Who said anything about burning people alive? On the other hand, it seems that whenever a spammer gets arrested, I get less spam, so I think Ralsky's guilty plea is good news.
Not quite. IANAL, but the constitutional prohibition on Ex Post Facto law has been interpreted to mean that Congress can't criminalize behavior retroactively. They can legalize behavior all they want. Also don't forget the retroactive tax increase they got away with a few years ago.
Don't worry. Removing the patch was easy once I knew that was what needed to be done. Just go to Add/Remove Programs, check the box for "Show updates", scroll down to KB951748, click the Remove button, and reboot (again).
You make the immediate assumption that it was a problem with the MS Patch.
In my book, it was a problem with the MS Patch. MS of all companies should know that they aren't releasing software into a vacuum, that they have to play nice with existing software. They should have noticed this update's incompatibility with ZoneAlarm before releasing it. They deserve a stinging slap on the wrist for not mentioning ZA in their knowledge base article about the update, and for not even mentioning DNS in the Automatic Update dialog. If it weren't for the article about the coordinated DNS patch on/. yesterday, my XP Home system might still be unable to use the net.
I'd be more inclined to forgive Microsoft this snafu if the update dialog box had said it was going to update the DNS client, and if the knowledge base article had mentioned possible incompatibilities with common firewalls like ZA. Instead, I had to twist the arms of four people on the phone to get them to help me at all, and one of them tried to tell me that the problem was Firefox and Thunderbird interfering with each other. I'm definitely going to look askance at MS updates in the future. They burned a lot of what goodwill and trust I had for them yesterday.
After over 2.5 hours on the phone tonight, a Microsoft tech told me to uninstall today's crapware update, which is what I was going to try anyway. I'm really hating MS at the moment.
Yes, I noticed when I installed an automatic update from Microsoft onto my WinXPHome system today, and it has since been unable to connect to the net. No web (Firefox 3, IE7), no email, no WoW. Nslookup times out, but gives a non-authoritative answer for google.com, and I can ping Google's IP address. I'm on the phone with Microsoft now, and they're giving me the outsource-runaround.
I fail to see how the tenant could successfully sue the apartment building owner. What grounds?
False advertising. The tenant may have chosen to rent from that landlord based partly on the assurance that the cameras provided some security, but the landlord bought fake cameras to save money. The landlord failed to provide a service for which the tenant paid every month.
Dr Twomey said Icann was still working through how much the application fee to register a domain name will be, but it is expected to be at least several thousand dollars.
'Cost recovery'
"We are doing this on a cost recovery basis. We've already spent $10m on this," he said. So at say, $5000 per top-level domain name, ICANN would have to sell 2000 TLDs to recover $10 million.
Yeah, let us blame Microsoft for all the crappy windows drivers out there instead of the hardware manufacturers. The fact that it works in Linux is just another indication that it is the drivers that are the issue. I agree, it probably is the drivers. But this is a USB keyboard, a generic Human Interface Device, and the Device Manager assures me that every driver file for every device in my system that has "USB" in its name was written by...drum roll please...Microsoft.
Funny, but IMHO Windows' support for USB still sucks. Sometimes my XP Home machine boots up and totally ignores my USB keyboard. Unplugging the kb and plugging it back in fixes the issue temporarily, but why should I have to do that? The motherboard setup program has no such issues, and neither do any Linux distros I've tried.
The company is far less interested in what you can do for them in your last few weeks than they are in learning how to live without you. That basically requires that they cut you out of the loop as soon as possible. And it would be nice of them to phrase it that way.
I removed a DVD drive from my machine and got locked out by WGA. I've had Windows XP Home require reactivation after I plugged in and unplugged a USB wireless adapter several times.
-Wtf is the collapsing of a black hole? I thought they evaporated... I think what's being called a collapse here is the creation of a black hole, not its destruction. That is, a black hole is created by the collapse of a mass in our universe.
The Microsoft Java namespace was entirely justified, Microsoft had bought into Java thinking that they could use it as their next generation programming language across the board. The only way to do that was to allow access to Windows APIs. Wasn't the problem that Microsoft put Windows-specific APIs into core Java packages, the ones whose names start with "java."? If MS had instead put those methods and constants into packages called something like "com.microsoft.XXX", then MS would have been in compliance with its license agreement with Sun, and Sun wouldn't have sued MS.
I said he worked at the company for 29 years, he wasn't stealing from them for 29 years. You didn't say how long the stealing took, just "a long period of time". You left me to infer how long you meant, and I did ask you for confirmation of details two comments ago.
What is a pension really, other than a reward from the company for years of good service to them. No. It's something you work for. For years. Decades. It's part of your pay. It's a promise that the company uses to recruit new employees and retain experienced ones. It's something the employee counts on having when he can no longer work, when he will likely not have opportunity to earn another pension. It's something worth far more than $13.16 a month (to use your numbers, $3000 / ( (29-10) * 12 ) ). So the guy gasses his car up once a month, and for that he loses his pension? I really don't care that it's not a 401k. The disparity between the punishment and the accusation just does not pass the smell test.
He lied to the company and stole from them, to the tune of at least $3000. Why should he be rewarded for that? So getting fired, sued, forced to pay restitution and maybe a fine as well would be the same as getting rewarded?
That's like saying he should get unemployment from them as well. No it isn't. But even at that, the guy had to help pay for the unemployment insurance, didn't he?
My point is that allowing the company to revoke pensions gives them an incentive to put anyone nearing retirement under a magnifying glass in hopes of being able to save the cost of the retiree's pension. So the company can leave infractions unpunished/unresolved for years, and then suddenly impose a penalty that may be far out of proportion to the infractions, and do this without judicial oversight. It's supposed to be in the company's interest to pay you market value for your work, but the possibility of revoking pensions makes it to be in their interest to fail to pay you everything they promised, which is the conflict of interest I'm talking about.
It's not like they wouldn't have fired him if he got to keep the pension. But is it like they went looking for dirt on him because he was about to claim his pension? IMHO, revocation of this guy's pension benefits was inappropriate and should be illegal. If he misappropriated any funds, the company should have to sue him. Then he could pay any judgment against him out of his pension.
Are you saying some guy was fired for spending $3000 over 29 years to gas up a car he drove to work every day? And for this he lost his pension, which was probably worth far more than $3000? Don't you see that creates a huge conflict of interest for the company?
fired after using his corporate card to pay for personal stuff. These guys lose their pensions Call me uncharitable, but I can't help but wonder if that's actually the reason for the firing.
Slashdot Mirror
Who said anything about burning people alive? On the other hand, it seems that whenever a spammer gets arrested, I get less spam, so I think Ralsky's guilty plea is good news.
To follow up, I just installed ZoneAlarm's latest patch and Microsoft's DNS update from July 8th, and I can still reach the net (web, email, WoW).
We all dream about doing this to our ex-employer, but he's the one who's had the balls to do it!
Some of us would rather remain employable, and have the maturity to keep our childish impulses in check.
selling Glider was interfering with Blizzard's contractual relationship with its customers.
This one I could buy, but honestly, isn't that between the customers and Blizzard?
What contractual relationship? I don't remember signing a contract to play WoW.
Not quite. IANAL, but the constitutional prohibition on Ex Post Facto law has been interpreted to mean that Congress can't criminalize behavior retroactively. They can legalize behavior all they want. Also don't forget the retroactive tax increase they got away with a few years ago.
Don't worry. Removing the patch was easy once I knew that was what needed to be done. Just go to Add/Remove Programs, check the box for "Show updates", scroll down to KB951748, click the Remove button, and reboot (again).
You make the immediate assumption that it was a problem with the MS Patch.
In my book, it was a problem with the MS Patch. MS of all companies should know that they aren't releasing software into a vacuum, that they have to play nice with existing software. They should have noticed this update's incompatibility with ZoneAlarm before releasing it. They deserve a stinging slap on the wrist for not mentioning ZA in their knowledge base article about the update, and for not even mentioning DNS in the Automatic Update dialog. If it weren't for the article about the coordinated DNS patch on /. yesterday, my XP Home system might still be unable to use the net.
Zone alarm, perchance?
Yes.
I'd be more inclined to forgive Microsoft this snafu if the update dialog box had said it was going to update the DNS client, and if the knowledge base article had mentioned possible incompatibilities with common firewalls like ZA. Instead, I had to twist the arms of four people on the phone to get them to help me at all, and one of them tried to tell me that the problem was Firefox and Thunderbird interfering with each other. I'm definitely going to look askance at MS updates in the future. They burned a lot of what goodwill and trust I had for them yesterday.
After over 2.5 hours on the phone tonight, a Microsoft tech told me to uninstall today's crapware update, which is what I was going to try anyway. I'm really hating MS at the moment.
Yes, I noticed when I installed an automatic update from Microsoft onto my WinXPHome system today, and it has since been unable to connect to the net. No web (Firefox 3, IE7), no email, no WoW. Nslookup times out, but gives a non-authoritative answer for google.com, and I can ping Google's IP address. I'm on the phone with Microsoft now, and they're giving me the outsource-runaround.
I fail to see how the tenant could successfully sue the apartment building owner. What grounds?
False advertising. The tenant may have chosen to rent from that landlord based partly on the assurance that the cameras provided some security, but the landlord bought fake cameras to save money. The landlord failed to provide a service for which the tenant paid every month.
Funny, but IMHO Windows' support for USB still sucks. Sometimes my XP Home machine boots up and totally ignores my USB keyboard. Unplugging the kb and plugging it back in fixes the issue temporarily, but why should I have to do that? The motherboard setup program has no such issues, and neither do any Linux distros I've tried.
That's why God invented reruns.
My point is that allowing the company to revoke pensions gives them an incentive to put anyone nearing retirement under a magnifying glass in hopes of being able to save the cost of the retiree's pension. So the company can leave infractions unpunished/unresolved for years, and then suddenly impose a penalty that may be far out of proportion to the infractions, and do this without judicial oversight. It's supposed to be in the company's interest to pay you market value for your work, but the possibility of revoking pensions makes it to be in their interest to fail to pay you everything they promised, which is the conflict of interest I'm talking about.
Are you saying some guy was fired for spending $3000 over 29 years to gas up a car he drove to work every day? And for this he lost his pension, which was probably worth far more than $3000? Don't you see that creates a huge conflict of interest for the company?