truth

The issue about truth is entirely relative. It varies from person to person and each individual decides what he considers truth depending on the audience they are addressing. Life has various ways of showing us certain things and am just beginning to appreciate that (hope its not too late).
When you get to a place and everybody around you seems to be complaining about this and that; so and so, the remedy is take your time and just listen/watch what is happening until you will be able to get your own deductions about the the place and the people around you!

I strongly recommend that you don't trust anybody even the person who is trying to get the closest to you just yet. In fact I'd rather you trust those who are much distant from you because the only reason they may be keeping their distance is because they do not want to tell you lies...

Their counterparts on the other hand may be out to get you in trouble (watu na viatu).

The gist of the matter is;

If I have to tell three people the truth about a situation, my answer may or may be different to the parties. The truth is always hard to concede either by the party telling or the one being told. Sometimes people horde the truth and this is mostly if it is to their benefit. So before you decide to horde the truth in FAVOUR of a LIE, think twice and do to others what you would want them to do to you...

Laugh with the ENEMY!

Fervently I asked her
Persistently, not to –
Hate.
Little did I know?

As we grew closer
She seemed to understand –
it was hard.
I could tell

Soon enough I believed
She had succeeded –
In the disparity between Hate, Dislike
I believed everything

Only dislike, don’t hate
Didn’t know my fate –
Dislike.
All I had done,
Taught her to laugh with the ENEMY!

The 9th Fallacy of Distributed Computing by Harry J Foxwell, PhD

While working recently with colleagues and customers to define and architect public and private "cloud computing" systems and to explore the technical challenges of implementing such systems, I was reminded of Peter Deutsch's observation in 1994 of the Seven Fallacies of Distributed Computing along with the Eight Fallacy added in 1996 by James Gosling:

1. The network is reliable.
2. Latency is zero.
3. Bandwidth is infinite.
4. The network is secure.
5. Topology doesn't change.
6. There is one administrator.
7. Transport cost is zero.
8. The network is homogeneous.

Although others have suggested additional fallacies, I think a critical cloud computing issue clearly suggests what the ninth one should be:

* 9. Location is irrelevant.

By suggesting this fallacy I mean the assumption that where computing happens and data resides is not an issue in today's massively connected global Internet. With sufficient connectivity and bandwidth, you might assume that outsourcing your computing services, possibly even outside your home country, is simply a matter of economics. This is clearly false. While end users of public cloud based applications may not be aware that or even care that their computation is occurring on some randomly and dynamically assigned set of virtualized servers which may change even as they use them, nor be concerned about precisely what storage devices are dynamically assigned to host their data, nevertheless these resources do indeed have physical presences which tie them to specific locations that have geographic and jurisdictional characteristics.

The overall stability and reliability of a cloud provider data center depends in part on its geographic location - its proximity to sufficient power and cooling resources, and its safety from natural and man-made disasters. That's why Google has built data centers close to power generating facilities and why Switch Communications built its huge SuperNAP center in geologically stable and meteorologically quiet Las Vegas.

But even more critical than physical location is the legal jurisdiction in which your computation occurs and where your data resides. Laws governing privacy, data ownership, intellectual property, monitoring, and auditing vary from state to state in the US and globally from one country to another. And pinning down the exact location of a global distributed IT service is difficult. In the event of legal disputes over liability or disclosure issues, where will cases be tried? Many such jurisdictional questions remain unanswered, and some countries are reacting with understandable caution about sharing global computing resources. Canada, for example, has prohibited the use of US data centers for certain government projects due to concerns about the provisions of the US Patriot Act, and India is considering legislation requiring IT business services to originate within the country.

So, if you haven't already frightened yourself examining the myriad cloud security issues, google for "cloud computing" with "jurisdiction" for some additional reading material. You'll find that, as with real estate, location is anything but irrelevant.