Read everything before mod-ding me down -- there's some germane material which won't make the cut-off...
How do you propose the family of four get medical care for a year be distributed (and used by the proper recipients)?
You have control of the resources before it reaches TPTB (The Powers That Be). Once it's there, however, all bets are off.
Here's an example:
You see people panhandling for money. Offer to take them in the nearest restaurant. Give management enough money...with the understanding it can only be used for the person in question and anything left over goes in the tip jar. The person you're helping is polite (if you're lucky) but refuses.
Does this mean:
1) They aren't hungry and anticipate having enough the next time he's hungy?
2) you've determined the reason they need the money is to buy some MD2020 (it's a wine -- Mad Dog 20/20 - you're better off to drink battery acid. I cannot imagine a hangover on it. Find some at a cheap-o liquor store try a little, and pitch it - it's an experiment -- not unlike a deep-friend twinkie or Snickers bar at a state fair. I buy whatever is new that year for a one-bite taste by tearing it off, passing the rest off to anyone else wanting a taste. If you are clueless about these deep-fried foods, consider yourself fortunate) or some other booze (or drug)?
3) they need the money for something else - something positive? e.g., sick kid to the clinic?
4) they really rake in the $$$ asking for money and have no reason to find a job.
5) sitting there kills time vs. sitting in the library and doing nothing.
6) ???
You've got the money in hand. How do you decide how it's distributed and how much to give them? (I have a personal pattern|policy, but we won't worry about that right now)
If you hand over the the funds, you have a good chance of believing it will be diverted. That's when the Time photo of Bono means squat. "Forgive the countries which can't pay their debts. It's crippling them trying to keep up." (read that: we're loan sharks) We clear the slate, they have nothing. We give them money, it goes the same place all of the other money has gone. Bono goes oh-fer by asking us to wipe the debts again. Fortunately, none of his money was diverted and he can continue to wear kool-yellow glasses.
If we give them "clean water, a secure food supply, basic medicine, reasonable security...for a year", how do you prevent the hard goods from being sold to another group|country for $$$ or exchanged in some other fashion? Reasonable security? Right now, we're in a bad spot right now [1] -- although we have now have an exit policy [2] and have to intervene in how many other companies using a fleet of UN black helicopters? If it's a UN and not US issue, there's plenty of representation from the countries who are robbing their people blind and have already diverted all of the funds. I hear a One World Order being proposed by someone coming in from the side door.
Lots of fine wishes, but it's not going to happen in the real world. Anyone for a video game? World Conquest & Domination? Wait. Something near to that was in Never Say Never Again.
__________________
[1] A man goes to hell and is greeted by Satan who explains the rules: "I'm going to walk you through a long hallway of rooms. You'll be able to look inside and determine if you want to stay there for eternity [or not]. If you choose to pass but find everything after it is worse, you cannot return. Again, once you pass, you cannot return." They go to the first room and all of the surfaces are so hot people are doing everything they can to avoid contact - jumping off of the floor, wall, taking turns standing on each other, etc. "I'll pass. There's no way I could handle that for eternity." "Fine. But you cannot return if everything else is worse." They go to room #2. Everything must be very cold because the vapor from everyone's breath can be seen in the air and everyone
They've been known as the 800 lb. anti-spammers for several years now. Read what you want to in the news about Microsoft's efforts, but fan away the smoke and there's nothing left but the mirror you're standing on. Microsoft has made some money, directed it to their "big three" (Huey, Dewey, and Louie - aka Marketing, PR, and Sales), and Dewey has done a good job of ensuring they make a lot of press by looking terrific. When you hear a consensus of HotMail issues and bCentral.com ratified in the anti world, then perhaps it's safe to venture back online. Microsoft's anti efforts are supposed to be a hammer, looking at 2003-U-CAN-SPAM as a blueprint. Has the volume decreased?
Aside from AOL, how many other Fortune 500 companies are actually doing something about spam generated by their resources, either by providing online services or have zombies?
By-and-large, AOL has had at least one person monitoring SPAM-L beyond the PORN (Post Once, Read Nothing) factor, where others such as Tropica have done. When questions have arisen, AOL has been pretty open about what they're doing and resolving issues. If they were like everyone else, they'd have left the guy who walked with their member list go. They pursued his hairy ass and taped his buns together.
Oh, and Louie could be generating more local (U$) income if the piracy@microsoft.com address actually worked. If you send them too little info, they tell you they need everything. Send everything along with an explanation at the top, and it'll be rejected, telling you it looks too much like spam. Send them text asking which way they want it and silence. Send plaintext message + ROT13 for the headers+payload, silence. Plaintext explaining you are unable to send anything, the response is, "We're working on it." So much for being a good guy. (actually, it started as an experiment and I had to see what happened all of the way around.
Besides, Windows started out as just a "work" OS (as all computer were for "work" back in those days).
But Windows wasn't Microsoft's brain child. It was the brain & love child of Microsoft and IBM. When the collaborative license was due to be renewed, Microsoft bolted, putting Plan B into effect: making one of their own. For a while after that, OS/2 and Windows software were interchangeable. There were even OS/2 focused books ~1993+ (Win 3.1 was ~May '92) before the publishers saw the spraypaint on the wall. I've probably got one somewhere in my unusual stack. (e.g. The first Internet book - Ed Krol ~Fall '92, the last OS/2 (user) book, a VB/DOS book, etc.
This should not prove to be a surprise. Ethically or Financially, Right or Wrong, Microsoft has made a lot of money (and saved a lot of time) purchasing & modifying the work product of others. See OS/2 & Windows (above), Microsoft providing HQ service & support with Compu$erve (someone asked me what I thought would happen then and I told them: "Micro$oft is preparing for an online service by seeing the ins and outs of how someone makes theirs work." M$N. Front Page. Visual SourceSafe, GIANT software, etc. Heck, look at DOS. Bought it a leverage of $50'000, hoping IBM would license it. (whew! they did). No chance for Microsoft Bob. The marriage to WHG III got in the way. So they scrapped it for pieces -- that's how Clippy was born.
People have talked about submarining patents, Microsoft has done the same thing with products. Never write what you can buy or steal. Or, as Nathan said after getting his JD: "You can't out-develop Microsoft, but you can out-invent them." The part re: not-develop is because they can buy a couple of companies in an extremely short period of time, out-developing someone else in what amounts to a short period of time. And Nathan should know, as his JD focused upon patent law and his group has focused specifically upon investing in or purchasing patents and been rather open about it. In fact, he and Microsoft have invested in the same companies (despite claims of animosity). The danger of trying to out-invent them is hearing the spooky voice of a landshark saying one word, over & over: "Farnsworth".
This just in: Bush announces Exit Plan: January 20, 2009.
...I have mod points (same here)... still. Part of the problem is a lot of software, but very little *good* software
I'll one-up you. The major problem isn't there little good software, but very few good software engineers.
Read it in toto before modding it. Thanks.
I've said before [that] 98% of the people in the industry don't belong and usually get a lot of private rants 'n raves when I've said it before[1], so I've reduced it to 95% to provide some leeway for compromise, attempting too make them happy[1]. People think it's fun, they make decent money, it's a challenge, and people direct comments to them as though they ran into John Holmes at Roselawn, Indiana[2]. You da man! All of that put together makes their ego make them take a swing at every ball which comes across the plate.
Code is inflated, buggy, a log of it written via trial & error, and if an actual review were to audit a sizeable fraction of code when prepared to be used, there'd be a lot of rewritten code or better coders who keep their jobs.
The best way to explain it is one of my quotes from a long, long time ago. It's a simple compromise, but if people knew what they were paying for, there would be a lot of unhappy people (and companies) running around:
"In this industry, you don't have to be good, just good enough."
_____________________________________
[1] Now, if you were to fall into the category of good why would you be p%ssed off about the other (larger) percentage? There are a lot of people who get upset when I assert these numbers. But it's like teaching a chess class: "Everyone who is a beginner or non-player go here ; everyone else." Which side of the room are people going to put themselves in? It's the same with coding. If we were to break it out on a voluntary rating basis, how many people would go to the left and right sides of the room? I'll assert the left side of the room is going to be mighty empty. As you are reading this, do you consider yourself to be on the left or right side? Realistically. If you had to assert your position on the right-hand side, what's your evidence going to be?
[2] When it was intact and he was alive. I'm trusting I shouldn't have to explain either of these, but that's what Google and Wikipedia are for.
Wiki Indianapolis (IN), Carmel (IN), Fishers, (IN); the final one is where I'm at -- and it's still a town, so we have a town council, not a mayor. We bought our house eighteen years ago with a population of 7'500 people. Fishers is growing so fast it paid for a special census in 2003 and is having another one this fall (estimated count: 60'000-63'000). The '03 one ended up with the state paying another $2M/year. I could go on & on about the resources available regarding sports, etc., but all should be worth finding in a few minutes vis Wiki or Google. I wonder why Final Four tournaments (for both genders) are held here if we're a backwater location? The same goes for pre-Olympic trials for track & field and water sports. the Indy 500, a F1 race, the Brickyard 400 NASCAR this weekend. You can walk the streets at night in Indy. Conventions produce a heavy use for the convention center and the new dome will be done within the next 2-2.5 years, then a new convention center will replace both existing buildings. You can walk in Fishers or Carmel. There's also something known as the "Monon" which is likely to be 25-30 miles long by now, running from the south of Indy all of the way to the regions of Fishers|Carmel and about 20-25 feet wide and paved. They've had to slow people down a bit because the usage volume has grown so high. You'd be surprised to see how many contraptions people have found to use the Monon to get exercise.
My mom teaches 3rd grade 2 hours north of hear and said the teachers up there think the suburbs are reputed to be a bunch of rich kids. "Would you rather teach at inner-city schools?" "No." Her students come from farming communities. I could write a ton, but it either oversells those convinced or will fall on deaf ears. Oh, generally for all directions of a clock, there's an interstate road passing through Indy.
The question isn't "what can we do?" but "what can't we do?" (say, what is there for families?) You'll burn out trying to do everything.
We do have all four seasons. And it's obvious which season is in effect.
The only thing we don't have is downhill skiing. But good places to do that aren't that far away.
How about bad in the way the June '6 issue of Discover (Are We Trapped On Earth: Why Cosmic Rays Could Prevent Us From Leaving ?
They cover a lot of cosmic issues in that article.
Few civ-science materials provide why a craft has to be bigger than Pamella Anderson's breasts to get there (Mars). My solution has always been launching multiple oassis types of craft which would be available to make a swap of resources along the way.
The primary issue which Discover (et al) has [covered in the [past] is what the minimal space to humans is required to avoid the inevitatable clustraphobia.
I haven't seen as much coverage in Scientific American or MIT's Technology Review.
People were getting sick and those who attended to them -- the equivalent of today's physicians, got sick and croaked. The next group, taking mercy on the sick (nuns and priests) became sick and croaked. The Pope then proclaimed a pilgrimage for a massive trip to show God their unity & support. Boom!. Congregate everyone and|or healthy in one spot. 90% of those who started the journey didn't make it home.
Eventually, those who were still alive realized where the rats were, people got sick. Kill the rats, people stayed will.
I beg to differ. Look at the US. Limits are set re: maximum production, based upon size, production, etc., but in the form of how much can be generated. The big companies then purchase the unused chits from the smaller companies as there are many small companies which aren't consuming their quota and it's extra income.
Now, who is permitting that to occur? It's not Grandma Rose living down the street.
Oooooo. This reminds me of something funny (but true), which I don't want to bury anywhere.
(this was in the Chicago Tribune at the time)
When Canada raised their cigarette tax to some ungodly level, it took months for anyone to catch onto this but a US farmer would somehow be traveling a bit too far beyond his boundar(y|ies) lines, stop for a few minutes to stretch & take a break, then after some time, returning to his field. Later, a Canadian farmer would go a bit too far over his boundar(y|ies) stop & stretch, then resume his work. There were times where the locations were random, etc.
As it turned out (and you can surmise), the American farmer was dropping a load of cigarettes on the American|Canadian side and the Canadian Farmer was picking them up. There were times where they might not pick everything on a single run (if at all), should they think someone was watching them.
I don't remember all of the other details, including how they heard about it and finally tracked it down, but it was still idea.
This was happening a lot, but it makes me wonder who would rat on a rather cool hack like that one.
When I was doing weekly commutes[1], I saw my first exposure to tobacco hanging in huge drying sheds in Kentucky. I always wondered why someone didn't make one large, singleton run of tobacco.
__________________________________
[1] Dice.com, CareerBuilder, Monster tend to look at traveling as a yes/no or a percentage value. I've tried to push the concept of "weekly commute" as anyone who hears the term immediately knows what it means and it would make sorting jobs out but it seems to be falling on deaf ears.
Not to mention people persist via referring to common sense.
I don't want common sense. I want good sense.
Laws that restrict game play are unconstitutional
(I don't care if they rope them away from the other games the way they do booze or magazines). As long as they don't control the manufacture or distribution for adults, it's fine by me.
Yet they remain challenged and challenged again. It pops up most frequently when there's a campaign underway and someone needs some free press. Elect me, I'll stop it. Right. They're going to define legislation.
The last time some moron tried something like that locally, it was before Bob & Tom went into syndication. A certain attorney had announced his intention to run. The day after that, he went after Bob & Tom and how profane it was for kids to hear B&T to be broadcast on school busses. The day following day, Bob & Tom had an impromptu party in his (work) office's parking lot. Lots of swastikas & megaphones + other, assorted noises.
Think FM near the end of the movie. The cops basically showed up and begged for a graceful shutdown at the end of the broadcast.
What the moron failed to do, yet others pointed out: if you don't want your kids to hear it on the bus, go to the school board and get another station assigned. It's like George Carlin used to point out: There are two dials on: one to turn it off, the other to change the channel.
The guy has tried to run several times but there's not even mention of it in any media.
I suppose someone could claim it's akin to a near miss with two aircraft, or when a movie or tv states up front The names of the innocent have been changed to protect the innocent. The innocent don't need protection. The guilty do.
Municipal or not, they still have rules which they must follow. And I'm guessing they don't keep up with all of them. 20-25 years ago, they tried (locally) to use a T -shaped turn to make approaching the the (from the left, above) the same (topolicoloy) as a "right turn on red". The cops weren't current on it and whilst I had to go spend a lot of time in court to support my case (but I service my clients at night and did my soccer workouts for college)as I had time, the po-lice had to send a lot of officers in court to defend the policy at the risk of showing an extremely low success late.[1]
The two times when I had to deal with one officer was when I was on foot to go to where my mom taught grade school and saw the driver slip into the intersection, causing three cars to become involved. As an EMT, I had to invoke triage and took the original driver, who had a broken neck (C3). I had fully uniformed officer grab me from behind and make some gestures as well as remarks about "kids....accidents" I tossed him my wallet with my licess prominently visible when enough equipment arrived, I walked up to him, got his name, badge number, etc. And I told him to prepare for a discussion with someone higher up than he was.
The next day, I got a call from the Captain of the Po-lice and wanted to know if I was still serious and would make good on assault and kidnapping (the patient was in my care and he interfered. We could do the paperwork and put it into his jacket or file it in court and have it filed in his jacked. Either way, he was going to get a dry ream. The Chief and the officer pled with me to let him go. "If I let him go and everyone else let them go (e.g. driving 15 over the speed limit), there'd be nothing to keep them in line." I gave him a choice. He chose the Chief's writeup because it would only be in one location - not in court & jacket, but only in the jacket.
It turned out this guy had a problem with tossing his weight around and was removed from the force about six months later. I ran into the Chief one day (who was laying pipe with the emergency director during off hours) and pointed out I wasn't as dumb as I appeared.
Another, quick SCOTUS story: SCOTUS ruled in either the most recent session or the session before that that the cops may have announce themselves before they kick in the door, but don't have to announce, wait, then kick the door in, which would present the potential of evidence being destroyed. So it's announce, kick, and apprehend.
If there are solutions to a particular problem and there's something which must be obtained to solve a problem, those being locked out casually can be held up as a reason to get the rules dropped.
About twenty years ago, they hired a procedures, products, and auditing responsibility. (read that: generate stupid rules & regulations for a group of fifty or sixty people)
Even the systerms programmers/tech support people were bound as well. My tactic was simple. Make about fifty copies, hang them on the cube wall alonog with the auditor's doctrines. This also a change from the hospital's hire/fire polic(y,ies), which was two written reprimands, two verbal, then you get tossed. We used to joke you could jump a nun in the dining commons, have it used as evidence and you'd keep your job. Back to point.
The HR polic was one written, one verbal, then they'd kick you to the curb. They had a list of specific things which must or must not be done, etc. They forgot to CYA: what happens when someone's out sick or unreachable? And the simplest part of the mores was don't do anything which affects more than one person. Whenever came to me for something to be done, I'd point to the policy procedures, and give them a copy of the note and tell them to come back when things are in proper order.
Only two of us would make firm bids (without giving away our methodology): my partner in crime said he'd kill it by the EOD, I said before lunch.
If The Man wants my cell phone and pager numbers which I'm paying for i.e.out of my bocket; e.g. for a child to reach me, then said Man better be coughing up a share of the bill...and not prorated upon usage. If every service did only usage, there'd be some financial difficulties in the business world.
By the same token, people working in The Man's Offce better understand when you are on vacation, "you got hit by a bus." i.e. You aren't there and they move forward.
.
So many people are friggin' afraid & neurotic not providing the extra communication (in general) and contact (vacations) that the office will find they're not needed, after thirty years, I've never seen someone canned for refusing to share personal info).
It's the embryolic stem cells which has the various parties frothing at the mouth because specific types could be generated for the purpose of research and not as for the purpose of life. Otherwise, they could wear out their current strains. Preventing the gov'ts funding don't stop the research, it will only slow it down.
This is why a couple of families (and many, many TV plotlines) have had an additional child which they're hoping will be a better donor for whatever the issue is.
The other popular service being provided is umbrylic freezing so you can be your own donor, where I know people to begin the process of freezing their offsprings' cords and creating an autologous blood bank should they need something to be available and not worry about getting infected (e.g, Hep D, and E haven't been discussed and Hep C wasn't discussed [at all until The Amazing Plastic Woman got it].
Scientific American, issue prior to than the current one (chess boards), has a big story re: do stem cells cause cancer.
It turns out to be the July '06 issue and the article is online (free): here
If that link breaks, go to sciam.com, and follow the yellow brick road.
It's got a few suggestions for additional reading. I've read a couple of them before and they're good reading, but slow at times.
As I've said before, Microsoft's biggest resources are Huey, Dewey and Louie (Marketing, PR, and Sales).
They have two tasks before them right now: Vista. That seems like one, but it's two. First, there's the standard upgrades and new machine purchased as well as any corporate issues. Secondly, and far more importantly, they're going to try and pry corporations from sitting pat. There's a lot of corporate licenses which are still running Win2K, both server and terminal, Visual Studio 6 (+SP6), SQL 2000, etc. The number of surprises are minimal, the cost inconsequential; in essence, their TCO is just about as inexpensive as it can be.
In order to upgrade from that position, they'd have to pay for a lot of upgrades - hardware, software, people, general support, yadda yadda.
Back to point.
Microsoft has tried this before: When DOS was the base and Windows was the "OS/2" (tongue in cheek) running on OS/2, MS-DOS, IBM-DOS, etc. There were allegations against Microsoft because Windows would only run on MS-DOS. Windows wouldn't run on any other DOS executables and those with problems were directed to purchase Windows, then call back if they had problems after that. That gave them some very short call-times for that group of supporters. Think of the old joke re: "Infinite Storeage" which amounted to "Write Only DASD". If you tried to read from it, smoke and problems would be make to the support and be queried: "You didn't read from it, did you?"."Oh,no. You can't do that. It's Write Only."
If you go back through the court documentation, the issue of what GUI would run upon which DOS product. The discussion generally went along the lines of, "Only if you can do without errors - there cannot be any errors which are produced because of the incompatibility." IFF (for the non-math people, IFF means "If and only if")
How many bags of flour do you need to find the wet spot?
2. Vista will be like Viagra[1] (aside from a simple spelling difference:
-- stay up for a few hours
in fact, you're supposed to call for assistance if it stays up more than four hours.
-- screw up everything it touches ,
-- care to add more?
And finally, anyone remember this little ditty from Boy Scout Camp?
Leader - Flee!
Response - Flee!
Leader - Flee, fly!
Response - Flee, fly!
Leader - Flee, fly, flo!
Response - Flee, fly, flo!
Leader - Vista!
Response - Vista!
Leader - Coom a la, coom a la, coom a la vista.
Response - Coom a la, coom a la, coom a la vista.
Leader - No, no, no, no not the vista.
Response - No, no, no, no not the vista.
Leader - Eenie meenie, dessameenie, ooh wah a wah a meenie.
Response - Eenie meenie, dessameenie, ooh wah a wah a meenie.
Leader - Ex a meenie, zoh la meenie, ooh wah a wah.
Response - Ex a meenie, zoh la meenie, ooh wah a wah.
Leader - Bee bidilie oh doe, boe doe, bah deeten dahten, shh.
Response - Bee bidilie oh doe, boe doe, bah deeten dahten, shh.
What cracks me up it seeing "spoilers" below, but within view, as though one is supposed to skim past some undefined period of time.
Has anyone failed to remember ROT13? If Wiki* had a ROT13 control, you could click it and see plaintext, clicked again, return to the original material.
sigh.
p.s.
I'll believe the singularity when I start seeing "All your base are belong to us" and yanking power plug doesn't faze it.
After the bubble broke and a lot of management thought they could save money by going over-shoring[1], management knew they still had to find some warm bodies locally. So they added water to the equation and all of the boats would rise. Added water as in effort poured into the body of water. You will generally find people who have director and VP in their titles (and not with seven or eight people in the company) doing hands-on. Directors generally have to be power users of Excel and Access. VPs aren't required to be quite as expensive, tool-wise.
The bottom line of this is the higher the leven of people a company has writing code, the smaller the number of people they have to hire, even if you have enough chimps sitting at enough keyboards.
____________________________________
[1] I've learned by experience, off-shoring is good if you aren't ever going to be managing the [source] code once you get it back. The quality code is generally illegable to anyone except to those who wrote it. It reminds me of the people who wrote code, then passed what they had thru file editors and changed COBOL variable names from "ADD CUSTOMER-WEEKLY-SALES TO CUSTOMER-CURRENT-TOTAL-SALES". to "ADD a3rafas TO awdfasdva-afws-Tasdffgas". i.e., obfuscated code guaranteeing job security. No, it's not apocryphal. I encountered this numerous times with my high school and college clients 20-25 years ago and writing the code to parse the variables proved to be quite a handy tool.
I don't see how the initial poster with this thread's title could manage to list all of the non-conformists and would have to continually keep it current, no how matter how many people are at play at any time.
The shorter list, however, would be to maintain a list of those who have white hats (good guys). It's then easier for people to browse and more elite. If a company wants to be on the [short] list, it's obvious what they need to be done to get onto and remain on the list.
If someone's not on the list & complains about it, they can also be put on an alternative list for grievances & the outcome of them?
Summary: If you've got 1'000 items which deal with one subject, wouldn't it be easier to list whichever one is shorter than the longes?
Persons, houses, papers, and effects all may contain the truth in facts and statements. The Constitution explicitly gives you the right to hide these truths from the government. In order to learn these truths, the government must get a warrant based on probable cause
But...The SCOTUS [1] did rule on a case within the previous two sessions dealing with how long they have to give you to hide things even when they do have a warrant. Traditionally, it was thought to be a polite situation -- they knock, announce themselves, give appropriate time to answer the door, and if that elapses, get the battering ram out and create a hole where the door used to be. IIRC, the police in one particular case were a bit less patient and made a cop-shaped hole in the door to get inside in rather short order (sine an announcement). The argument was over the degree of politeness they had to perform [first]. I believe the ruling was the police were permitted to take the door out first, and introduce themselves after the situation was secured. i.e., no more giving them time to flush the joint down the toilet.
(am I remembering this correctly?)
________________________
[1] As we have people asking questions about the US gov't in general, SCOTUS == Supreme Court Of The United States.
And if someone declares "Grammar Nazi!", just remember two things, equally important:
1. They're invoking Godwin's Law. Conceding an argument on their second post?
2. Declarations of "Grammar Nazi!" against those who point out glaring spelling, punctuation, and grammar errors are generally made by Grammar Idiots.
I love the Grocer's Apostrophe (add 's to anything to make it plural). I passed a pool hall the other day (Chalkies). It's smokeless! It's where the Black Widow hangs out when she's at home between tournaments. One of the advertisements in the window involved scheduling "Party's". What's just as bad is when people make any unfamiliar word an acronym (all uppercase).
(I propose "The Ignoramus' Acronym".)
No, this isn't flamebait. It's an ongoing examination of those who can write and those who cannot, and the excuses the latter use when they aren't being defensive.
Microsoft's penchant for proprietary systems have changed...partially. They received a patent for Microsoft Office Documents' XML format(s).
As I've pointed [here] out before (many times):
that permits everyone to use it, but permits Microsoft to panic and decide to enforce it - *poof*!
That also means they could permit everyone to read it, but only those who are licensed to write that format. If a business is running multiple document formats, they'd be able to read MS Office, but not write it. This could prove some real problems for companies, both internally and in communication with other firms.
Windows isn't their lifeblood any more. MS Office represents 1/3 of their revenue and a goodly portion of their profit. That sacred cow is going to be protected unless|until something else supplants it as a stream of money.
(please read everything before modding it. I'm tired of being modded because someone reads out of context - with incomplete info
There are one or two who have claimed to see the light and give up the ghost.
What's said is most of the spam isn't coming from people connecting to Russia or China and zapping it back here, but within the US. This is because there are still plenty of ISPs who are willing to harbor spammers because they are easy money. In fact, they likely can charge the spammers more in order to remain "protected", regardless of what the TOS might say. Little side deals (pink contracts). And some of the ISPs -- high enough up the food chain -- really just don't give a rat's ass what goes on, as long as the money flows.
The 2003 U-CAN-SPAM act was written by the DMA (Direct Marketing Association) who claimed to be "anti spam" and Congress largely believed them. The unfortunate thing is the DMA's definition of spam is|was a lot different than everyone else's. Why did they do it? Jerry Cerasale (VP) said, "we don't believe an opt-in requirement provides a viable economic model." translated: if you can't guarantee our ability to make money, we will fight it tooth & nail. Requiring Confirmed Opt-in (what spammers and ignorant people calll "double opt-in") would have made them pop a vein.
What's sick is are all of the spam messages which have a tiny little graphic (or text in lieu of) down in the lower right-hand corner stating their U-CAN SPAM compliance. This would mean: proper headers, a relevant subject, a legitimate snailmail address, and a legitimate, working opt-out address. Oh, you can harvest email addresses, but you can't send to those harvested addresses. The number of bulkers who send email messages which comply with this (and things which don't come to mind) can be counted on one, perhaps two hands. I had one where examination of their sh%tty IIS setup revealed two text files, both of which said you were being removed from the system. What was displayed was an IIS error and a reference to the file where a quick hack of the site revealed they had no intention of making things do what they are supposed to. Why did the DMA do what they did? To give everyone who wants to send permission, and (more importantly) to get rid of state laws, under the pretense they couldn't keep track of which addresses resided in which state and they were tired of being sued. U-CAN-SPAM wiped out the existing state laws with no grandfathering.
Ronnie Scelson, who likes to parade himself as a king of spam, but not as loudly as Alan Ralsky, former/. cat toy (see archives), testified before Congress during the 2003 law development, basically told them, "there is nothing you can do legislatively|legally which can stop me from spamming." And he proved himself right by watching them screw the pooch. (Ronnie lives in the "2005 Hurricane Alley" (Slidell, La), but was unfortunately spared last year.
If you were to quiz certain groups re: who can go after spammers, you'd likely be told it's a Federal thing: the FBI, FTC, Justice Dept, etc. What's being over looked are two other parties: SAGs (State Attorneys General) and ISPs. The only SAG I've heard earn a reputation for pursuits, let alone success is NY. The only ISPs have been AOL. Microsoft has put their landsharks to work, but Microsoft themselves harbor spammers on Hotmail and refuse to do anything about it, let alone spamvertised sites on bCentral. You'd think the standard ISP would go after them in order to show a success rate and separate themselves from their primary [local] competitors. All things being equal, if you had a choice between two ISPs but one goes after spammers, which would you choose? I know people who have created an ISP by providing a service to a single client and pursued spammers,
Slashdot Mirror
Read everything before mod-ding me down -- there's some germane material which won't make the cut-off...
How do you propose the family of four get medical care for a year be distributed (and used by the proper recipients)?
You have control of the resources before it reaches TPTB (The Powers That Be). Once it's there, however, all bets are off.
Here's an example:
You see people panhandling for money. Offer to take them in the nearest restaurant. Give management enough money...with the understanding it can only be used for the person in question and anything left over goes in the tip jar. The person you're helping is polite (if you're lucky) but refuses.
Does this mean:
1) They aren't hungry and anticipate having enough the next time he's hungy?
2) you've determined the reason they need the money is to buy some MD2020 (it's a wine -- Mad Dog 20/20 - you're better off to drink battery acid. I cannot imagine a hangover on it. Find some at a cheap-o liquor store try a little, and pitch it - it's an experiment -- not unlike a deep-friend twinkie or Snickers bar at a state fair. I buy whatever is new that year for a one-bite taste by tearing it off, passing the rest off to anyone else wanting a taste. If you are clueless about these deep-fried foods, consider yourself fortunate) or some other booze (or drug)?
3) they need the money for something else - something positive? e.g., sick kid to the clinic?
4) they really rake in the $$$ asking for money and have no reason to find a job.
5) sitting there kills time vs. sitting in the library and doing nothing.
6) ???
You've got the money in hand. How do you decide how it's distributed and how much to give them? (I have a personal pattern|policy, but we won't worry about that right now)
If you hand over the the funds, you have a good chance of believing it will be diverted. That's when the Time photo of Bono means squat. "Forgive the countries which can't pay their debts. It's crippling them trying to keep up." (read that: we're loan sharks) We clear the slate, they have nothing. We give them money, it goes the same place all of the other money has gone. Bono goes oh-fer by asking us to wipe the debts again. Fortunately, none of his money was diverted and he can continue to wear kool-yellow glasses.
If we give them "clean water, a secure food supply, basic medicine, reasonable security...for a year", how do you prevent the hard goods from being sold to another group|country for $$$ or exchanged in some other fashion? Reasonable security? Right now, we're in a bad spot right now [1] -- although we have now have an exit policy [2] and have to intervene in how many other companies using a fleet of UN black helicopters? If it's a UN and not US issue, there's plenty of representation from the countries who are robbing their people blind and have already diverted all of the funds. I hear a One World Order being proposed by someone coming in from the side door.
Lots of fine wishes, but it's not going to happen in the real world. Anyone for a video game? World Conquest & Domination? Wait. Something near to that was in Never Say Never Again.
__________________
[1] A man goes to hell and is greeted by Satan who explains the rules: "I'm going to walk you through a long hallway of rooms. You'll be able to look inside and determine if you want to stay there for eternity [or not]. If you choose to pass but find everything after it is worse, you cannot return. Again, once you pass, you cannot return." They go to the first room and all of the surfaces are so hot people are doing everything they can to avoid contact - jumping off of the floor, wall, taking turns standing on each other, etc. "I'll pass. There's no way I could handle that for eternity." "Fine. But you cannot return if everything else is worse." They go to room #2. Everything must be very cold because the vapor from everyone's breath can be seen in the air and everyone
They do serve a unique function: Spam control.
They've been known as the 800 lb. anti-spammers for several years now. Read what you want to in the news about Microsoft's efforts, but fan away the smoke and there's nothing left but the mirror you're standing on. Microsoft has made some money, directed it to their "big three" (Huey, Dewey, and Louie - aka Marketing, PR, and Sales), and Dewey has done a good job of ensuring they make a lot of press by looking terrific. When you hear a consensus of HotMail issues and bCentral.com ratified in the anti world, then perhaps it's safe to venture back online. Microsoft's anti efforts are supposed to be a hammer, looking at 2003-U-CAN-SPAM as a blueprint. Has the volume decreased?
Aside from AOL, how many other Fortune 500 companies are actually doing something about spam generated by their resources, either by providing online services or have zombies?
By-and-large, AOL has had at least one person monitoring SPAM-L beyond the PORN (Post Once, Read Nothing) factor, where others such as Tropica have done. When questions have arisen, AOL has been pretty open about what they're doing and resolving issues. If they were like everyone else, they'd have left the guy who walked with their member list go. They pursued his hairy ass and taped his buns together.
Oh, and Louie could be generating more local (U$) income if the piracy@microsoft.com address actually worked. If you send them too little info, they tell you they need everything. Send everything along with an explanation at the top, and it'll be rejected, telling you it looks too much like spam. Send them text asking which way they want it and silence. Send plaintext message + ROT13 for the headers+payload, silence. Plaintext explaining you are unable to send anything, the response is, "We're working on it." So much for being a good guy. (actually, it started as an experiment and I had to see what happened all of the way around.
Besides, Windows started out as just a "work" OS (as all computer were for "work" back in those days).
But Windows wasn't Microsoft's brain child. It was the brain & love child of Microsoft and IBM. When the collaborative license was due to be renewed, Microsoft bolted, putting Plan B into effect: making one of their own. For a while after that, OS/2 and Windows software were interchangeable. There were even OS/2 focused books ~1993+ (Win 3.1 was ~May '92) before the publishers saw the spraypaint on the wall. I've probably got one somewhere in my unusual stack. (e.g. The first Internet book - Ed Krol ~Fall '92, the last OS/2 (user) book, a VB/DOS book, etc.
This should not prove to be a surprise. Ethically or Financially, Right or Wrong, Microsoft has made a lot of money (and saved a lot of time) purchasing & modifying the work product of others. See OS/2 & Windows (above), Microsoft providing HQ service & support with Compu$erve (someone asked me what I thought would happen then and I told them: "Micro$oft is preparing for an online service by seeing the ins and outs of how someone makes theirs work." M$N. Front Page. Visual SourceSafe, GIANT software, etc. Heck, look at DOS. Bought it a leverage of $50'000, hoping IBM would license it. (whew! they did). No chance for Microsoft Bob. The marriage to WHG III got in the way. So they scrapped it for pieces -- that's how Clippy was born.
People have talked about submarining patents, Microsoft has done the same thing with products. Never write what you can buy or steal. Or, as Nathan said after getting his JD: "You can't out-develop Microsoft, but you can out-invent them." The part re: not-develop is because they can buy a couple of companies in an extremely short period of time, out-developing someone else in what amounts to a short period of time. And Nathan should know, as his JD focused upon patent law and his group has focused specifically upon investing in or purchasing patents and been rather open about it. In fact, he and Microsoft have invested in the same companies (despite claims of animosity). The danger of trying to out-invent them is hearing the spooky voice of a landshark saying one word, over & over: " Farnsworth ".
This just in: Bush announces Exit Plan: January 20, 2009.
...I have mod points (same here)... still. Part of the problem is a lot of software, but very little *good* software
." Which side of the room are people going to put themselves in? It's the same with coding. If we were to break it out on a voluntary rating basis, how many people would go to the left and right sides of the room? I'll assert the left side of the room is going to be mighty empty. As you are reading this, do you consider yourself to be on the left or right side? Realistically. If you had to assert your position on the right-hand side, what's your evidence going to be?
I'll one-up you. The major problem isn't there little good software, but very few good software engineers.
Read it in toto before modding it. Thanks.
I've said before [that] 98% of the people in the industry don't belong and usually get a lot of private rants 'n raves when I've said it before[1], so I've reduced it to 95% to provide some leeway for compromise, attempting too make them happy[1]. People think it's fun, they make decent money, it's a challenge, and people direct comments to them as though they ran into John Holmes at Roselawn, Indiana[2]. You da man! All of that put together makes their ego make them take a swing at every ball which comes across the plate.
Code is inflated, buggy, a log of it written via trial & error, and if an actual review were to audit a sizeable fraction of code when prepared to be used, there'd be a lot of rewritten code or better coders who keep their jobs.
The best way to explain it is one of my quotes from a long, long time ago. It's a simple compromise, but if people knew what they were paying for, there would be a lot of unhappy people (and companies) running around:
"In this industry, you don't have to be good, just good enough."
_____________________________________
[1] Now, if you were to fall into the category of good why would you be p%ssed off about the other (larger) percentage? There are a lot of people who get upset when I assert these numbers. But it's like teaching a chess class: "Everyone who is a beginner or non-player go here ; everyone else
[2] When it was intact and he was alive. I'm trusting I shouldn't have to explain either of these, but that's what Google and Wikipedia are for.
Author! Author!
Wiki Indianapolis (IN), Carmel (IN), Fishers, (IN); the final one is where I'm at -- and it's still a town, so we have a town council, not a mayor. We bought our house eighteen years ago with a population of 7'500 people. Fishers is growing so fast it paid for a special census in 2003 and is having another one this fall (estimated count: 60'000-63'000). The '03 one ended up with the state paying another $2M/year. I could go on & on about the resources available regarding sports, etc., but all should be worth finding in a few minutes vis Wiki or Google. I wonder why Final Four tournaments (for both genders) are held here if we're a backwater location? The same goes for pre-Olympic trials for track & field and water sports. the Indy 500, a F1 race, the Brickyard 400 NASCAR this weekend. You can walk the streets at night in Indy. Conventions produce a heavy use for the convention center and the new dome will be done within the next 2-2.5 years, then a new convention center will replace both existing buildings. You can walk in Fishers or Carmel. There's also something known as the "Monon" which is likely to be 25-30 miles long by now, running from the south of Indy all of the way to the regions of Fishers|Carmel and about 20-25 feet wide and paved. They've had to slow people down a bit because the usage volume has grown so high. You'd be surprised to see how many contraptions people have found to use the Monon to get exercise.
My mom teaches 3rd grade 2 hours north of hear and said the teachers up there think the suburbs are reputed to be a bunch of rich kids. "Would you rather teach at inner-city schools?" "No." Her students come from farming communities. I could write a ton, but it either oversells those convinced or will fall on deaf ears. Oh, generally for all directions of a clock, there's an interstate road passing through Indy.
The question isn't "what can we do?" but "what can't we do?" (say, what is there for families?) You'll burn out trying to do everything.
We do have all four seasons. And it's obvious which season is in effect.
The only thing we don't have is downhill skiing. But good places to do that aren't that far away.
They may be the hardest hit, but they won't need us (men) for long.
_____________________________
Those who don't read
How about bad in the way the June '6 issue of Discover (Are We Trapped On Earth: Why Cosmic Rays Could Prevent Us From Leaving ?
They cover a lot of cosmic issues in that article.
Few civ-science materials provide why a craft has to be bigger than Pamella Anderson's breasts to get there (Mars). My solution has always been launching multiple oassis types of craft which would be available to make a swap of resources along the way.
The primary issue which Discover (et al) has [covered in the [past] is what the minimal space to humans is required to avoid the inevitatable clustraphobia.
I haven't seen as much coverage in Scientific American or MIT's Technology Review.
Sort of.
People were getting sick and those who attended to them -- the equivalent of today's physicians, got sick and croaked. The next group, taking mercy on the sick (nuns and priests) became sick and croaked. The Pope then proclaimed a pilgrimage for a massive trip to show God their unity & support. Boom!. Congregate everyone and|or healthy in one spot. 90% of those who started the journey didn't make it home.
Eventually, those who were still alive realized where the rats were, people got sick. Kill the rats, people stayed will.
It wasn't government that cut pollutions
I beg to differ. Look at the US. Limits are set re: maximum production, based upon size, production, etc., but in the form of how much can be generated. The big companies then purchase the unused chits from the smaller companies as there are many small companies which aren't consuming their quota and it's extra income.
Now, who is permitting that to occur? It's not Grandma Rose living down the street.
Oooooo. This reminds me of something funny (but true), which I don't want to bury anywhere.
(this was in the Chicago Tribune at the time)
When Canada raised their cigarette tax to some ungodly level, it took months for anyone to catch onto this but a US farmer would somehow be traveling a bit too far beyond his boundar(y|ies) lines, stop for a few minutes to stretch & take a break, then after some time, returning to his field. Later, a Canadian farmer would go a bit too far over his boundar(y|ies) stop & stretch, then resume his work. There were times where the locations were random, etc.
As it turned out (and you can surmise), the American farmer was dropping a load of cigarettes on the American|Canadian side and the Canadian Farmer was picking them up. There were times where they might not pick everything on a single run (if at all), should they think someone was watching them.
I don't remember all of the other details, including how they heard about it and finally tracked it down, but it was still idea.
This was happening a lot, but it makes me wonder who would rat on a rather cool hack like that one.
When I was doing weekly commutes[1], I saw my first exposure to tobacco hanging in huge drying sheds in Kentucky. I always wondered why someone didn't make one large, singleton run of tobacco.
__________________________________
[1] Dice.com, CareerBuilder, Monster tend to look at traveling as a yes/no or a percentage value. I've tried to push the concept of "weekly commute" as anyone who hears the term immediately knows what it means and it would make sorting jobs out but it seems to be falling on deaf ears.
Not to mention people persist via referring to common sense.
I don't want common sense. I want good sense
Laws that restrict game play are unconstitutional
(I don't care if they rope them away from the other games the way they do booze or magazines). As long as they don't control the manufacture or distribution for adults, it's fine by me.
Yet they remain challenged and challenged again. It pops up most frequently when there's a campaign underway and someone needs some free press. Elect me, I'll stop it. Right. They're going to define legislation.
The last time some moron tried something like that locally, it was before Bob & Tom went into syndication. A certain attorney had announced his intention to run. The day after that, he went after Bob & Tom and how profane it was for kids to hear B&T to be broadcast on school busses. The day following day, Bob & Tom had an impromptu party in his (work) office's parking lot. Lots of swastikas & megaphones + other, assorted noises.
Think FM near the end of the movie. The cops basically showed up and begged for a graceful shutdown at the end of the broadcast.
What the moron failed to do, yet others pointed out: if you don't want your kids to hear it on the bus, go to the school board and get another station assigned. It's like George Carlin used to point out: There are two dials on: one to turn it off, the other to change the channel.
The guy has tried to run several times but there's not even mention of it in any media.
I suppose someone could claim it's akin to a near miss with two aircraft, or when a movie or tv states up front The names of the innocent have been changed to protect the innocent. The innocent don't need protection. The guilty do.
Municipal or not, they still have rules which they must follow. And I'm guessing they don't keep up with all of them. 20-25 years ago, they tried (locally) to use a T -shaped turn to make approaching the the (from the left, above) the same (topolicoloy) as a "right turn on red". The cops weren't current on it and whilst I had to go spend a lot of time in court to support my case (but I service my clients at night and did my soccer workouts for college)as I had time, the po-lice had to send a lot of officers in court to defend the policy at the risk of showing an extremely low success late.[1]
The two times when I had to deal with one officer was when I was on foot to go to where my mom taught grade school and saw the driver slip into the intersection, causing three cars to become involved. As an EMT, I had to invoke triage and took the original driver, who had a broken neck (C3). I had fully uniformed officer grab me from behind and make some gestures as well as remarks about "kids....accidents" I tossed him my wallet with my licess prominently visible when enough equipment arrived, I walked up to him, got his name, badge number, etc. And I told him to prepare for a discussion with someone higher up than he was.
The next day, I got a call from the Captain of the Po-lice and wanted to know if I was still serious and would make good on assault and kidnapping (the patient was in my care and he interfered. We could do the paperwork and put it into his jacket or file it in court and have it filed in his jacked. Either way, he was going to get a dry ream. The Chief and the officer pled with me to let him go. "If I let him go and everyone else let them go (e.g. driving 15 over the speed limit), there'd be nothing to keep them in line." I gave him a choice. He chose the Chief's writeup because it would only be in one location - not in court & jacket, but only in the jacket.
It turned out this guy had a problem with tossing his weight around and was removed from the force about six months later. I ran into the Chief one day (who was laying pipe with the emergency director during off hours) and pointed out I wasn't as dumb as I appeared.
Another, quick SCOTUS story: SCOTUS ruled in either the most recent session or the session before that that the cops may have announce themselves before they kick in the door, but don't have to announce, wait, then kick the door in, which would present the potential of evidence being destroyed. So it's announce, kick, and apprehend.
There are a few tradeoffs at play here.
If there are solutions to a particular problem and there's something which must be obtained to solve a problem, those being locked out casually can be held up as a reason to get the rules dropped.
About twenty years ago, they hired a procedures, products, and auditing responsibility. (read that: generate stupid rules & regulations for a group of fifty or sixty people)
Even the systerms programmers/tech support people were bound as well. My tactic was simple. Make about fifty copies, hang them on the cube wall alonog with the auditor's doctrines. This also a change from the hospital's hire/fire polic(y,ies), which was two written reprimands, two verbal, then you get tossed. We used to joke you could jump a nun in the dining commons, have it used as evidence and you'd keep your job.
Back to point.
The HR polic was one written, one verbal, then they'd kick you to the curb. They had a list of specific things which must or must not be done, etc. They forgot to CYA: what happens when someone's out sick or unreachable? And the simplest part of the mores was don't do anything which affects more than one person. Whenever came to me for something to be done, I'd point to the policy procedures, and give them a copy of the note and tell them to come back when things are in proper order.
Only two of us would make firm bids (without giving away our methodology): my partner in crime said he'd kill it by the EOD, I said before lunch.
If The Man wants my cell phone and pager numbers which I'm paying for i.e.out of my bocket; e.g. for a child to reach me, then said Man better be coughing up a share of the bill...and not prorated upon usage. If every service did only usage, there'd be some financial difficulties in the business world.
By the same token, people working in The Man's Offce better understand when you are on vacation, "you got hit by a bus." i.e. You aren't there and they move forward.
. So many people are friggin' afraid & neurotic not providing the extra communication (in general) and contact (vacations) that the office will find they're not needed, after thirty years, I've never seen someone canned for refusing to share personal info).
It's the embryolic stem cells which has the various parties frothing at the mouth because specific types could be generated for the purpose of research and not as for the purpose of life. Otherwise, they could wear out their current strains. Preventing the gov'ts funding don't stop the research, it will only slow it down.
This is why a couple of families (and many, many TV plotlines) have had an additional child which they're hoping will be a better donor for whatever the issue is.
The other popular service being provided is umbrylic freezing so you can be your own donor, where I know people to begin the process of freezing their offsprings' cords and creating an autologous blood bank should they need something to be available and not worry about getting infected (e.g, Hep D, and E haven't been discussed and Hep C wasn't discussed [at all until The Amazing Plastic Woman got it].
Scientific American, issue prior to than the current one (chess boards), has a big story re: do stem cells cause cancer.
It turns out to be the July '06 issue and the article is online (free): here
If that link breaks, go to sciam.com, and follow the yellow brick road.
It's got a few suggestions for additional reading. I've read a couple of them before and they're good reading, but slow at times.
As I've said before, Microsoft's biggest resources are Huey, Dewey and Louie (Marketing, PR, and Sales).
They have two tasks before them right now: Vista. That seems like one, but it's two. First, there's the standard upgrades and new machine purchased as well as any corporate issues. Secondly, and far more importantly, they're going to try and pry corporations from sitting pat. There's a lot of corporate licenses which are still running Win2K, both server and terminal, Visual Studio 6 (+SP6), SQL 2000, etc. The number of surprises are minimal, the cost inconsequential; in essence, their TCO is just about as inexpensive as it can be.
In order to upgrade from that position, they'd have to pay for a lot of upgrades - hardware, software, people, general support, yadda yadda.
Back to point.
Microsoft has tried this before: When DOS was the base and Windows was the "OS/2" (tongue in cheek) running on OS/2, MS-DOS, IBM-DOS, etc. There were allegations against Microsoft because Windows would only run on MS-DOS. Windows wouldn't run on any other DOS executables and those with problems were directed to purchase Windows, then call back if they had problems after that. That gave them some very short call-times for that group of supporters. Think of the old joke re: "Infinite Storeage" which amounted to "Write Only DASD". If you tried to read from it, smoke and problems would be make to the support and be queried: "You didn't read from it, did you?"."Oh,no. You can't do that. It's Write Only."
If you go back through the court documentation, the issue of what GUI would run upon which DOS product. The discussion generally went along the lines of, "Only if you can do without errors - there cannot be any errors which are produced because of the incompatibility." IFF (for the non-math people, IFF means "If and only if")
1. Juice you say?
How many bags of flour do you need to find the wet spot?
2. Vista will be like Viagra[1] (aside from a simple spelling difference:
-- stay up for a few hours
in fact, you're supposed to call for assistance if it stays up more than four hours.
-- screw up everything it touches
, -- care to add more?
And finally, anyone remember this little ditty from Boy Scout Camp?
Leader - Flee!
Response - Flee!
Leader - Flee, fly!
Response - Flee, fly!
Leader - Flee, fly, flo!
Response - Flee, fly, flo!
Leader - Vista!
Response - Vista!
Leader - Coom a la, coom a la, coom a la vista.
Response - Coom a la, coom a la, coom a la vista.
Leader - No, no, no, no not the vista.
Response - No, no, no, no not the vista.
Leader - Eenie meenie, dessameenie, ooh wah a wah a meenie.
Response - Eenie meenie, dessameenie, ooh wah a wah a meenie.
Leader - Ex a meenie, zoh la meenie, ooh wah a wah.
Response - Ex a meenie, zoh la meenie, ooh wah a wah.
Leader - Bee bidilie oh doe, boe doe, bah deeten dahten, shh.
Response - Bee bidilie oh doe, boe doe, bah deeten dahten, shh.
Like this?
What cracks me up it seeing "spoilers" below, but within view, as though one is supposed to skim past some undefined period of time.
Has anyone failed to remember ROT13? If Wiki* had a ROT13 control, you could click it and see plaintext, clicked again, return to the original material.
sigh.
p.s.
I'll believe the singularity when I start seeing "All your base are belong to us" and yanking power plug doesn't faze it.
After the bubble broke and a lot of management thought they could save money by going over-shoring[1], management knew they still had to find some warm bodies locally. So they added water to the equation and all of the boats would rise. Added water as in effort poured into the body of water. You will generally find people who have director and VP in their titles (and not with seven or eight people in the company) doing hands-on. Directors generally have to be power users of Excel and Access. VPs aren't required to be quite as expensive, tool-wise.
The bottom line of this is the higher the leven of people a company has writing code, the smaller the number of people they have to hire, even if you have enough chimps sitting at enough keyboards.
____________________________________
[1] I've learned by experience, off-shoring is good if you aren't ever going to be managing the [source] code once you get it back. The quality code is generally illegable to anyone except to those who wrote it. It reminds me of the people who wrote code, then passed what they had thru file editors and changed COBOL variable names from "ADD CUSTOMER-WEEKLY-SALES TO CUSTOMER-CURRENT-TOTAL-SALES". to "ADD a3rafas TO awdfasdva-afws-Tasdffgas". i.e., obfuscated code guaranteeing job security. No, it's not apocryphal. I encountered this numerous times with my high school and college clients 20-25 years ago and writing the code to parse the variables proved to be quite a handy tool.
It's definitely going to be one of those positive situations where software is doctored to perform particularly well [when combinations are involved].
I don't see how the initial poster with this thread's title could manage to list all of the non-conformists and would have to continually keep it current, no how matter how many people are at play at any time.
The shorter list, however, would be to maintain a list of those who have white hats (good guys). It's then easier for people to browse and more elite. If a company wants to be on the [short] list, it's obvious what they need to be done to get onto and remain on the list.
If someone's not on the list & complains about it, they can also be put on an alternative list for grievances & the outcome of them?
Summary: If you've got 1'000 items which deal with one subject, wouldn't it be easier to list whichever one is shorter than the longes?
(or provide users a choice of the two [lists])
Persons, houses, papers, and effects all may contain the truth in facts and statements. The Constitution explicitly gives you the right to hide these truths from the government. In order to learn these truths, the government must get a warrant based on probable cause
But...The SCOTUS [1] did rule on a case within the previous two sessions dealing with how long they have to give you to hide things even when they do have a warrant. Traditionally, it was thought to be a polite situation -- they knock, announce themselves, give appropriate time to answer the door, and if that elapses, get the battering ram out and create a hole where the door used to be. IIRC, the police in one particular case were a bit less patient and made a cop-shaped hole in the door to get inside in rather short order (sine an announcement). The argument was over the degree of politeness they had to perform [first]. I believe the ruling was the police were permitted to take the door out first, and introduce themselves after the situation was secured. i.e., no more giving them time to flush the joint down the toilet.
(am I remembering this correctly?)
________________________
[1] As we have people asking questions about the US gov't in general, SCOTUS == Supreme Court Of The United States.
And if someone declares "Grammar Nazi!", just remember two things, equally important:
1. They're invoking Godwin's Law. Conceding an argument on their second post?
2. Declarations of "Grammar Nazi!" against those who point out glaring spelling, punctuation, and grammar errors are generally made by Grammar Idiots.
I love the Grocer's Apostrophe (add 's to anything to make it plural). I passed a pool hall the other day (Chalkies). It's smokeless! It's where the Black Widow hangs out when she's at home between tournaments. One of the advertisements in the window involved scheduling "Party's". What's just as bad is when people make any unfamiliar word an acronym (all uppercase).
(I propose "The Ignoramus' Acronym".)
No, this isn't flamebait. It's an ongoing examination of those who can write and those who cannot, and the excuses the latter use when they aren't being defensive.
Microsoft's penchant for proprietary systems have changed...partially. They received a patent for Microsoft Office Documents' XML format(s).
As I've pointed [here] out before (many times):
that permits everyone to use it, but permits Microsoft to panic and decide to enforce it - *poof*!
That also means they could permit everyone to read it, but only those who are licensed to write that format. If a business is running multiple document formats, they'd be able to read MS Office, but not write it. This could prove some real problems for companies, both internally and in communication with other firms.
Windows isn't their lifeblood any more. MS Office represents 1/3 of their revenue and a goodly portion of their profit. That sacred cow is going to be protected unless|until something else supplants it as a stream of money.
(please read everything before modding it. I'm tired of being modded because someone reads out of context - with incomplete info
There are one or two who have claimed to see the light and give up the ghost.
What's said is most of the spam isn't coming from people connecting to Russia or China and zapping it back here, but within the US. This is because there are still plenty of ISPs who are willing to harbor spammers because they are easy money. In fact, they likely can charge the spammers more in order to remain "protected", regardless of what the TOS might say. Little side deals (pink contracts). And some of the ISPs -- high enough up the food chain -- really just don't give a rat's ass what goes on, as long as the money flows.
The 2003 U-CAN-SPAM act was written by the DMA (Direct Marketing Association) who claimed to be "anti spam" and Congress largely believed them. The unfortunate thing is the DMA's definition of spam is|was a lot different than everyone else's. Why did they do it? Jerry Cerasale (VP) said, "we don't believe an opt-in requirement provides a viable economic model." translated: if you can't guarantee our ability to make money, we will fight it tooth & nail. Requiring Confirmed Opt-in (what spammers and ignorant people calll "double opt-in") would have made them pop a vein.
What's sick is are all of the spam messages which have a tiny little graphic (or text in lieu of) down in the lower right-hand corner stating their U-CAN SPAM compliance. This would mean: proper headers, a relevant subject, a legitimate snailmail address, and a legitimate, working opt-out address. Oh, you can harvest email addresses, but you can't send to those harvested addresses. The number of bulkers who send email messages which comply with this (and things which don't come to mind) can be counted on one, perhaps two hands. I had one where examination of their sh%tty IIS setup revealed two text files, both of which said you were being removed from the system. What was displayed was an IIS error and a reference to the file where a quick hack of the site revealed they had no intention of making things do what they are supposed to. Why did the DMA do what they did? To give everyone who wants to send permission, and (more importantly) to get rid of state laws, under the pretense they couldn't keep track of which addresses resided in which state and they were tired of being sued. U-CAN-SPAM wiped out the existing state laws with no grandfathering.
Ronnie Scelson, who likes to parade himself as a king of spam, but not as loudly as Alan Ralsky, former
If you were to quiz certain groups re: who can go after spammers, you'd likely be told it's a Federal thing: the FBI, FTC, Justice Dept, etc. What's being over looked are two other parties: SAGs (State Attorneys General) and ISPs. The only SAG I've heard earn a reputation for pursuits, let alone success is NY. The only ISPs have been AOL. Microsoft has put their landsharks to work, but Microsoft themselves harbor spammers on Hotmail and refuse to do anything about it, let alone spamvertised sites on bCentral. You'd think the standard ISP would go after them in order to show a success rate and separate themselves from their primary [local] competitors. All things being equal, if you had a choice between two ISPs but one goes after spammers, which would you choose? I know people who have created an ISP by providing a service to a single client and pursued spammers,