Vladis, I'm not going to argue with you on a socio economic opinion that companies who have stock holders are evil because they don't spend their funds where they want you to and promote anti-social behavior by doing so. If you think society's biggest problem is to stop port scanning then I hope you succeed in your crusade. I think many of us have bigger problems than you getting port scanned but if you every truly get attacked, I'll be there to help.
As a good friend of mine says "no one ever goes to work and says, how am I going to suck today." We can all improve in our operations, public shaming for not dropping ones other duties to hand over information that you aren't privileged to is a bit sad. </rant> *nite* -- Ross ross [at] dillio.net > On Sat, 14 Mar 2009 00:56:24 CDT, Ross said: >> I know I won't be able to change your mind. Saying a company's business >> decisions are antisocial just because they aren't doing you want is very >> unhelpful. I don't know how many large ISPs you have worked for but I'm >> not sure if you understand corporate budgets or politics. > > Ross - it doesn't help when you turn around and present another false > dichotomy. > > It's quite possible that Joe *does* understand corporate budgets and > politics, > and *still* thinks that business decisions are antisocial. In fact, one > can > fairly easily argue that *many* of our current socio-economic issues are > due > to the fact that corporate decisions are in general required to be in the > stockholder's interests, not society's. In other words, they are in > general > *by definition* anti-social. > > So the correct phrasing is "How do we change the anti-social behavior into > something less anti-social which still pleases the stockholders?" > >> Seriously, what will be your next analogy, pedophiles are the same as >> file >> sharers? > > Paging Jack Valenti... >