I have the same "problem" here. I've interpreted it as a sign that the university wants me to have a better work/life balance, and now I leave no later than when the temperature gets uncomfortable.

Major maintenance events excluded, of course.

Well, if we're picking nits, any depreciating asset IS tax deductible - over time.

While the useful life of the asset is generally used for internal accounting purposes, for tax purposes it's not always relevant. (For those following along at home, businesses track depreciation on their own books using generally accepted accounting principles, but deduct depreciation expenses on their tax returns based on current tax codes.)

In this decade alone, the Canada Revenue Agency has placed computer hardware in four different asset classes with 30%, 45%, 55%, and 100% depreciation rates. Right now, computer purchases fall into a special class (class 52) which even waives the usual half year rule.

So, a computer is a 100% tax writeoff in year one, but still gets treated as a capital asset. I'd call that tax deductible. :)

Well, no, but that's not relevant. My original point, which I really didn't make very well, was that I object to the colloquial use of the word idiot to describe someone who only lacks either the skill or desire to perform basic computer maintenance tasks.

Words have meaning, and it matters that they do. An idiot acts like an idiot no matter what the field of endeavor is. A person of otherwise normal intelligence who acts like an idiot only in specific areas is not an idiot.

Likewise, a person who refuses to learn or do for themselves is not (necessarily) an idiot. A lot of other labels may apply, but not that one.

You were doing great right up to this point. What exactly justifies calling people who make an informed decision to purchase a service they aren't comfortable with doing themselves idiots ?

There are a lot of smart people in the world who are computer illiterates. I have one customer who just paid me 2 hours labour to do an initial setup on his new laptop. The usual - take it out of the box, connect to wifi, decrapify, and run updates. He's not comfortable doing it himself, he wants to know that it was done right, and he wants me to be familiar with the system so he can call me if he has problems. He's also a heart surgeon - hardly someone I'd consider an idiot.

If you've got 600+ seats, I would assume you also have an MSCA or MSEA agreement, in which case the incremental cost of the Windows upgrade licenses is zero.

I don't anymore, but a few years ago I did.

Me too, 'cept it was my Granny and her antebellum world that I would visit. Then I would run barefooted all day long, climbing trees, free as a song.

Wait - Hugh, is that you? It's me, Ray!

So, BMW used an inline 4 instead of the boxer for their new S1000RR Superbike because why?

35 hour workweek, x2 = 70, /9 = 7.78.

It's worse than that. The actual question is "Male donors: Have you had sex with a man, even one time since 1977?"

So, interpreted in the strictly non-Clintonian way, getting a blowjob once from a guy 30 years ago in a bit of college experimentation should disqualify someone from giving blood? What if it was a 2 guy 1 girl threesome? (No guy-guy contact, just sharing a girl.) Is that still "sex with a man"?

Someday, just for fun, I'm going to ask the screener to clarify that question. :)

The problem is that that question is asked by a person, you don't just check the box. The purpose being that if the screener thinks you're lying, they take your blood anyway but then flag it as suspect and it never gets used. I'm sure a lot of perfectly good blood gets wasted from people who's embarrassment at being asked that question get misinterpreted as being untruthful.

I'm not aware of any studies comparing general cell phone usage with task specific radio usage. In that respect, I'm just an asshole with an opinion. There has been a fair bit of research into the distraction effect of handsfree cell phone use though. Here's one http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/01/030129080944.htm to start with.

One thing to think about - if you *felt* distracted, it wouldn't be (as) dangerous, because you would tend to compensate for the risk in some way.

I think it's similar to the self-perception distortion associated with drunk driving. I know I personally have to give away my keys before the third drink, because somewhat tipsy me doesn't recognize that he's a danger behind the wheel the same way sober me would. Interestingly though, completely slaughtered me wouldn't try to drive even if he did have the keys.

Seconded. I recently decided I wanted an ebook reader, looked at what was available in Canada, and bought one. If the Kindle had been available, it *might* have been what I bought, but since it wasn't, it's just a lost sale for Amazon. Every month they delay entering the Canadian market is just that much smaller their potential market becomes.