Feeds

back to article OMG! US science quangocrats surf porn at work!

In a shock revelation, US media have revealed that federal quangocrats at the National Science Foundation (NSF) have been browsing outrageous amounts of porn at work. In an "exclusive" culled largely from publicly-available documents and congressional testimony, the The Washington Times (the paper perhaps most famous for being …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Wow

Who knew that quangos were a bunch of w**kers?

0
0
Megaphone

WHY WONT...

... ANYONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN !!!!!! We MUST ban porn, nudity, thoughts about nudity, the possibility of nudity for the sake of the chieldren.

0
0
Coat

Not their fault

Perhaps they saw "NSFW", didn't read it properly, and thought it related to them.

0
0
Coat

The NSF?

More like the NSFW!

0
0
Coat

so NSF + ...

does that mean that NSF and their wankers are NSFW?

0
0
Happy

Ooh!

I have a hilarious play on words linking the NSF acronym with the NSFW acronym which may cause people to ROFL. Am I too late?

0
0
Happy

NSF and TWaT in a story about porn

you must have LOVED this story it so nealy writes it self

0
0
Grenade

Hmm, the Washington Times

That would be the same very very right wing Washington Times that isn't exactly known for it's love of any federal agency

0
0
Stop

Groan

So, 0.8% of employees at NSF? Clearly "endemic" has a different meaning to that which I always understood.

Government organisations might be more productive if they just got on with carrying out their remits, rather than hiring porn monkeys and then muppets to "investigate" the porn monkeys.

0
0

hard working

In just one case, a senior staff member was said to have spent "at least 331 days looking at pornography on his government computer and chatting online with nude or partially clad women".

That's not bad. He is probably entitled to 30 days of paid holiday and a few more bank holidays so that means he worked every Saturday and Sunday. Presumably he didn't have a PC at home and wanted to carry on his research project.

You'd think Government agencies would go through some kind of Internet filtering. Well I would. Apparently wrongly.

0
0
WTF?

And how much does a porn filter cost?

And how much does a porn filter cost?

0
0
Silver badge

TWaT

Nothing surprising here. But "TWaT" made my day the way to call it pub'o'clock.

EA

0
0

Pussy

Maybe they're just Rammstein fans and have been watching the new "pussy" video?

0
0
Paris Hilton

Once again, only half the story.

pRoN, at work, yadda yadda.....half the story!!!

What sites were they visiting, I mean, c'mon, share the smut with the taxpayer.

Paris, because, y'know, vids and stuff on sites.......

0
0
Silver badge

Be fair, now

Employees of those ridiculous quangos have to do *something* all day, don't they? And since they don't do any enforcing, having been paid off by the people they are supposed to policing, they would be staring at four walls if they didn't have some harmless recreation.

What's that you say - why not abolish those quangos? Gah! That's the sort of thinking that we don't need in government.

0
0
Coat

Missing one from ElReg's collection of new SI units?

>" ... federal quangocrats at the National Science Foundation (NSF) have been browsing outrageous amounts of porn at work. ..."

So how much exactly is an outrageous amount? And how different is an outrageous amount at work as compared to an outrageous amount at home?

I'm thinking something like "1 outrage of pr0n is the amount that would cover an area the size of Wales if you opened out all the centerfolds".

0
0
Joke

Grew how much?

Yeah, they may say it grows by six times with the smut, but everyone knows they're looking at three times at best. Ain't that always the way...

0
0
WTF?

pr0n kings

"TWaT did note that:

The foundation is hardly the only government agency to be embarrassed by disclosures about employees looking at pornography at work.

The inspector general for the Securities and Exchange Commission noted in a report last fall that it had recently conducted three investigations into employees who misused government computers to view pornography.

Nearly 4,000 people work at the SEC."

Yeah, and given none of them actually had a second in years to have a look at Madoff's filings (otherwise, things would have been crystal clear), guess how many have become pr0n kings ?

0
0
Coat

National Science Foundation Workers...

Well if they will insist on tagging links relevant to National Science Foundation Workers with NSFW.

0
0
Grenade

Hmm...

A.) How can I get paid $58,000 or whatever for goofing off...

B.) For y'all suffering out there from the econolypse, now you know what was so important at the SEC that they missed all the warning signs...

0
0
Silver badge

Bah!

So *this* is why we have no flying cars yet?

0
0
Bronze badge
Paris Hilton

Basic maths

Dammit, I'm sick to death of mathematical increases in tiny numbers being quoted in the "medja" because they sound dramatic. A six fold increase in s*d all is still s*d all.

La Hilton -bubble headed?

0
0
Joke

Opportunity knocks

I wonder if you could boost productivity by putting porn banners on the internal apps?

0
0
Linux

Also: Defecating bears roam forests uncontrolled

Is the bear Catholic?

0
0
Big Brother

Yzers Went Haywire On NSF Traffic?

Perhaps NSF just drew NSA Traffic&Content bureau out of yearly budget just this autumn because of the agency's multiple attempts to analyze all that porn stuff. Just someone issued a circular recently about a bunch of global crooks who invented the way to deliver a sensitive information through some breached porn sites to its members (-;

A cool technique to piss off Frater Magnus Echelonicus. Also, it is considered that the uglier the porn is, the less time will officers be psychologically able to work in the bureau.

73

0
0
Gold badge
Joke

So do the IT staff have to put in margin

on the server capacity for all the pron their holding?

0
0

http://www.bccmeteorites.com/misconduct-planetary.html

They have a lot of explaining to do.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.