I am amused by the ways people treat different technologies. I see people who assume that email delivery is perfect and instantaneous, and get upset if their message is delayed or doesn't reach the destination. The same people will follow up a fax with a phone call to confirm the recipient got it. There appears to be no difference in the importance of the messages involved, so perhaps it is a generational (in terms of the technology) thing.
The other thing I see around here is the people who request a receipt (we use Outlook) when they send a global email to all 1500 users on the system. Most of them only do it once.
Looking at this discussion from the other side of the Pacific, I have to say I am surprised about the amount of cynicism about government (as opposed to politics). I have never really understood the position that small government is by definition better than small government (or vice versa, for that matter). Perhaps I am naive, but at its best, government should exist as a force for good, to assist all citizens to live a better life and improve the human condition. Of course, this requires that the government should be "for the people and of the people". Unfortunately, many citizens ignore the "of the people" part. This means that to affect change, people need to get involved in the process. And at the basic level, that means to get informed and to vote. A democracy where a majority of eligible voters do not exercise their right cannot be in a healthy state.
Slashdot Mirror
The other thing I see around here is the people who request a receipt (we use Outlook) when they send a global email to all 1500 users on the system. Most of them only do it once.
"Australia is a lucky country, run by second-rate people who share its luck." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucky_Country
Sounds about right.
Looking at this discussion from the other side of the Pacific, I have to say I am surprised about the amount of cynicism about government (as opposed to politics). I have never really understood the position that small government is by definition better than small government (or vice versa, for that matter). Perhaps I am naive, but at its best, government should exist as a force for good, to assist all citizens to live a better life and improve the human condition. Of course, this requires that the government should be "for the people and of the people". Unfortunately, many citizens ignore the "of the people" part. This means that to affect change, people need to get involved in the process. And at the basic level, that means to get informed and to vote. A democracy where a majority of eligible voters do not exercise their right cannot be in a healthy state.