Better than, I'm supposed to use this dingly dangly to do work, but the tools I'm allowed to use don't quite do what I need. If I could just use this app I could increase productivity, but IT has the system so locked down that to even think about using a different app is grounds for termination. Face it, IT's job is to facilitate the rest of the company's performance of the real purposes of the company. IT doesn't make money for the company it enables the money making areas to make the money. A wise IT dept allows users to add additional tools, but with the caveat that the only fix available is a system wipe and restore to original configuration. The Users are responsible for keeping their data backed up. As to the Gadget aspect, if the company didn't buy it, the company isn't responsible to fix it. If the company did, the company should have an extra stockpile, and any broken gadget is simply replaced with a baseline new one, again leaving it up to the employee to restore the apps and data they want. And it's the employee's job if their failure to maintain a backup causes critical data to be lost. Okay, everybody tell me how wrong I am.

The first two Doctor Who feature films weren't so bad. Why do you think this one will be?

don't blame the artist, they are getting shafted by the same ass-clowns that are issuing out these notices. The RIAA steals so much money from them it's unbelievable. I just wish that the suit against the Canadian RIAA hadn't been settled and had gone the course. Then, at least, the artists would have had some semblance of hope in seeing some money back from the thieves ill-gotten gains.

Infringing on (RIAA's) Copyright & Profitability - Pirate Bay Infringing on (RIAA's) Copyright & Profitability - Weird Al, cover tunes on YouTube, fair use, time shifting (all unlicensed DVRs) Infringing on (Microsoft's) Patents & Profitability - Ubuntu & Android (and All Linux) Infringing on (Apple's) Patents & Profitability - RIM (darned Canadians Eh?) Infringing on (Fox New's) 'Truth' & Profitability - BBC, CBC, Al Jezeera Infringing on (Catholic Church's) 'Truth' & Profitability - Scientific Publications, Tax-Free Status (and, well, reality) Infringing on (Corporate 1%) 'Truth' & Profitability - Government Regulation, Democrats, 'Occupy Everywhere' Infringing on (Government & Corporate) 'Truth' & Profitability - Anonymous, Occupy Everywhere, 'Free Thinkers' Infringing on (Corporate) 'Truth' & Profitability - Google (by providing access to views that challenge 'Everything is fine')

Expect some harsh censorship in this 'Land of Free' (copyright used without permission)

"Daddy, there's no option for "mega elephant" size!"

Nevermind that. Permitting, one-time taxes, environmental reviews, and various other government fees will kill you. Worse yet, you have no idea how much all that will cost because the government agencies bill for professional services by the hour. You think AT and T would be bad as a monopoly again? At least your phone bill had a stated rate. The permitting and inspection process has no such animal. It will "cost a lot", but you have no idea how much.

That kills the project right there. A lot of us would love to do a project like that. We can predetermine the cost of the land. We can predetermine the cost of a pre-fab structure. We can even get reasonable estimates for foundations if we know the dimension of the structure; but that's as far as you can go. After that, it's anybody's guess. Unless you have money to burn, or are willing to risk not being able to complete the project within a reasonable budget, you have to say "no".

I have actually seen uncompleted projects for sale by desperate sellers. It's a sad state of affairs.

This is in California, BTW so it might not be so bad elsewhere; but something tells me it's not much better.

You can build any house anywhere you want (in residential zones, or outside of city limits to avoid zoning issues), but you have to meet certain standards that we as a society/government have set for safety-related issues. The scope of these standards was more-or-less set before anyone thought of renewable housing, and simply updated over the years, so it's quite unlikely the provisions were written simply to exclude these houses.

So without knowing more (thanks for providing a link...) I expect the reason his housing projects are blocked is because they do not conform to building codes, not because they threaten the establishment. I am a libertarian and oppose government building codes, but it's simply dishonest to portray a building-code issue as a man-keeping-us-down-for-profit issue. If that's not what's going on, maybe you should have posted a few links to solid information so I wouldn't jump to the obvious conclusions.