You didn't finish your story. How long did the new director take to fix the Mac printing issue? How much equipment did he have to buy? If those multi-function printers that they purchased from [big brand A] only supported one protocol that only worked with one machine, then it's a bit more involved than simply checking a few options.

Having worked in a similar position, it can be incredibly hard managing hundreds of computers with different requirements. When one supplier decides that they're not going to support the new OS iteration fast enough, the IT department gets to pick up the slack and everyone hurts.

I see very little proof here beyond that snarky responses beget snarky responses and the system stays broken.

Part of the problem, as well, is that IT is an incredibly demanding job. You have to try and fix machines that are always finding new ways to break. Users are rarely supportive and, with great regularity, directly oppose any attempt to change things to increase stability. They frequently don't want to change a small behavior of theirs that would make their lives much easier, such as allowing their machine to backup once a week, or even once a month.

When your day-in-day-out job is to deal with the angriest person in the building, you tend to either have an emotional breakdown or you ice-over, harden up, and learn to bring a healthy level of disdain with you. It's about survival. Trying to actively be everyone's friend gets you beaten pretty badly in the field. You can't give everyone what they want.

Finally, because of policies, you have the be the bad guy. You can't simply choose not to enforce the policies. Someone higher up the chain makes those decisions for one reason or another, and even if they are good decisions for overall policy, there are bound to be problems that arise. Because policy will always be in need of update and will never completely respond to the needs of users, you, the IT monkey, becomes the lightning rod for every ounce of ire that cannot be directed at the policy.

Everyone expects that IT seems to either magically know exactly what's going on at all times, or that they're know-nothing lower primates. The truth is they're working stiffs like anyone else and that their job revolves entirely around dealing with the problems that noone else really wants to touch.

It's janitorial work w/ computers and added stress.

Bruce Sterling is also an excellent choice to contact, as he strongly supports the view of fixing broken systems. Also: for shame all of you who immediately move to the illegality argument itself. It's also been illegal before to make copies of your own music, but I don't think that stopped any of you. The case here is that OP got him/herself into a problem where they're no longer in legal territory and are wondering how to remain in ethical territory. The response to "do nothing" runs counter to everything I know about true hacker ethic. If you find a problem, fix it. To go back and hide in your hole and hope noone comes after you may be the most legally advisable (I am not a lawyer) but it's certainly not the most ethical. Don't ask OP to compromise themselves in favor of supporting a poorly written law.

The problem is, while you may have the same skills as a college-taught programmer you don't have the little piece of paper to verify them. However, most people are finding that that little piece of paper doesn't necessarily convey these abilities either. You need to update your CV beyond just a paper format. Try submitting a link with your paper CV that can demonstrate your programming ability and highlight your creativity and capabilities. That way they don't just read about what skills you claim to have, they can see what you actually do. This'll help you rise to the top.

I find it particularly interesting that their choice of performers is OneRepublic and The Black Keys. It's particularly odd because The Black Keys have some of the strongest independent credentials out there. They've been consistently published by independent labels and have really carved out their own musical niche by themselves. The idea that they're playing a concert for Microsoft is a bit... odd. I don't particularly care, however. If I was in the area I would be one of the first there for the show.

I can definitely back a lot of those. I also know quite a few people who would get right behind them, and I go to one of the most conservative universities in the country. Now if someone could just get that message out and *STICK* to it, then we'd have a contender to pull for.

You've been amazing at the helm. Thank you for exposing me to so many interesting stories and opinions. I would be a good deal more foolish if it wasn't for your work. We'll miss you!

Been trying to debug a C++ program that's springing leaks like a rusted bucket. I've had to learn the language for research purposes and I know that I'm probably quite incompetent, but I'm what we have to make it work.

The "100% Accuracy" thing is a bit of a stickler, but there are some fun examples in Social Psychology. I know they're not about being "nudged" but they *are* about influence and susceptibility and there should be many more examples in Social Psychology if you are interested in learning more:

-- Asch's Conformity Study: An individual was asked to rate the length of a line while placed in a group. The subject would answer after 5 other people, who were all instructed to agree on the wrong line. The choice was patently obvious, but a *very* large number caved. Those who did not were highly distressed, over LINES.

--Milgram's Obedience study: proved that the average person would electrocute someone to death if told to by an authority figure.

-- Stanford Prison Experiment: demonstrated that individuals fill the role that they are placed into. Atrocity is easy; standing up for your own values is hard.

All in all, I cannot prove with a causal reliability that you are, indeed, prone to influence. However, I know that I myself feel worried on a day to day basis about being influenced and often am despite my best attempts not to be. Either a.) you are a paragon among men (hats off to you) or b.) you have yet to have your own vulnerability proven to you.

The funny thing about Psychology is that you yourself are easily influenced and will only recognize it when you pay attention for it. Nudging is extremely common and has been used as a basic social method for as long was we've been interacting. Noone's immune. It's just important to realize when it's happening and to think twice about it.

Advertising *is* nudging, no question. It frequently manipulates decisions instead of persuading.

I'm actually an industrial engineering student who studies cognitive ergonomics (pretty much social engineering). I'm actually quite interested in "nudging technologies" and am doing a bit of research in related fields. I took a Psych class that discussed the relevance of subliminal messaging and covered a bit of the controversy surrounding it. The professor mentioned something strange: subliminal messaging doesn't make an individual do anything they otherwise would not do if persuaded. You can only get standard behavior that the individual would be interested in performing on their own. These nudging technologies do affect an individual's autonomy by affecting the choices they make, but, in the end, they still can make their own decision to take the elevator. An important contrast to consider is that the alternative to make people take the stairs more is to coerce them by making rules. Is that any more ethical? At least in a nudge system they have the option to do as they wish. Sure, the individual may not be aware that they are influenced, but it would be a system incredibly hard to abuse. I've had to deal w/ individuals who throw their newly emptied coke bottles into the trash when the trash can is directly next to the trash can. I don't feel that the best approach is to convince them with general aphorisms about the environment but rather to nudge them that way we can all get along to taking care of more important problems.