I'd feel much more comfortable if Google would purge its records of searches, or at least remove the IP addresses, but I suppose they have their reasons. I'll let you guess what those reasons might be.
I won't bother making you guess, I'll get straight to the point. There have been rumors for some time now that Google's largest paying clients are governments.
This rumor rings particularly true with Google Groups. So, you post something controversial to Usenet with "X-No-Archive: Yes." You, me, and every other average Joe don't see the post in groups.google.com. But guess who does see it? How about well-funded clients who are paying Google a premium to access archives of supposedly "unarchived" Usenet posts?
The same can be said of binaries. If Google has the resources to cache just about every web page in existance, and a newsfeed strong enough to capture all of the text groups, then they certainly have the resources to maintain an archive of Usenet binaries. Imagine the spook potential of having access to every mp3/warez/child porn/etc binary Usenet post for long enough to conduct an investigation, with the ability to search back through reasonably recent posts to prove prior offenses by the same person. Absolutely priceless.
I have to admit that if I were running the show at Google, I'd quickly cave in to governmental or other high-paying requests to archive things that the general public thought I wasn't archiving. Monetary offers to do this sort of clandestine spidering - whether by governments or wealthy individuals - are almost certainly too outrageous to pass up.
Federal elected officials get unlimited free (pronounced "payed for by taxes") postage, so you're paying for the paper junk mail too.
You're referring to the franking privilege, but your interpretation is overly broad. Postage is provided free of charge for official business only, with restrictions, and campaign mailings do not qualify. There are more severe restrictions placed upon franked mailings during election years, and nearly any franked mailing within 60 days of any election in which the sender is a candidate is totally prohibited unless it's clearly official business, to cut down on "shadow" campaign mailings.
There are some exceptions. A lot of people know the factoid about Jackie Kennedy having free use of the USPS for the remainder of her life, but few realize that all first ladies have that privilege. So do all former Presidents. There are restrictions here too; oddly enough, the franking privilege for ex-Presidents and ex-First Ladies is only good for personal mail. Go figure, they have to pay for their personal postage while they're in power, but they get it free forever after that!
You can see some of the regulations in the USPS Domestic Mail Manual, S E050. The 60 day rule regarding elections and franked mailings is not mentioned here but I'm certain of it.
Full disclosure: I spent 5 years working for a commercial mail receiving agency (CMRA) and I mostly knew the DMM inside and out. That was 5 years ago, and things have certainly changed, but I was able to find the franked mail guidelines easily enough in the current DMM.
Viacom is CBS, Disney is ABC, and neither are going to be merging with either [MS]NBC or each other anytime soon. Corporate ire aside, the FCC would never allow one company to operate two of the broadcast networks (they probably wouldn't give Viacom/CBS/MTV permission to use the restroom at this point). Perhaps I'm missing something...
how many times does the shopkeeper in a gas station look so carefully on the notes you pass on to him?
Well, it's not that easy - how many gas stations are there where you can keep trying if he does look? Yeah, maybe you can pull it off once, but why bother?
If you want to try passing fake bills, you better not go to the same gas station very often. Or the same grocery store. Or the same, well, anywhere. The point is that passing fake bills is difficult because people tend to do their shopping at the same place. If enough bogies show up in a certain area, you can be damn sure someone's going to figure out who's passing them. (I'm not speaking from experience as anything other than a cashier - but I dealt with Secret Service and US Postal Inspectors while I was on that job.)
There's only so many gas stations, eventually a cashier will get wise and remember "hey, that's the same guy who passed me a weird bill last week." Even if the shopkeeper isn't adept enough at handling cash to spot a phony, trust me, the bank is going to notice it while they're counting up the Circle K's daily deposit. When Circle K's daily deposit starts coming up with fake $20's every few days, the bank will call the Treasury. The Treasury will send a couple of nice gentlemen to tell Circle K's managers and cashiers to be on close lookout for fake bills, and record the date/time when they find one.
From there it's straight to the surveillance tapes, and most likely straight to those nice gentlemen sitting in a van parked outside waiting for Joe Moron to show back up and pay for gas again.
1. Junk mail, which has a realworld cost (printing paper means felling trees); or
2. An email, which has negligible cost and is easily disposed of by deletion?
I think I'd prefer the one that actually costs the candidate some money to send. If you want to send me your unsolicited message, then by God you ought to be the one paying for it, even if you are the leader of the free world.
I'm not too impressed with anybody in the race, but if I'm getting spam from them
Going along with your nick, the Skynyrd lyric "gimme back, gimme back my bullets" comes to mind when anyone sends me spam.
[Note to overly paranoid Treasury Department staff: This is not a threat of physical harm to anyone.]
Re:Why was it illegal there though?
on
Cell-Phone Wars
·
· Score: 1
It isn't illegal, nobody's going to jail for using their cellphone while they wait to get their tags renewed. The policy of that particular establishment prohibits the use of cellphones and pagers. Why? I don't know, though I presume it's probably to prevent annoyance of the staff and other patrons. Aside from the offending morons, the other 99% of us sat there quietly waiting our turn.
What's wrong with that?
Why can't people sit in the company of other people and respect the atmosphere, perhaps talking quietly to the person nearest them if they feel the need to chat? Why is it that people these days equate "20 minute wait" with "potential 20 minute phone call?" I stand in line at the grocery store for 10 minutes sometimes, but I don't get the urge to call someone up. I often spend more than half an hour driving to work, but that doesn't make me want to spend that time talking to someone.
A funny thing came up locally in recent months. One of the suburb governments discovered that many of their employees were spending more time on the cellphone at work, than working! They banned cellphones from the offices, and you should have seen the reaction, pure outrage, municipal workers pitching a fit on the TV news. Come on, these are public servants, at work, yet they're going nuts over the thought of losing the ability to sit around blabbing all day.
The County Clerk's office does make an interesting case, though; it isn't private property since it's a county government facility. But if they can ban the public from using cellphones on the property - and enforce it to the point where they tell violators to leave - then certainly private businesses can do the same.
I do wonder what happens to the idiot jurors who leave their phones on during jury duty (the real thing, not just selection). I'd love to be in the courtroom when the judge held a juror in contempt for repeatedly disrupting court proceedings...
Agreed, inconsiderate users are the problem
on
Cell-Phone Wars
·
· Score: 1
My license plate expired at the end of the year, so late December I went to the County Clerk's office to renew my tags. You can do it by mail but it costs more because they charge a mail handling fee, so I always do it in person at the County Clerk's office.
In order to get inside the waiting room, you have to open a door with a sign on it which says, in large block letters "NO FOOD, NO DRINKS, TURN OFF CELL PHONES OR PAGERS." Once you get inside, there are several 8.5 x 11 signs posted on the front of the service counter which show a cell phone surrounded by the universal "banned" insignia (think "no smoking" signs, the circle with a slash). Seems pretty straightforward to me.
I was in the waiting room for about half an hour before my number was called. In those 30 minutes, 4 or 5 peoples' cell phones went off. Each time, one of the attendants would say (rather loudly) "please turn your phones and pagers off" as if to remind everyone of the sign on the door. It was obvious who they were meaning to speak to, but they did it politely and in a general manner so as not to embarass anyone in particular.
One guy's phone rang, the warning was given, and he proceeded to hang up and call the other person back! As if it somehow mattered who initiated the call. Hello, the sign said TURN THE FUCKING THING OFF!
A woman sitting a few seats down got 3 calls (the "general reminder" was announced after her "Hey Ya" ringtone blared out the first time). She was asked to leave the 2nd time her phone rang and she assured the attendant she'd turned it off. The 3rd time we all had to listen to 20 bars of "Hey Ya" in MIDI form, she was not asked but told to leave. To her credit, she did so.
Cell phones aren't bad technology. Unfortunately, far too many of their owners have bad manners, can't control themselves, can't imagine the thought of turning the damn things off for a few minutes, and have no clue how to exist in a waking state without talking to someone about something or other that could wait until the next face-to-face meeting. That's the problem. Note, I'm not saying this applies to everyone with a cell phone, but the stereotype exists for a reason.
I'm all for portable jammers. You want to blabber while I'm trying to watch a movie, or researching something in the library, or waiting quietly for my number to be called to renew my car tags, or trying to read a book before jury duty starts, fine. I want to fuck up your conversation in return, and you deserve it.
OK, after seeing the replies, I did some lyric digging. First off, AC/DC is an Australian band, not a British one, but the posters who intimated that telephone numbers in AC/DC's part of the world are six digits were correct. According to AC/DC's own lyrics page, the actual verse is:
Pick up the phone, I'm always home Call me any time Just ring 36 24 36 hey I lead a life of crime
In the recording, the "hey" is pronounced as more of a "ho" - I just listened. So, I stand corrected. It's not 362-4360, though at least I was right that it isn't 362-4368, either. As could be expected from AC-DC, it's 36-24-36.
I've mirrored the PDF file here. At 2.5MB a pop, this mirror is subject to disappear at any time, but perhaps it'll alleviate the load on Groklaw for the time being. Please post other mirrors here.
So basically you want all the benefits of free speech, but none of the responsibilities. All the latitude, none of the culpability. You are afraid to stand behind your words and actions.
And what, exactly, is wrong with that? If you think that freedom of speech comes with a nametag requirement, a couple of guys named James Madison and Alexander Hamilton would have disagreed.
Getting a "your server is attracting the attention of our investigators" letter from a federal agency is probably enough to spur a lot of stressed, ignorant people into hiring someone who's able to tell them what it all means and/or fix it.
Even when a lot of those stressed, ignorant people are in countries where the FTC has absolutely no jurisdiction or authority?
So it's not your fault you're getting into debt, you were forced to buy that car, that TV, that VCR, that computer... With money that you didn't had...
If you read my post, you'll note that I live with my parents now. Some things can be presumed from this fact. I don't own a TV. I don't own a VCR. I don't own much of anything. I have 4 computers, all of which were bought and paid for up-front (and one of which was a gift). Even when I was "independent," I didn't own a TV. My roommate at the time provided the TV.
As an aside, he's a geek like me. We both went to the same college, and got the exact same degree, and graduated at the same time. While I struggled looking for an IT job, he gave up and took a job doing weather-stripping. He makes more money doing weather-stripping than I have ever made doing programming. He's the one with the big TV and his own house. Weather-stripping doesn't require a college degree. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with manual labor - one of my two jobs is manual labor, and I'm happy to have the job - I'm just saying that while I did "the right thing" by going to college, it didn't do me a damned bit of good. I'd be making better money in construction than by using my technical skills. That bothers me.
Without my car I wouldn't be able to get to work, so yes, I did have to buy a car. And I didn't go out and buy a Mustang or a Porsche. My car payment is $335 a month. My car insurance is $120 a month (it's illegal here to drive a car without having insurance). I spend probably $60 a month in gas getting to and from work, with very little other driving. That's about $500 a month just to be able to go to work...
What I'm getting at is that I don't spend excessively. I don't use my credit cards as toys. I never have. Two years ago, I was paying off my credit cards in full every month, and proud of it - because two years ago, I was gainfully employed as a programmer. But a lot of debt can be accrued within two years, especially when college textbooks cost $100 or more apiece, not to mention tuition.
These days, I try to avoid using the credit cards, in favor of my debit card. That doesn't change the fact that I still have a lot of debt, and interest is driving me deeper into debt with each passing month. I have one credit card with a balance of about $5,000. Each month I send a check for $100, or more if I can afford it, and I don't make any new charges. But the following month, the statement says my balance is still about $5,000...
I don't have any health insurance. I don't have any dental insurance. I've had a large cavity for more than 6 months, but I can't afford to go to the dentist. At whatever point that the cavity begins causing me physical pain, I will go to the dentist, and charge the root canal on my credit card. And then I'll be another $2000+ in debt.
Yes, I'm responsible for my credit card debt. But if I'm having to pay an American company, who is charging me interest in American dollars, why shouldn't I expect them to hire American people?
I think you miss the point of my post. I'm not complaining that I'm in debt. Most Americans are in debt and to be quite honest, I'm far better off than a lot of people. My beef is with American companies whose customer base is made up of Americans, yet they're outsourcing their labor to foreign countries. I believe that if the majority of your revenue comes from Americans, then you damned well ought to be required to hire Americans.
I work for an Indian call center which does all sorts of processing and telemarketing for clients like Chase,Citi..ec.
OK, so American companies like Chase and Citibank are hounding me (an American) for being late on my credit card payments, yet they're sending their jobs to an entirely different country instead of supporting the very Americans they're driving into debt. With you so far.
I work as a systems admin at night(USA time), studying for my GMAT in the day along with catching a little sleep.
OK, so you're a student with a full-time job, much like many Americans. With you so far.
The job gets me about $7000 annually.
OK, so you have a job which presumably pays for your rent, groceries, transportation (car payment, gas), utility bill, internet bill, phone bill. I'm making a bit of a jump here, after reading numerous reports that a $10K/year salary is more than enough to pay for a happy lifestyle in India. Unfortunately, there are a lot of Americans who can't say the same.
Yes I am going to study in the USA probably steal another job there, temp or not if I can get it.Does that make me bad?Does that make the whole outsourcing industry bad?Its not the minimum wage factor that I'd like to argue.
I don't hate you because you're Indian. I don't hate you because you're in a foreign country. I don't hate you at all, really, I'd be doing the same thing if I were in your shoes. I think I speak for most American geeks when I say: we don't hate Indians, we hate American companies who are offshoring!
What I hate is that you're taking a job that I could be doing. There is absolutely no reason that an American company, which takes advantage of American tax benefits, and whose customer base is made up primarily of Americans, cannot hire Americans as its workforce. (I find this particularly true of banking and credit institutions - how do they expect their customers to ever pay off their credit card debt if all the jobs are going overseas - but I digress.)
I'm not arguing minimum wage either. I did everything I was "supposed to do." I went to college. I got a degree. In 2003, I made less than $20,000, and that's with two jobs. I have about $8,000 in credit card debt. I live about as modest a lifestyle as you can live in America while still a) having a car to get to work, b) buying enough food to survive, and c) being able to get drunk now and then (forgive me, but it's my only form of entertainment; $6 for 3 hours of buzz is better than $8 to go see a movie).
For those of you who don't live in the US, $20,000 is not a living wage unless you live in housing projects. Late last year, I had to give up my apartment ($650/month rent) and move back in with my parents. At the age of 24. Most of my geek friends are in the same situation. Meanwhile, my friends who are waiters in restaurants - with no college degree, and without the debt associated with college - are doing just fine, they have their own places, they've got 60 inch TV's, sweet cars, etc.
Everyday we get about 5 tasks that were done wrong by some desk jockey in the USA and have to be streamlined and corrected here.(not talking about the actually processing, just simple reports n stuff)
And for every task that was "done wrong" by some "desk jockey" in the USA, there are 10 people in the USA who could have done the job just fine, but they don't have a job, because companies are shipping them overseas.
Ok maybe not everything is that bad but what is a guy like me supposed to do? I earn more than most of my friends..live an ok lifestyle and struggle to save up for future education.This is the typical scenario you find in a IT outsourcing company in India.
So, you make more money than most of your friends, and you expect me - the guy with a CS degree who can't get an entry-level tech support job because I'm "overqualified," and can't g
You, sir, have just proven that all Russell Spragues are criminals and must be locked up! By using the alias "Kingfox," you've infringed upon the trademarks of not one but two media companies. Don't relax just yet, the FBI is investigating anyone named Russell Sprague and your flagrant trademark violations have surely put you on their radar!
I'm wondering about the legal basis for the "illegal interception of satellite signals" part.
IANAL. However, "satellite theft" accusations usually fall under USC 47 605. This is one of the laws DirecTV was using to base its lawsuits against "smart card" owners, IIRC.
(a) Except as authorized by chapter 119, title 18, no person receiving, assisting in receiving, transmitting, or assisting in transmitting, any interstate or foreign communication by wire or radio shall divulge or publish the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning thereof, except through authorized channels of transmission or reception,
[...] (6) on demand of other lawful authority. No person not being authorized by the sender shall intercept any radio communication and divulge or publish the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of such intercepted communication to any person. No person not being entitled thereto shall receive or assist in receiving any interstate or foreign communication by radio and use such communication (or any information therein contained) for his own benefit or for the benefit of another not entitled thereto.[...]
(b) The provisions of subsection (a) of this section shall not apply to the interception or receipt by any individual, or the assisting (including the manufacture or sale) of such interception or receipt, of any
satellite cable programming for private viewing if - 1) the programming involved is not encrypted; and [...]
Note the phrase "satellite cable programming," it qualifies satellite TV as cable TV. So now we look to USC 47 553, which says:
(a) Unauthorized interception or receipt or assistance in intercepting or receiving service; ''assist in intercepting or receiving'' defined (1) No person shall intercept or receive or assist in intercepting or receiving any communications service offered over a
cable system, unless specifically authorized to do so by a cable operator or as may otherwise be specifically authorized by law. [...]
In a nutshell, 47 605 establishes that satellite TV qualifies as cable TV (as well as "radio"), and 47 553 makes it illegal to intercept cable TV without the authorization of the operator.
Last year, I got an envelope in the mail. Inside the envelope was a booklet with 24 hours worth of time slots for a week's worth of days. The envelope also contained 5 crisp $1 bills, along with a request that I write down what I was watching on TV in the appropriate time slots, and send the booklet back in the enclosed pre-paid envelope.
Yes, Nielsen, the almighty ratings mystery machine, randomly carpet-bombs America with envelopes containing $5 cash, and relies upon the recipients of those envelopes to a) accurately log their television habits and b) bother to send back the booklet. There is no secret gizmo that you have to remember to disconnect from your TV before you order the PPV porn, you don't become a "Nielsen home" for life, etc. You just get a packet in the mail with 5 free dollars, and you're so surprised that you figure you might as well participate for a week.
Contrary to the AC reply, you don't need to start a family first. The envelope appeared at my apartment, at which I was the sole resident. And yes, I did fill out the log book and send it back. Of course, I imagine it was easier for me (at most I watch MSNBC for awhile, or the local news from 10-10:30 PM) than for the typical household...
Alternatively, some care deeply but think the candidates on the ballot all suck and stay away from the polls in disgust.
I don't care how disgusted I am, I'm not going to stay away from the polls. Voting for a candidate because you see him as the lesser of all evils, even if that candidate still disgusts you somehow or another, is not a wasted vote, because you're voting for the candidate you most approve of. That's what an election is all about. Not bothering to show up at the polls because all of the candidates suck (or for any other reason) is wasting your vote. "I don't approve of any of them" is a cop-out. The least disgusting candidate is the one who is most appealing to you, and that is the candidate you should vote for, lest you let everyone else decide in your stead.
Is the lesson of Florida - whose electoral votes were in such close contention that it went all the way to the Supreme Court - really this lost on people? I've seen the numbers as low as 500 votes, and as high as 2,000, depending on who sponsored the recount. Florida has more than 16 million residents. If 5,000 more of them had bothered to show up and vote, things might have been much different today. (I'm not saying we'd have a different president, just that there would have been less contention, and less resentment.)
My father has never voted in his life, and says he never will unless the electoral system is replaced by the popular vote. It's a shame, really. How many hundreds of thousands of people think that way, and could sway an election if they actually went and voted instead of standing around saying "fuck it, I don't think this is fair?" Presuming my father loathes Bush, he's wasting a vote by not going and voting for a challenger. Presuming he loves Bush, he's wasting a vote by not going and supporting him. Either way, by not voting, he's basically casting a de-facto vote for whichever candidate wins.
Your comment reminds me of my father, except instead of "this isn't fair," it's "they all suck." I'm sorry, but the fact is that "None of the Above" can't run this country. 363 days from now, on January 20 2005, one of {Bush, Dean, Kerry, Edwards, Clark [, a few longshots]} will be running this country. They might all suck, but one of them has to suck the least in your opinion. One of them disgusts you less than any of the others, even if he's the biggest longshot. Go vote for that person. If you can't be bothered with the primaries, at least go to the polls in November and vote for "the lesser of all evils." It's your only chance that you won't get stuck with the candidate who sucks harder.
There are a lot of people who hate George W. Bush, and are quick to criticize, but when you ask who they voted for, they tell you they didn't vote. If you don't vote, you forfeit the right to complain about your President.
Vote, and be glad that we still have the right to do so. It's one of the most important things you'll ever do.
Slashdot Mirror
And just three days after that, it appeared here:
4 8&mode=thread
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/02/09/02452
Which, I imagine, makes this story not a dupe, but a triplicate!
This rumor rings particularly true with Google Groups. So, you post something controversial to Usenet with "X-No-Archive: Yes." You, me, and every other average Joe don't see the post in groups.google.com. But guess who does see it? How about well-funded clients who are paying Google a premium to access archives of supposedly "unarchived" Usenet posts?
The same can be said of binaries. If Google has the resources to cache just about every web page in existance, and a newsfeed strong enough to capture all of the text groups, then they certainly have the resources to maintain an archive of Usenet binaries. Imagine the spook potential of having access to every mp3/warez/child porn/etc binary Usenet post for long enough to conduct an investigation, with the ability to search back through reasonably recent posts to prove prior offenses by the same person. Absolutely priceless.
I have to admit that if I were running the show at Google, I'd quickly cave in to governmental or other high-paying requests to archive things that the general public thought I wasn't archiving. Monetary offers to do this sort of clandestine spidering - whether by governments or wealthy individuals - are almost certainly too outrageous to pass up.
Just food for thought.
There are some exceptions. A lot of people know the factoid about Jackie Kennedy having free use of the USPS for the remainder of her life, but few realize that all first ladies have that privilege. So do all former Presidents. There are restrictions here too; oddly enough, the franking privilege for ex-Presidents and ex-First Ladies is only good for personal mail. Go figure, they have to pay for their personal postage while they're in power, but they get it free forever after that!
You can see some of the regulations in the USPS Domestic Mail Manual, S E050. The 60 day rule regarding elections and franked mailings is not mentioned here but I'm certain of it.
Full disclosure: I spent 5 years working for a commercial mail receiving agency (CMRA) and I mostly knew the DMM inside and out. That was 5 years ago, and things have certainly changed, but I was able to find the franked mail guidelines easily enough in the current DMM.
If you want to try passing fake bills, you better not go to the same gas station very often. Or the same grocery store. Or the same, well, anywhere. The point is that passing fake bills is difficult because people tend to do their shopping at the same place. If enough bogies show up in a certain area, you can be damn sure someone's going to figure out who's passing them. (I'm not speaking from experience as anything other than a cashier - but I dealt with Secret Service and US Postal Inspectors while I was on that job.)
There's only so many gas stations, eventually a cashier will get wise and remember "hey, that's the same guy who passed me a weird bill last week." Even if the shopkeeper isn't adept enough at handling cash to spot a phony, trust me, the bank is going to notice it while they're counting up the Circle K's daily deposit. When Circle K's daily deposit starts coming up with fake $20's every few days, the bank will call the Treasury. The Treasury will send a couple of nice gentlemen to tell Circle K's managers and cashiers to be on close lookout for fake bills, and record the date/time when they find one.
From there it's straight to the surveillance tapes, and most likely straight to those nice gentlemen sitting in a van parked outside waiting for Joe Moron to show back up and pay for gas again.
[Note to overly paranoid Treasury Department staff: This is not a threat of physical harm to anyone.]
It isn't illegal, nobody's going to jail for using their cellphone while they wait to get their tags renewed. The policy of that particular establishment prohibits the use of cellphones and pagers. Why? I don't know, though I presume it's probably to prevent annoyance of the staff and other patrons. Aside from the offending morons, the other 99% of us sat there quietly waiting our turn.
What's wrong with that?
Why can't people sit in the company of other people and respect the atmosphere, perhaps talking quietly to the person nearest them if they feel the need to chat? Why is it that people these days equate "20 minute wait" with "potential 20 minute phone call?" I stand in line at the grocery store for 10 minutes sometimes, but I don't get the urge to call someone up. I often spend more than half an hour driving to work, but that doesn't make me want to spend that time talking to someone.
A funny thing came up locally in recent months. One of the suburb governments discovered that many of their employees were spending more time on the cellphone at work, than working! They banned cellphones from the offices, and you should have seen the reaction, pure outrage, municipal workers pitching a fit on the TV news. Come on, these are public servants, at work, yet they're going nuts over the thought of losing the ability to sit around blabbing all day.
The County Clerk's office does make an interesting case, though; it isn't private property since it's a county government facility. But if they can ban the public from using cellphones on the property - and enforce it to the point where they tell violators to leave - then certainly private businesses can do the same.
I do wonder what happens to the idiot jurors who leave their phones on during jury duty (the real thing, not just selection). I'd love to be in the courtroom when the judge held a juror in contempt for repeatedly disrupting court proceedings...
My license plate expired at the end of the year, so late December I went to the County Clerk's office to renew my tags. You can do it by mail but it costs more because they charge a mail handling fee, so I always do it in person at the County Clerk's office.
In order to get inside the waiting room, you have to open a door with a sign on it which says, in large block letters "NO FOOD, NO DRINKS, TURN OFF CELL PHONES OR PAGERS." Once you get inside, there are several 8.5 x 11 signs posted on the front of the service counter which show a cell phone surrounded by the universal "banned" insignia (think "no smoking" signs, the circle with a slash). Seems pretty straightforward to me.
I was in the waiting room for about half an hour before my number was called. In those 30 minutes, 4 or 5 peoples' cell phones went off. Each time, one of the attendants would say (rather loudly) "please turn your phones and pagers off" as if to remind everyone of the sign on the door. It was obvious who they were meaning to speak to, but they did it politely and in a general manner so as not to embarass anyone in particular.
One guy's phone rang, the warning was given, and he proceeded to hang up and call the other person back! As if it somehow mattered who initiated the call. Hello, the sign said TURN THE FUCKING THING OFF!
A woman sitting a few seats down got 3 calls (the "general reminder" was announced after her "Hey Ya" ringtone blared out the first time). She was asked to leave the 2nd time her phone rang and she assured the attendant she'd turned it off. The 3rd time we all had to listen to 20 bars of "Hey Ya" in MIDI form, she was not asked but told to leave. To her credit, she did so.
Cell phones aren't bad technology. Unfortunately, far too many of their owners have bad manners, can't control themselves, can't imagine the thought of turning the damn things off for a few minutes, and have no clue how to exist in a waking state without talking to someone about something or other that could wait until the next face-to-face meeting. That's the problem. Note, I'm not saying this applies to everyone with a cell phone, but the stereotype exists for a reason.
I'm all for portable jammers. You want to blabber while I'm trying to watch a movie, or researching something in the library, or waiting quietly for my number to be called to renew my car tags, or trying to read a book before jury duty starts, fine. I want to fuck up your conversation in return, and you deserve it.
RIP Bon Scott. Ride on, ride on...
Or in vocals, "just ring, three six two four, three six oh, I lead a life of crime."
I've mirrored the PDF file here. At 2.5MB a pop, this mirror is subject to disappear at any time, but perhaps it'll alleviate the load on Groklaw for the time being. Please post other mirrors here.
:)
Thanks PJ for all you do
As an aside, he's a geek like me. We both went to the same college, and got the exact same degree, and graduated at the same time. While I struggled looking for an IT job, he gave up and took a job doing weather-stripping. He makes more money doing weather-stripping than I have ever made doing programming. He's the one with the big TV and his own house. Weather-stripping doesn't require a college degree. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with manual labor - one of my two jobs is manual labor, and I'm happy to have the job - I'm just saying that while I did "the right thing" by going to college, it didn't do me a damned bit of good. I'd be making better money in construction than by using my technical skills. That bothers me.
Without my car I wouldn't be able to get to work, so yes, I did have to buy a car. And I didn't go out and buy a Mustang or a Porsche. My car payment is $335 a month. My car insurance is $120 a month (it's illegal here to drive a car without having insurance). I spend probably $60 a month in gas getting to and from work, with very little other driving. That's about $500 a month just to be able to go to work...
What I'm getting at is that I don't spend excessively. I don't use my credit cards as toys. I never have. Two years ago, I was paying off my credit cards in full every month, and proud of it - because two years ago, I was gainfully employed as a programmer. But a lot of debt can be accrued within two years, especially when college textbooks cost $100 or more apiece, not to mention tuition.
These days, I try to avoid using the credit cards, in favor of my debit card. That doesn't change the fact that I still have a lot of debt, and interest is driving me deeper into debt with each passing month. I have one credit card with a balance of about $5,000. Each month I send a check for $100, or more if I can afford it, and I don't make any new charges. But the following month, the statement says my balance is still about $5,000...
I don't have any health insurance. I don't have any dental insurance. I've had a large cavity for more than 6 months, but I can't afford to go to the dentist. At whatever point that the cavity begins causing me physical pain, I will go to the dentist, and charge the root canal on my credit card. And then I'll be another $2000+ in debt.
Yes, I'm responsible for my credit card debt. But if I'm having to pay an American company, who is charging me interest in American dollars, why shouldn't I expect them to hire American people?
I think you miss the point of my post. I'm not complaining that I'm in debt. Most Americans are in debt and to be quite honest, I'm far better off than a lot of people. My beef is with American companies whose customer base is made up of Americans, yet they're outsourcing their labor to foreign countries. I believe that if the majority of your revenue comes from Americans, then you damned well ought to be required to hire Americans.
That's all.
OK, so American companies like Chase and Citibank are hounding me (an American) for being late on my credit card payments, yet they're sending their jobs to an entirely different country instead of supporting the very Americans they're driving into debt. With you so far.
OK, so you're a student with a full-time job, much like many Americans. With you so far.
OK, so you have a job which presumably pays for your rent, groceries, transportation (car payment, gas), utility bill, internet bill, phone bill. I'm making a bit of a jump here, after reading numerous reports that a $10K/year salary is more than enough to pay for a happy lifestyle in India. Unfortunately, there are a lot of Americans who can't say the same.
I don't hate you because you're Indian. I don't hate you because you're in a foreign country. I don't hate you at all, really, I'd be doing the same thing if I were in your shoes. I think I speak for most American geeks when I say: we don't hate Indians, we hate American companies who are offshoring!
What I hate is that you're taking a job that I could be doing. There is absolutely no reason that an American company, which takes advantage of American tax benefits, and whose customer base is made up primarily of Americans, cannot hire Americans as its workforce. (I find this particularly true of banking and credit institutions - how do they expect their customers to ever pay off their credit card debt if all the jobs are going overseas - but I digress.)
I'm not arguing minimum wage either. I did everything I was "supposed to do." I went to college. I got a degree. In 2003, I made less than $20,000, and that's with two jobs. I have about $8,000 in credit card debt. I live about as modest a lifestyle as you can live in America while still a) having a car to get to work, b) buying enough food to survive, and c) being able to get drunk now and then (forgive me, but it's my only form of entertainment; $6 for 3 hours of buzz is better than $8 to go see a movie).
For those of you who don't live in the US, $20,000 is not a living wage unless you live in housing projects. Late last year, I had to give up my apartment ($650/month rent) and move back in with my parents. At the age of 24. Most of my geek friends are in the same situation. Meanwhile, my friends who are waiters in restaurants - with no college degree, and without the debt associated with college - are doing just fine, they have their own places, they've got 60 inch TV's, sweet cars, etc.
And for every task that was "done wrong" by some "desk jockey" in the USA, there are 10 people in the USA who could have done the job just fine, but they don't have a job, because companies are shipping them overseas.
So, you make more money than most of your friends, and you expect me - the guy with a CS degree who can't get an entry-level tech support job because I'm "overqualified," and can't g
Here is a Screenshot of the computer on the desk in the Oval Office...
You, sir, have just proven that all Russell Spragues are criminals and must be locked up! By using the alias "Kingfox," you've infringed upon the trademarks of not one but two media companies. Don't relax just yet, the FBI is investigating anyone named Russell Sprague and your flagrant trademark violations have surely put you on their radar!
Last year, I got an envelope in the mail. Inside the envelope was a booklet with 24 hours worth of time slots for a week's worth of days. The envelope also contained 5 crisp $1 bills, along with a request that I write down what I was watching on TV in the appropriate time slots, and send the booklet back in the enclosed pre-paid envelope.
Yes, Nielsen, the almighty ratings mystery machine, randomly carpet-bombs America with envelopes containing $5 cash, and relies upon the recipients of those envelopes to a) accurately log their television habits and b) bother to send back the booklet. There is no secret gizmo that you have to remember to disconnect from your TV before you order the PPV porn, you don't become a "Nielsen home" for life, etc. You just get a packet in the mail with 5 free dollars, and you're so surprised that you figure you might as well participate for a week.
Contrary to the AC reply, you don't need to start a family first. The envelope appeared at my apartment, at which I was the sole resident. And yes, I did fill out the log book and send it back. Of course, I imagine it was easier for me (at most I watch MSNBC for awhile, or the local news from 10-10:30 PM) than for the typical household...
Is the lesson of Florida - whose electoral votes were in such close contention that it went all the way to the Supreme Court - really this lost on people? I've seen the numbers as low as 500 votes, and as high as 2,000, depending on who sponsored the recount. Florida has more than 16 million residents. If 5,000 more of them had bothered to show up and vote, things might have been much different today. (I'm not saying we'd have a different president, just that there would have been less contention, and less resentment.)
My father has never voted in his life, and says he never will unless the electoral system is replaced by the popular vote. It's a shame, really. How many hundreds of thousands of people think that way, and could sway an election if they actually went and voted instead of standing around saying "fuck it, I don't think this is fair?" Presuming my father loathes Bush, he's wasting a vote by not going and voting for a challenger. Presuming he loves Bush, he's wasting a vote by not going and supporting him. Either way, by not voting, he's basically casting a de-facto vote for whichever candidate wins.
Your comment reminds me of my father, except instead of "this isn't fair," it's "they all suck." I'm sorry, but the fact is that "None of the Above" can't run this country. 363 days from now, on January 20 2005, one of {Bush, Dean, Kerry, Edwards, Clark [, a few longshots]} will be running this country. They might all suck, but one of them has to suck the least in your opinion. One of them disgusts you less than any of the others, even if he's the biggest longshot. Go vote for that person. If you can't be bothered with the primaries, at least go to the polls in November and vote for "the lesser of all evils." It's your only chance that you won't get stuck with the candidate who sucks harder.
There are a lot of people who hate George W. Bush, and are quick to criticize, but when you ask who they voted for, they tell you they didn't vote. If you don't vote, you forfeit the right to complain about your President.
Vote, and be glad that we still have the right to do so. It's one of the most important things you'll ever do.