While you did a fine job of finding and illuminating the holes in the specific examples and notions in the granparents' complaint, I am still with his side of the debate in spirit.
I am in the camp that favors (the use of) language leaning toward the prescriptive. I find the 'evolution' of English whereby common misuse gets validated by an entry in 'the dictionary' to be repugnant. Just because a lot of people get it wrong does not make it right.
I would rather have a system where scholars compose new words as needed to evolve the language to reflect enlightenment, new technology, etc. I don't want the average dolt in the street to (*ahem*) contribute to the language.
But I'm rightly seen as a control freak by most.:)
quote: "In many companies getting an intranet website created on the official webserver requires tons of red tape [...] Then IT wonders why IIS or whatever is running on 47 PCs sitting under desks all over the company, completely unmanaged."
The red tape is very much NOT likely to be IT's fault. It's likely a result of other requirements, processes, policies and such as dictated by the C*O and or law. And not because IT loves to make your life harder.
Some people would rather shortcut their way to getting some pet project a little farther along then to notice the bigger picture.
Yes, I understand, you/we are just trying to meet your own goals and fulfill the expectations and requirements set upon you. It's a survival thing and anything that gets in your way is 'the enemy' by definition. That includes IT. If they can't do what you need on your timetable or whatever, then that puts you in a bad spot.
Perhaps the *real* problem is with our bosses. They want what they want and they don't want to hear any excuses. Even if the excuse is a legitimate matter of policy/budget/staff/etc., and or stems from a decision made above their heads. But, that's a problem with unreasonable bosses - not with IT trying to fuck you.
quote: "Likewise in many companies users get a 25MB email quota or something silly like that, and then IT wonders why so many users find ways to go through proxy servers to get to gmail."
No, we don't wonder. We know that you can't be bothered to manage your email in a reasonable fashion. In your head, servers, disk space, server RAM, HDs, network ports, backup tapes and the IT staff needed to make it all work grow on trees and IT is a bunch of assholes because we simply prefer to mock you while pretending to not be able to pluck another Exchange server out of thin air.
I have NEVER seen an IT organization who held back on something like email quotas when they were given what they need to give the users more. It's almost always due to budget and other constraints (put in place by others). Give me more money, more staff, more tools and I'll give you whatever you want (that is possible).
quote: "provide instructions for users to import their root cert,"
That's funny. In most organizations, you can't trust some users to follow instructions on how to change their email signature to include their street address or the like and you think you can get people to update their root cert?
quote: "Rarely do people in IT talk about how they often don't even know what the business problems are for the company, divisions, units and work groups they are providing services for."
It's fruitless to have a one way conversation with people who are not listening to anything other than "Yes, of course, we'll do that for you - immediately.":)
IT does not know about the business problems because they do not have a seat at the table. At the executive level, where the real decisions are made, IT is not invited to the Board Meeting. They are either a cost center or a mere service provider, not a member of the core team. At the middle mgmt level IT is rarely included with the business meetings. Dept heads come up with ideas on what they want to do, but the IT mgr was not invited so no one told them why this or that might not be possible, has to be done differently, violate policy or law, etc.
quote: "problems of structure within IT itself"
Which are often dictated well above the IT level of the organization, friend. Very few people, least of all a bunch of techies, love bureaucracy for it's own sake. Being charged with both operating within and sometimes enforcing the processes and policies made necessary by law or the structure defined by the Board is both thankless and not-fun.:)
quote: "IT arrogance (we do not provide that service and you can't go elsewhere for it)"
That you characterize this as arrogance shows ignorance and a lack of understanding (of the kind you accuse IT of lacking, it should be noted) for the reality of IT operations (in most places).
That IT does not provide it is likely a function of; A) prevented by security concerns/laws/policy at the top, B) not affordable, practical or do-able within current infrastructure, C) does not actually constitute a *justifiable* need or benefit, and so on.
That "you can not go for it elsewhere" is also likely a function of the above or similar.
But, people don't like "No", aren't interested in the reasons why, and want to just blame the person who has the unfortunate role of "messenger".
There is a partnership needed. IT needs to be included (as opposed to excluded) as a contributing partner in the business AND IT has to care about more than tech widgets. It's the future of business.
When YOU invite IT to the table, and openly and respectfully engage them as a solution provider, and give them what they need to actually do the job, you'll probably find yourself getting what you want and them being happy to have made it happen.
But, if during such a process you find out that it can't be done, for any of a number of reasons, but it's your boss or the C*O telling you as much, I want you to get on your knees before IT and beg forgiveness for all the other times when the reasons where the same but you blamed IT.:)
quote: "They need or want something that you, in your capacity as the provider of IT services, are not providing."
It seems that people many people believe that (their) IT organizations have all the latitude to give their customers whatever they need, much less what they want' but they are just a bunch of lazy, nasty, uncooperative, control freaks who relish the chance to interfere with the work someone is trying to do. (Of course, a LOT of what people are trying to be able to do has nothgin to do with *work* at all, like IM or shopping online, but we'll save that argument for another thread)
The reality *usually* is that IT is hamstrung by budget, policy, justifications, and little things like time and space.
If this thing that is needed is truly needed, then it's up to the 'customer' to go through whatever channels and processes are needed to get that capability implemented. In other words, it has to trickle down from the Top. If access to an external storage solution makes sense to THE BUSINESS and if it can be fit into other considerations, then IT will be *given* the money, manpower, resources, etc., to make it happen. If not, it is NOT the fault of IT.
I get so tired of people who have no idea what it's like to be in IT criticizing things the way they do things. Mostly, but not entirely, it's people who *think* they need something and just want IT to magically pull it out of their asses. And when they can't (no money, no time, violates policy, can't work with existing systems, violates the security provisions that the law requires, etc.) IT gets called blamed. Don't shoot the messenger, people.
quote: "It's the same reason they set up unofficial file servers and install 'unapproved' applications."
Or, they do it because they have no respect for the limitations that companies have to function under. Only a very rare few IT teams LIKE to say No. Most of us actually prefer to make people happy and to help companies succeed. But, there are limits. IT is often put in the position of enforcing the limits someone else has decided on. And then, to make it more fun, the people who made the limits never own them. The CEO, et al, never backs up IT by saying "Hey! Lay off the geeks. They are just doing what we told them to." Instead, IT is the scapegoat, caught in the middle.
"Rather than arrogantly treating those you work with as 'Yokels', you could understand and provide for their needs."
It's not CURRENTLY the common business model for IT to be empowered to, and responsible for, understanding and providing for their needs. For that to be the case and to actually work, IT would have to have a seat at the Board Meeting. Most companies don't include IT as part of the core business decision process. They are step-children with all the responsibility but none of the authority. The Executive Staff (CEO, CTO, CFO, etc. - if there is a CIO he's probably there as a courtesy/figurehead) has to define and authorize what the company needs to get it's business done. If you don't like it when IT says "No", or is forced to break your toy, complain to the people who actually made the decision.
another win for a company that has developed a reputation for going after spammers.
I had no idea anyone was under the impression that Verizon gave a shit about SMS spam.
I mean, I know that if you complain to customer service you can get a credit for text spam. But that's not what I need or want. I want a whitelist feature. Not the blacklist that they give you. With only like 15 entries possible. I want a simple whitelist; if it's not my alert server or my girlfriend or my best friend, I don't want the text message. You would think that that would be easy to do. A simple filter.
But after 3 years of asking, I still don't have it. So, I turned the whole feature off for my number. Now they don't get any money from me (My plan does not include a TXT allowance, so they could make a few dimes off of me).
I wish WoW had a rep/karma system. Not sure how it could be done to actually work - so many liars and people who would vote you down just because you didn't give them the gold they begged for - but damn I'd like to see it.
Maybe your rep vote would be weighted based on your rep! Good rep toons' votes get counted for more.
A lack of morale is what can happen when people at work have juvenile expectations of what they should be allowed to do at work and or of what they can do with company equipment.
Most of the older folks around remember when going to work meant that your time while at work was only for work. And that did not make any of us/them throw a tantrum.
Of course you can do most any reasonable thing you want during your break, on and with your personal property. If you want to check your email or play some tunes, fine. Get a personal music player, load your music on it and listen to it during your break. IM your ass off from your personal cell phone during lunch. Power up your Treo for 15 minutes twice a day to check your stock quotes. But don't whine about not being able to use company resources and company equipment to indulge your personal life.
It's not the IT department's job to teach [safety] security. That should come as a series of internal policies and training from HR and other departments - after the policy comes from 'on high'.
IT bitches because most companies have a huge lack of understanding on all sides, next to zero real policy direction from the top (IT is not at the Board table), and thus are left to clean up the mess. With too little money, too few staff and no way to prevent the problem without making enemies. Of people like you.
People are unlikely to die because their DRAM is too slow. (Gamers are not people.)
LOL No, really, out loud. At work. Thanks.
Wowtwit: "I need someone to enchant my 2H sword"
Me: "You *need* an enchant?"
Wowtwit: "ya I need that glow thing."
Me: "Look. You need air, you need water, you don't frakking NEED an enchant."
Wowtwit: "w/e, I really want that red glow - it's really cool!"
(pounds head on keyboard)
Me: "I can do the Fiery Enchant, that's the red glow, but it costs ## gold"
Wowtwit: "u r kidding that's too much"
Me: "Enchants are expensive because they cost money to make and they actually DO things - not just make things pretty. Now go away kid, ya bother me."
I'm guessing we won't be seeing a reply to this.
A doctorate in the topic suggests a nontrivial amount of knowledge in the subject. And just plain trumps his wannabe academic butt.:)
2. Psychologically, signing up for a "Yahoo ID" seems like a much bigger commitment than "making an account on Flickr."
Huh? Psychologically? Is this a fancy way of saying "has no basis in fact"?
Yes, it is.
It won't surprise you to hear that most people function in a virtual vacuum of analytical and or rational thought. They follow impulses that meet murky needs, avoid things that make them uncomfortable, dance around things that would lead to an examination of their inner workings and the like.
So, call it 'psychological', 'emotional' or 'human', people make a minor of choices based on something sensible.
When I moved into my new house, it had tons of incandescent lightbulbs and a few halogens - I replaced about 80 percent of the incandescents with compact flourescents and my electric bill was about one-quarter what it was before - and now in the summer my kitchen isn't a sauna from all the lights.
I find it hard to imagine how light bulbs could use enough energy such that reducing their consumption 60% or so would result in your whole electric bill going down by three-fourths. What about the refrigerator, washing machine, blower on the furnace, etc. Those are major appliances. Hell, your PC should use more energy than 3 or 4 light bulbs.
First, you have to have a awful LOT of lightbulbs in your house to even have the means to consume that much energy. But, you did say 'tons of incandescent lightbulbs'.
Second, you'd have to have them all on all the time! I guess being raised in California made me energy conscious and a conservative energy user. I turn off lights when I leave a room and so on as a habit. I know lots of people light up their whole house... I guess it keeps to boogey man away.:)
Third, last I checked, a 60 watt-equivalent CFL is 13watts. That's one-fifth, not 1/20th.:)
Your "real world" is what you, and people like you, have created.
It's true that the examples you give reflect a common way of things, but none of what you exemplify is a matter of "this is how it will always be", the only way it can be, etc. In fact, to the degree to which things are as you illustrate is, in large part, in my opinion, precisely because so many people have chosen to lower their standards, to give up caring and to shut down their compassion. This sort of thing is okay with you because your heart is withered.
A bunch of kids are working at McDonald's after school. Someone craps all over the bathroom. The manager is NOT going to assign the most popular kid to clean it up, is he? He's going to assign the unpopular kid. That's life.
Maybe if the manager is, himself, a shitheaded twit who plays schoolyard games at work, yes, it would happen that way. But, even McDonald's has a few human beings employed in managerial roles would have some more rational system of rotating duties, not playing out immature social games.
And that kid is going to be teased about it the next day at school. That's life.
It's my opinion is that the biggest reason that a kid gets teased about such things is that we all realize, subconsciously, that if we were to tell the bullyfuck to knock it off, that he will simply turn his ugliness on the us. Since no one wants that attention, it's safer to keep quiet.
The secret is the bully is the one in danger. He's outnumbered 10 to 1 or better. If one person stood up to him, and then another behind that guy, and three more behind him, and so on, things would change fast. But, people are afraid and that gives the asshole coward the power.
Now, that kid can either learn the "social skill" of "dealing with it" from the experience or he can declare himself "emotionally devastated" by the "trauma".
It's true that a few rare people have made too much out of what would otherwise be something less than a trauma, but mocking those who suffer, in ways your dead soul can't appreciate, just makes you less human. 'Dealing with it' is not a way to a happy life. It's a desparate survival tactic - made necessary by people who themselves were hurt and they are now lashing out at others.
The real sadness is how it seems that most people are too far gone, the scars over their heart formed so long ago, that they really can't imagine why it should be different. They split their psyche and left the tender part to die alone a long time ago.
Sometimes, the envelope was never sealed in the first place - maybe the stamping machine ran out of water or glue.
Sometimes formerly sealed envelopes become unsealed during normal handling. The sticky part of the flap was left too dar and so it had a tenuous grip on the paper, or the like.
You're right about it not being paranoia. It can be an overdeveloped sense of importance. As if what you (the generic you) get via the letter carrier is actually that interesting... riiight.
"Paranoid schizophrenics outnumber their enemies at least two to one"
"Just because you aren't paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.:)
I just wanted to say thank you for posting that Heinlein quote. I am unaware of the referenced book and its story, but I may have to find and read it just to see more of what the character puts forth.
As often, I find much value in what Heinlein (his characters) has/d to say. There's a cutting truth behind the opinions and attitudes he puts forth. And, for whatever truth or selfaggrandizement I find in this; I enjoy the feeling that because I understand what he is saying, there's a fair chance I am worthy of being among the elevated groups he describes and not among the dim-witted masses he lampoons.:)
Do you know what PCMCIA stands for?
People Can't Memorize Computer Industry Acronyms:)
Re:That's a Little Extreme
on
iPods at War
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
And I could make an argument for calling you a traitor, or perhaps more accurately as being "Unamerican", for not being a proper defendant of the true American way. Nothing is more important to this society that the promulgation of profit. Capitalism is the game. We sidestep morals, ethics and, as often as can be managed, law, to get to the black ink and beyond - every f'ing day.
It can be said that the major REASON we are in that part of the world, putting our young men and women at risk and to death, is to protect our access to the fuels of capitalism, to evangelize capitalism, to import/export capitalism. Our flavor, which we believe we have the god-given DUTY to force on everyone else.
For millions of computer users, the only way they know how to get onto the internet/web is by that big blue E on the desktop. (You sometimes have to use the IE icon on a FF shortcut.) People are easily trained and or indoctrinated. Microsoft knows this, plays to it under the guise of 'user experience' and so on. They work hard to gain 'brainshare'.
I worked six months as a TechSup Engineer for the largest Exchange hosting company in the US/World and I learned a lot about handhelds and who uses them for what.
We supported ActiveSync, OMA, Good and BES. Not mention IMAP, OWA, etc. By far, the BB/BES piece was the most broken. Now, I left the co. just as BES Server 4.0 SP2 was rolling, so it may be better now, but we got easily 4-to-1 gripes for BB/BES over Good and or Activesync. The most common, but not the only problem? Over and over and over - wireless synchronization with the server would just break.
No, not because we did not know what we were doing, either. The company I worked for was a Microsoft Gold Certified partner and they consulted with us for their development and QA of Exchange Server (especially) as a hosted service. We had great access to information and support at M$.
We would spend hours diagnosing BB h/w, Exchange server, BES Server, wireless networks, etc. Sometimes wiping handhelds, sometimes deleting and recreating accounts on BES (and losing useful message status info), sometime replacing the BB, etc. It was often a mystery as to what went wrong and which of the several things we tried might have actually been the fix. Sometimes, it would just fix itself, if you struggled long enough.
And then there's the cost. Of course, most BB owners seem to be mucky-mucks that aren't paying out of their pockets in the first place. Their BB is paid for by you and me... err, their company/gov't... who gets their money from you and me. If you run your own BES server, there's a very substantial licensing cost. Then there's the "Blackberry Enterprise" mail service that most WSPs hit you for.
Then there is the Treo650. Except for the unconscionably small amount of usuable RAM, it seems to be a great device. More apps, an interface and form factor most people seem to prefer, etc.
The Pocket PCs seemed to be a really strong product too. Especially with expansion slot/card options. Add free ActiveSync built into Exchange Server and no extra charge from your WSP and you're in nice shape.
I don't own any of them, but when I go to buy, it will NOT be a BB.
Most people function within a similar social hierarchy to that which you see in chimpanzees or bonobos. They are bullies to smaller monkeys and victims of the bigger ones.
I personally wish that there was a way for Karma or some other Just power to not only turn the tables on these kinds of asswipes, but to TELL them that their current suffering is a direct consequence of their former lapses in humanity.
They say "what goes around comes around". But, without someone telling you that your current woes are payback for being an asshole, most assholes will simply take their displeasure and use it to fuel yet more ugliness.
You meant asshole, not idiot. The asshole resells the domain name to the idiot.
But that only makes sense if you agree that it's ethically or otherwise a bad thing to profit just because you can, without actually doing anything to earn your way in the world.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, right, okay. I see it's time to renew that petition for a new Moderation category: "stupi^H^H^H^H^Huninformed".
While you did a fine job of finding and illuminating the holes in the specific examples and notions in the granparents' complaint, I am still with his side of the debate in spirit.
:)
I am in the camp that favors (the use of) language leaning toward the prescriptive. I find the 'evolution' of English whereby common misuse gets validated by an entry in 'the dictionary' to be repugnant. Just because a lot of people get it wrong does not make it right.
I would rather have a system where scholars compose new words as needed to evolve the language to reflect enlightenment, new technology, etc. I don't want the average dolt in the street to (*ahem*) contribute to the language.
But I'm rightly seen as a control freak by most.
quote: "In many companies getting an intranet website created on the official webserver requires tons of red tape [...] Then IT wonders why IIS or whatever is running on 47 PCs sitting under desks all over the company, completely unmanaged."
The red tape is very much NOT likely to be IT's fault. It's likely a result of other requirements, processes, policies and such as dictated by the C*O and or law. And not because IT loves to make your life harder.
Some people would rather shortcut their way to getting some pet project a little farther along then to notice the bigger picture.
Yes, I understand, you/we are just trying to meet your own goals and fulfill the expectations and requirements set upon you. It's a survival thing and anything that gets in your way is 'the enemy' by definition. That includes IT. If they can't do what you need on your timetable or whatever, then that puts you in a bad spot.
Perhaps the *real* problem is with our bosses. They want what they want and they don't want to hear any excuses. Even if the excuse is a legitimate matter of policy/budget/staff/etc., and or stems from a decision made above their heads. But, that's a problem with unreasonable bosses - not with IT trying to fuck you.
quote: "Likewise in many companies users get a 25MB email quota or something silly like that, and then IT wonders why so many users find ways to go through proxy servers to get to gmail."
No, we don't wonder. We know that you can't be bothered to manage your email in a reasonable fashion. In your head, servers, disk space, server RAM, HDs, network ports, backup tapes and the IT staff needed to make it all work grow on trees and IT is a bunch of assholes because we simply prefer to mock you while pretending to not be able to pluck another Exchange server out of thin air.
I have NEVER seen an IT organization who held back on something like email quotas when they were given what they need to give the users more. It's almost always due to budget and other constraints (put in place by others). Give me more money, more staff, more tools and I'll give you whatever you want (that is possible).
*sheesh*
quote: "provide instructions for users to import their root cert,"
That's funny. In most organizations, you can't trust some users to follow instructions on how to change their email signature to include their street address or the like and you think you can get people to update their root cert?
quote: "Rarely do people in IT talk about how they often don't even know what the business problems are for the company, divisions, units and work groups they are providing services for."
:)
:)
:)
It's fruitless to have a one way conversation with people who are not listening to anything other than "Yes, of course, we'll do that for you - immediately."
IT does not know about the business problems because they do not have a seat at the table. At the executive level, where the real decisions are made, IT is not invited to the Board Meeting. They are either a cost center or a mere service provider, not a member of the core team. At the middle mgmt level IT is rarely included with the business meetings. Dept heads come up with ideas on what they want to do, but the IT mgr was not invited so no one told them why this or that might not be possible, has to be done differently, violate policy or law, etc.
quote: "problems of structure within IT itself"
Which are often dictated well above the IT level of the organization, friend. Very few people, least of all a bunch of techies, love bureaucracy for it's own sake. Being charged with both operating within and sometimes enforcing the processes and policies made necessary by law or the structure defined by the Board is both thankless and not-fun.
quote: "IT arrogance (we do not provide that service and you can't go elsewhere for it)"
That you characterize this as arrogance shows ignorance and a lack of understanding (of the kind you accuse IT of lacking, it should be noted) for the reality of IT operations (in most places).
That IT does not provide it is likely a function of; A) prevented by security concerns/laws/policy at the top, B) not affordable, practical or do-able within current infrastructure, C) does not actually constitute a *justifiable* need or benefit, and so on.
That "you can not go for it elsewhere" is also likely a function of the above or similar.
But, people don't like "No", aren't interested in the reasons why, and want to just blame the person who has the unfortunate role of "messenger".
There is a partnership needed. IT needs to be included (as opposed to excluded) as a contributing partner in the business AND IT has to care about more than tech widgets. It's the future of business.
When YOU invite IT to the table, and openly and respectfully engage them as a solution provider, and give them what they need to actually do the job, you'll probably find yourself getting what you want and them being happy to have made it happen.
But, if during such a process you find out that it can't be done, for any of a number of reasons, but it's your boss or the C*O telling you as much, I want you to get on your knees before IT and beg forgiveness for all the other times when the reasons where the same but you blamed IT.
quote: "They need or want something that you, in your capacity as the provider of IT services, are not providing."
It seems that people many people believe that (their) IT organizations have all the latitude to give their customers whatever they need, much less what they want' but they are just a bunch of lazy, nasty, uncooperative, control freaks who relish the chance to interfere with the work someone is trying to do. (Of course, a LOT of what people are trying to be able to do has nothgin to do with *work* at all, like IM or shopping online, but we'll save that argument for another thread)
The reality *usually* is that IT is hamstrung by budget, policy, justifications, and little things like time and space.
If this thing that is needed is truly needed, then it's up to the 'customer' to go through whatever channels and processes are needed to get that capability implemented. In other words, it has to trickle down from the Top. If access to an external storage solution makes sense to THE BUSINESS and if it can be fit into other considerations, then IT will be *given* the money, manpower, resources, etc., to make it happen. If not, it is NOT the fault of IT.
I get so tired of people who have no idea what it's like to be in IT criticizing things the way they do things. Mostly, but not entirely, it's people who *think* they need something and just want IT to magically pull it out of their asses. And when they can't (no money, no time, violates policy, can't work with existing systems, violates the security provisions that the law requires, etc.) IT gets called blamed. Don't shoot the messenger, people.
quote: "It's the same reason they set up unofficial file servers and install 'unapproved' applications."
Or, they do it because they have no respect for the limitations that companies have to function under. Only a very rare few IT teams LIKE to say No. Most of us actually prefer to make people happy and to help companies succeed. But, there are limits. IT is often put in the position of enforcing the limits someone else has decided on. And then, to make it more fun, the people who made the limits never own them. The CEO, et al, never backs up IT by saying "Hey! Lay off the geeks. They are just doing what we told them to." Instead, IT is the scapegoat, caught in the middle.
"Rather than arrogantly treating those you work with as 'Yokels', you could understand and provide for their needs."
It's not CURRENTLY the common business model for IT to be empowered to, and responsible for, understanding and providing for their needs. For that to be the case and to actually work, IT would have to have a seat at the Board Meeting. Most companies don't include IT as part of the core business decision process. They are step-children with all the responsibility but none of the authority. The Executive Staff (CEO, CTO, CFO, etc. - if there is a CIO he's probably there as a courtesy/figurehead) has to define and authorize what the company needs to get it's business done. If you don't like it when IT says "No", or is forced to break your toy, complain to the people who actually made the decision.
another win for a company that has developed a reputation for going after spammers.
I had no idea anyone was under the impression that Verizon gave a shit about SMS spam.
I mean, I know that if you complain to customer service you can get a credit for text spam. But that's not what I need or want. I want a whitelist feature. Not the blacklist that they give you. With only like 15 entries possible. I want a simple whitelist; if it's not my alert server or my girlfriend or my best friend, I don't want the text message. You would think that that would be easy to do. A simple filter.
But after 3 years of asking, I still don't have it. So, I turned the whole feature off for my number. Now they don't get any money from me (My plan does not include a TXT allowance, so they could make a few dimes off of me).
I wish WoW had a rep/karma system. Not sure how it could be done to actually work - so many liars and people who would vote you down just because you didn't give them the gold they begged for - but damn I'd like to see it. Maybe your rep vote would be weighted based on your rep! Good rep toons' votes get counted for more.
If I could, I'd mod you up, Insightful. :)
A lack of morale is what can happen when people at work have juvenile expectations of what they should be allowed to do at work and or of what they can do with company equipment.
Most of the older folks around remember when going to work meant that your time while at work was only for work. And that did not make any of us/them throw a tantrum.
Of course you can do most any reasonable thing you want during your break, on and with your personal property. If you want to check your email or play some tunes, fine. Get a personal music player, load your music on it and listen to it during your break. IM your ass off from your personal cell phone during lunch. Power up your Treo for 15 minutes twice a day to check your stock quotes. But don't whine about not being able to use company resources and company equipment to indulge your personal life.
It's not the IT department's job to teach [safety] security. That should come as a series of internal policies and training from HR and other departments - after the policy comes from 'on high'.
IT bitches because most companies have a huge lack of understanding on all sides, next to zero real policy direction from the top (IT is not at the Board table), and thus are left to clean up the mess. With too little money, too few staff and no way to prevent the problem without making enemies. Of people like you.
People are unlikely to die because their DRAM is too slow. (Gamers are not people.) LOL No, really, out loud. At work. Thanks. Wowtwit: "I need someone to enchant my 2H sword" Me: "You *need* an enchant?" Wowtwit: "ya I need that glow thing." Me: "Look. You need air, you need water, you don't frakking NEED an enchant." Wowtwit: "w/e, I really want that red glow - it's really cool!" (pounds head on keyboard) Me: "I can do the Fiery Enchant, that's the red glow, but it costs ## gold" Wowtwit: "u r kidding that's too much" Me: "Enchants are expensive because they cost money to make and they actually DO things - not just make things pretty. Now go away kid, ya bother me."
I'm guessing we won't be seeing a reply to this. A doctorate in the topic suggests a nontrivial amount of knowledge in the subject. And just plain trumps his wannabe academic butt. :)
2. Psychologically, signing up for a "Yahoo ID" seems like a much bigger commitment than "making an account on Flickr."
Huh? Psychologically? Is this a fancy way of saying "has no basis in fact"?
Yes, it is.
It won't surprise you to hear that most people function in a virtual vacuum of analytical and or rational thought. They follow impulses that meet murky needs, avoid things that make them uncomfortable, dance around things that would lead to an examination of their inner workings and the like. So, call it 'psychological', 'emotional' or 'human', people make a minor of choices based on something sensible.
When I moved into my new house, it had tons of incandescent lightbulbs and a few halogens - I replaced about 80 percent of the incandescents with compact flourescents and my electric bill was about one-quarter what it was before - and now in the summer my kitchen isn't a sauna from all the lights. I find it hard to imagine how light bulbs could use enough energy such that reducing their consumption 60% or so would result in your whole electric bill going down by three-fourths. What about the refrigerator, washing machine, blower on the furnace, etc. Those are major appliances. Hell, your PC should use more energy than 3 or 4 light bulbs. First, you have to have a awful LOT of lightbulbs in your house to even have the means to consume that much energy. But, you did say 'tons of incandescent lightbulbs'. Second, you'd have to have them all on all the time! I guess being raised in California made me energy conscious and a conservative energy user. I turn off lights when I leave a room and so on as a habit. I know lots of people light up their whole house... I guess it keeps to boogey man away. :)
Third, last I checked, a 60 watt-equivalent CFL is 13watts. That's one-fifth, not 1/20th. :)
Here, let me put it in real world terms for you.
Your "real world" is what you, and people like you, have created.
It's true that the examples you give reflect a common way of things, but none of what you exemplify is a matter of "this is how it will always be", the only way it can be, etc. In fact, to the degree to which things are as you illustrate is, in large part, in my opinion, precisely because so many people have chosen to lower their standards, to give up caring and to shut down their compassion. This sort of thing is okay with you because your heart is withered.
A bunch of kids are working at McDonald's after school. Someone craps all over the bathroom. The manager is NOT going to assign the most popular kid to clean it up, is he? He's going to assign the unpopular kid. That's life.
Maybe if the manager is, himself, a shitheaded twit who plays schoolyard games at work, yes, it would happen that way. But, even McDonald's has a few human beings employed in managerial roles would have some more rational system of rotating duties, not playing out immature social games.
And that kid is going to be teased about it the next day at school. That's life.
It's my opinion is that the biggest reason that a kid gets teased about such things is that we all realize, subconsciously, that if we were to tell the bullyfuck to knock it off, that he will simply turn his ugliness on the us. Since no one wants that attention, it's safer to keep quiet.
The secret is the bully is the one in danger. He's outnumbered 10 to 1 or better. If one person stood up to him, and then another behind that guy, and three more behind him, and so on, things would change fast. But, people are afraid and that gives the asshole coward the power.
Now, that kid can either learn the "social skill" of "dealing with it" from the experience or he can declare himself "emotionally devastated" by the "trauma".
It's true that a few rare people have made too much out of what would otherwise be something less than a trauma, but mocking those who suffer, in ways your dead soul can't appreciate, just makes you less human. 'Dealing with it' is not a way to a happy life. It's a desparate survival tactic - made necessary by people who themselves were hurt and they are now lashing out at others.
The real sadness is how it seems that most people are too far gone, the scars over their heart formed so long ago, that they really can't imagine why it should be different. They split their psyche and left the tender part to die alone a long time ago.
Sometimes, the envelope was never sealed in the first place - maybe the stamping machine ran out of water or glue.
:)
Sometimes formerly sealed envelopes become unsealed during normal handling. The sticky part of the flap was left too dar and so it had a tenuous grip on the paper, or the like.
You're right about it not being paranoia. It can be an overdeveloped sense of importance. As if what you (the generic you) get via the letter carrier is actually that interesting... riiight.
"Paranoid schizophrenics outnumber their enemies at least two to one"
"Just because you aren't paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
I just wanted to say thank you for posting that Heinlein quote. I am unaware of the referenced book and its story, but I may have to find and read it just to see more of what the character puts forth.
:)
As often, I find much value in what Heinlein (his characters) has/d to say. There's a cutting truth behind the opinions and attitudes he puts forth. And, for whatever truth or selfaggrandizement I find in this; I enjoy the feeling that because I understand what he is saying, there's a fair chance I am worthy of being among the elevated groups he describes and not among the dim-witted masses he lampoons.
Thanks!
Pagans? I resent that remark!
:)
If you knew anything you'd realize that pagans don't use "x one-thousand". They use "x great-goddesses"
Do you know what PCMCIA stands for? People Can't Memorize Computer Industry Acronyms :)
And I could make an argument for calling you a traitor, or perhaps more accurately as being "Unamerican", for not being a proper defendant of the true American way. Nothing is more important to this society that the promulgation of profit. Capitalism is the game. We sidestep morals, ethics and, as often as can be managed, law, to get to the black ink and beyond - every f'ing day.
It can be said that the major REASON we are in that part of the world, putting our young men and women at risk and to death, is to protect our access to the fuels of capitalism, to evangelize capitalism, to import/export capitalism. Our flavor, which we believe we have the god-given DUTY to force on everyone else.
No wonder we are hated and mocked.
Don't read too little into it.
For millions of computer users, the only way they know how to get onto the internet/web is by that big blue E on the desktop. (You sometimes have to use the IE icon on a FF shortcut.) People are easily trained and or indoctrinated. Microsoft knows this, plays to it under the guise of 'user experience' and so on. They work hard to gain 'brainshare'.
I worked six months as a TechSup Engineer for the largest Exchange hosting company in the US/World and I learned a lot about handhelds and who uses them for what.
We supported ActiveSync, OMA, Good and BES. Not mention IMAP, OWA, etc. By far, the BB/BES piece was the most broken. Now, I left the co. just as BES Server 4.0 SP2 was rolling, so it may be better now, but we got easily 4-to-1 gripes for BB/BES over Good and or Activesync. The most common, but not the only problem? Over and over and over - wireless synchronization with the server would just break.
No, not because we did not know what we were doing, either. The company I worked for was a Microsoft Gold Certified partner and they consulted with us for their development and QA of Exchange Server (especially) as a hosted service. We had great access to information and support at M$.
We would spend hours diagnosing BB h/w, Exchange server, BES Server, wireless networks, etc. Sometimes wiping handhelds, sometimes deleting and recreating accounts on BES (and losing useful message status info), sometime replacing the BB, etc. It was often a mystery as to what went wrong and which of the several things we tried might have actually been the fix. Sometimes, it would just fix itself, if you struggled long enough.
And then there's the cost. Of course, most BB owners seem to be mucky-mucks that aren't paying out of their pockets in the first place. Their BB is paid for by you and me... err, their company/gov't... who gets their money from you and me. If you run your own BES server, there's a very substantial licensing cost. Then there's the "Blackberry Enterprise" mail service that most WSPs hit you for.
Then there is the Treo650. Except for the unconscionably small amount of usuable RAM, it seems to be a great device. More apps, an interface and form factor most people seem to prefer, etc.
The Pocket PCs seemed to be a really strong product too. Especially with expansion slot/card options. Add free ActiveSync built into Exchange Server and no extra charge from your WSP and you're in nice shape.
I don't own any of them, but when I go to buy, it will NOT be a BB.
I'm sick of it too.
Most people function within a similar social hierarchy to that which you see in chimpanzees or bonobos. They are bullies to smaller monkeys and victims of the bigger ones.
I personally wish that there was a way for Karma or some other Just power to not only turn the tables on these kinds of asswipes, but to TELL them that their current suffering is a direct consequence of their former lapses in humanity.
They say "what goes around comes around". But, without someone telling you that your current woes are payback for being an asshole, most assholes will simply take their displeasure and use it to fuel yet more ugliness.
Makes me sad and angry.
But that only makes sense if you agree that it's ethically or otherwise a bad thing to profit just because you can, without actually doing anything to earn your way in the world.