Posts by MVS 12 publicly visible posts • joined 1 Dec 2010
A reminder of yesteryear, and fun for those not aquainted:
I present to you the Chronicles of George:
https://www.chroniclesofgeorge.com
This is a company santitized dump of the helplessdesk ticketing system of all of "George's" (the first line helpdesk operator) incoherent and misspelled tickets, with MST3K style commentary.
The website was created another guy working there for cathartic release of all the pent-up emotions gathered during his affiliation with the George.
I was at a Windows World conference in Chicago (96 maybe) and was there when B.G. was proudly demonstrating this new technology called USB; it blue-screened. I suspect some engineers were fired. It was a moment in time, though I was only amused, not gleeful. He probably should have rebooted first.
No, he must be held to account for stealing free & public documents; not.
In order to break a law, you have to knowingly bypass security controls. There is no indication in the article this was done, or that there were any controls on a free and public site to even bypass.
Use of an http tool to download documents doesn't constitute breaking of any law/policy. What if I have a slurp type plugin on me Firefox?
How does one become an unauthorized user on a free system, assuming it was normal downloading?
I would say that there might be a civil case against Unisys. What do you think?
Homer keeps getting hung up on free:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0779676/quotes
(It's the fourth one down, started by Jane)
Hahaha, I pictured a shortcut into one of those "misting gardens" that are nice in the hot summers and the Ewoks enchanting one into a pleasant moment of relaxation between parsecs.
Oh, and their heads will move up and down very mechanically, or at least that's the childhood memory of other singing thingies.
S&C since there are always Pirates nearby in theme parks, but Paris would be more pleasant.
Using your line of reasoning, and divisive trolling, he must have been a democrat, otherwise he would have been informed as to who the candidates were...
Anybody who uses the term "teabagging" obviously has not assocated them, and appears to be buying into the "us vs. them" mantra that the Illuminati (insert preferred group who is controlling us) is pushing.
Hahah, "you must pass the bill so you can read it...".
Remember the first bill passed in Fall 2008 to "save the economy". That was the first jump off the cliff (not the cause, but the knee-jerk reaction). I recall all the dire warnings about not passing it scared most of the pols into voting for it. (Point of context, though I blame Republicans for buying into it as well, is that in 2008, the House and Senate were dem controlled).
To me fear/emotion based arguments are a total waste of time. I think it's time for all us to unite against the lies from political (govt., media, business, Hollywood and so on) scam artists and those who practice cronyism at the expense other U.S. citizens. For example, saying "the rich must pay their fair share" is an emotional argument. Saying that those taxpayers (individuals and businesses) who make over 250,000 and are paying no income taxes should have their loopholes removed (unless those loopholes somehow truly benefit the economy, but there should be a high bar to prove it) is a better platform. If you look at any of the IRS, GAO, CBO statistics, the rich ARE paying their fair share, so it's a divisive, really ridiculous argument. Let's not let them get away with it.
Bills should not be loaded with extraneous issues not directly related to the one being passed, and dividing the U.S. should not be tolerated. If you can intelligently argue your point from your principles, then we can have the conversation and still be friends afterwards.
Beer, since it's a good idea for everyone to relax, and get away from the emotional loading and do our best to weigh the facts.
I had five dead printers in my garage last year, three were Epsons. Stupid clogging print head. But. it all started when I thought I could use the compatible cartridges on my Epson 700, which prior to that was producing very nice photos and related home printing demands quite nicely for a couple of years. After the the third Epson gave up, I tried a Canon or two, and was screwed just as quick. (I have several of their cameras with the frozen lens issue, so I will NEVER buy another Canon product).
I currently have an HP 6500, and had to replace (Free under warranty) the print head. The LCD screen is scrambled, so I need to call them again, and it's not yet a year old. My HP 4L (circa 1995) still prints just fine, and I refill the toner. I also got an HP 3505dn, and it does pretty well, but the four toners cost $100 - $125 apiece. I won't go down the "compatible, or remanufactured" route again, too risky.
I just want a reliable, reasonably economical printer so my family can print school stuff, pictures, and work/volunteer documents when needed. Why is this so hard?
It would be a better dialog if you were willing to look at both the good and bad. Bush was one of the better leaders in that he didn't run from the fight (radical Islam), he tried to bridge the aisles (much to the chagrin of conservatives), and he made principled decisions based on what he believed best for the country.
Have you read the book so you can refute with facts?
One of my guiding principles is to consider carefully the admonition: Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil. So if you're going to call Bush evil, make a good argument, without all the drama, and be careful not to defend headlines, but the real story. Oft times I hear those who would call Bush a terrorist defending behaviour antithetical to the U.S. Constitution. If you believe crimes were committed, just be sure to apply the same standard to all others as well.
Unless you can make a reasoned argument to the contrary, I believe Bush is not only intelligent, but honest and courageous. I didn't agree with some of his decisions, but I think history will vindicate him. I saw the left go radical, and had seen an email around the end of 2000 which laid out the strategy of disinformation the press and others were going to use to discredit him. Sure enough, all of their petulant bleating got louder and louder, but very few challenged the lies. I'm so glad to see some justice with Mr. CBS, Dan (I'd) Rather (not tell the truth) . In his book, Bush talks about the hurtful lies and misinformation, but felt it was beneath the office to go on the attack. I wished he had come out more to defend the administration, but he had made a principled choice not take a chance to tarnish the Presidency's luster on his watch.
For crying out loud, look up the news reports on the economy in 2005, they were talking about how terrible it was, and yet it was strong. That should be at least a yellow flag for someone who wishes to be objective. Katrina is another example. I saw the press conference a day or so before it hit, and Bush asked if there was anything the governor of Louisiana needed, and the governor said no. The Federal government has to be asked to help, they couldn't unilaterally push in to help without permission. There is blame to go around, so make sure to look at it objectively (think about all the flooded buses in N'orleans). It's time to defend the truth, and I won't defend anyone based on party or otherwise, but based on their actions.
And if you're not willing to take a breath and have a respectful conversation to defend your points, then don't waste the time.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
