er... Nice to watch and good on 'em fer doing it but hardly amazing. Certainly nothing new here. The balloon tech has been publicly available for over 50 years. Upper air observations using more or less the same balloon tech have been in effect for at least 50 years as well. Co-ordinated international launches occur at 0000Z and 1200Z from over 800 locations in the world. All of the data is shared.
Lots of references available... Wikipedia has some nice stuff on it as does the NOAA.
A nice side-effect of all this government diddling around in the upper-atmosphere (and NO ONE calls it "edge of space") is the ready availability of the balloons at a cheap price. Free if you know some one in the government weather services. They never miss one or two "damaged" balloons. Hence the ability for amateurs to launch stuff.
30,000 metres is not unusual. Actually, 25 to 35 is very typical. Flights go up to 40k on a regular basis. Just depends on balloon resilience, hydrogen fill, temp at altitude, etc. Not kicking the balloon is a good thing too.
Now, if someone filled a condom with hydrogen, attached an instrument package and had it reach 30,000 before bursting: THAT would be news. Probably would make a great Trojan commercial as well. The mind she boggles.
I do wish that some of these amateurs would do something truly original. I mean its nice that people are going out and having fun, getting fresh air, building stuff etc and I in no way want to belittle their efforts, but this is/. and it would be nice to see some scientific/tech advancement from the balloon crowd. So, where's the beef?
But it IS rocket science... see P 270 of "Modern engineering for design of liquid-propellant rocket engines" By Dieter K. Huzel, David H. Huang, Harry Arbit
-- My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III
Awww... they were so cute. The Nova 1200 was where I stopped using DGs. TTFN
Car tires have 25% or more by weight of carbon black (petroleum based compound) whose primary purpose is to increase strength and durability. It may be that it was first added to decrease static charge but that is not the claim today.
Carbon black makes an attractive black tint as well.
However, the level of conductivity is such that tires are better described as (very) slightly leaky insulators than as conductors.
For good measure, I defied/. tradition and conducted my own experiment. I used my trusty Fluke to measure our F250's Vativas from hub to tread. Off scale. No conductivity. Nada.
The Fluke isn't the right instrument for leaky insulators but for all intents and purposes: tires are insulators. Period.
Don't believe me then go try it yourself. Don't have a meter? Well try this: take a desk lamp with a zip wire electrical cord. Snip one of the wires in the pair and pull each side back 10 or 15 cm. Strip a cm or two back on each end.
Get an extension cord; plug it in and drag it out to your vehicle. Plug the lamp in, make sure the lamp switch is on, and press the wire ends against the tire at separate locations. If the light goes on, your tire is a conductor. Report back to/. with a video.;->
For another reference, look up causes of jerry can fires at gas pumps. Sceptre (jerry can mfr) has a safety video for filling gas cans and the first thing they point out is to take the container out of the vehicle and place it on the ground. The very real fear is that static discharge due to car being isolated from ground may create an explosion.
Don't confuse this. [...] but one of the multiple reasons is passenger attention. Take off and landing are, statistically, the most dangerous times, where all passengers are required to be attentive to what goes on. [...] Airplanes and procedures are carefully planned so that you can evacuate quickly in case of an emergency, and people being distracted form electronics isn't really a good idea.
Oh tish tosh.
The airlines don't care if you pay attention to the safety video/demo. Well, maybe they care but they don't do anything to ensure attention. People read newspapers, talk to each other and do all kinds of distracting things at take off and landing. Flight attendants don't carry pointer sticks to rap people's knuckles if they don't listen.
You are espousing technological bigotry: it's OK to talk to a person beside you but not via a communication device.
If I'm playing Angry Birds while the plane is blowing up on take off, then so much the better. At least I'm distracted from my impending doom;->
Your car is touching the ground. Shielding is easy when you have a solid ground. How, exactly, do you get an effective ground when you're in the air?
er... This question is a bit like '... but how can it fly? Metal is so much heavier than air. How, exactly, can that fly? '
but you asked and I will assume that it is an honest question and you are not attempting humour. So, consider:
1. Although there is no "earth" ground, there is a "signal" ground which is whatever conductive element is chosen to be the signal ground. Typically, this is the metal chassis of the device, which is bonded to all other devices on the aircraft via explicit conductive frames and via the aircraft frame/body. Interesting as this topic is (it can get complex), it is largely irrelevant to the issue of shielding. Not completely, but shielding does not depend on a ground or a ground plane.
2. Shielding is accomplished by enclosing the object in a Faraday Cage. A Faraday Cage is simply a container made of conducting material. The material does not have to be solid but could be a mesh, as long as the mesh is electronically opaque to the radiation in question. So... a metal hamster cage will do for some things but it is best to use a continuous metal box. Hence your cell phone board has a tin box mounted over the critical rf components and the pc board has a solid metal layer to shield the bottom side. You will likely see similar constructions on your computer's video card.
3. Your car chassis is not grounded to the earth unless you have conductive rubber tires or you have one of those straps/chains dragging below your vehicle. BTW, the straps are to prevent static build up and have nothing to do with shielding.
4. All sorts of devices are shielded from interference or from causing interference without being attached to an "earth" ground. Your car radio, cell phone, portable TV, etc. Hell, what is the Earth grounded to????
The interweb has plenty of references.... I don't know why, but this question makes me think of Captain Jack asking "but why's the rum gone?".
They didn't get off "easy". Under Canadian law, this is about the amount that they would be expected to pay: the actual loss to the plaintiff. Under current law, that's all the plaintiff is entitled to. So... the lawyers got out their desk calculator and said "put aside $x per title * $n titles", and that's what they did. This was the expected result and is in line with legal precedent... nothing earthshaking.
What is curious is the timing. Bill C32 is in the works which delivers much of what the record companies have asked for (although they are still complaining), including statutory damages.
(Removed/modified some text. See the link for complete article.)
In Canada:
* The levy applies to "blank audio recording media", such as CD-Rs.
* The levy is paid by importers and manufacturers of such media sold within Canada
* The levy is collected regardless of the purchaser's end use of the media.
* The levy is distributed as per: 66% to authors and publishers,18.9% to performers and 15.1% to record companies.
* The [distribution] methodology [is] based on commercial radio airplay and commercial sales samples, ignoring sales not logged by Soundscan.... As of September 7, 2007 over one hundred million dollars has been distributed.
* In conjunction with the levy, the Copyright Act allows individuals to make copies of sound recordings for their own private, non-commercial use. They may not distribute the copy.
IANAL but in Canada, suing for damages is a bit different from the US... my understanding is that damages awards for loss have to be consistent with actual, concrete, demonstrable loss. I know that these things get complex and follow some convoluted paths, at least to the non-lawyers, but I was given this example. Say I offer to sell you a car at $1000 less than the going rate and you accept but before you come over to pay and collect the vehicle, I sell the car to someone else. You can sue me for damages but you are basically limited to the $1000 difference between the going rate and my original offer to sell. Now that's straight damages. I don't believe there are any statutory damages for copyright.
Bill C32 I think, changes that. It introduces American style "statutory" damages with a minimum per instance (er... $100 non-commercial and $200 commercial) for copyright violations. The maximums are much higher ($5000 for commercial). The Bill has passed second reading, still needs third reading and to pass in the senate. It is not yet in force:
So... you have to think that there is some house-cleaning going on. Currently, the damages would be limited to actual license costs plus possibly legal fees, hence the ability for the association to set aside an exact amount for the settlement. They have been thinking about this for a long time.
I believe that the industry association has a vested interest to get this matter out of the way in prep for the passing of C32, which could push the damages up significantly, as high as $1.5 Billion. I would also be suspicious that the Heritage Minister is involved here somewhere and strong armed the artists to accept the industry settlement so that Bill C32 could be put into place without any embarassing fallout. The argument would be that C32 is good for the artists so accept this and be done with it. I think that everyone involved in the settlement is doing the ol' nod nod wink wink.
There has been a long running difference in view between Heritage Canada (artists, er... proponent of blank CD/DVD surcharges) and Industry Canada (resp. for telecom, ISPs, etc and traditionally against making ISPs etc responsible for infringing data transmission). I would bet money that the two ministries have been settling differences behind the scenes and in cabinet. This "settlement" is just one item on a long list of to-do items that are part of aligning Canadian copyright law with American law. I am not saying there is conspiracy but there is an expected amount of co-ordination and deal making within the Conservative party cabinet. Okay.... maybe it IS a conspiracy;->
One thing is for certain: a lot of shit has been going on behind the scenes in this story.
I can imagine people like Einstein and Hawking standing around blowing flecks of spittle in each others' faces arguing, and like one Anon. commenter said, "hands slapping the walls" and just being total fucking retards until they pick this specific book up. Ahhhhhh! Scientists don't hafta be reeeeTARDIIIIIIIDD any MOOOOOOOOORE
1. Please be more PC wrt "total fucking retards". "total fucking asswipes" is a much more acceptable phrase
2. Please reference Monty Python's coverage of Greece vs Germany at the 1972 Olympics in the sport of Philosopher's Football
Actually, there were BPs in a redundant configuration but when the control was lost the main failed to operate and the backup's batteries were in too poor condition to work. As with most disasters there were a myriad of contributing factors. After looking at numerous reports (everyone is certainly trying to make sure their investigations are public) it looks like:
1. Familiarity breeds contempt. Alarms shut down or ignored partly because of annoyance and partly because incorrect conclusions were made about the state that the well was in, leading to a dangerous situation and disastrous consequences. Not unlike pilots in poor visibility conditions who ignore their instruments and distrust them leading to controlled flight into terrain.
2. Money trumps safety. There was tremendous corporate pressure to bring the well in. In the oil production world, almost everything is done by contract with petroleum producer owning and operating very little of what is going on. Rigs, crews, services are all contracted to do certain jobs and the competition is fierce. No one wants to be the company that could not do the task or who were late getting it done. Consider: if some different decisions were made and the well was brought in safely but say two or three months late and with several million more dollars spent, we would have never heard about anything and some of the well contractors, including individuals such as the rig boss, contract engineers, may have been looking for work elsewhere.
I'm interested to see if anything changes after all of the investigations, a la airline safety after a TSB investigation.
TFA says this is a "rare" event but runway renumbering must occur all over the place, more so if the longtitude is orthogonal to the path of the magnetic pole.
Must keep the government airspace handbook editors busy.
I am not a pilot (can you tell?) but long ago did have some business around YZF, YCB, YSY, YCO etc and the runway designations were all True so I thought it would be the same everywhere.
I'm Canadian you insensitve clod. We use True North (coincidentally Strong and Free) for runway designations and thus are immune to drifting runway numbers. Let's hope desperately that the Earth's spin axis doesn't start moving!
Strangely... as the years go by, I AM feeling a growing desire to learn the Cyrillic alphabet.
What were you supposed to fucking be doing while you started typing this? Stop being such a flake and be productive or I'll enter you in a contest. 1st place is a nice set of steakknives, second place is you're fired. Interested now?
Signed, Your fucking distraction-channeling boss
P.S. Go fuck yourself
That's a bit harsh. I hope it's supposed to be humour.
He was just upset because I stereotyped ADHD, and he likely didn't read the whole thing. Probably has some personal involvement.... I know where he's coming from.
Fuck you and your crass generalisations. People with ADHD are not fucking flakes and can be very reliable.
Well fuck you and your inability to read/comprehend. And fuck you for your crass insensitivity to my sense of humour. And while I'm in the mood: fuck you for being so quick to fire up your anger.
Now, are we through with that? Whew.
My intention was to point out that the writer of the TFA was management challenged and did not recognize the value of the people he had working for him. Personally, I think every good IT guy is at least a bit OC and ADHD. I include myself. If the world were populated entirely by the neural typicals then we would be missing much of the scientific advances that we currently enjoy. Include fire in that group.
Slashdot Mirror
What am I missing here? Hotmail accounts are throw away in the first place but what's the big deal about email aliases? My ISP has had this forever.
er... Nice to watch and good on 'em fer doing it but hardly amazing. Certainly nothing new here. The balloon tech has been publicly available for over 50 years. Upper air observations using more or less the same balloon tech have been in effect for at least 50 years as well. Co-ordinated international launches occur at 0000Z and 1200Z from over 800 locations in the world. All of the data is shared.
Lots of references available... Wikipedia has some nice stuff on it as does the NOAA.
A nice side-effect of all this government diddling around in the upper-atmosphere (and NO ONE calls it "edge of space") is the ready availability of the balloons at a cheap price. Free if you know some one in the government weather services. They never miss one or two "damaged" balloons. Hence the ability for amateurs to launch stuff.
30,000 metres is not unusual. Actually, 25 to 35 is very typical. Flights go up to 40k on a regular basis. Just depends on balloon resilience, hydrogen fill, temp at altitude, etc. Not kicking the balloon is a good thing too.
Now, if someone filled a condom with hydrogen, attached an instrument package and had it reach 30,000 before bursting: THAT would be news. Probably would make a great Trojan commercial as well. The mind she boggles.
I do wish that some of these amateurs would do something truly original. I mean its nice that people are going out and having fun, getting fresh air, building stuff etc and I in no way want to belittle their efforts, but this is /. and it would be nice to see some scientific/tech advancement from the balloon crowd. So, where's the beef?
I have to agree. Rest assured I will be on the internet within minutes to register my disgust throughout the world.
An Itanium link? I didn't know they were still making those.
Better known as the Itanic. So mod me troll!
EMF/RFI shielding isn't rocket science.
But it IS rocket science... see P 270 of "Modern engineering for design of liquid-propellant rocket engines" By Dieter K. Huzel, David H. Huang, Harry Arbit
-- My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III
Awww... they were so cute. The Nova 1200 was where I stopped using DGs. TTFN
Car tires have 25% or more by weight of carbon black (petroleum based compound) whose primary purpose is to increase strength and durability. It may be that it was first added to decrease static charge but that is not the claim today.
Carbon black makes an attractive black tint as well.
However, the level of conductivity is such that tires are better described as (very) slightly leaky insulators than as conductors.
For good measure, I defied /. tradition and conducted my own experiment. I used my trusty Fluke to measure our F250's Vativas from hub to tread. Off scale. No conductivity. Nada.
The Fluke isn't the right instrument for leaky insulators but for all intents and purposes: tires are insulators. Period.
Don't believe me then go try it yourself. Don't have a meter? Well try this: take a desk lamp with a zip wire electrical cord. Snip one of the wires in the pair and pull each side back 10 or 15 cm. Strip a cm or two back on each end.
Get an extension cord; plug it in and drag it out to your vehicle. Plug the lamp in, make sure the lamp switch is on, and press the wire ends against the tire at separate locations. If the light goes on, your tire is a conductor. Report back to /. with a video. ;->
For another reference, look up causes of jerry can fires at gas pumps. Sceptre (jerry can mfr) has a safety video for filling gas cans and the first thing they point out is to take the container out of the vehicle and place it on the ground. The very real fear is that static discharge due to car being isolated from ground may create an explosion.
http://www.scepter.com/safe_use_instructions/safe_use/
Another clue that tires are insulators is the number of conductive tire patents that show up on google.
Modded "funny". So you WERE attempting humour. Drat. I hardly ever get that right; I thought you were serious.
Don't confuse this. [...] but one of the multiple reasons is passenger attention. Take off and landing are, statistically, the most dangerous times, where all passengers are required to be attentive to what goes on. [...] Airplanes and procedures are carefully planned so that you can evacuate quickly in case of an emergency, and people being distracted form electronics isn't really a good idea.
Oh tish tosh.
The airlines don't care if you pay attention to the safety video/demo. Well, maybe they care but they don't do anything to ensure attention. People read newspapers, talk to each other and do all kinds of distracting things at take off and landing. Flight attendants don't carry pointer sticks to rap people's knuckles if they don't listen.
You are espousing technological bigotry: it's OK to talk to a person beside you but not via a communication device.
If I'm playing Angry Birds while the plane is blowing up on take off, then so much the better. At least I'm distracted from my impending doom ;->
Your car is touching the ground. Shielding is easy when you have a solid ground. How, exactly, do you get an effective ground when you're in the air?
er... This question is a bit like '... but how can it fly? Metal is so much heavier than air. How, exactly, can that fly? '
but you asked and I will assume that it is an honest question and you are not attempting humour. So, consider:
1. Although there is no "earth" ground, there is a "signal" ground which is whatever conductive element is chosen to be the signal ground. Typically, this is the metal chassis of the device, which is bonded to all other devices on the aircraft via explicit conductive frames and via the aircraft frame/body. Interesting as this topic is (it can get complex), it is largely irrelevant to the issue of shielding. Not completely, but shielding does not depend on a ground or a ground plane.
2. Shielding is accomplished by enclosing the object in a Faraday Cage. A Faraday Cage is simply a container made of conducting material. The material does not have to be solid but could be a mesh, as long as the mesh is electronically opaque to the radiation in question. So... a metal hamster cage will do for some things but it is best to use a continuous metal box. Hence your cell phone board has a tin box mounted over the critical rf components and the pc board has a solid metal layer to shield the bottom side. You will likely see similar constructions on your computer's video card.
3. Your car chassis is not grounded to the earth unless you have conductive rubber tires or you have one of those straps/chains dragging below your vehicle. BTW, the straps are to prevent static build up and have nothing to do with shielding.
4. All sorts of devices are shielded from interference or from causing interference without being attached to an "earth" ground. Your car radio, cell phone, portable TV, etc. Hell, what is the Earth grounded to????
The interweb has plenty of references. ... I don't know why, but this question makes me think of Captain Jack asking "but why's the rum gone?".
To translate a car analogy: If you speed, remove your front license plate
You insensitive clod; I'm from Alberta. We are front license plate challenged here.
They didn't get off "easy". Under Canadian law, this is about the amount that they would be expected to pay: the actual loss to the plaintiff. Under current law, that's all the plaintiff is entitled to. So... the lawyers got out their desk calculator and said "put aside $x per title * $n titles", and that's what they did. This was the expected result and is in line with legal precedent... nothing earthshaking.
What is curious is the timing. Bill C32 is in the works which delivers much of what the record companies have asked for (although they are still complaining), including statutory damages.
You missed the obvious question: How on earth did the damages end up within 5% of what they had set aside?
Easy. No statutory damages for copyright infringement in Canada, only actual damages. That changes with Bill C32 in 2nd reading now.
So... damage calculation is very straightforward: what would you have had to pay to keep it kosher? Pay that + some expenses and yer done.
The same Canadian law that gives royalties to record companies for all blank media sold, even when they aren't being used for copyright infringement?
Are you referring to the blank media levy? That is not a royalty and only a portion is to be given to the record companies:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_copying_levy#Canada
(Removed/modified some text. See the link for complete article.)
In Canada:
* The levy applies to "blank audio recording media", such as CD-Rs. ... As of September 7, 2007 over one hundred million dollars has been distributed.
* The levy is paid by importers and manufacturers of such media sold within Canada
* The levy is collected regardless of the purchaser's end use of the media.
* The levy is distributed as per: 66% to authors and publishers,18.9% to performers and 15.1% to record companies.
* The [distribution] methodology [is] based on commercial radio airplay and commercial sales samples, ignoring sales not logged by Soundscan.
* In conjunction with the levy, the Copyright Act allows individuals to make copies of sound recordings for their own private, non-commercial use. They may not distribute the copy.
umm.. it was a joke???
IANAL but in Canada, suing for damages is a bit different from the US... my understanding is that damages awards for loss have to be consistent with actual, concrete, demonstrable loss. I know that these things get complex and follow some convoluted paths, at least to the non-lawyers, but I was given this example. Say I offer to sell you a car at $1000 less than the going rate and you accept but before you come over to pay and collect the vehicle, I sell the car to someone else. You can sue me for damages but you are basically limited to the $1000 difference between the going rate and my original offer to sell. Now that's straight damages. I don't believe there are any statutory damages for copyright.
Bill C32 I think, changes that. It introduces American style "statutory" damages with a minimum per instance (er... $100 non-commercial and $200 commercial) for copyright violations. The maximums are much higher ($5000 for commercial). The Bill has passed second reading, still needs third reading and to pass in the senate. It is not yet in force:
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Sites/LOP/LEGISINFO/index.asp?Language=E&Chamber=N&StartList=A&EndList=Z&Session=23&Type=0&Scope=I&query=7026&List=stat
So... you have to think that there is some house-cleaning going on. Currently, the damages would be limited to actual license costs plus possibly legal fees, hence the ability for the association to set aside an exact amount for the settlement. They have been thinking about this for a long time.
I believe that the industry association has a vested interest to get this matter out of the way in prep for the passing of C32, which could push the damages up significantly, as high as $1.5 Billion. I would also be suspicious that the Heritage Minister is involved here somewhere and strong armed the artists to accept the industry settlement so that Bill C32 could be put into place without any embarassing fallout. The argument would be that C32 is good for the artists so accept this and be done with it. I think that everyone involved in the settlement is doing the ol' nod nod wink wink.
There has been a long running difference in view between Heritage Canada (artists, er... proponent of blank CD/DVD surcharges) and Industry Canada (resp. for telecom, ISPs, etc and traditionally against making ISPs etc responsible for infringing data transmission). I would bet money that the two ministries have been settling differences behind the scenes and in cabinet. This "settlement" is just one item on a long list of to-do items that are part of aligning Canadian copyright law with American law. I am not saying there is conspiracy but there is an expected amount of co-ordination and deal making within the Conservative party cabinet. Okay.... maybe it IS a conspiracy ;->
One thing is for certain: a lot of shit has been going on behind the scenes in this story.
I can imagine people like Einstein and Hawking standing around blowing flecks of spittle in each others' faces arguing, and like one Anon. commenter said, "hands slapping the walls" and just being total fucking retards until they pick this specific book up. Ahhhhhh! Scientists don't hafta be reeeeTARDIIIIIIIDD any MOOOOOOOOORE
1. Please be more PC wrt "total fucking retards". "total fucking asswipes" is a much more acceptable phrase
2. Please reference Monty Python's coverage of Greece vs Germany at the 1972 Olympics in the sport of Philosopher's Football
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Philosophers'_Football_Match
sigh... so many "sheldon" moments
I meant, BP as in Blowout Preventers, as opposed to BP as in the company formerly known as British Petroleum.
Cheers
er... I meant "Blowout Preventers" for "BPs". Sorry for the confusion with British Petroleum.
Actually, there were BPs in a redundant configuration but when the control was lost the main failed to operate and the backup's batteries were in too poor condition to work. As with most disasters there were a myriad of contributing factors. After looking at numerous reports (everyone is certainly trying to make sure their investigations are public) it looks like:
1. Familiarity breeds contempt. Alarms shut down or ignored partly because of annoyance and partly because incorrect conclusions were made about the state that the well was in, leading to a dangerous situation and disastrous consequences. Not unlike pilots in poor visibility conditions who ignore their instruments and distrust them leading to controlled flight into terrain.
2. Money trumps safety. There was tremendous corporate pressure to bring the well in. In the oil production world, almost everything is done by contract with petroleum producer owning and operating very little of what is going on. Rigs, crews, services are all contracted to do certain jobs and the competition is fierce. No one wants to be the company that could not do the task or who were late getting it done. Consider: if some different decisions were made and the well was brought in safely but say two or three months late and with several million more dollars spent, we would have never heard about anything and some of the well contractors, including individuals such as the rig boss, contract engineers, may have been looking for work elsewhere.
I'm interested to see if anything changes after all of the investigations, a la airline safety after a TSB investigation.
TFA says this is a "rare" event but runway renumbering must occur all over the place, more so if the longtitude is orthogonal to the path of the magnetic pole.
Must keep the government airspace handbook editors busy.
I am not a pilot (can you tell?) but long ago did have some business around YZF, YCB, YSY, YCO etc and the runway designations were all True so I thought it would be the same everywhere.
Bad assumption. Much shame.
Thanks for making things right!
I'm Canadian you insensitve clod. We use True North (coincidentally Strong and Free) for runway designations and thus are immune to drifting runway numbers. Let's hope desperately that the Earth's spin axis doesn't start moving!
Strangely... as the years go by, I AM feeling a growing desire to learn the Cyrillic alphabet.
What were you supposed to fucking be doing while you started typing this? Stop being such a flake and be productive or I'll enter you in a contest. 1st place is a nice set of steakknives, second place is you're fired. Interested now?
Signed,
Your fucking distraction-channeling boss
P.S.
Go fuck yourself
That's a bit harsh. I hope it's supposed to be humour.
He was just upset because I stereotyped ADHD, and he likely didn't read the whole thing. Probably has some personal involvement.... I know where he's coming from.
Cheers
And you are... ????
Fuck you and your crass generalisations. People with ADHD are not fucking flakes and can be very reliable.
Well fuck you and your inability to read/comprehend. And fuck you for your crass insensitivity to my sense of humour. And while I'm in the mood: fuck you for being so quick to fire up your anger.
Now, are we through with that? Whew.
My intention was to point out that the writer of the TFA was management challenged and did not recognize the value of the people he had working for him. Personally, I think every good IT guy is at least a bit OC and ADHD. I include myself. If the world were populated entirely by the neural typicals then we would be missing much of the scientific advances that we currently enjoy. Include fire in that group.