Yes. The thing is, the judge would be charged only with voiding lawsuits that could not win on their face. That is, if everything the plaintiff says is assumed to be true, would it win anything? If the answer is no, the suit goes away. That prevents crap like when someone claimed to be God and that David Copperfield was usurping his divine powers in performance of his tricks. The courts have no jurisdiction over divinity, so the suit goes away. Joe Blow wore a red shirt, so I want $1999! Wearing a red shirt is not a tort, so suit goes away.
OTOH, badco dumped rat poison in the river and my family got sick? Well, it may or may not be true but if shown in court it would result in damages awarded, so it may proceed.
That's a great example of why I think a judge should review any lawsuit before the defendant is even bothered with it. It should be shot down immediately.
Why not? It's supposed to be reasonable secure against such actions. Would you also consider it unreasonable to sue the makers of a "high security lock" that would unlock if you jiggled the door knob?
So how about when I'm at home watching baseball on my time and they expect me to actually answer the phone if they call?
And if they want me to log in using my personal computer and internet connection, do I gain personal ownership of the project?Why not, a portion was developed on my time using my resources.
There is a barrier between work and the rest of one's life. It may be impermeable or permeable. Ever have to work late, come in on a weekend, deal with work emails or calls after hours? It just got permeable. That permeability goes in both directions. That's not so complicated.
You apparently flunked logic. First, he did not claim degrees are useless at all. He said they are unnecessary for programming. He went on to say that he then chose to get 2 degrees to further his knowledge. Indeed, a degree program is a valid way to do that. It is not the only way to do that.
APPROPRIATE regulation. The ban on re-importing drugs already made to FDA specs and exported to another country has no conceivable safety benefit. Particularly when the other country is also in the 1st world and has regulations of it's own similar to ours.
He didn't do A, he didn't use a title to imply for b, and he didn't claim he could fix the thing. He merely offered observations to probably registered engineers for their consideration.
The government never collected tax money for universal healthcare. Obamacare was never claimed to be universal healthcare. It was claimed to expand the availability of health insurance and it did that. Feel free to argue if it was a good value or if it expanded it enough or even if insurance was an appropriate approach to healthcare, but it did what was claimed. The telecoms get heaps of money to implement universal service and have for a long time.
Or he was alleging malpractice on the part of the state employed transportation engineers who never should have signed off on the defective system that fines people for running a red when they did no such thing.
What would actually happen is websites would demand indemnity from the ad networks. Any ad network that wanted to actually push ads to anyone would be forced to accept that term. Then, with the financial burden being on them, they might actually screen the ads they serve.
And that is where the free speech comes in. He has the free speech right to indicate his education and capabilities. What he can't do is PRACTICE engineering in Oregon. That is, he may not offer his services for hire.
If that's all you saw, you must not have wanted to see more. Pretty much all of the telecoms have been taking massive grants and subsidies since the mid '90s to build out universal broadband service. They have yet to actually perform to the level they promised.
As soon as you grab the knife and fork with the intent to perform surgery, you are practicing.
As for traffic lights, actually there *IS* a conspiracy over the length of yellows in many places, especially where there are cameras. Not big conspiracies, a bunch of little ones.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. The thing is, the judge would be charged only with voiding lawsuits that could not win on their face. That is, if everything the plaintiff says is assumed to be true, would it win anything? If the answer is no, the suit goes away. That prevents crap like when someone claimed to be God and that David Copperfield was usurping his divine powers in performance of his tricks. The courts have no jurisdiction over divinity, so the suit goes away. Joe Blow wore a red shirt, so I want $1999! Wearing a red shirt is not a tort, so suit goes away.
OTOH, badco dumped rat poison in the river and my family got sick? Well, it may or may not be true but if shown in court it would result in damages awarded, so it may proceed.
That's a great example of why I think a judge should review any lawsuit before the defendant is even bothered with it. It should be shot down immediately.
Why not? It's supposed to be reasonable secure against such actions. Would you also consider it unreasonable to sue the makers of a "high security lock" that would unlock if you jiggled the door knob?
Reminds me of Robin Williams (as Mork) talking about tipping the waiter.
So how about when I'm at home watching baseball on my time and they expect me to actually answer the phone if they call?
And if they want me to log in using my personal computer and internet connection, do I gain personal ownership of the project?Why not, a portion was developed on my time using my resources.
There is a barrier between work and the rest of one's life. It may be impermeable or permeable. Ever have to work late, come in on a weekend, deal with work emails or calls after hours? It just got permeable. That permeability goes in both directions. That's not so complicated.
H1-Bs to the rescue! It's Bollywood Summer!
You apparently flunked logic. First, he did not claim degrees are useless at all. He said they are unnecessary for programming. He went on to say that he then chose to get 2 degrees to further his knowledge. Indeed, a degree program is a valid way to do that. It is not the only way to do that.
APPROPRIATE regulation. The ban on re-importing drugs already made to FDA specs and exported to another country has no conceivable safety benefit. Particularly when the other country is also in the 1st world and has regulations of it's own similar to ours.
Not a problem. Nationalize the patent and put the manufacture out to bid.
He didn't do A, he didn't use a title to imply for b, and he didn't claim he could fix the thing. He merely offered observations to probably registered engineers for their consideration.
Sounds like a hostile or at least dismal work environment to me. More lord of the flies than a workplace really.
Itr appears that the oregon law relies on the general definition of "practice" it does not itself define it.
The government never collected tax money for universal healthcare. Obamacare was never claimed to be universal healthcare. It was claimed to expand the availability of health insurance and it did that. Feel free to argue if it was a good value or if it expanded it enough or even if insurance was an appropriate approach to healthcare, but it did what was claimed. The telecoms get heaps of money to implement universal service and have for a long time.
OK, have a look at a lawyer's definition then.
Or he was alleging malpractice on the part of the state employed transportation engineers who never should have signed off on the defective system that fines people for running a red when they did no such thing.
What would actually happen is websites would demand indemnity from the ad networks. Any ad network that wanted to actually push ads to anyone would be forced to accept that term. Then, with the financial burden being on them, they might actually screen the ads they serve.
And that is where the free speech comes in. He has the free speech right to indicate his education and capabilities. What he can't do is PRACTICE engineering in Oregon. That is, he may not offer his services for hire.
Who hired him to engineer?
If that's all you saw, you must not have wanted to see more. Pretty much all of the telecoms have been taking massive grants and subsidies since the mid '90s to build out universal broadband service. They have yet to actually perform to the level they promised.
As soon as you grab the knife and fork with the intent to perform surgery, you are practicing.
As for traffic lights, actually there *IS* a conspiracy over the length of yellows in many places, especially where there are cameras. Not big conspiracies, a bunch of little ones.
But not in Oregon. Their law is specifically about practicing while being unregistered.
Practicing requires that you be hired or at least offer your services for hire.. He was not and did not.
That might take a whole other website and a few years time to pile up the many cases of this going back to the mid '90s.
So quick cash grab then.