That makes about as much sense as whining about being broke and not being able to feed your family while you walk to the closest 7-11 and buy a six pack and cigarettes.
Budget cuts have to start somewhere and enough of them will add up in the end.
The Federal government (and many states) reimburse employees mileage for using their personal car when on official travel. Why would using your personal phone to conduct official business be any different?
If people were using the phones for personal use, that is embezzlement of public funds and there should be criminal charges brought against the users.
This is a joke right? You don't honestly believe that someone with a government-furnished cell phone should be charged with embezzlement if they use the phone for personal use do you?
If they stay within their provided number of minutes whats the problem?
We can't even patch some of our systems or install an antivirus client on some of our equipment because it is considered a "medical device" and would lose FDA certification.
One proposed solution is to VLAN these devices so we don't have radiology equipment spreading conficker throughout our network . . .
Training has little to do with it. You need the personality traits of common sense and healthy suspicion, which no amount of training will imbue you with. At best, you can be a parrot, but won't be able to apply those traits to new and unknown situations, which is what was required here.
Bull. Training has alot to do with it. Sure some people won't "get it" and continue to do stupid stuff while on a PC at work, but to blatantly write off training is stupid. Tons of Federal employees grew up without PCs and were "trained" to use them at work. Many of these folks actually pay attention to training and react accordingly to various situations.
However, there are those folks who will NEVER get it and continue to open up every email attachment they get regardless of who it comes from and if they're expecting it or not.
Our freaking cubes are so tight (less than 100 square feet) and small that simply talking on the phone is a total pain. There's a guy in the cube next to me who always has to use his speaker phone for EVERY call. I can't even hear myself think when he's on the phone.
That alone should be reason enough to not support cubicles.
Looking back at my own life, I had free reign beyond belief but still had the sense (and perhaps fear?) to not do bad shit. The kids that were doing the worst shit were the ones whose parents were the most oppresive, those kids learned real quick how to have dual personalities and hide things from the parents with gusto.
I think most of us had a similar experience. Rebelling against the "system" and the like . . . I just don't see using some of these tools as being oppressive.
Oppressive to me would mean no friends over, no fun after school, no movies, no parties, etc.
Trusting that your kids will make the right choice is one thing. Your kids actually doing the right thing is another.
Kids who feel that they have free rein to do as they please are IMO less likely to always do the right thing. However, a kid that knows that mom and dad will find out about me breaking this rule or that rule are probably more likely to not go down the road of bad choices.
My kids are 7 and 12. Do they always do what I tell them to do? No. Do I always find out that they didn't do it? No. Do they get punished for it when I do? Yes. Would something like possibly provoke them to make better choices? I believe it would.
Are you choosing to go this route because you don't want to educate yourself on the issues and/or candidates, or do you honestly believe that everyone who runs for office is unfit to serve?
Slashdot Mirror
Wonder what type of controller it would ship with . . . and if you'd get your very own bottle of "kinect-y jelly".
Are you telling me there's not one condo available in all of Del Boca Vista?
The amounts are different but the point remains the same.
That makes about as much sense as whining about being broke and not being able to feed your family while you walk to the closest 7-11 and buy a six pack and cigarettes.
Budget cuts have to start somewhere and enough of them will add up in the end.
The Federal government (and many states) reimburse employees mileage for using their personal car when on official travel. Why would using your personal phone to conduct official business be any different?
Really?
Should teachers who spend their own money get reimbursed for buying supplies for their classrooms? They get paid to teach not provide supplies.
Reimbursement and entitlement are two different concepts.
If people were using the phones for personal use, that is embezzlement of public funds and there should be criminal charges brought against the users.
This is a joke right? You don't honestly believe that someone with a government-furnished cell phone should be charged with embezzlement if they use the phone for personal use do you?
If they stay within their provided number of minutes whats the problem?
Hullo, IT
Have you turned if off and back on again?
Maybe I should've said I wanted them segregated from our main network. Sheesh.
I think that's part of the problem.
If only I could make that determination . . .
Six words:
I work for the Federal government.
I don't want our medical devices on our main network.
Exactly. Our Bio-Med folks manage these devices but IT has been given the responsibility to patch many of them.
We can't even patch some of our systems or install an antivirus client on some of our equipment because it is considered a "medical device" and would lose FDA certification.
One proposed solution is to VLAN these devices so we don't have radiology equipment spreading conficker throughout our network . . .
A massage and a happy ending . . .
Training has little to do with it. You need the personality traits of common sense and healthy suspicion, which no amount of training will imbue you with. At best, you can be a parrot, but won't be able to apply those traits to new and unknown situations, which is what was required here.
Bull. Training has alot to do with it. Sure some people won't "get it" and continue to do stupid stuff while on a PC at work, but to blatantly write off training is stupid. Tons of Federal employees grew up without PCs and were "trained" to use them at work. Many of these folks actually pay attention to training and react accordingly to various situations.
However, there are those folks who will NEVER get it and continue to open up every email attachment they get regardless of who it comes from and if they're expecting it or not.
"Younger workers' lives are all integrated, not segregated," says Larry Rivard. "They have learned to work anywhere — at a kitchen table or wherever."
Could that be because their office space has become so worthless that anywhere else is preferable?
Exactly. Man folks in my office suite go outside to talk on their cell phones.
Our freaking cubes are so tight (less than 100 square feet) and small that simply talking on the phone is a total pain. There's a guy in the cube next to me who always has to use his speaker phone for EVERY call. I can't even hear myself think when he's on the phone.
That alone should be reason enough to not support cubicles.
Looking back at my own life, I had free reign beyond belief but still had the sense (and perhaps fear?) to not do bad shit. The kids that were doing the worst shit were the ones whose parents were the most oppresive, those kids learned real quick how to have dual personalities and hide things from the parents with gusto.
I think most of us had a similar experience. Rebelling against the "system" and the like . . . I just don't see using some of these tools as being oppressive.
Oppressive to me would mean no friends over, no fun after school, no movies, no parties, etc.
Have you voted in previous elections?
If every political decision was solely left up to one individual then I could see this being a legit stance.
Trusting that your kids will make the right choice is one thing. Your kids actually doing the right thing is another.
Kids who feel that they have free rein to do as they please are IMO less likely to always do the right thing. However, a kid that knows that mom and dad will find out about me breaking this rule or that rule are probably more likely to not go down the road of bad choices.
My kids are 7 and 12. Do they always do what I tell them to do? No. Do I always find out that they didn't do it? No. Do they get punished for it when I do? Yes. Would something like possibly provoke them to make better choices? I believe it would.
What a pathetic way to look at it.
Are you choosing to go this route because you don't want to educate yourself on the issues and/or candidates, or do you honestly believe that everyone who runs for office is unfit to serve?
That makes way too much sense. Which means it ain't ever gonna happen.
True, but the white hats gotta make their money some how.