OK, I'd get a call from the secret service, they'll make sure I was joking and that's that. In the actual incident, the ``secret service'' would probably be the school administration, since it is they who are protecting the teacher. They'd realize that that the kid was joking and leave it at that. But that didn't happen, did it?
Right, but I'm saying that I do not think that such an IM icon constitutes a threat. A threat would be literally coming up and threatening him, and not posting a picture of him getting killed.
He did not threaten the teacher. He did not come up to him and tell him that he will kill him. He showed no acts of violence towards him. He, from his own home, made an IM icon of his teacher getting shot with an accompanying caption.
Would I get arrested/suspended for posting a similar picture with Bush? No, and neither should the kid.
I am confused. This was not a death threat. He did not come to the teacher and say, ``I am going to kill you''. He posted, from his own home, a picture of his teacher being shot, with an accompanying caption. It is immoral and sick, sure, but how is it illegal? If I say, Kill Bush, with an accompanying icon, would I get arrested? I don't think so.
Furthermore, a psychologist and the local sherrif dissmissed the claims. Am I missing something here?
Seriously, they are really not that expensive. Dell has brand new notebooks starting at $499. eBay has more and cheaper. Seriously, you could easily get a decent compy and install GNU/Linux on it for $300-$400.
Still, does it really matter if the method is illegal or just what you use the method for? The whole point is to access forbidden content, after all.
No, it is an important distinction. For example, my family (which comes from Soviet Russia) kept a lot of illegal books. There were people whose job was to get illegal books into the country, usually from the US. People who got these books in were (usually) in less trouble than those who read them. It is far more difficult to track, in this case, who reads the material than who can get access to it.
I am neither a lawyer nor a Chinese resident, so I am not sure, but I don't think that it is illegal. If someone in China wants to connect to a server in the USA, and that server happened to be told to ignore reset packets from China, then that can't be illegal. If a Chinese citizen's computer just happened to be configured to ignore reset packets, then I doubt that it will be illegal. Having said that, actually looking at forbidden content is probably illegal.
Having said that, not trusting your sysadmin will also get you in a lot of trouble in that you will be unable to use any computer of which you are not the administrator.
A similar thing has happened to me, albeit not as seriously. Just use cold, hard logic. Do not let emotions get the best of you. Reason it out, you know this, you've been studying this for months, you have done countless other problems like it.
Instead of looking at the whole assignment as a problem, break it up into more manageable ones. Chances are you know something, or else you probably would not have enjoyed the class. Try to identify which part is giving you trouble and reason it out.
The title of this article is ``Copying with Exam *Panic* Attacks?''. If you are panicking because you are afraid that you will fail, reason it out: if you walk out, you are sure to fail. You miss 100% of the shots you don't take, and all that.
Seriously, just relax. Think of it logically, and you will be fine.
See, this is the problem: when a customer calls, they do not talk to the person who wrote the script, but to the CSR. It is the CSR who annoys the person, even if he has no choice in the matter, and so the customer gets annoyed at the CSR. It sucks to be the CSR, but to be honest, no one put a gun to his head and said ``You have to go work at AOL and be a jackass to customers.'' He did it himself.
No, you do not understand, he was not unprepared. He just wanted to find out about pricing, especially since Comcast keeps adding strange trials, discounts, etc. He never said that he was ready to order.
The fact that companies are able to get away with this sort of thing is ridiculous. Seriously, it ought to be illegal.
I actually heard somewhere that if you call, identify yourself and your account, say, ``Cancel the account'' and hang up, they can't do anything about it and must cancel it. I do not know myself. Does anyone else?
A similar thing has actually happened with my friend, albeit with Comcast and with signing up as opposed to cancelling. He called to ask about prices and the exact product. After the lady told it to him, he asked her to wait a few minutes and asked a family member about purchasing. The family member told him that he was busy and to call Comcast back later. After my friend told this to the lady, her response was ``Well... what if I gave you another five minutes, will you be done then?'' He responded that he will not. Her answer was ``But I don't understand! It's so easy! I'm giving you five minutes...'' At this point, my friend completely lost it, and screamed ``I don't bloody care whether or not you understand it! I will call back later!'' and hung up.
That's right. In fact, the title of the article, although it grabs your attention immediately, is very wrong. He is just not going to do as much actual work, but he is still chairman.
Oh, and a note to those that are saying that we can't make fun of him anymore: we still can, because he *started* microsoft. What will we do when he dies? We will still make fun of him!
1) How many CD's there are 2) How often you expect to use them
If there are many CD's, your choices are either thich jewel cases or the circular stacks with the pole in the middle, that come with a bunch of CD's. If you expect to look through them, you should buy the thick jewel cases (or a binder, actually). If you do not, storing them on the large circular things is great, because it does not take up too much space. Essentially, if you want to have it, *just in case*, go with the smallest, least obtrusive method. If you want to use them, then go with something that is easy to look through.
Having said that, I suggest you stop using CD's. Buy a large USB disk, create a backup directory with a bunch of subdirectories, and use that instead. Or even buy an external hard drive for backups. If it's really that important to you, it's worth the cost. Also, consider backing up over a network to another server, as opposed to physical media (or along with physical media).
There is a world of difference between him maintaining the server and between him using it. I am arguing that the school has no right to threaten his maintaining of the server. They can prohibit him from using it, but that's different.
The question is not whether or not the school can block the website. They have full right to do that, and this is largely not disputed. What *is* disputed, is whether or not they can threaten him for running the proxy while not in school. The anwer is no, as far as I know, because he runs it outside of the school's power. Thus, while he is outside of the school's power, the fact that he is a student is irrelevant. It would be the same as them threatening a random person who has nothing to do with the school, but who runs a proxy server.
I do not think that they can keep him for graduating due to running a proxy server outside of school. They have no control there. What they can do is make an ammendment to their Acceptable Network Use Policy, saying that you cannot run proxy servers, and make everybody sign them.
Yes, but the question is not whether or not the school can block the proxy server. It is whether or not they can threaten him for not taking it down. I say no, because (I'm assuming) he did it someplace outside of the school's reach.
As far as I know, the school can decide what network traffic is allowed within their own network. They can block whatever they want, and they can punish people for breaking the policy for using the network. Thus (as someone else mentioned), if they are downloading pr0n, even using a proxy, they are still downloading pr0n.
However, it seems to me that the issue is that the school does not want the kid to have the proxy, period. Assuming he set it up and maintains it outside of school, they have no right to do that. They can punish him for using it, and they can punish others for using it, but they cannot punish him for keeping it.
My personal suggestion is to ignore the threats for a while. The school knows perfectly well that they can't do what they're doing, but they're hoping that the kid does not. Wait until graduation time is too close for comfort. If they are still serious, then sue them. Or at least threaten to sue them. There is no way that they can win.
Computer literacy isapplicable in a particular field. For business, it is how to work your way around Windows, for a developer or sysadmin, around UNIX, BSD, or GNU/Linux, etc.
What you mentioned is more for the average user, and I would add some more stuff to it (word processing, web browsing, email, etc.)
but at least my pages will look OK in whatever popular browser I use for testing.
Exactly. Not everyone uses the ``popular browser''. The popular browser, at the moment is IE. I, and many others are using Firefox. Now, both I.E. and Firefox generally handle errors quite well. But other browsers often don't.
Do you remember the old buttons on web pages from the nineties -- the ones that said something like ``Best viewed with Internet Explorer''? This is what you're doing. Do you really think people are going to switch their browser just for you?
The one thing that gets me is people using divs when they should use tables. Divs have not deprecated. For all the grail hunters, you are being duped... tables is the only true solution.
I am not sure if you are being sarcastic, and I hope to God that you are, but just in case:
No one is saying that we should do away with tables. The thing is, that some people use tables for the entire layout of their website, and not just for when actual table data is needed. divs and float work better when you want a picture to the left of a heading. That is not a table. Not only is it ugly, and difficult to maintain, it loses its semantic meaning becuse it is *not* a table.
1) If developers start using standards, Microsoft will support them 2) ACID 2 uses some very fancy CSS to confuse browsers 3) Just make sure your pages are valid, you don't have to trick anyone.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, I'd get a call from the secret service, they'll make sure I was joking and that's that. In the actual incident, the ``secret service'' would probably be the school administration, since it is they who are protecting the teacher. They'd realize that that the kid was joking and leave it at that. But that didn't happen, did it?
Right, but I'm saying that I do not think that such an IM icon constitutes a threat. A threat would be literally coming up and threatening him, and not posting a picture of him getting killed.
He did not threaten the teacher. He did not come up to him and tell him that he will kill him. He showed no acts of violence towards him. He, from his own home, made an IM icon of his teacher getting shot with an accompanying caption.
Would I get arrested/suspended for posting a similar picture with Bush? No, and neither should the kid.
I am confused. This was not a death threat. He did not come to the teacher and say, ``I am going to kill you''. He posted, from his own home, a picture of his teacher being shot, with an accompanying caption. It is immoral and sick, sure, but how is it illegal? If I say, Kill Bush, with an accompanying icon, would I get arrested? I don't think so.
Furthermore, a psychologist and the local sherrif dissmissed the claims. Am I missing something here?
Seriously, they are really not that expensive. Dell has brand new notebooks starting at $499. eBay has more and cheaper. Seriously, you could easily get a decent compy and install GNU/Linux on it for $300-$400.
No, it is an important distinction. For example, my family (which comes from Soviet Russia) kept a lot of illegal books. There were people whose job was to get illegal books into the country, usually from the US. People who got these books in were (usually) in less trouble than those who read them. It is far more difficult to track, in this case, who reads the material than who can get access to it.
I am neither a lawyer nor a Chinese resident, so I am not sure, but I don't think that it is illegal. If someone in China wants to connect to a server in the USA, and that server happened to be told to ignore reset packets from China, then that can't be illegal. If a Chinese citizen's computer just happened to be configured to ignore reset packets, then I doubt that it will be illegal. Having said that, actually looking at forbidden content is probably illegal.
That reasoning can get you in a lot of trouble. http://www.theregister.co.uk/odds/bofh/ is an example that comes to mind.
Having said that, not trusting your sysadmin will also get you in a lot of trouble in that you will be unable to use any computer of which you are not the administrator.
A similar thing has happened to me, albeit not as seriously. Just use cold, hard logic. Do not let emotions get the best of you. Reason it out, you know this, you've been studying this for months, you have done countless other problems like it.
Instead of looking at the whole assignment as a problem, break it up into more manageable ones. Chances are you know something, or else you probably would not have enjoyed the class. Try to identify which part is giving you trouble and reason it out.
The title of this article is ``Copying with Exam *Panic* Attacks?''. If you are panicking because you are afraid that you will fail, reason it out: if you walk out, you are sure to fail. You miss 100% of the shots you don't take, and all that.
Seriously, just relax. Think of it logically, and you will be fine.
See, this is the problem: when a customer calls, they do not talk to the person who wrote the script, but to the CSR. It is the CSR who annoys the person, even if he has no choice in the matter, and so the customer gets annoyed at the CSR. It sucks to be the CSR, but to be honest, no one put a gun to his head and said ``You have to go work at AOL and be a jackass to customers.'' He did it himself.
No, you do not understand, he was not unprepared. He just wanted to find out about pricing, especially since Comcast keeps adding strange trials, discounts, etc. He never said that he was ready to order.
The fact that companies are able to get away with this sort of thing is ridiculous. Seriously, it ought to be illegal.
I actually heard somewhere that if you call, identify yourself and your account, say, ``Cancel the account'' and hang up, they can't do anything about it and must cancel it. I do not know myself. Does anyone else?
A similar thing has actually happened with my friend, albeit with Comcast and with signing up as opposed to cancelling. He called to ask about prices and the exact product. After the lady told it to him, he asked her to wait a few minutes and asked a family member about purchasing. The family member told him that he was busy and to call Comcast back later. After my friend told this to the lady, her response was ``Well... what if I gave you another five minutes, will you be done then?'' He responded that he will not. Her answer was ``But I don't understand! It's so easy! I'm giving you five minutes...'' At this point, my friend completely lost it, and screamed ``I don't bloody care whether or not you understand it! I will call back later!'' and hung up.
(I know, I know, I will get ``offtopic'' for this as well)
Nothing more pathetic than a FirstPost, that isn't anywhere near first.
That's right. In fact, the title of the article, although it grabs your attention immediately, is very wrong. He is just not going to do as much actual work, but he is still chairman.
Oh, and a note to those that are saying that we can't make fun of him anymore: we still can, because he *started* microsoft. What will we do when he dies? We will still make fun of him!
It depends on two factors:
1) How many CD's there are
2) How often you expect to use them
If there are many CD's, your choices are either thich jewel cases or the circular stacks with the pole in the middle, that come with a bunch of CD's. If you expect to look through them, you should buy the thick jewel cases (or a binder, actually). If you do not, storing them on the large circular things is great, because it does not take up too much space. Essentially, if you want to have it, *just in case*, go with the smallest, least obtrusive method. If you want to use them, then go with something that is easy to look through.
Having said that, I suggest you stop using CD's. Buy a large USB disk, create a backup directory with a bunch of subdirectories, and use that instead. Or even buy an external hard drive for backups. If it's really that important to you, it's worth the cost. Also, consider backing up over a network to another server, as opposed to physical media (or along with physical media).
There is a world of difference between him maintaining the server and between him using it. I am arguing that the school has no right to threaten his maintaining of the server. They can prohibit him from using it, but that's different.
The question is not whether or not the school can block the website. They have full right to do that, and this is largely not disputed. What *is* disputed, is whether or not they can threaten him for running the proxy while not in school. The anwer is no, as far as I know, because he runs it outside of the school's power. Thus, while he is outside of the school's power, the fact that he is a student is irrelevant. It would be the same as them threatening a random person who has nothing to do with the school, but who runs a proxy server.
I do not think that they can keep him for graduating due to running a proxy server outside of school. They have no control there. What they can do is make an ammendment to their Acceptable Network Use Policy, saying that you cannot run proxy servers, and make everybody sign them.
Yes, but the question is not whether or not the school can block the proxy server. It is whether or not they can threaten him for not taking it down. I say no, because (I'm assuming) he did it someplace outside of the school's reach.
As far as I know, the school can decide what network traffic is allowed within their own network. They can block whatever they want, and they can punish people for breaking the policy for using the network. Thus (as someone else mentioned), if they are downloading pr0n, even using a proxy, they are still downloading pr0n.
However, it seems to me that the issue is that the school does not want the kid to have the proxy, period. Assuming he set it up and maintains it outside of school, they have no right to do that. They can punish him for using it, and they can punish others for using it, but they cannot punish him for keeping it.
My personal suggestion is to ignore the threats for a while. The school knows perfectly well that they can't do what they're doing, but they're hoping that the kid does not. Wait until graduation time is too close for comfort. If they are still serious, then sue them. Or at least threaten to sue them. There is no way that they can win.
Are you serious? Who rated parent ``Insightfull''? It was so obviously a joke...
Not really...
Computer literacy isapplicable in a particular field. For business, it is how to work your way around Windows, for a developer or sysadmin, around UNIX, BSD, or GNU/Linux, etc.
What you mentioned is more for the average user, and I would add some more stuff to it (word processing, web browsing, email, etc.)
Exactly. Not everyone uses the ``popular browser''. The popular browser, at the moment is IE. I, and many others are using Firefox. Now, both I.E. and Firefox generally handle errors quite well. But other browsers often don't.
Do you remember the old buttons on web pages from the nineties -- the ones that said something like ``Best viewed with Internet Explorer''? This is what you're doing. Do you really think people are going to switch their browser just for you?
I am not sure if you are being sarcastic, and I hope to God that you are, but just in case:
No one is saying that we should do away with tables. The thing is, that some people use tables for the entire layout of their website, and not just for when actual table data is needed. divs and float work better when you want a picture to the left of a heading. That is not a table. Not only is it ugly, and difficult to maintain, it loses its semantic meaning becuse it is *not* a table.
Exactly. I don't see why a browser should handle wrong code properly.
1) If developers start using standards, Microsoft will support them
2) ACID 2 uses some very fancy CSS to confuse browsers
3) Just make sure your pages are valid, you don't have to trick anyone.