My question is - what the hell do we have TRADE AGREEMENTS with China for. They want to make it illegal for companies to produce this information to these governments, but this government itself is catering heavily to countries with low wage labor, like China. Pass that law, and let's throw some politicians in jail for treason while we are at it.
You remember that whole toothpaste fiasco from China? They EXECUTED the official responsible for letting that slip by. Not fined, jailed, or sentenced to community service for not 'catching' pad product being exported - they ended his life. You know how much press that got in the US? Dick. Why? Because people and politicians don't WANT to recognize what we are supporting by doing business over there (not to mention the MILLIONS of factory jobs we've shipped off - GFG - wonder who THAT makes rich, aye?)
The irony of it all is, even the people of the countries we setup these trade agreements with don't want them. Wonder why.....
There is an ongoing study with clinical trials in the US testing the use of Huperzine A (a chinese herb) to treat Alzheimer's disease. It's also believed to treat other forms of dementia.
My family has a long history, on my Father's side, of dementia setting in during the 60's -- so my Father and I both read all the news we can regarding such things.
In fact, my Father was mentioning a University study today of a herb that not only has been shown in controlled trials to treat the effects of AD but to also reverse the effects of the disease. Ironically, I can not recollect the name of the University or the herb he was referring to.
Perhaps it's the same herb, perhaps not - I forget.
I tend to agree, I don't particularly see any real visibly innovative changes in design on this plane. That said, despite some bad history -- Japan is hardly a country I have any concern about -- personally, considering their neighbors - I'm surprised they don't do more with their Military. I think they are counting on their somewhat innocent attitude to bring the US to the rescue should they be forced into a war.
NewScientist published an article a while back about chimps in the Congo using spears to kill bushbabies. Thrusting the spears into hollow trees and checking the tips for blood.
I live in Arkansas (yes, insert toothless redneck joke here) - recently the power companies that serve my area (two of them serve NW Arkansas) got approval and implemented a rate increase. They sought and received this approval based on lower power consumption due to mild summer temperatures. I based my thoughts off of that - and I stick too them. The power companies will retain operating costs that they have to cover even if people are using less power - I am no expert but I believe this is about as certain as death and taxes.
In fact, it would not even surprise me if you end up having to pay a USE TAX on solar energy. An example of this would be natural gas - if you have a natural gas well on your property - you still have to pay taxes on what you use from there - as well you also have to pay fees (depending on where you live, I'm sure) to the utility company. Sounds insane, and stupid - but I know that's how natural gas works in my area as I've paid those very fees and taxes myself in the past - frankly it's more trouble then it's worth.
I do agree we will still need the grid, and that's really what I was getting at. Even though they will be selling less power - they are still going to have high operating costs to maintain the grid and power generation capabilities - the less energy people use the more they are going to have to charge for what they do sell.
Like I was saying, it's something we are going to have to deal with eventually - but it's not going to be a smooth road and it's not going to be as simple as what many people perceive it as.
Much like cars - if 90% of the cars on the road were completely solar powered, the remaining 10% of the petrol powered vehicle owners would find themselves paying much higher rates at the pump.
Evidently it seems everyone disagrees with me on this one - but I simply can not see how - perhaps that in itself is where I perceive the problem.
Imagine you are a gas station owner - you sell 10k gallons of gas a week now. Then a year later everyone is driving electric cars and you are selling 1k gallons of gas a week. How are you going to make up for that lost profit and still be able to offer gas to your customers? After all, you still have to pay for those expensive tanks, licensing, and to get the gas tanked to your station -- the only realistic resolution is to increase the profit, cut costs (smaller tanks, open fewer hours, et), or simply stop selling gas. The same, only much more complex and politicized would apply to our power grids.
In the end, though, of course I think it's all for the best - I'm just saying it's going to be a bumpy road as things balance themselves out - much like all progress in the world today.
I think the most important question is what would mass adoption of solar power due to our power grid. Non-solar generated electricity would go through the roof, for starters - causing the adoption rate to increase - again causing rates on non-solar energy to increase - until at some point the power companies wouldn't be able to afford to operate their grids anymore.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for using the most abundant, pure, and untapped energy source available to us -- but slapping a few panels on a house and calling it a day is just where it will start. One can't help but wonder what bumps will be on the road that follows. Industries would collapse, the economy would struggle to balance itself, communities and governments would struggle to maintain their grids.
Sounds like a real mess to me, one we seem to be destined to encounter (or perhaps face another worse should we not).
Maybe it's just me, but I think the impact of solar energy being cheaper than grid power is going to be a bigger concern than how long the cells last - eventually (and soon, no doubt) it's going to be much cheaper to go with solar power - yet there doesn't seem to be much discussion over such issues.
The company I just started for layed off 15 people from the IT department the first week I was there. Yesterday we had a meeting discussing next years budget, and where cuts would be made - I'll give you one guess what department was mentioned first...
Ignorance is bliss, and if you've got a good job in IT it's easy to be blissful.
You should be thankful you have one of those jobs, not berate others who do not.
For years I myself pondered what to do with my career, or perhaps lack thereof. I never finished my degree, and I knew that hurt and would continue to hurt for the rest of my life unless I finished it.
I've worked just about every IT job there is since 1997 - starting as a programmer analyst. If I tried to go over the laundry list of languages, OS environments, and software I'm either very familiar with or sometimes even had a hand in developing -- I'd probably forget a dozen or more between them - maybe more. A couple of years ago I gave up on finding stable work - and took up private consulting. Being something of a jack-of-all-trades, I didn't have any problems finding work.
It was not until then that I fully realized what was happening with IT. To me, I had just seen jobs going overseas without realizing the full scope of how it effected IT as an industry.
Being a consultant, you're something of a throw-away employee. No major overhead, no accounting headaches, no benefits to deal with, just cuts it plain and simple - not to mention the best part - they can fire you just because, with no consequences. In reality, that is what the general IT industry has become as a whole. An industry of throw-away employees. One where most employers expect you to know exactly what they need. Specific OS, language, and development environments.
If a company is looking to downsize, IT is almost always the first place they look, and the department hit the hardest.
I made the decision about 5 months ago that I was going back to school, I was going to finish a degree - but it was not going to be a CS degree. The industry, in my opinion, is completely lost. Even on the administration side. Don't get me wrong, there are jobs to be had - but the pay very rarely fits the level of responsibility and knowledge required.
Just weeks before classes started I got a call from a friend who thought he had *the* job lined up for me - as an engineer. Transportation Logistics Engineer, to be more specific. How I manage to always get jobs I have no specific education in is beyond me, but I considered myself saved and I really don't care why. Most of the people at the company stay there for their entire working careers - getting a position there with no degree in the specific field they were seeking had never even crossed my mind.
But, I digress...
I've worked in IT for 10 years. I've seen it all, from being the solo network admin at a small company to being lead developer on projects for some of the largest corporations in the world. I turned away from the industry and I will never look back for anything more than a hobby. Even today, I am still getting calls from people I had consulted with desperate for me to schedule in some time for them - offering weekend and evening work if I would come fix or support key systems they don't want to pay an employee to maintain.
If a friend asked me if they should consider a degree or career in IT, I would not hesitate to warn them of the instability, irregular hours, low pay for skill and responsibility, lack of a future, and in general the bad past experiences I have had. Things like not seeing my son for more than a couple hours a month for the first three years of his life, due to work. Or the many times I found myself not going home or sleeping for days on end. It sounds like a nightmare and people wonder how such things could honestly happen, but there is an entire industry of just that - it's called IT, and I'm proud to say I'm not a part of it anymore.
That's just me, though. Some people like that, I suppose.
We keep working so hard to ship all our jobs overseas then these pricks want to say they are dissatisfied with innovation?
It's no wonder innovation in the US is lacking, severely. I mean, seriously - how many people do you know in the US who have a job where innovation is even allowed? Not many - not many at all. Actually, not many of the people I know even work in information or research fields anymore - all their jobs have been shipped overseas and filled by H1-B visa workers who will work for nearly half the money.
Another decade at this rate and the only thing America will be is a consumerist state - how we will all be consumers when there are 0 jobs here held by Americans is beyond me, though.
I find your argument interesting. However, one thing I like the most about Linux is the fact I actually have the ability to fix any problems I may encounter. Unfortunately, I am not able to say the same thing for Windows.
In all honesty, were Windows open source - my perspective might well change. I couldn't honestly say, since that option obviously not available. But I would certainly give it a chance.
An example would be an issue one of my desktops has with msvcirt.dll that causes issues with (some) C/C++ compiled programs. It's a known issue, and there is even a hotfix that was developed in October of 2004. Amazing how it's still a hotfix, in 2007. I can even get the hotfix - all I have to do is pay $59. I might even be able to get it free by calling MS and sitting through a half hour of interrogation about my Windows license (And yes, it's legit - OEM from Dell, it's the principle of the matter that bothers me most. If I wanted to be treated like a criminal just to be a customer, I'd buy music CDs, too.)
It sounds to me the process of denail, blame, and self righteousness might be at work here -- but I don't believe it's in support for Linux adoption. Linux is free. It is also an extremely reliable platform. Most importantly, it is an open system. Should something go wrong, you are able to fix it yourself -- should you be capable.
The only thing I see giving MS an advantage is the fact they already have the majority of the market-share. As MS' market-share lowers and Linux adoption grows, we will see a greater level of commercial software development on Linux -- and the game will certainly change then. Personally, though, unless you use MS Office or play games only available to Windows -- there's really no benefit to having Windows over Linux aside from preferences. And I imagine a great many people will always prefer Windows because it is familiar, if nothing else. Honestly, for the work I do on the PC -- were it not for the completely crap inability I have to fix problems within Windows due to it's closed nature -- I would probably prefer Windows for the GUI environment. I guess I just like the GUI better, to be frank. But when it comes to the dirty 'real' work - I will always have a preference for the unix-like command line of Linux.
Then again, if UltraEdit-32 was available on Linux, haha - that might change too. Ohh my, what a mind twister!
In the end, both OS' have room for improvement. I like them both, but to say anyone promoting either OS is in denial, blame, or self-righteous is just arrogant at best.
Honestly, it's amazing Linux has the adoption level and interest that it does given the influence a corporation the size of MS has. Really, it wouldn't be surprising to see MS spend hundreds of millions on lobbying and campaign donations.
MS also donates software (and otherwise, I'm sure) heavily in districts where people of political influence reside.
It's sad, but I don't question that a good level of MS support in the government is simply bought - one way or another.
Mr. Campbell would be wise to word his MS preference carefully, as the voters of Illinois' citizens may feel their tax dollars should go to science projects that could save them tens of millions. Monies that could be put to good use for education in low income areas, real estate I'm well aware Illinois has in great abundance.
I'm one of those people who goes back and forth on ideas of God a lot, but one thing I know for sure is I don't believe in hell. Being a father is the closest thing I can acquaint to the idea of a God - and as a Father I could never condemn my son to such a thing, for any act.
Another thing I believe, as a father, is that the most hurtful thing a son can do to his father is deny him.
Lastly, while I do question all these things frequently - I also believe that if there is a God - he made me this way. He gave me this ability to question these things, and what father would condemn his son to eternal damnation for merely doing what is natural?
That aside, the article is off-base in my opinion. WiFi seems more likely to become a boost to cellular usage - expanding networks and lowering costs for providers. (IE: They combine their cellular service to work with WiFi VOIP - when a customer is in WiFi range, calls go over cheaper VOIP - when no WiFi is available it goes cellular.)
I believe there was a related article a couple of weeks ago where Google (?) was petitioning the FCC to require cellular networks to open their services to competitors - my speculation at the time was that they wanted to offer a full WiFi VOIP solution where you had cellular service when no WiFi was available.
To make my babble short, I think WiFi will expand cellular usage - not the other way around.
Yes, to you it may seem odd. However, as a juror I would most certainly be questioning this persons educational background. This guy has a Ph.D., and teaches at a well recognized university - he uses his profession and education to qualify himself as an expert. Showing he lacks in a general area of study moves to discredit him as an expert witness.
It's nothing groundbreaking, and doesn't prove anything about him as a CS expert, but in general it makes him look bad. And if the lawyer were really lucky, he would have gotten angry and let it show. Nothing discredits an expert witness like getting them mad.
In general, people try to distance themselves from someone who is aggressive, and having an outburst on a witness stand certainly makes you look aggressive.
From what I read, it certainly looks like the attorney did a very good job, despite the onslaught of objections from opposing council.
I'm not an accountant, but basically what happens is they fill their W4 out with their employer as being tax exempt or having no tax liability (assuming their employer does this for them at all) for the previous year. They work through the year, then when tax time comes they file (I'm not sure the specifics of how - as I understand it they can simply request a tax-id and file using that) - and claim a crapload of dependants. Whether or not the dependants are real is beyond me - I would presume so - probably all anchorbabies. When you make $12k a year and have 5 dependants that means you get a $5,000.00 tax credit.
50 working weeks in the year at $6/hr = $12k. Enter $12k into an income tax estimate site with 5 dependants filing as head of household and you'll receive the same result. If that doesn't piss-off every tax paying American, I don't know what would.
In my locale, it is estimated that over 30% of the population is undocumented immigrants (SEE: ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS).
It's very difficult for me, personally, to support a tax system powering a government that refuses to enforce the laws that are there to protect citizens from illegal immigrants and the effects they have on our local and national economy. Furthermore, a great deal of my tax dollars go to local, state, and federal programs to assist low income families - all heavily exploited by illegal immigrants.
Last Sunday, an illegal immigrant ran over and killed a four year old little gear - then drove off. The local newspaper reported the driver as being WHITE, for fear of a backlash from the hispanic community. Moreover, police were unable to locate the driver of the vehicle until Thursday, when a local pizza store offered a reward. Low and behold, once the reward was offered it was mere hours before someone turned the murderer in.
I'll pay my taxes, and I'll even be honest about it (painfully so), but like HELL I'll be happy about it.
More on topic to the article; I think the IRS might find itself a nasty little mess if it gets its way. An example would be the rampant buyout fraud on eBay and other auction sites, like when my car sold three times before it actually sold. (Nice way for eBay to rack up on fees, btw.) If eBay reports the value of four vehicle sales to the IRS, and I report only one -- smells like an audit nightmare. They may get what they want, but personally I think the responsibility should rest with financial institutions rather than private auction sites.
I personally am somewhat ill of the IRS simply imposing itself on whomever they feel, with no restitution. So, they get this -- then what? What's next? We end up carrying around consumer cards with our tax-id on them so they can track our spending, too? I know, sounds stupid - but there has to be a line - the IRS already has too much power -- and controls the population of this country with fear.
In this country you are innocent until proven guilty on everything but taxes. When it comes to taxes you are presumed guilty until you can prove your innocence, and the amount of tools and powers the IRS has to destroy your life without a trial by jury and conviction is just insane. And the system is so complicated, to be fair and efficient most people need an accountant (See: A degree and professional experience, with constant re-education) to do so.
If anything, the IRS needs a severe reduction in it's powers and tracking abilities. Funny how they'll go full-on trying to collect on every cent the workin' man makes - but no one seems to give a flip about the billions of dollars lost to the tax system as a result of illegal immigrants - dollars which I might add are getting mailed off to another country, increasing it's impact on our economy even moreso.
A lot of people argue that illegal immigrants don't pay taxes - and greatly they are right. They don't pay taxes, but you bet your sweet rear they file taxes. Most illegal immigrants make under $20k/year, and have MANY dependents. You bet they file. They file and they receive a VERY large refund, even though they NEVER pay a cent in to begin with. Think about that for a second, because that return they are getting is YOUR money. It's the honest working middle-class Americans who are paying for these illegal immigrants. Corporations get to pay them crap wages, putting them in a bracket to get earned income credit (SEE: Thousands of dollars while paying NO MONEY in), and the me and you's of this country are the ones paying for it. The US Government gives a very modest estimate of 10 million illegal immigrants, Mexico itself estimates over THIRTY MILLION. Next time you look at the taxes withheld from your paycheck, take a step back and think about that. Think about where YOUR money is going -- how much of that goes to things the citizens of this country want and care for.
One thing a lot of people overlook when considering this as a future option is that as they allow their teeth to rot it's not just their teeth rotting.
Many people put off getting proper dental care until they've waited too late -- once infection starts setting in it doesn't just rot the tooth - it also rots the bone the tooth is rooted in.
So if you've got issues with your teeth and you're thinking this may be a future option - make sure you properly care for your teeth now or you may not be able to take advantage of these future options so easily.
Having a genetically engineered tooth surgically placed is one thing - it's a totally new story when your surgeon has to grind down the damaged bone in order to create a proper rooting surface (A common practice for people getting posts when they let their teeth go bad for a prolonged period).
I have also read of people prone to sinus infections losing root surfaces.
I've always had chalky teeth -- and for several years now I've been following the progress in this area. One of the first things I learned was how important it was to preserve the root surface. So don't put off proper care.
Not at all. I'm unclear at what point you would have possibly derived that from any of my comments.
And it takes you 10 minutes to find one, how long will it take you to find 1000? Also, are you positive that you would NEVER EVER be wrong at all?
I'm affraid I do not see how your reference to a persons ability to find a bot in game, and the time it takes, should at all effect Blizzard's ability to identify them. The point I was making, which I thought was very clear, is that banning the botters does not stop them.
Do I think it's possible that someone I thought was a bot was not? Of course, but I'm not banning them either, am I? Reporting them merely serves to notify Blizzard, allowing the opportunity for them to investigate. I don't think at any point I have said, or even insinuated that I somehow have better bot detecting skills than Blizzard's program.
Do you know the definition of acceptable losses? Removing or even setting back thousands of cheaters and botters at the expense of a few "innocent" people is ok according to them apparently. It is regrettable, but it can and will happen. Yes, I know that you feel helpless when it is you, and there is nothign you can do about it, but that is not a good enough reason to have them do nothing at all. If you feel so strongly about their policies, I would suggest you speak with your wallet against them.
Again, here you are saying I would rather them do nothing about it. I'm affraid I do not understand where you get this from?
I'm at a loss for time to give your comment the full reply it deserves - however I would like to add, as quickly as I can, that I do applaud actions against cheaters. I'm merely trying to point out that I believe more could be done to shrink that number of false positives without a great burden to Blizzard. I also understand farmers and other forms of cheating are very difficult to detect, and this I fully understand. I'm specifically talking about those accounts whom are identified as cheating merely through the automated anti-cheat software, Warden.
I agree that the forums have always been like that, I didn't think I said this was a special circumstance.
However, I do disagree that in other mass-bannings anything is different. Every time there is a mass banning there is a huge drove of posts on the forums where people plea their innocence.
The Linux issue didn't become astoundingly obvious right away - it wasn't until the users themselves were able to identify the problem that anything really happened. I didn't see thousands of posts from Linux users saying they thought they were banned because they run Linux - though there were some - most posts were simply vague pleas from banned players hoping to get their accounts back - with no clue what they can do since emailing wow-accountadmin@worldofwarcraft.com is a fruitless venture.
The point I'm trying to get across is that even if it's just 2 wrong bans of 2000 - those two people should have a chance. Since I don't think anyone can argue there is a reasonable way to prove you didn't cheat - the only fair and honest thing I can think of to remedy the issue is for Blizzard to provide a couple of warnings to give the player a chance to remove programs falsely identified as cheats.
"But all in all, I think it is doing more good than bad."
Again, that's an easy position to take until you are one of the falsely banned.
I would argue that it is not acceptable. Why? Because the cheaters/botters are still in the game. Right now. They're in there. Takes 10 minutes of play time, tops, to find one. There are droves of them.
Blizzard's anti-cheat system is not keeping them out - and if it's not keeping them out why should it be acceptable that innocent people are banned?
That's mularky. Blizzard simply saying a program is identified as cheating, without specific details as to how it was detected, could not realistically assist botters. It could take thousands of attempts before they could bypass it - or potentially could NEVER do so. Then, even IF they did get a working non-detected bot for it to really hurt the gaming community in WoW it would have to be publicly available - at which point Blizzard could, with nearly no effort, adjust their cheat detection to detect the new bot. Even if it were not publicly available players in the game would report the bot - and Blizzard could then work off of that. The greater burden would be on the cheater, not Blizzard.
"By allowing cheats that have been detected to go on for a bit of time, you are able to gain information on all other things that the known cheater is doing to help you nail other cheaters."
And if you ban them every time they are caught the cheating community never gets a chance to grow. So, why let a cheating community foster for months - when you could stop the community from being created to begin with?
I mean, really... What if the US Law worked like that? A criminal comes into a community and you just let that criminal foster and commit crimes in the community so you can see how many people the criminal can get to commit crimes too?
And again, I would like to point out - those who botted and got banned are for a large part already back in the game, right now, botting away - building up another charector.
They don't care. To them, it's just a mild inconvenience now.
My point with regard to my personal situation was merely the lack of responsiveness of their Account Administration department.
It's an extremely slow process.
I'm confident I'll get my account back, and I have a second account I play so it's not a life ending deal or anything - but the point wasn't that - it was merely that the process is extremely slow.
To say communication is poor between Blizzard and those attempting to recover accounts would be putting it very nicely.
Now, as proof that the Linux users banned would have stayed banned I offer this:
Blizzard has a standard policy that they will re-investigate your account closure one time. You can verify this reading the forums. The policy may or may not be stated somewhere, this I am not sure of.
However, if you read the forums you will find posts where users quote the communication they have had with Blizzard where after a re-investigation they ask again and they receive a reply from Blizzard stating the account was re-investigated on xxxx date and was found to be in violation of blah blah, etc... Which leads me to believe this is either policy or standard practice.
Now, if you read even on this/. article -- there are replies from Linux users who recently had their account bans lifted who state they did in fact contact Blizzard regarding the account closure - and Blizzard replied and said the account was re-investigated, came up with the same determination, and the account will stay closed.
I stand by, solid as stone, my determination that Blizzard would never have lifted those bans were it not for the overwhelming support, demand -- and most importantly of all, I think -- publicity provided by the Linux community. (I consider any help from Cadega to be help from the Linux community)
You are correct, though, in that Blizzard's EULA gives them blanket protection from anything. However, this isn't a legal rambling - it's about customers.
If it were about legal ramblings, though, I'd imagine some groklaw posters would start quoting cases where blanket protections and EULA's don't hold up in court. Not that many (if any) people would go the full length to sue to get access to their account back -- it's pathetic to think that's realistically the only avenue of true defense they have, though.
Slashdot Mirror
My question is - what the hell do we have TRADE AGREEMENTS with China for. They want to make it illegal for companies to produce this information to these governments, but this government itself is catering heavily to countries with low wage labor, like China. Pass that law, and let's throw some politicians in jail for treason while we are at it.
You remember that whole toothpaste fiasco from China? They EXECUTED the official responsible for letting that slip by. Not fined, jailed, or sentenced to community service for not 'catching' pad product being exported - they ended his life. You know how much press that got in the US? Dick. Why? Because people and politicians don't WANT to recognize what we are supporting by doing business over there (not to mention the MILLIONS of factory jobs we've shipped off - GFG - wonder who THAT makes rich, aye?)
The irony of it all is, even the people of the countries we setup these trade agreements with don't want them. Wonder why.....
That our government is owned by corporations. What a surprise.
There is an ongoing study with clinical trials in the US testing the use of Huperzine A (a chinese herb) to treat Alzheimer's disease. It's also believed to treat other forms of dementia.
My family has a long history, on my Father's side, of dementia setting in during the 60's -- so my Father and I both read all the news we can regarding such things.
In fact, my Father was mentioning a University study today of a herb that not only has been shown in controlled trials to treat the effects of AD but to also reverse the effects of the disease. Ironically, I can not recollect the name of the University or the herb he was referring to.
Perhaps it's the same herb, perhaps not - I forget.
I tend to agree, I don't particularly see any real visibly innovative changes in design on this plane. That said, despite some bad history -- Japan is hardly a country I have any concern about -- personally, considering their neighbors - I'm surprised they don't do more with their Military. I think they are counting on their somewhat innocent attitude to bring the US to the rescue should they be forced into a war.
NewScientist published an article a while back about chimps in the Congo using spears to kill bushbabies. Thrusting the spears into hollow trees and checking the tips for blood.
Pretty interesting stuff.
I live in Arkansas (yes, insert toothless redneck joke here) - recently the power companies that serve my area (two of them serve NW Arkansas) got approval and implemented a rate increase. They sought and received this approval based on lower power consumption due to mild summer temperatures. I based my thoughts off of that - and I stick too them. The power companies will retain operating costs that they have to cover even if people are using less power - I am no expert but I believe this is about as certain as death and taxes.
In fact, it would not even surprise me if you end up having to pay a USE TAX on solar energy. An example of this would be natural gas - if you have a natural gas well on your property - you still have to pay taxes on what you use from there - as well you also have to pay fees (depending on where you live, I'm sure) to the utility company. Sounds insane, and stupid - but I know that's how natural gas works in my area as I've paid those very fees and taxes myself in the past - frankly it's more trouble then it's worth.
I do agree we will still need the grid, and that's really what I was getting at. Even though they will be selling less power - they are still going to have high operating costs to maintain the grid and power generation capabilities - the less energy people use the more they are going to have to charge for what they do sell.
Like I was saying, it's something we are going to have to deal with eventually - but it's not going to be a smooth road and it's not going to be as simple as what many people perceive it as.
Much like cars - if 90% of the cars on the road were completely solar powered, the remaining 10% of the petrol powered vehicle owners would find themselves paying much higher rates at the pump.
Evidently it seems everyone disagrees with me on this one - but I simply can not see how - perhaps that in itself is where I perceive the problem.
Imagine you are a gas station owner - you sell 10k gallons of gas a week now. Then a year later everyone is driving electric cars and you are selling 1k gallons of gas a week. How are you going to make up for that lost profit and still be able to offer gas to your customers? After all, you still have to pay for those expensive tanks, licensing, and to get the gas tanked to your station -- the only realistic resolution is to increase the profit, cut costs (smaller tanks, open fewer hours, et), or simply stop selling gas. The same, only much more complex and politicized would apply to our power grids.
In the end, though, of course I think it's all for the best - I'm just saying it's going to be a bumpy road as things balance themselves out - much like all progress in the world today.
I think the most important question is what would mass adoption of solar power due to our power grid. Non-solar generated electricity would go through the roof, for starters - causing the adoption rate to increase - again causing rates on non-solar energy to increase - until at some point the power companies wouldn't be able to afford to operate their grids anymore.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for using the most abundant, pure, and untapped energy source available to us -- but slapping a few panels on a house and calling it a day is just where it will start. One can't help but wonder what bumps will be on the road that follows. Industries would collapse, the economy would struggle to balance itself, communities and governments would struggle to maintain their grids.
Sounds like a real mess to me, one we seem to be destined to encounter (or perhaps face another worse should we not).
Maybe it's just me, but I think the impact of solar energy being cheaper than grid power is going to be a bigger concern than how long the cells last - eventually (and soon, no doubt) it's going to be much cheaper to go with solar power - yet there doesn't seem to be much discussion over such issues.
The company I just started for layed off 15 people from the IT department the first week I was there. Yesterday we had a meeting discussing next years budget, and where cuts would be made - I'll give you one guess what department was mentioned first...
Ignorance is bliss, and if you've got a good job in IT it's easy to be blissful.
You should be thankful you have one of those jobs, not berate others who do not.
For years I myself pondered what to do with my career, or perhaps lack thereof. I never finished my degree, and I knew that hurt and would continue to hurt for the rest of my life unless I finished it.
I've worked just about every IT job there is since 1997 - starting as a programmer analyst. If I tried to go over the laundry list of languages, OS environments, and software I'm either very familiar with or sometimes even had a hand in developing -- I'd probably forget a dozen or more between them - maybe more. A couple of years ago I gave up on finding stable work - and took up private consulting. Being something of a jack-of-all-trades, I didn't have any problems finding work.
It was not until then that I fully realized what was happening with IT. To me, I had just seen jobs going overseas without realizing the full scope of how it effected IT as an industry.
Being a consultant, you're something of a throw-away employee. No major overhead, no accounting headaches, no benefits to deal with, just cuts it plain and simple - not to mention the best part - they can fire you just because, with no consequences. In reality, that is what the general IT industry has become as a whole. An industry of throw-away employees. One where most employers expect you to know exactly what they need. Specific OS, language, and development environments.
If a company is looking to downsize, IT is almost always the first place they look, and the department hit the hardest.
I made the decision about 5 months ago that I was going back to school, I was going to finish a degree - but it was not going to be a CS degree. The industry, in my opinion, is completely lost. Even on the administration side. Don't get me wrong, there are jobs to be had - but the pay very rarely fits the level of responsibility and knowledge required.
Just weeks before classes started I got a call from a friend who thought he had *the* job lined up for me - as an engineer. Transportation Logistics Engineer, to be more specific. How I manage to always get jobs I have no specific education in is beyond me, but I considered myself saved and I really don't care why. Most of the people at the company stay there for their entire working careers - getting a position there with no degree in the specific field they were seeking had never even crossed my mind.
But, I digress...
I've worked in IT for 10 years. I've seen it all, from being the solo network admin at a small company to being lead developer on projects for some of the largest corporations in the world. I turned away from the industry and I will never look back for anything more than a hobby. Even today, I am still getting calls from people I had consulted with desperate for me to schedule in some time for them - offering weekend and evening work if I would come fix or support key systems they don't want to pay an employee to maintain.
If a friend asked me if they should consider a degree or career in IT, I would not hesitate to warn them of the instability, irregular hours, low pay for skill and responsibility, lack of a future, and in general the bad past experiences I have had. Things like not seeing my son for more than a couple hours a month for the first three years of his life, due to work. Or the many times I found myself not going home or sleeping for days on end. It sounds like a nightmare and people wonder how such things could honestly happen, but there is an entire industry of just that - it's called IT, and I'm proud to say I'm not a part of it anymore.
That's just me, though. Some people like that, I suppose.
We keep working so hard to ship all our jobs overseas then these pricks want to say they are dissatisfied with innovation?
It's no wonder innovation in the US is lacking, severely. I mean, seriously - how many people do you know in the US who have a job where innovation is even allowed? Not many - not many at all. Actually, not many of the people I know even work in information or research fields anymore - all their jobs have been shipped overseas and filled by H1-B visa workers who will work for nearly half the money.
Another decade at this rate and the only thing America will be is a consumerist state - how we will all be consumers when there are 0 jobs here held by Americans is beyond me, though.
[insert goatse link]
Yes, but lest not forget -- Chief is a Cylon!
I find your argument interesting. However, one thing I like the most about Linux is the fact I actually have the ability to fix any problems I may encounter. Unfortunately, I am not able to say the same thing for Windows.
In all honesty, were Windows open source - my perspective might well change. I couldn't honestly say, since that option obviously not available. But I would certainly give it a chance.
An example would be an issue one of my desktops has with msvcirt.dll that causes issues with (some) C/C++ compiled programs. It's a known issue, and there is even a hotfix that was developed in October of 2004. Amazing how it's still a hotfix, in 2007. I can even get the hotfix - all I have to do is pay $59. I might even be able to get it free by calling MS and sitting through a half hour of interrogation about my Windows license (And yes, it's legit - OEM from Dell, it's the principle of the matter that bothers me most. If I wanted to be treated like a criminal just to be a customer, I'd buy music CDs, too.)
It sounds to me the process of denail, blame, and self righteousness might be at work here -- but I don't believe it's in support for Linux adoption. Linux is free. It is also an extremely reliable platform. Most importantly, it is an open system. Should something go wrong, you are able to fix it yourself -- should you be capable.
The only thing I see giving MS an advantage is the fact they already have the majority of the market-share. As MS' market-share lowers and Linux adoption grows, we will see a greater level of commercial software development on Linux -- and the game will certainly change then. Personally, though, unless you use MS Office or play games only available to Windows -- there's really no benefit to having Windows over Linux aside from preferences. And I imagine a great many people will always prefer Windows because it is familiar, if nothing else. Honestly, for the work I do on the PC -- were it not for the completely crap inability I have to fix problems within Windows due to it's closed nature -- I would probably prefer Windows for the GUI environment. I guess I just like the GUI better, to be frank. But when it comes to the dirty 'real' work - I will always have a preference for the unix-like command line of Linux.
Then again, if UltraEdit-32 was available on Linux, haha - that might change too. Ohh my, what a mind twister!
In the end, both OS' have room for improvement. I like them both, but to say anyone promoting either OS is in denial, blame, or self-righteous is just arrogant at best.
Honestly, it's amazing Linux has the adoption level and interest that it does given the influence a corporation the size of MS has. Really, it wouldn't be surprising to see MS spend hundreds of millions on lobbying and campaign donations.
MS also donates software (and otherwise, I'm sure) heavily in districts where people of political influence reside.
It's sad, but I don't question that a good level of MS support in the government is simply bought - one way or another.
Mr. Campbell would be wise to word his MS preference carefully, as the voters of Illinois' citizens may feel their tax dollars should go to science projects that could save them tens of millions. Monies that could be put to good use for education in low income areas, real estate I'm well aware Illinois has in great abundance.
I'm one of those people who goes back and forth on ideas of God a lot, but one thing I know for sure is I don't believe in hell. Being a father is the closest thing I can acquaint to the idea of a God - and as a Father I could never condemn my son to such a thing, for any act.
Another thing I believe, as a father, is that the most hurtful thing a son can do to his father is deny him.
Lastly, while I do question all these things frequently - I also believe that if there is a God - he made me this way. He gave me this ability to question these things, and what father would condemn his son to eternal damnation for merely doing what is natural?
Certainly no father I'd care to believe in.
Poor security didn't stop cellular adoption.
That aside, the article is off-base in my opinion. WiFi seems more likely to become a boost to cellular usage - expanding networks and lowering costs for providers. (IE: They combine their cellular service to work with WiFi VOIP - when a customer is in WiFi range, calls go over cheaper VOIP - when no WiFi is available it goes cellular.)
I believe there was a related article a couple of weeks ago where Google (?) was petitioning the FCC to require cellular networks to open their services to competitors - my speculation at the time was that they wanted to offer a full WiFi VOIP solution where you had cellular service when no WiFi was available.
To make my babble short, I think WiFi will expand cellular usage - not the other way around.
Yes, to you it may seem odd. However, as a juror I would most certainly be questioning this persons educational background. This guy has a Ph.D., and teaches at a well recognized university - he uses his profession and education to qualify himself as an expert. Showing he lacks in a general area of study moves to discredit him as an expert witness.
It's nothing groundbreaking, and doesn't prove anything about him as a CS expert, but in general it makes him look bad. And if the lawyer were really lucky, he would have gotten angry and let it show. Nothing discredits an expert witness like getting them mad.
In general, people try to distance themselves from someone who is aggressive, and having an outburst on a witness stand certainly makes you look aggressive.
From what I read, it certainly looks like the attorney did a very good job, despite the onslaught of objections from opposing council.
No problem man, they've got it covered. See, we'll outsource the service and hosting to India and borrow the money from China.
It's all good.
I'm not an accountant, but basically what happens is they fill their W4 out with their employer as being tax exempt or having no tax liability (assuming their employer does this for them at all) for the previous year. They work through the year, then when tax time comes they file (I'm not sure the specifics of how - as I understand it they can simply request a tax-id and file using that) - and claim a crapload of dependants. Whether or not the dependants are real is beyond me - I would presume so - probably all anchorbabies. When you make $12k a year and have 5 dependants that means you get a $5,000.00 tax credit.
50 working weeks in the year at $6/hr = $12k. Enter $12k into an income tax estimate site with 5 dependants filing as head of household and you'll receive the same result. If that doesn't piss-off every tax paying American, I don't know what would.
In my locale, it is estimated that over 30% of the population is undocumented immigrants (SEE: ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS).
It's very difficult for me, personally, to support a tax system powering a government that refuses to enforce the laws that are there to protect citizens from illegal immigrants and the effects they have on our local and national economy. Furthermore, a great deal of my tax dollars go to local, state, and federal programs to assist low income families - all heavily exploited by illegal immigrants.
Last Sunday, an illegal immigrant ran over and killed a four year old little gear - then drove off. The local newspaper reported the driver as being WHITE, for fear of a backlash from the hispanic community. Moreover, police were unable to locate the driver of the vehicle until Thursday, when a local pizza store offered a reward. Low and behold, once the reward was offered it was mere hours before someone turned the murderer in.
I'll pay my taxes, and I'll even be honest about it (painfully so), but like HELL I'll be happy about it.
More on topic to the article; I think the IRS might find itself a nasty little mess if it gets its way. An example would be the rampant buyout fraud on eBay and other auction sites, like when my car sold three times before it actually sold. (Nice way for eBay to rack up on fees, btw.) If eBay reports the value of four vehicle sales to the IRS, and I report only one -- smells like an audit nightmare. They may get what they want, but personally I think the responsibility should rest with financial institutions rather than private auction sites.
I personally am somewhat ill of the IRS simply imposing itself on whomever they feel, with no restitution. So, they get this -- then what? What's next? We end up carrying around consumer cards with our tax-id on them so they can track our spending, too? I know, sounds stupid - but there has to be a line - the IRS already has too much power -- and controls the population of this country with fear.
In this country you are innocent until proven guilty on everything but taxes. When it comes to taxes you are presumed guilty until you can prove your innocence, and the amount of tools and powers the IRS has to destroy your life without a trial by jury and conviction is just insane. And the system is so complicated, to be fair and efficient most people need an accountant (See: A degree and professional experience, with constant re-education) to do so.
If anything, the IRS needs a severe reduction in it's powers and tracking abilities. Funny how they'll go full-on trying to collect on every cent the workin' man makes - but no one seems to give a flip about the billions of dollars lost to the tax system as a result of illegal immigrants - dollars which I might add are getting mailed off to another country, increasing it's impact on our economy even moreso.
A lot of people argue that illegal immigrants don't pay taxes - and greatly they are right. They don't pay taxes, but you bet your sweet rear they file taxes. Most illegal immigrants make under $20k/year, and have MANY dependents. You bet they file. They file and they receive a VERY large refund, even though they NEVER pay a cent in to begin with. Think about that for a second, because that return they are getting is YOUR money. It's the honest working middle-class Americans who are paying for these illegal immigrants. Corporations get to pay them crap wages, putting them in a bracket to get earned income credit (SEE: Thousands of dollars while paying NO MONEY in), and the me and you's of this country are the ones paying for it. The US Government gives a very modest estimate of 10 million illegal immigrants, Mexico itself estimates over THIRTY MILLION. Next time you look at the taxes withheld from your paycheck, take a step back and think about that. Think about where YOUR money is going -- how much of that goes to things the citizens of this country want and care for.
One thing a lot of people overlook when considering this as a future option is that as they allow their teeth to rot it's not just their teeth rotting.
Many people put off getting proper dental care until they've waited too late -- once infection starts setting in it doesn't just rot the tooth - it also rots the bone the tooth is rooted in.
So if you've got issues with your teeth and you're thinking this may be a future option - make sure you properly care for your teeth now or you may not be able to take advantage of these future options so easily.
Having a genetically engineered tooth surgically placed is one thing - it's a totally new story when your surgeon has to grind down the damaged bone in order to create a proper rooting surface (A common practice for people getting posts when they let their teeth go bad for a prolonged period).
I have also read of people prone to sinus infections losing root surfaces.
I've always had chalky teeth -- and for several years now I've been following the progress in this area. One of the first things I learned was how important it was to preserve the root surface. So don't put off proper care.
Not at all. I'm unclear at what point you would have possibly derived that from any of my comments.
I'm affraid I do not see how your reference to a persons ability to find a bot in game, and the time it takes, should at all effect Blizzard's ability to identify them. The point I was making, which I thought was very clear, is that banning the botters does not stop them.
Do I think it's possible that someone I thought was a bot was not? Of course, but I'm not banning them either, am I? Reporting them merely serves to notify Blizzard, allowing the opportunity for them to investigate. I don't think at any point I have said, or even insinuated that I somehow have better bot detecting skills than Blizzard's program.
Again, here you are saying I would rather them do nothing about it. I'm affraid I do not understand where you get this from?
I'm at a loss for time to give your comment the full reply it deserves - however I would like to add, as quickly as I can, that I do applaud actions against cheaters. I'm merely trying to point out that I believe more could be done to shrink that number of false positives without a great burden to Blizzard. I also understand farmers and other forms of cheating are very difficult to detect, and this I fully understand. I'm specifically talking about those accounts whom are identified as cheating merely through the automated anti-cheat software, Warden.
I agree that the forums have always been like that, I didn't think I said this was a special circumstance.
However, I do disagree that in other mass-bannings anything is different. Every time there is a mass banning there is a huge drove of posts on the forums where people plea their innocence.
The Linux issue didn't become astoundingly obvious right away - it wasn't until the users themselves were able to identify the problem that anything really happened. I didn't see thousands of posts from Linux users saying they thought they were banned because they run Linux - though there were some - most posts were simply vague pleas from banned players hoping to get their accounts back - with no clue what they can do since emailing wow-accountadmin@worldofwarcraft.com is a fruitless venture.
The point I'm trying to get across is that even if it's just 2 wrong bans of 2000 - those two people should have a chance. Since I don't think anyone can argue there is a reasonable way to prove you didn't cheat - the only fair and honest thing I can think of to remedy the issue is for Blizzard to provide a couple of warnings to give the player a chance to remove programs falsely identified as cheats.
"But all in all, I think it is doing more good than bad."
Again, that's an easy position to take until you are one of the falsely banned.
I would argue that it is not acceptable. Why? Because the cheaters/botters are still in the game. Right now. They're in there. Takes 10 minutes of play time, tops, to find one. There are droves of them.
Blizzard's anti-cheat system is not keeping them out - and if it's not keeping them out why should it be acceptable that innocent people are banned?
That's mularky. Blizzard simply saying a program is identified as cheating, without specific details as to how it was detected, could not realistically assist botters. It could take thousands of attempts before they could bypass it - or potentially could NEVER do so. Then, even IF they did get a working non-detected bot for it to really hurt the gaming community in WoW it would have to be publicly available - at which point Blizzard could, with nearly no effort, adjust their cheat detection to detect the new bot. Even if it were not publicly available players in the game would report the bot - and Blizzard could then work off of that. The greater burden would be on the cheater, not Blizzard.
"By allowing cheats that have been detected to go on for a bit of time, you are able to gain information on all other things that the known cheater is doing to help you nail other cheaters."
And if you ban them every time they are caught the cheating community never gets a chance to grow. So, why let a cheating community foster for months - when you could stop the community from being created to begin with?
I mean, really... What if the US Law worked like that? A criminal comes into a community and you just let that criminal foster and commit crimes in the community so you can see how many people the criminal can get to commit crimes too?
And again, I would like to point out - those who botted and got banned are for a large part already back in the game, right now, botting away - building up another charector.
They don't care. To them, it's just a mild inconvenience now.
My point with regard to my personal situation was merely the lack of responsiveness of their Account Administration department.
/. article -- there are replies from Linux users who recently had their account bans lifted who state they did in fact contact Blizzard regarding the account closure - and Blizzard replied and said the account was re-investigated, came up with the same determination, and the account will stay closed.
It's an extremely slow process.
I'm confident I'll get my account back, and I have a second account I play so it's not a life ending deal or anything - but the point wasn't that - it was merely that the process is extremely slow.
To say communication is poor between Blizzard and those attempting to recover accounts would be putting it very nicely.
Now, as proof that the Linux users banned would have stayed banned I offer this:
Blizzard has a standard policy that they will re-investigate your account closure one time. You can verify this reading the forums. The policy may or may not be stated somewhere, this I am not sure of.
However, if you read the forums you will find posts where users quote the communication they have had with Blizzard where after a re-investigation they ask again and they receive a reply from Blizzard stating the account was re-investigated on xxxx date and was found to be in violation of blah blah, etc... Which leads me to believe this is either policy or standard practice.
Now, if you read even on this
I stand by, solid as stone, my determination that Blizzard would never have lifted those bans were it not for the overwhelming support, demand -- and most importantly of all, I think -- publicity provided by the Linux community. (I consider any help from Cadega to be help from the Linux community)
You are correct, though, in that Blizzard's EULA gives them blanket protection from anything. However, this isn't a legal rambling - it's about customers.
If it were about legal ramblings, though, I'd imagine some groklaw posters would start quoting cases where blanket protections and EULA's don't hold up in court. Not that many (if any) people would go the full length to sue to get access to their account back -- it's pathetic to think that's realistically the only avenue of true defense they have, though.