Well I don't live in America either, so apparently you're guilty of exactly the same assumption. I thought you were talking about iTunes, like TFA and basically everybody else. Or are we all just supposed to guess at the private little war you're having in your head?
...and you know what the biggest problem is with end users, besides the lack of comments? Spaghetti code. Have you ever TRIED to unravel a strand of DNA?
I think we need to rewrite users from the ground up, get rid of all the legacy code, institute better security measures and coding practices from SQUARE ONE. Only THEN will open source software gain ground on the desktop.
Also, as a side note, we need to make sure that the human genome conforms to the LKML coding style, because once end users are accepted into the kernel, guess who has the responsibility to maintain them for the next 20 years? Too many people think that as soon as the Kernel programmers allow them to be born they can just give up trying to improve this contribution to LINUX. This attitude needs to be corrected.
Remember: LINUX kernel programmers are doing you a favour, and LINUX is free and open source and these people are donating their time. If you don't like their end user requirements, there is nothing preventing you from forking off into the afterlife.
"It was a Remembrance Day (ww2) coin.. why would this strike anyone as suspicious? As for the "man-made" bit.. well, it's a coin.. who'd they expect made it?"
America ALWAYS has reason to be suspicious, because America has Enemies. And they aren't just ordinary, run-of-the-mill enemies, either. They are extremely sophisticated Enemies that justify constant fear that is so intense that no amount of say comical-like fumbling like mistaking coins for transmitters or constitutional rights for constitutional suggestions, NONE of it is inexcusable. Because we must always remember, and furthermore, NEVER forget, that THEY know that we know that the government knows that SPIES know, that nobody would EVER slap a big honkin' red decal on the exact spot where they had implanted their supersecret nanotech listening devices. Therefore, it is THE perfect cover! 'Au revoila!' as the Canadians say. Y'see, Chief? I got right into the culture... disappeared... went native... melted away... never even knew I was there.
To catch a spy, you have to think like a spy..... No? Wouldyoubelieve... well-intentioned buffoon?
"Fred Anderson has a long-standing impeccable reputation and is widely regarded as one of the most ethical CFO's in the nation whose extraordinary contributions to Apple's success during his eight-year tenure are unquestioned. He is accurately recognized by many current and former Apple employees and throughout the industry as a man of exceptional ability, achievement and integrity.
"With respect to today's announced settlement by the SEC of its complaint against him, Fred is pleased to put this matter behind him.
"In the settlement Fred makes no admission or denial of the claims by the SEC. The terms of the settlement permit Fred to continue to act as an officer or director of public companies and do not bar him from practicing before the SEC. The claims against him also do not include fraud under the two antifraud provisions of the securities laws requiring proof of knowing misconduct.
"With respect to the Executive Team grant that is the subject of the complaint against him:
* Fred was told by Steve Jobs in late January 2001 that Mr. Jobs had the agreement of the Board of Directors for the Executive Team grant on January 2, 2001. At the time Mr. Jobs provided Fred this assurance, Fred cautioned Mr. Jobs that the Executive Team grant would have to be priced based on the date of the actual Board agreement or there could be an accounting charge. He further advised Mr. Jobs that the Board would have to confirm its prior approval in a legally satisfactory method. He was told by Mr. Jobs that the Board had given its prior approval and the Board would verify it. Fred relied on these statements by Mr. Jobs and from them concluded the grant was being properly handled.
* Fred understood that, under Apple's stock option plan and accounting rules at the time, a grant date could be moved to a later date than the date of the actual grant decision and that there would be no compensation expense as long as the stock price on the new date was higher than the price on the original date. Apple's 1998 Executive Officer Stock Option Plan provided in Section 16 that 'The date of grant of an Option...shall be, for all purposes, the date on which the Administrator (in this case the Board) makes the determination granting such Option...or such later date as is determined by the Administrator '. Mr. Anderson understood that the date of grant was to be moved forward pursuant to this provision from January 2 to January 17 to avoid any appearance of impropriety that might arise from a grant awarded just prior to the stock price rise that resulted from the 2001 MacWorld exhibition and Mr. Job's keynote speech at the exhibition on January 9. He further understood that the January 17 date was selected by Mr. Jobs and Ms. Nancy Heinen, the former General Counsel, and that the stock price on January 17 was higher than the price on January 2.
* Finally, Mr. Anderson understood that the Board of Directors, which consisted of sophisticated corporate executives of national stature, including the former Chief Financial Officer of IBM, verified the January 17 date by signing in early February 2001 a Unanimous Written Consent (UWC) with an effective date of January 17. It now appears the Board may not have given the necessary prior approval to the grants, contrary to what Mr. Anderson understood from Mr. Jobs and from the Board's signing of the UWC with an effective date of January 17.
"Mr. Anderson has agreed to pay disgorgement, the difference in the value of the stock between the January 17 date and the date in early February when the UWC was signed by the Board.
"With respect to the October 2001 grant to Mr. Jobs that is also the subject of the complaint, Fred had virtually no involve
Microsoft has responded to the latest round of EU requests by asking how much the EU thinks they should charge for Windows Server Protocols. Sarcastic bastards.
Slashdot Mirror
Well I don't live in America either, so apparently you're guilty of exactly the same assumption. I thought you were talking about iTunes, like TFA and basically everybody else. Or are we all just supposed to guess at the private little war you're having in your head?
...and you know what the biggest problem is with end users, besides the lack of comments? Spaghetti code. Have you ever TRIED to unravel a strand of DNA? I think we need to rewrite users from the ground up, get rid of all the legacy code, institute better security measures and coding practices from SQUARE ONE. Only THEN will open source software gain ground on the desktop. Also, as a side note, we need to make sure that the human genome conforms to the LKML coding style, because once end users are accepted into the kernel, guess who has the responsibility to maintain them for the next 20 years? Too many people think that as soon as the Kernel programmers allow them to be born they can just give up trying to improve this contribution to LINUX. This attitude needs to be corrected. Remember: LINUX kernel programmers are doing you a favour, and LINUX is free and open source and these people are donating their time. If you don't like their end user requirements, there is nothing preventing you from forking off into the afterlife.
"$30 a disk you fuckers. No sale!" It's $10 a disk. No clue!
"It was a Remembrance Day (ww2) coin.. why would this strike anyone as suspicious? As for the "man-made" bit.. well, it's a coin.. who'd they expect made it?" America ALWAYS has reason to be suspicious, because America has Enemies. And they aren't just ordinary, run-of-the-mill enemies, either. They are extremely sophisticated Enemies that justify constant fear that is so intense that no amount of say comical-like fumbling like mistaking coins for transmitters or constitutional rights for constitutional suggestions, NONE of it is inexcusable. Because we must always remember, and furthermore, NEVER forget, that THEY know that we know that the government knows that SPIES know, that nobody would EVER slap a big honkin' red decal on the exact spot where they had implanted their supersecret nanotech listening devices. Therefore, it is THE perfect cover! 'Au revoila!' as the Canadians say. Y'see, Chief? I got right into the culture ... disappeared ... went native ... melted away ... never even knew I was there.
To catch a spy, you have to think like a spy..... No? Wouldyoubelieve ... well-intentioned buffoon?
"Fred Anderson has a long-standing impeccable reputation and is widely regarded as one of the most ethical CFO's in the nation whose extraordinary contributions to Apple's success during his eight-year tenure are unquestioned. He is accurately recognized by many current and former Apple employees and throughout the industry as a man of exceptional ability, achievement and integrity. "With respect to today's announced settlement by the SEC of its complaint against him, Fred is pleased to put this matter behind him. "In the settlement Fred makes no admission or denial of the claims by the SEC. The terms of the settlement permit Fred to continue to act as an officer or director of public companies and do not bar him from practicing before the SEC. The claims against him also do not include fraud under the two antifraud provisions of the securities laws requiring proof of knowing misconduct. "With respect to the Executive Team grant that is the subject of the complaint against him: * Fred was told by Steve Jobs in late January 2001 that Mr. Jobs had the agreement of the Board of Directors for the Executive Team grant on January 2, 2001. At the time Mr. Jobs provided Fred this assurance, Fred cautioned Mr. Jobs that the Executive Team grant would have to be priced based on the date of the actual Board agreement or there could be an accounting charge. He further advised Mr. Jobs that the Board would have to confirm its prior approval in a legally satisfactory method. He was told by Mr. Jobs that the Board had given its prior approval and the Board would verify it. Fred relied on these statements by Mr. Jobs and from them concluded the grant was being properly handled. * Fred understood that, under Apple's stock option plan and accounting rules at the time, a grant date could be moved to a later date than the date of the actual grant decision and that there would be no compensation expense as long as the stock price on the new date was higher than the price on the original date. Apple's 1998 Executive Officer Stock Option Plan provided in Section 16 that 'The date of grant of an Option...shall be, for all purposes, the date on which the Administrator (in this case the Board) makes the determination granting such Option...or such later date as is determined by the Administrator '. Mr. Anderson understood that the date of grant was to be moved forward pursuant to this provision from January 2 to January 17 to avoid any appearance of impropriety that might arise from a grant awarded just prior to the stock price rise that resulted from the 2001 MacWorld exhibition and Mr. Job's keynote speech at the exhibition on January 9. He further understood that the January 17 date was selected by Mr. Jobs and Ms. Nancy Heinen, the former General Counsel, and that the stock price on January 17 was higher than the price on January 2. * Finally, Mr. Anderson understood that the Board of Directors, which consisted of sophisticated corporate executives of national stature, including the former Chief Financial Officer of IBM, verified the January 17 date by signing in early February 2001 a Unanimous Written Consent (UWC) with an effective date of January 17. It now appears the Board may not have given the necessary prior approval to the grants, contrary to what Mr. Anderson understood from Mr. Jobs and from the Board's signing of the UWC with an effective date of January 17. "Mr. Anderson has agreed to pay disgorgement, the difference in the value of the stock between the January 17 date and the date in early February when the UWC was signed by the Board. "With respect to the October 2001 grant to Mr. Jobs that is also the subject of the complaint, Fred had virtually no involve