Do you want your airplane pilot looking up what the trim settings, or throttle settings are on the plane when he is landing? Do you want your surgeon having to look up where the sciatic or femoral nerve is in the middle of your hip replacement?
Of course not, but I'd rather have the surgeon set reminders about his Mom's birthday rather than have a sudden realization he needs to send her flowers during my operation.
Secondly, (and on a more serious note) most of what you are discussion isn't fact memorization but more or less pattern recognition. As in a Taxi driver remembers streets by visualization rather than remembering English words in a set pattern of directions.
Both the pilot and surgeon see there instruments and results and have sort of zen moments in which they simply know that it is right or wrong. Almost like natural instincts or reflexes due to the course work and hands on training.
I mean... Would you trust a surgeon who hasn't practiced on a cadaver but simply read a book? How about a pilot who has never flown a flight sim much less had logged actual flight time and simply sat down in the cockpit for the first time with nothing but memorizations from a hand book.
Of course they do need to study the texts, but again... These particular jobs require a great deal of practice which no memorization can assist you 100% of the job.
Now other professions like lawyers and researchers do need a great deal of memorization but I don't generally have to worry about trusting my lives to them on a daily basis.
Consumers want stuff for free. That does not justify any means of getting it.
Of course not, but morality sometimes has nothing to do with the free market.
A realist will look at things like prohibition, piracy, and the war on drugs and go "Hey, the reason why there is so much crime and a hideous black market was because the market wants those things regardless of morality!"
People want music and they want it as cheap and convenient as possible. Sometimes this means free, but often more than not it just means they want a convenient yet cheap place to download them for a small fee. If the power that be refuse to allow such things through laws and other means, then the market simply creates a black market making the issue a moot point.
It wouldn't be difficult IMO if you had filmed that sequence with Uri Geller to take him to court for damages, and in the case of such a blatantly false claim you could probably get punitive damages for Uri committing perjury in claiming ownership when he in fact he didn't have copyright.
That is great... If you can afford a lawyer or find one nice enough to help you out for free.
Otherwise, copyright cases are very hard to do on your own if you try to pull the offender into small claims court unless you already are a lawyer yourself.
And especially so if the person you are suing gets a lawyer and/or somehow gets the civil suit differed to a higher court or one that has trial by jury in civil suits.
Secondly, many DMCA take down notices are forged as a round about DoS attack. Most service providers won't often verify the sender until they pull the content and force the actual copyright owner to send in a counter take down notice. Of course at that point, only does the service provider see that the email headers were from a bogus hotmail account.
We are talking about pure powered caffeine that has been manufactured in a lab... You won't find it in any stores and if it is used in food or medication process its handled very carefully.
The LD50 of caffeine is 10 grams orally. The lethality depends on the size of the person taking the caffeine. (LD50 refers to the amount of caffeine is takes for a 50% chance of death.)
In cases of extreme overdose, death can result. The median lethal dose (LD50) of caffeine is 192 milligrams per kilogram in rats.[57] The LD50 of caffeine in humans is dependent on weight and individual sensitivity and estimated to be about 150 to 200 milligrams per kilogram of body mass, roughly 80 to 100 cups of coffee for an average adult taken within a limited timeframe that is dependent on half-life. Though achieving lethal dose with caffeine would be exceptionally difficult with regular coffee, there have been reported deaths from overdosing on caffeine pills, with serious symptoms of overdose requiring hospitalization occurring from as little as 2 grams of caffeine
I support Ron Paul, but in general I will argue that where there is no free market, it should be regulated to have one. Otherwise, it is just a controlled economy by a non-governmental entity.
Seeing that telecommunications is by default a monopoly due to barriers of entry, it should be regulated to ensure competition and free market can be perused.
Dude. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to do a whois on my websites and find out who I am. If I really wanted to stay anonymous. I'd post anonymous through a proxy server. Not like there is a North Korean spy stalking me... Then again, my name is so common that someone with my name is on the TSA's do not fly list and I have to prove that I'm not them each time I fly.
It's an effort being undertaken by local, state, and federal law enforcement and security professionals to attempt to protect the public. That is the first and primary goal. There are no ulterior motives that rise to any meaningful level. Let's keep things in some sort of perspective.
If it was your job to protect the people and property of New York City, what kinds of initiatives would you be undertaking? Hint: if your answer is along the lines that it's much better to stomach the errant terrorist attack every now and then rather than take proactive action to attempt to prevent them using whatever means you have at your disposal, you probably won't be in that job for long.
Not to goodwin this, but I have a good metaphor.
You are a train engineer in Germany in 1933. Due to increased demands on the train system you are asked to design a train and help plan out new railways to make the system most efficient as possible in that it can haul more cargo per haul and you design and help develop the train. Its your job and you go about it the best way possible resulting a system that rivals any other nation in terms of cargo hauled.
After the war... You find out that your efficient train lead to the deaths of countless s more concentration camp people.
Aren't you going to feel pretty bad? Given the choice would wish that you didn't do those things? Or are you going to say "It was my job! I don't care!" and call it a day.
I'm not saying our government is even close to Nazi Germany, but sometimes the potential is there for bad things to happen behind the efforts of something that by all means looks like something positive for the majority of citizens until after the fact. The road to hell is paved in good intentions after all.
SSBN's are the chickens of the sea - they run away from the slightest noise in order to stay undetected; the attack boats like to trail them in order to kill them if needed. Unless these new ones are extra quiet they'll be less a strategic threat than a symbol of power.
True, but SSBN are there for strategic reasons and not tactical ones.
To kill one would mean an act of war and as long as its in international waters you can't do anything but track it. Of course if it opened its missile bays off the coast of California, then the proverbial poop is going to hit the fan and someone only has a minute to decide whether or not to attack another nation's ship without an act of war.
So basically, China could sail those things all around surfaced with music playing and acheive the same effect: "We've got first strike capability just like you!"
Though, I'm sure they'll use them to test US reactions and tracking capabilities.
having google maps during the cuban missle crisis or the cold war would've been bad ass...
Check out this one which is about a mile or so from the South side check point of the coastal DMZ.
Thats a building, but its been painted to match the terrain. I suspect they are afraid of DPRK flying around their border. If you scroll through to the north, you can see the trench fences (the last parking lot) and then opposing that the North Korean side. If you keep scrolling west you can follow the trench fence system to the west coast. There are a lot of interesting things such as trenches and border forts and hidden nooks and cranies you can only see from the air.
Profiting from someone else's works seems to be a questionable litmus test when figuring out whether a particular behavior is right.
I would think "Does this cause the other person any harm?" would be better because the fact that the store owner profits off someone else's impede the original person from making a profit? Chances are if they had to pay money to play the song, then they might choose not to play the song. The original person has not been affected either way positively or negatively.
Whereas your speeding example puts others in physical danger and has a clear negative impact on society.
I think the problem with licensing fees is that it only benefits a non-party to the situation and neither benefits the original artist nor the person taking advantage of the prior art. How do they even tell they played the songs a certain amount to make sure the artists are payed proportional to their play time. You can't.
It would make much more sense to deal with the artist directly and make sure they are OK with you using their work or make a deal with them rather than have these middle man organizations who simply exploit both parties.
In truth these middlemen are exploiting the work of others for their own gain. So how about that as an unfairness perception test?
Not only did the licensers harm the shopkeeper they also profited from the work of other artists whom more likely than not will not compensate proportionally.
This has been how it's worked for decades. ASCAP/BMI are assigned the public performance rights to songs, and they can be very thorough about collecting from everybody owes them.
Technically slavery was legal and practiced for centuries. Doesn't mean this policy should stay so.
For example, can this wonderful robot tell the difference between a weaponless pocket thief and a group of boys armed with super-soakers?
To be fair, a real cop would shoot the boys anyways.
Then the thief would get robbed by a thugg who actually had a weapon on the way home from the heist.
But seriously, I don't think the first application of this robot is to have it patrol willy nilly. They'd probably send it in when a real cop wouldn't do when dealing with barricaded suspects.
Do you really want to be in an environment where the first round through your battery pack not only leaves you with a bullet inside you but also sets you on fire/douses you with acid.
Did you not read the warning label?
"WARNING: Do not use battery in lieu of body armor. Do not insert battery in mouth. Do not wear battery under body armor. Do not leave battery in direct sunlight. Do no expose batter to direct gunfire. May result in injury or death!"
Or, maybe quantum determinalism is your point? Though the hypothetical cat would have to employ its understanding of probability...I suppose that is not your point.
Not really, but does consciousness require comprehension? Most likely not since an amoeba probably has some type of consciousness and the fore counts as an observer.
Heck... A video camera probably counts an observer unless of course until a conscious being looks at the tape and only then does the waveform collapse.
But the point I was trying to make is that fate has a great deal to do with situations. What if the batteries spontaneously failed or the cat choked on a hair ball earlier that night because it ate a bird that happened to fly off course from its regular migration route due to weather changes caused by a butterfly flapping its wings on another continent.
Sure you can prepare for things like that, but sometimes you can't help but getting struck by lighting with a clear blue clear sky, having a meteor land on your house, happen to be next to a nuclear bomb going off, or simply having a brain aneurysm for no good apparent reason.
Yes its rare... But they said the Titanic was unsinkable and sometimes Murphy's law happens to favor "worst possible scenarios" simply because it can.
But let me tell you, from my experience, when the job is it's own reward and you hold yourself to your own standards, work life becomes so much easier; No longer are you at the mercy of whatever idiot boss you have this week.
I'd have to argue that even the world's best and rewarding job can be ruined by bad management.
And worst and unforgiving job with evil and hateful customers can be alleviated by a caring and sympathetic management.
Of course its not management's responsibility to by sympathetic, but if they don't want high employer turnover or a disgruntled staff who is a bunch of Wally's then they have to do what what management is supposed to do and manage the social situation.
Happy employees who feel their jobs are worth doing are productive employees and is better for the bottom line.
In fact, the ONLY lessons to be learned from your story are 1) Check your smoke detector batteries, dumbass! 2) Get a cat.
So... What if in universe B you didn't check the batteries because you flipped a coin that came up heads... Or got a dog instead of a cat because you killed the original cat in some sort of weird science experiment.
I hope you never apply for any sysadmin position anywhere, until/unless you lose that kind of attitude.
Quick question? Would anyone seriously go into an interview and say those things? Everyone has dark secrets or disturbing beliefs.
It is just people either are good at covering it up or the other party remains willfully naive because they want to pretend they don't have similar issues too.
I'll admit, that I have no interest in anyones files (porn, music, personal information... its all useless rubbish to me) because maybe my dark secret is just so anti-social it would make anyone uncomfortable to say the least. Heck... then again... its not anything compared to some people though.
Deep down. You've thought horrible things too. Things you can't believe that crossed your mind. If you say that you haven't... Well either you are liar or you aren't human. Its like going through your father's personal things after his funeral and finding some dark history he hid from you all his life. Or maybe your grandmother's death bed confession... Even the sweetest people have done bad things in their life they regret. Of course some of us will go to our graves pretending these things never happened.
That said all humans think bad things... However, its mostly the sociopaths that act on them willfully and the rest of us act in moment of weakness or in good intentions.
Too many people expect their managers to help them with their self-esteem. No one other than yourself should have any hand in that.
Huh. My manager helps with my self esteem. By driving me to drink... Hence, I feel better about myself because I'm drunk.
But seriously, shitty management will make you feel bad about yourself, because they won't recognize you with either respect nor pay.
And good lord knows its hard to get that out of the average customer.
Of course the higher up in the corporate world you go, the more management and customers will spend the time to make your job feel like it is worth doing, but even then if you feel that neither the pay nor customer or management's satisfaction reflects your effort, then you tend to adjust your effort to match the respect the customer and management give you.
Whether this is simply reading Slashdot when you are supposed to be working, actively causing projects to not succeed out of spite and putting the blame on coworkers (it happens), or simply going full hog and committing crimes will depend on the ethics of the person.
Personally, I don't think many of us have any problems with surfing on slashdot because we'd probaly be staring at the wall even if we didn't have an internet connection, but I will have to say it is managment's responsibility to make employees feel like they are needed and useful in their daily jobs.
Even the most highly ethical hard working person will eventually throw their hands up in disgust and start wasting time if their manager doesn't recognize anything they do. Its human nature. People want to be respected and acknowledge that what they do is important.
Some corps go the wrong way and hand out employee appreciation rewards, but in fact all it takes is a manager person to sit the employee down and say "Hey... Your doing a good job!" or "Hey... We need to work on things because I like you but I don't want the higher ups getting rid of you"
So does that mean I could examine every single file on your computer, including your e-mail, passwords, financial data, etc, by saying I'm looking for kiddie-porn?
From my understanding, there have been instances of Geeksquads turning in customers for child porn. Of course... It might have been their desktop background.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you want your airplane pilot looking up what the trim settings, or throttle settings are on the plane when he is landing? Do you want your surgeon having to look up where the sciatic or femoral nerve is in the middle of your hip replacement?
Of course not, but I'd rather have the surgeon set reminders about his Mom's birthday rather than have a sudden realization he needs to send her flowers during my operation.
Secondly, (and on a more serious note) most of what you are discussion isn't fact memorization but more or less pattern recognition. As in a Taxi driver remembers streets by visualization rather than remembering English words in a set pattern of directions.
Both the pilot and surgeon see there instruments and results and have sort of zen moments in which they simply know that it is right or wrong. Almost like natural instincts or reflexes due to the course work and hands on training.
I mean... Would you trust a surgeon who hasn't practiced on a cadaver but simply read a book? How about a pilot who has never flown a flight sim much less had logged actual flight time and simply sat down in the cockpit for the first time with nothing but memorizations from a hand book.
Of course they do need to study the texts, but again... These particular jobs require a great deal of practice which no memorization can assist you 100% of the job.
Now other professions like lawyers and researchers do need a great deal of memorization but I don't generally have to worry about trusting my lives to them on a daily basis.
Consumers want stuff for free. That does not justify any means of getting it.
Of course not, but morality sometimes has nothing to do with the free market.
A realist will look at things like prohibition, piracy, and the war on drugs and go "Hey, the reason why there is so much crime and a hideous black market was because the market wants those things regardless of morality!"
People want music and they want it as cheap and convenient as possible. Sometimes this means free, but often more than not it just means they want a convenient yet cheap place to download them for a small fee. If the power that be refuse to allow such things through laws and other means, then the market simply creates a black market making the issue a moot point.
It wouldn't be difficult IMO if you had filmed that sequence with Uri Geller to take him to court for damages, and in the case of such a blatantly false claim you could probably get punitive damages for Uri committing perjury in claiming ownership when he in fact he didn't have copyright.
That is great... If you can afford a lawyer or find one nice enough to help you out for free.
Otherwise, copyright cases are very hard to do on your own if you try to pull the offender into small claims court unless you already are a lawyer yourself.
And especially so if the person you are suing gets a lawyer and/or somehow gets the civil suit differed to a higher court or one that has trial by jury in civil suits.
Secondly, many DMCA take down notices are forged as a round about DoS attack. Most service providers won't often verify the sender until they pull the content and force the actual copyright owner to send in a counter take down notice. Of course at that point, only does the service provider see that the email headers were from a bogus hotmail account.
It sounds good but I have a sneaking suspicion something in there is going to bite us in the ass. What is it?
I dunno... Either a lobby of an ATT competitor is involved, or the FCC head wants an iPhone without changing carriers.
From: http://www.docdroppers.org/wiki/index.php?title=T
From Wiki:
I support Ron Paul, but in general I will argue that where there is no free market, it should be regulated to have one. Otherwise, it is just a controlled economy by a non-governmental entity.
Seeing that telecommunications is by default a monopoly due to barriers of entry, it should be regulated to ensure competition and free market can be perused.
Corporate sponsorship of research doesn't automatically invalidate that research
No, but it sure does include the high possibility of it being biased.
Dude. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to do a whois on my websites and find out who I am. If I really wanted to stay anonymous. I'd post anonymous through a proxy server. Not like there is a North Korean spy stalking me... Then again, my name is so common that someone with my name is on the TSA's do not fly list and I have to prove that I'm not them each time I fly.
If you consume a tablespoon of pure caffeine (actually I think it takes less) you'll be dead before you hit the floor.
It's an effort being undertaken by local, state, and federal law enforcement and security professionals to attempt to protect the public. That is the first and primary goal. There are no ulterior motives that rise to any meaningful level. Let's keep things in some sort of perspective.
If it was your job to protect the people and property of New York City, what kinds of initiatives would you be undertaking? Hint: if your answer is along the lines that it's much better to stomach the errant terrorist attack every now and then rather than take proactive action to attempt to prevent them using whatever means you have at your disposal, you probably won't be in that job for long.
Not to goodwin this, but I have a good metaphor.
You are a train engineer in Germany in 1933. Due to increased demands on the train system you are asked to design a train and help plan out new railways to make the system most efficient as possible in that it can haul more cargo per haul and you design and help develop the train. Its your job and you go about it the best way possible resulting a system that rivals any other nation in terms of cargo hauled.
After the war... You find out that your efficient train lead to the deaths of countless s more concentration camp people.
Aren't you going to feel pretty bad? Given the choice would wish that you didn't do those things? Or are you going to say "It was my job! I don't care!" and call it a day.
I'm not saying our government is even close to Nazi Germany, but sometimes the potential is there for bad things to happen behind the efforts of something that by all means looks like something positive for the majority of citizens until after the fact. The road to hell is paved in good intentions after all.
SSBN's are the chickens of the sea - they run away from the slightest noise in order to stay undetected; the attack boats like to trail them in order to kill them if needed. Unless these new ones are extra quiet they'll be less a strategic threat than a symbol of power.
True, but SSBN are there for strategic reasons and not tactical ones.
To kill one would mean an act of war and as long as its in international waters you can't do anything but track it. Of course if it opened its missile bays off the coast of California, then the proverbial poop is going to hit the fan and someone only has a minute to decide whether or not to attack another nation's ship without an act of war.
So basically, China could sail those things all around surfaced with music playing and acheive the same effect: "We've got first strike capability just like you!"
Though, I'm sure they'll use them to test US reactions and tracking capabilities.
having google maps during the cuban missle crisis or the cold war would've been bad ass...
Check out this one which is about a mile or so from the South side check point of the coastal DMZ.
Thats a building, but its been painted to match the terrain. I suspect they are afraid of DPRK flying around their border. If you scroll through to the north, you can see the trench fences (the last parking lot) and then opposing that the North Korean side. If you keep scrolling west you can follow the trench fence system to the west coast. There are a lot of interesting things such as trenches and border forts and hidden nooks and cranies you can only see from the air.
Profiting from someone else's works seems to be a questionable litmus test when figuring out whether a particular behavior is right.
I would think "Does this cause the other person any harm?" would be better because the fact that the store owner profits off someone else's impede the original person from making a profit? Chances are if they had to pay money to play the song, then they might choose not to play the song. The original person has not been affected either way positively or negatively.
Whereas your speeding example puts others in physical danger and has a clear negative impact on society.
I think the problem with licensing fees is that it only benefits a non-party to the situation and neither benefits the original artist nor the person taking advantage of the prior art. How do they even tell they played the songs a certain amount to make sure the artists are payed proportional to their play time. You can't.
It would make much more sense to deal with the artist directly and make sure they are OK with you using their work or make a deal with them rather than have these middle man organizations who simply exploit both parties.
In truth these middlemen are exploiting the work of others for their own gain. So how about that as an unfairness perception test?
Not only did the licensers harm the shopkeeper they also profited from the work of other artists whom more likely than not will not compensate proportionally.
This has been how it's worked for decades. ASCAP/BMI are assigned the public performance rights to songs, and they can be very thorough about collecting from everybody owes them.
Technically slavery was legal and practiced for centuries. Doesn't mean this policy should stay so.
For example, can this wonderful robot tell the difference between a weaponless pocket thief and a group of boys armed with super-soakers?
To be fair, a real cop would shoot the boys anyways.
Then the thief would get robbed by a thugg who actually had a weapon on the way home from the heist.
But seriously, I don't think the first application of this robot is to have it patrol willy nilly. They'd probably send it in when a real cop wouldn't do when dealing with barricaded suspects.
The previous list was enumerated by a Greek philosoph of the ancient time, it was not some marketing bullshit from Realizar Marketing.
Weren't ancient philosophers the bullshit marketers of their time?
Do you really want to be in an environment where the first round through your battery pack not only leaves you with a bullet inside you but also sets you on fire/douses you with acid.
Did you not read the warning label?
"WARNING: Do not use battery in lieu of body armor. Do not insert battery in mouth. Do not wear battery under body armor. Do not leave battery in direct sunlight. Do no expose batter to direct gunfire. May result in injury or death!"
Or, maybe quantum determinalism is your point? Though the hypothetical cat would have to employ its understanding of probability...I suppose that is not your point.
Not really, but does consciousness require comprehension? Most likely not since an amoeba probably has some type of consciousness and the fore counts as an observer.
Heck... A video camera probably counts an observer unless of course until a conscious being looks at the tape and only then does the waveform collapse.
But the point I was trying to make is that fate has a great deal to do with situations. What if the batteries spontaneously failed or the cat choked on a hair ball earlier that night because it ate a bird that happened to fly off course from its regular migration route due to weather changes caused by a butterfly flapping its wings on another continent.
Sure you can prepare for things like that, but sometimes you can't help but getting struck by lighting with a clear blue clear sky, having a meteor land on your house, happen to be next to a nuclear bomb going off, or simply having a brain aneurysm for no good apparent reason.
Yes its rare... But they said the Titanic was unsinkable and sometimes Murphy's law happens to favor "worst possible scenarios" simply because it can.
But let me tell you, from my experience, when the job is it's own reward and you hold yourself to your own standards, work life becomes so much easier; No longer are you at the mercy of whatever idiot boss you have this week.
I'd have to argue that even the world's best and rewarding job can be ruined by bad management.
And worst and unforgiving job with evil and hateful customers can be alleviated by a caring and sympathetic management.
Of course its not management's responsibility to by sympathetic, but if they don't want high employer turnover or a disgruntled staff who is a bunch of Wally's then they have to do what what management is supposed to do and manage the social situation.
Happy employees who feel their jobs are worth doing are productive employees and is better for the bottom line.
which usually implies a strong position in world trade and good relations with its major trading partners
Technically, North Korea is stable if you count Kim Jong Il's iron grip over everything and they don't have any trading partners other than China.
Of course if Kim Jong Il dies of natural causes (or his general's tie him in a bag and toss him into the Taedong river) then not so stable.
In fact, the ONLY lessons to be learned from your story are
1) Check your smoke detector batteries, dumbass!
2) Get a cat.
So... What if in universe B you didn't check the batteries because you flipped a coin that came up heads... Or got a dog instead of a cat because you killed the original cat in some sort of weird science experiment.
I hope you never apply for any sysadmin position anywhere, until/unless you lose that kind of attitude.
Quick question? Would anyone seriously go into an interview and say those things? Everyone has dark secrets or disturbing beliefs.
It is just people either are good at covering it up or the other party remains willfully naive because they want to pretend they don't have similar issues too.
I'll admit, that I have no interest in anyones files (porn, music, personal information... its all useless rubbish to me) because maybe my dark secret is just so anti-social it would make anyone uncomfortable to say the least. Heck... then again... its not anything compared to some people though.
Deep down. You've thought horrible things too. Things you can't believe that crossed your mind. If you say that you haven't... Well either you are liar or you aren't human. Its like going through your father's personal things after his funeral and finding some dark history he hid from you all his life. Or maybe your grandmother's death bed confession... Even the sweetest people have done bad things in their life they regret. Of course some of us will go to our graves pretending these things never happened.
That said all humans think bad things... However, its mostly the sociopaths that act on them willfully and the rest of us act in moment of weakness or in good intentions.
Too many people expect their managers to help them with their self-esteem. No one other than yourself should have any hand in that.
Huh. My manager helps with my self esteem. By driving me to drink... Hence, I feel better about myself because I'm drunk.
But seriously, shitty management will make you feel bad about yourself, because they won't recognize you with either respect nor pay.
And good lord knows its hard to get that out of the average customer.
Of course the higher up in the corporate world you go, the more management and customers will spend the time to make your job feel like it is worth doing, but even then if you feel that neither the pay nor customer or management's satisfaction reflects your effort, then you tend to adjust your effort to match the respect the customer and management give you.
Whether this is simply reading Slashdot when you are supposed to be working, actively causing projects to not succeed out of spite and putting the blame on coworkers (it happens), or simply going full hog and committing crimes will depend on the ethics of the person.
Personally, I don't think many of us have any problems with surfing on slashdot because we'd probaly be staring at the wall even if we didn't have an internet connection, but I will have to say it is managment's responsibility to make employees feel like they are needed and useful in their daily jobs.
Even the most highly ethical hard working person will eventually throw their hands up in disgust and start wasting time if their manager doesn't recognize anything they do. Its human nature. People want to be respected and acknowledge that what they do is important.
Some corps go the wrong way and hand out employee appreciation rewards, but in fact all it takes is a manager person to sit the employee down and say "Hey... Your doing a good job!" or "Hey... We need to work on things because I like you but I don't want the higher ups getting rid of you"
There. Was that hard?
So does that mean I could examine every single file on your computer, including your e-mail, passwords, financial data, etc, by saying I'm looking for kiddie-porn?
From my understanding, there have been instances of Geeksquads turning in customers for child porn. Of course... It might have been their desktop background.
They were paid to install iTunes.
Actually, I think that is the biggest crime right there.