Why don't we just have a national "party line" telephone system?
Why do we wear clothes?
Why is there such a thing as "intellectual property"?
Why do we have copyright?
Why do we have PINS on our checking account?
Nobody cares until its their business being snooped.
So the lesson here is use an emotional metric. Ask them why they spent three hours on the phone with their mistress/lover discussing whether or not "this feels wrong", or, why they felt a need to buy a 50 count box of Preparation H at the Kroger on the corner of West and Spring the other day, or, why they felt a need to withdraw $1000 dollars from their checking account on a Friday night at around 11:53 P.M. and who was that woman standing next to them at the ATM on 5th and Pine?
Ask these kinds of questions, explaining that all the information came from readily available sources, and I guarantee you'll see some outrage.
Names like "Valerie Plame"?
Since the president likes to speak in absolutes, he can answer this one question:
Which is more important, America's security, or telecom immunity?
Well . . . there's goes my desire for a cheeseburger . . .
Seriously:
These kids are screwed when and if they reach the higher stages of education.
Is that when the plaintiff gets to be on top, or is it the other way around?