Slashdot Mirror
CTO is Too Young for Comdex
Update: 10/22 14:00 by michael : eswierk writes "After reading the Wired article about Mike Lavers being too young for Comdex, I immediately dashed off a email to Comdex imploring them to stop being a Big Dumb Corporation and admit the kid. Who knew I'd get a reply from the VP. I don't normally distribute personal email, but this seems like one worth repeating to those foaming at the mouth.
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 08:56:40 -0400From: Bill Sell
Subject: Re: Mike Lavers too young for Comdex
Ed, as far as I can tell, Mike never asked anyone in management about attending. This is a case of the Internet gone amok again with a fable and fiction, not fact. Too bad.
Bill Sell
Vice President & General Manager, COMDEX"
I'm not sure I see the foaming, however. According to the original Wired article, COMDEX was contacted and refused to make an exception for their policy, then refused to comment to Wired News. And of course, Sell still hasn't offered to actually let Lavers or any other under-agers attend. Where's the fiction, where's the fable? More than likely, COMDEX's insurance coverage is based upon only adults being present, and would be difficult to change at this late date, which is why they don't want to change their policy now; but that's no excuse for not having anticipated younger attendees in the first place, or for trying to spin it after the fact as an internet fable. COMDEX might do better to solve the problem instead of spinning it.
Don't flame. I'm not saying he shouldn't be allowed to go. I"m just saying that some lawyer somewhere probably told the COmdex organizers "You're going to get sued if people under the age of 18 attend your show." And in all honesty, the lawyer might be right....ultra-conservative parents can be a nightmare.
So my question is, how do you bend the rules to allow a CTO of a company to attend who isn't 18? I submit that it's probably harder than just saying "Come on in!".
Werd.
when several members of our company were underage, we had problems getting in to E3.
We contacted the show management and they got us special badges. It was a little bit of trouble, not much.
I'm surprised Comdex wouldn't do the same.
What could there be at a tech show that's innappropriate for a 17 year old? Are they going to be showing pornography or selling tobacco products to everyone who walks in? Even though it's true in the US 18 is that magical age, there are just some things that don't make sense. I went to trade shows at 16 and 17, and there's nothing there that could be wrong for a youngster to see. What are they afraid of?
What could possibly go on at Comdex that would require an age of 18 to attend? I'm 23 so I'm not some teenie bitchin cause I'm not old enough. Do they all gather 'round and smoke big stogies or something? Can someone explain this to me? G
======== In the future, everything will be artificial. ========
The real problem that causes the age minimum is this year's featured "Novell Fly Girls" dance troupe, which will be performing their controversial routine entitled "10 Base T&A". Check for them in the program under keynote speeches, wednesday morning.
Other highlights should include Steve Ballmer performing an interpretive dance to a collection of his favorite "slow jams." Look for that in the alley near the west entrance.
Hotnutz.com
Protecting minors from Comdex? Come on.
He's 17, that's old enough to see R-rated movies. He can go see Eyes Wide Shut and he can't get into a computer show? Yeah, right. I agree, they need to get with reality here.
Remember, in 1993 we had high-school kids writing the most beautiful graphics demos in assembler ever. And throughout our history, it's been high school kids and college drop-outs driving the industry. Microsoft, Apple, you name it. Computer nerds with free time always make a difference, and if you don't support those, you are not supporting innovation.
---
pb Reply rather than vaguely moderate me.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
This is ridiculous. I have been going to comdex since i was 15 years old. You just lie about your age on the registration form and nobody says anything about it. They dont even check the forms.
It is just plain stupid to set a age like 18 when there are some 16 or 17 year olds who belong there more then some of the 40 year olds.
I'll be cynical and say that if he was the head of a larger firm, say $10Million+ per year, he could get in with just a wink. Money does talk.
I'm just wondering how he makes legally binding deals? If I recall Business Law right, he couldn't have incorporated without being legally declaried an adult. If he's 17, and the company takes a nose dive or something, it's Dad who gets to fed off ravenous lawsuits and creditors despite being incorporated while junior can just wait until 18, and try again scot free. Also techincally, he can't make a business deal. I could make a big deal with him, get all the goods/services and then not fulfill my half of the contract. Courts might decide since he can't make the call, the deal never happened.
I think he should, or can be allowed on the floor, but any deal making would have to be with Dad.
Once again, general rules put in place for some reason are enforced beyond all reason by people unable to reason.
---
Book(n): Utensil used to pass time while waiting for the TV repairman
I wish I had problems like this when I was 17.
Being serious, what does suck is that Comdex isn't going to pay any sort of price for this. Do you think the press and Mega-Corp CTOs (the people who actually ligitimize and make shows Comdex profitable) are going to care? Do you think they are going to stop going?
Probably not. Thats what really sucks here.
If he can not got in, they should do there best get to get free publicy as result of this with some from os stunt. consider wiring someone over 18 up with a video camera and two way mike do live feeds out while Mike acts as remote controller.
Banfield
Pavlov's Dog vs. Schrodinger's Cat
Banfield
At the Comdex's held in Canada, it seems the rules change every year. The age restriction seems to fluctuate from anywhere between 16 and 21.
But volunteers who are under the age required are allowed. Thus, I would assume exceptions could be made for exhibitors.
Maybe it's different in the States, but here, although they have stupid rules, they at least have smart people, running Comdex.
---
I hope you're not pretending to be evil while secretly being good. That would be dishonest.
Comdex just needs to make exceptions for Corporate officers.
Sounds like this "kid" has it together. Do people
go to Comdex to work or play?
I doubt this "kid" would be interested in playing anyway. Sounds like a worker to me.
And, he should be an example to lazy butts like me!
Just like him, I am of a similiar age, and have had my company for the last 6 years. Ever since I was little I have sat at a desk with a phone and played a business man. Thats just what I wanted to do. I attend alot of the local conferences, and although they say you must be 18, they always allow me in. Comdex's response suprises me. The reason the have this age limit is so they dont get parents bringing there kids and letting them run around. These conferences must remain at a certain level or professionalism. But exceptions should certainly be made for young entrepenuers that have a legitamate reason for being there.
I will be attending Supercomputing 99 in portland and ITEC. Any other slashdotters going to be at either one of those?
Jeff Knox
For all the advocacy these days for the rights of children and the push towards getting kids interested in math, science and engineering, I see this move by the folks managing Comdex as a serious travesty. For years and years now college students and many bright young high school kids have been often times at the very fore-front of the technological envelope. What I fail to see, though, is why a person's age has any affect on what that person's abilities are when it comes to participating in a convention. The only reason I could agree to something like this is if law prevented the individual from going.
Whom does it serve to prevent the very best and brightest entrepreneurs from attending? Why must kids who are constantly being told that they need to become "more involved" and need to "make something of themselves" are constantly being held back with excuses like, "you're not old enough" and "you don't have that right". On one hand, the government is telling many kids that they have the right to divorce their parents, for example. Other examples include allowing a child to have the right to sue their school over something as trivial as being prevented from participating in cheerleading because of bad marks (as a case in Ohio proved). On the other hand, we're telling people under 18 that they're not smart enough to vote, not smart enough to drink (at least in the U.S.), not old enough to determine whether they need to attend school or not and not old enough to sign legal documents. At this rate, who is to say that legislation shouldn't be enacted from people under 18 from holding jobs or from starting companies or from learning how the world they are about to enter into and shape works?
This just sickens me.
Now, Comdex can come back saying something like, "Our main goal is to prevent families with kids from coming in and treating the convention like a circus." This point has some merit. I know that I would not appreciate having to navigate through strollers and pouty children while trying to learn more about cutting edge products. I have enough problem with screaming kids in church (but that's a different thread altogether).
What I think would benefit everyone in this case would be a levelheaded case-by-case look at individuals whom have a real vested interested in attending. Discrimination of this type (mind you, I use this word very carefully) really has no place in this literal "world of tomorrow."
For all of our sake, I hope Mike Lavers continues to press on and make a case of this. I think he has a very valid point and has every right to attend Comdex. It's bad business to prevent him from going. As an aside to his father, I hope he continues to encourage his son and I hope they are able to build a strong business and interest other young people into participating and building in the high tech culture that is all of our future.
Let's see private company decides to set some criteria for selling a pass to their event. Kid doesn't qualify. What's the issue? Did I miss something about life, liberty, and right to attend trade shows or something?
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
I know RealNetworks had a similar policy for their conference, but when I emailed them about it, they were really nice about writing back and said they would be glad to make exceptions. They just didn't want people bringing kids and stuff.
That said, Comdex sticking to that policy is fairly dumb. I know I'd be pissed about it, if it wasn't Comdex. I mean, who wants to go to Comdex anyway?
e;
Networld 1995 I was thrown out by the management. I was only 14 at the time, was just starting my studies for Novell's CNE certification and was tossed out because I was under-aged and did not belong there. My father's company had paid for my pass and had asked me to attend as a representative of them. I was dressed in slacks, combatboots that had a semi-decent shine to them, a polo-type shirt and a blue windbreaker (it was a bit chilly that day). The security goons took me upstairs after I came back from lunch (after I had been given the morning to ROAM the whole expo) and I was informed that if I came back they'd press legal charges.
;) Doom deathmatch competition in which I whooped all commers...
Networld 1996. I had my revenge. I went the entire expo in shorts and T-Shirts. I had certified at the end of 1995/beginning 1996 (final test passed on 12/31, cert dated 1/4). They never touched me from then on. The reason? If they threatened me with legal action to have me removed I could threaten them with legal action for impeeding my work as a CERTIFIED PROFESSIONAL.... They tend not to jack with you unless you really do something wrong... the expo got renamed the following year and at that time I was working with the local Professional Association setting up booths and other crap for Novell and was running demos of things.... granted I still prefered the demo I ran in 1996..
Hack me, Crack me, Make me bleed
a faster box would be all I need
Having owned a company when I was underage.., you are correct. My father is a lawyer and held onto the shares which I could not legally own, but appointed me as an officer.
That way, any deals were between the company and the client, not myself. As for this Comdex thing, why to they have an age limit? That's very bizarre...
If Comdex is like alot of other shows that i've been on, they are REALLY big on collecting marketting data.
And for some reason, it is illegal to collect marketting data from minors without parental consent.
While the low-level gate entry guards probably wouldn't care if you were 17yrs old - you can bet the Comdex/exhibitor law-talkin-guys would be. So making a blanket rule is a simple way to avoid legal problems.
Really, sounds to me that this guy is raising a fuss just to get attention for his company.
Tom
some of the industry's brightest minds (myself *not* included) are under 18. Going to events like comdex would really help us in our careers. We could see and try new tech., talk to others like us...
My worthless opinion...
David
Ever notice how fucked up our American laws and attitudes are about age? Both the young and old are shunned despite what they contribute. Ageism runs rampant. There should be a single set age to watch R/Adult movies, drive, vote, smoke, drink, get laid, get married, run for office, get a real job, etc. I personally would vote to extend such rights as low as 15yo's even though I'm now 21 myself. Even now I often get snuffed by a lot of jobs and such because of my age. It's really amazing given I work in the tech industry and have been coding and hacking hardware for over ten years. I know many 15yo's that are more intelligant and mature than many 30yo's I know and know many people 50+ that are still as bleeding edge as ever. This is just more government supported discrimination.
:P
Anyone else find it funny that you could get married before you could buy porn? I suppose you're expected to wait for the honeymoon until your 18 (or 21 depending on your area) or maybe just where blindfolds.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
I've been going to comdex since I was 16 or so, and it's real simple - don't tell them how old you are. No one really cares, they just don't want a bunch of kids running around.
-lx
I'm not joking, with parental supervision he should be able to get in..
(But I would hate to think how embarassing it would be to get on stage and give a speech with your mom there, correcting grammatical mistakes.. gohd)
Comdex not only has to worry about liability, but (Supposedly, I've never been) half the show is porn.
This article here paints a picture of COMDEX to be some kind of bachanalian orgy of geeks and strippers and prostitutes. And naturally the MAN wants to keep the kid down. Don't worry, kid, you'll be old enough for prostitutes next year.
- ----------
-----------------------------------------------
This is just one of those things that bugs me about big bureaucracies, like large companies, universities, the government... When things don't follow the rules, often someone has to change the rules. Sometimes, nobody wants to take the initiative and there is often no one who will tell them to. This is a big reason why bureaucracies are so annoying, you go to one window and they tell you to go to another, etc. Sometimes defending the status quo is easier than changing the rules. I bet that is what is happening here.
-- Moondog
Umm, you're confused. And it's very negligible, as I seriously doubt there would be an exposed electrical cord that ONLY he would trip over.
:|
Geez. I'm 17. I wish I were able to consider going to Comdex
Clearly, since it has become a story item on /., that the kid has whined to enough people about the situation. A measure of a man is how he gets things done, not how he whines about it.
I too had similar problems when I was a kid, I learned way around the system. I lied about my age, whatever it took to get where I needed to be.
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run -
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And - which is more - you'll be a Man my son!
"If" - Rudyard Kipling
Andrew
They should set an IQ limit for attendance - say around 120 minimum. Oh, but then the Comdex organizers couldn't get in ,,,
No one said he has a right to go. The argument is just that Comdex is being ignorant in their refusal to let him in. 16 year old geeks have no implicit right to go to any convention, Gen Con, whatever. Organizers see the value in letting children attend in some cases. In this case, this child owns a profitable computer company. Why shouldn't he be allowed to represent his company? Yes, I understand that Comdex has a rule, but is this what the rule was set up for? To protect Comdex from 17 yr olds and their companies? Probably not.
Going to wired and slashdot to generate negative publicity regarding comdex is a very reasonable strategy to get them to change an inane policy.
Probably a lot of people, considering you need to have a pass and a badge to get in and wander around.
would you lie about your age to the COMDEX organizers? I would.
Then I can honestly say I won't be doing business with you. Sure, it seems "petty," but your willingness to disregard ethics on small things only shows me that you're more likely to disregard them on larger and larger matters. If the organizers of the show say no, then, I'm sorry, but its their show and they can set the rules. That doesn't mean a I like the rules they set, however I'm not going to lie about something just to get into a computer show. There are other shows, and other ways of getting in (why not try calling everyone you can find related to Comdex? The article seems like they only called once, probably the main number. Try finding the principals of the show, e-mailing them)
(Full disclosure: I'm 19. My business was incorporated in 1993, at the age of 13. We've never had this problem for one simple reason: Our sales guy is over 21....he can take clients out for drinks if they like)
I have absolutely no idea if this is related, but Nevada state law prohibits minors in "gaming areas." The casinos aren't particularly happy to kick out anyone, but they do it to protect their gaming license. Aren't many of the Comdex functions located inside conference rooms at the Las Vegas hotels? (Obviously not the big circus, but concurrent conferences.) It seems likely that the hotels would "know" that nobody under 18 would ever attend one of those conference and thus line the halls with slot machines. After all, Las Vegas is not known for being subtle.... If that's the case, Comdex could simply be enforcing statutory limits that the organizers agree are stupid, but are powerless to change. We really need more information before we start blasting Comdex for something that may be beyond its control.
several years back a group of my friends and I went to comdex in Atlanta... we werent older than 14-15 then.... guess its a new rule?
I believe that Jeff Goldblum had an excellent line in Jurassic Park that went something like '...you spent so much time wondering whether or not you could that you spent no time wondering whether or not you should."
Advocating that this boy _lie_ is wrong. He should try to negotiate with the Comdex officials, again. Go right up the line, to the very top. If he cannot attend the event, then he should live with it. Comdex isn't the end of the world. Lying may get him in, but it's still wrong.
I'm sorry. What I meant to say was 'please excuse me.'
what came out of my mouth was 'Move or I'll kill you!'
What totally pisses me off about all these laws is that being a 20-year old and PAYING TAXES to this wonderful country (and, by the way, more taxes than 3/4 of the population), I still can not buy myself a bottle of Heineken!! It's plain ridiculous - if they think I am old and responsible enough to support poor single mothers and to pay the politicians' salaries through my taxes, then at least I should be allowed to do what these poor mothers and politicians are allowed to do!!!
The word "woman" is no longer politically correct.
The word "woman" is no longer politically correct.
You should use "Female-American" instead.
I can relate to this person somewhat, as I founded my little company when I was 17. Granted it's not quite the moneymaker this company seems to be, but it keeps me comfortable.
I ran into several issues back then, mainly that where I am (tx) a contract can't be legally binding. I had to go through all sorts of loopholes to get a sales tax ID, etc. And I wouldn't wish having to deal with the Tx State Comptroller as a minor on my worst enemy - - talk about a nightmare.
My point is this: The 18 year threshold is waay outdated. I think it should be 16 (at least for most things).
I mean think about it, in the U.S., you can operate a motor vehicle, but can't enter into a contract. You can be drafted before you can (legally) drink alcohol.
I think there is too much residue left over from when most people actually subscribed to the 'think of the children' mindset. It's time for us, as a country, to grow up.
Actually, he can be held responsible for his actions, as can his parents...but this is not about the kid. Comdex is responsible if he trips over a cord because Comdex let it happen.
A better example would be, what if he started insulting everyone there (or, say, started spreading lies about everyone's favorite sofware company). Comdex could get sued as an accessory to libel because they let the kid in, and he's not responsible for what he does (see above).
What bull As a fellow 17 year old trying to run a business I can relate. All our young lives it seems we have to be repressed to "learn" from the older generation, and that simply isn't fair. Never in my entire life have I been anything like other people who coincidentely share my age, I've yet to see why I should be treated a certain way because of it. It all starts in school (I prefer to call it a Pavlovian Temple) where we're surrounded by people with the seeming IQ of peanuts and a maturity to match and I can fully understand why they wouldn't be wanted. I am NOT like them, Why then am I treated like them? Perhaps I know why.. because all those people with their seeming IQ of peanuts are who inherit the Earth. The whole damn place is set up for idiots.. people who are too narrow-minded to see beyond themselves. It's simply not fair and it will remain that way. Majority rules when you can't see beyond yourself.
Back in the spring, when I was still 17, I was plannin to go to Comdex myself. When i went to register, I saw the must you must be 18 to attend.
I emailed the contact for Comdex listed on the page and explained my situation. In a nutshell, the reply I was given stated that as long as I could prove I was really attending for business, and I had a business card to present, they would let me in.
UNIX is user friendly - It's just picky about it's friends.
Amusing as it sounds that they make these rules so that kids won't see things that make Mommy sue, I've always been told by show organizers that it's a simple safety issue.
The exhibit floor is considered safe enough for adults, but not safe enough for "children". Piles of wire with rubber mat thrown over the top and duct tape at the edges, booths that could probably be knocked over if kids chasing each other slam into them, etc. Here in the USA a person 17 years and 364 days is considered likely to crawl on their hands and knees and chew on the ethernet cable, but the next day is fully adult.
It would be law suit city if they didn't do this.
This is also why they could not care less if you lie to get in. All they need is to be able to go into a court and say that they made a Good Faith effort to keep "the children" safe.
garyr
-- your Web browser is Ronald Reagan
If alcohol is being served, wouldn't the agre restriction have to be 21? Last I heard, the drinking age in Nevada is still 21.
-B
Yea, but do they card you when they give out the ID's? not likely. I know the article says "It's the principal of the thing" but I'll bet if he just tryed to buy a badge like anyone else they wouldn't check up on it.
Well mabey they would now. But if he hadn't said anything I'll bet he would have gotten in just fine.
people using Microsoft products. This guy is at a very impressionable age. Pr0n is one thing, but he shouldn't be exposed to stuff like Windows.
Does *ANY* function at COMDEX serve alcohol? Even just beer at a closing-time bash would be sufficient to bring it under the state laws re the legal drinking age -- minors are not allowed into a facility where alcohol is served, even if it's at a private after-hours party. These laws are VERY strictly enforced and the vendor can get stiff fines or do serious jail time if found to be in violation -- even because some 17 year old kid lied about his age and the vendor didn't know any different.
I'm not defending such laws, COMDEX, nor the notion of "magic ages", just pointing out that it may be due to something COMDEX has NO choice about.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
...that makes a strong case for the argument that this company is for real.
Disclaimer: At the time of this posting, their site was up and lightning fast... if it goes down in the next hour or so, well, nevermind.
a programmer at 3, he already had 11 years experience
Am I justified in being skeptical of a 3 year old "programmer", or am I just jealous that I didn't do anything remotely resembling programming until I was 9?
I suppose Mozart wrote his first concerto at about the same age though...
In base 5, for example, this guy is 34, which
makes him more than old enough to get into
Comdex.
I think it's great that these kids (I can't believe I can call them that now) are finding cool jobs in the industry. But I have one question-what's their secret? I am just finishing up a 4-year degree in IT, with a focus on Web Development, and 1 1/2 years of work experience in the field.
While I have been inundated with calls from headhunters, they all seem to say the same thing: "We're really looking for someone with 2-3 years experience" What the f@ck is up with that? Where is this IT worker shortage that has been flaunted for the past 3 years or so? Seems to me a 4-year Bachelors degree in IT doesn't mean squat!
Thank you for letting me rant. PangusWhile I agree that he should be allowed in, it seems somewhat obvious to me that the already-mentioned solution of simply lying to get the magic badge would do just fine for him. This leads me to believe that these folks are just parlaying the whole damn mess into a huge publicity grab. And hey, it worked.
If the kid's smart enough to turn a fat profit doing what he does, the odds of him not concocting the obvious social hack here are pretty damn low. It's a decently shrewd move, all in all, and frankly I'm surprised how uptight everyone's getting about the ageism issue. The Man is playin' ya!
-cp
You all should do just a mite bit of research before you go off on Comdex for requiring a minimum age. I've had tickets to go for the past few years (I'm 21 now), and I actually asked & found out why, instead of just bitching about it. It has to do with insurance. They have to pay a ton more in insurance costs if they're going to have kids out on the floor. Kids do have a habit of getting into trouble. You can still go at almost any age, I've never heard of anyone being turned away at the door, it's just a semi-under-the-table entrance. You sign up ahead of time, get your ticket mailed to you, and when you get there you have no problems at all. You might have to have an ID card to get your specialty tickets & stuff, I don't remember.
But in reality, there is nothing stopping this CTO from going to Comdex. This whole story & the outrage is all based on a load of crap.
COMDEX is way over rated anyway. It's gotten too big to be of any value anymore. He should stick to smaller shows, like LINUX World! They let 2 penguins in who were nowhere near 18.
-Praxxis
>REBOOT.COM - B8 40 00 8E D8 C7 06 34 12 72 00 EA 00 00 FF FF
Why so long? Do you really need to determine whether it's a soft or hard reboot?
REBOOT.COM - 9A 00 00 FF FF
Each year several tons of underage geeks attend COMDEX. They just use a badge with someone elses name on it. Cheers, gbs
Did you know that the USA and Somalia are the only countries that still have not signed the UN Children's Rights Convention? Pfui!
Use The Source, Luke!
I find it extremely amusing that a 17-year old would need to be "protected" from seeing bare titties. Or 15-year old, or 13, or 5 or 0 or...
And don't start quoting any Fraudian psychology or permanent trauma crap.
Of course this doesn't help much if the legal drinking age is 21.
There are most likely a lot of reasons for an 18 year old limit.
1) They don't want parents bringing children to the conference. The conference has no child care facilities and parents that are engrossed in demonstrations and talking with exibitors are not very good at supervision. The rule is there to make the comdex experience better for everyone attending. Even worse, some parents would let their children run free throughout the convention getting into all kinds of trouble. It would be one thing if the children were also interested in the products, but they seldom are.
2) Children generally don't BUY anything. Since Comdex is all about selling products, some of which are extremely expensive and require corporate financing, children simply don't fit into the equation. I Remember as a child (back in the late 70's and early 80's), I'd go into computer stores to waste time. The sales staff would effectively ignore me, and sometimes ask me to leave. They wouldn't actually spend any time TALKING to me, since they knew couldn't afford their product.
3) In order to get a pass, you have to fill out a great deal of detailed information. It's illegal to collect said information from children without parental approval. Simply having a checkbox on the form that there is parental approval is not sufficient. Enforcing this would be costly and it's just a lot easier if they don't deal with it by prohibiting minors.
4) Comdex is a dangerous place. It really is. hundreds of thousands to millions of people all trying to squeeze through some very tight areas. There were times as an adult that i've nearly been trampled. Children could easily get hurt by the masses. Comdex is barely safe for adults. Allowing children would be considered a reckless disregard for safety.
5) Using your swipe card, you can sign up for many "deals", including limited time demos that if you do not return them within x number of days, you're billed for them. Children cannot be responsible for signing said agreements. Prohibiting them helps solve some of the legal issues.
Comdex might be a private organization, but it's renting public accomodations and opening the show to the public so various anti-discrimination laws kick in.
(In contrast, a company that rents the same space for the office Christmas party - for employees and their guests alone - is not a public accomodation.)
Age discrimination *is* illegal... but age discrimination against minors (and the under-21s) is legal. Sometimes it's even required by law. (E.g., if there's alcohol or nudity.)
17 is too young to visit Comdex, but at the same time, an 11-year-old is arrested for "incest" because a neighbour saw him and his 5-year-old sister naked. Wicked times we're living in...
I attended Comdex PacRim in Vancouver (where the "magic legal age" is 19) when I was around 14.
I'm not sure why this surprises anyone. In case you forgot, ageism is not against the law in this country. When there was too much racism we fought a war, for sexism we ammended the constitution, but, really who gives a rats ass about that small portion of the population who is under 25 or over 65? A couple years ago when I was 25, I tried to rent a car but I had to pay extra because of my age. I was merely 24 with only 8 years of driving experience. I asked the guy if he gave females a discount and charged hispanics more. Same problem on the upper end of age. How many times have I seen programming candidates not taken seriously during an interview because they were too old?
>I think he has a very valid point and has every >right to attend Comdex.
I'm sorry, but he has no 'right' to attend Comdex. Comdex is a private show, and if it wanted to only invite one-legged albino 35-year-olds, so be it. Many people's comments on this story are confusing the private act of Comdex with national/state laws regarding age to buy alcohol/tobacco/etc. They are totally seperate issues. There is no LAW saying you can't go to a trade show below age 18. Comdex has made a business decision, and obviously they value a kid-free event higher than they value the contribution a few under-18 year olds could make.
I went to Comdex a couple of times before I was 18, knowing that they could ask me to leave. This didn't happen and I enjoyed the show. (I was never asked my age, either on the registeration form or by the Badge Agent). If he had just gone to the show, he most likely wouldn't have had a problem.
Why is he wasting is time going to comdex, it's just a bunch of suit's and booth babes. It's hardly intellectually stimulating.
Here's another example of a young guy who has founded an ICT compagny. The compagny is called Chello and it offers fast broadband internet services for home use.. The founder is only 14 year old... http://www.chello.nl (sorry, it's Dutch) ps. btw call me stupid, but what is the difference between a CEO (ChiefExacutiveOfficer?), CTO, COO, Cwhatever, where these American sites always talk about?
A similar thing happened to my 13 year old (then 10). My son was a award winning webmaster and designer and was to be interviewed on the floor of the Toronto version of COMDEX by a local TV station, but was denied access by show management.
The day was saved when the owner of the TV station (Moses Zaimner, City-TV for u local TO folks) himself and successfully got the RULES changed.
mitd
BTW, my kid is now a grade 8 student and works part for a game design shop... ahhhh I fell so old:(
mitd -- Made in the Dark
"One good thing about spam... You don't gotta answer it"
There may be issues with expo insurance. Our robotics group ran into some problems with allowing minors to attend our meetings, evidently because insurance executives seem to have a notion of out-of-control pre-teens running around wreaking havoc and injuring themselves. It would probably cause contract problems if this is the case and they were to admit any minor for any reason.
most kids that age can't handle the kind of stuff that 17 year old can. and just because he can doesn't mean he should get preferential treatment. i just turned 18 and i'm not bothered at all by this.
I got in, when I was 16. I was 6'4" then and grew a small beard. I looked atleast 20. I thought they jhust had the 18+ rule to keep out little kids. I think they need to change it to 15+.
Well I agree that this is the most stupid thing. I have so say not been allowed to go to trade shows since I was 15. I have been involved in many parts of the industry from being a reseller to a contractor and I feel insulted that I would be disciminated for being too young and having the ordasity to get involved with the brainy old people. I am now 19 and can now get in without having to pretend to be over 18, ooo the privileges. Is it as bad for your health as smoking (age 16 in the uk), okay I take that back the stress will probably kill you before the cigarette. It still seems they don't want our business and therefore our money. Do they not think that if we have made it in the industry by our age that maybe our little brains can cope with the ooo complicated stuff probably better than they can.
I am the network administrator and webmaster for my company. I'm only 17 years old. I am completely responsible (although technically not legally) for just about /everything/ dealing with technology at my company. I have begun seriously looking into VoIP, and other networking technologies. I /can/ afford to purchase products from vendors...in fact, I have recently purchased a bunch of new hardware for our LAN (a hub, routers, PC's, a server). I would have /loved/ to attend Comdex...it would have been a great place to get some info and demo's of things like new VoIP technologies. But alas, I'm 7 short months from being considered a real professional. I think that is bull. Comdex could easly get around the legal technicalitys of having minors attend, by only allowing minors who have a)verifiable IT jobs, and b)a sort of 'insurance' contract provided by aformentioned job. This would cover them financially, and legally ( I think...I don't have a law degree...but this seems to make sense..). I think this is just one more example of the stupidity of the 'magical 18' in the US. Just as the magic age used to be 21 (it still is for alcohol..go figure, you can choose the leaders of the country, but your not allowed to induldge in alcohol?), that became outdated, as kids grew up faster. I think we (the US) are rapidly approaching the point where most kids are 'grown up' earlier than 18. I think new laws should be made...but hey..I don't vote....so..what I think doesn't matter does it?
And you know what's really inconvenient? Around the same time, I was left out of a business trip to a conference, in part because the company I worked for couldn't find anyone who would rent me a car. It turns out to be practically impossible to drive a rental car if you're under 21.
Even now that I'm 24, when I was on a recent business trip, my company had to switch me away from their usual car rental (a National agency) because they absolutely will not rent cars for drivers under 25. Sucka please. I've never had an accident or even been ticketed for a moving violation in what is now eight years that I've been driving. Even when they found another agency that would let me drive, they charged an extra $15 a day... well, at least it's not my money.
On the bright side, he's a lot less likely to be fired for going out with 13 year old girls.
actually, your age was true a while ago, but it's WAY WAY WAY too high now. Now 40% of girls have had sex by the time they're 14 (according to one study). keeps getting lower all the time.
maybe becasue it's the only thing that's legal -- though I doubt that.
Lea
Everyone here seems to be making a big fuss over the "rights" of this 17 year old to attend. (this is a YRO story right?)
I first attended Comdex in 1984, when I was 14. Since I live in Las Vegas, it's not that hard to get there. While in the past years they have had a statement about minimum age, they make on average two dozen exceptions EVERY year. In other words, if you are for real, and you ask, no problem.
I know this because holding comdex really tasks this town for security people, and I know a few who end up working there for extra bucks. They all get the indoctrination on the different badge types, the show rules etc. Every year they hand out the list of "people under age who are allowed in anyways".
This whole story is just a way for MatrixCubed to get some free press
There was a time when /. was about people who are plugged in discounting the lies. That was the whole point of the "new-media". Now it has become just another instrument to get the populace roused up over non-issues.
To purchase it is not like spending money but rather it is an investment in the future in a blow against the empire
Hey now, this is America. Home of whiney kids that just MUST have their way, dammit! Just tune in to Dateline on NBC every day.
Sure there may be insurance reasons, needing parental permission, alcohol, etc, but dammit that's not good enough! We've got to whine, especially kids nowadays!! Everyone else in this country/world had better let everyone who wants to do something do it, no matter what, or they'll go to the press/lawyers. Obviously, Comdex is ONLY doing this because they are nothing but anti-kid biggots. There can't be any other reason, right?
Folks, there wasn't much at the spring Comdex here in Chicago worth going through all this fuss. And there is no principle you're fighting for. It's just pathetic whining.
Not recommended. Nicotine does horrible things to your cappilary blood flow and is a great way to help get frostbite, and if you have frostbite, its a good way encourage your extremities to fall off. If you want to use a cigarette has a heat source, I don't recommend smoking it.
This is almost to small an issue to mention, but I wanted to discourage this meme from spreading.
Carl C-M
Former Mountain Oriented First Aid Instructor for the Seattle Mountaineers.
Good comment, I agree that this incident, while legal on Comdex's part, is a travesty.
Being adult enough for killing at 18 and adult enough to drink at 21 shows how diffuse the U.S. notion of adulthood is. It seems to be difficult to say it happens at a certain age.
Cultures used to have a thing called a "rite of passage" that defined adulthood more flexibly. These rites were often uncomfortable, and sometimes dangerous. Which may be appropriate after all -- irresponsible adults are expensive to society and can hurt others.
I don't think it would work to invent a cultural rite or exhume one of the sometimes barbaric rites once used for the purpose. But things like marriage and military service should certainly qualify, and confer adulthood. Being a CTO probably should too. Existing vestigal rites like bar mitzvah and confirmation should be legally recognized only if they meet standards. We could allow a judge to declare a person officially of legal age when petitioned with evidence of maturity and responsibility. Being able to create, present, and defend such a petition isn't a bad test, though biased and expensive if you require lawyers.
There is a lot to be said for treating adulthood as the difficult achievment it is, instead of an unearned privilege granted by age. There are also a lot of possible abuses in a system that validates adulthood. You have to wonder if society doesn't have the right to protect itself from 30 and 40 year old children though.
Doesn't employing a 14 year old count as child labor? What if he was working in a sweatshop sewing shoes together rather than fielding support calls?
Actually when I went to Comdex-Chicago back in March, the Linux Global Summit had an open bar. (Provided by our good friends at Caldera!) I was 22 at the time, and they didn't even ask for an ID. So yes, you can get Heinegin(sp), and both red and white wine at Comdex. (no mixed drinks though :( )
Basically, the problem is paranoia, driven by hypercapitalism. American companies are so driven by the need to profit that they will notice and conscientiously avoid anything that even remotely might cause them to lose money to the legal process directly (i.e. through a successful lawsuit against them) or indirectly (i.e. through resources consumed during an unsuccessful lawsuit against them).
Let me get this straight. The sqeamishness of American companies to do things that will get them sued is a bad thing, and it is their fault that the legal system is screwed up? Huh?
It was my impression that the purpose of the civil legal system was to provide incentive for people to not harm one another. If you break my window, I sue you to recover the cost, and add a punative damage to make sure you don't do it again. It would seem, then, that in a rational legal system, we would want people to try to minimize lawsuits, since this means that they are not stepping on the toes of other people.
In an irrational legal system, on the other hand, people are punished for things over which they have no control(employee-on-employee sexual harrassment), are punished for things that were not considered crimes when they were done (Antitrust law), punished for selling products that were known by both sides to be dangerous at the point of sale (guns and cigarrettes), and for having products that are unpopular but and later proven perfectly safe. (breast implants)
My question for you is this: what do you expect companies to do? They get sued over an unbelievable array of transgressions, and if they can get run out of business by just a few such lawsuits. How can you blame businesses for the sorry state of our legal system? What do you want from them?
The problem with the legal system is not capitalism or large corporations but an abrogation of individual responsibility. When smokers sue tobacco companies, juries should realize that there have been warning labels on cagarettes for 20 years and acquit. When women sue breast implant manufacturers with bogus scientific evidence, jurors should have realized that the evidence was lacking and acquit. When employers get sued for employee on employee sexual harrassment, the jurors should realize that this is not something that employers can possibly control.
Instead of holding people responsible for their actions, jurors see someone who was hurt, assume that the fault lies with whoever has the most money, and award enourmous damages against that defendent, regardless of whether they did anything wrong. Every few years lawyers come up with yet another novel theory to fleece yet another corporation with yet another trumped up charge. It is no wonder companies are scared to take risks. Those that have in the past have been driven out of business.
Everybody here is saying "he should've just lied or not said he's underage". That seems great, but then he wouldn't have gotten Free Advertising.
Personally I think the move to follow the rules was brilliant as they just got a pile of publicity for $0 USD. Keep up the good work.
let's see the lawyers get out of that catch. Heh, wonder if you could use that excuse at the theater. That is really the only place they have strict age checking I can see.
Yes, it seems to be a myth. Back in the days, while I had to make a fake ID for myself, my underage friends in the military only had to show their military IDs and they never had a problem. And believe you me, we tried more than our fair share of bars. Seems like an unwritten rule in the bar biz, and, IMO, a good one.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
IIRC, Comdex Canada had the same policy in place. The reason being I believe was insurance purposes. It would cost far less to insure these events with an "adults only" limitation.
If this is the case, I hope Comdex realizes that it may be worth that extra dough to at least allow teenagers in to the event. We have a lot of very young professionals in this business...let's hope Comdex is as cutting adge as they claim to be.
VENI! VIDI! VICI!
This just wouldn't surprise me in the least. I mean, the very *thought* of a 17 year, 364 day-old human being seeing a *barely*clothed*woman* is just too frightening to contemplate. The "magic age" concept in America has always pissed me off. At sixteen years old, I could volunteer to go fight for and potentially die for my country, but I still couldn't smoke, vote, or drink. So I could take a bullet for Uncle Sam, but he won't let me drink a beer or light up a cigarette?!?! And don't get me started on the absolutely maniacal age-of-consent laws that make even less sense. I still haven't worked them out ... they're different in every state, and they're not uniform either! In Colorado for example you if you're 17 and 364 days old, you can have sex with anyone over the age of either 15 or 16 (I forget which :), but once you turn 18, suddenly anyone under 18 becomes illegal. "Sorry, my love, but it's illegal for us to have sex anymore until you turn 18!" And there's *another* range of ages for 14 to 16 (or 15, whichever it was)! Oy. The funniest bit is how "child pornography" is defined when compared to age-of-consent laws. "So, um, we fifteen-year-olds can have sex with each other, but not film it? We can make/have *children* but not film the conception? Um, help?" Utter lunacy. It is so disgusting and revolting to think people as uptight as my parents (hehehehe :) decided they had the power to control people's lives in such stupid ways. It'd be nice if such "privileges" (although how continuing the species could possibly be considered a privilege is beyond me :) were awarded based on merit, instead of age. Some people are more mature than others.
Read my stuff.
someone tell me why this is at score=0
because some one dosent like the UN?, lets here BOTH SIDES of the issue
I have to admit that I have been through this "age-inferiority" treatment more than once. As a 17-year old network operations engineer, I have been looked down upon because of my age multiple times. I've been able to get into "18 and up" tradeshows by showing my business card and license, but why the hassle? I can understand that tradeshows are supposed to be a business environment, and little kids running around are not exactly the image one gets when they think of big business, but banning the people who will be doing the business in the next few years? If 'we' are supposed to be future business leaders and all, 'we' (the youth) will make sure to avoid the companies that wanted to avoid us. Not exactly a bright business move, in my opinion. Age comes up a lot in my life, and my career -- many adults do not respect my authority over them, and many people on the same level as me do not respect me as an equal -- just as a high-school kid who would be better suited flipping burgers (or worse!).
:)
I do appreciate the respect I get from some people -- those are the people and companies that I will do business with in my future. I get a handfull of little pep-talks every day from the 'elders' who don't feel threatened by my being there. "Your on the right track!" "Your better off doing this than goofing off" "I wish I wouldn't have done such-and-such when I was your age...". Any company who wants to gain my intrest, and the intrest of the next generation of IT industry workers, needs to focus on, or at least listen to, the youth of today.
As for COMDEX -- I refuse to attend any event that rejects me even with proof of an actual IT job. I do not plan on ever going back -- and it's entirely their fault.
Oh well -- Some people will never learn. Human nature, I guess?/
Jason
email me with any comments, iota@inaxx.net
also -- excuse the spelling errors, it's "past my bedtime"
Yeah! Segregation and descrimination! Next lets sue Disney and every other theme park because they make you be a certain height to go on rides!
Stan "Myconid" Brinkerhoff
SB.
why? ellipses connote a trailing thought, suggesting that more should be said on the subject...
I'm a freelance journalist in the games industry, 16 years old. I was set to cover E3 for one of my employers until I noticed the '18 or older' restriction on their site. We called them up and they said no exceptions could be made. There's a 90% chance that I could have snuck in, but I didn't want to risk the time and airfare and such if there was any chance of not getting in. So not only did *I* lose the (not inconsiderable) income I would have gained from the gig, E3's organizers lost the income I would have given *them* by covering their games. Which is more valuable: a 16 year old gaming journalist with good connections and a strong magazine to back him up, or a 26 year old Babbage's clerk? Feh. -Cybrid
I let one of my 35 year old buddies get my badge for me. He just said he forgot his ID, and the lady said "Oh, well you look at older than 21" Ya, they hire the bright ones. Funny though, I never saw anyone who looked even near my age.
Due to the overwhelming response to the recent
article at Wired, this site is experiencing heavier
than normal load. Please bear with us,
we appreciate your support.
Not a good thing to put on your front page when you're trying to sell commercial web hosting services - you mean your systems/network can't support a high level of hits?!. Also what was someone saying about grammatical errors?
Too bad he's an important guy, so they actually pay attention to things like his age.
The first time I went to Comdex, I was 17 as well. I got a lot out of it. A non-technical entrepreneur relative took me down there as his "technical advisor." I didn't even know there was an age limit (I guess he put me down as age 18). But I didn't see anything that would have made it important to keep the audience 18 or over. I went again last year, and again, there wasn't any reason to keep people out based on age.
I can see why they would want to keep some young people out: I know a lot of people that would be immature enough to cause a problem at Comdex. At least once you turn 18, you are legally responsible for your own stupidity. Even though I know a bunch of older people who probably shouldn't be admitted based on maturity level, and many 15 year olds who should, the legal repercussions make 18 a logical cutoff point. Too bad rules have to be solid (you give an inch, they take a mile).
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Hi,
:(
;-)
Am I the only one who finds these unfounded?
Case study:
In San Francisco most strip clubs are 18+ and virtually all dance clubs are 21+.
You would argue that's because of "Wet" bar. Well, both 18+ clubs that I go to have alcoholic drinks in them, they just stamp you as not eligible to buy.
Yet near my house, there is a more technically advanced club that plays my favorite music and I can't go to.
In other words, you are welcome to get screwed when you are 18, but you are not welcome to dance until you're 21 and get some stress relief that way.
If you ask me, that is very sad.
FYI, I was once not able to attend a computer show when I was 16. I was employed as an IS manager at the time.
Stupid laws, I literally have to fly across the world to avoid the age limits.
I don't drink and live half a block away. I read slashdot, how dangerous can I be?
I might just have to get involved in politics later on, this practice is plain unacceptable.
I am 19 now.
--
Leonid S. Knyshov
Network Administrator
Leonid S. Knyshov
Find me on Quora
It's just that nobody liked the post enough to put it up to 1.
<tim><
You're correct in that the society foolishly creates the magic label of "teenagers" and then systematically strips them of priveledges without concern to ability, intelligence, or demonstrated maturity. That's one issue.
(you can sense the 'but' coming on...)
But,
I'm more concerned about your overdependence on the single factor of IQ as a determination of one's usefulness. If you really are as intelligent as you say, you know that test with a bunch of funny pictures with rotational transformations generously applied can't really tell how well you deal with all situations.
So ease up on the brainiac bit. Otherwise it will cause some problems for you later (if it isn't now), I promise you.
Mike the CTO is 17, but Andrew (his brother) the support manager is 14. You might be able to pass one in no sweat, but I dunno about the other.
One has to wonder how much effort Dad Dave made to get his "principals" (yeah, nice name for your CHILDREN, Dad) into COMDEX before the Wired reporter got the scoop.
Note there are no quotes from either of the teenage technocrats in the article, it's all Dad. I wonder what they think, and if they're not just annoyed as hell at dear old Dad like I would be for making a big frigging deal out of the thing.
J.
damned vulpine http://sb.drtwister.com/
Meanwhile, I don't assume Comdex's "decision" here was made by a bunch of suits so much as just the way things happened to be, the way the people staffing the booths thought they were supposed to handle this. It's a loss for COMDEX, at least, but not the end of freedom in America.
Practice random senselessness and act kind of beautiful.
You guys remember Second Reality demo, headed up by Skaven? I think he was also the one that did Catch that Goblin, his last demo before he went to animation school (as if he needed it. )
--Joseph
Looking carefully at those sentences, I can see why Comdex might do what it did. If they drop the age below 18, they might get sued for letting in immature, irresponsible "children". If they don't, but do case-by-case checks of those below 18, then they can really be accused of "discrimation", as in "how dare you say my son isn't mature enough to attend this, when you let that 16-year-old in?"
Tough position to be in, given the amount of scrutiny this sort of thing obviously involves. One man's "good" discrimination being another man's "bad"....
Practice random senselessness and act kind of beautiful.
Every day the US moves a step closer to being a socialist country.
--
Height is a measurement that correlates directly to one's safety on theme park rides.
Age is a measurement that correlates rather loosely to one's ability to attend a COMDEX. Maturity is a better measure, though unfortunately rather subjective.
Age is also tied arbitrarily to legal liability.
[I wonder why 18 was ever chosen as the age of legal of consent/age of majority in the U.S.? Anybody know the history of it?]
A 17 year old CTO is not allowed to visit the
comdex but a 11 year old gets chained and
handcuffed. Anyone out there to explain me
the logic?
The rest of this issue is State Law, something no one is going to change for a long long time.
Bottom's up.
17 and younger are often required to be accompeted by an adult. (18 or higher)
If something happened to the 17 year old while unattended, comdex would uninsured. It's a common practice.
I imagine that they realize that it would be hard to keep track of a 17 year at Comdex, and therefore just ban kids in general. Comdex is not Disney World, you know.
I imagine that if the 17 year old CTO promised to stay with the 18 year old CEO, Comdex would be okay with it.
God, I'm almost 24 and I'm already starting to feel like I'm over the hill, especially on Slashdot.
I was too denied entry to a Linux Conference in London. I run a sucessful profit making ISP (www.meridianuk.net) , which employs staff, and yet I am considered insignificant because I am not yet 18. This is absurd. I feel that I have a part to play in the development of the OS, and have showed my support in Linux for the last 3 years, most of my servers running Linux. How many people here by a copy of linux for everyone of their servers ? WHY should I be denied axs to a con ? The only way that I managed to get in was to falsify my date of birth. That make sense, I can drive, have sex, but go to a conference which I helped fund, HEAVENS NO!
Anti-trust law has been on the books for decades
:) He actually does have a bit of a point, though I don't see how that would in any way invalidate anti-trust law, especially today as it's been around for decades now.
Yes, but when it was first put on the books, it was put there (IIRC) to deal with whatever monopoly was being a pain in the ass at the time (I don't remember which, it's been a while since I took history
industry/corporate America is responsible for most of the legal difficulties of our U.S. system
How so? It seems to me that our legal difficulties are due to two problems: 1) the idiots we have in government, and 2) ourselves for putting those idiots in office. After all, the companies aren't the ones writing the damn laws. I will admit though that companies (and unions, for that matter) have way more influence under our current system than they ought to. The situation could be fixed but simply banning any political contributions from any entity other than US citizens (and put a reasonable limit to how much individuals can contribute). Of course, that would require that the idiots in office actually do what's right; and that the voters actually vote them out of office if they don't.
If cigs kill people (they do), shouldn't the cig companies STOP selling them?
Well, they probably *should*, from a moral perspective. But we shouldn't be legislating morality (history has shown us it's a bad idea). It's really the responsibility of the individual to not smoke. The laws shouldn't be used against the tobacco companies, unless the tobacco companies lied about or withheld evidence about the harmful effects of smoking (there is evidence that they did indeed do that). If people are stupid enough to smoke and not quit, well I guess it's natural selection at work.
As I see it, the laws are there to protect our citizens from each other, not to protect John Doe from himself. If I want to smoke myself to death, then that should be my right. As long as I don't expose anyone else to the fumes, why not?
If you think an individual can make up their mind on their own, then how come cig manufactures spend billions each year on advertising?
Because they need some way to distinguish their products from the competition. If you don't advertise, how is your customer supposed to know if your product is better? Name recognition doesn't hurt, either.
This is my opinion and my opinion only. Incidentally, IANAL.
MOO;IANAL.
There used to be a picture linked here.
When I was... 15 or so I was denied access to PC Expo in NYC... Sucked then, still sucks now. Although now I am 18... I can't see what legal issue there is with allowing under age people into these expos. The only issue I can see is that for the most part 18/and older is the group that makes the purchasing decisions for the companies the people at the expos are trying to sell their products to.
Contracts signed by minors are not legally binding so that waiver you signed woudn't hold up in court. No real was around it, unless you get a parent to sign.
Ahhh, but I never said I was from the United States, now did I? But, now that we've gotten that bit out of the way, I am: Texas, in fact. However, as was stated earlier, you can be an officer of a corporation with few problems at all. I never lied about my age (clients knew I was 13; we even had an office party on my 16th birthday) and did everything I could to abide by the laws in place. Sure, that meant missing out on some things (we never went to Comdex), but its worked out rather well.
I do not see how one (1) ethical misstep leads to an increase in the likelihood of other ethical missteps.
It doesn't necessarily increase, but once you've begun lying about the "small" stuff, what happens when something comes along that is small to you, but very important otherwise? Or, if you're used to lying to cover your ass, who says you won't do it again, and more often? It's not always true, but does remind me of one of my favorite sayings: Generally, I hate generalities. This is a generality based on my experience (no, all of my friends are not liars).
But Microsoft did, and in front of the U.S. Congress too.
That's Microsoft, not me. I don't emulate Microsoft's practices, or do business with them.
Finally, a show for me!
--
I am currently in between my sophmore and pre-junior years at college for a master degree in computer engineering, and I would like to go to comdex sometime, but I am only 14 so I won't be able to go to comdex for 4 more years. By then I could have 2 Phd's, this doesn't seem like a smart policy, but I can understand it after all the lawsuits. Getting 1 million dollars because the coffee at Mcdonalds was too hot is just dumb. I can see why comdex wouldn't want to get get into a lawsuit, but there must be some way around this.
My guess is they have the age restriction for the simple reason of limiting the numbers of people. The only two times that I have been to Comdex I was 16 and 17 years old (My dad took me, how great is that!). At the time (I'm 24 now), the minimum age was 16. They've obviuosly changed it since then.
Because I wind up paying for your respiratory illnesses via insurance premiums and taxes for public health spending, making up your work while you're out sick or on a "smoke break," inhaling fumes off your clothes when you come back inside...
This is one of the many reasons why the government shouldn't be paying for health care. It's a strangely backwards argument: we're going to force other people to pay for your illnesses, and then we're using that as an excuse to keep you from smoking. What should be done is that the government should simply refuse to pay for smoking related illnesses. If smokers choose to smoke anyway, that's their choice.
In a libertarian society, you *would* only be effecting yourself.
I don't get what the f*** is so special about Comdex.
There was a vast change in the 1999 Chicago Comdex that I didn't like. Couldn't put my finger on it, but I left feeling disappointed.
Hi, I'm also 17 and living in the UK. Despite the fact that I have been in the press/TV/etc... for several IT related things (including being the youngest computing student in the UK when I was 13) I have great difficulty getting in to IT events also. The most recent example would be "Linux Expo" organised by IT Events - a company with the unenlightened philosophy that anyone under the age of 18 (or students!) should not be allowed to attend their events. This is a stupid policy. Can't they realise that we represent the future of the IT industry and that we therefore deserve a rightful place at such preceedings. They need to MOVE with the times...
http://www.jonmasters.org/
Yes, industry/corporate America is responsible for most of the legal difficulties of our U.S. system.
For example...?
I gotta say your distinction between rational & irrational legal systems seems fairly vague and ill-defined.
By a rational legal system, I mean one with clearly established rights and a legal process that upholds those rights. For example, it was always assumed previously that people had a right to buy and sell any product they chose. (as long as they don't do so fraudulantly) And it was assumed that the buying party took responsibility for his actions with said product, even if that product was dangerous.
An irrational legal system ignores the fact that the consumer freely chose to purchase and use a product that he knew was dangerous. Instead, they blame the company that sold the product, even though they weren't the ones who fired the gun or smoked the cigarette.
In a nutshell, a rational legal system punishes people for violating clearly-defined rights, while an irrational one punishes people when other people are unhappy with them and they have lots of money.
As for antitrust law, it has been on the books for a century, and it is still a bad law. This issue comes up on the weekly MS flamewar, so suffice it to say at this point that it is so vague and overreaching that it can apply to almost any successful company. The result is that it gets reinterpreted every few years to fit current legal fads, and companies get screwed over for doing something that the previous administration's antitrust division had not considered a crime.
Abrogation (itihysi) of corporate responsibility is generally the rule and not the other way around.
For example...
If cigs kill people (they do), shouldn't the cig companies STOP selling them?
No, they shouldn't. There are millions of people who enjoy smoking and wish to continue doing so. Every one of them sees a warning on the pack of every cigarrette they smoke, and most of them are probably reminded regularly by others that smoking is dangerous. They choose to do it anyway. What right do you have to stop them?
If you think an individual can make up their mind on their own, then how come cig manufactures spend billions each year on advertising?
To sell their product. Car companies spend a lot more. Are people manipulated into buying those? All companies advetise. That's how they get people to use their product instead of their competition's. But people are not the mindless drones you seem to think they are. They don't blindly consume whatever the ads tell them to.
**Being age 13 and working for an incorporated business is usually against Federal labor laws. Would that make you the sort of person you honestly won't be doing business with?** as the law sees it, and as it has been explained to me by people in business for quite some time(including lawyers), there is no age limit on owning your own company-every kid at some point has a lawn mowing "company" or something of the sort. to incorporate protects the individual, regardless of age.....he wasnt hired but someone at 13-he was doing the hiring.that makes all the difference
Just for clarification for the AC: I am neither a libertarian nor a smoker...
The restaurant, airplane thing should be dealt with by simply banning smoking in public.
Anyway, I'd write more but I gotta go...
You and many others have argued some very good points in reaction to my post. Yours especially is interesting to think about. By the very act of making a thorough case-by-case basis, they are in fact discriminating. It's something to ponder.
Also, to the individual who posted regarding the fact Comedx is, in fact, an event sponsored by a private organzation, I agree with you. I should have thought more carefully when I wrote my piece. You are right, they are a private organization and have every right to limit who goes in to their event. However, I would hope to argue that they might have a little more insight to what the world has become and realize that there are some people under 18 that are and will continue to make valuable contributions to the industry and that these individuals would benefit greatly from attending Comdex.
I already made the concession that not every kid under 18 needs or should attend Comdex, but that there are exceptions. As many of us know, the exceptions to the rule are often to most difficult cases to handle, whether it be in regards to Comdex, system administration, Linux or life in general
True, smoking does effect other people. But the question is whether it affects people in big enough ways to justify prohibiting it. The problems you cite with smokers can happen just as much with other activities. There are lots of reasons that people take frequent breaks, call in sick, etc. That doesn't mean that you should regulate all of those things.
The sick issue you bring up is something to be worked out between you and your employer. If the employer wants to pay nonsmokers for the sick days they don't use, or only hire nonsmokers, or do any of a number of things, that's just fine with me.
The same is true of the smokers and tech support. If I were their employer, I would probably ask them to stagger their smoking breaks to keep up with demand. This isn't an issue of smoking: it's an issue of personal responsibility. Smoking doesn't force people to take regular breaks all at once. The solution is not to stop smoking. The solution is for people to do their jobs.
As for restaurant and airplanes, I see that as a simply property issue. Businesses should be free to allow or disallow smoking on their premises. Customers can seek to patronize establishments that prohibit smoking if that is what they prefer. As the number of smokers decreases, the number of nonsmoking establishments decreases as well.
The point is that in all of these cases, the people being inconvenienced have a choice in the matter. If you don't like having smoking employees, don't hire them. If you don't like being in restaurants with smokers, go to a different restaurant.
The alternative of banning smoking, on the other hand, takes away choice from the smokers. I see no reason why a group of smokers should not be free to get together and have a smoke if they so desire. And I see no reason why they should not invite nonsmoking customers to patronize the same extablishment. As long as market forces are at work, you will see a mix of policies, and customers will patronize those establishments with the best policies from their perspective.
There's an article in Wired about how comdex just decided to let him in, after all.