You realize that when you speak like this about a person, you become that which you claim to hate (I guess you would claim to hate Glenn Beck, I don't know). That doesn't bother you at all?

I know the AC title is all about saying some kind of explitive joined with a derogatory ad hominem. But, This is EXACLTY the type of thing he would say about someone else! It's not productive. It just clouds your judgement and only speaks to people who only think like you do.

I know it's slashdot, I know "someone on the internet is wrong". But This was modded "Insightful". Really?

OK, that wasn't really helpful... I'd delete it if I could. My point is: If we can't trust each other as an employee and employer (espeically in the world of software development, where you have really smart, creative people in the job), I will find a way to screw you and you will find a way to screw me. That sucks. I'd rather work for a company that trusts and respects its developers and puts in reasonable (relative term I know) limits to protect against mistakes.

Making it so I'm working at a dumb terminal to code is not a reasonable limit.

Cubicle prison is Hyperbole.

Sorry, I just don't buy into the "the only way to guarantee software developers don't screw up is to lock down every single thing they do". I've worekd there. Bosses that monitor every URL visited by their employees, Companies that don't trust their developers to work, and instead make them fill out time cards for every 15 mintues spent on a task throughout the day (not for billing purposes), Internet firewalls that only let through a whitelist of sites, Full Disk Encryption on Desktop PCs so that build times go up by 4x but we can check the box with some IT blowhard, IT departments that control every single piece of software that goes on your computer, Threats of firing unless you comply with some silly IT regulation (really, you threaten to FIRE HIGHLY PAYED EMPLOYEES as a matter of general procedure??). Man, the list goes on and sounds whiny, I guess. But it sucks, it's an awful atmosphere to work in.

If I'm going to write software for you for a living, there is a better way. It's called trust. There are plenty of companies that trust their employees. Sometimes thieves steal things. No IT policy prevents it 100%, But draconian IT policies do prevent talented people from working at their companies. Some safeguards are good, not all.

The OP (AC) said "would you have ANY machine with access to the source code, connected in any way whatsoever to the outside world?". I would not work at that company. If I can't get to the internet while I work (and access the source code), I won't work for you. Call that entitled, call it childish, but I call it normal business in 2012. Software developers have options, and I bet if you have that culture at your company, they don't want to work for you and do it *only* because they are stuck there, or aren't good enough/motivated enough to find something better. (I'm speaking to the general you, not you specifically EDIII).

Sense of entitlement... haha. Employees wanting to enjoy their jobs is entitlement now. Good job AC. Maybe the 1080s would have been a better time for you to be a "boss".

So people can code without sitting in their cubicle prison? Also, if you act like its still 1980, people will work around it (d/l the source to their laptop), or you will get employees that suck and hate their jobs (government contractors).

It's a TSA regulation (and other governments have similar authorities). The airports and airlines don't have say about where the scanners are placed. If you search google you will find a list of airports, but they are probably out of date (idk?).

That said: you can opt out and get a pat-down, just like you would at the smaller airport. Just do that?

*your* electric bill/taxes should be everyone's electric bill/taxes. The vast majority don't take advantage of the credits, but pay for them anyway.

Well, "be just fine" is relative I think. That is a ton of sugar, like 7-8 times the US recommended limit. Horrible for your teeth, contains no nutritional value, other than hydration, robs you of opportunities to eat foods that are actually good for you. So you consume 800 calories of pure sugar a day, that would either make you fat, or eliminate 800 other calories from your diet. which is a lot!!! like as much as a big steak.

Depending on your gender it is around half of your recommended healthy intake (even for active individuals).

Best investment/upgrade to a consumer device under medium and larger workloads, maybe once you get above 1GB of memory. And it's not even close. Benchmarks don't do the change in speed justice. All operations on the laptop feel 2x, maybe 3x faster. Some faster than that. You are replacing a link in your computer that was the weakest by 2-3 orders of magnitude. It's no wonder it is such a dramatic improvement.

They have internet access at the library here in the US. Free. I don't live in europe, so I don't know about there. Maybe in the future, I would see internet as vital as electricity, and thus something the government should admin, but not now. (my opinion of course).

So maybe stop complaining about television and how much television costs to other countries, and just stop watching it. It does suck a lot. But your responses are downvoted for a reason. They sounds very whiney.

You know, I agree with you, it's a good point.

However, I also think people can be swayed by statistics (true or not). Put in front of them the human or financial savings (backed by the right industry experts and politicians/celebrities), and it will get support. My opinion of course.

I could even see Google teaming with an insurance company to certify reduced insurance rates with this system, maybe discounts on cars (see the cash for clunkers program). Maybe even guaranteeing no accidents or your car purchase is discounted, as long as you agree to submit full logs of an accident back to them (to prove it was an avoidable accident).

People are scared of change, but they also *really* like money. Which Google has a lot of.

This headline and summary are horribly written. I'm not an English major by any stretch of the imagination, but even I can pick out a loser when I see it. It's misleading, factually inaccurate, and leads to a number of useless comments like "UHHH, DUH? Who Thought that up to 10Mbit meant 10Mbit? Are they stupid? Not a story!". The article clearly states in the first freaking paragraph that this isn't news to hardcore nerds, but *is* news to the unwashed masses. Take a look at the difference a headline makes:

    Ars: Your fears confirmed: "up to" broadband speeds are bogus

    Slahdot: ISPs Lie About Broadband "Up To" Speeds

I'll leave analysis of the fugly summary as an exercise to the reader. Slashdot editors really need to clean things up. It happens multiple times per day, is frustrating, and really dumbs down the comments. It's not youtube yet, but it's close.

...Officially added to the noise