It seems like a flaw in record keeping to me, the employer should pay you for the time you are available. If equipment isn't working it is the employers problem not the employee. As long as the employee is available they are doing there duty to the employer.
approach to fighting spam. your idea will not work. here is why it won't work. (one or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses ( ) mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected ( ) no one will be able to find the guy or collect the money ( ) it is defenseless against brute force attacks ( ) it will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it () users of email will not put up with it ( ) microsoft will not put up with it ( ) the police will not put up with it ( ) requires too much cooperation from spammers () requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once () many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers ( ) spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists ( ) anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) laws expressly prohibiting it () lack of centrally controlling authority for email ( ) open relays in foreign countries ( ) ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses ( ) asshats ( ) jurisdictional problems ( ) unpopularity of weird new taxes ( ) public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money () huge existing software investment in smtp () susceptibility of protocols other than smtp to attack () willingness of users to install os patches received by email ( ) armies of worm riddled broadband-connected windows boxes ( ) eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches ( ) extreme profitability of spam ( ) joe jobs and/or identity theft ( ) technically illiterate politicians ( ) extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers ( ) dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves ( ) bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering ( ) outlook () botnets
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
() ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical () any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable ( ) smtp headers should not be the subject of legislation ( ) blacklists suck ( ) whitelists suck ( ) we should be able to talk about viagra without being censored ( ) countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud ( ) countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks ( ) countermeasures must work if phased in gradually ( ) sending email should be free ( ) why should we have to trust you and your servers? ( ) incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses ( ) feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem ( ) temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome ( ) i don't want the government reading my email ( ) killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
furthermore, this is what i think about you:
() sorry dude, but i don't think it would work. ( ) this is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it. ( ) nice try, assh0le! i'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
ah the old charge back scam, I'm familiar with that one from eBay. I'm not sure what you can really do apart from trying to verify the identity of the buyer.
She was attempting to commit a crime. The scam victim is not innocent, they think they are aiding and abetting a criminal in a foreign country and will be financially rewarded for it.
A burglar who falls through my skylight and breaks their neck also gets what they deserve.
Google Apps gives me what I want: A browser-based place to write stuff and make spreadsheets and store the documents where I can access them whenever I like.
Slashdot Mirror
I prefer to do things properly...
Call me old fashion....
It seems like a flaw in record keeping to me, the employer should pay you for the time you are available. If equipment isn't working it is the employers problem not the employee. As long as the employee is available they are doing there duty to the employer.
Sorry I couldn't be bothered filling it out.
Your post advocates a
() technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. your idea will not work. here is why it won't work. (one or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
( ) mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) no one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) it is defenseless against brute force attacks
( ) it will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
() users of email will not put up with it
( ) microsoft will not put up with it
( ) the police will not put up with it
( ) requires too much cooperation from spammers
() requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
() many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
( ) anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) laws expressly prohibiting it
() lack of centrally controlling authority for email
( ) open relays in foreign countries
( ) ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
( ) asshats
( ) jurisdictional problems
( ) unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
() huge existing software investment in smtp
() susceptibility of protocols other than smtp to attack
() willingness of users to install os patches received by email
( ) armies of worm riddled broadband-connected windows boxes
( ) eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
( ) extreme profitability of spam
( ) joe jobs and/or identity theft
( ) technically illiterate politicians
( ) extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
( ) dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) outlook
() botnets
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
() ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical
() any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) smtp headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) blacklists suck
( ) whitelists suck
( ) we should be able to talk about viagra without being censored
( ) countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
( ) countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
( ) sending email should be free
( ) why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
( ) feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) i don't want the government reading my email
( ) killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
furthermore, this is what i think about you:
() sorry dude, but i don't think it would work.
( ) this is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) nice try, assh0le! i'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
I find it amusing when people get offended by words.
The word "cunt" seems to get the most reaction, especially from women.
Why? Are people that lame they had to decide "ok, I think im going to start being upset by, *list of everyday words*"
Its kinda sad.
I have no mercy for someone who breaks into my house.
ah the old charge back scam, I'm familiar with that one from eBay. I'm not sure what you can really do apart from trying to verify the identity of the buyer.
You mean like this?
http://tinyurl.com/6rywju
Now that you mention it we might as well make a bit of cash. but Nigeria must pay upfront, I don't trust their credit rating.
She was attempting to commit a crime. The scam victim is not innocent, they think they are aiding and abetting a criminal in a foreign country and will be financially rewarded for it.
A burglar who falls through my skylight and breaks their neck also gets what they deserve.
It's still the victims stupidity
My Dog is smarter the most of the Australian population. She got zapped by an electric fence once and learned not to mess with it.
I see many humans doing stupid things, and they don't learn.
"The ability to speak, does not make you intelligent" -Qui-Gon Jinn
Where the scam? If your paid upfront does it matter where you send the completed work?
We need a National Dipshit Register. So these people can be flagged.
Why would someone go public to say "Look what a stupid bitch I am!"
Really I can shut my laptop down in less than 10 seconds, leaving the battery cover off enables me to improve that to 2-3 seconds.
My dog is a bitch you insensitive clod...
A credible source would have no problem with accountability.
Dammm,
Where's the "-1 fail"
:P
Oh Shit!
Don't let them unite!
I thought the days of losing data when the power goes out where long gone.
Apparently not :D
and another thing.
What happened to the "$100 laptop"?
I'll give them $200 for mine and they can keep the spare.
My dog already knew and understood this, that does not speak well for science.
Google Apps gives me what I want: A browser-based place to write stuff and make spreadsheets and store the documents where I can access them whenever I like.
So long as you have an internet connection!