I was talking about this one: "The AAG cable's western terminus will be in Mersing. It will run from there through major landing points in Lantau in Hong Kong, Currimao in the Philippines, and Hawaii to its eastern terminus in San Luis Obispo, California."
It came up in discussion threads after the massive indian internet disruption in late 2008.
Of course that's 7 internet years since then so possibly new cables exist.
Everyone involved with movies makes more money these days.
You see it in the way movies have less of everything real (smaller sets, fewer extras, fewer real stunts, simulated exotic locations).
IN the 20's, 30's, 40's and 50's, most hollywood types were paid salaries a lot closer to the rest of the country. And they made a *ton* more movies as a result.
Each movie was cheap- the audience paid the same percentage of their income to see a movie a week that we pay to see a movie a month. An actor might be in 15 movies in 5 years.
The major failures that I see in projects by new project managers often turn on not asking for availability by secondary and tertiary teams such as testing, documentation, and installation teams.
---
I like RUP methodology a lot. It uses agile concepts and has a high focus on identifying "risks" early.
This is a wonderful concept that has helped me many times. Break the project into pieces that are easy to crank out and those which are unproven ("risks"). Resolve all unproven aspects of the project before beginning the easy parts of the project.
Are you depending on MySQL working under Windows Happy Clown edition? Then make sure of that early. Do you need to code a bunch of transaction classes and services for data? Do that later.
Starting the easy parts (so you can show progress) results in $100 million dollar canceled projects. ---
Agile/Rup/etc. type management (vs Waterfall) assumes you can't capture 100% of the requirements in advance so you have frequent iterations.
It's also true that debugging big O time is exponential. The sooner you let the testing team start testing, the more effective their testing will be. Bugs will be found sooner and be easier to fix.
If you want a recipe for missing your deadlines, do a lot of coding up front- never show the users until it is 99% complete- and give it to testers when all unit testing is finished and the project is 100% done.
Look at the current financial crisis (which stunned Greenspan).
War is extremely rational and profitable for a subset of society. That subset is able fairly easily to make emotional arguments- even stupid ones "we must fight because we are fighting", "we must fight because we have lost so much it would be wrong to stop fighting".
In some cases, wars are inevitable. If there are resources for 100 people and you have 200 people, someone is going to die.
The current situation is bleak at best, Maritime attacks are on the increase. Pirates are more aggressive. The financial impact is significant and increasing. Military solutions are weak- they can't be everywhere at the same time and private sector solutions are non-existent...
Bond Papers reported in April 2006 on the offshore security issue. At the time, the commander of Canadian Forces in the Atlantic region said DND was making the security issue a top priority. A former chief of strategic planning for the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) also described the offshore rigs as a potentially "high value target" for terrorists. Attacking the rigs could cause severe environmental harm and disrupt local economies.... Byline: Graham Grant AN ALBANIAN immigrant who sparked a massive North Sea security alert waslast night receiving psychiatric care. Dana Rusa, 23, who.... An oil rig in the North Sea has been evacuated after a security alert. Up to 539 oil workers are being moved off the affected rig in an operation that began...... Nigeria: The Implications of the Latest Oil Rig Attack | STRATFOR Despite an expanded and refurbished navy, Nigeria cannot guarantee the security of oil rigs in the Gulf of Guinea. And despite presidential and foreign...
---
And on land we have the multiple trillions (and thousands of lives) spent on oil field security. Oil companies have managed to externalize their security costs to the military. The true cost of oil is probably $400 to $800 more per family per year. Ignoring ongoing cost for mangled veterans.
A friend of mine had a hacker friend who got a job testing security at nuclear plants.
He found so many security flaws that the managers posted his picture and said, "Please help our new security tester".
Among the flaws. * A "man trap" which he easily climbed out of. * People who let him in to secure areas when he said "Just a second- hold the door" * Secure areas with only partial concrete/steel walls (the rest of the surrounding area was sheetrock) * trivial passwords * Passwords on sticky notes
The impact of a nuclear terrorist attack could be catastrophic. It's like the financial derivatives- the downside was unlikely- but the consequences were horrific. If folks found a way to attack America, China, or Russia through Uruguay nuclear power plants, then an attack will happen.
I'm not sure it is paranoia when you've been attacked multiple times
Nuclear is a reasonable part of the mix. It's land bound and so you get protection and law enforcement for free (except for having to overbuild the structure by a few million dollars in terrorist proofing these days). You have a large local crew and a local security force to protect it (equivalent to a coast guard cutter & crew). It's probably a lot harder to steal valuable stuff from it.
Nuclear does make a big target - but any centralized power system will. Not sure what the effect of a 20k non-nuclear bunker buster would be.
Developing countries populations are replaced by faster breeding populations (islamic europe... palestinian isreal... spanish texas and california).
View wealth and education as penicillin. It works for a while, then the part of the population that is immune to it outbreeds the rest and becomes dominant in the population.
You don't get my point- there is nothing we can do and it ends horrifically. Even killing large numbers of people would not result in a net drop in population. i.e. We are doomed. Gather ye rosebuds while ye may. She dies, he dies, we all die.
I'm not proposing you do anything about it. We are 3 billion people past doing anything about it. I think there would be objections to a long term solution.
It's okay-- after any die off, the surviving population will adapt even if they have completely trashed the oceans, poisoned the environment with artificial estrogens, and destroyed most of the arable farm land. It's not like we are going to leave america to go find a 50 square mile arable spot somewhere else in the world. You mostly die in place.
Yes, speaking as a Heinlein indoctrinated former libertarian, let me say it is a great in theory (small government, low taxes!) but sucks in reality (no one to protect 90% of society from the most powerful, most abusive 10%).
I think in the real world, libertarian philosophy turns out badly much quicker than many competing philosophies. Nothing stops abuse long term (the rich and powerful always take over).
Look at Greenspan... shocked that people acted in their own short term interest regardless of the damage to their companies and the nation.
Yes- I believe in a world where people strip houses of wiring and pirates attack ships, that the large commercial windmills that contain very large copper cores (look it up- I did last time- it's about $30k wholesale apparently) would either require expensive protection ( say a coast guard cutter and a crew of 30 ) or it would be robbed.
And no, my personal windmill or solar cells, generator, etc. would not be attacked while a large concentrated source of power would be attacked (as they have been many times, including by america in recent wars). A wind plant with a couple hundred 10 story tall windmills concentrated within a couple square miles would be a great target. Ten thousand solar panels, windmills, etc. sitting next to everyone's house would not be attacked. (But they also are subject to theft - not common yet, but get enough of them on enough roofs and these $800 panels will get ripped off too- just like air conditioner compressors, wiring, etc.)
The aluminum is a new twist- perhaps it would not be. Depends on how valuable it is. But, you still have to protect the windmills from extortion type blackmail.
The most common argument "it hasn't happened yet" worked really well at stopping the 9/11 attack and many other things that haven't happened yet.
I would also say, if I have $100 to spend, then once you past 6 to 10 bands I like, someone is not going to get money unless someone lowers the price of their music below the $10 to $15 range.
and even argued that sea based windmills would be inefficient recently (I think they will be attacked for their parts and be big targets if there was a war and I think maintenance in a high saline environment will be higher than they think)...
I do have to point out that * any supplemental power comes off of the most expensive part of your bill (I pay more over 250kwh, and a whole lot over 750kwh). * the more windmills we build, the cheaper it will get to make them.
Still- I think nano-solar type approaches are the most likely to work out.
The ultimate result of feeding 6 billion people... is at least 7 billion people. The ultimate result of feeding 7 billion people... is at least 8 billion people.
it's a red queen's race-- and the longer we run it, the more horrifically it ends.
Libertarians ignore the fundamental reality that only a powerful government can keep their "miracle land" in force.
Corporations and powerful individuals do not behave in agreement with libertarian beliefs- the behave in their own raw self interest.
The inevitable cycle so far is-- the powerful reach a certain point and begin to grow unbounded. They crush everyone else and take all their stuff.
The powerful finally become such a small part of society, that the rest of society kills them and takes their stuff. Even in democracies usually- and when it doesn't come to violence, the alterative is voting to take all their stuff (99% or even over 100% tax rates).
It's okay- I get that you are not arguing- and I even get your point that a lot of folks would not be significantly negatively impacted by a computer turnoff policy ( I am particularly interested in the "auto-turnon" feature mentioned here-- tho in many cases, it would result in losing my "state" so it would still be invalid for me).
Okay so on your points... There are a couple of issues that I take with your situation:
First off... I'm a low level supervisor over a team of eight people over three business areas that used to have three separate teams of 6 to 10 people per team 36 months ago. Deferred maintenance and business growth is causing problems which is irritating executives outside of the IT area. Adding resources is not an option (in fact, I'll probably lose another resource or two before the end of the summer).
To vent a bit- I was told I had to attend the meeting, outside of my regular working hours *in person* (not by phone) by my manager- who is not attending the meetings at all, and then the two executives who are calling the meetings so early- phoned in. So I'm a bit pissed about that.
I had to answer questions without preparation based on overnight results of patches, network based documents, and analyst summary emails sent to me after working hours last night. These early meetings will continue as long as there are problems. Problems will probably continue as long as we are understaffed.
The area I supervise has so few resources lately that the problems have been growing. Adding additional resources is not an option (in fact, I'll have less in August). , if you really walked into the meeting a half an hour early, why was everyone else also there half and hour early, and why would it be expected that you would immediately produce answers to questions about emails sent yesterday with absolutely no time to take your laptop out of the bag, flip it open and press the power button? I do not know why executives insist on calling early meetings instead of end of day meetings.
Second... A blackberry would be insufficient since I had to open, read, and quickly summarize documents on the network and work with large emails. Plus (and this would more support your point), I hate blackberries. Mine sits on my desk. It kept making 911 calls when I carried it around with me. The holster broke. It kept spamming me with meeting invites that I had already processed on my laptop. And it was *slooooow* compared to my laptop. I have to keep up with/approve a lot of infopath documents and it's easier to do that when I keep my laptop with me. I can't respond to microsoft infopath documents on my blackberry. But I agree- I could probably use the blackberry more than I do- and on some mornings (which I couldn't predict), I could get by on the blackberry without needing a laptop. Heck- as bad as it is, some days I could get by without accessing the laptop all day (just along series of meetings).
Third, Yup- which is my I was only in screensaver mode last night. A complete power-down would kill me under these constraints.
Don't get me wrong- I have waste time (as you see in this post). But it tends to be after lunch- not when I arrive. Our day is typically "emergency mode for the first two hours in the morning, then slows down until lunch, meetings/work time after lunch, then working to meet deadlines (even working late- one guy put in over 80 hours a couple weeks ago) until you finally just get up and walk out the door.
I won't arguing that I can be prone to hyperboly. If we were having this discussion 2 or 3 years ago, what you are saying would probably be true. I'm not an essential cog- I have absolutely no authority- I used to have authority but things have gotten so crisis mode that the managers are directly doing everything and bypassing things. I never said I couldn't afford 3 minutes- I said the lost productivity costs exceed the electrical power savings. As I said above, you could turn my computer off during lunch and I co
You can put in almost any search term and by the rule of 32, you see an adult site for it in the top results.
"innocent girl"-- top result- an adult site. With "safe moderation" on. You certainly don't want to search for "girl horses" because your aspiring equestrienne wants to find information about girls and horses.
I think that's fine- the internet IS an adult area. OTH, I'm jaded and I've still been squicked by some random images that come up and I have no idea how they got into a particular search results image summary page. The phrase "my eyes!" comes to mind at times like that.
If you are a concerned parent and you want to filter your children's internet experience, you want google disabled unless you are in the room.
Now on the anti microsoft rant... I bet the same thing is true of their search engine which they do not block.
---
I think it would be cool if web sites had an "appropriate age" or "rating" in their robots.txt file.
Then search engines would have the tools to allow users to search and get the appropriate "G" or "X" rated material they desired.
Exactly, And trains are not currently as big a target as planes.
Security to board trains (and Buses) is not as time-consuming as it is for a plane.
However-- planes are frequently 20 to 30 miles away (due to noise, safety, and land for runways). I think the comedienne Kathleen Maddigan (sp) said something like,"I flew in to Denver Airport this morning-- tho I'm not sure why you guys put it in Canada".
No. I'm saying that just this morning, I walked into a meeting a half an hour before my normal start time and was asked questions regarding emails sent yesterday which required that my laptop was functional. I'd prefer not to sit there looking helpless while I wait for my laptop to boot up.
However, since you and others here are apparently not expected to work from the second you walk in the door, perhaps you can leave your PC's off an extra minute and save the power I used with my laptop in sleep mode overnight instead of turning it off.
Some days, it's not like this. Some days, I come in and it is boring and nothing happens. But with all the cutbacks in resources, those days are not as common as they used to be.
Slashdot Mirror
So is Spock.
It takes a good actor to pull of a supposedly "emotionless" character.
Pixar and Dreamworks have gotten pretty good at "improvisational" stuff for their animated actors tho.
That was a cool thread and it all fit.
I wonder if that is an archetype and there are silent movie/vaudeville performers before Fatty who we have simply forgotten about?
I was talking about this one: "The AAG cable's western terminus will be in Mersing. It will run from there through major landing points in Lantau in Hong Kong, Currimao in the Philippines, and Hawaii to its eastern terminus in San Luis Obispo, California."
It came up in discussion threads after the massive indian internet disruption in late 2008.
Of course that's 7 internet years since then so possibly new cables exist.
Everyone involved with movies makes more money these days.
You see it in the way movies have less of everything real (smaller sets, fewer extras, fewer real stunts, simulated exotic locations).
IN the 20's, 30's, 40's and 50's, most hollywood types were paid salaries a lot closer to the rest of the country. And they made a *ton* more movies as a result.
Each movie was cheap- the audience paid the same percentage of their income to see a movie a week that we pay to see a movie a month. An actor might be in 15 movies in 5 years.
The movie needed a good score and a better soundtrack.
It had a jarring sound hit or miss soundtrack and a worthless score.
The violence is tricky- some violence was put in- that wasn't in the comic books. OTH, some violence in the comic books was removed from the movie.
Other than that, I wouldn't change a bit or any bitsies.
Along those lines, apparently a single cable leaving california provides most of the indian bandwidth.
They probably need a bit more redundancy there.
www.pmi.org
I want to highlight the team effort aspect.
The major failures that I see in projects by new project managers often turn on not asking for availability by secondary and tertiary teams such as testing, documentation, and installation teams.
---
I like RUP methodology a lot. It uses agile concepts and has a high focus on identifying "risks" early.
This is a wonderful concept that has helped me many times. Break the project into pieces that are easy to crank out and those which are unproven ("risks"). Resolve all unproven aspects of the project before beginning the easy parts of the project.
Are you depending on MySQL working under Windows Happy Clown edition? Then make sure of that early.
Do you need to code a bunch of transaction classes and services for data? Do that later.
Starting the easy parts (so you can show progress) results in $100 million dollar canceled projects.
---
Agile/Rup/etc. type management (vs Waterfall) assumes you can't capture 100% of the requirements in advance so you have frequent iterations.
It's also true that debugging big O time is exponential. The sooner you let the testing team start testing, the more effective their testing will be. Bugs will be found sooner and be easier to fix.
If you want a recipe for missing your deadlines, do a lot of coding up front- never show the users until it is 99% complete- and give it to testers when all unit testing is finished and the project is 100% done.
Good Luck!
One of the largest non-nuclear explosions resulted from data corruption like that.
Look at the current financial crisis (which stunned Greenspan).
War is extremely rational and profitable for a subset of society. That subset is able fairly easily to make emotional arguments- even stupid ones "we must fight because we are fighting", "we must fight because we have lost so much it would be wrong to stop fighting".
In some cases, wars are inevitable. If there are resources for 100 people and you have 200 people, someone is going to die.
Search for "oil rig security"-- first page.
http://www.rzdmpa.com/index.php/oil-rig-security
The current situation is bleak at best, Maritime attacks are on the increase. Pirates are more aggressive. The financial impact is significant and increasing. Military solutions are weak- they can't be everywhere at the same time and private sector solutions are non-existent...
http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:JLjTVfGFIkIJ:bondpapers.blogspot.com/2006/11/oil-rig-security-gains-national.html+oil+rig+security&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Possible national security threats to offshore oil installations is prompting the federal natural resources department to legislation governing the offshore, according to the Ottawa Citizen. The changes would give greater say in offshore physical security to the two joint federal-provincial regulatory boards.
Bond Papers reported in April 2006 on the offshore security issue. At the time, the commander of Canadian Forces in the Atlantic region said DND was making the security issue a top priority. A former chief of strategic planning for the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) also described the offshore rigs as a potentially "high value target" for terrorists. Attacking the rigs could cause severe environmental harm and disrupt local economies. ... ... ... ... ...
Byline: Graham Grant AN ALBANIAN immigrant who sparked a massive North Sea security alert waslast night receiving psychiatric care. Dana Rusa, 23, who.
An oil rig in the North Sea has been evacuated after a security alert. Up to 539 oil workers are being moved off the affected rig in an operation that began
Nigeria: The Implications of the Latest Oil Rig Attack | STRATFOR
Despite an expanded and refurbished navy, Nigeria cannot guarantee the security of oil rigs in the Gulf of Guinea. And despite presidential and foreign
---
And on land we have the multiple trillions (and thousands of lives) spent on oil field security. Oil companies have managed to externalize their security costs to the military. The true cost of oil is probably $400 to $800 more per family per year. Ignoring ongoing cost for mangled veterans.
There was a cool sci fi story about that concept back in the 50's. It involved some kind of inflatable plastic towers.
Seems like if you use the differential to any degree, you are going to cancel it.
Not paranoid enough.
A friend of mine had a hacker friend who got a job testing security at nuclear plants.
He found so many security flaws that the managers posted his picture and said, "Please help our new security tester".
Among the flaws.
* A "man trap" which he easily climbed out of.
* People who let him in to secure areas when he said "Just a second- hold the door"
* Secure areas with only partial concrete/steel walls (the rest of the surrounding area was sheetrock)
* trivial passwords
* Passwords on sticky notes
The impact of a nuclear terrorist attack could be catastrophic. It's like the financial derivatives- the downside was unlikely- but the consequences were horrific.
If folks found a way to attack America, China, or Russia through Uruguay nuclear power plants, then an attack will happen.
I'm not sure it is paranoia when you've been attacked multiple times
Nuclear is a reasonable part of the mix. It's land bound and so you get protection and law enforcement for free (except for having to overbuild the structure by a few million dollars in terrorist proofing these days). You have a large local crew and a local security force to protect it (equivalent to a coast guard cutter & crew). It's probably a lot harder to steal valuable stuff from it.
Nuclear does make a big target - but any centralized power system will. Not sure what the effect of a 20k non-nuclear bunker buster would be.
Developing countries populations are replaced by faster breeding populations (islamic europe... palestinian isreal... spanish texas and california).
View wealth and education as penicillin. It works for a while, then the part of the population that is immune to it outbreeds the rest and becomes dominant in the population.
You don't get my point- there is nothing we can do and it ends horrifically. Even killing large numbers of people would not result in a net drop in population.
i.e. We are doomed. Gather ye rosebuds while ye may. She dies, he dies, we all die.
I'm not proposing you do anything about it. We are 3 billion people past doing anything about it. I think there would be objections to a long term solution.
It's okay-- after any die off, the surviving population will adapt even if they have completely trashed the oceans, poisoned the environment with artificial estrogens, and destroyed most of the arable farm land. It's not like we are going to leave america to go find a 50 square mile arable spot somewhere else in the world. You mostly die in place.
Yes, speaking as a Heinlein indoctrinated former libertarian, let me say it is a great in theory (small government, low taxes!) but sucks in reality (no one to protect 90% of society from the most powerful, most abusive 10%).
I think in the real world, libertarian philosophy turns out badly much quicker than many competing philosophies. Nothing stops abuse long term (the rich and powerful always take over).
Look at Greenspan... shocked that people acted in their own short term interest regardless of the damage to their companies and the nation.
Yes- I believe in a world where people strip houses of wiring and pirates attack ships, that the large commercial windmills that contain very large copper cores (look it up- I did last time- it's about $30k wholesale apparently) would either require expensive protection ( say a coast guard cutter and a crew of 30 ) or it would be robbed.
And no, my personal windmill or solar cells, generator, etc. would not be attacked while a large concentrated source of power would be attacked (as they have been many times, including by america in recent wars). A wind plant with a couple hundred 10 story tall windmills concentrated within a couple square miles would be a great target. Ten thousand solar panels, windmills, etc. sitting next to everyone's house would not be attacked. (But they also are subject to theft - not common yet, but get enough of them on enough roofs and these $800 panels will get ripped off too- just like air conditioner compressors, wiring, etc.)
The aluminum is a new twist- perhaps it would not be. Depends on how valuable it is. But, you still have to protect the windmills from extortion type blackmail.
The most common argument "it hasn't happened yet" worked really well at stopping the 9/11 attack and many other things that haven't happened yet.
I would also say, if I have $100 to spend, then once you past 6 to 10 bands I like, someone is not going to get money unless someone lowers the price of their music below the $10 to $15 range.
and even argued that sea based windmills would be inefficient recently (I think they will be attacked for their parts and be big targets if there was a war and I think maintenance in a high saline environment will be higher than they think)...
I do have to point out that
* any supplemental power comes off of the most expensive part of your bill (I pay more over 250kwh, and a whole lot over 750kwh).
* the more windmills we build, the cheaper it will get to make them.
Still- I think nano-solar type approaches are the most likely to work out.
The ultimate result of feeding 6 billion people... is at least 7 billion people.
The ultimate result of feeding 7 billion people... is at least 8 billion people.
it's a red queen's race-- and the longer we run it, the more horrifically it ends.
Libertarians ignore the fundamental reality that only a powerful government can keep their "miracle land" in force.
Corporations and powerful individuals do not behave in agreement with libertarian beliefs- the behave in their own raw self interest.
The inevitable cycle so far is-- the powerful reach a certain point and begin to grow unbounded. They crush everyone else and take all their stuff.
The powerful finally become such a small part of society, that the rest of society kills them and takes their stuff. Even in democracies usually- and when it doesn't come to violence, the alterative is voting to take all their stuff (99% or even over 100% tax rates).
rinse, wash, repeat.
It's okay- I get that you are not arguing- and I even get your point that a lot of folks would not be significantly negatively impacted by a computer turnoff policy ( I am particularly interested in the "auto-turnon" feature mentioned here-- tho in many cases, it would result in losing my "state" so it would still be invalid for me).
Okay so on your points...
There are a couple of issues that I take with your situation:
First off...
I'm a low level supervisor over a team of eight people over three business areas that used to have three separate teams of 6 to 10 people per team 36 months ago. Deferred maintenance and business growth is causing problems which is irritating executives outside of the IT area. Adding resources is not an option (in fact, I'll probably lose another resource or two before the end of the summer).
To vent a bit- I was told I had to attend the meeting, outside of my regular working hours *in person* (not by phone) by my manager- who is not attending the meetings at all, and then the two executives who are calling the meetings so early- phoned in. So I'm a bit pissed about that.
I had to answer questions without preparation based on overnight results of patches, network based documents, and analyst summary emails sent to me after working hours last night. These early meetings will continue as long as there are problems. Problems will probably continue as long as we are understaffed.
The area I supervise has so few resources lately that the problems have been growing. Adding additional resources is not an option (in fact, I'll have less in August).
, if you really walked into the meeting a half an hour early, why was everyone else also there half and hour early, and why would it be expected that you would immediately produce answers to questions about emails sent yesterday with absolutely no time to take your laptop out of the bag, flip it open and press the power button? I do not know why executives insist on calling early meetings instead of end of day meetings.
Second...
A blackberry would be insufficient since I had to open, read, and quickly summarize documents on the network and work with large emails. Plus (and this would more support your point), I hate blackberries. Mine sits on my desk. It kept making 911 calls when I carried it around with me. The holster broke. It kept spamming me with meeting invites that I had already processed on my laptop. And it was *slooooow* compared to my laptop. I have to keep up with/approve a lot of infopath documents and it's easier to do that when I keep my laptop with me. I can't respond to microsoft infopath documents on my blackberry.
But I agree- I could probably use the blackberry more than I do- and on some mornings (which I couldn't predict), I could get by on the blackberry without needing a laptop. Heck- as bad as it is, some days I could get by without accessing the laptop all day (just along series of meetings).
Third,
Yup- which is my I was only in screensaver mode last night.
A complete power-down would kill me under these constraints.
Don't get me wrong- I have waste time (as you see in this post). But it tends to be after lunch- not when I arrive. Our day is typically "emergency mode for the first two hours in the morning, then slows down until lunch, meetings/work time after lunch, then working to meet deadlines (even working late- one guy put in over 80 hours a couple weeks ago) until you finally just get up and walk out the door.
I won't arguing that I can be prone to hyperboly. If we were having this discussion 2 or 3 years ago, what you are saying would probably be true. I'm not an essential cog- I have absolutely no authority- I used to have authority but things have gotten so crisis mode that the managers are directly doing everything and bypassing things.
I never said I couldn't afford 3 minutes- I said the lost productivity costs exceed the electrical power savings. As I said above, you could turn my computer off during lunch and I co
Google is not a safe site.
You can put in almost any search term and by the rule of 32, you see an adult site for it in the top results.
"innocent girl"-- top result- an adult site. With "safe moderation" on. You certainly don't want to search for "girl horses" because your aspiring equestrienne wants to find information about girls and horses.
I think that's fine- the internet IS an adult area. OTH, I'm jaded and I've still been squicked by some random images that come up and I have no idea how they got into a particular search results image summary page. The phrase "my eyes!" comes to mind at times like that.
If you are a concerned parent and you want to filter your children's internet experience, you want google disabled unless you are in the room.
Now on the anti microsoft rant... I bet the same thing is true of their search engine which they do not block.
---
I think it would be cool if web sites had an "appropriate age" or "rating" in their robots.txt file.
Then search engines would have the tools to allow users to search and get the appropriate "G" or "X" rated material they desired.
Exactly,
And trains are not currently as big a target as planes.
Security to board trains (and Buses) is not as time-consuming as it is for a plane.
However-- planes are frequently 20 to 30 miles away (due to noise, safety, and land for runways). I think the comedienne Kathleen Maddigan (sp) said something like,"I flew in to Denver Airport this morning-- tho I'm not sure why you guys put it in Canada".
No.
I'm saying that just this morning, I walked into a meeting a half an hour before my normal start time and was asked questions regarding emails sent yesterday which required that my laptop was functional. I'd prefer not to sit there looking helpless while I wait for my laptop to boot up.
However, since you and others here are apparently not expected to work from the second you walk in the door, perhaps you can leave your PC's off an extra minute and save the power I used with my laptop in sleep mode overnight instead of turning it off.
Some days, it's not like this. Some days, I come in and it is boring and nothing happens. But with all the cutbacks in resources, those days are not as common as they used to be.