I know someone that has a damper system like the one you describe. It cost about $1000 to have it installed (not bad actually for parts+labor). Now they can individually control temp in each room with either a control panel near the front door or a control in the bedroom.
I'm an open source fan personally, so I'd do Misterhouse. My father had a setup a few years back that he home-built with a linux distro that was made for a little headless machine that he stuck in the basement. He got really complex with it and did all the programming himself in Assembly (he's a masochist) instead of making use of the built-in tools. He wanted to do it HIS way. It worked great though. My dad's HA setup was dialed into all of the lighting and thermostat controls for the house and it did some cool stuff. He had a temperature probe on the outside of the house, and the system would decide (based on outside temperature, time of day, and whether anyone was in the house) whether or not to run the A/C to keep the house cool, but first it would spin up all the ceiling fans.
In reference to the "serious flaws" and weaknesses...ever wondered why none of the home automation tech we've been promised since 1950 has come to be common in homes? Things like auto-opening drapes, autoadjusting lighting, stuff like that. Ever wished someone would just sell something like that? The reason we don't have all of this cool stuff is that there is a company (can't remember the name off the top of my head) that holds a bunch of over-broad patents on most of what we think of as "duh" innovations in home automation. They don't license or sell their tech. They just sue people who try to make stuff.
If we end up with a string of verdicts like this I have two things to say:
1. I, for one, welcome our new RIAA overlords
2. I think we finally have step 3!
1. Produce easily copied item no one wants to pay for
2. Let people get used to getting it for free
3. Sue your customers for millions of dollars
4. Profit!
The main reason for having stuff like this, though, is to keep people that are still running Service Pack 1 and an expired copy of an anti-virus from overrunning the network - it's unbelievable how many people are thoroughly unpatched. Other people with fully patched machines aren't really in danger, but the routers and switches will still try and route the traffic that some stupid piece of spyware or trojan is throwing all over the network. This results in overall network degradation for all users. We're really not trying to make your life miserable, we're trying to keep the philosophy students from flooding the network with garbage packets from their neglected spam zombies. Unfortunately it has to be an all or nothing approach. We can't be discriminatory and say "Everyone except the CS/IT majors have to run the security software" - the board of trustees would go apeshit if we did, not to mention the student response. Now, we don't just force this on the students. ALL of the employees (including the IT staff and faculty) have to authenticate through Clean Access in order to use the on-campus wireless. We don't do it for desktops at the moment but we are looking at that possibility.
The school I work for is also a little unique because considering the size of our student body, we have no on-campus housing. The Internet connection is on-campus only. We don't have any dorms that we provide Internet to so the only time students have access to our network resources is when they're on-campus for classes and such. They're free to uninstall Clean Access when they leave, but they'll need to put it right back on when they try to use the wireless again.
We've tried the whole "assuming the students are adults" tactic and it resulted in a couple dozen MPAA letters threatening lawsuits. We'll start treating the students like adults when they stop acting like children and violating the campus acceptable use policy. Until all of the students suddenly become trustworthy and stop using our network for sharing copyrighted material over bittorrent we'll keep making them install security compliance software and we'll keep that layer 7 firewall up just to make sure.
Yeesh, how draconian. The university I work for uses Cisco's Clean Access product to ensure Windows users have Windows updates and an anti-virus, but we would never claim the right to unfettered access to student's computers. We can get into the files that students store on our network, but we don't really care what's in your student drive. We only ever look in there if there's a suspicion of wrongdoing or if the student asks us to (like a former student who can't get into the drive anymore and needs some file).
...and the Helpdesk or network engineers response will be:
"We don't care what's on your computer as long as you are up to date security-wise. If you don't want to install the security software then we don't have to give you Internet access." I work in IT at a large University and this is exactly what we do. We do make rare exceptions to the security policy for certain edge cases (such as the occasional "The stupid crappy Cisco Clean Access software just won't freaking work!" or "I paid for an anti-virus that Clean Access doesn't support").
We use Cisco Clean Access at the University where I work in the IT department. Don't think that we don't know you can do that. We're not as dumb as the CS majors think. We're well aware of the fact that you can change your user agent, and if we find out you're doing it we add your MAC address to the blocked list. Then you get to come talk to the campus IT security team and beg for your Internet access back.
Obviously I know that the MAC can be spoofed, and you are free to do so. Just keep in mind that if you get caught trying to circumvent our network security measures we can and will take away your Internet access permanently.
I'm not sure who provides their CSA, but ours only checks for antivirus, antivirus updates, windows updates, and common P2P programs (usually limewire).
So? I don't care if it makes your dorm room smell like a fresh spring breeze. If I don't want it, then you have no right to demand that I have it.
Actually...they do. Most Universities (like the one I work for) have an acceptable use policy. Agreement to the acceptable use policy is part of the school giving you permission to use THEIR network resources. You may have paid tuition, but the school's network does not belong to you. It belongs to the school, and if the school's policy says that you have to have a screensaver featuring fluffy bunnies in order to access their network then tough shit if you don't like fluffy bunnies.
If you were a private company, then maybe I can understand, it's your network, you have the right to set the rules.
Ok.
Even if you're a private university, though, I most certainly do not understand, because again, MY tuition and fees pay for that network, and Internet access is pretty much required to complete just about any degree these days. Deny it, and you might as well tell a student that he can't have any textbooks.
If you don't like it they can admit someone else.
Not to mention that it sounds like you've fallen into the same trap that the RIAA/MPAA has fallen into. "Because some people use Limewire for illegal purposes, since you have it installed, you must be using it for illegal purposes." Sorry bub, but the whole "guilty until proven innocent" thing doesn't fly very well with me.
I do agree with you here. At the university I'm at we don't do the "guilty until proven innocent" thing. We got a little more proactive and setup a layer 7 firewall on our network that blocks all P2P traffic. Of course there are ways around it via VPNs and proxies, but the installation of that firewall resulted in about a 60% reduction in our network resources and an overall speed increase for the entire campus (we have about 3000 employees and 25000 students).
If you have some reasonable suspicion based on tangible evidence that my machine is spewing out malware or otherwise violating policies designed to protect the university or its network, then by all means, shut off it's connection, show me what you've got, and we'll deal with it like adults.
We do this in addition to the Security agent scans checking for current anti-virus and Windows updates (Mac, Linux, and wi-fi based cell phones are automatically exempt).
I wouldn't want my machine, if infected, to convey malware any more than you do. If you want to make such a "Client Security Agent" available for me to use, then thanks, I'll consider it.
But again, it is my machine, and it is my money that is paying for that Internet connection.
Yep, and thank you for your money. It is being used to pay for OUR network and OUR Internet connection. If YOU want to use YOUR machine on OUR wireless network (that we have graciously provided you with - we don't have to give you an Internet connection) you'd damn well better install the security agent or you can wait in line to use a computer lab where some idiot making $9.00/hour from your tuition (thank you again) can watch everything you're doing on that computer.
Accessing it is not a privilege that the university has graciously given to me for free, it is a paid-for service, and you'd better have a damn good reason for taking my money and then denying it to me. "You might get infected or break copyright law" is not a valid excuse.
Actually it is a privilege you've been given for free even though you paid tuition and student fees. I can only speak for the institution where I am em
I'm not saying that was Microsoft's fault. I just think it was funny I saw this article while I was working on these machines. I'm blaming whoever ordered the machines without actually checking with IT on what they should order. It's weird...one came with XP Tablet edition, the other three have Vista Business and they're all the exact same model.
I'm not blaming Microsoft at all, it's a combination of bad ordering and bad support - we have had nothing but trouble with the crap that Toshiba sends us.
Part of the problem is also the lack of ability for Vista to work with our corporate network. It does "kind of" work, but it's really kludgey and unstable. I honestly don't know who to blame for this. Microsoft for forcing an operating system on us that doesn't allow a large vendor's network setup to continue to work properly - or Novell for not getting Netware working properly with Vista?
Netware DOES work with Vista, but it works differently than it did with XP. Try explaining that to 2000 technophobic faculty who just want their computers to work the way they always did and expect you as the IT guy to do what they want.
One of the departments on-campus where I do IT support just bought a bunch of POS Toshiba tablets for some faculty. They came with Vista. Vista doesn't work with most of our campus systems. I have to figure out how to get the tablets working properly using our campus license of XP Pro. I have three of them sitting in front of me that I am trying three different techniques on...we'll see how this goes. Vista...making IT miserable since November of 2006.
Fool! You have to have Bernard get the keys from the inside of the door of the fat guy's room, give the keys to the guy in the ski mask, use the crowbar you get from the guy with the ski mask to get the quarter stuck in the gum, get another quarter from the pay phone, use both quarters in the magic fingers bed to shake the fat guy off of it, get the sweater he was sleeping on, hit the vending machine with the crowbar and take all the quarters, then take the sweater and put it in the dryer using all of the quarters from the vending machine, then have Laverne get the hamster out of the ice machine, microwave him and get the sweater out of the dryer and put it on him so he's not cold!
Slashdot Mirror
I know someone that has a damper system like the one you describe. It cost about $1000 to have it installed (not bad actually for parts+labor). Now they can individually control temp in each room with either a control panel near the front door or a control in the bedroom.
I'm an open source fan personally, so I'd do Misterhouse. My father had a setup a few years back that he home-built with a linux distro that was made for a little headless machine that he stuck in the basement. He got really complex with it and did all the programming himself in Assembly (he's a masochist) instead of making use of the built-in tools. He wanted to do it HIS way. It worked great though. My dad's HA setup was dialed into all of the lighting and thermostat controls for the house and it did some cool stuff. He had a temperature probe on the outside of the house, and the system would decide (based on outside temperature, time of day, and whether anyone was in the house) whether or not to run the A/C to keep the house cool, but first it would spin up all the ceiling fans.
In reference to the "serious flaws" and weaknesses...ever wondered why none of the home automation tech we've been promised since 1950 has come to be common in homes? Things like auto-opening drapes, autoadjusting lighting, stuff like that. Ever wished someone would just sell something like that? The reason we don't have all of this cool stuff is that there is a company (can't remember the name off the top of my head) that holds a bunch of over-broad patents on most of what we think of as "duh" innovations in home automation. They don't license or sell their tech. They just sue people who try to make stuff.
I am soooo going to try this.
So...wait...Multiple Sclerosis is keeping CO from coming out for the XBox?
I don't think Apple wants to open that can of worms. If they become a Windows OEM then they're going to have to take all the support calls too.
Will colonists on Jupiter's moons (except for Europa of course) be able to play WoW? That 17 minute latency would be a real game killer.
If we end up with a string of verdicts like this I have two things to say:
1. I, for one, welcome our new RIAA overlords
2. I think we finally have step 3!
1. Produce easily copied item no one wants to pay for
2. Let people get used to getting it for free
3. Sue your customers for millions of dollars
4. Profit!
If I had mod points today...
+1 Insightful
Oh well...I've already posted in this thread like 7 times so I couldn't mod you up anyway.
No. But I am quite tired of having to track down students that think they're smarter than our whole IT department and feed them some humble pie.
The main reason for having stuff like this, though, is to keep people that are still running Service Pack 1 and an expired copy of an anti-virus from overrunning the network - it's unbelievable how many people are thoroughly unpatched. Other people with fully patched machines aren't really in danger, but the routers and switches will still try and route the traffic that some stupid piece of spyware or trojan is throwing all over the network. This results in overall network degradation for all users. We're really not trying to make your life miserable, we're trying to keep the philosophy students from flooding the network with garbage packets from their neglected spam zombies. Unfortunately it has to be an all or nothing approach. We can't be discriminatory and say "Everyone except the CS/IT majors have to run the security software" - the board of trustees would go apeshit if we did, not to mention the student response. Now, we don't just force this on the students. ALL of the employees (including the IT staff and faculty) have to authenticate through Clean Access in order to use the on-campus wireless. We don't do it for desktops at the moment but we are looking at that possibility.
The school I work for is also a little unique because considering the size of our student body, we have no on-campus housing. The Internet connection is on-campus only. We don't have any dorms that we provide Internet to so the only time students have access to our network resources is when they're on-campus for classes and such. They're free to uninstall Clean Access when they leave, but they'll need to put it right back on when they try to use the wireless again.
We've tried the whole "assuming the students are adults" tactic and it resulted in a couple dozen MPAA letters threatening lawsuits. We'll start treating the students like adults when they stop acting like children and violating the campus acceptable use policy. Until all of the students suddenly become trustworthy and stop using our network for sharing copyrighted material over bittorrent we'll keep making them install security compliance software and we'll keep that layer 7 firewall up just to make sure.
Yeesh, how draconian. The university I work for uses Cisco's Clean Access product to ensure Windows users have Windows updates and an anti-virus, but we would never claim the right to unfettered access to student's computers. We can get into the files that students store on our network, but we don't really care what's in your student drive. We only ever look in there if there's a suspicion of wrongdoing or if the student asks us to (like a former student who can't get into the drive anymore and needs some file).
...and the Helpdesk or network engineers response will be: "We don't care what's on your computer as long as you are up to date security-wise. If you don't want to install the security software then we don't have to give you Internet access." I work in IT at a large University and this is exactly what we do. We do make rare exceptions to the security policy for certain edge cases (such as the occasional "The stupid crappy Cisco Clean Access software just won't freaking work!" or "I paid for an anti-virus that Clean Access doesn't support").
Obviously I know that the MAC can be spoofed, and you are free to do so. Just keep in mind that if you get caught trying to circumvent our network security measures we can and will take away your Internet access permanently.
Have a nice day.
So? I don't care if it makes your dorm room smell like a fresh spring breeze. If I don't want it, then you have no right to demand that I have it.
Actually...they do. Most Universities (like the one I work for) have an acceptable use policy. Agreement to the acceptable use policy is part of the school giving you permission to use THEIR network resources. You may have paid tuition, but the school's network does not belong to you. It belongs to the school, and if the school's policy says that you have to have a screensaver featuring fluffy bunnies in order to access their network then tough shit if you don't like fluffy bunnies.
If you were a private company, then maybe I can understand, it's your network, you have the right to set the rules.
Ok.
Even if you're a private university, though, I most certainly do not understand, because again, MY tuition and fees pay for that network, and Internet access is pretty much required to complete just about any degree these days. Deny it, and you might as well tell a student that he can't have any textbooks.
If you don't like it they can admit someone else.
Not to mention that it sounds like you've fallen into the same trap that the RIAA/MPAA has fallen into. "Because some people use Limewire for illegal purposes, since you have it installed, you must be using it for illegal purposes." Sorry bub, but the whole "guilty until proven innocent" thing doesn't fly very well with me.
I do agree with you here. At the university I'm at we don't do the "guilty until proven innocent" thing. We got a little more proactive and setup a layer 7 firewall on our network that blocks all P2P traffic. Of course there are ways around it via VPNs and proxies, but the installation of that firewall resulted in about a 60% reduction in our network resources and an overall speed increase for the entire campus (we have about 3000 employees and 25000 students).
If you have some reasonable suspicion based on tangible evidence that my machine is spewing out malware or otherwise violating policies designed to protect the university or its network, then by all means, shut off it's connection, show me what you've got, and we'll deal with it like adults.
We do this in addition to the Security agent scans checking for current anti-virus and Windows updates (Mac, Linux, and wi-fi based cell phones are automatically exempt).
I wouldn't want my machine, if infected, to convey malware any more than you do. If you want to make such a "Client Security Agent" available for me to use, then thanks, I'll consider it.
But again, it is my machine, and it is my money that is paying for that Internet connection.
Yep, and thank you for your money. It is being used to pay for OUR network and OUR Internet connection. If YOU want to use YOUR machine on OUR wireless network (that we have graciously provided you with - we don't have to give you an Internet connection) you'd damn well better install the security agent or you can wait in line to use a computer lab where some idiot making $9.00/hour from your tuition (thank you again) can watch everything you're doing on that computer.
Accessing it is not a privilege that the university has graciously given to me for free, it is a paid-for service, and you'd better have a damn good reason for taking my money and then denying it to me. "You might get infected or break copyright law" is not a valid excuse.
Actually it is a privilege you've been given for free even though you paid tuition and student fees. I can only speak for the institution where I am em
I am feeling REALLY unintelligent after reading the summary. I'm not even going to try to RTFA.
Good to know. I had no idea they had done this. All of the demos I've seen on-line look like sitting around a dining room/coffee table.
I feel kinda sorry for the poor bastard who has to stand over it staring at the screen for 4+ hours. He's gonna have a serious neck/back ache.
For the Mac version macgamefiles.com has all of the patches AND they download faster than they do through the Blizzard updater.
It probably would work, but good luck trying to keep everything straight with all those monitors, machines, and laptops.
...and there was much rejoicing! *yay*
I'm not saying that was Microsoft's fault. I just think it was funny I saw this article while I was working on these machines. I'm blaming whoever ordered the machines without actually checking with IT on what they should order. It's weird...one came with XP Tablet edition, the other three have Vista Business and they're all the exact same model.
I'm not blaming Microsoft at all, it's a combination of bad ordering and bad support - we have had nothing but trouble with the crap that Toshiba sends us.
Part of the problem is also the lack of ability for Vista to work with our corporate network. It does "kind of" work, but it's really kludgey and unstable. I honestly don't know who to blame for this. Microsoft for forcing an operating system on us that doesn't allow a large vendor's network setup to continue to work properly - or Novell for not getting Netware working properly with Vista?
Netware DOES work with Vista, but it works differently than it did with XP. Try explaining that to 2000 technophobic faculty who just want their computers to work the way they always did and expect you as the IT guy to do what they want.
One of the departments on-campus where I do IT support just bought a bunch of POS Toshiba tablets for some faculty. They came with Vista. Vista doesn't work with most of our campus systems. I have to figure out how to get the tablets working properly using our campus license of XP Pro. I have three of them sitting in front of me that I am trying three different techniques on...we'll see how this goes. Vista...making IT miserable since November of 2006.
Fool! You have to have Bernard get the keys from the inside of the door of the fat guy's room, give the keys to the guy in the ski mask, use the crowbar you get from the guy with the ski mask to get the quarter stuck in the gum, get another quarter from the pay phone, use both quarters in the magic fingers bed to shake the fat guy off of it, get the sweater he was sleeping on, hit the vending machine with the crowbar and take all the quarters, then take the sweater and put it in the dryer using all of the quarters from the vending machine, then have Laverne get the hamster out of the ice machine, microwave him and get the sweater out of the dryer and put it on him so he's not cold!
Wow...I am so sad that I remembered all that...