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 …
Who knew that quangos were a bunch of w**kers?
... ANYONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN !!!!!! We MUST ban porn, nudity, thoughts about nudity, the possibility of nudity for the sake of the chieldren.
Not their fault
Perhaps they saw "NSFW", didn't read it properly, and thought it related to them.
More like the NSFW!
so NSF + ...
does that mean that NSF and their wankers are NSFW?
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?
NSF and TWaT in a story about porn
you must have LOVED this story it so nealy writes it self
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
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.
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.
And how much does a porn filter cost?
And how much does a porn filter cost?
Nothing surprising here. But "TWaT" made my day the way to call it pub'o'clock.
Maybe they're just Rammstein fans and have been watching the new "pussy" video?
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.......
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.
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".
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...
"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 ?
National Science Foundation Workers...
Well if they will insist on tagging links relevant to National Science Foundation Workers with NSFW.
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...
So *this* is why we have no flying cars yet?
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?
I wonder if you could boost productivity by putting porn banners on the internal apps?
Also: Defecating bears roam forests uncontrolled
Is the bear Catholic?
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.
So do the IT staff have to put in margin
on the server capacity for all the pron their holding?
They have a lot of explaining to do.
- Crawling from the Wreckage Want a more fuel efficient car? Then redesign it – here's how
- Review Xperia Z3: Crikey, Sony – ANOTHER flagship phondleslab?
- Human spaceships dodge ALIEN BODY skimming Mars
- Downrange Are you a gun owner? Let us in OR ELSE, say Blighty's top cops
- Ex-US Navy fighter pilot MIT prof: Drones beat humans - I should know