Throttled no more - and never was!

I owe Verizon FiOS an apology.

In my last post, I suggested Verizon had throttled my connection in an insidious manner by remotely restricting the speed of my internal network to 10 Mbps. I now learn I was wrong. Still, I'm pleased to learn a new set of symptoms to watch for when a router is failing.

Many months ago, I discovered, but did not report, my Verizon-supplied Actiontec MI424WR router had mysteriously failed to recognize the encrypted wireless connection from one of my PCs. It had worked faithfully for some time, then suddenly refused to recognize the PC-provided key. I worked on the connection at some length, and finding it would accept something somewhat less secure, but still moderately safe, I settled for that lesser connection. I now believe that was the first symptom of impending failure.

The episode I reported in my last blog was but another symptom. It really made no sense to me that all 100 Mbps wired connections would work one day, and fail the next, yet the 10 Mbps would work without fault. I felt something was amiss, but Bocona's tendency toward believing conspiracy theories left me weak in that regard, and so I blamed Verizon... even though I had not spoken with them on the issue.

But when the router suddenly seized up and dropped all connections, I was left with no choice but to call Verizon. Power cycling did nothing for me locally, and while Verizon reported they could connect to and speak with the router from their end, their efforts to restart the router on their end produced nothing. They quickly gave up trying and overnighted a new router.

The new router (same model) works flawlessly. I'm again secured and back up to speed.

The moral of this story, all political motives aside, is when the Verizon-supplied equipment stops doing what it is supposed to do, I can troubleshoot to my heart's content, but should still contact Verizon support. It may well be that I'm experiencing symptoms of a bigger problem that only Verizon is aware of, and failing to report it only delays an inevitable heartache.

And while I'm at it, I should work harder to be more immune to Bocona's wild ideas!

The Fastest Internet Connection - Throttled!

There's been a lot of talk lately about ISPs throttling your bandwidth to save a little money. Of course, you don't expect an ISP to throttle your bandwidth if you're paying for that bandwidth... and if they failed to provide the contracted bandwidth, there might be legal hassles.

So how does an ISP throttle your bandwidth while at the same time provide the bandwidth they're contractually liable for?

Well, I can't speak for the legal side of the issue, not being an attorney, but from the technical side of things, throttling the NIC seems to work pretty well for Verizon FiOS.

I have a server, two PCs, and a printer on a wired network, and a separate PC on a wireless connection (fortunately, as we will see). The wired network featured a Linksys 10/100 switching router, and an older Linksys workgroup hub daisy-chained to the router. The server and the printer were attached to the workgroup hub; the PCs shared the faster 10/100 switching router, which was at one time connected to a DSL line, but has lately served only as a switch, subservient to the Verizon-provided Actiontec MI424WR router. The Actiontec offers wireless b/g connectivity, which is how the 3rd PC joins the network.

Yesterday morning, the wired network went down. Old-fashioned swap-and-test troubleshooting isolated the problem (at first) to the 10/100 switching router, so I plugged the workgroup hub into one of the Actiontec's four ports and pulled the PCs from the router, moving them to two of the Actiontec ports. Lo and behold, the standalone PCs failed to join the network, behaving similarly to the now-discarded router. A ping test showed only about half the packets were getting through.

It then occurred to me that the one common factor between the failed devices that was NOT common to the working one was that the failed devices were presenting auto-sensing 10/100 NICs to the Actiontec ports. The older workgroup hub was 10 mbps only, not a problem for the low-demand server and printer. I tested the theory by using the wirelessly-connected PC to log into the Actiontec's control panel (where I found something disturbing) and reconfigured the affected ports to 10 mbps/full-duplex. I left the PCs' own NICs at auto-sensing.

The connection miraculously cleared; my network was effectively throttled down to 10 mbps.

And that something disturbing? Someone had remotely logged into the router's console about an hour before I work that morning. No direct evidence I could find to show what was changed; the security log simply recorded the person leaving. The source address was 0.0.0.0. I'm presently inclined to think someone at Verizon had introduced a firmware upgrade that effectively killed 100 mbps connections. I don't have a better explanation.

If I get a full day free, I'll call Verizon tech support and work through the tiers until I find someone who can give me a better explanation than Verizon wanting to throttle my bandwidth without violating my service agreement. Unfortunately, with work on Goodwill Too! progressing nicely, I don't see that call coming any time soon.

Goodwill doesn't necessarily mean used goods

Someone recently asked me what my biggest obstacle is to the success of Goodwill Too! (for those who just joined us, Goodwill Too! is the e-commerce web site at http://www.goodwilltoo.com operated by my employer, Goodwill Industries-Suncoast).

Of course, there are plenty of obstacles, just as there are plenty of successes, but the one that jumps out at me these days is a preconception. Goodwill Industries is well-known for quite a few things, but one thing people think of when they think of a Goodwill store is a pretty good selection of used merchandise. Gently used, more often than not, but used nonetheless. That Goodwill takes donations of used items and sells those items in their stores to generate revenue to run its programs is no surprise to most people. I think many people are surprised, though, to learn not every Goodwill store limits itself to donated goods.

Like many Goodwills elsewhere, Goodwill-Suncoast supplements its stores' offerings with a copious amount of new items. Since the organization's customers are used to finding used items at very low prices, the new merchandise is also offered for less than typical retail. This is not a universal idea, however. Not every Goodwill, worldwide, offers new goods. It is easy enough to tell which ones do, however, when one walks in a store. The new goods are packaged like they would be anywhere else, so they tend to stand out.

So, when I was tasked with building a virtual Goodwill store, the aforementioned Goodwill Too!, I knew I'd be able to offer both new goods and gently used goods, and our local customers don't seem to have a problem with it.

The problem is, web site visitors from outside Goodwill-Suncoast's area often assume everything offered on the web site is previously used. It doesn't seem to matter what we say on the site, they want to believe the entire site is stocked with donated merchandise.

Yes, we have some gently used items online, but for the most part, they are confined to the Gently Used Merchandise category. The rest of the site, roughly 7/8 of the inventory, is brand new merchandise. Those low prices you see on items are low because we got a good deal on them... not because the items had been used once!

So, success would come to Goodwill Too! a bit faster if people looked at the merchandise the right way. Goodwill Too! is a shopping web site offering retail items cheaply and carrying a few donated items because, after all, we are still Goodwill!

I think if the Goodwill Too! Team just got that word out, people who shied away from Goodwill stores in the past would take a peek at our selection, and shortly another barrier would fall.

What do you think?

Like any good sailor, one must learn when to change tack

It's been a while since I've last written, as you can tell. Of course I have an excuse (it's up to you whether you're willing to buy my excuse). You see, I have a new job.

No, I didn't lose the one I acquired when I last wrote. That's the job that's been keeping me busy, and I've finally gotten to the point where I can talk about it.

For the first few months my job was a bit of a mystery, because my key responsibility was a project we were developing below the industry radar. Whether that was a good idea is no longer a question. The project became visible to the light of day on October 29, 2007, and the task has switched from development to maintenance.

On October 29, the world learned (at least, those in the world who cared) that I had been named E-Commerce Manager for Goodwill Industries-Suncoast. My task was to build and manage a virtual Goodwill Store. There were quite a few really interesting ways I could have gone about this task; I took one of the least interesting ones. Why? I believed I had no choice.

The project, in fact, the whole E-Commerce Department, is not a subset of IT, like many would expect. No, E-Commerce is a subset of the group that runs the brick & mortar stores, and more specifically, the E-Commerce Manager answers to the Director of Acquisitions and Allocations (A&A). A&A, while waiting for an incoming E-Comm Mgr, attempted to lay the groundwork, with some assistance from IT. The result is that many of the initial decisions were made before I came aboard, and as the new guy, I didn't believe I had the ability to challenge those decisions.

So, I went with the flow.

The result is the web site you'll find at goodwilltoo.com. When I find the time to talk, down the road, I'll probably talk some about that web site: the reasoning behind some decisions as well as comments about products, themselves. Particularly fun, from my point of view, is how work as an e-commerce manager in a world unattached to IT or Marketing departments compares to my previous (mis)conceptions.

Oh, and as you'd expect, I'll close with this: if you happen to be someone who likes to save money when shopping, please be sure to visit the web site. And while you're at it, bring some friends. Not just for Goodwill, but for me as well!

Change for the Better

It's funny how things can happen just when they need to happen. Take my job and my water lines, for example ...

A dramatic increase in our water bill told us something was amiss. The county water department nonchalantly informed us we had a water leak somewhere in the 50+ year-old plumbing on our property, but was kind enough to tell us they'd rebate part of the water bill when we present them with a copy of the plumber's bill for fixing the leak. That, of course, means we have to have a plumber fix the leak. We knew we'd need pipe work eventually, but my less-than-optimal current occupation made paying for a plumber a challenge. Unfortunately, at the rate the water was apparently flowing, we'd soon need to finance our water bill, so we had little choice.

Finding a water leak is amazingly like finding a break in a network, and makes one think briefly about the "pipes" we pump out data through. The analogy is never clearer than when you're troubleshooting a broken water pipe. Do you know where the lines run? Check the obvious and least expensive places first. With the water main being my Internet and the meter acting as the router, I started tracing the problem just far enough to confirm the problem wasn't obvious. A water leak under ground can make itself evident, particularly in a time of drought, by an abnormally green patch of lawn over the pipe. The problem (like some I've run into chasing Ethernet breaks) is I didn't know where the pipes actually ran. No patch of lawn looked better than another, suggesting the break wasn't out in the open, but I didn't know where to look.

I gave in, and we called a leak detector. Shortening an already-too-long story, he found the leak under some bushes (which were benefiting from the extra water without actually looking like it, those devils!). Next came the plumber, and with him the bad news: The leak was a ruptured main line into the house, just past the turn-off, and the rupture led under the house.

We could put it off no longer. We had to re-pipe the house. Water was shut off, and the next week was spent getting quotes and lining up financing. Meantime, a helpful neighbor donated a bucket and access to his water, so we could keep a toilet operational. We called it a "hurricane drill", living off bottled water and quickly discovering how much stored water was needed to keep functionally sanitary (like most people, we are woefully unprepared).

The financing was the really ugly part, as my retail manager job had until now only managed to keep us afloat. Now our boat has sprung a leak and I had to find a way to keep us from sinking.

A dry dock beats a life preserver

That was when one of life's funny coincidences occurred. I answered a scantily-detailed ad for an e-commerce manager position and was pleasantly surprised to be called about it. I might even say I was amazed, given my previously noted observations on job hunting. My good fortune came from the method of response required by the employer. The ad requested faxed resumes or personally-submitted applications ... no e-mails accepted. The responses had to drop to a mere handful of applicants who were serious enough to locate a fax machine or drop by to apply. My resume, once buried in an avalanche of applicants, now stood for itself, and of course my credentials in e-commerce were exemplary (if I do say so myself).

The interview was a pleasant two-hours long, and both myself and my prospective employer were bursting with enthusiasm about the project - a new venture for the company and a new department to be managed, complete with a warehouse crew for the receiving and shipping of inventory.

They offered me the job on the same day the plumber started digging the hole to lay the new pipes. The pay is more in line with what I should be making at this point in my career (read into that whatever you want), so my boat can stay afloat a while longer. I start July 30, and hope to share my observations and pitfalls as I go.

See? Things do have a way of working out. Who would have thought ...?

Victory over Checkers ... of a sort

You may recall I've had an ongoing feud with Checkers over customer service. More specifically, I grew tired of the local restaurant's carelessness in handling a special order, where they time and time again ignored requests to hold onions on sandwiches Bocona would order, despite warnings that she was allergic to them. Even a call to their corporate offices went unreturned.

Bocona forgave them, since she really does like the Big Buford burgers. I was the one who had to deal with their ineptness, however, and I insisted that my boycott of the restaurant be maintained.

Perhaps I was not alone in my actions.

Earlier this week we drove past the restaurant in question and found it closed. Not just closed, but very closed. Quite permanently so. The signs are gone, the windows boarded up. It appears the company decided the store simply wasn't worth saving.

No, we never did hear from the company. But Bocona's temptation is gone, as are the chain's employees who simply couldn't learn from their mistakes. I don't necessarily wish ill-will upon those employees, but I would hope they weren't simply transferred to other locations. These people shouldn't be in a position to put customers at risk. I hope they found other work ... the kind where customer lives aren't risked when they make mistakes.

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work in fast-food, but you do have a responsibility to remember the health of your customers may be affected by your actions. If you can't live up to that responsibility, don't get a job in a restaurant. It's that simple.

I'm not celebrating. I regret the restaurant had to close. But I'm glad there is one less place where quality of service plays second-fiddle to the profit margin. I truly am tired of what fast-food has become.

One man's protection is another man's censorship

My attention has been drawn toward Google's fight against global Internet censorship, and like many others, I find it amusing that Google has chosen to champion this cause, in light of its well-publicized participation in the censorship of the web from within Chinese IP space. I've read Google's line on both subjects - how censorship is an economic issue, rather than a political one, and that their censorship of web searches from China was necessary to allow Chinese access to any part of Google - and I don't exactly see the positions as contradictory.

Like any other corporation, Google clearly wants to have its cake and eat it too. No surprise. Google regrets having to censor Chinese access, but looks at the censorship as the lesser of two evils. After all, how can a company truly succeed with a motto like "Do no Evil" when it is given a choice between one of two evils?

But today's issue is global Internet censorship, which, if defeated, would essentially allow Google to remove the blocks it was forced to place on Chinese inquiries. A noble cause, one might say, and very characteristic of Internet culture. After all, my ability to write these words comes courtesy of the freedom from censorship afforded me by my residency in the United States.

But that doesn't mean I'm not being censored. Yes, I have freedom of speech, but we've already seen numerous cases where that freedom carries a caveat. You can't shout "Fire!" in a crowded theater, as one famous example puts it (unless there really is a fire, I suppose). There are restrictions on one's freedom from censorship - and how free you really are depends on the definition of censorship and who is doing the defining.

It's well and good to take a stance against censorship, but before going too far, ask yourself what you might be opening the gates for. Pornography? Piracy? Spam? Terrorism? Where is that line between protection and censorship? Who should have the right to define it, if anyone? And what makes that party any better at drawing the line than the next party?

The fight against global Internet censorship is probably a spin-off of the fight for Net Neutrality, and just like that fight, the truth lies somewhere between the spin doctors for both sides.

Don't be quick to take a position.

As for elsewhere...

Bocona reports the local Checkers has changed management, and she's willing to give them an upteenth chance. I still haven't seen an e-mail from anyone with Checkers, and am not as quick to accept an untendered apology. I hope Bocona's forgiving attitude doesn't lead her to her grave.

---

Things aren't so rosy at my retail position. For a few weeks I had them contracting me to rebuild their Internet marketing strategy (which sorely needs repair), but once they saw what it would cost them in hard dollars to do things right, that project was axed. I don't think this gig is going to last me very long.

---

Verizon and I had another spat. I requested a speed upgrade, but it didn't appear to happen, so I called support. The tech made a few adjustments and had me switch the Internet connection from the Actiontec router directly to one of my PCs. A quick SNMP reset/renew and there I was, faster, but not quite fast enough -- I thought. Arrangements were made for techs to look into the matter, but when I got off the phone and switched the connection back to the Actiontec, the Internet connection was dead.

I called back. Different tech this time, and he wasn't interested in what the previous tech had done. After 30 minutes and two router power cycles, he decided I'd blown the router, and he had to send me a replacement. Final. No buts about it.

Off the phone, I logged into the router's management console and issued an SNMP reset/renew. Problem solved... but I had to call Verizon a third time and cancel the planned delivery of a replacement router. I guarantee the contents of that call found their way to a supervisor.

So, life is faster, now, but not necessarily any better. If you have an IT position for me in the Tampa Bay area, I'd like to hear what you have to say.

If not, you are still welcome to drop by Your World News if you like.

Checkers no longer finishes the race

Bocona likes the Big Buford. I have to admit, so do I.

But Bocona is also allergic to onions, one of the ingredients in Checkers' burger.

"No problem," one might say, "simply order a Big Buford without onions."

If only it were that simple. You see, we've tried that, but the Checkers restaurant on 14th Street West in Bradenton, FL doesn't seem to know how to do special orders. In fact, they can't even get the simple ones right.

Four of the last five visits I've made to that restaurant resulted in botched orders, including placing onions on Big Bufords requested without them. Errors that, if it weren't for the caution routinely taken by the consumer, might have resulted in hospitalization or death.

On the last visit, I told the store manager - who happened to take my order that day - she screwed up.

"No I didn't," she replied, pointing at my receipt, "I told them to make the burger without onions. The cooks screwed up."

Clearly this manager doesn't understand the concept of managerial responsibility. On each of the many botched visits, I've received the same results: a less-than-heartfelt apology and a replacement for the problem order. Nothing to compensate for the time or fuel wasted (Checkers is a drive-thru restaurant, and the errors are usually caught at home, then driven back to the restaurant for correction).

But take heart! The bag says if I'm happy with my Checkers experience, I should tell a friend, while if I'm not, I should call a toll-free number. So Bocona called that toll-free number Saturday, March 10. She told the voice at the other end what happened, and the voice at the other end took her name, her phone number, and her e-mail address (which is actually one of my e-mail addresses, but that isn't important).

And now, over one week later, we're still waiting for someone from Checkers Corporate to call or e-mail about her complaint.

Meanwhile, we've lost our patience. We're voting with our money and boycotting Checkers. What you'd expect anyone to do.

And I'm doing what any responsible blogger would do - telling the world about it. Who knows? Maybe there are a few other lives I can save besides my wife's.

Verizon FiOS: Power IS an Issue

Continuing my series on Verizon FiOS, you may recall from my first post an observation that the ONT has a battery backup for the phone line, but the router would require its own UPS to maintain an Internet connection during a power failure, as would the attached televisions.

I see now this speculation was only that, but in a very negative way. I recently found myself in a position to test this speculation, and was unhappy with what I learned.

It isn't a power issue; it's designed that way

On a recent afternoon, Bocona flipped a light switch in the master bath and a light bulb dramatically failed. The bulb apparently had a hot spot and literally blew out, not only failing the light but also the circuit, tripping a breaker. This breaker controlled the master bath, the master bedroom, the guest bath, and half of the guest bedroom (aka, my office). Bocona, of course, noticed the bulb failure in the master bath and switched to the guest bath, where she discovered the light was also dysfunctional. She did not recognize the power failure, however. She called me to tell me the lights had gone out in both baths, asking me to pick up replacement bulbs on my way home.

When I got home, the story became more complicated. Bocona reported the TV service had failed; all she could watch was shows recorded on the DVR. Both the TV and the DVR functioned fine, but we had no live programming. I asked her to check the TV in the master bedroom while I called Verizon Support to report the outage. Before I got a human on the line, however, she called out to tell me the power was out in the master bedroom.

This got me thinking, and I went to my office. As I expected, everything in my office worked except the power outlet the ONT's power supply was using. The Actiontec router was looking very normal, but the battery backup's status lights showed the ONT was running on battery.

Now, remember, Verizon said the battery backup existed to ensure phone service during a power outage. The phone was working (I had started to use it to call for support), but even though the router had its independent power and was showing good service, the DVR was not receiving a TV signal.

I went to the breaker box and reset the tripped breaker, and returned to my office. The ONT successfully returned to household current. Next we tried the TV, but found no improvement. On a hunch, I power cycled the router, and after a few moments the TV service was restored.

My disappointing conclusion was that investment in UPSes for the router and the TV/set-top boxes would be mostly wasted. The battery backup does exactly what Verizon promises: it permits the ONT to maintain the phone service.

It does not permit the ONT to maintain the TV service, on the possibility I could maintain power to the televisions and set-top boxes. Alas, I did not check the Internet connection, although the experiment would be easy to duplicate.

A workaround

I'm not crazy about the idea, but there is still, theoretically, another way around this. What I would have to do is put a very good UPS on the power outlet used to feed the ONT, then plug the ONT/battery backup into this UPS. In theory, the ONT would then be unaware of the power failure as long as the UPS functioned, and the ONT wouldn't cut off the other services until the UPS died. In hurricane threatened communities, this might be appropriate, but I'd like to get a power professional's opinion before making the investment... or even better, an opinion from a knowledgeable Verizon FiOS technician (not necessarily equated to Verizon FiOS support).

If I learn anything new, I'll be sure to share. Meanwhile, feel free to visit http://yourworldnews.frayernet.com to share your favorite news and technology links.

Verizon FiOS: Tiling Be Gone!

In my last entry, I reported some lingering and persistent trouble with "tiling" with my new Verizon FiOS TV service. Well, I'm happy to report the trouble has been resolved.

I began to have intermittent trouble with the DVR/set-top box. Once, maybe twice a day, the box would "lock up." The only way around these spells was to physically detach the power cord from the Motorola box, then re-attach the cord and wait out the power cycle. Needless to say this was annoying behavior, and a call to Verizon FiOS Tech Support ensued.

Tech Support sent a hard reset command to the box remotely, but instead of completing the boot process, the box died with an error code (not translated, unfortunately). The tech on the phone scheduled a service call for the first day I was available, and saved me from total TV boredom by explaining I could get basic cable channels by moving the coax from the set-top box directly to the antenna/cable input on my TV.

The Experienced Technician

On the designated date and time, the technician arrived, supposedly to swap the set-top box. I scratched my head a bit when he started buckling on his tool belt. After all, I thought, how many tools would he need to exchange a defective set-top box? My inquiry on the subject drew a satisfying answer.

"I don't take anything for granted," he replied. "The problem may be your set-top box, but it may be something else."

I described the previous tech's exercise with attenuators, which drew a scoff from the tech. A few minutes with the meter, and the tech pronounced my signal to be at the ideal strength without the attenuators (which he handily removed). He then replaced the set-top box as planned, re-initialized and activated it, and waited for it to boot.

It failed to boot properly, stopping on a very permanently tiled display.

The tech eyed the cable from the wall. The very yellowed cable. The cable that had been installed by the home's previous owners, more than 15 years before. The cable used by the FiOS installer, apparently to avoid having to re-cable my home.

The tech then traced that suspicious length of cable to where it joined with the new cable that had been installed when FiOS was installed. Muttering something under his breath, likely about the installer I'm guessing, the tech went to his truck. Out came the spool of coax and his stepladder. In a few short minutes, the old, yellowed cable was gone, and shiny, white cable completed the run from the line splitter to the set-top box.

The set-top box was rebooted, and the TV's normal picture returned.

We haven't seen the tiling since!

Epilogue

Since writing about my Verizon FiOS installation, that story has become one of the heaviest read pieces in this series. I'd like to answer questions, but I actually need to determine what the questions are before I can answer them. Please post your comments and questions to the blog, so I can share your questions and their answers with my readers. I'll continue to share some of the more interesting aspects of my Verizon FiOS installation in future blogs.

And for those who are wondering, I did manage to get a job, though oddly enough it wasn't in the technology field. I'm in a retail management position, now, and may talk more about it in the future. And I'm still encouraging visits to Your World News, as you might expect.

Now I'm off to see what Bocona has recorded on the DVR these days ...

Verizon FiOS

A couple months ago, I switched to Verizon FiOS. Today, I'll talk about why I switched, what I got, and how things have been since I switched.

FiOS is Verizon's new network, offering phone, TV, and Internet service on a single set of lines, competing directly with traditional cable providers, such as Bright House or Comcast, for those same services.

Manatee County, Florida, and more specifically the southern part of the county, where I live, was "wired" for FiOS early in 2006. I use the term "wired" loosely, as FiOS is based on fiber optic technology, burying miles of fiber throughout the affected neighborhoods. I was somewhat annoyed at the time, as Manatee County had just finished burying new water lines in my neighborhood, laying fresh sod over the digging, and it seemed that sod had just gotten a good hold on the land when the crews came by and buried the fiber. Alas, the crews did not do as nice a job covering up behind them, leaving my yard somewhat less attractive when they left.

I said the neighborhoods were affected, and in that I wasn't just referring to the buried lines. FiOS is intended to replace the copper lines in the area, although it will be pretty gradual about the process. Any new phone service installed in the area would be done as part of FiOS. If a household subscribes to Verizon's FiOS TV, Verizon will automatically convert the phone service to FiOS as well. I do not know if one can get FiOS without phone service, but I find it unlikely. Purely speculating, I think the phone service is not actually necessary for FiOS to function, and the service itself could very likely be disabled at Verizon's end, leaving other services intact.

FiOS Phone

Unlike Bright House's phone offering, Verizon FiOS does not use VoIP for phone service. The phone service rides the common fiber through the neighborhood, and fiber is run from the main fiber line to an Optical Network Terminal (ONT), where it is separated from the other services. Your standard phone lines are connected to the ONT, and when the ONT is powered up, the standard phone line to the copper network is severed, and phone service is switched to the fiber line.

The up side of this is that many older neighborhoods have the copper lines running above ground, sharing poles with the power grid. Since the fiber is buried in my neighborhood, it is not subject to the service problems that came with the elevated lines. I used to be plagued with static, particularly after rain, that would occasionally make the phone line nearly unusable. this should never be a problem again.

The down side of the phone service is that the phones are no longer powered by the network. The ONT must be powered by the subscriber's power. The drain is small, equal to leaving a small light on 24/7, but when the power is interrupted, there is a risk that the phone will die as well. To reduce this risk, the ONT is attached to a battery backup, powered by a small, rechargeable, motorcycle-class battery, warranted for two years. Eventually the battery will need replacing, and I will be responsible for doing that, but the battery is fairly common, so I won't worry about it. The battery will support the ONT for at least four hours, after which you no longer have any service until power is restored. We had two hurricanes take out power for 12 hours each last year, pre-FiOS; I suggest you keep a charged cell phone battery handy if you anticipate a lengthy power outage and want the security of a phone beyond the life of the battery backup.

The battery backup is dedicated to the ONT. This is worth knowing as we discuss the other services.

FiOS Internet

For most of the rest of the country, FiOS Internet makes up your remaining service, as TV is only available where arrangements have been made with local authorities for Verizon to offer TV service. FiOS Internet is about on par with cable modem, although service offerings do allow you to purchase speeds in excess of that provided by coax-based cable.

Prior to FiOS, readers may recall I was using Verizon DSL. The most common DSL subscriber has a maximum download speed of 768 kbps and a maximum upload speed of 128 kbps, significantly slower than cable modem's advertised 5 mbps (typical cable modem speeds are closer to 1 mbps). DSL can be pumped up to as much as 3 mbps, but actual throughput will be less than that. For the purpose of comparison, we'll stick with the advertised values.

So, cable modem is typically faster than DSL, but FiOS starts at 5 mbps down and 2 mpbs up, or roughly twice the speed of cable modem, and seriously faster than my DSL. If I'm willing to pay for it, I can get my FiOS pumped up to 50 mbps! Not that I'd need that kind of speed to maintain Your World News.

Reason to switch, for sure, but that wasn't what made me do it. Switching didn't become an issue to me until I had a second technical snafu with my DSL subscription. I found that, because I live in a FiOS neighborhood, Verizon doesn't want to install DSL here any longer. Sure, I could push them to do it, but support calls would become a pain, as they would keep trying to pawn me off on FiOS.

Why was I hesitant? The system requirements. Verizon says FiOS Internet is supported on Windows 2000 and up, or on Macs. Not my older Windows 98 machines, not Linux, and not NetWare (I have an old NetWare 5.1 server on my network). A phone conversation with FiOS Tech Support straightened me out on that. The problem is two-fold, and not actually a problem at all. See, FiOS Tech Support doesn't promise to have assistance available for the other OSes, and besides, Windows 98 isn't going to notice the speed improvements. Ha! The system requirements aren't as stingy as I thought it might be. What I do on my private LAN side is essentially my problem, just like with DSL.

So, since my budget was tight, I went with the basic Internet package, and turned my attention to FiOS TV.

FiOS TV

TV service is something I wasn't quite ready for, but any other choices were simply impractical. We we not cable subscribers. I haven't been fond of Bright House since when they used to be part of Time Warner. I had my reasons for disliking Time Warner, but can only profess to stubbornness about Bright House. I had DSL, so I had no desire for cable modem, and no desire for TV cable if I didn't need it. We had DirecTV satellite, but were spending way too much for what we used, and FiOS TV offered digital signal quality coming over fiber (no rain fade, a big issue in Florida). So, giving up DirecTV for 180 basic channels of FiOS TV wasn't that difficult.

I ponied up for two set-top boxes: a master box with DVR capabilities for the living room, where we do most of our TV viewing, and a basic box for the small TV in the master bedroom. We didn't have DVR with our early-adopter satellite TV system, so I couldn't pass on the novelty of it. It sure beats VHS!

Choosing Internet and TV at the same time dictates a hardware change in the FiOS configuration. FiOS Internet comes with a rather conventional router, but the combined service calls for something on the unusual side.

Remember, phone service was split off from the fiber at the ONT. The TV and Internet signals are sent from the ONT to a Cat 5 twisted pair wire that ends at a special, Actiontec router. This router (which includes a fairly configurable firewall, satisfying my technical whims) splits the TV signal from the Internet traffic, sending the TV traffic through the house's pre-wired coax network (along with IP-based controls for the set-top boxes). The remaining Internet traffic is placed on a separate segment, offered through four conventional ports and a built-in 802.11b/g wireless transceiver.

The Difficulties

Now that I've had the service for a couple of months, I'm seeing a few issues, none of which so far make me regret the move. The first issue has yet to be solved, mostly because I haven't devoted serious time to tackling it. The TVs have been suffering from intermittent "tiling", where little squares of the picture seem to fall briefly out-of-sync with the rest of the picture. As this is intermittent, they are a devil to catch, and the first round of troubleshooting (changing out attenuators that regulate the signal level) seemed to do little good. I'm preparing to call them back on it.

The second issue occurred when I found I was getting hit with a series of port scans that drove my incoming traffic much higher than normal. I found that I was having trouble changing my dynamic IP address. The commands would execute on the router, but it kept getting the same address back. I called Verizon Tech Support for assistance, and they discovered they were also unable to get the address to change. I wouldn't go as far as to say I had a static address for the price of a dynamic one, but it sure felt like it.

The router has some other minor annoyances, particularly in trying to stop the reporting of specific firewall rule violations, requiring me to filter those reports with a third-party tool. I don't think they planned for many subscribers to pay attention to the firewall as much as I do. I get questionable traffic generated by the router, itself, but the documentation for the router is difficult to obtain, and fairly weak when it is found.

The most recent issue is fairly predictable, but one needs to keep it in mind in any case. The battery backup only works for the ONT. A power problem does impact the rest of the system. Make sure you have at least one conventional, line powered phone, if you want to use the phone line during a power outage (true in any phone system, of course). While you won't be watching TV during an outage (in most cases), the set-top boxes lose their menuing system when the power goes off. When the power comes back, the boxes connect to Verizon over the Internet to download fresh menus, including those used to access the DVR. This means you may have an extended period after power comes back when you can't watch a DVR recording or do more than flip through the TV channels one at a time. A recent extended outage left us waiting an extra 15 minutes or so after the power came back before we could resume a recorded movie, and that still left us having to fast forward through the recording to find where we left off.

Putting these devices on UPSes might help. Certainly keeping the router powered would allow you to use the Internet via independently powered computers (probably at a loss of ONT operating time), but putting the set-top boxes on UPSes might also prevent the annoying delay of service resumption I just described. That is entirely up to you.

Conclusion

Verizon FiOS wasn't something I anticipated getting right now, but it hasn't been a very painful investment, and I think my overall quality of life has improved by having done so. The gains clearly beat the drawbacks, and I'd suggest anyone eligible to subscribe should give it serious consideration.

Promises, Promises

When interviewing for a job, it's good to keep in mind that any promises you get may not last through the process.

I recently interviewed for a network administration position with a major manufacturer. The interview went splendidly. For nearly an hour and a half, I had a pleasant conversation with the incumbent, who was being promoted to a position supervising the administrators at multiple plants. We spoke of the old days, the state of the industry, and the kind of work that was being performed in the position (work that well exceeded the tradition of basic network administration). The interview only ended because the principal was summoned to a conference call.

Hasty "good-byes" were exchanged. He gave me his card, and told me I would be called for a second interview. Had I not received a call by the end of the week, I was to call him, as he was leaving for a business trip the following week, and he wanted to be sure things progressed.

I left, jubilant. I felt this was a job I could excel at, and looked forward to the subsequent call. But I made two mistakes:

1. I was the first person interviewed. Others would follow, and I knew nothing of them. Of course, I never do know anything of other candidates, and make my best effort in the first interview, but one should never leave a first interview confident of the future.
2. I believed his promise that there would be a second interview.

The principal is not the only person involved in the process, and even if he/she is, the decision of who makes the cut can't truly be made until all the candidates have been seen. A promise at the end of an interview that you will be called for a second interview is only lip service, especially if you are one of the first to be interviewed.

If I had been one of the last interviewed, I would have had better feedback during the interview as to how I stood against my competitors. Maybe he wouldn't have said anything directly, but I could have read the comparison in his behavior, and might have noticed where I needed to put more emphasis. At the least, I would not have been as likely to invoke the strong positive vibes that led me to think I had a future. Had the interview then ended with a promise of a second interview, I would be more justified in believing the promise, since he would have been less likely to make such a promise after doing a mental comparison to the other candidates, unless I did indeed stand out.

Also, being at the tail end would allow me to remain more clearly in his mind when the actual choices were made.

So, given the opportunity, I believe I will opt for an interview at the tail-end of the process, and will only count on getting that second chance when that second chance is actually arranged.

Interviewers will lie to you. They may not do so knowingly or willingly, but that makes it no less true. You can only count on what you know to be true, and take the rest with a grain of salt.

The resumes will continue to fly, and in the meantime, I continue to work on Your World News. I can still use some volunteers there. Drop by the site and drop me a line if you're interested in helping.

Why put off 'til tomorrow... oh, never mind.

Have you ever talked with someone who was thinking of buying a new computer, but every time he or she was about to make the plunge, he or she heard about some new feature coming out soon and decided to wait until that new thing was available?

Has that person purchased a computer yet?

Usually one of two things gets a person with this problem to change his or her mind. Either he or she gets tired of waiting for a promise that will never be fulfilled, or someone finally gets through to him or her that waiting for the next big thing often does little but deprive one of the benefits the current model has available now.

By now you might be thinking I'm about to lecture on the evils of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) as a marketing tool, but remember, I seem to be perpetually in the job hunt, so my point is really related to finding work.

And I'm not going to use this as an excuse to talk about birds in hand versus birds in bushes, though, of course, I could. The lesson is the same.

No, oddly enough, it isn't me who can't make a decision, here. I've had the misfortune of interviewing with an employer who has fallen into this very trap. You see, this employer has a vacancy, but they also have a workaround for the vacancy, and the workaround is working fine for them. They know they should hire someone for the position, but they aren't in a hurry to do so. As a result, the instructions given to HR is to find the perfect department manager.

Alas, no one has convinced HR (or possibly worse, the President of the company, whom the position in question would answer to) that such a person does not exist. Rather than pick from the ample supply of applicants, they simply run a fresh ad occasionally, and HR has to spend her time screening resumes and attending interviews. She told me herself she was hired four months ago and hasn't had time to do real HR stuff because she has to find the perfect department manager.

Meanwhile, the department's staff makes due with self-management, supplemented with doses of supervision from the President and the Production Manager. Before long, they will forget what it was like to have a department manager, and the small problems that have been festering for months will become big problems that the eventual hire will curse, unable to cleanly solve.

They told me they'd call me if they decide I'm the person they're looking for. As time passes, I'm starting to wonder if I really do want them to call. I won't envy the person who is picked for the position.

So, I'm still shopping, and spending my spare time at Your World News. See ya there!

Innovation isn't all it's cracked up to be

Someone reminded me I hadn't written to the blog for a while, being so caught up in the seemingly never-ending job search. Until I think of something better to say, this will have to do...

I was browsing through Your World News and came across an article that I found somewhat interesting. You might remember the blog I wrote on HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray. Well, two engineers at Warner have developed a means by which a single disc can support HD-DVD, Blu-Ray, and standard DVD, all at the same time.

If Warner makes licensing the technology affordable, the new disc could make the entire issue of which format is better moot. It would also dramatically reduce inventory costs for wholesalers, retailers, and especially rental companies.

Warner was the first studio to release a film, Lake House, in both HD formats. This new solution is a win-win for everyone involved, and I look forward to learning what happens with it, if anything.

After all, good ideas often don't survive competition. One of my favorite innovations was a cassette tape that had re-usable record protection. Where conventional cassette tapes have punch-out holes that prevent the record mechanisms from engaging (leaving us to apply adhesive tape over the holes to record over a protected tape), the cassette I speak of had a cover that could be easily rotated away from the hole with a screwdriver or fingernail. The cassette was sold by Loran and is no longer in production.

With this in mind, I look at Warner's development with interest, but am resigned to take what I can get.

Which is a little like my job search, I'm afraid...

Florida: The Right to Not Work?

They call Florida a "Right to Work" state. I never knew what that was supposed to mean to the worker, but to the employer it means he has the right to fire an employee without having to go to extremes to justify it. The law gives the employer the ability to terminate an employee for practically any reason.

For example, let's say a company hires someone who happens to have some writing ability, and that someone is asked to write anonymously for the company's blog. If the blog later appears elsewhere as written by the CEO of the company, it might not behoove the employee to ask any questions. In Florida, an employer can terminate an employee for questioning the actions of an employer. The employer may still be held liable for the actions, themselves, but simply questioning those actions would be legitimate grounds for dismissal.

Go figure.

By the way, while I'm out there looking for work, you could be at Your World News checking out what else is happening... and maybe even sharing your own point of view. Do drop by, won't you?

About that Trial ...

I promised when last I wrote to write about my jury duty experience, but I'll warn you now, it isn't very dramatic. At best, I can offer that it was a criminal trial, but it was a lowly misdemeanor, albeit one that falls in the pet peeves department. It's a long story, which I'll trim to the important parts.

This Story is About Taking Responsibility

The accused was charged with leaving the scene of an accident, and I was one of seven jurors chosen to hear the case. The trial started at about 9 AM Wednesday morning, and the opening statements from both sides left me about neutral, a good place to be as a juror.

The first witness for the prosecution was the victim, a young black man who just happened to be an auto body mechanic. Bad luck for the defendant, there. The witness first advised us he was there because he was ordered to be there; he had no particular animosity against the defendant. The reason for this came clear a little while later.

The victim had been stopped in traffic at a traffic light, and felt his car rear-ended. He looked in his mirror, saw the defendant, stepped out of his car and, looking the defendant in the eye, he signaled for the defendant to pull into a neighboring parking lot. The victim then returned to his car and pulled into the parking lot. Rather than follow, the defendant proceeded down the road.

The victim quickly re-entered traffic behind the defendant, called 911, and described the offending vehicle and the tag number. He was then told to return to the scene of the accident. The victim returned to meet with a state trooper.

Technology Makes the Job Easier

The trooper used his onboard computer to look up the car, and from that, the owner of the car. The computer displayed the driver's license picture of the owner, whom the victim identified as the driver of the car.

Of course, the defense had to have their say, and they went after the physical proof of damage: which was nonexistent. The victim had called the defendant's insurance company (number provided by the trooper), and an insurance adjuster came out to check the damage. The adjuster offered the victim $48 for the repair - about an hour's labor. As I mentioned, the victim was an auto body mechanic and knew the damage would cost more to repair, so he asked a co-worker to prepare an estimate. The estimate from his co-worker came to over $1,000... but he'd lost the estimate when he later left the employ of that company (he thought he might have thrown it out with other papers from the company).

Further, the victim had been in the process of trying to trade-in the vehicle for another, and succeeded to do so roughly a week after the accident. So, the victim did not have the car, or proof the accident had occurred - except for the testimony of the trooper, who came up next.

He Should Know, He Sees It Everyday
The trooper indicated he saw the damage, believed it to be new damage (no dirt or rust), then went on to describe how he apprehended the defendant. It appears the defendant wasn't home, but a neighbor indicated the defendant frequented a local bar, where the trooper caught up with him. The trooper brought the defendant outside and asked about the accident. He said the defendant denied being in an accident, and showed the trooper where no damage had existed on the car. The defendant persisted in denying involvement, claimed he'd been there a couple of hours (the accident had occurred maybe 1 and 3/4 hours earlier), and the trooper arrested him.

A third witness, a bartender at the bar, recognized the defendant as a regular patron who had been in the bar maybe an hour and a half before the trooper arrived.

Bad Move for the Defense

Next came the defense's turn, and they had only one witness: the defendant. He took the stand on his own behalf, and described the events of the day. What we found most important was that the defendant was very detailed about everything except his interview with the trooper, when he suddenly could not recall the specific events of the discussion. We also noticed that his activities would have put him at the scene of the accident at nearly the right time, if you allowed fudging with the timeline (and no one except the trooper had an accurate timeline of their events). Finally, the defense offered into evidence photos of the defendant's car, as the defendant boasted of its pristine condition (a nicely kept 15+ year old car).

After closing arguments, six of us were allowed to go to the jury room; the seventh was our mystery alternate, who was visibly disappointed at not getting to deliberate.

A Nice Way to Top Off a Nice Trial

Through fate, and maybe a little excitement, the jury decided to let me be the foreperson. Before we took our first vote, we passed around the pictures of the defendant's car. Then came the first ballot:

"All who believe the defendant's guilty, raise your hand!" No wimpy secret ballot for THIS jury. Five hands went in the air - and I was the lone holdout. "Convince me," I said.

They did. I had a crazy theory that it was possible the victim had setup the defendant, and without physical evidence, we couldn't convict. They saw it another way. My theory, while possible, wasn't plausible. The two had never met; there was no reason to believe the defendant had any money, or even insurance, at the time; and the rest of the story fit the victim's claim. I again looked at the pictures... and you know, that front bumper DID look out of alignment with the rest of the body. You couldn't tell at a casual glance, but that car HAD been in an accident at some point.

I gave in, and signed the paper. My first jury had convicted its first criminal.

We never did find out what the sentence was, but I wouldn't have passed on the experience for anything. Lunch time!

An Aside

By the way, a couple of notes: first, I have found a new job, which I'll write about a little later, and yes, I'm still collecting news at Your World News. I hope you'll come visiting.

They call it Jury DUTY for a reason

I take my civic responsibilities seriously, so when I was summoned for jury duty the thought of avoiding it never crossed my mind. I understand there are circumstances why one might need to defer jury duty; it even happened to me, once before. But when called, U.S. citizens have an obligation to respond, and it surprised me to learn that a sizeable number of people summoned simply don't appear.

If you want the benefits that come from being a U.S. citizen, then you should be willing to satisfy the obligations of one. And it isn't like the obligations are strenuous: remember, the draft doesn't exist in the U.S. any longer (for now). Where's the pain in voting? Yes, it takes time from our busy lives, but with the extra steps our various federal, state, and local governments have taken to make voting convenient (such as absentee and early voting), is there really an excuse not to register and vote?

This is usually when some moron says something about registering to vote just gets him on the list for jury duty. I call him a moron since he's another of those abusive citizens who want to take, take, take, without giving any more than his tax dollars. Like all you need to do to be a U.S. citizen is buy an annual membership!

Well, just for that moron's information, many localities no longer use the voter roles as the pool for potential jurors. In Manatee County, Florida, potential jurors are selected from driver's license registrations. If you're so afraid to be called for jury duty, give up your driving privileges!

Jury Duty in my community

Jury duty is handled differently for different locales. Manatee County calls all of the week's potential jurors together on Mondays, and each judge collects his or her pool of potential jurors from that larger pool. Those selected are told when to report for service, and those not selected are returned to the big pool. If you aren't chosen by the end of Monday, you're dismissed from duty for another year.

I was selected from my first pool, and found myself on a jury for a criminal case. I'll talk a little more on this next time.

Still room for editors

Your World News is now up to 1,000 links and growing. We still have room for more volunteer editors. Visit the site, then write me for details.

Good job interviews can get creative

Job interviews come in many forms. I was reminded of this with a recent application, for a position related to website development and management.

In this particular case, it appears I skipped the traditional face-to-face Q&A or the similar yet common phone interview. Instead, the employer jumped straight to evaluating my skills, providing a situation requiring me to evaluate a site and offer my recommendations.

This particular interview reminded me to a small degree of the second interview I had for the ICA position. In that case, the first interview was in group form. ICA extended an invitation to 30 some individuals to attend a meeting where the organizers explained the organization's purpose and what they sought. Then they gave each of us a few minutes to ask questions and formulate our ideas as to where we might fit in. After this, we were tasked to go home and, if we were still interested in the position, we were to write an essay explaining how we would approach the position, and why we thought we were the ones to do the job.

For the ICA job, the essays determined who would be invited to the third interview (the essay counted as interview #2): dinner with the executive director and his senior staff. What was surprising about this whole thing was that, even though I ended up being cut after the third interview, my ideas were sound enough that the executive director paid me for the right to use parts of my essay in the final plan, then later called me back when he decided I did have a role in implementing that plan, after all.

This time it's different

In the current situation, the site I was tasked to evaluate was a live site having issues, and the principal offered to pay me to do my evaluation. What he got for his investment was both a solution to the problem at hand, and an example of how I performed the work. Clearly, the work came first, as I expected it would, but I found it odd, and maybe a little refreshing, that they wanted to see me in action before they took the time to learn about me.

As a bonus to this, the company again offered to pay me for my effort, but I took the tact of offering the employer to pay me only what he thought the results were worth. This was risky, since I might find myself essentially uncompensated for my fair effort, but I was confident that I could produce something of at least some value. I pointed out to him that, if I nailed the problem, a decision to hire me would be far more valuable to me than any one-time fee would be worth.

The task was done. I found the problem and made my recommendations. In fact, I made more recommendations than the scope of the task required. As a result, I now have an appointment for the long-overdue personal interview.

Things are looking up.

Lest you've forgotten

Still haven't visited Your World News yet? What are you waiting for? At a minimum, you might find a link to some otherwise missed interesting news. And who knows, you might actually find the site stimulating enough to participate in the news sharing concept.

I look forward to seeing you there!

The IT Job Dance

Fresh from another interview, some thoughts come to mind that might make the whole process easier for both parties.

See, one of the most annoying things about seeking an IT job is that no matter how many positions there are, and there seems to be quite a few positions in the Tampa Bay area, there are always more applicants than the employer (or recruiter) really needs. In fact, I think a lot of employers turn to recruiters because they can't handle the flood of applicants on their own.

But there is another side to this coin: employers are publishing dreams when they list their required qualifications. One pundit observed that employers are trying to save a buck by advertising for a relatively lower-paying position, but asking for skills belonging to a rightfully higher-paying position. The thought is that the "network administrator" they hire with Java coding skills could actually fill the need for the "Java developer" they really want but can't afford.

I think of it another way. The employers list the skills an ideal employee would have, but fully expect to have to settle for something less. Maybe there is a "network administrator" with Java, ASP, and Oracle skills in addition to his CISSP and CCNA, but you'd stand a better chance of finding three people with those skills combined. Still, there's no harm in asking, right? So, the company that really needs an Oracle administrator asks for everything else, just in case.

Now, what happens?

At first, the company that asks for the moon gets nothing, but then it occurs to the IT workers growing desperate for work that the employer has published a wish list, not a true requirements list, so in their desperation they submit their resumes, matching maybe only 10% of the requirements. The employers get 100+ apps for every job advertised, can't handle the volume, and end up turning to recruiters, who probably end up manipulating the deal into something that cost the employers far more than if they'd kept it to themselves. The next ad is lighter on the wish list, maybe even accurate in the needs, but the workers are already used to applying to anything, and so the overall problem doesn't get better. Every job opportunity is met with 100+ applicants, few of whom are actually qualified, and many of the qualified are "round filed" due to the sheer volume of applications.

How do we fix this problem?

We'll start with the employer: only advertise what you need as requirements, and list the bonuses separately. Be realistic in your needs. A network administrator shouldn't be expected to know Java; either you need an administrator or you need a programmer, but don't ask for both as requirements. And does the administrator really need a Bachelor's degree? Or is that just something to try to reduce the volume. If the latter, it isn't working. Finally, list your salary expectations. You'll get a whole lot fewer applications once people see what you plan to pay, especially if you're hiring for an entry-level position.

And for the job hunters, stop applying for everything in sight. You're only making things worse. Only apply if you truly believe you have a shot at the position. If the ad seems genuinely written toward a specific skill set, only apply if you have that skill set. This reduces the number of applications HR has to screen, and increases the odds for the truly qualified. Essentially a win-win situation. And, of course, don't claim a skill if the skill doesn't exist. Not only does it hurt your reputation, but it makes it harder on everyone else who has to follow you.

I recently applied for a job I probably shouldn't have. The position was advertised way below my skill set, but in a moment of weakness, I went ahead and applied.

I was amazed to find myself granted an interview... which lasted a whole 10 minutes. Just long enough for the IT Director to look me in the eye and ask me why I applied for a position clearly beneath me. It then occurred to me why he granted the interview. I was simply a break from the norm, a chance to put his feet up. But I did point out that if he'd published his salary expectations, I wouldn't have responded. Hopefully, we both walked away from that interview a little more prepared for the next time.

Now, I need to teach Bocona to be a little more patient.

As for other things...

Don't forget, if you haven't been there lately, you need to visit Your World News, where you not only keep current on the news, but tell others what news is important to you.

Google is NOT the answer to passing the Florida Accredited Claims Adjuster exam

To the person who found my blog googling "florida accredited claims adjuster exam answers", I would like to suggest you first google "florida accedited claims adjuster".

By definition, you can't become a Florida Accredited Claims Adjuster without taking a class. If you take the class, you'll have the answers to the exam. It's that simple. What you are probably seeking are the answers to the standard Florida Claims Adjuster exam. That's the exam you can take if you don't take the class. And it's much harder. If you really want to be a claims adjuster in Florida, take my advice and take the class.

Now, that said, I'd also suggest you think about what motivates you to become a claims adjuster. Bocona, seeing dollar signs flashing before her eyes after two years of horrible hurricanes, made me get my license, but without any practical experience in auto repair or construction, it was truly a waste of money.

For what it's worth, I'm still looking for an IT job.

While I have your attention

If you haven't done so, please take the opportunity to visit Your World News, where you have the chance to not only read the news - you can make the news!