If I am interpreting you correctly, you are saying that people that compare the Lord of the Rings and Star Wars never get laid and live in their parents basement?
No it is not petty, it is frustrated. These corporations get tax incentive AFTER tax incentive and they waste the money. AT&T just decided to ditch the one year contract renewal discount in my area. I've previously tried to get my speed upgraded, the problem is the phone line running back to the CO (about 50ft up the road) is crap. Previously they offered me a discount, so that they would not have to replace the line. So I've been stuck at 1.5mbit/256kbit for a while now. However, lastnight I noticed the discount was no longer there.
So I asked them: (this converstion took place lastnight btw)
Me: Hello, I noticed that I am no longer getting a discount on my DSL.
Them: Yes sir, we discontinued that discount program in Jan.
Me: Um okay, yes I am aware I was on a 12 month contract with discount, but the additional discount I was receiving, was because you guys were unable to upgrade me to the maximum speed on my DSL, even though I am 50ft away from the CO, because the line from my house to the CO is junk. What happened to that discount?
Them: Sir, I am sorry the we cannot offer you that discount anymore.
Me: Okay, so you've resolved my line problems then? Cool, upgrade me to the maximum DSL speed package you have! This is awesome!
Them: Umm sir, your account has been flagged as not being able to support the highest speed due to technical issues on site.
Me: Yup! With your phone line! Which is why I was getting the discount, i.e. it was saving your company money by offering me a $10/month discount on my DSL, rather than get a crew out to pull an entire new pair to my house, since your tech's already told me there were no spares.
Them: I am not sure what you want me to do, Sir!
Me: Either replace my phoneline, or give me my discount back please.
Them: I will need to speak with my supervisor, one moment
Long story short, the chick came back and told me her supervisor told her the discount could no longer be offered. So I asked her about upgrading the phone line, since there is no incentive for me to deal with their crappy junk anymore. She told me, I'd need to call repairs and her supervisor advised her to inform me there might be a charge!
So let me get this straight; they have crappy malfunctioning equipment, but it is MY responsibility to pay for repairs? I don't freaking think so, Jim!
Downside is, the only other highspeed solution here is a crappy cable company that charges x2 the amount I am NOW paying, for a 512k/128k connection... ohhhh just bend me over and fuck me to death already!
Part of me really wants to see the US IT workforce shrink. Getting people who are just not suited for the work into other jobs would probably be the best thing yet for code and system quality. Example pet peeves from my side of the house (systems) are developers who have no clue about things like code optimization and don't know the code they're working on inside and out.
That is an extremely arrogant comment; you're assuming that you are competent at what you do? What is your basis for that? And the fact that co-workers may idolize you (or atleast you think so) is no justification, nor is being rated by your boss who may not be a competent IT worker themselves! I was always looked at as God's gift to the silicon at previous jobs, I was way beyond my co-workers, I was the goto man by them. Then I landed another gig where sure, I am better than some, but I also have team members that far outclass me as a programmer and as an adaptable business developer. These are not arrogant type people either, they understand their background and they help guide me a lot. When they say I've improved, or pat me on the back for good work, I know I've done a good job. If you're measuring yourself on a limited bench mark, that your current co-workers are inferior to you, then you're an arrogant SOB that needs to find a challenge elsewhere to realize how little you think you know.
I used to be a systems guy (and after multiple companies as a contractor, a darn good one it turns out since a lot of those companies were willing to pay top dollars to retain me) but I moved in to programming (where I consider myself a developing developer... i.e newbie to mid level coder). I used to think like you, that the programmers I provided services for (Sys Admin/DBA etc etc role) were bad coders or just plain lazy. Now I understand and have for over the last year, that project deadlines often hamper our code optimizing. Basically, if the user is happy with the system response, then we are. Any possible system disruption should of been sorted out in a development environment and then in a test environment (where QA is meant to verify your project works and causes no issues). If in production, it appears said system is causing issues, then we fix it and we analyze why it caused said issue.
The other part of me is a little worried about what I'm going to be doing in 10 years. I love problem solving and don't really want to give up an IT career!
Yet you are also saying that a part of you wants to see the US IT Workforce shrink... oh yeah, as long as it is not you... gotcha. Sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but do you know how much of an ass those comments make you?
Umm, I sit at your house, use your network and attempt to break into some federal computer system. The fed's track you down, since you were connected to your provider, you tell them about some phantom friend that used your network. I deny it, guess what? You're responsible. Doubt you'll be charged? Give it a try. It was your equipment, it was your account.
The RIAA is going to use the same tactic, they DO NOT need to associate it with an individual, they CAN accuse the College of copyright infringement and go after the College. The College either settles, or provides proof it was not the College persee' but some student (cue throwing student on fire). So you want a magic law? Well, bud, the law as I told you is them operating under the copyright laws.
Oh incidentally, I was involved in providing information to officials several years back about a criminal case. The College I was working at refused to provide any login information about a student first, after several threats of obstruction of justice (valid threat to) information was handed. Sure, that was criminal and this is civil...
Yes I understand said MAC addresses can be faked, the point I was making, is the RIAA could lean on the said College to attempt to force a MAC registration. Your MAC address not registered? No IP address for you. Similar could be done with their gateway to the Internet, if the MAC address is not in an address table, drop packets. Sure, you could snoop the local network, grab a random MAC address, wait for the sender to go offline, use it for your own usage, but the RIAA does not care about getting the actual guilty party, they just want a target, ANY target.
So yes, as I was saying, what they ARE trying to do, is force a College to either a) take responsibility for all activity coming from their network to the big bad world, or b) pass responsibility on to the student. The only laws that applies is the copyright laws being violated, if the College does not play ball, they are going to try and strong arm the said College into giving up the offenders to protect themselves, or said College becomes responsible for the violations as the network operator.
Don't assume the lack of a written federal or state law that says the RIAA can do whatever they want slows them down; the RIAA is acting upon cases of copyright violation of protected work, they are attempting to settle "damages" against those copyrights.
To them, this is perfect justification to do as they please.
In regards to Colleges and the such, the individual cannot be held accountant when operating behind a NAT device without the College helping the RIAA, but the College paying for the internet connection then sharing it inside their network can be. What they are saying, is they want these Colleges to force MAC address registration on campus. I.e. students are required to register all their NIC MAC addresses, they also want the colleges to record incoming and outgoing traffic inside their network and associate that traffic with a particular MAC (via a DHCP lease log perhaps) address.
The idea is ingenious if they can force the college to hand off accountability to the student, or if the college is willing to block p2p traffic altogether.
Agreed! Any good satellite company will come out and find a place within an "acceptable" area for you if they get an acceptable signal. As long as it isn't a long run that will incur significant signal loss (I think RG6 is rated to what 1000ft?) most companies are willing to install where you want it, they may charge you extra for installation, but you have options. Is the poster sure there are no WISP's in the area?
I'd be more intent on using the Anti-American approach; America is based on capitalism and having exclusive deals with a single provider is very anti-competition, is therefor anti-American or some such. Demand that the board provide you with an analysis of a) Benefits to the Citizens, b) Their plan for network improvements (leads back to a), c) demand the board and mayor provide evidence that his exclusive deal has actually improved communications, tax revenue and general sustainability of the infrastructure.
The idea is not to make Comcast do anything, the idea is to get rid of these exclusive deals. A city signing on to exclusive deals, generally brokered by employees of the city with something to gain should be illegal. There is no reason to have a single provider system, none at all that is good for you and I.
I for one, welcome our new R2D2 sized falling space debris overlords! May they fall on your house, scar you for life and give you a reason as to why you are still a virgin and living with your parents when you are 40 years old! On the other hand, I feel bad for your parents - so I withdraw my previous comment. May our new... ah fuck whatever!
Wow it sank, people died, it was a loss sure, we've explained it to death, made crappy movies about it! Can we move on now? Or should we spend another couple hundred million dollars explaining what we already know? It is not like we need that money elsewhere is it? No hungry people in the world, no space to explore, no economies to fix.
I miss my Tank Mage! Trammel was not bad, it allowed crafters to hang out and be carebears - the problem was, when they kept expanding Trammels role in the game instead of expanding Fel! New quests, new creatures, new drops should of only been available in Fel. My wife and I owned hoses only in Fel and crafted there, it was _not_ that dangerous if you knew what the heck you were doing. Most reds I found were just that red in color only, they had no clue and probably were simple ganksters of noob crafters etc. I ran an unassisted client (okay, I used UOMap, sue me:P) and still whipped some serious ass of the macroers.
Going rogue is never a good option, you're often left with a less than satisfactory implementation of what you're trying to accomplish and if the powers that be discover your existence, either you're fired or your project is canned with no chance of appeal (that becomes spite on Corp IT's part). If you're also careless you will take down other systems like you describe.
I used to work in an environment where each business unit had their own IT support groups, rolling back up to Corp. IT. We were a manufacturing firm and for the most part, those that were making the decisions up top had no concept of what we did or needed in the business units (how could they?). The issue is, whether those up top are willing to learn about the business.
I was a rogue operative, even inside my own team in my own IT group in a sub business unit; I was the guy pushing pulling legacy data via MQ-Series, instead of via FTP each morning so we could get real time production data as it was entered in our legacy systems. I was the guy pushing using SSRS with SQL Server to deliver snapshot reports each morning, while still allowing the users to view the reports in real time. I was the guy that was given a mission to eliminate as much manual process in reporting as possible (i.e.: We have 15 people doing reports, we don't need 15 people doing reports... please write code to fix this). The strategy I was using was having the leaders of your department or business unit push what they need for you. If you're a lowly programmer or end user, no one is going to listen if you go it solo (I found this the hard way). But if a director of your department, starts talking with IT with you or for you, telling them we are trying to accomplish a goal you need their assistance on Corp. Systems side, then things will happen. If your unit lead has no desire to do this and you are the only one trying to affect change, then perhaps it is time to leave and find another job - some places simply will not innovate or have no desire to look at new things until they are forced to.
Faith isn't about rationality (this may piss off a few people, but it is true); faith is about a confidence that something created or set things in motion. If you subscribe to the Christian view, then the end result of this thing we call life is either eternal hell or eternal paradise (I have issues with these concepts even as a Christian - perhaps I am by my own beliefs not a true Christian). As a science type myself, my faith gives me confidence that there are rules to the universe and that the rules we are trying to learn exist for a reason and do not arbitrarily act in contradiction to one another.
Q: "how is this idea any different from an atheists viewpoint other than what started it all (which atheists generally have no viewpoint on)?"
A: There really is no difference; I feel compelled to explain the creation of this universe is because a Supreme Being made it so. From an atheists stand point, it is irrelevant if God created the universe or not, if we're just examining the rules of this universe. Our ideas diverge, when you as an Atheist attempt to explain what created the big bang; I believe a Supreme Being, you may believe another universe fell apart and our universe started as a tiny fragment of another, or this is the 2nd to nth time our universe has expanded and collapsed.
Q: "What relevance does God have now that he's set the rules of the universe (physics et al) in place?"
A: Truth is, I don't know. If God is all powerful, then God has seen the beginning and the end of his creation. I.e. God is timeless, so right at this moment is He relevant, on a linear scale? Perhaps not, but on a grander scale live by my rules and there will be a place for you in heaven, then I'd have to say yes. See my other attempt to answer one of your questions:
Q: "Does God ever interfere with the universe (changes the rules, even on a local or minute scale) for his own purposes (e.g. Jesus walking on water, Moses parting the sea, other misc miracles)?" A: Refer to my attempt to answer above; if he has seen all, then he has already set things in motion that will caused Moses to part the sea, if He is all powerful and created this construct, then He has the intimate knowledge needed to cause an odd force of some kind to pull the sea apart. Because we can't explain why it happened, does not mean it did not and was not programmed (if you will) to happen.
So is this interference or preordained based on the rules He wrote for the verse? I dunno, I think that is up to the individual to decide.
A: If so, why? And does this have any effect on how one should live their life?
Q: Dunno on the first part, I am not God, hehe. Everything that happens around us has the potential to affect us. This is where it gets tricky though, if God has absolute control over the rules of the universe, does that mean we still have free will? Or is the shape of the universe (and of us) already determined based on the programming He has done? I don't really know for sure; if you take it at face value that we are defined by the rules He has created, then no we do not. But is this really true? It is conceivable that God created the rules of the universe, physics etc and how we evolve but left out any programming on how we as individuals operate (though human nature would seem to indicate certain tendencies were programmed in - and yes, the tendency for violence is one of the things I am really pissed off about).
Q: is there ANYTHING about your belief structure that changes how you should live your life?
A: My questions change. I did not believe in God for so long, I am still not 100% sure why I started to believe again I was so hard core science type and a total atheist. But no matter the questions I asked science, certain things in my life still did not make sense (very personal reasons I'd rather not discuss); somewhere along the way during a physics class, certain faith based opinions and views started to emerge in my skull, some of them I found reassuring some scared me.
Since the average Joe does not like to use their brain power beyond deciding what they want to eat, what TV program they are going to watch or if they need more beer, I'd say option one is likely yes.
Most people are programmed that questioning God's existence is blasphemy, like wise any topic that questions where we came from that does not end in "God created everything" is again blasphemy and a taboo topic, so they are not open to questioning our existence beyond scripture.
There is nothing inherently wrong with Religion per see' I believe in Christ, I accept him as my savior, but I also have faith that God created a physical universe with rules (we call it physics). If we accept the fact that God or whatever you want to call this Supreme Being, created a construct (the Universe) and then began to apply rules to said construct (physics), in order for this construct to remain viable, could God simply pop man in to existence? Or would God need to work within the rules of this construct that He created for it to remain viable? Okay, put another way: If the construct rules imply that object "a" could not possibly exist within the construct, could God place object "a" inside the construct while still allowing the rules He set in place to be viable and consistent without rewriting these rules? Most Christians would say "yes, God is all powerful" granted, He is - but I have to argue that God would need to alter the rules of this universe in order for object "a" to exist within it to allow the universe and its existing rules to remain viable.
I am sure I am going to get flamed for this, but I have faith that the physical universe exists with rules, I have this faith because of what I said above. This means, our existence is built using the rules that God created for the universe. I am of the opinion, that evolution is the mechanism that God used to bring the proper components together within the bounds of this construct to create us. I've met no Creationists or Christians that would ever accept this is the way it happened they believe God snapped his fingers and said "let there be man". I believe God snapped his fingers and altered or added rules to this construct so man could evolve.
I believe it is illogical not to think that God has to work within the rules of the construct He created; that snapping something in to existence that violates the existing rules/laws of the universe might break the thing He created, instead he would need to alter the fundamental rules He created from the beginning and let it ripple through existence until He has His desired result. Most people take offense to this idea, because they feel it undermines the superiority of God and His power - I tend to disagree:)
In a related story, Microsoft CEO Steve Balmer threw multiple chairs after he heard of the newly discovered "young" planet. Steve was quoted as saying, "I bet freaking google has already tried to map the fucker! ".
Whoops, I forgot to review my draft before submission, sorry Mr. / Ms. Grammar Nazi! I so beg your forgiveness, shall I bend over for you so you can administer punishment?
Actually, I believe they shutdown due to a safety issue. When they lose grid power for powering water cooling pumps etc, their standard response is to shutdown for safety reasons. Yes I know, a power generating plant that gets power off the grid, but consider if the plant is unable to drive a turbine to power its own pumps, where does it get the power from? Okay backup generators, but they can also fail. From what I hear the current dropped enough from the grid to cause them to need to shutdown the reactors. This is a good safety thing. The bad thing is the issues on the grid that caused this and other sites to shutdown generation.
And now, we return you to regular scheduled blackout... if this were an actual emergency, you would of killed the person sitting next to you.
Sure sounds like the terrorists are winning so far doesn't it? They created terror, which has lead to panic, big brother being thrusted into everyones face under the idea of "keeping us safe".
No jumping ship is the right thing to do if the environment has become hostile; what the hell do you think it is going to be like now? It has now become a us vs them mentality. Apparently you've never seen this happen; I've worked as a consultant in a Union shop and seen disputes over OT and over other things, the end result is generally a sense of hostility between employer and employee.
Everything else you say, I agree with - I always negotiate a) a good rate and b) extra benefits on the side, being able to work from home is one of them and being able to comp out when there is no official OT or comp time policy here.
Sure they can, they just do not tell you that they are doing that and most places have in the employmeny contract that you are not allowed to discuss your earnings with another employee. The ownership is on the employee to prove they were discriminated against.
Slashdot Mirror
If I am interpreting you correctly, you are saying that people that compare the Lord of the Rings and Star Wars never get laid and live in their parents basement?
Yeah, it's petty. But it makes me feel better.
No it is not petty, it is frustrated. These corporations get tax incentive AFTER tax incentive and they waste the money. AT&T just decided to ditch the one year contract renewal discount in my area. I've previously tried to get my speed upgraded, the problem is the phone line running back to the CO (about 50ft up the road) is crap. Previously they offered me a discount, so that they would not have to replace the line. So I've been stuck at 1.5mbit/256kbit for a while now. However, lastnight I noticed the discount was no longer there.
So I asked them: (this converstion took place lastnight btw)
Me: Hello, I noticed that I am no longer getting a discount on my DSL.
Them: Yes sir, we discontinued that discount program in Jan.
Me: Um okay, yes I am aware I was on a 12 month contract with discount, but the additional discount I was receiving, was because you guys were unable to upgrade me to the maximum speed on my DSL, even though I am 50ft away from the CO, because the line from my house to the CO is junk. What happened to that discount?
Them: Sir, I am sorry the we cannot offer you that discount anymore.
Me: Okay, so you've resolved my line problems then? Cool, upgrade me to the maximum DSL speed package you have! This is awesome!
Them: Umm sir, your account has been flagged as not being able to support the highest speed due to technical issues on site.
Me: Yup! With your phone line! Which is why I was getting the discount, i.e. it was saving your company money by offering me a $10/month discount on my DSL, rather than get a crew out to pull an entire new pair to my house, since your tech's already told me there were no spares.
Them: I am not sure what you want me to do, Sir!
Me: Either replace my phoneline, or give me my discount back please.
Them: I will need to speak with my supervisor, one moment
Long story short, the chick came back and told me her supervisor told her the discount could no longer be offered. So I asked her about upgrading the phone line, since there is no incentive for me to deal with their crappy junk anymore. She told me, I'd need to call repairs and her supervisor advised her to inform me there might be a charge!
So let me get this straight; they have crappy malfunctioning equipment, but it is MY responsibility to pay for repairs? I don't freaking think so, Jim!
Downside is, the only other highspeed solution here is a crappy cable company that charges x2 the amount I am NOW paying, for a 512k/128k connection... ohhhh just bend me over and fuck me to death already!
Tes
Part of me really wants to see the US IT workforce shrink. Getting people who are just not suited for the work into other jobs would probably be the best thing yet for code and system quality. Example pet peeves from my side of the house (systems) are developers who have no clue about things like code optimization and don't know the code they're working on inside and out.
That is an extremely arrogant comment; you're assuming that you are competent at what you do? What is your basis for that? And the fact that co-workers may idolize you (or atleast you think so) is no justification, nor is being rated by your boss who may not be a competent IT worker themselves! I was always looked at as God's gift to the silicon at previous jobs, I was way beyond my co-workers, I was the goto man by them. Then I landed another gig where sure, I am better than some, but I also have team members that far outclass me as a programmer and as an adaptable business developer. These are not arrogant type people either, they understand their background and they help guide me a lot. When they say I've improved, or pat me on the back for good work, I know I've done a good job. If you're measuring yourself on a limited bench mark, that your current co-workers are inferior to you, then you're an arrogant SOB that needs to find a challenge elsewhere to realize how little you think you know.
I used to be a systems guy (and after multiple companies as a contractor, a darn good one it turns out since a lot of those companies were willing to pay top dollars to retain me) but I moved in to programming (where I consider myself a developing developer... i.e newbie to mid level coder). I used to think like you, that the programmers I provided services for (Sys Admin/DBA etc etc role) were bad coders or just plain lazy. Now I understand and have for over the last year, that project deadlines often hamper our code optimizing. Basically, if the user is happy with the system response, then we are. Any possible system disruption should of been sorted out in a development environment and then in a test environment (where QA is meant to verify your project works and causes no issues). If in production, it appears said system is causing issues, then we fix it and we analyze why it caused said issue.
The other part of me is a little worried about what I'm going to be doing in 10 years. I love problem solving and don't really want to give up an IT career!
Yet you are also saying that a part of you wants to see the US IT Workforce shrink... oh yeah, as long as it is not you... gotcha. Sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but do you know how much of an ass those comments make you?
Tes
Umm, I sit at your house, use your network and attempt to break into some federal computer system. The fed's track you down, since you were connected to your provider, you tell them about some phantom friend that used your network. I deny it, guess what? You're responsible. Doubt you'll be charged? Give it a try. It was your equipment, it was your account.
The RIAA is going to use the same tactic, they DO NOT need to associate it with an individual, they CAN accuse the College of copyright infringement and go after the College. The College either settles, or provides proof it was not the College persee' but some student (cue throwing student on fire). So you want a magic law? Well, bud, the law as I told you is them operating under the copyright laws.
Oh incidentally, I was involved in providing information to officials several years back about a criminal case. The College I was working at refused to provide any login information about a student first, after several threats of obstruction of justice (valid threat to) information was handed. Sure, that was criminal and this is civil...
Yes I understand said MAC addresses can be faked, the point I was making, is the RIAA could lean on the said College to attempt to force a MAC registration. Your MAC address not registered? No IP address for you. Similar could be done with their gateway to the Internet, if the MAC address is not in an address table, drop packets. Sure, you could snoop the local network, grab a random MAC address, wait for the sender to go offline, use it for your own usage, but the RIAA does not care about getting the actual guilty party, they just want a target, ANY target.
So yes, as I was saying, what they ARE trying to do, is force a College to either a) take responsibility for all activity coming from their network to the big bad world, or b) pass responsibility on to the student. The only laws that applies is the copyright laws being violated, if the College does not play ball, they are going to try and strong arm the said College into giving up the offenders to protect themselves, or said College becomes responsible for the violations as the network operator.
Don't assume the lack of a written federal or state law that says the RIAA can do whatever they want slows them down; the RIAA is acting upon cases of copyright violation of protected work, they are attempting to settle "damages" against those copyrights.
To them, this is perfect justification to do as they please.
Tes
In regards to Colleges and the such, the individual cannot be held accountant when operating behind a NAT device without the College helping the RIAA, but the College paying for the internet connection then sharing it inside their network can be. What they are saying, is they want these Colleges to force MAC address registration on campus. I.e. students are required to register all their NIC MAC addresses, they also want the colleges to record incoming and outgoing traffic inside their network and associate that traffic with a particular MAC (via a DHCP lease log perhaps) address.
The idea is ingenious if they can force the college to hand off accountability to the student, or if the college is willing to block p2p traffic altogether.
Agreed! Any good satellite company will come out and find a place within an "acceptable" area for you if they get an acceptable signal. As long as it isn't a long run that will incur significant signal loss (I think RG6 is rated to what 1000ft?) most companies are willing to install where you want it, they may charge you extra for installation, but you have options. Is the poster sure there are no WISP's in the area?
I'd be more intent on using the Anti-American approach; America is based on capitalism and having exclusive deals with a single provider is very anti-competition, is therefor anti-American or some such. Demand that the board provide you with an analysis of a) Benefits to the Citizens, b) Their plan for network improvements (leads back to a), c) demand the board and mayor provide evidence that his exclusive deal has actually improved communications, tax revenue and general sustainability of the infrastructure.
The idea is not to make Comcast do anything, the idea is to get rid of these exclusive deals. A city signing on to exclusive deals, generally brokered by employees of the city with something to gain should be illegal. There is no reason to have a single provider system, none at all that is good for you and I.
No it is bad that they ask; if they actually had a fundamental understanding of freedom and liberty, they would be ashamed of themselves.
I think you are right, it is not like NASA has crashed any probe ever in to another planet by accident.
I for one, welcome our new R2D2 sized falling space debris overlords! May they fall on your house, scar you for life and give you a reason as to why you are still a virgin and living with your parents when you are 40 years old! On the other hand, I feel bad for your parents - so I withdraw my previous comment. May our new... ah fuck whatever!
Wow it sank, people died, it was a loss sure, we've explained it to death, made crappy movies about it! Can we move on now? Or should we spend another couple hundred million dollars explaining what we already know? It is not like we need that money elsewhere is it? No hungry people in the world, no space to explore, no economies to fix.
I miss my Tank Mage! Trammel was not bad, it allowed crafters to hang out and be carebears - the problem was, when they kept expanding Trammels role in the game instead of expanding Fel! New quests, new creatures, new drops should of only been available in Fel. My wife and I owned hoses only in Fel and crafted there, it was _not_ that dangerous if you knew what the heck you were doing. Most reds I found were just that red in color only, they had no clue and probably were simple ganksters of noob crafters etc. I ran an unassisted client (okay, I used UOMap, sue me :P) and still whipped some serious ass of the macroers.
Going rogue is never a good option, you're often left with a less than satisfactory implementation of what you're trying to accomplish and if the powers that be discover your existence, either you're fired or your project is canned with no chance of appeal (that becomes spite on Corp IT's part). If you're also careless you will take down other systems like you describe.
I used to work in an environment where each business unit had their own IT support groups, rolling back up to Corp. IT. We were a manufacturing firm and for the most part, those that were making the decisions up top had no concept of what we did or needed in the business units (how could they?). The issue is, whether those up top are willing to learn about the business.
I was a rogue operative, even inside my own team in my own IT group in a sub business unit; I was the guy pushing pulling legacy data via MQ-Series, instead of via FTP each morning so we could get real time production data as it was entered in our legacy systems. I was the guy pushing using SSRS with SQL Server to deliver snapshot reports each morning, while still allowing the users to view the reports in real time. I was the guy that was given a mission to eliminate as much manual process in reporting as possible (i.e.: We have 15 people doing reports, we don't need 15 people doing reports... please write code to fix this). The strategy I was using was having the leaders of your department or business unit push what they need for you. If you're a lowly programmer or end user, no one is going to listen if you go it solo (I found this the hard way). But if a director of your department, starts talking with IT with you or for you, telling them we are trying to accomplish a goal you need their assistance on Corp. Systems side, then things will happen. If your unit lead has no desire to do this and you are the only one trying to affect change, then perhaps it is time to leave and find another job - some places simply will not innovate or have no desire to look at new things until they are forced to.
Tes
I apologize for the spelling and grammar mistakes :) Work can be distracting at times ;)
Faith isn't about rationality (this may piss off a few people, but it is true); faith is about a confidence that something created or set things in motion. If you subscribe to the Christian view, then the end result of this thing we call life is either eternal hell or eternal paradise (I have issues with these concepts even as a Christian - perhaps I am by my own beliefs not a true Christian). As a science type myself, my faith gives me confidence that there are rules to the universe and that the rules we are trying to learn exist for a reason and do not arbitrarily act in contradiction to one another.
Q: "how is this idea any different from an atheists viewpoint other than what started it all (which atheists generally have no viewpoint on)?"
A: There really is no difference; I feel compelled to explain the creation of this universe is because a Supreme Being made it so. From an atheists stand point, it is irrelevant if God created the universe or not, if we're just examining the rules of this universe. Our ideas diverge, when you as an Atheist attempt to explain what created the big bang; I believe a Supreme Being, you may believe another universe fell apart and our universe started as a tiny fragment of another, or this is the 2nd to nth time our universe has expanded and collapsed.
Q: "What relevance does God have now that he's set the rules of the universe (physics et al) in place?"
A: Truth is, I don't know. If God is all powerful, then God has seen the beginning and the end of his creation. I.e. God is timeless, so right at this moment is He relevant, on a linear scale? Perhaps not, but on a grander scale live by my rules and there will be a place for you in heaven, then I'd have to say yes.
See my other attempt to answer one of your questions:
Q: "Does God ever interfere with the universe (changes the rules, even on a local or minute scale) for his own purposes (e.g. Jesus walking on water, Moses parting the sea, other misc miracles)?"
A: Refer to my attempt to answer above; if he has seen all, then he has already set things in motion that will caused Moses to part the sea, if He is all powerful and created this construct, then He has the intimate knowledge needed to cause an odd force of some kind to pull the sea apart. Because we can't explain why it happened, does not mean it did not and was not programmed (if you will) to happen.
So is this interference or preordained based on the rules He wrote for the verse? I dunno, I think that is up to the individual to decide.
A: If so, why? And does this have any effect on how one should live their life?
Q: Dunno on the first part, I am not God, hehe. Everything that happens around us has the potential to affect us. This is where it gets tricky though, if God has absolute control over the rules of the universe, does that mean we still have free will? Or is the shape of the universe (and of us) already determined based on the programming He has done? I don't really know for sure; if you take it at face value that we are defined by the rules He has created, then no we do not. But is this really true? It is conceivable that God created the rules of the universe, physics etc and how we evolve but left out any programming on how we as individuals operate (though human nature would seem to indicate certain tendencies were programmed in - and yes, the tendency for violence is one of the things I am really pissed off about).
Q: is there ANYTHING about your belief structure that changes how you should live your life?
A: My questions change. I did not believe in God for so long, I am still not 100% sure why I started to believe again I was so hard core science type and a total atheist. But no matter the questions I asked science, certain things in my life still did not make sense (very personal reasons I'd rather not discuss); somewhere along the way during a physics class, certain faith based opinions and views started to emerge in my skull, some of them I found reassuring some scared me.
Maybe
Since the average Joe does not like to use their brain power beyond deciding what they want to eat, what TV program they are going to watch or if they need more beer, I'd say option one is likely yes.
Most people are programmed that questioning God's existence is blasphemy, like wise any topic that questions where we came from that does not end in "God created everything" is again blasphemy and a taboo topic, so they are not open to questioning our existence beyond scripture.
There is nothing inherently wrong with Religion per see' I believe in Christ, I accept him as my savior, but I also have faith that God created a physical universe with rules (we call it physics). If we accept the fact that God or whatever you want to call this Supreme Being, created a construct (the Universe) and then began to apply rules to said construct (physics), in order for this construct to remain viable, could God simply pop man in to existence? Or would God need to work within the rules of this construct that He created for it to remain viable? Okay, put another way: If the construct rules imply that object "a" could not possibly exist within the construct, could God place object "a" inside the construct while still allowing the rules He set in place to be viable and consistent without rewriting these rules? Most Christians would say "yes, God is all powerful" granted, He is - but I have to argue that God would need to alter the rules of this universe in order for object "a" to exist within it to allow the universe and its existing rules to remain viable.
I am sure I am going to get flamed for this, but I have faith that the physical universe exists with rules, I have this faith because of what I said above. This means, our existence is built using the rules that God created for the universe. I am of the opinion, that evolution is the mechanism that God used to bring the proper components together within the bounds of this construct to create us. I've met no Creationists or Christians that would ever accept this is the way it happened they believe God snapped his fingers and said "let there be man". I believe God snapped his fingers and altered or added rules to this construct so man could evolve.
I believe it is illogical not to think that God has to work within the rules of the construct He created; that snapping something in to existence that violates the existing rules/laws of the universe might break the thing He created, instead he would need to alter the fundamental rules He created from the beginning and let it ripple through existence until He has His desired result. Most people take offense to this idea, because they feel it undermines the superiority of God and His power - I tend to disagree
Tes
In a related story, Microsoft CEO Steve Balmer threw multiple chairs after he heard of the newly discovered "young" planet. Steve was quoted as saying, "I bet freaking google has already tried to map the fucker! ".
Whoops, I forgot to review my draft before submission, sorry Mr. / Ms. Grammar Nazi! I so beg your forgiveness, shall I bend over for you so you can administer punishment?
Actually, I believe they shutdown due to a safety issue. When they lose grid power for powering water cooling pumps etc, their standard response is to shutdown for safety reasons. Yes I know, a power generating plant that gets power off the grid, but consider if the plant is unable to drive a turbine to power its own pumps, where does it get the power from? Okay backup generators, but they can also fail. From what I hear the current dropped enough from the grid to cause them to need to shutdown the reactors. This is a good safety thing. The bad thing is the issues on the grid that caused this and other sites to shutdown generation.
And now, we return you to regular scheduled blackout... if this were an actual emergency, you would of killed the person sitting next to you.
Tes
With all those prescription drugs, yeah I'd say Rush is pretty high...
Sure sounds like the terrorists are winning so far doesn't it? They created terror, which has lead to panic, big brother being thrusted into everyones face under the idea of "keeping us safe".
Tes
No jumping ship is the right thing to do if the environment has become hostile; what the hell do you think it is going to be like now? It has now become a us vs them mentality. Apparently you've never seen this happen; I've worked as a consultant in a Union shop and seen disputes over OT and over other things, the end result is generally a sense of hostility between employer and employee.
Everything else you say, I agree with - I always negotiate a) a good rate and b) extra benefits on the side, being able to work from home is one of them and being able to comp out when there is no official OT or comp time policy here.
Tes
Sure they can, they just do not tell you that they are doing that and most places have in the employmeny contract that you are not allowed to discuss your earnings with another employee. The ownership is on the employee to prove they were discriminated against.
Maybe I am confused, now that they are classified non-excempt, does that mean the OT pay is retroactive? If so, grab money, cue job search...