Pinky and the Brain, is there any chance we can have a thread about how Lab operations and the technical workforce have been negatively impacted by the Hagengruber mandate? I know that files have been corrupted and permanently ruined, foreign nationals have been excluded from instrumentation, and finally, LANCE's computer system is on the line. Maybe we should discuss?Now, I realize that I'm not Pinky or the Brain, but the Pink One asked me to help on this; so here's what I suggest: this Hagengruber fellow seems bent on imposing a "one size fits all" solution to desktop computing at LANL. From past experience, I know that the only result from mandating these types of restrictions on an organization's computing infrastructure will have one single effect: a huge loss in productivity.
Now, I suspect Mssr. Hagengruber has received feedback to this effect on his plan. Yet, he still seems committed to imposing his will. I submit, therefore, that his intent is to further damage productivity at LANL. This downside to efficiency loss will be offset by the benefit (his perspective, of course) of him being able to claim to have 'standardized' desktop computing at LANL. 'Standardized' for 'security' reasons.
This post is now open to comments on this subject. The discussion will be more meaningful if someone can first send us a copy of the Hagengruber Manifesto for posting here.
Update, 10/22/2007: The Hagengruber Manifesto (pdf) can be viewed here.