go ahead, ask me anything!
That’s right, Google got even greater by adding hybrid maps to their Google Maps service. The hybrid maps combine the satellite photos with maps so that you can see street names and see the rooftops of your destination. Here’s a nifty example using a particularly confusing part of the country.
Time for sleep; big day tomorrow, er, today.
I have never been a fan of Epson. It was mostly because of my so-so experience with their printers, usually stemming from their use of gravity feeds for paper input. After not so long, the gravity feeds jammed on me, or sucked in five sheets of paper at once rather than one. This post at Ed Foster’s Gripelog details a nasty rebate scam program in which Epson (or their rebate clearinghouse) creates a bank account (Ecount) in your name with C/Base, a Pennsylvania-based financial institution. Instead of a rebate check, you are sent a debit card, complete with a VISA logo.
While this is not a horrible idea, it does beg the question as to how Epson or its affiliates can legally open a bank account in your name without your express approval. While it is convenient to have a debit card with a VISA logo that can be used at millions of retailers, it is troublesome that the recipient of the rebate is held responsible for an overlimit fee of $15 if the card is not returned to Epson (or its affiliate). The only way you can receive the rebate check is to return the debit card and wait another six to eight weeks. You are apparently not given the choice of receiving a check or a debit card when you fill out the rebate form.
So, this is yet another reason to not buy an Epson printer. What Epson has done here is basically trick its customers into having open bank accounts with some bank of Epson’s choosing. Let’s not even get into how this may affect your credit score or credit history. Shady rebate practices are the first non-hardware-related reason Epson has given me to not purchase their equipment. So, if you managed to never have a bad experience with Epson hardware, at least be aware of how the corporate office treats their customers.
You know when that sometimes they give away free samples when you’re walking around the grocery store/Sam’s Club/Costco, right? Well, sometimes I feel all excited that I’m going to get some free snacks, but then other times I wonder why it is this particular thing they’ve got on display is free. I mean, they just give it out, plus they usually have a person manning the display, and that person’s gotta cost something, right? Well, anyways, today’s Boondocks reminded me of it:
So, I’ve got iTunes playing at work since today is Friday and there aren’t too many people around. A couple of tracks from Buffy’s Once More With Feeling played through, and it reminded of what a good episode that was. That is all; short and sweet.
From this slashdot post, I found out about a c|net article about a study on time wasted at work. The article reports, "Average hours wasted per person, per day, were highest in the insurance industry, at 2.5 hours per day. The public sector (excluding education) was second at 2.4 hours per day, followed by research & development at 2.3 hours a day. The ‘Software & Internet’ industry ranked fifth, at 2.2 hours a day."
First, I find it interesting that the insurance industry was found to be the most time-wasting of the industries surveyed. I still do not quite understand how the insurance industry works, despite Rich’s attempts to explain it to me. It still seems like a shady industry to me that is selling snake oil. Second, I wonder why education is excluded from the public sector. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? I know I have spent a lot of time on the internet at work, but as my previous job included being webmaster for the school’s website, I found that to be honest research on improving the usability of the site. Third, I like the article’s conclusion:
More-than-expected time spent goofing off isn’t necessarily a bad thing, argued Bill Coleman, senior vice president at Salary.com. "In some cases this extra wasted time might be considered ‘creative waste’–time that may well have a positive impact on the company’s culture, work environment, and even business results," Coleman said in a statement. "Personal Internet use and casual office conversations often turn into new business ideas or suggestions for gaining operating efficiencies."
I agree that sometimes the seemingly un-job-related web searches or conversations I have had at work have led to eureka moments. Of course, sitting at home I can’t recall any of those, but I’m sure they happened.
The article also mentioned that one of the current trends is to accept more time off from work in lieu of a salary increase. When you get used to living within your means, I could see how taking some extra time off could be more beneficial than getting a raise. This is especially true if it gives you a chance to spend some of your earnings on yourself. I wonder, though, how do companies cover the extra time off?
It would seem to me that the extra time off given by an employer would equate to either paying someone else more money to cover for a vacationing employee or reducing company productivity since there are less hours worked. I suppose that there could be benefits where the extra time off increases productivity and workplace morale, but I’m not sure that the benefits would equal the costs. I also suppose that good management would be able to maintain a proper balance in the workplace, else the next stop for the employees is the unemployment line.
This, of course, also reminds me of a few things I read when perusing the comments on the Harry Potter leak. Some of the comments negatively portrayed management and, to a certain extent, the business world in general. For example, the first comment asks, "How many poor bastards will be fired by the store in an attempt to cover managements (sic) ass?" Another comment states, "It IS ALWAYS management’s fault, that’s what they’re for, to be responsible for fuckups. That’s why they get paid more and why they get to sit around on their fat lazy arse all day long."
Working in a school, I feel like I have a different view of the business world, not being in the "mainstream" real world. The way things are viewed in education are different than in the business world. Why is it acceptable to cut the little guy when someone higher up the food chain screws up? How do some of the executives who were partially or even wholly responsible for major financial losses at their past employers continue to find themselves in high-paying executive jobs? Is it who, rather than what, you know? I guess the answer will always be up to whomever is asked the question (a rather dumb thought, now that I’ve typed it out).
A week or so ago I remembered Al (and soon here) telling us about her being in an AP article. I opened my WP Dashboard today, and the top link in Other WordPress News (a.k.a. WordPress Planet) was to this post on Weblog Tools Collection about the price of blogging. It’s interesting to see the mass media writing about technology and such that I have been using for years.
After checking my e-mail, I quickly visited some sites I frequent. One that I don’t normally frequent is digg, even though I have posted about it in the past. Well, I went to it on a whim just now, and the first link was Tom Cruise Is Nuts. There’s no argument here. I just thought I’d share the good news. Good night!
Recent Comments