I guess don't feed the troll would probably apply here but if you don't let the American companies import labor then that company may decide it should move to where labor is cheap, which would you prefer?
It's only greed if you look at it from the perspective of the us worker. For the guy with the HB-1 visa its a great use of his skill and you better believe that he is getting paid more then he was back home otherwise he wouldn't of bothered to apply for one of the very few slots available. Why is his future worth any less then yours?
I don't see why they should pay more for your services when someone is willing to do it for less. The company is the one suffering if they are missing adequate skill sets for what the task demands. I really don't understand why a company should "hire locally" first when its not in its best interest to do so.
Wouldn't increasing the gas tax thereby further increasing the value of low gas mileage vehicle be preferable? I mean doesn't this just help the pocket book of SUV driving suburbanites vs hybrid driving people?
I love waterloo, I decided to stay here after I got my university degree there. It's really nice to have an office with trees outside. It's only an hour away from Toronto, and it has a very large Asian community so the food here is great and varied. And despite what you think we are one of the premier Math and Computer science school in North America, we compete with MIT for contests.
'unprecedented expansion' of the agency's authority that would have 'a profound effect on virtually every sector of the economy,' touching 'every household in the land.'.
Isn't this exactly what we need for the EPA to be capable of doing? it might be time to expand the EPA's power significantly then.
or they were sent there because Americans were paying 1000$ per person for Pakistani's to turn over "Al-Queda" to them or because they were a journalist for Al Jazeera or because they took a connecting flight through the US... Very, very few people in gitmo have been convicted of anything...
The problem isn't that an average person can understand what they're voting for, it's that you have to be clear to a really dumb person, because they can vote too. If your machine is too complicated for half the people you don't have a fair election.
Apparently Noam Chomsky was also a moderator on that facebook group. It would be really interesting if he was pulled into this. Really the problem seems to be the injunction on the entire site instead of the specific documents.
James Randy Swift is offering 1 million dollar to show that they can accuratly dowse. I would like to assume that anyone actually able to do it would have claimed the prize. The fact that no one can replicate it in a controlled setting makes claim that it is possible dubious at best.
The number of comments supporting dowsing rods based on anecdotal evidence on the article page makes me realize that we have a lot of work to do before anything like an educated majority will happen.
Except you cannot be legaly obliged to create documents that incriminate yourself and the court is contending that since the IP's are stored in RAM however briefly this does not constitute creating a new document by logging those IP's. Which is twisted since RAM is not "stored" by definition.
It forces Torrentspy to create documentation that was not there initially. You can't make some create documents to incriminate themselves. The RIAA argument is that they are not creating documents since they are stored in RAM. The problem is that RAM is not storage and because of the Judge's lack of understanding of the technology gave a faulty verdict. Being able to log something cannot force you to log it.
They are arguing that an IP is not a unique identifier especially on university networks. Also that the discovery process can only occur after the people have been identified and not before so that looking at the IP traces cannot be done before they are notified. The first part may be of some help if you are using a router or sharing your connections but the second part could be very interresting as it would imply that the RIAA has no right to check your IP until you are notified so they would lose their enforcement power and have to rely on the police to do the work.
The problem with the RIAA is that it has very questionable practices in regards to its sending subpeona's and when it sues people not that piracy is right.
The problem is that it believes itself to be a police force with powers to investigate and aprehend criminals. It does not.
However that does not mean that piracy is ok. It only means that evil corporations are evil. While you may argue that information wants to be free and copyrights are badly flawed that does not mean your piracy is not against the law. It's the practice of the RIAA that are unlawful not its intent.
Yeah sorry, I didn't bother to RTFA until after i posted because I thought the idea of someone constantly refreshing the page to obtain free songs. As for the cap I think it would be a neat experiment if they didn't cap it for how much people are willing to pay for DRM free content. Also it would work without capping if the song dropped a bit of value over time as well.
I for one plan on using my first post skill by downloading as many songs for free legaly as possible. But seriously after they reach over 0.99$ who is going to ever buy that song from them again?
I would be happy to have a credit freeze on all my accounts. Borrowing money is a horrible system. It works for starting a business or a mortage on a house but all the little scams like car loans and furniture store and such only encourage people to live beyond their means. Paying cash for those kinds of things is so much cheaper. Debt is a form of slavery, your no longer working for money your working so they won't take your things away. It makes it so the credit card company owns you. Sure you can be good with a credit card but they do everything in their power to make you fall in that trap so that they can milk as much money from you as possible.
I don't trust the banks to secure their data or use it in non malicious ways. They don't trust me to be able to secure my computer properly. I also don't trust the connection between my computer and their servers to be completly secure. All of these have reasons not to trust each other since all of these have failed at some point or another. I think i'll stick to ATM's for my needs. At least if it fails it's their hardware that's getting blamed and not mine.
I'm sorry but are you seriously this conceited. If you believe you own the right for anyone to call their software open source you are sadly mistaken. You didn't write THE open source definition you wrote YOUR open source definition. People do not have to agree with you. The use of open and free to describe the kind of software people want to write was a poorly chosen one to begin with. The terms are very confusing when people hear free they usually think free as in beer. Which is why it was changed to open source. The problem with your arguments is that the freedoms associated with open source are defined by their license so that some open source projects are more open sourced then others. BSD licenses are much different then GPL licenses. I don't see why any organisation needs to take control of what is allowed to call itself open source. Like any software you have to read the license and see if you agree with the terms their. If you don't like the terms don't buy the software. Don't use semantics to force an unescessary check to buy from your foundation.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess don't feed the troll would probably apply here but if you don't let the American companies import labor then that company may decide it should move to where labor is cheap, which would you prefer?
It's only greed if you look at it from the perspective of the us worker. For the guy with the HB-1 visa its a great use of his skill and you better believe that he is getting paid more then he was back home otherwise he wouldn't of bothered to apply for one of the very few slots available. Why is his future worth any less then yours?
I don't see why they should pay more for your services when someone is willing to do it for less. The company is the one suffering if they are missing adequate skill sets for what the task demands. I really don't understand why a company should "hire locally" first when its not in its best interest to do so.
Its great to know that you don't value your rights and freedom enough that you are not willing to feel slight discomfort to protect them...
If doctors were always listened to there would be no obese people since they are always told to exercise and eat healtier.
Wouldn't increasing the gas tax thereby further increasing the value of low gas mileage vehicle be preferable? I mean doesn't this just help the pocket book of SUV driving suburbanites vs hybrid driving people?
Those witness stand chairs are bolted down right?
I love waterloo, I decided to stay here after I got my university degree there. It's really nice to have an office with trees outside. It's only an hour away from Toronto, and it has a very large Asian community so the food here is great and varied. And despite what you think we are one of the premier Math and Computer science school in North America, we compete with MIT for contests.
'unprecedented expansion' of the agency's authority that would have 'a profound effect on virtually every sector of the economy,' touching 'every household in the land.'.
Isn't this exactly what we need for the EPA to be capable of doing? it might be time to expand the EPA's power significantly then.
or they were sent there because Americans were paying 1000$ per person for Pakistani's to turn over "Al-Queda" to them or because they were a journalist for Al Jazeera or because they took a connecting flight through the US... Very, very few people in gitmo have been convicted of anything...
The problem isn't that an average person can understand what they're voting for, it's that you have to be clear to a really dumb person, because they can vote too. If your machine is too complicated for half the people you don't have a fair election.
Apparently Noam Chomsky was also a moderator on that facebook group. It would be really interesting if he was pulled into this. Really the problem seems to be the injunction on the entire site instead of the specific documents.
James Randy Swift is offering 1 million dollar to show that they can accuratly dowse. I would like to assume that anyone actually able to do it would have claimed the prize. The fact that no one can replicate it in a controlled setting makes claim that it is possible dubious at best.
The number of comments supporting dowsing rods based on anecdotal evidence on the article page makes me realize that we have a lot of work to do before anything like an educated majority will happen.
If a law had no people complaining about it, wouldn't that law be fair and just?
Couldn't some of that 250 000 just people not bothering activating them or planning on giving them away as christmass gifts or whatnot.
Except you cannot be legaly obliged to create documents that incriminate yourself and the court is contending that since the IP's are stored in RAM however briefly this does not constitute creating a new document by logging those IP's. Which is twisted since RAM is not "stored" by definition.
It forces Torrentspy to create documentation that was not there initially. You can't make some create documents to incriminate themselves. The RIAA argument is that they are not creating documents since they are stored in RAM. The problem is that RAM is not storage and because of the Judge's lack of understanding of the technology gave a faulty verdict. Being able to log something cannot force you to log it.
They are arguing that an IP is not a unique identifier especially on university networks. Also that the discovery process can only occur after the people have been identified and not before so that looking at the IP traces cannot be done before they are notified. The first part may be of some help if you are using a router or sharing your connections but the second part could be very interresting as it would imply that the RIAA has no right to check your IP until you are notified so they would lose their enforcement power and have to rely on the police to do the work.
The problem with the RIAA is that it has very questionable practices in regards to its sending subpeona's and when it sues people not that piracy is right.
The problem is that it believes itself to be a police force with powers to investigate and aprehend criminals. It does not.
However that does not mean that piracy is ok. It only means that evil corporations are evil. While you may argue that information wants to be free and copyrights are badly flawed that does not mean your piracy is not against the law. It's the practice of the RIAA that are unlawful not its intent.
Yeah sorry, I didn't bother to RTFA until after i posted because I thought the idea of someone constantly refreshing the page to obtain free songs. As for the cap I think it would be a neat experiment if they didn't cap it for how much people are willing to pay for DRM free content. Also it would work without capping if the song dropped a bit of value over time as well.
I for one plan on using my first post skill by downloading as many songs for free legaly as possible. But seriously after they reach over 0.99$ who is going to ever buy that song from them again?
I would be happy to have a credit freeze on all my accounts. Borrowing money is a horrible system. It works for starting a business or a mortage on a house but all the little scams like car loans and furniture store and such only encourage people to live beyond their means. Paying cash for those kinds of things is so much cheaper. Debt is a form of slavery, your no longer working for money your working so they won't take your things away. It makes it so the credit card company owns you. Sure you can be good with a credit card but they do everything in their power to make you fall in that trap so that they can milk as much money from you as possible.
I don't trust the banks to secure their data or use it in non malicious ways. They don't trust me to be able to secure my computer properly. I also don't trust the connection between my computer and their servers to be completly secure. All of these have reasons not to trust each other since all of these have failed at some point or another. I think i'll stick to ATM's for my needs. At least if it fails it's their hardware that's getting blamed and not mine.
I'm sorry but are you seriously this conceited. If you believe you own the right for anyone to call their software open source you are sadly mistaken. You didn't write THE open source definition you wrote YOUR open source definition. People do not have to agree with you. The use of open and free to describe the kind of software people want to write was a poorly chosen one to begin with. The terms are very confusing when people hear free they usually think free as in beer. Which is why it was changed to open source. The problem with your arguments is that the freedoms associated with open source are defined by their license so that some open source projects are more open sourced then others. BSD licenses are much different then GPL licenses. I don't see why any organisation needs to take control of what is allowed to call itself open source. Like any software you have to read the license and see if you agree with the terms their. If you don't like the terms don't buy the software. Don't use semantics to force an unescessary check to buy from your foundation.