Providing a good education to all kids is such a smart investment, so why isn't it happening??
It isn't happening because well educated people don't destroy their environment, or pick fights with their neighbors. Well educated people ask why, and want to know why they are being asked to support something.
The drug that does marvels for me is practicing judo twice a week.
I found the same thing in Lau Kune Do.http://www.laukunedo.com/ The Daoists have been refining the consciousness for millenium, long before Pfizer and the bunch decided to start tweaking on some Nazi secrets to provide us with, "Better living through chemistry."
Regarding the article, it just goes to show how little respect society as a whole has for the individual. All of these drugs are helping people become better parts of the machine at the expense of their bodies. Does America need to drug itself to maintain it's competitive edge in the same way that SS soliders needed to drug themselves to dominate the battlefields of mid-20th century Europe? Maybe the meth can offset the childhood obesity problem. (Don't worry kids, just hang on until college and we'll get you all straightened out). =)
All tangents aside, the body is completely capable of regulating the mind and vice versa. Drugs are just a cop out for those who haven't been exposed to the alternatives. Like the parent mentioned, judo (or any dedicated martial training) will bring about quantifiable results. Another one that I've had great success with is biofeedback. http://www.drakeinstitute.com/ Unfortunately for the greater good, I don't see either of those becoming widespread anytime soon given our societies propensity for pushing high cost, low effect, quick fix solutions on most situations.
We're ultimately powerless until we can have the use of the SSN for anything but Social Security accounting made illegal.
And then once the use of the SSN becomes illegal, someone is going to have to do some clever coding along the lines of... SELECT sekritinph0 WHERE sekritinph0.IllegalizedSSN = sekritinph0.LegalReplacementIdentifer
Hmmmm, maybe I should get a patent for that while there is still time.
There are obviously guys on here with experience in larger enterprises than I have been exposed to. Thanks for sharing guys, there are some good tools that I need to go look into.
All I can offer is my own experience with RIS, Windows 2000 Server, and Windows 2000 Pro and XP desktops. The biggest PITA with RIS is the network drivers. With Ghost you just get the NDIS driver, set the driver to use with your bootdisk, and then image your workstation. It includes all the nifty utils to flip the SID, name the computer, and everything else that needs to be done. With RIS, you have to edit.inf files, copy drivers to bunch of sub-directories, and all sorts of other mess. In my experience, the headaches with the drivers alone was enough not to use it.
The other problem that I ran into was lag with file copies. Most of the networks that I'm on are using 100MB switches. With 1 computer copying an image, the file copy performance was okay. With 2 computers, it starts to lag. By the time I got to 4, I couldn't do anymore and the copy rate was SSLLLOOOOWWWW. The server was pretty standard for the time... Proliant ML370 P4 Xeon, 4 gigs of RAM, 128MB SmartArray controller on a RAID-5 array. I'm not sure if my experience with RIS was unique, or if it was a misconfig on my part, but my boss had a boner for RIS for a while until I beat him over the head with Ghost, so I had the chance to try RIS at a few sites. It was always the same story with the slow copies (but boy was that great for billable time). =)On the other hand, I've done 10-20 simultaneous Ghost deployments without any noticable slowdown.
That was my experience with RIS and Ghost. I categorize RIS with ntbackup... just because it comes with the OS, doesn't necessarily mean you should try to use it in a production environment.
Take a course in basic programming structure first. You need the foundation of how to properly setup the code. By that I mean declaring variables, setting up functions, properly commenting (gasp) your code so that others can follow what you've done.
Once you understand the proper structure it is much easier to branch out to the nuiances of the various languages.
There's more to AV than your home computer. Managing 1000s of machines across the country takes more than the tinyest AV program you can stick on one computer. Our needs are first and foremost having an AV install on each system, with good virus defs, and that we can actually manage remotely. SAV is still the best for that in our opinion....
And that's a pretty sad state of affairs when more often than not, an upgrade to the newest version requires a complete uninstall of the old version because the upgrade functionality simply doesn't work. And then the uninstall falls flat on it's face and that requires running CleanWipe.
I've been using Symantec / Norton "corporate / enterprise" AV since 7.6 and the program blows. It takes more time to maintain than is reasonable. The upgrades are a complete PITA. But for the most part, it seems to get the job done. I was at a client yesterday, and the lady is the cheapest person in the entire world. She is still running Norton 7.6 Corporate edition to protect her 10 PCs. Much to my surprise, they haven't been infected.
Regarding the most recent exploit, I figure it has something to do with port 137/139 (NetBIOS) exploits. Those ports need to be opened on the client machines so that the central server can administer them. I don't know anyone these days who is letting those ports through the perimeter firewall, so for 99% of the world, the exploit won't big that big of a problem (assuming that it truly is related to an RPC vulnerability). And for what it's worth, most of the time those ports are opened via an explicitly defined group policy that limits connections to those ports to the IP address of the central AV server.
Um, it's a search toolbar, not an OS. I'm sure M$ still happily cashes Dell's checks for each copy of the OS that ships with nearly every model...
The larger issue in this case is the 12.5 billion dollar online advertising market. Google, Yahoo and Microsoft are trying to generate revenue by serving up advertising. Because Google is integrating their toolbar and desktop search on Dell PCs, Microsoft is losing potential revenue that would have been generated by Dell shipping PCs with their browsers automatically feeding people into MSN.
On the subject of advertising, Microsoft is obviously flailing. They are trying to do too many things at once. That is good news for people who are taking aim at their core OS / application business, but bad news for people using Microsoft software.
I work as a consultant slinging warez for the evil empire in the SMB sector of the world. Most of my clients have less than one hundred users. It has been my experience that with the exception of poorly written third party software, 95% of the users can get away with generic "user" or "power user" rights to the local workstation.
Even in cases where admin rights are necessary, virii and malware can be mitigated by a combination of tools. With Symantec AV, MS Defender, and a good firewall at the perimeter with content control, the only people who cause problems for me are bored users who get to sites that aren't on the content control deny list. Once I explain to their boss that they're paying me +$100 an hour to clean up a mess that could have been avoided if the employee was doing their god damn job instead of jacking off on someone else's time, the problem usually goes away.
When a workstation blows up, a re-image gets things up an running again in an hour or two.
Even though it's possible to work around the 'dangers' of admin rights, I do agree that it is a problem. Microsoft took a step in the right direction with the Windows XP RunAs. I've found that at my clients who have XP and need admin rights for a particular application, setting up a shortcut that uses the RunAs functionality gets the job done most of the time.
This whole thing is silly. WebRoot was only able to become a viable business because Microsoft released an insecure browser that needed a plug-in (of sorts) to protect it. Microsoft realized that their browser was a huge security hole, so they bought up a third party company that helps to address the problem. Then they released a software package for free that helps take care of something that shouldn't have even needed to be taken care of in the first place. Should Microsoft have charged the end-user for the cost of cleaning up the mess that Microsoft made? Of course not! But it's okay for another company to profit off of Microsoft's mistake? It seems to me like Microsoft did an alright job of cleaning up after themselves, but now WebRoot is mad because Microsoft (sort of) got their act together?
Come on, gimme a break! WebRoot built a business around what amounts to a security vulnerability. Did they honestly expect that it would never be patched? What exactly do they want the outcome to be? They want Microsoft to continue releasing crappy software so that they have a viable business model? Why don't go after Symantec since Symantec has included 'malware' detection in 10.0?
Wired did the right thing, and I'm just waiting for the owned media backlash. Wired put out the real information, but I'm willing to bet that the only coverage we will see about it in the major, mainstream news outlets will be framed in the light, "Wired magazine violates court order, AT&T and DoJ considering legal reprocussions."
It sort of makes one hesitant to out source IT operations to a place like India. Hmmmm... maybe it's time to DDoS India and bring those jobs back to the US. If the Indian's are such technology mavens, maybe they'll find it in their best interests to resolve the DDoS / DNS Amplification issue and then we can all welcome our new, outsourced Indian overlords. =)
I have in Nvidia motherboard. I can install WinXP on the machine, but I can't use the onboard network interface until I've installed the drivers. It has USB2, but I can only get USB1.1 speeds until I install the drivers. It has onboard sound, but I need to install the appropriate drivers.
And this is where the Windows world is ahead of the game. That motherboard you bought came with a driver CD. If that motherboard was an HP scanner, or a Canon camera, or any other piece of hardware from a major manufacturer I can say with 99% certainty that it probably came with some hugely obnoxious, multi-color poster with steps 1-8 that cover everything from unpacking the device, to inserting the CD, to installing the drivers... complete with some screen shots of what the driver installation procedure looks like on all flavors of Windoze.
Now with Linux on the other hand, you need to know how to install a kernel module, and I can bet with 100% certainty that your newest piece of hardware won't come with a nice, full color poster that tells you how to do that. And on top of that, the nearest resource about how to do that is going to be on the internet, but with the example of your motherboard, you'd be SOL because the drivers are on the CD, and your NIC doesn't work yet.
How are you going to know that the government is going to come take them away? Are you going to turn on the news and find out? How about when they come knocking on your door? The government disarms people all the time... that's what the SWAT team is for.
The same government that was formed by a violent revolution will not be overthrown by a violent revolution. The only thing that allowing American's access to firearms is doing is ensuring that if this country were ever to be invaded by a foreign force, it would theoretically make the urban warfare in Iraq look tame by comparison.
However when this system falls, it will be because of outside pressures that force the country to turn on itself.
Unfortunately the large majority of the population does not use the web for their news. Of those that do, I'd assume that at least 50% of them turn to a main stream web portal such as Yahoo or MSN that simply presents the same content that they'd find if they were to turn off MTV and turn on their local news.
Once production starts, it usually takes between six- to eight-weeks for PC manufacturers to load the operating system onto new computers, Gartner said.
Six weeks! - and I thought I had a slow hard drive when it took two hours to install Linux.
Perhaps that should have been "six to eight weeks to begin shipping..."?
I know that you're trying to be funny, but I think they mean it will take them that long to develop the disk images with all of the nifty, need to be removed programs like AOL, and Earthlink, and all the other crap that OEMs have to load on there because of the anti-competitive whiners.
And granted, six to eight weeks is a ridiculous amount of time, but that's life in corporate America. You know that the OEMs are going to have to have meetings about how to develop the images, and what to include, and when to take down the lines to do the upgrades, and blah blah blah blah blah.
And then there's Outlook's inability to receive executables. Yes, I know viruses blah blah blah, but there are times when I've a legitimate reason to send someone an.exe. Being able to tell Outlook "yes, I know what's at stake, show me the damn attachment anyway" would help.
There are tweaks that allow Outlook to open whatever attachment you want. They can be rolled out via GPO. Or just do what everyone else in the world does....ZIP the.EXE.
So Macs are for kids who want cool toys and who want to play around. PCs are for people who have to work and get things done. Work isn't fun... work is lame. (Duh)
Or Macs are for people who want to do things better, because the PC way isn't good enough.
What they need is an Exchange killer. They need a directory. And most importantly, they need conversion tools. One of the ways that Microsoft made huge headway against Novell in the late 90s was by having extremely simple to use conversion tools that pulled all of the data out of NDS.
What are you talking about... integrate well with the rest of the office? Since when do Mac's integrate well with anything? I think the only company that took longer to impliment TCP/IP than Microsoft was Apple.
Or maybe by integrate you mean... "Will fit in well with the caty bitches in marketing who snipe at everyone else in the office?" =)
As for viruses, I've never had a problem with a virus, or spyware on my computer and I've been running Microsoft software since 1992. A Microsoft box can be made secure, it just takes effort and good administration. Unfortunately Microsoft went for ease of use instead of security. They snatched up a huge swath of the market that way. Now they're playing catchup.
If you listen to a Mac guy, or a *nix guy, they'll tell you that Microsoft is lame because of security problems. But when you look back at Bugtraq and CERT archives from the mid-90s, they are full of *nix exploits and bugs. Sooner than later, Microsoft is going to get their OS hardened too. And for what it's worth, I still haven't come across a compromised Windows 2003 Server yet.
I work for a firm that pimps warez and services for the evil empire. Although we have numerous successful deployments that involve dozens of servers, hundreds of users, and geographically seperated sites, there are some contracts that we can't bid on simply because no one in the company is certified. Even though we can get the job done, and even though 99% of our business comes via word of mouth from satisifed customers, there are contracts (mostly governmental / Fortune 500) that we can't even come close to.
Having said that, I have worked alongside numerous certified individuals, and more often than not, they are the least competent people out there. The knowledge that comes from being interested in something and wanting to truly figure out how it works will always be more valuable and genuine than the knowledge that comes from a lesson plan.
Yet having said that, certifications are a good, but sometimes frustrating way to codify what you know. Like for example, who cares how ntbackup works? No one uses NTBackup in the real world. But none the less, you need to waste brain power learning how it works if you want an MCSE.
The portion of the article that caught my eye was the "War on Drugs" style property seizure laws that will allow the government to seize and auction computers. That seems to me like a strong enforcement tool for keeping computers out of the hands of the populace. Anyone inclined enough to figure out how to crack copy protection is likely to be inclined towards places like Slashdot, and other 'non-mainstream' content on the Internet.
This legislation is a big crap on the lower class. In any hood in America, you can find copies of any CD or DVD out there. The locals who can't afford computers and iPods and all the new technologies, can still benefit from low priced access to the media. Those people would never buy full priced music or movies, but the media companies don't care about that.
The government cares about untaxed money. There is a pretty good sized economy that traffics in pirated media. I see the legislation as a tool that allows the government to effectively crack down on that. It really sucks. I'd rather have the guys without jobs making money by providing music and movies, instead of crack and guns.
Slashdot Mirror
It isn't happening because well educated people don't destroy their environment, or pick fights with their neighbors. Well educated people ask why, and want to know why they are being asked to support something.
I found the same thing in Lau Kune Do.http://www.laukunedo.com/ The Daoists have been refining the consciousness for millenium, long before Pfizer and the bunch decided to start tweaking on some Nazi secrets to provide us with, "Better living through chemistry."
Regarding the article, it just goes to show how little respect society as a whole has for the individual. All of these drugs are helping people become better parts of the machine at the expense of their bodies. Does America need to drug itself to maintain it's competitive edge in the same way that SS soliders needed to drug themselves to dominate the battlefields of mid-20th century Europe? Maybe the meth can offset the childhood obesity problem. (Don't worry kids, just hang on until college and we'll get you all straightened out). =)
All tangents aside, the body is completely capable of regulating the mind and vice versa. Drugs are just a cop out for those who haven't been exposed to the alternatives. Like the parent mentioned, judo (or any dedicated martial training) will bring about quantifiable results. Another one that I've had great success with is biofeedback. http://www.drakeinstitute.com/ Unfortunately for the greater good, I don't see either of those becoming widespread anytime soon given our societies propensity for pushing high cost, low effect, quick fix solutions on most situations.
And then once the use of the SSN becomes illegal, someone is going to have to do some clever coding along the lines of... SELECT sekritinph0 WHERE sekritinph0.IllegalizedSSN = sekritinph0.LegalReplacementIdentifer
Hmmmm, maybe I should get a patent for that while there is still time.
All I can offer is my own experience with RIS, Windows 2000 Server, and Windows 2000 Pro and XP desktops. The biggest PITA with RIS is the network drivers. With Ghost you just get the NDIS driver, set the driver to use with your bootdisk, and then image your workstation. It includes all the nifty utils to flip the SID, name the computer, and everything else that needs to be done. With RIS, you have to edit .inf files, copy drivers to bunch of sub-directories, and all sorts of other mess. In my experience, the headaches with the drivers alone was enough not to use it.
The other problem that I ran into was lag with file copies. Most of the networks that I'm on are using 100MB switches. With 1 computer copying an image, the file copy performance was okay. With 2 computers, it starts to lag. By the time I got to 4, I couldn't do anymore and the copy rate was SSLLLOOOOWWWW. The server was pretty standard for the time... Proliant ML370 P4 Xeon, 4 gigs of RAM, 128MB SmartArray controller on a RAID-5 array. I'm not sure if my experience with RIS was unique, or if it was a misconfig on my part, but my boss had a boner for RIS for a while until I beat him over the head with Ghost, so I had the chance to try RIS at a few sites. It was always the same story with the slow copies (but boy was that great for billable time). =)On the other hand, I've done 10-20 simultaneous Ghost deployments without any noticable slowdown.
That was my experience with RIS and Ghost. I categorize RIS with ntbackup... just because it comes with the OS, doesn't necessarily mean you should try to use it in a production environment.
I know someone else out there besides me had to find the ending that they wanted and then tried to read it backwards to get to that ending.
Take a course in basic programming structure first. You need the foundation of how to properly setup the code. By that I mean declaring variables, setting up functions, properly commenting (gasp) your code so that others can follow what you've done.
Once you understand the proper structure it is much easier to branch out to the nuiances of the various languages.
And that's a pretty sad state of affairs when more often than not, an upgrade to the newest version requires a complete uninstall of the old version because the upgrade functionality simply doesn't work. And then the uninstall falls flat on it's face and that requires running CleanWipe.
I've been using Symantec / Norton "corporate / enterprise" AV since 7.6 and the program blows. It takes more time to maintain than is reasonable. The upgrades are a complete PITA. But for the most part, it seems to get the job done. I was at a client yesterday, and the lady is the cheapest person in the entire world. She is still running Norton 7.6 Corporate edition to protect her 10 PCs. Much to my surprise, they haven't been infected.
Regarding the most recent exploit, I figure it has something to do with port 137/139 (NetBIOS) exploits. Those ports need to be opened on the client machines so that the central server can administer them. I don't know anyone these days who is letting those ports through the perimeter firewall, so for 99% of the world, the exploit won't big that big of a problem (assuming that it truly is related to an RPC vulnerability). And for what it's worth, most of the time those ports are opened via an explicitly defined group policy that limits connections to those ports to the IP address of the central AV server.
The larger issue in this case is the 12.5 billion dollar online advertising market. Google, Yahoo and Microsoft are trying to generate revenue by serving up advertising. Because Google is integrating their toolbar and desktop search on Dell PCs, Microsoft is losing potential revenue that would have been generated by Dell shipping PCs with their browsers automatically feeding people into MSN.
On the subject of advertising, Microsoft is obviously flailing. They are trying to do too many things at once. That is good news for people who are taking aim at their core OS / application business, but bad news for people using Microsoft software.
Even in cases where admin rights are necessary, virii and malware can be mitigated by a combination of tools. With Symantec AV, MS Defender, and a good firewall at the perimeter with content control, the only people who cause problems for me are bored users who get to sites that aren't on the content control deny list. Once I explain to their boss that they're paying me +$100 an hour to clean up a mess that could have been avoided if the employee was doing their god damn job instead of jacking off on someone else's time, the problem usually goes away.
When a workstation blows up, a re-image gets things up an running again in an hour or two.
Even though it's possible to work around the 'dangers' of admin rights, I do agree that it is a problem. Microsoft took a step in the right direction with the Windows XP RunAs. I've found that at my clients who have XP and need admin rights for a particular application, setting up a shortcut that uses the RunAs functionality gets the job done most of the time.
Come on, gimme a break! WebRoot built a business around what amounts to a security vulnerability. Did they honestly expect that it would never be patched? What exactly do they want the outcome to be? They want Microsoft to continue releasing crappy software so that they have a viable business model? Why don't go after Symantec since Symantec has included 'malware' detection in 10.0?
Wired did the right thing, and I'm just waiting for the owned media backlash. Wired put out the real information, but I'm willing to bet that the only coverage we will see about it in the major, mainstream news outlets will be framed in the light, "Wired magazine violates court order, AT&T and DoJ considering legal reprocussions."
It sort of makes one hesitant to out source IT operations to a place like India. Hmmmm... maybe it's time to DDoS India and bring those jobs back to the US. If the Indian's are such technology mavens, maybe they'll find it in their best interests to resolve the DDoS / DNS Amplification issue and then we can all welcome our new, outsourced Indian overlords. =)
And it also runs on Windows.
And this is where the Windows world is ahead of the game. That motherboard you bought came with a driver CD. If that motherboard was an HP scanner, or a Canon camera, or any other piece of hardware from a major manufacturer I can say with 99% certainty that it probably came with some hugely obnoxious, multi-color poster with steps 1-8 that cover everything from unpacking the device, to inserting the CD, to installing the drivers... complete with some screen shots of what the driver installation procedure looks like on all flavors of Windoze.
Now with Linux on the other hand, you need to know how to install a kernel module, and I can bet with 100% certainty that your newest piece of hardware won't come with a nice, full color poster that tells you how to do that. And on top of that, the nearest resource about how to do that is going to be on the internet, but with the example of your motherboard, you'd be SOL because the drivers are on the CD, and your NIC doesn't work yet.
When the government comes to take them away.
How are you going to know that the government is going to come take them away? Are you going to turn on the news and find out? How about when they come knocking on your door? The government disarms people all the time... that's what the SWAT team is for.
The same government that was formed by a violent revolution will not be overthrown by a violent revolution. The only thing that allowing American's access to firearms is doing is ensuring that if this country were ever to be invaded by a foreign force, it would theoretically make the urban warfare in Iraq look tame by comparison.
However when this system falls, it will be because of outside pressures that force the country to turn on itself.
Unfortunately the large majority of the population does not use the web for their news. Of those that do, I'd assume that at least 50% of them turn to a main stream web portal such as Yahoo or MSN that simply presents the same content that they'd find if they were to turn off MTV and turn on their local news.
Six weeks! - and I thought I had a slow hard drive when it took two hours to install Linux.
Perhaps that should have been "six to eight weeks to begin shipping..."?
I know that you're trying to be funny, but I think they mean it will take them that long to develop the disk images with all of the nifty, need to be removed programs like AOL, and Earthlink, and all the other crap that OEMs have to load on there because of the anti-competitive whiners.
And granted, six to eight weeks is a ridiculous amount of time, but that's life in corporate America. You know that the OEMs are going to have to have meetings about how to develop the images, and what to include, and when to take down the lines to do the upgrades, and blah blah blah blah blah.
There are tweaks that allow Outlook to open whatever attachment you want. They can be rolled out via GPO. Or just do what everyone else in the world does... .ZIP the .EXE.
SharePortal services?
So Macs are for kids who want cool toys and who want to play around. PCs are for people who have to work and get things done. Work isn't fun... work is lame. (Duh)
Or Macs are for people who want to do things better, because the PC way isn't good enough.
What they need is an Exchange killer. They need a directory. And most importantly, they need conversion tools. One of the ways that Microsoft made huge headway against Novell in the late 90s was by having extremely simple to use conversion tools that pulled all of the data out of NDS.
What are you talking about... integrate well with the rest of the office? Since when do Mac's integrate well with anything? I think the only company that took longer to impliment TCP/IP than Microsoft was Apple. Or maybe by integrate you mean... "Will fit in well with the caty bitches in marketing who snipe at everyone else in the office?" =) As for viruses, I've never had a problem with a virus, or spyware on my computer and I've been running Microsoft software since 1992. A Microsoft box can be made secure, it just takes effort and good administration. Unfortunately Microsoft went for ease of use instead of security. They snatched up a huge swath of the market that way. Now they're playing catchup. If you listen to a Mac guy, or a *nix guy, they'll tell you that Microsoft is lame because of security problems. But when you look back at Bugtraq and CERT archives from the mid-90s, they are full of *nix exploits and bugs. Sooner than later, Microsoft is going to get their OS hardened too. And for what it's worth, I still haven't come across a compromised Windows 2003 Server yet.
I work for a firm that pimps warez and services for the evil empire. Although we have numerous successful deployments that involve dozens of servers, hundreds of users, and geographically seperated sites, there are some contracts that we can't bid on simply because no one in the company is certified. Even though we can get the job done, and even though 99% of our business comes via word of mouth from satisifed customers, there are contracts (mostly governmental / Fortune 500) that we can't even come close to.
Having said that, I have worked alongside numerous certified individuals, and more often than not, they are the least competent people out there. The knowledge that comes from being interested in something and wanting to truly figure out how it works will always be more valuable and genuine than the knowledge that comes from a lesson plan.
Yet having said that, certifications are a good, but sometimes frustrating way to codify what you know. Like for example, who cares how ntbackup works? No one uses NTBackup in the real world. But none the less, you need to waste brain power learning how it works if you want an MCSE.
The portion of the article that caught my eye was the "War on Drugs" style property seizure laws that will allow the government to seize and auction computers. That seems to me like a strong enforcement tool for keeping computers out of the hands of the populace. Anyone inclined enough to figure out how to crack copy protection is likely to be inclined towards places like Slashdot, and other 'non-mainstream' content on the Internet. This legislation is a big crap on the lower class. In any hood in America, you can find copies of any CD or DVD out there. The locals who can't afford computers and iPods and all the new technologies, can still benefit from low priced access to the media. Those people would never buy full priced music or movies, but the media companies don't care about that. The government cares about untaxed money. There is a pretty good sized economy that traffics in pirated media. I see the legislation as a tool that allows the government to effectively crack down on that. It really sucks. I'd rather have the guys without jobs making money by providing music and movies, instead of crack and guns.