And we handle this regularly.
The department local to where the thefts occurred should have been notified in the first place and a police report filed. If you've done that, there will be an officer associated with that report. Get in touch with him/her directly with the information you have. If you can't, find out who the detectives are for that PD and get in touch with them. If you can gather any and all information you've got regarding IP addresses, etc., put it all together before getting in touch.
Unfortunately, if they're not remotely tech savvy and/or simply afraid of technology, it may take some prodding. Most state police agencies have teams specifically tasked with this sort of thing, so it may be that you have to contact your state's police for help.
When you bring any documentation, also make sure you have estimated costs of all the hardware. That will sometimes help get people's attention, being able to say it's X number of dollars. Not saying it's right, but much of the time you run into departments who won't pay much attention to "petty" thefts, but will take notice of $2000 or more.
There have been a number of/. stories regarding people in your situation tracking down stolen computers. You might try searching for those or Google articles and blogs about the steps folks have taken when facing lackluster police response.
Well, the information may in fact be pervasive, however getting someone to look at it, accept it or even be willing to discuss it is another matter altogether.
Case in point, I met someone who was a die hard "believer" who was attempting to get me to "believe". Yes, he actually believed (or so he claimed) that the world was created by a god about 6000 years ago. He said that the tools used today to carbon date objects were "flawed" and that "scientists simply made machines that looked like they did something [he didn't get it when I asked if they go "PING!"... go figure], but all they did was churn out answers the scientists want", and that mankind couldn't measure the speed of light (after I'd pointed out that we could easily find objects in the sky well over 6k light years away, and if they were in fact several million/billion light years away, how could the light be reaching us if the universe were only 6k years old?). I explained that he himself could measure the speed of light with rather simply tools, and suggested he look into the methods used by folks like Armand Fizeau. Needless to say, the guy just said "No, I don't need to. It's all in the Bible."
What I'm getting at is that you can't communicate to some people, regardless of how good your data is, your evidence, or your argument. If a person flat out refuses to hear counter to their belief because of "faith", there is nothing you can do. Faith is, after all, accepting something as fact which observation and evidence prove to be false.
"If a person walks on water, they'll sink."
"No, the Bible said Christ did."
"OK, if a person can, and you've got faith, the Charles is right over there. Knock yourself out."
FTA: "Haptic technology has uses ranging from remote medical breast checks and exploring distant lands, to recreating the feel of fabrics."
Yes, but when can I remotely feel and explore distant breasts?
Gotta have priorities, mate.
Get... Get your hand away from that moderation button, you! Don't mod me, bro! It's a legitimate, technical and inherently geeky question of a viable, important and distinctly boob related issue that I'm sure I'm not alone in... Oh bugger, you modded me down, didn't you?
smeg.
Oh I RTA:) But I am, admittedly, a cynic and I question the validity of any sort of statement along these lines. This announcement is pretty much "take our word for it".
That said, personally I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were 10m active subscriptions, even not including multi-box players, particularly after finding out my 70yo redneck uncle actually played (though he's a NElf... which makes me thankful he's related by marriage, not blood).
From what I have seen, the use of multiple accounts by single users is not all that uncommon. Blizzard doesn't seem to actually delete accounts after they've been deactivated. If someone cancels their subscription, their account name, their toons, everything remains (much like AOL's method of fudging their numbers). So of those 10m subscribers, I'd be curious to find out if those are individuals, or simply active subscribers, or in fact accounts created but not currently subscribed counted in that total.
I found a book of simple Russian phrases to try and figure out that video. It seems that the announcer's record is scratched, and his hovercraft is full of eels....bouncy bouncy.
VERY well put!! But I do disagree with you on a couple counts.
First, personally I wouldn't like the game as much as I do if there were more griefers. From what I've read about UO (no, never played, so please pardon me if this is an inaccurate statement) it got to the point where some people could barely play the game anymore if they made the "wrong" enemy, and there was quite the plethora of people who went out of their way to be those enemies. And when I play on PvP servers, solo questing is just about impossible. Certainly it's more exciting and challenging, but there are times when some folks don't want to have to watch their back constantly. If you're wide open to attack at any time, and potentially from someone using a speed hack or item hack, the game would start to lose it's appeal.
Second, I have lots of fun still even with *cough* a few toons at 70. Respec my Druid and I go from healbot to tank. Do it again, and now I stand around and just nuke. Do the same for, say, a Paladin and you're... well, healer or tank. Perhaps it's due to the server I'm on being one of the most populated, but when I'm out and about I always see lots of people, new and old faces, and never have much difficulty in finding a group if I'm in the mood.
Too MUCH regulation is certainly a bad thing, and perhaps there are times when Blizzard goes overboard. But IMO most of the time they have kept things in the middle of the road.
Totally agree with you on PvP though... These days you don't require anything even remotely resembling skill, you just need to put in the time.
Oh yes indeedy, I still play. Have since about two weeks after the game went "retail". So far it's the first and only MMORPG I play (normally just an FPS) and I still enjoy it. Personally I don't bother with 90% of the daily quests or factions, simply because I only get time to play perhaps 2-3 nights each week and only for a few hours. When I am on, I much prefer to group with folks or level alts since what keeps me playing is the variety you get with each class. Sure, the same quests, often the same grinds, but what keeps me at it is that with each class and spec, you have to do many of those same quests quite differently. And in groups, you play a very different role, some easier and some more taxing.
Besides, I don't feel any burning desire for a big dragon to fly around on. I'm perfectly content to see my big Tauren Druid on Midnight:D
Actually he wore normal clothes, drove a normal, run of the mill Oldmobuick, talked frequently with other employees, etc. Was he socially inept? No more so than most of us. Was he an oddball? No more so than me. What would cause us to look into his actions? Simple. He frequently "alt-tabbed" web pages when anyone was coming. He asked me (often) about what we did and didn't track with regards to users browsing habits, even though I'd made it quite clear we didn't. He made reference to having "unpopular" sexual proclivities.
There was more, actually, but I hardly feel the need to justify my actions to you. You may want to make sure this isn't the pot calling the kettle "delusional paranoids", sparky.
That's another thing. Watching this video, those officers were either poorly trained, or... No, I'm betting poorly trained. With four officers on him, hell even two should have been plenty, but four could easily have restrained him and gotten him cuffed. One kneels on the upper shoulder (NOT the neck or head) while another sits on his legs. Two other officers each pull the hands back. With judicious use of weight on tender body parts (not the joy department!) you can very easily convince someone to do what you're telling them. Heck, get even a ball point pen between the ring and middle finger of a hand and squeeze them together, suddenly you've got a very, very pliable arm (try it for yourself... It's ouchy).
I don't know what that university police department's policy is with regards to force, but personally if anyone here did that, they'd be fired. (I'm not a cop, BTW, but I am very familiar with at least our policy and procedures with regards to force)
A very, very valid point. Where DO you draw the line?
Personally I find hate groups such as the KKK abhorrent, but does that mean they should be shut down and not allowed to protest or rally? No. Even they deserve the liberty to gather, to say their opinions and gather in protest. It is, of course, a double edged sword: freedom of speech means freedom for everyone.
While that kid was kind of annoying, according to the article, he did not warrant use of a taser (at least by the standards of the police station I work for). He was already on the ground, he was already under control. Once the person is down and double cuffed, that should be it, drag his sorry backside out.
Of course, I can see many times where use of a taser is more than justified.
"The argument over which is better, VI or Emacs, is perfectly val*ZZZZAP!!*GUAAAHHHHHGH!*"
Not too many years ago I worked for a "web startup" (i.e. small company founded by Harvard MBA who smoked lots of weed, drove a VW, and was out to "save the world") as IT manager. As the market tanked, the CEO became more and more concerned for the future of the company and with good reason! We'd gone from regular upper 6 figures per month to less than half that, with three locations whittled down to essentially one and a half. Many employees left for greener pastures. When things REALLY started to go down hill, the CEO asked me to intercept any emails between current and former employees, and then "hinted" that since so many of our clients had their email hosted on our email server, couldn't I do the same with them.
I know that, legally, he had the right to get access to current employee email, and any former employee whom he had granted continued use of our email system (not sure on that last bit, IANAL). But asking me to, or suggesting I should allow him to, read client emails was a final straw. While he may have the "legal right" to read employee emails, it left a very bad taste in my mouth. Suggesting I allow him to read client's emails? It was like licking a rat. At the end of the day I had to go home and see myself in the mirror, and I knew that reading other people's personal, private emails was something so abhorrent. (Rimmer: "Lister, that is my private, personal, private diary; full of my personal, private, personal things." Cat: "It's gone public.")
Now all that said, at another job, myself and some other IT workers suspected one of the devs of possibly being a pedo. We didn't read his emails, we didn't pour through his computer (which we could easily have done), but we did put google to good use, and at one point we did packet sniff where he was browsing. Was I proud of that? Well, actually yes. If he HAD been looking at kiddie porn, if he HAD been a sexual predator, being a father how could I stand back and not try to do something? It turned out he wasn't a diddler, just... Really really really really creepy.
It is a very fine line between "ethical" and "non-ethical", it can be very hard to judge which is which, and everyone will have their own opinions. But in the end you have to live with yourself, and certainly I'm not qualified to decide right and wrong, nor pass judgment. If I had my way, anyone who sold a poorly made curry would be strung up and boiled in oil.
The networks make money to produce these shows how? While it would be very entertaining to imagine them pulling the money from their greedy backsides, the fact is the money comes through ad revenue.
Now, if there is an increase in use of devices which reduce the number of eyeballs a network can claim were focused on an advertisement, the value of that ad space has now also gone down. Even if we're talking about a few million using these devices out of the entire population, that number will only increase if nothing is done. Remember, the VCR is/was relatively "stupid". It required programming, and lets face it the majority of the Viewing Public is only a few IQ points above being watered thrice weekly! A TiVo, OTOH, is getting easier and easier and you can search out those programs you want to view and it will record as needed.
Where was I? Off rambling... Ah yes!
They see their gravy train potentially getting derailed! What if they go to a potential ad sale and say "We know that $BIGNUM viewers will see this show, and they will by and large be tech savvy with lots of money" and the advertiser decides against, fearing a large number of TiVo/PVR users? And what if the networks see that happen MORE and MORE often?
What then? Will TV become more and more like Pay Per View? Will there be more "subscription only" channels?
While I love the TiVo and loath advertising, what we are seeing is tantamount to an organism (granted, a parasitic and repulsive one) doing what it can to survive. Or, in this case, remain fat, slimy and repugnant.
Slashdot Mirror
And we handle this regularly. The department local to where the thefts occurred should have been notified in the first place and a police report filed. If you've done that, there will be an officer associated with that report. Get in touch with him/her directly with the information you have. If you can't, find out who the detectives are for that PD and get in touch with them. If you can gather any and all information you've got regarding IP addresses, etc., put it all together before getting in touch.
/. stories regarding people in your situation tracking down stolen computers. You might try searching for those or Google articles and blogs about the steps folks have taken when facing lackluster police response.
Unfortunately, if they're not remotely tech savvy and/or simply afraid of technology, it may take some prodding. Most state police agencies have teams specifically tasked with this sort of thing, so it may be that you have to contact your state's police for help.
When you bring any documentation, also make sure you have estimated costs of all the hardware. That will sometimes help get people's attention, being able to say it's X number of dollars. Not saying it's right, but much of the time you run into departments who won't pay much attention to "petty" thefts, but will take notice of $2000 or more. There have been a number of
Dunno' bout that. Perhaps a hutch. Maybe a chesterfield.
"I hope they add a talking donkey."
/me ducks
Sorry, but I believe Hillary will be on the campaign trail for at least a little while longer.
Well, the information may in fact be pervasive, however getting someone to look at it, accept it or even be willing to discuss it is another matter altogether.
Case in point, I met someone who was a die hard "believer" who was attempting to get me to "believe". Yes, he actually believed (or so he claimed) that the world was created by a god about 6000 years ago. He said that the tools used today to carbon date objects were "flawed" and that "scientists simply made machines that looked like they did something [he didn't get it when I asked if they go "PING!"... go figure], but all they did was churn out answers the scientists want", and that mankind couldn't measure the speed of light (after I'd pointed out that we could easily find objects in the sky well over 6k light years away, and if they were in fact several million/billion light years away, how could the light be reaching us if the universe were only 6k years old?). I explained that he himself could measure the speed of light with rather simply tools, and suggested he look into the methods used by folks like Armand Fizeau. Needless to say, the guy just said "No, I don't need to. It's all in the Bible."
What I'm getting at is that you can't communicate to some people, regardless of how good your data is, your evidence, or your argument. If a person flat out refuses to hear counter to their belief because of "faith", there is nothing you can do. Faith is, after all, accepting something as fact which observation and evidence prove to be false.
"If a person walks on water, they'll sink."
"No, the Bible said Christ did."
"OK, if a person can, and you've got faith, the Charles is right over there. Knock yourself out."
"I'm not Christ!"
"No shit. You're no Einstein, either."
Oh (!**#*!@&&!*#((!*@
/me hangs head in shame...
indeed, this is so. Too much saki last night.
FTA: "Haptic technology has uses ranging from remote medical breast checks and exploring distant lands, to recreating the feel of fabrics."
Yes, but when can I remotely feel and explore distant breasts?
Gotta have priorities, mate.
Get... Get your hand away from that moderation button, you! Don't mod me, bro! It's a legitimate, technical and inherently geeky question of a viable, important and distinctly boob related issue that I'm sure I'm not alone in... Oh bugger, you modded me down, didn't you?
smeg.
Yes, but can you imagine what spam could be like back then, if combined with current methods?
"L00k at th3se Ankl3s!"
"H4wt babe shoz her SH0ULDER!"
"Get UR sn4k3 0ilz heer. CH3APZ!"
Oh I RTA :) But I am, admittedly, a cynic and I question the validity of any sort of statement along these lines. This announcement is pretty much "take our word for it".
That said, personally I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were 10m active subscriptions, even not including multi-box players, particularly after finding out my 70yo redneck uncle actually played (though he's a NElf... which makes me thankful he's related by marriage, not blood).
I am a little curious about those numbers.
From what I have seen, the use of multiple accounts by single users is not all that uncommon. Blizzard doesn't seem to actually delete accounts after they've been deactivated. If someone cancels their subscription, their account name, their toons, everything remains (much like AOL's method of fudging their numbers). So of those 10m subscribers, I'd be curious to find out if those are individuals, or simply active subscribers, or in fact accounts created but not currently subscribed counted in that total.
I found a book of simple Russian phrases to try and figure out that video. It seems that the announcer's record is scratched, and his hovercraft is full of eels. ...bouncy bouncy.
The 2x4 had +2 to hit against PHBs.
Bless their black little hearts, and Microsoft for keeping me on the gravy train... But a very simple solution to all.
- One large 2x4, say about 5' long.
- Five or six nails, roughly 4"
- One large hammer
Instructions:
1) Choose which end of the 2x4 will be your "top" and "bottom" (no, not THAT type of "top" and "Bottom" you filthy minded little buggers!).
2) Toward the top end of 2x4, drive the nails completely through, so that one and has a lovely little array of nail points sticking out.
3) Hold the hammer in your right hand, toss the 2x4 out the window, find offending user, and smack them about the head with the hammer.
Problem solved, and quite a bit of fun and simple yet effective stress reduction.
My nipples explode with DELIGHT!
My hovercraft was full of eels.
VERY well put!! But I do disagree with you on a couple counts.
... well, healer or tank. Perhaps it's due to the server I'm on being one of the most populated, but when I'm out and about I always see lots of people, new and old faces, and never have much difficulty in finding a group if I'm in the mood.
First, personally I wouldn't like the game as much as I do if there were more griefers. From what I've read about UO (no, never played, so please pardon me if this is an inaccurate statement) it got to the point where some people could barely play the game anymore if they made the "wrong" enemy, and there was quite the plethora of people who went out of their way to be those enemies. And when I play on PvP servers, solo questing is just about impossible. Certainly it's more exciting and challenging, but there are times when some folks don't want to have to watch their back constantly. If you're wide open to attack at any time, and potentially from someone using a speed hack or item hack, the game would start to lose it's appeal.
Second, I have lots of fun still even with *cough* a few toons at 70. Respec my Druid and I go from healbot to tank. Do it again, and now I stand around and just nuke. Do the same for, say, a Paladin and you're
Too MUCH regulation is certainly a bad thing, and perhaps there are times when Blizzard goes overboard. But IMO most of the time they have kept things in the middle of the road. Totally agree with you on PvP though... These days you don't require anything even remotely resembling skill, you just need to put in the time.
Oh yes indeedy, I still play. Have since about two weeks after the game went "retail". So far it's the first and only MMORPG I play (normally just an FPS) and I still enjoy it. Personally I don't bother with 90% of the daily quests or factions, simply because I only get time to play perhaps 2-3 nights each week and only for a few hours. When I am on, I much prefer to group with folks or level alts since what keeps me playing is the variety you get with each class. Sure, the same quests, often the same grinds, but what keeps me at it is that with each class and spec, you have to do many of those same quests quite differently. And in groups, you play a very different role, some easier and some more taxing.
:D
Besides, I don't feel any burning desire for a big dragon to fly around on. I'm perfectly content to see my big Tauren Druid on Midnight
Afterward, Brett Alexander was heard to lament "Perhaps using those parts from my mom's old Pinto wasn't the best idea..."
Actually he wore normal clothes, drove a normal, run of the mill Oldmobuick, talked frequently with other employees, etc. Was he socially inept? No more so than most of us. Was he an oddball? No more so than me. What would cause us to look into his actions? Simple. He frequently "alt-tabbed" web pages when anyone was coming. He asked me (often) about what we did and didn't track with regards to users browsing habits, even though I'd made it quite clear we didn't. He made reference to having "unpopular" sexual proclivities.
There was more, actually, but I hardly feel the need to justify my actions to you. You may want to make sure this isn't the pot calling the kettle "delusional paranoids", sparky.
That's another thing. Watching this video, those officers were either poorly trained, or ... No, I'm betting poorly trained. With four officers on him, hell even two should have been plenty, but four could easily have restrained him and gotten him cuffed. One kneels on the upper shoulder (NOT the neck or head) while another sits on his legs. Two other officers each pull the hands back. With judicious use of weight on tender body parts (not the joy department!) you can very easily convince someone to do what you're telling them. Heck, get even a ball point pen between the ring and middle finger of a hand and squeeze them together, suddenly you've got a very, very pliable arm (try it for yourself... It's ouchy).
I don't know what that university police department's policy is with regards to force, but personally if anyone here did that, they'd be fired. (I'm not a cop, BTW, but I am very familiar with at least our policy and procedures with regards to force)
A very, very valid point. Where DO you draw the line?
Personally I find hate groups such as the KKK abhorrent, but does that mean they should be shut down and not allowed to protest or rally? No. Even they deserve the liberty to gather, to say their opinions and gather in protest. It is, of course, a double edged sword: freedom of speech means freedom for everyone.
Counter protesting KKK with clowns is by far the best way to deal with those smegheads: http://asheville.indymedia.org/article/107Clowns
While that kid was kind of annoying, according to the article, he did not warrant use of a taser (at least by the standards of the police station I work for). He was already on the ground, he was already under control. Once the person is down and double cuffed, that should be it, drag his sorry backside out.
Of course, I can see many times where use of a taser is more than justified.
"The argument over which is better, VI or Emacs, is perfectly val*ZZZZAP!!*GUAAAHHHHHGH!*"
Not too many years ago I worked for a "web startup" (i.e. small company founded by Harvard MBA who smoked lots of weed, drove a VW, and was out to "save the world") as IT manager. As the market tanked, the CEO became more and more concerned for the future of the company and with good reason! We'd gone from regular upper 6 figures per month to less than half that, with three locations whittled down to essentially one and a half. Many employees left for greener pastures. When things REALLY started to go down hill, the CEO asked me to intercept any emails between current and former employees, and then "hinted" that since so many of our clients had their email hosted on our email server, couldn't I do the same with them. I know that, legally, he had the right to get access to current employee email, and any former employee whom he had granted continued use of our email system (not sure on that last bit, IANAL). But asking me to, or suggesting I should allow him to, read client emails was a final straw. While he may have the "legal right" to read employee emails, it left a very bad taste in my mouth. Suggesting I allow him to read client's emails? It was like licking a rat. At the end of the day I had to go home and see myself in the mirror, and I knew that reading other people's personal, private emails was something so abhorrent. (Rimmer: "Lister, that is my private, personal, private diary; full of my personal, private, personal things." Cat: "It's gone public.") Now all that said, at another job, myself and some other IT workers suspected one of the devs of possibly being a pedo. We didn't read his emails, we didn't pour through his computer (which we could easily have done), but we did put google to good use, and at one point we did packet sniff where he was browsing. Was I proud of that? Well, actually yes. If he HAD been looking at kiddie porn, if he HAD been a sexual predator, being a father how could I stand back and not try to do something? It turned out he wasn't a diddler, just... Really really really really creepy. It is a very fine line between "ethical" and "non-ethical", it can be very hard to judge which is which, and everyone will have their own opinions. But in the end you have to live with yourself, and certainly I'm not qualified to decide right and wrong, nor pass judgment. If I had my way, anyone who sold a poorly made curry would be strung up and boiled in oil.
The networks make money to produce these shows how? While it would be very entertaining to imagine them pulling the money from their greedy backsides, the fact is the money comes through ad revenue.
Now, if there is an increase in use of devices which reduce the number of eyeballs a network can claim were focused on an advertisement, the value of that ad space has now also gone down. Even if we're talking about a few million using these devices out of the entire population, that number will only increase if nothing is done. Remember, the VCR is/was relatively "stupid". It required programming, and lets face it the majority of the Viewing Public is only a few IQ points above being watered thrice weekly! A TiVo, OTOH, is getting easier and easier and you can search out those programs you want to view and it will record as needed.
Where was I? Off rambling... Ah yes!
They see their gravy train potentially getting derailed! What if they go to a potential ad sale and say "We know that $BIGNUM viewers will see this show, and they will by and large be tech savvy with lots of money" and the advertiser decides against, fearing a large number of TiVo/PVR users? And what if the networks see that happen MORE and MORE often?
What then? Will TV become more and more like Pay Per View? Will there be more "subscription only" channels?
While I love the TiVo and loath advertising, what we are seeing is tantamount to an organism (granted, a parasitic and repulsive one) doing what it can to survive. Or, in this case, remain fat, slimy and repugnant.
Could be worse. They could be planning on making movies out of Hitchhikers Guide or Red Dwarf or...
...oh crap.
THINK of the great pieces of cinematic perfection based on comic books!
Insipid and trite, yet full of rubust low quality acting and flat dialog, Hollywood again and again gives us.... Well, crap.
At least they're consistent.