I was watching the news and saw the recent peaceful protesters bring firearms to rallies protesting Obama and the Second Amendment and I was amazed at the stupidity of it. How stupid are these people, giving politicians the political fodder they need to use against them?
That is about as smart as going to a bar next to a police station, stumbling back to your car, blowing your horn and driving off. Yes, you can go to a bar, yes you can blow your car horn and yes you can drive home. But it is bringing unneeded attention to yourself and begging for a police officer to pull you over. People like those I saw on TV are like that, they would go in to the bar, drink water, fake stumble out to the car, flip the cops off and drive off. They are sober, so everything is legal and when the cop rightfully pulls them over, they are going to yell that their rights have been violated and are being targeted by the police. Then you get things like ridiculous alcohol level laws and sobriety traffic checkpoints all because some dummies screwed it up for the rest of us (No I don't think that is how blood alcohol tests and sobriety checkpoints were started I am just using a parable here).
I support the 2nd Amendment, probably more than the average citizen, but I would not do anything as stupid as publicly carrying my legal weapon to a protest against the president, basically asking people to take my rights from me. I almost wonder if opponents of the 2nd Amendment paid some of these individuals to show up at these rallies to look stupid; one of the guys with the M4/AR-15 strapped on his back did not look comfortable at all with the weapon, just stupid no matter what and it hurts the rest of us. I know people are saying that is just proof that stupid people are allowed to own firearms and they should be confiscated, but we can not throw away what was given to us by our founding fathers because of a few idiots. If we do then what stops us from losing even more for our own "protection". Likke automobiles for example. I could legally buy a dump truck and drive it full speed through the middle of a crowded stadium during the Alabama vs Auburn or Ohio State vs. Michigan game and chances are I would hurt a lot more people than I could ever get with any semi-automatic firearm. More people are injured by stupid, careless drivers every year than ever get wounded by a firearm. A true example is where a construction company owner, wielded steel around his bulldozer and took it on a destructive killing spree through the middle of a down town in the Midwest. Yes this has actually happened. I can still buy a bulldozer of my own though.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Thoughts on Movie Advertisement
While watching TV tonight every station aired commercials for the new Brad Pitt movie every 30 minutes it seemed. The big line is
What would happen if that same line was used every hour advertising for other movies about our wars against the Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, British, Iraqis, American Indians, Philippines, etc. (you name them and chances are high that the US Army has done away with a group of them, we are quite good at that, after all killing is the job of the military whether we acknowledge it or not. Any soldier active or not, remembers standing on the parade field and screaming at the top of their lungs "WHAT MAKE THE GRASS GROW GREEN, ........ THE BLOOD, THE BLOOD MAKES THE GRASS GROW GREEN". That is when the realization of you job duty as a soldier comes to the forefront)
I am just curious as to what would happen if any other former or current enemy of the US was targeted in this manner. Where are the people saying consider the feelings of the Germans, many people living in the US are former German Nazis, they were being loyal to their country at the time. I wonder what they think as they see that commercial hourly and remember their dead brothers who were justifiably slain by the American War machine. If we can bring up those wounds to the Germans, why is it not ok to show video clips of the attack on the twin towers every hour to make us remember current events and why we need a strong defense and that their are very powerful forces out there who wish death and destruction upon us.
Since there are American Nazis, I do not agree with them by the way, and I think they are a sad ridiculous group (the original Nazis were for national socialism by the way, remind you of some of our current politicians?), why can we say "We are in the business of killing Nazis" but if someone said the same thing and substituted another group, say Muslims, they would be chastised and branded hate mongers? All Muslims do not wish death and destruction on us, all Nazis did not wish it upon us either. I know an old man who was a member of the former Hitler youth, he says he didn't understand at that time what it was really about, but that he was wanting to defend those around him and be patriotic to his country, not necessarily kill people. He said most of those around him felt the same way he did, it was the radicals that you had to watch out for. Sounds familiar to current events doesn't it? But yet it is OK to label them and wish death upon them.
I am just wondering if anyone else finds it odd. Personally it doesn't bother me, I was just noticing how it seemed unfair for us not to be able to say we are in the business of killing our current enemies when it is okay to glorify our past victories of killing Nazis. As a closing statement I will say that when I joined the U.S. Army at 17 years old, I like every other soldier, swore an Oath to Protect the Constitution of the United States of America from ALL enemies foreign and domestic, so any enemy of the US and its Constitution (yes even domestic politicians) should be fair game. Things are different now then they were in the 1700's; unfortunately we can't tar and feather them anymore and get away with it; the only effective weapon we currently have against those domestic enemies of the Constitution is our vote, so in the next voting year I am going to vote against any incumbent politician (Republican or Democrat) who has voted against what was laid out by our founding fathers when they laid out our Constitution. I am scared I am in a losing battle for the first time in my life. Get on the "We are in the business of Killing Socialism" band wagon and stick up for what so many of our forefathers died for.
"We are interested in one thing, Killing Nazis"I find this kind of funny, it doesn't disturb me at all, they were the enemy of the US during that time period. I saw the original "Inglorious Bastards" when I was about 9 or 10 on HBO (that is the first movie I remember having nudity in it from my youth, it made a lasting impression to say the least) . What does surprise me though, although it shouldn't, is where are all the do gooders who normally come out to say "you can't say that, you are going to offend the Germans", you know, the kind of people Hollywood is made up of. The kind of people who say eating meat is murder to animals.
What would happen if that same line was used every hour advertising for other movies about our wars against the Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, British, Iraqis, American Indians, Philippines, etc. (you name them and chances are high that the US Army has done away with a group of them, we are quite good at that, after all killing is the job of the military whether we acknowledge it or not. Any soldier active or not, remembers standing on the parade field and screaming at the top of their lungs "WHAT MAKE THE GRASS GROW GREEN, ........ THE BLOOD, THE BLOOD MAKES THE GRASS GROW GREEN". That is when the realization of you job duty as a soldier comes to the forefront)
I am just curious as to what would happen if any other former or current enemy of the US was targeted in this manner. Where are the people saying consider the feelings of the Germans, many people living in the US are former German Nazis, they were being loyal to their country at the time. I wonder what they think as they see that commercial hourly and remember their dead brothers who were justifiably slain by the American War machine. If we can bring up those wounds to the Germans, why is it not ok to show video clips of the attack on the twin towers every hour to make us remember current events and why we need a strong defense and that their are very powerful forces out there who wish death and destruction upon us.
Since there are American Nazis, I do not agree with them by the way, and I think they are a sad ridiculous group (the original Nazis were for national socialism by the way, remind you of some of our current politicians?), why can we say "We are in the business of killing Nazis" but if someone said the same thing and substituted another group, say Muslims, they would be chastised and branded hate mongers? All Muslims do not wish death and destruction on us, all Nazis did not wish it upon us either. I know an old man who was a member of the former Hitler youth, he says he didn't understand at that time what it was really about, but that he was wanting to defend those around him and be patriotic to his country, not necessarily kill people. He said most of those around him felt the same way he did, it was the radicals that you had to watch out for. Sounds familiar to current events doesn't it? But yet it is OK to label them and wish death upon them.
I am just wondering if anyone else finds it odd. Personally it doesn't bother me, I was just noticing how it seemed unfair for us not to be able to say we are in the business of killing our current enemies when it is okay to glorify our past victories of killing Nazis. As a closing statement I will say that when I joined the U.S. Army at 17 years old, I like every other soldier, swore an Oath to Protect the Constitution of the United States of America from ALL enemies foreign and domestic, so any enemy of the US and its Constitution (yes even domestic politicians) should be fair game. Things are different now then they were in the 1700's; unfortunately we can't tar and feather them anymore and get away with it; the only effective weapon we currently have against those domestic enemies of the Constitution is our vote, so in the next voting year I am going to vote against any incumbent politician (Republican or Democrat) who has voted against what was laid out by our founding fathers when they laid out our Constitution. I am scared I am in a losing battle for the first time in my life. Get on the "We are in the business of Killing Socialism" band wagon and stick up for what so many of our forefathers died for.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Email Attachments - Consider Before You Embed!
I recently received an email from someone in a storage related distribution list. At the bottom of the email it has this bitmap image embedded in the email (I have saved it as a png file to compress it without losing any of its original quality and save space).
The only thing that made me notice it was that the email showed that it had an attachment, the only attachment was this image. I then started thinking, why use an image to say this, that takes up unnecessary space. I looked at the email properties and found that the size of this email was 54 KB. Not too bad, but I looked at another much longer email that had no embedded images or files and saw that the average was 7 KB. I saved the attachment out and found that his embedded image was 28 KB by itself. There again, not a huge amount. Then I looked at how many people were on this distribution list (all of the recipients are on the same Exchange server) and found that there were roughly 2,500 people that received that email and attachment.With that one 28 KB attachment it has consumed around 70 MB of storage.
28 KB * 2500 = 70,000Kb (68.4 MB)
Still not a whole lot. But, considering that I could go back and see that this same person has sent over 25 emails to this distribution list you now have 1.67 GB of storage consumed it is starting to look like a lot of wasted storage.
68.4 * 25 = 1,708.98 MB (1.67 GB)
I know that I have seen this same attachment on a lot of emails not only from this poster but from others as well. If only 4 other users have this same embedded attachment and they send 10 emails each then they have consumed around 2.67 GB of storage for their attachment only. This does not include any actual useful data.
4 * 28 KB = 112 KB
10 * 112 KB = 1,120 KB
1120 KB * 2500 = 2,800,000 KB (2,734.375 MB) or (2.67 GB)
If over a 6 month period these same 4 users send an additional 2500 emails that has 10 people carbon copied then they have consumed yet another 2.67 GB bringing them up to 5.34 GB of storage! To put this into perspective an MP3 version of AC/DC's song Back in Black takes roughly 3.95MB of storage. You could store 1,367 copies of that song in the same amount of storage used for the attachment in this email.That is over 136 individual music CDs. If a storage administrator found a single user on this same Local Area Network storing 136 CDs on corporate owned storage it would be grounds for dismissal.
What makes this stand out to me is that this is a distribution for Storage Professionals, people who should understand the implications of extra data embedded into an email, I could understand if these were normal End Users, but not those whose job it is to minimize the amount of money spent on storing data. Maybe they should change their logo to a text version that states:
The only thing that made me notice it was that the email showed that it had an attachment, the only attachment was this image. I then started thinking, why use an image to say this, that takes up unnecessary space. I looked at the email properties and found that the size of this email was 54 KB. Not too bad, but I looked at another much longer email that had no embedded images or files and saw that the average was 7 KB. I saved the attachment out and found that his embedded image was 28 KB by itself. There again, not a huge amount. Then I looked at how many people were on this distribution list (all of the recipients are on the same Exchange server) and found that there were roughly 2,500 people that received that email and attachment.With that one 28 KB attachment it has consumed around 70 MB of storage.
28 KB * 2500 = 70,000Kb (68.4 MB)
Still not a whole lot. But, considering that I could go back and see that this same person has sent over 25 emails to this distribution list you now have 1.67 GB of storage consumed it is starting to look like a lot of wasted storage.
68.4 * 25 = 1,708.98 MB (1.67 GB)
I know that I have seen this same attachment on a lot of emails not only from this poster but from others as well. If only 4 other users have this same embedded attachment and they send 10 emails each then they have consumed around 2.67 GB of storage for their attachment only. This does not include any actual useful data.
4 * 28 KB = 112 KB
10 * 112 KB = 1,120 KB
1120 KB * 2500 = 2,800,000 KB (2,734.375 MB) or (2.67 GB)
If over a 6 month period these same 4 users send an additional 2500 emails that has 10 people carbon copied then they have consumed yet another 2.67 GB bringing them up to 5.34 GB of storage! To put this into perspective an MP3 version of AC/DC's song Back in Black takes roughly 3.95MB of storage. You could store 1,367 copies of that song in the same amount of storage used for the attachment in this email.That is over 136 individual music CDs. If a storage administrator found a single user on this same Local Area Network storing 136 CDs on corporate owned storage it would be grounds for dismissal.
What makes this stand out to me is that this is a distribution for Storage Professionals, people who should understand the implications of extra data embedded into an email, I could understand if these were normal End Users, but not those whose job it is to minimize the amount of money spent on storing data. Maybe they should change their logo to a text version that states:
Consider Your Storage: Only include attachments when absolutely necessary to get your point across! And if you are going to print this email delete it from your inbox.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
