muhahaha, even with a low-bandwidth set of webpages, that dude's swamped out his 128kbit line. Somebody give that man an OC3! For the good of the world!
[4:54:45 a.m.] I'm a guy
[4:54:51 a.m.] are you a guy?
[4:54:58 a.m.] this is very confusing.
[4:55:16 a.m.] whaaaat
[4:55:23 a.m.] aren't you a sexy babe?
[4:55:34 a.m.] arent u a sexy babe
[4:57:42 a.m.] are you sexybabe86?
[4:58:01 a.m.] no... arent u
[4:58:13 a.m.] no
[5:46:10 a.m.] hello
Uh... Telemarketing sucks, but nobody said the poor schmuck on the phone was getting rich. That schmuck's bosses are, and possibly the private company that's administering her/his prison is. These are the people we sue, and the people we dislike intensely. Telemarketers don't punch in phone numbers. That's too low-tech. computers can dial numbers. Computers can determine (more or less) if there's a human on the line. Then computers can determine which script reader has just finished a call, so as to maximize the efficiency of the schmuck. You can have a recording do it too, and some do (by the way, I ain't ever giving to anybody's election campaign that uses a robodialer. So that means, I ain't giving money to politicians), but far and above it's much more effective to use humans. Calling someone up to listen to a recording really really pisses that person off, unless they're so lonely the cold tones of a machine are welcome relief from their miserable existence. And most of those lonely suckers learn to speak back to machines.
true enough. It could just be XP screwing with me, and I earnestly hope it is. But half the time I turn it on (connected or not), it just sits there, and I hear that joyful sound of the heads physically resetting themselves, over and over again, I think I don't need to build a desktop system (I could probably get one at work, if I didn't mind Win 95 on a 486 platform) to get the SMART notice.
Oh, and to the guy who asked: that was what was in my laptop bag at that moment. Well, almost. The brick and laptop were, in fact, on my desk when I wrote that. And an alpha geek would have had at least a sharp zaurus lurking about somewhere. Hell, if I wanted those honors, I'd have mentioned the (physically) broken Auditor distro in the side pocket.
1) Black Comb
2) 33 CYP
3) 50 Euros
4) some old cat 5 cable
5) a stack of ATM receipts.
6) Passport
7) Expired Visa
8) Italian Codice Fiscale
9) "Alien Registration Certificate"
10) 3 expired boarding passes
11) carbon copy of a baggage irregularity claim
12) a couple of bizarre connectors.
13) nasty photocopies of latin philosophical texts
14) Year-old Compaq Presario R3000 with 3.00 P4M (Keeps you warm on a cold winter night), Radeon 9600, 60 Gig HDD, and 1 gig of ram.
15) Big-ass power brick.
16) 120 gig HDD in a 3.5 " enclosure (failing, slowly)
17) another big-ass power brick.
18) 4-year-old Nikon E995.
19) Years of future back pain.
Well, lessee, how many school districts can afford IT staff that is trained properly? Let's face it, if you're trained properly in IT security, and have the skillset necessary to lock down a high-school computer system, you're probably working for a firm that can pay a lot more.
Heck, even so-called "script-kiddies" are highly motivated. They have enormous amounts of time they can dedicate to figuring out how to compromise a system. The one IT guy at a school (if the school is lucky to have one FTE in IT) is probably spending the majority of time keeping the hardware afloat.
So high schools are the classic underdefended overattacked computer targets.
Well, I'm sorry to hear yet another game has a less-than-ideal MP experience.
Let's face it, MP design is an expensive and unpredictable proposition: by definition, you need to pay a group of people to validate and refine any design, and try to find loopholes.
Then you release it in the wild, and social interaction throws everything out the window. Imbalances come out, and the most effective, simple play style comes to dominate (aka "Gaming the Game"). Many users get alienated and leave for other products. At that point, you can either nerf-and-patch -- usually with the result of alienating the remaining players who stayed with the product because of that "simple play style" -- or you can adjust for those deficiencies and charge for an "update" -- the case of the infamous "battlefield 2.5" joke made above. But then you're locked into updating once every year, tops, and perpetually chasing the gameplay problems.
So, what are the options? A) Hit a home run: by divine inspiration, get it right. B) Keep it as simple as possible. Social interaction is complex; games don't need complex rules. C) Give the users wide latitude in developing their own maps and rules, and hope that some evolutionary theory lets the best stuff float to the surface.
Well, Doom was a turning-point for a lot of things, but the reasons shift with perspective.
At the time, Doom demonstrated the power of the internet as a distribution system, and the relevance of what today would be called "Independent games". Here was a company with no distributor, making a game that turned heads and dropped jaws.
With a little perspective, we realize that Doom came out about the time the Amiga and Atari ST had ceased to be commercially viable game platforms -- we were seeing titles for them into 91, maybe 92, but that was it. By 93, if you had a personal computer, it was either an intel-based machine (usually running DOS), or a Mac. Suddenly, DOS became what it never was in the preceding decade: the primary platform for PC-based games.
And, God yes, most of the stuff released in the "Golden Age" alluded to there was crap; most of it was industrial crap, mass-produced for a market.
And, yeah, everyone has their own masturbatory history of video games, and their own lists of "most influential". Most of their work is based on memory and sweet nostalgia.
BTW, the Earl Weaver Baseball article is pretty cool, and brought back some fine bits of Nostalgia.
Yeah, that was the problem growing up in California. Never did figure out what dewpoint was, other than when it was high, it was time to jack the prices through the roof.
Anyway, I'm of two minds. Games can be useful, but teachers are lazy, so they'll probably use them like videos (aka, "Excuse me while I wheel in the Visiting Professor"). If one gets beyond using games to teach students about reality, and uses them as example descriptions of reality, then they can be useful. But, then again, you'd probably lose most of the class.
I suppose multiplayer things are useful and cool. After all, you got 30+ bodies in a room, might as well take advantage of that. At the very least, you'll get some cool deathmatches out of it. Why shoot your fellow students in real life, then? It'd mean you couldn't shoot them again the next day.
If sent by mail, an original and five copies of any comment should be addressed to: Copyright GC/ I&R, P.O. Box 70400, Southwest Station, Washington, DC 20024-0400.
First, this is the Copyright Office, not the Patent Office. Second, they're not looking for, nor will they likely accept, arguments along the lines of "single-standards are dangerous". And they claim that Firefox and Safari standards are planned for the future. So you need to give them a good reason, now, not to do this. What are such good reasons?
Well, for one, preregistration is for copyrighted works that "have a history of pre-release infringement". And, as a publisher in such a field, there's no way in hell you're going to expose that information to known security risks, such as MSIE. It's like starting an antitheft service for cars likely to be stolen, then requiring the owners to leave the cars in an unguarded lot with the keys in the ignition.
Likewise, you can argue that no ultra-secure, enterprise-critical information, such as copyright pre-registration data, resides on any machine capable of running MSIE. Again, it's an issue of security. Denying this service to all but MSIE users effectively removes it from all except those who really need it.
Now all you need is someone willing to fire off a letter in sextuplicate.
Um... I hate to nitpick here, but this article is clearly not a dupe of the preceding one. The preceding article states that TI is developing single-chip GSM technology that will result in $25 cellphones. this article states that TI is developing single-chip GSM technology that will result in $20 cellphones.
Of course, the dollar could have gotten stronger against the rupee in the interim, which itself would be newsworthy...
In TFA she discusses two sorts: those who play ball, and those who don't. One of the continuing problems with IT security is the fact that the bright folks who can find or fix problems aren't always the ones who understand how really big, clunky corporations work.
The only goal in the article there is to do discourage people from doing the whole "I found a vulnerability, you have 5 days to comply" nonsense. Yeah, sure, it works great if you've got a 1-person operation with no legal team, and no multitiered support system in place to filter out the garbage.
A) Empty classrooms with mysteriously full attendance. B) "clicking tools" now loaded in the standard Auditor distro -- everyone in your frat mysteriously gets all the right answers to the quiz; complaints from the rich kids about their fancy Cross ClickBen getting "Clikjacked". C) Quiz designed to overcome high school shyness about sexual topics mysteriously reveals entire cheerleadng squad turns out for backdoor antics with donkeys. D) Awkward Teacher/Student and Student/STudent interaction replaced with Awkward User/Technology interaction.
we could go back further. The history of gaming consoles is littered with the burnt out plastic husks of cool, sophisticated game machines released without adequate software support.
Hell, some of them had some great titles -- TG16, for example, had some cool stuff built and released in Japan -- but nothing that really resonated.
I'm amused by the comments here: the Xbox supporters tout technological superiority and mutters "shovelware" at the opposition; the PS crowd points to unit sales, and refers to their opposition as if it were Rommel's Afrika Korps: sure they've got fancy hardware, but not enough of it; their supply stream is messed up; besides, they are the minions of Evil intent on securing the precious oil fields of bourgeois living rooms to power the Dark Empire; the Nintendogs revel in security through obscurity and point to the "Nintendo Magic", and refuse to rule out the Seattle Mariners from this years' pennant.
The point of the article is that right now the reality is sinking in to these companies, a reality that has hit every console company, and is probably the reason why Nintendo is the only console dynasty around: consoles reinvent their business with every generation. There's a tremendous pressure to keep pace with technology, just as there's a tremendous pressure to have "killer titles". But I challenge you to go out and find cases of when a "killer title" came out on cutting-edge technology. For that matter, I challenge you to find a successful console release when that console was technologically the most sophisticated. The point of the article is that developers need to acquire a familiarity with these new boxes: that doesn't mean just poking around -- that means finding the talent capable of understanding how these little buggers work and squeezing the most out of them. Two rules come to mind:
1. The more complex the system, the more potential points of failure. Consoles can't be buggy. Developers are right now figuring out how tough these systems are.
2. There is no science of the accidental. Okay, my boy Harry came up with this one. 3 cores? 1 core and 8 vpus (or whatever they are)? Meanwhile the code is being written top-down; when stuff from entirely different sections of codes collides with unintended consequences, it's a bitch to debug, since it doesn't follow classic philosophical cognitive rules. The article linked some comments by Gabe Newell that implies this is happening with development here.
So whatever xbox may have at launch, if Sony's looking at their platform, and not seeing much in terms of stable software that will be ready, they'll have to defer.
Yeah, but the best open source products have people involved who are paid for their time in working on it.
Amateurs are great, and amateur drive is an amazing thing -- it's enabled me to produce software of a quality and sophistication that a "professional operation" couldn't match for anywhere near the price.
But the "great advantage" of amateurs -- they work better at projects they love, without bosses -- is also their great shortcoming. As a rule, amateurs don't do the crap work. Most amateurs, being their own bosses, won't do, or do inadequately the pain-in-the-ass parts of the job. Check grammar on a weblog? Make the GUI useful and intuitive to an average user? Hang around and get the damn thing finished? Ensure that your startup has a legally sound foundation?
In short, discipline is something amateurs as a group lack, and that's something some of those fancy degrees teach : to achieve something, you can't just do the stuff you like.
As far as meetings go, well sure, meetings are to be abhorred by any sensible person. That's also why in Universities (where you get your fancy degrees) we teach people to break up in arbitrary small groups and work on a project. The smart ones figure out pretty quick that small group work sucks and determine to avoid such situations, or make them as functional as possible.
And well, yeah, it sucks being a wage slave, but most jobs are just that: jobs, and for lazy-ass amateurs like me to live our lives, we need an infrastructure of people who work for a living.
Look, there are two groups of people reading this article: A) Those who get it B) Those who don't.
members of group B have read through post after post from members of group A, yet persist in their error. So there's no sense in being redundant here.
Think of it as something akin to how you behave on a date with a total knockout. You wanna get root access, but you don't want to blow it by talking about your nerdy life. So you start talking, and let her "lead" -- you then adapt the reality to what s/he finds important and fascinating. Yeah, sure you like n'Sync too! Absolutely, I just can't stand all these clever people at these clever people parties. While IRL you'd get dumped for being a spineless nerd, here the voting system plays your role, and you get to be the hot guy/girl: You vote, and the damn thing finds other people who voted like you.
OKay, none of you have been on dates, so maybe it'll just help to think of Amazon's patented system, or Tivo's: you buy something from Amazon, or a few things, and it starts recommending crap. On tivo, you start watching a few episodes of Xena, and it suddenly thinks you're a lesbian and fills the box accordingly. How do these systems work? By comparing your behaviour to others, finding a profile and behaving according to it.
That's all this credence system is -- you vote, and create a voting profile, and the system shows the results of others voting similar to you. There are no absolutes. A spammer doesn't have a chance.
Slashdot Mirror
still giggling
Uh...
Telemarketing sucks, but nobody said the poor schmuck on the phone was getting rich. That schmuck's bosses are, and possibly the private company that's administering her/his prison is. These are the people we sue, and the people we dislike intensely.
Telemarketers don't punch in phone numbers. That's too low-tech. computers can dial numbers. Computers can determine (more or less) if there's a human on the line. Then computers can determine which script reader has just finished a call, so as to maximize the efficiency of the schmuck.
You can have a recording do it too, and some do (by the way, I ain't ever giving to anybody's election campaign that uses a robodialer. So that means, I ain't giving money to politicians), but far and above it's much more effective to use humans. Calling someone up to listen to a recording really really pisses that person off, unless they're so lonely the cold tones of a machine are welcome relief from their miserable existence. And most of those lonely suckers learn to speak back to machines.
true enough. It could just be XP screwing with me, and I earnestly hope it is. But half the time I turn it on (connected or not), it just sits there, and I hear that joyful sound of the heads physically resetting themselves, over and over again, I think I don't need to build a desktop system (I could probably get one at work, if I didn't mind Win 95 on a 486 platform) to get the SMART notice.
Oh, and to the guy who asked: that was what was in my laptop bag at that moment. Well, almost. The brick and laptop were, in fact, on my desk when I wrote that. And an alpha geek would have had at least a sharp zaurus lurking about somewhere. Hell, if I wanted those honors, I'd have mentioned the (physically) broken Auditor distro in the side pocket.
1) Black Comb
2) 33 CYP
3) 50 Euros
4) some old cat 5 cable
5) a stack of ATM receipts.
6) Passport
7) Expired Visa
8) Italian Codice Fiscale
9) "Alien Registration Certificate"
10) 3 expired boarding passes
11) carbon copy of a baggage irregularity claim
12) a couple of bizarre connectors.
13) nasty photocopies of latin philosophical texts
14) Year-old Compaq Presario R3000 with 3.00 P4M (Keeps you warm on a cold winter night), Radeon 9600, 60 Gig HDD, and 1 gig of ram. 15) Big-ass power brick. 16) 120 gig HDD in a 3.5 " enclosure (failing, slowly) 17) another big-ass power brick. 18) 4-year-old Nikon E995. 19) Years of future back pain.
Well, lessee, how many school districts can afford IT staff that is trained properly? Let's face it, if you're trained properly in IT security, and have the skillset necessary to lock down a high-school computer system, you're probably working for a firm that can pay a lot more.
Heck, even so-called "script-kiddies" are highly motivated. They have enormous amounts of time they can dedicate to figuring out how to compromise a system. The one IT guy at a school (if the school is lucky to have one FTE in IT) is probably spending the majority of time keeping the hardware afloat.
So high schools are the classic underdefended overattacked computer targets.
Well, I'm sorry to hear yet another game has a less-than-ideal MP experience.
Let's face it, MP design is an expensive and unpredictable proposition: by definition, you need to pay a group of people to validate and refine any design, and try to find loopholes.
Then you release it in the wild, and social interaction throws everything out the window. Imbalances come out, and the most effective, simple play style comes to dominate (aka "Gaming the Game"). Many users get alienated and leave for other products. At that point, you can either nerf-and-patch -- usually with the result of alienating the remaining players who stayed with the product because of that "simple play style" -- or you can adjust for those deficiencies and charge for an "update" -- the case of the infamous "battlefield 2.5" joke made above. But then you're locked into updating once every year, tops, and perpetually chasing the gameplay problems.
So, what are the options?
A) Hit a home run: by divine inspiration, get it right.
B) Keep it as simple as possible. Social interaction is complex; games don't need complex rules.
C) Give the users wide latitude in developing their own maps and rules, and hope that some evolutionary theory lets the best stuff float to the surface.
Well, Doom was a turning-point for a lot of things, but the reasons shift with perspective.
At the time, Doom demonstrated the power of the internet as a distribution system, and the relevance of what today would be called "Independent games". Here was a company with no distributor, making a game that turned heads and dropped jaws.
With a little perspective, we realize that Doom came out about the time the Amiga and Atari ST had ceased to be commercially viable game platforms -- we were seeing titles for them into 91, maybe 92, but that was it. By 93, if you had a personal computer, it was either an intel-based machine (usually running DOS), or a Mac. Suddenly, DOS became what it never was in the preceding decade: the primary platform for PC-based games.
And, God yes, most of the stuff released in the "Golden Age" alluded to there was crap; most of it was industrial crap, mass-produced for a market.
And, yeah, everyone has their own masturbatory history of video games, and their own lists of "most influential". Most of their work is based on memory and sweet nostalgia.
BTW, the Earl Weaver Baseball article is pretty cool, and brought back some fine bits of Nostalgia.
Of course -- "backwards compatible with select xbox games" = "downloads ported executable for a few titles"
What lies beyond is a mystery, but one thing is certain: God favours those who travel in style.
Can you switch it on corpsecam?
Yeah, that was the problem growing up in California. Never did figure out what dewpoint was, other than when it was high, it was time to jack the prices through the roof.
Anyway, I'm of two minds. Games can be useful, but teachers are lazy, so they'll probably use them like videos (aka, "Excuse me while I wheel in the Visiting Professor"). If one gets beyond using games to teach students about reality, and uses them as example descriptions of reality, then they can be useful. But, then again, you'd probably lose most of the class.
I suppose multiplayer things are useful and cool. After all, you got 30+ bodies in a room, might as well take advantage of that. At the very least, you'll get some cool deathmatches out of it. Why shoot your fellow students in real life, then? It'd mean you couldn't shoot them again the next day.
Now go forth and duplicate.
First, this is the Copyright Office, not the Patent Office.
Second, they're not looking for, nor will they likely accept, arguments along the lines of "single-standards are dangerous". And they claim that Firefox and Safari standards are planned for the future. So you need to give them a good reason, now, not to do this.
What are such good reasons?
Well, for one, preregistration is for copyrighted works that "have a history of pre-release infringement". And, as a publisher in such a field, there's no way in hell you're going to expose that information to known security risks, such as MSIE. It's like starting an antitheft service for cars likely to be stolen, then requiring the owners to leave the cars in an unguarded lot with the keys in the ignition.
Likewise, you can argue that no ultra-secure, enterprise-critical information, such as copyright pre-registration data, resides on any machine capable of running MSIE. Again, it's an issue of security. Denying this service to all but MSIE users effectively removes it from all except those who really need it.
Now all you need is someone willing to fire off a letter in sextuplicate.
Never mind. RTFA
Okay, so where do I get the patch without installing "windows genuine advantage"?
And, as a matter of fact, I legitimately own two XP licenses and one computer.
Did anybody actually look at the video? It's not a game engine, it is clearly a troll!
Um... I hate to nitpick here, but this article is clearly not a dupe of the preceding one.
The preceding article states that TI is developing single-chip GSM technology that will result in $25 cellphones.
this article states that TI is developing single-chip GSM technology that will result in $20 cellphones.
Of course, the dollar could have gotten stronger against the rupee in the interim, which itself would be newsworthy...
In TFA she discusses two sorts: those who play ball, and those who don't. One of the continuing problems with IT security is the fact that the bright folks who can find or fix problems aren't always the ones who understand how really big, clunky corporations work.
The only goal in the article there is to do discourage people from doing the whole "I found a vulnerability, you have 5 days to comply" nonsense. Yeah, sure, it works great if you've got a 1-person operation with no legal team, and no multitiered support system in place to filter out the garbage.
A) Empty classrooms with mysteriously full attendance.
B) "clicking tools" now loaded in the standard Auditor distro -- everyone in your frat mysteriously gets all the right answers to the quiz; complaints from the rich kids about their fancy Cross ClickBen getting "Clikjacked".
C) Quiz designed to overcome high school shyness about sexual topics mysteriously reveals entire cheerleadng squad turns out for backdoor antics with donkeys.
D) Awkward Teacher/Student and Student/STudent interaction replaced with Awkward User/Technology interaction.
we could go back further. The history of gaming consoles is littered with the burnt out plastic husks of cool, sophisticated game machines released without adequate software support.
Hell, some of them had some great titles -- TG16, for example, had some cool stuff built and released in Japan -- but nothing that really resonated.
I'm amused by the comments here: the Xbox supporters tout technological superiority and mutters "shovelware" at the opposition; the PS crowd points to unit sales, and refers to their opposition as if it were Rommel's Afrika Korps: sure they've got fancy hardware, but not enough of it; their supply stream is messed up; besides, they are the minions of Evil intent on securing the precious oil fields of bourgeois living rooms to power the Dark Empire; the Nintendogs revel in security through obscurity and point to the "Nintendo Magic", and refuse to rule out the Seattle Mariners from this years' pennant.
The point of the article is that right now the reality is sinking in to these companies, a reality that has hit every console company, and is probably the reason why Nintendo is the only console dynasty around: consoles reinvent their business with every generation. There's a tremendous pressure to keep pace with technology, just as there's a tremendous pressure to have "killer titles". But I challenge you to go out and find cases of when a "killer title" came out on cutting-edge technology. For that matter, I challenge you to find a successful console release when that console was technologically the most sophisticated.
The point of the article is that developers need to acquire a familiarity with these new boxes: that doesn't mean just poking around -- that means finding the talent capable of understanding how these little buggers work and squeezing the most out of them. Two rules come to mind:
1. The more complex the system, the more potential points of failure. Consoles can't be buggy. Developers are right now figuring out how tough these systems are.
2. There is no science of the accidental. Okay, my boy Harry came up with this one. 3 cores? 1 core and 8 vpus (or whatever they are)? Meanwhile the code is being written top-down; when stuff from entirely different sections of codes collides with unintended consequences, it's a bitch to debug, since it doesn't follow classic philosophical cognitive rules. The article linked some comments by Gabe Newell that implies this is happening with development here.
So whatever xbox may have at launch, if Sony's looking at their platform, and not seeing much in terms of stable software that will be ready, they'll have to defer.
Read up there. Somebody actually called Microsoft's disastrous and at best second-rate "Combat Flight Simulator" series "Generally Excellent"!
Oh, yeah, the article... I spotted this gem:Woah Nelly! This guys craftsmanship mixes some serious metaphors, however clear the picture may be!
Yeah, but the best open source products have people involved who are paid for their time in working on it.
Amateurs are great, and amateur drive is an amazing thing -- it's enabled me to produce software of a quality and sophistication that a "professional operation" couldn't match for anywhere near the price.
But the "great advantage" of amateurs -- they work better at projects they love, without bosses -- is also their great shortcoming. As a rule, amateurs don't do the crap work. Most amateurs, being their own bosses, won't do, or do inadequately the pain-in-the-ass parts of the job. Check grammar on a weblog? Make the GUI useful and intuitive to an average user? Hang around and get the damn thing finished? Ensure that your startup has a legally sound foundation?
In short, discipline is something amateurs as a group lack, and that's something some of those fancy degrees teach : to achieve something, you can't just do the stuff you like.
As far as meetings go, well sure, meetings are to be abhorred by any sensible person. That's also why in Universities (where you get your fancy degrees) we teach people to break up in arbitrary small groups and work on a project. The smart ones figure out pretty quick that small group work sucks and determine to avoid such situations, or make them as functional as possible.
And well, yeah, it sucks being a wage slave, but most jobs are just that: jobs, and for lazy-ass amateurs like me to live our lives, we need an infrastructure of people who work for a living.
Look, there are two groups of people reading this article:
A) Those who get it
B) Those who don't.
members of group B have read through post after post from members of group A, yet persist in their error. So there's no sense in being redundant here.
Think of it as something akin to how you behave on a date with a total knockout. You wanna get root access, but you don't want to blow it by talking about your nerdy life.
So you start talking, and let her "lead" -- you then adapt the reality to what s/he finds important and fascinating. Yeah, sure you like n'Sync too! Absolutely, I just can't stand all these clever people at these clever people parties. While IRL you'd get dumped for being a spineless nerd, here the voting system plays your role, and you get to be the hot guy/girl: You vote, and the damn thing finds other people who voted like you.
OKay, none of you have been on dates, so maybe it'll just help to think of Amazon's patented system, or Tivo's: you buy something from Amazon, or a few things, and it starts recommending crap. On tivo, you start watching a few episodes of Xena, and it suddenly thinks you're a lesbian and fills the box accordingly. How do these systems work? By comparing your behaviour to others, finding a profile and behaving according to it.
That's all this credence system is -- you vote, and create a voting profile, and the system shows the results of others voting similar to you. There are no absolutes. A spammer doesn't have a chance.
Not another Holodeck article! those are the worst!
People expect thieves to act like thieves. Act like you know what you're doing, and you can walk out with most data.
Another lesson -- put AP mines in your crawlspaces.
Assuming, of course, that software could use some basic user interface techniques without paying exorbitant patent fees.