Chiang was just a power hungry dictator, not much different than Mao. Mao and other CCP members were also members of the KMT. Chiang like most KMT members, were trained by the Russians. Chiang only fought the Japanese because Chang Hsueh-liang and a few other generals kidnapped him to force him to fight the Japanese. Chiang didn't give a damn about the people, he just wanted to consolidate his power by killing Mao. The second front against the Japanese was a joke and the KMT killed a lot of Chinese people while trying to slow down the Japanese, just check out the 1938 yellow river flood. The KMT were corrupt and used terror to rule. They continued to do that in Taiwan with 40 years of martial law and political killings. The only reason the KMT survived is with the support of other nations.
I have a N82 which is similar to the N95. It's got a GPS built in and able to use assisted GPS. I download the maps for free from the Nokia site. It's also got a 5 mega pixel camera with a Xenon flash. So I don't need to bring a digital camera with me. It als has 3G access. I can see a regular web page without a problem. The N82 is faster than the N95. It's got memory expansion with microSD. It cost me 180 with a 2 year AT&T contract so it's a lot cheaper than the iphone. I like the Nokia N82 more than the iphone. I'm not willing to pay $300 more for a lot less functions and a touch screen.
The judge's ruling is just idiotic. The insider trading rule doesn't just apply to employee's of a corporation. The rule is there to protect against illegal gains from stock trades from information that is not public. This case does fall into those circumstances. Even a janitor working for the building owner who overhears a building tenant's company information can be charged with insider trading. Insider trading rules are very much a part of the financial industry. That's why Martha Stewart's claim that she didn't know it was insider trading was total crap. She used to work in the industry and knew the rules. In this case, the SEC needs to prove the guy did steal the insider information.
obviously slept through the aerodynamics class. If you put a forcefield around the plane, there would be no airflow to the engines so no thrust produced. without the movement, there would be no lift. So it won't fly.
> Say what you like about Apple, there should be some rewards for innovation.
Yeah they really innovated the ipod by creating a non-existing technology like mp3 players. Like MP3 players didn't exist before the ipod came around. Get real. This is just another company improving on an existing idea. It's the essence of competition.
IBM makes and sells the chips. IBM's biggest customer of Cell processors right now is Sony. IBM has been trying to sell the chips to other companies. Sony is not the right company to sue. They just target Sony because Sony has a bad rep and is an easier target than IBM. This is just another SCO in the making and I hope IBM crushes these idiots too.
Their hiring process is a joke. They want the most academically qualified person(PHD) but they are not necessarily the best person for the job. So most people with experience do not qualify. I personally went through some of their process and got really tired of their know nothing non-technical managers try to figure out what they want. First they want to hire locally, then off-shore, then locally, then off-shore. I got sick of their games and just decided to ignore Google all together.
My experience with Google hiring process was a joke and just turned me off of working for them. I was contacted by a recruiter a while back for a contract position. The first phone interview was missed because the recruiter didn't tell me that the hiring manager was calling and I missed the call. Then I found out the next day that the position was being "outsourced." A few days later, I was called back by the recruiter that the hiring manager changed her mind and wanted to talk to me again. So a new phone interview was arranged. The morning of the arranged phone interview, got a call that the hiring manager changed her mind again and will be "outsourcing" the position again. So the interview was cancelled. So I basically decided the people at Google were too annoying to deal with and don't really care about working for them anymore.
This proposal doesn't really do anything besides rubber stamping what goole has already done in China.
1) Data that can identify individual users should not be hosted in Internet restricting countries, where political speech can be treated as a crime by the legal system.
All this means is that Google can't host their servers in place like China but it doesn't mean that they con't reveal the information.
2) The company will not engage in pro-active censorship.
They need to define what pro-active censorship is.
3) The company will use all legal means to resist demands for censorship. The company will only comply with such demands if required to do so through legally binding procedures.
This is just the rubber stamp of what they do now. If Google is told by the courts in China to reveal the information, they have no choice to comply.
4) Users will be clearly informed when the company has acceded to legally binding government requests to filter or otherwise censor content that the user is trying to access.
The biggest rubber stamp of Google's "you are looking at censored seach results" that they use in Google China's search engine.
5) Users should be informed about the company's data retention practices, and the ways in which their data is shared with third parties.
this should already be done wih most website.
The proposal does not propose anything that Google doesn't already do. This was probably put in by the controller in NY just so he can say that he did something. It looks good on paper but it does nothing.
6) The company will document all cases where legally-binding censorship requests have been complied with, and that information will be publicly available.
Now if IBM really wants to have fun with SCO, use their litigation discovery to find out if there is some document in SCO that basically says SCO has no legal basis for a patent infringement suit. Once that's out, it's like blood in the water. The class action lawyers will jump at a chance to file a suit on behalf of the stockholders.
That's just crap. If the companies involved were not doing harmful things to people or enviroment, then there would not be a need for the Gates Foundation. It's dumb to do something bad and then feel guilty about it to do something to fix the bad thing. Just don't do the bad thing in the first place. The Gates Foundation is pretty much there to make Gates look like he's doing good despite the fact that he is doing evil.
Slashdot Mirror
Chiang was just a power hungry dictator, not much different than Mao. Mao and other CCP members were also members of the KMT. Chiang like most KMT members, were trained by the Russians. Chiang only fought the Japanese because Chang Hsueh-liang and a few other generals kidnapped him to force him to fight the Japanese. Chiang didn't give a damn about the people, he just wanted to consolidate his power by killing Mao. The second front against the Japanese was a joke and the KMT killed a lot of Chinese people while trying to slow down the Japanese, just check out the 1938 yellow river flood. The KMT were corrupt and used terror to rule. They continued to do that in Taiwan with 40 years of martial law and political killings. The only reason the KMT survived is with the support of other nations.
I have a N82 which is similar to the N95. It's got a GPS built in and able to use assisted GPS. I download the maps for free from the Nokia site. It's also got a 5 mega pixel camera with a Xenon flash. So I don't need to bring a digital camera with me. It als has 3G access. I can see a regular web page without a problem. The N82 is faster than the N95. It's got memory expansion with microSD. It cost me 180 with a 2 year AT&T contract so it's a lot cheaper than the iphone. I like the Nokia N82 more than the iphone. I'm not willing to pay $300 more for a lot less functions and a touch screen.
The judge's ruling is just idiotic. The insider trading rule doesn't just apply to employee's of a corporation. The rule is there to protect against illegal gains from stock trades from information that is not public. This case does fall into those circumstances. Even a janitor working for the building owner who overhears a building tenant's company information can be charged with insider trading. Insider trading rules are very much a part of the financial industry. That's why Martha Stewart's claim that she didn't know it was insider trading was total crap. She used to work in the industry and knew the rules. In this case, the SEC needs to prove the guy did steal the insider information.
obviously slept through the aerodynamics class. If you put a forcefield around the plane, there would be no airflow to the engines so no thrust produced. without the movement, there would be no lift. So it won't fly.
> Say what you like about Apple, there should be some rewards for innovation. Yeah they really innovated the ipod by creating a non-existing technology like mp3 players. Like MP3 players didn't exist before the ipod came around. Get real. This is just another company improving on an existing idea. It's the essence of competition.
IBM makes and sells the chips. IBM's biggest customer of Cell processors right now is Sony. IBM has been trying to sell the chips to other companies. Sony is not the right company to sue. They just target Sony because Sony has a bad rep and is an easier target than IBM. This is just another SCO in the making and I hope IBM crushes these idiots too.
Their hiring process is a joke. They want the most academically qualified person(PHD) but they are not necessarily the best person for the job. So most people with experience do not qualify. I personally went through some of their process and got really tired of their know nothing non-technical managers try to figure out what they want. First they want to hire locally, then off-shore, then locally, then off-shore. I got sick of their games and just decided to ignore Google all together.
My experience with Google hiring process was a joke and just turned me off of working for them. I was contacted by a recruiter a while back for a contract position. The first phone interview was missed because the recruiter didn't tell me that the hiring manager was calling and I missed the call. Then I found out the next day that the position was being "outsourced." A few days later, I was called back by the recruiter that the hiring manager changed her mind and wanted to talk to me again. So a new phone interview was arranged. The morning of the arranged phone interview, got a call that the hiring manager changed her mind again and will be "outsourcing" the position again. So the interview was cancelled. So I basically decided the people at Google were too annoying to deal with and don't really care about working for them anymore.
This proposal doesn't really do anything besides rubber stamping what goole has already done in China.
1) Data that can identify individual users should not be hosted in Internet restricting countries, where political speech can be treated as a crime by the legal system.
All this means is that Google can't host their servers in place like China but it doesn't mean that they con't reveal the information.
2) The company will not engage in pro-active censorship.
They need to define what pro-active censorship is.
3) The company will use all legal means to resist demands for censorship. The company will only comply with such demands if required to do so through legally binding procedures.
This is just the rubber stamp of what they do now. If Google is told by the courts in China to reveal the information, they have no choice to comply.
4) Users will be clearly informed when the company has acceded to legally binding government requests to filter or otherwise censor content that the user is trying to access.
The biggest rubber stamp of Google's "you are looking at censored seach results" that they use in Google China's search engine.
5) Users should be informed about the company's data retention practices, and the ways in which their data is shared with third parties.
this should already be done wih most website.
The proposal does not propose anything that Google doesn't already do. This was probably put in by the controller in NY just so he can say that he did something. It looks good on paper but it does nothing.
6) The company will document all cases where legally-binding censorship requests have been complied with, and that information will be publicly available.
Now if IBM really wants to have fun with SCO, use their litigation discovery to find out if there is some document in SCO that basically says SCO has no legal basis for a patent infringement suit. Once that's out, it's like blood in the water. The class action lawyers will jump at a chance to file a suit on behalf of the stockholders.
That's probably the price point they need from the accounting stand point to pay for a settlement with the SEC over Jobs' options.
That's just crap. If the companies involved were not doing harmful things to people or enviroment, then there would not be a need for the Gates Foundation. It's dumb to do something bad and then feel guilty about it to do something to fix the bad thing. Just don't do the bad thing in the first place. The Gates Foundation is pretty much there to make Gates look like he's doing good despite the fact that he is doing evil.
You can buy a car but it can't function without some type of fuel. It doesn't mean that you have to buy the fuel from the car dealer.