Network security should not be used to cover ineffective or lazy management. If you have employees doing things they should not, the management should deal with it. If you are setting up a wireless network that you want your employees to have access to, and you are trying to figure out how to stop them from spending to much time on the web doing non work related activities… THAT IS A MANAGEMENT ISSUE, not a technical one. Yes you can block stuff. Yes you can limit peoples personal devices. You have not solved the problem.

Many years ago if a worker did not show up on the line when you needed them, it was very obvious. Now it is not so clear when an employee spends hours on Facebook or Ebay rather than working on the accounting books.

The principle is still the same – good employees do good work. Bad employees do not. If a good employee checks Facebook or the weather or the baseball scores during the day, they might just end up being a better employee because they are less stressed out. A bad employee can be blocked from Facebook or any other websites and they are not suddenly going to be a good employee.

How do you deal with using the network as a restrictive tool for bad employees or lazy management?

http://www.hometownpizza.com

We need Net Neutrality. We must be able to use the internet connection that we are WAY over paying for to get on the internet, and freely surf the web. If we EVER allow the telecommunication companies to control what we see and find on the internet, we have allowed ourselves to be censored by big bussiness.

Imagine if you will, that you pick up the phone and call Wal-Mart, but because ATT, or Verizon has a deal with K-mart, the phone call gets forwarded to K-mart. That is exactly what the FCC is making sure does not happen.

Many arguments will talk about how this is unnecessary regulation on a bright spot in the economy. However, if I type in a URL in a browser at my home right now, and it is not a known, good, URL, Insight Communications forwards my web browser to their search page. Not the search page I have set up in my browser. Not the search page that is a known good, reliable source of information. Their own advertising search page. While currently this only happens when I type in an incorrect URL, and I have fixed the issues by putting in my own DNS entries in my router, without this current regulation it could continue to get worse. Imagine if you were searching for information on a specific candidate for congress, and some other candidate had paid Insight Communications to forward those searches to their campaign page. Would that be enough to make you mad? To ask for Net Neutrality?

Imagine if you were trying to find a recipe and wanted to go to recipe.com, but Insight Communications forwarded your browser to show you their food page instead. That would be bad. That is exactly what this regulation is meant to prevent. It is needed. It is time.

Thank you FCC. (And I do not think the FCC has done anything that I have thanked them for since … uh… well..)

“Make no mistake about it, the ongoing WikiLeaks operation against the US is an act of war. It is not merely a criminal offense to publish hundreds of thousands of classified US government documents with malice aforethought. It is an act of sabotage.

Like acts of kinetic warfare on military battlefields, WikiLeaks’ information warfare against the US aims to weaken the US. By exposing US government secrets, it seeks to embarrass and discredit America in a manner that makes it well neigh impossible for the US to carry out either routine diplomacy or build battlefield coalitions to defeat its enemies.”

Purposely publishing secret information that will endanger the interests of a country is an act of war. Today, Wikileaks declared war on The United States of America. I believe that the Obama administration has an obligation to see it as an act of war and respond accordingly.

- Quote from Pastor Craig Basler