I just got my ass handed to me, and Fitchburg State University’s tech lead is pissed, at MCB.

I just got the final word. FSU’s tech lead, Sherry, told me this. We’ll let an XP system on the network. But we don’t officially support it anymore. they won’t work on, or provide support for, a system that is not 1. up to date. 2. under warranty. 3. does not have a LEGAL COPY of an up-to-date operating system on it.
I was officially told this afternoon, do not bring a used machine on the network. here it is. “So, for the security of yourself, the school’s network, and to prevent legal trouble, no used system, and nothing older than vista, or 7. If necessary, you can purchase an upgrade disc from the bookstore for $7.”
So I was correct about not accepting a used system, as who knows if I’d be getting a legal copy of XP? there’s also the questionable integrity of anything on Craigslist. Get a Windows machine off Craigslist, you’re just inheriting someone else’s problem. Also, if I have issues with the machine, I can’t take it down to i.t., because they simply will not help, if it’s an XP machine. Ladies and gentlemen, it’s dead, let’s throw it a party…I mean, funeral. I absolutely must get a new machine. I cannot bring a used one onto the campus, it will be allowed on the network, but not supported. So if it, too, goes the way of this frankenputer, I’m, for all intents and purposes, fucked, and not pleasurably either.

Also, Sherry would like to give a nice, sticky, and unpleasant piece of her mind to the idiot at MCB who put XP on a vista system. She figures the original configuration of this system was probably illegal to start with. She’s not too thrilled. I suspect she’s already called there and rammed her foot up somebody’s ass.



Mirrored from shane and krista's rantings and musings..

and this person has other kids? not anymore she don’t.

We start out today… with yet another clue.
This is what… the 2nd day in a row?
Doing the morning cruise through RSS feeds, we find a mother that got charged for an amber alert, why? because the mother decided to use her kid as
insurance
so a man would return her car.
Then she claimed the child was abducted, oh yeah, this is just brilliant.
Have the article in full.

The Elmira mother charged after the city’s first use of the Amber Alert system used her 3-year-old son as “insurance” when she loaned an acquaintance her car, a prosecutor said Thursday.

Stephanie A. Davila, 33, of South Walnut Street, was also accused of lying to police as they were looking for her son, Jacob Ryan Rubin Davila.
Law enforcement officials said the mother loaned her car to a man she didn’t know well and made him take the boy so he would return the vehicle.
The boy, who was reported missing Tuesday night, was found unharmed Wednesday morning at a motel room in Henrietta, a suburb of Rochester.
Stephanie Davila and the man accused of taking Jacob Davila, Quentin M. Singletary, 26, of Rochester, were both charged Wednesday with endangering the welfare of a child, a misdemeanor. They are scheduled to appear at 9 a.m. Wednesday in Elmira City Court.
“Right now, I feel we’ve got appropriate charges filed,” Chemung County District Attorney Weeden Wetmore said Thursday, adding that he’d spoken in detail with Capt. Joe Kain, commander of the Elmira Detective Bureau, about the investigation.
The misdemeanor complaint against Stephanie Davila accuses her of misleading police as they looked for her son.
“When the patrol originally went over there, she flat-out told us it was an abduction of her child against her wishes,” Kain said.
That information led police to issue an Amber Alert, saying that Jacob Davila had been abducted, Kain said.
“It wasn’t until we interviewed some of her other kids, and some of the information was able to be obtained to find out that she actually did give him (Singletary) consent to take her car and one of her children,” Kain said.
Another charge may be coming: Wetmore said he may charge Singletary with unlawful imprisonment, but Davila’s actions the night Jacob Davila went missing might stand in the way.
“(Davila) insisted that (Singletary) take her son when he took the car, as insurance that he would return the car,” Wetmore said, adding that that was the reason for her charge.

“He never intended to kidnap (Jacob), or anything. He just took the kid and went to do his business in Rochester,” Wetmore said.

Wetmore said he charged Singletary with endangering “because he had the kid legitimately, but for whatever reason he decided to go off to Rochester.”
Wetmore said he didn’t know why Singletary went to Rochester with Jacob Davila, and said Stephanie Davila also didn’t know.
“She didn’t want to know what his business was,” Wetmore said.
“According to her, she thought he was just going to a local Burger King. She let her son go off.”
Kain said there is no evidence Singletary’s trip to Rochester was related to drug trafficking.
He said there may have been some drug paraphernalia in the motel room in Henrietta where deputies found the boy, but Singletary and Jacob Davila had only been in that room for a few minutes. He said they stayed in a different room at the motel.
When deputies found Jacob Davila, they questioned Singletary, one man and two women.
Kain said the three other adults whom deputies found in the room “knew nothing about Quentin Singletary … abducting a kid or anything like that. They knew (Jacob) as his girl’s baby, so they never questioned anything about it. He just kind of hung out up there with them.”
Though the three other adults in the motel room may have thought the boy belonged to Singletary’s girlfriend, Kain said he didn’t know whether he and Stephanie Davila actually had a romantic relationship.
He said the two met about two weeks ago and had seen each other a few times since then.
“Quentin didn’t even know the boy’s name,” Kain said. “If he had to think for a while, it would come to him. … (Davila) doesn’t know him; he doesn’t know nothing about her.
“That’s his lifestyle, just come and go and do his own thing. He’s not accountable to anybody …,” Kain said.
Kain said Singletary has a criminal history but didn’t elaborate except to say that Singletary had never been arrested in Elmira.
Police said they fielded perhaps thousands of calls after issuing the Amber Alert. Kain said two of those callers provided information that helped locate Jacob Davila. He said he planned to talk to both.
“They did an outstanding job and it helped us out immensely, so I’d like to commend them in whatever way I can,” Kain said.
“It’s nice when people step up and do the right thing, especially when it’s a good cause: the protecting and the saving of a little kid.”

So in short, the man in question, Kain, isn’t being charged, unless I’m missing something, and the mother is.
Please do be taking the rest of her kids to, ok?
Related: I hate stupid people, stop failing, please? thanks.

Mirrored from shane's rants.

And people wonder why I don’t fly?

and here, we go again.
TSA, seriously
agaain

The 50-year-old pilot, who lives outside Sacramento, asked that neither he nor his airline be identified. He has worked for the airline for more than a decade and was deputized by the TSA to carry a gun in the cockpit.

He is also a helicopter test pilot in the Army Reserve and flew missions for the United Nations in Macedonia.

Three days after he posted a series of six video clips recorded with a cell phone camera at San Francisco International Airport, four federal air marshals and two sheriff’s deputies arrived at his house to confiscate his federally-issued firearm. The pilot recorded that event as well and provided all the video to News10.

At the same time as the federal marshals took the pilot’s gun, a deputy sheriff asked him to surrender his state-issued permit to carry a concealed weapon.

A follow-up letter from the sheriff’s department said the CCW permit would be reevaluated following the outcome of the federal investigation.

The YouTube videos, posted Nov. 28, show what the pilot calls the irony of flight crews being forced to go through TSA screening while ground crew who service the aircraft are able to access secure areas simply by swiping a card.

“As you can see, airport security is kind of a farce. It’s only smoke and mirrors so you people believe there is actually something going on here,” the pilot narrates.

Video shot in the cockpit shows a medieval-looking rescue ax available on the flight deck after the pilots have gone through the metal detectors. “I would say a two-foot crash ax looks a lot more formidable than a box cutter,” the pilot remarked.

A letter from the TSA dated Dec. 6 informed the pilot that “an administrative review into your deputation status as a Federal Flight Deck Officer has been initiated.”

According to the letter, the review was directly related to the discovery by TSA staff of the YouTube videos. “The content and subject of these videos may have violated regulations concerning disclosure of sensitive security information,” the letter said.

The pilot’s attorney, Don Werno of Santa Ana, said he believed the federal government sent six people to the house to send a message.

“And the message was you’ve angered us by telling the truth and by showing America that there are major security problems despite the fact that we’ve spent billions of dollars allegedly to improve airline safety,” Werno said.

The pilot said he is not in trouble with his airline, but a supervisor asked him to remove public access to the YouTube videos.

He does, however, face potential civil penalties from the TSA. He said he would likely go public when it becomes clear what the government plans to do with him.
He still hasn’t gone public, but further research indicates he did resign as an FFDO. from this article we have:

The pilot said he had resigned his position as an FFDO and was told by a TSA representative the resignation would result in the case being closed. The pilot’s attorney, Don Werno, said he was waiting for formal written confirmation.

In my opinion, why should he have to resign his job, because he showed flaws in a security system? it doesn’t make sense.
from the same article we have this

Current regulations require flight crews to pass through a TSA checkpoint, while ground crews can gain access to the same aircraft simply by swiping a card at an unmanned door.

“How effective is security when everybody on board is screened and everybody on the ground isn’t?” the pilot asked.

How safe do I feel now knowing that?
Should the ground crew not go through *the exact* same screening everyone else does?
I stand behind my previous claims, I’ll stay with greyhound, at least, until such time, as stuff like this is put in place for ground transportation.
Then I may just stop traveling crossboarder all together.
TSA, kindly, die.

Mirrored from shane's rants.

really, suing, at a time like this? seriously?

Me and my rss scrolling catching up on the past day’s worth of feeds since the 19th, brought me to this
article
regarding an $80-million lawsuit that Jo-Anne Blair is filing against both the housing company and the property management company of the building on 200 welsley street.
As you may or may not know, some 1500+ people were ripped from their homes back in september when a massive 6 alarm blaze ripped through this downtown highrise.
I personally know one person that’s been effected in this building, but you, my dear readers, may no many, many more.
What brought this to my attention was the article that
680 news
referenced.
That national post article is linked
here
and quoted below in it’s entirety.
My comments and thoughts will follow the article.

Wellesley fire victim files $80-million lawsuit

Aaron Lynett/National Post
Jo-Anne Blair stands outside of her fire-damaged building at 200 Wellesley Street East in Toronto, Friday evening, November 12, 2010. Blair has filed a class action lawsuit against Toronto Community Housing over the fire.
December 18, 2010 – 10:00 am

Jo-Anne Blair has a hard time sleeping at night. She constantly checks to see that her smoke alarm is working. The wail of a fire truck sends her into a fit of panic and she smells things burning even when nothing is.

It has been nearly three months since a fire ripped through a high-rise building on Wellesley Street and forced some 1,500 people to flee their homes. Most have been able to return, but not Ms. Blair, who lived across the hall from the purported epicentre of the blaze. She was marooned on her balcony for six hours before firefighters gave her a thumbs-up through the sliding door and escorted her out through water that came up past their ankles.

A week later, Toronto Community Housing had relocated her to a townhouse near Main and Danforth, where she’s had to “beg, borrow and steal to get some furniture to sit on.” Grateful for her share of the donations collected from across the city, she longs to return home.“You can sit at your table in the morning and can have your coffee. You go to bed at night and you have your own pillow,” said Ms. Blair, a former bookkeeper who lived at 200 Wellesley since 1984. “When you get up in the morning, do you look at your children’s pictures [or] your personals that belong to you?”

She is spearheading a lawsuit against Toronto Community Housing Corporation, which owns the complex, and Greenwin Property Management, which looked after it, alleging they breached their duty of care. She is suing both parties for $80-million, with the intent that the proceedings are certified as a class-action.

Ashley Hutcheson for National Post
.In a statement of claim filed with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Ms. Blair alleges that she, “on several occasions,” alerted Greenwin to the potential fire hazard caused by a neighbour’s “hoarding” of stacks of paper and other material.

Fire officials initially said a lot of combustible material in a unit on the 24th floor appeared to be fuelling the flames, but the cause remains unknown. The Office of the Ontario Fire Marshall is investigating.
“Notwithstanding these warnings, Greenwin failed to make any, or did make inadequate attempts, if any, to remedy the problem,” according to the statement of claim. It alleges the defendants failed to keep the building up to fire, or safety codes (her fire alarm did not go off) and didn’t help occupants obtain adequate shelter, food or medicine in the aftermath of the crisis.

“It’s not about being uncaring, because I don’t think TCHC is uncaring. I think they care, they’re in the social housing business,” said Brian Shell, Ms. Blair’s lawyer. “I think it’s about the inability to effectively reach out to the community at a moment of high stress and tension. It may be an issue of expertise, or it may be just an issue of lack of creativity. Too many things going on. They are focused on how to figure out how to dry off the building, but they’ve forgotten they have hundreds of people spread out across the city.”

A spokesman for Greenwin said it was “prudent” not to comment on a matter that is before the courts. Mitzie Hunter, chief administrator for the housing authority, similarly would not discuss allegations made in the suit.

She said TCH has done everything in its power to help.

“We’ve provided alternative housing, food vouchers, transit passes. Immediately following, there was assistance through the Canadian Red Cross, the Salvation Army, all of the agencies throughout the city. So we certainly want to ensure that tenants have the support they need,” said Ms. Hunter. Toronto public health has been on scene, she said, there is an onsite information desk, a 24-hour hotline and frequent newsletter updates.

In recent weeks, TCH has also offered tenants a voluntary compensation package, while admitting no liability. Tenants who live in a bachelor apartment are eligible to receive $3,300; a two bedroom gets $5,300, plus additional amounts for each occupant for the unit. They have until Jan. 21 to sign up for a cheque. In exchange, tenants give up their right to participate in the class-action suit, which lawyers say is unlikely to be certified before the Jan. 21 deadline.

“We’ve offered to help on a compassionate basis so that tenants can return to their normal lives as soon as possible,” said Ms. Hunter, who noted that former Chief Justice of Ontario Roy McMurtry, Senior Counsel for TCH solicitors Gowlings, has endorsed the plan over what could be an otherwise lengthy legal battle.

Ms. Blair may very well be reliving the day for much longer.

“To this day I will never ever be placed in another apartment. I don’t trust anybody with anything. I’m constantly having nightmares like I’m trapped and I can’t get out.”

I can understand the stress, the heartache, and the sense of loss that accompanies such a tragidy.
What I can’t understand is, why this individual feels that on top of the already high stress levels on both the tennants, and the management/property management companies, does she think she needs to file a lawsuit?
Reading the article above, and having been following this since the morning of the fire in question, I feel that everyone that can do something, has done all they can, and will continue to provide as much aid, and help as needed to bring all the tennants back to their homes.
We may never know what started this fire, or who’s responsible for it, but ladies and gentlemen, common sense should prevale in this troubling time, and instead of suing people, find ways to survive, and allow the company(s) to get back to the job of bringing you back to your home, or relocate you to another home.
TCHC, and it’s partners are doing everything in their power to get everyone back, and lawsuits like this, only slow the process.
I welcome your comments.

Mirrored from shane's rants.

Freedom scientific responds to my april 11th post and my opinion on their response and my response t

***note*** This post is based on factual information, and also will contain my opinion on the matters listed herein ***end note***
hello my faithful readers,
after:
This post
was posted on April 11th, 2009 I received a phone call on April 14th, 2009 from Eric Damery Vice president of blindness software products at freedom scientific stating that, no, Mr. Bryan carver did not send the message posted in that post, and can I please take it down because I was being spoofed by someone.
After receiving that call, I sent the following headers to Mr. Damery that show that indeed Mr. Carver did send this message that was in the post referenced above:

>
Delivered-To: va3duk@gmail.com
Received: by 10.103.223.18 with SMTP id a18cs371379mur;
Wed, 7 Apr 2009 10:42:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.229.89.146 with SMTP id e18mr3676622qcm.23.1234299018989;
Wed, 7 Apr 2009 10:42:18 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path:
Received: from partners.FreedomScientific.com (partners.freedomscientific.com [66.77.170.196])
by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 9si2359251qyk.56.2009.02.10.12.50.17;
Wed, 7 Apr 2009 10:42:18 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of Bcarver@freedomscientific.com designates 66.77.170.196 as permitted sender) client-ip=66.77.170.196;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of Bcarver@freedomscientific.com designates 66.77.170.196 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=Bcarver@freedomscientific.com
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7235.2
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=”—-_=_NextPart_001_01C98BC1.2EB5F266″
Subject: your jaws license .
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2009 10:42:18 -0500
Message-ID:
From: “Bryan Carver”
To: “Shane Davidson”

He calls me back and still tells me that Mr. Carver did not send this message, their are inconsistancies in capatilizations of the signature, this isn’t how his signature looks, on and on and on and on it goes and he is still insisting I remove the post.
Dear faithful reader, you’ve seen the headers, and those with an incling of technical knowledge know just as well as I do that headers, can not be faked unless you really really know what your doing.
I am stating here and now, that in my *opinion* freedom scientific is scared, they don’t want to here the customers opinion because it gives them bad PR, but I’m sorry to say, I will continue to state my opinion, and post the facts as I see it, because I don’t work for them, and I’ll gladly use the compitition and tell you exactly what I think of your products, weather you like it or not.
So I *will* not remove the post, the post remains as is.
I have a right to post the facts as I see it and I am excersising that right as a canadian citizen and as a consumer and freedom scientific will have to deal with it.
Now, if I receive an official seese and desist letter telling me to do something about it, I may or may not, we’ll just have to see when that time arrives.
Thank you all for reading and have a great night and I look forward to your comments on this ever expanding issue.

Mirrored from shane's rants!.