Posts
The link leads to the California Department of Education's Food program page. What is of particular interest to me is the fact that, although one can find any combination of data analysis and training materials regarding transport, acquisition, distribution, and costs (in the form of grants or reimbursements) there is missing something very important to the actual use of the food itself (I'll cut-and-paste):
Nutrition Analysis of School Meals
School meal nutrition analysis report from National School Lunch Program reviews conducted by the California Department of Education (CDE).
* School Meal Nutrition Analysis Report: 1998-2005 (In Process)
Yes, that's right. the actual nutritional value of the food served in the public schools of Cal-ee-Foh-nee-a is not only 4 years past due, but hasn't been properly analyzed in 11 years. I checked the "nutrition information" page of my local school district and I found all sorts of information regarding the carbohydrate values of the food they serve. Where's the vitamins? The salt? The sugar (well HFCS [gag] anyway)? McDonald's has a more comprehensive nutritional list (almost kept a straight face there) than our public schools.
This is not good. I don't really care if the food improves or not. I don't even care that what they serve is truly a tragic approximation of food. Okay, the fruits are good as long as they haven't soaked everything in lemon juice. All I want is the information necessary to correct nutritional deficiencies arising from the ingestion of this meal. I need to know what vegetables to serve to give the right balance of vitamins and minerals. How, exactly, are parents supposed to compensate with such a lack of information?
Sunday, November 08, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
I'm sick of Mcafee no-Service
McAfee is absolute crap. I keep trying to find answers on their site and can't find them. the FAQ section is crap - you can only ever see the front page,which is only the first ten of the results (of usually hundreds). Clicking on "next" to see 11 - 20 takes you right back to the support home page. I've told this to their technicians, I've told it to the supposed technical support manager and you know what I was told? "It works fine from here."
No shit? Really? Guess what? You are not accessing it from my location. Every other site I go to works just peachy, but NOT YOURS!
Now I can can understand that the technicians are clueless lumps working from a set-script. Hell, I've written half those scripts (for other companies) so I know what kind of crap they are forced to spew. But to have a "manager" come across as totally lost in his own little world and not caring a whit about customer service? No, that don't cut it.
My original concern is that their software insists on trying to update itself as many as 5 times a day. I was told that this was normal. In whose fucking universe? Any software manager that actually thinks I want my computer bogged down by a useless update five times a day is an absolute twit. Not only should they be fired, but the person who hired them should be fired and both their mothers slapped twice for raising such incompetent boobs. They aren't unnecessary you say? Okay, where's the change notes? Oh, there aren't any? Anywhere? Really? You're going to push updates 5 times a day and you aren't even competent enough to put together a change list that appends to a file that the CUSTOMER can read to see what the changes are? Well, don't allow it to update if you don't want it to you say? Tried that - told it to let me know about the update 2 days from now and in less than 2 hours it was prompting me, again, to make an update.
Umm, Mr. security dude, if you're worried that the hackers might find out that you've figured out their thing and have blocked it... well... hate to break it to you, but they don't care. They wrote it, sent it out, and started a new project. They are NOT salivating waiting for you to fail or not fail to stop their toys. You are nothing to them, just some corporate entity that acts like "Big Daddy" patting customers on the head calling us poor, deluded, public persons who don't know what's in their best interest.
This is the result of allowing people in their twenties to write or enact corporate policy. You get boneheads working management, a huge customer turnover rate, and losing revenue.
Oh, wait, you make up for that by charging for semi-competent, semi-sentient customer support in the form of access to the download area. Oh, yeah, you can download that crap without the agreement by the way.. and it's easily opened and read and therefore hackable. If that ain't the absolute definition of incompetent, then the dictionary needs some revision.
Although my current subscription dates from 2005, I've been a customer since 1994. Not anymore. If everyone else had any sense they'd pull you off of their computers so fast it would make your investors heads explode. When my current subscription expires I will be using someone else's product.
No shit? Really? Guess what? You are not accessing it from my location. Every other site I go to works just peachy, but NOT YOURS!
Now I can can understand that the technicians are clueless lumps working from a set-script. Hell, I've written half those scripts (for other companies) so I know what kind of crap they are forced to spew. But to have a "manager" come across as totally lost in his own little world and not caring a whit about customer service? No, that don't cut it.
My original concern is that their software insists on trying to update itself as many as 5 times a day. I was told that this was normal. In whose fucking universe? Any software manager that actually thinks I want my computer bogged down by a useless update five times a day is an absolute twit. Not only should they be fired, but the person who hired them should be fired and both their mothers slapped twice for raising such incompetent boobs. They aren't unnecessary you say? Okay, where's the change notes? Oh, there aren't any? Anywhere? Really? You're going to push updates 5 times a day and you aren't even competent enough to put together a change list that appends to a file that the CUSTOMER can read to see what the changes are? Well, don't allow it to update if you don't want it to you say? Tried that - told it to let me know about the update 2 days from now and in less than 2 hours it was prompting me, again, to make an update.
Umm, Mr. security dude, if you're worried that the hackers might find out that you've figured out their thing and have blocked it... well... hate to break it to you, but they don't care. They wrote it, sent it out, and started a new project. They are NOT salivating waiting for you to fail or not fail to stop their toys. You are nothing to them, just some corporate entity that acts like "Big Daddy" patting customers on the head calling us poor, deluded, public persons who don't know what's in their best interest.
This is the result of allowing people in their twenties to write or enact corporate policy. You get boneheads working management, a huge customer turnover rate, and losing revenue.
Oh, wait, you make up for that by charging for semi-competent, semi-sentient customer support in the form of access to the download area. Oh, yeah, you can download that crap without the agreement by the way.. and it's easily opened and read and therefore hackable. If that ain't the absolute definition of incompetent, then the dictionary needs some revision.
Although my current subscription dates from 2005, I've been a customer since 1994. Not anymore. If everyone else had any sense they'd pull you off of their computers so fast it would make your investors heads explode. When my current subscription expires I will be using someone else's product.
Tuesday, September 08, 2009
Photos of War
I listened to Neal Conan on NPR while driving to lunch today. I understand why he needs to talk about it - the majority of the American populace is composed of craven lunatics with no sense of reality.
There is never a way to truly understand a person's sacrifice in war by simply looking at an amputated limb or a flag-draped box. I can feel sympathy for them, but I can never truly understand how much that person suffered. Not knowing how they suffered, I cannot know how reprehensible their death or permanent injury was. To never show such photographs is to completely dishonor their sacrifice. To have the parents of this man wish to so dishonor their son's sacrifice by not wanting the photograph shown is even more reprehensible.
These soldiers volunteered for service knowing that war existed and that they might die. Not once were they ever shown what a dead body looks like when hit by a grenade or a .50 caliber bullet. Those things leave holes in bodies, spray blood and body parts on the landscape, and expose interior body parts that most would prefer not to see. That preference has led to a misunderstanding by the general Americans populace that death is clean and quick. It is for the same reasons they don't want to know where their meat comes from - there's just too much blood. Americans revel in Gore movies (what we call Horror movies now - good grief). Those that claim that the scenes in movies and war are different have never seen the photographs. Those movies are made by people who have seen them and make them exactly because they make you squirm. It's about time the American people squirmed to real images of what war looks like. Un-doctored, unstaged (like the Civil War photographs were), raw, screaming, in your face reality. Not for kicks, but for edification.
Americans - it's no wonder the rest of the world hates us: we are apes that pick our butts and sniff and then claim we've never heard of butts.
To APR: well done. It's time for someone to tell the military to go to hell so that people can put a true face to the deaths that have occurred on both sides of these wars. The steps taken to elicit at least the comments of the most affected individuals warrants praise. These dead people are listed in military parlance as, "Non-operational assets." Does that sound like they give a shit? No, not really. So, again, Nice job.
To the editor of whatever newspaper that claimed that their nine-year old might see the paper and be horrified: That would be a good thing. Death such as what occurs in war should be viewed as horrible. Does that mean that you should also tell that same nine-year old that wars should never be fought? I bet you wouldn't do that. Oh, you'd tell us that you would so you could make all the politicians and pansy-asses out there happy, but there is no way you ever got to be a news editor of any stripe without exulting in blood and mess - whether or not you think it's a good or a bad thing. "If it bleeds, it leads," is an axiom that has never been truer than in today's media. Yes, even on NPR. How dare you take the right of your readership to teach their children away from them by withholding the photograph.
To the man who said that these dead people are fighting for our freedom: guess what? these wars were never about our freedom. It was for someone else's freedom and our safety. I always disagreed with the stated reasons we went there, but never disagreed that we need to go there. However, I believe we've been there too long. We fought there, gained their freedom, and have since tried to turn their cultures into America Light. Is the American military so incompetent that they can't teach military tactics to military personnel from other countries that we need to be there years after the original governments have been destroyed? (I know one person who was able, with about 40 others, to train the Contras in about 14 months.) The answer to that is obviously, yes. If you believe otherwise means that you believe in American Imperialism. Yes - colonialism by proxy. The only people who've threatened my freedom since 2001 are those within the United States government. Remember the Patriot Act? Do you know the differences between liberty, freedom, and safety? No? Hmm...thought the Marines only recruited smart people. My fault for assuming.
To the people who equate these photographs as being against war just as pictures of car crash victims are against drunk drivers: I seem to remember a film in high-school that depicted just such a thing as part of the Driver's Education course (yeah, California actually cared back then). I've completely forgotten the name of the film, but I bet it's still being shown in the now private courses. Besides, as one comedian said it, "20% of all accidents involve alcohol. Well, damn it, get all those sober people off the road and let us drunks drive in peace!" You may not like that comment, and I do not endorse drunk driving, but it is illustrative of how little the analogy fits this situation. Those films were never meant to deter drunk driving, they were meant to encourage safety. Publishing the photographs accomplish the same thing.
There is never a way to truly understand a person's sacrifice in war by simply looking at an amputated limb or a flag-draped box. I can feel sympathy for them, but I can never truly understand how much that person suffered. Not knowing how they suffered, I cannot know how reprehensible their death or permanent injury was. To never show such photographs is to completely dishonor their sacrifice. To have the parents of this man wish to so dishonor their son's sacrifice by not wanting the photograph shown is even more reprehensible.
These soldiers volunteered for service knowing that war existed and that they might die. Not once were they ever shown what a dead body looks like when hit by a grenade or a .50 caliber bullet. Those things leave holes in bodies, spray blood and body parts on the landscape, and expose interior body parts that most would prefer not to see. That preference has led to a misunderstanding by the general Americans populace that death is clean and quick. It is for the same reasons they don't want to know where their meat comes from - there's just too much blood. Americans revel in Gore movies (what we call Horror movies now - good grief). Those that claim that the scenes in movies and war are different have never seen the photographs. Those movies are made by people who have seen them and make them exactly because they make you squirm. It's about time the American people squirmed to real images of what war looks like. Un-doctored, unstaged (like the Civil War photographs were), raw, screaming, in your face reality. Not for kicks, but for edification.
Americans - it's no wonder the rest of the world hates us: we are apes that pick our butts and sniff and then claim we've never heard of butts.
To APR: well done. It's time for someone to tell the military to go to hell so that people can put a true face to the deaths that have occurred on both sides of these wars. The steps taken to elicit at least the comments of the most affected individuals warrants praise. These dead people are listed in military parlance as, "Non-operational assets." Does that sound like they give a shit? No, not really. So, again, Nice job.
To the editor of whatever newspaper that claimed that their nine-year old might see the paper and be horrified: That would be a good thing. Death such as what occurs in war should be viewed as horrible. Does that mean that you should also tell that same nine-year old that wars should never be fought? I bet you wouldn't do that. Oh, you'd tell us that you would so you could make all the politicians and pansy-asses out there happy, but there is no way you ever got to be a news editor of any stripe without exulting in blood and mess - whether or not you think it's a good or a bad thing. "If it bleeds, it leads," is an axiom that has never been truer than in today's media. Yes, even on NPR. How dare you take the right of your readership to teach their children away from them by withholding the photograph.
To the man who said that these dead people are fighting for our freedom: guess what? these wars were never about our freedom. It was for someone else's freedom and our safety. I always disagreed with the stated reasons we went there, but never disagreed that we need to go there. However, I believe we've been there too long. We fought there, gained their freedom, and have since tried to turn their cultures into America Light. Is the American military so incompetent that they can't teach military tactics to military personnel from other countries that we need to be there years after the original governments have been destroyed? (I know one person who was able, with about 40 others, to train the Contras in about 14 months.) The answer to that is obviously, yes. If you believe otherwise means that you believe in American Imperialism. Yes - colonialism by proxy. The only people who've threatened my freedom since 2001 are those within the United States government. Remember the Patriot Act? Do you know the differences between liberty, freedom, and safety? No? Hmm...thought the Marines only recruited smart people. My fault for assuming.
To the people who equate these photographs as being against war just as pictures of car crash victims are against drunk drivers: I seem to remember a film in high-school that depicted just such a thing as part of the Driver's Education course (yeah, California actually cared back then). I've completely forgotten the name of the film, but I bet it's still being shown in the now private courses. Besides, as one comedian said it, "20% of all accidents involve alcohol. Well, damn it, get all those sober people off the road and let us drunks drive in peace!" You may not like that comment, and I do not endorse drunk driving, but it is illustrative of how little the analogy fits this situation. Those films were never meant to deter drunk driving, they were meant to encourage safety. Publishing the photographs accomplish the same thing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)