This entire discussion sounds so much like the ones on self censorship with regards to the government/other evil entity listening in on our conversations. You change your behaviour on the mere suspicion that something could happend, which is a really bad thing. That way the red-team wins on walk-over.
In this specific case, people fail to pursue the american dream, of creating value for themselves and society on the basis that a company they used to work for might go after them in court.
Does anyone know if/how often lawsuits like this actually does happend to real people? What US states enforce non-compete clauses without any compensation to the signee?
More than one-third said torture was acceptable under some conditions, and fewer than half said they would report a colleague for unethical [battlefield] behavior.
If this is the reason for using robots instead of human soldiers, we should also get Robo-Rumsfelts and Robo-Cheneys.
2. My advice to you is that you believe everything your read on slashdot and that you act on it.
Should this advice cause you to end up dead or in jail, your family can take comfort in the fact that lying and giving terrible advice like this on a public website, is still not illegal in the free world.
You are obviously and intelligent guy with morals, but I hope to think this is true for me to.
I have turned away customers whom I do not wish to be associated with and have also walked away from money on the table, when things seem forced or when you just feel something is "off".
Regarding my accused fraudulent behaviour, I would not send the customer a credit invoice simply because this would mean that they now have overpaid even more. The invoice is just U-OWE-ME documentation. The money sent should match the documentation or one of the parties now owe the other guy some money. The paperwork must balance the real money and if you have too much money in the bankaccount, there will simply be some other account in your bookkeeping that has increased, showing that you now owe your customer.
I would never cash a check this way, in part because it is inefficent and we only deal with direct bank transfers, but more importantly because something is obviously wrong here. Still, A long time ago, when transactions took several days, I have had customers (old trusted japanese company) who overpaid us. I then contacted them, told them of the situation and was told "the next time we buy something, we will pay as much less as you now received in surplus". It is kind of like being the bank for this customer.
More like 30 seconds to boot + another 29:30 taking a coffee break and chatting with coworkers.
Why would anyone stare at their computer screens while the machine is booting and you are not even paid to do it?
If people really are that lazy as this spin-doctor/attorney Richard Rosenblatt (from TFA) is making them out to be... Why not fire them? If employees where really this lazy, wouldn't you expect them to at least be consistent in their personalities and not just confine their lazyness to the first unpaid 30 minutes of the day? If they really where this lazy, I would expect them to waste a couple of hours in the morning and some in the afternoon as well, when they where at least getting paid.
Trust in paper documents seems to be lagging way behind the ability to forge them. How hard is it to scan/photoshop/print a utility bill these days?
I would say very hard.
Let me present to you, the HP PSC 2355, combined printer/scanner/hairdrier.
It won't scan unless I have toner in the printer. In addition, some errors present themselves, requiring you to press the ok button. Once you do this, it presents the same info again, requiring you to press the ok button...
The HP PSC 2355: "you just can't reason with it, and it simply will not stop until you are dead"
If someone simply lies to you and rips you off, that's not a "con". That's just fraud. If you are careful, you can avoid most fraud, but "cons" always rely on greed.
Although english isn't my first language, I suspect that fraud is a legal term and that "con" is just another word for an elaborate trick. In my opinion, nothing to do with greed in the victim, although common.
I have two examples of "honesty cons" I've seen myself:
* A girl approached us at Liverpool trainstation, very upset, claiming that her jealous boyfriend had left her stranded in the city without any money. She asked for a pound or two in order to call her dad. I told her I could make the call for her, but strangely she lost interest in us. Several hours later, as we where going back to Manchester, I saw this unfortunate girl again, and she was still trying to "call her dad". Interestingly enough, she did not recognize us from before and asked again.
* When I was food shopping, a man asked me very politely for some money for his hungry kids. He was new to the country, the social office had messed up his payment and their office was now closed. (The horrible thing about this type of lie is that it leeches on peoples kindness, making society worse.) Even though a part of me actually believed him, I did not give him any money because I thought it was a con. Later I saw the same guy leaving with some really crappy expensive ready made kidsfood and a box of cigarettes. Had he bought flour, eggs, sugar and yeast he could have feed the family for a week for the same amount of money. I'm still not sure if it was a trick or if he was just really stupid. Either way he deserves death, for lying and killing my trust or for buying cigarettes when his kids are starving.
If you want to make the sale so badly that you'll take the wrong payment just because the buyer is in a hurry... ask the IRS how honest you are in your accounting and bookkeeping. It's not honest to knowingly sell a $10 thing for $100 now and "fix it later."
You don't know what you are talking about. Do you honestly believe that the IRS would mind if your customers pays you too much? If you pay back the surplus amount, nothing is wrong in your books. Do you think the IRS would drag you to jail if I sent $1000 to your bank account for no reason?
I actually run a business and as long as your transactions are documented you are in the clear with the tax authorities. Basically, you would owe the overshooting amount to this customer in your own records. Still, any respectable business owner would repay overpayments when discovered. Regardless if you have any moral or not, the customer in question would discover this himself later and would have lost any trust he had in you, for not letting him know of his mistake.
The problem is that if you only force them to buy heavier equipment, they will just increase taxes and people will have to pay even more to be spied upon.
I believe a working solution must force them to use a silly amount of manpower since they have "an unlimited supply of money".
Reverse spam (reason):
As the cost of listening in on private communication is getting lowerer, we are seeing an effect similar to what we saw when mass-communication was made simple and cheap by email. The marginal cost of listening in on you as well, is close to zero, just as the cost of sending an additional email is close to zero for a spammer who has already sent a large amount of spam.
When that cost is sufficiently low, government has no reason to abstain from listening in. After all, if you look at every individual, you are bound to cover every criminal/hindu/terrorist/addict/pedofile/political opponent/whatever voter negative phrase.
We need to raise that cost in terms of the labour required. If they can not automate it, they will be forced to focus on the real enemies.
You do make some really interesting points. Let me append a little story about behavioural change that has to do with similar principles, but the punishment in this story is completly different, being financial rather than physical.
I read a case of an Israeli daycare center where some parents on occation picked up their twaddlers 30 minutes late, allways apologizing (but it was still a randomly reoccuring event).
The daycare came up with the great idea of placing an extra fee for people who picked up their kids late. This idea worked and very few parents where ever late.
Since the problem was solved, the daycare center now removed the late fee and... many more parents than initially had, now started picking up ther kids late. What had happened? Previously the parents hurried in order not to inconvenience others. Now they knew that picking up their kid late was comparable to a small fee which they could put up with since it did not happend that often. The parents had been taught to focus on monetary inconvenience instead the people taking care of their kids.
I see similarities to teaching kids that they will get beaten if they do something wrong, instead of teaching them correct values in that they see what is right and what is wrong. One technique will only work when someone is watching.
Feel free to argue as long as you don't actually do it.
Doesn't anyone find it funny that in a society where you are not allowed to vote in an election, you are not allowed to have sex and you are not allowed to drink alcohol.... (wait for it)... you should be considered mature enough to handle tools of death? I am of course only talking about cars:-)
What happens when you are in an awful car accident and need to free your family?
So you think that ones capacity to cope with mutilated corpses is higher if one is beaten as a child? Anyone, regardless of childhood would either deal with the situation or natural selection would take out his/her blood line.
Besides, I know from my military service that it is often completely unexpected people who "step up to the plate" when things do get serious.
True story to prove my point
At one time, a guy in my platoon caught fire. Most people just froze including all members of the rough crowd (people with the proposed type of childhood beatings and who enjoyed guns just a little bit more than was healthy). Afterwards large parts of the company talked about the incident and after a while, it seemed like an entire football team had been involved in helping out. We where only two people involved. What was really interesting is that peoples self images, made them imagine that they had been involved in saving this guy. It was not just PR. They actually belived they had been involved. It was like their minds could not cope with them not helping out, so in their minds they had helped out. Still, the two of us who did put out the fire, both saw some of these people sitting perhaps 5 meters away after the fire was out and things got a bit less stressed. What they did before the fire was out is unclear to me, but they where not helping us put out the fire.
My point is that you never know who is going to cope with a situation. Had it been something else, perhaps I would have frozen, but in this situation I acted. I was never beaten as a child, but I coped a whole lot better than most other people on site.
I realize that this is just a single data point, but you offered none.
Up to a certain age, spanking(used sparingly as appropriate) shows the misbehaver that savage behavior will be responded to with savage behavior.
Why limit yourself when it comes to age? Would you not appreciate the learning experience of being beaten by someone who had your best in mind? If it is good for the kids, it is good for everyone.
Please explain why adults should not be beaten when misbehaving. Why this artificial age limit?
So after you get your car back from the garage, you would be prepared for it to lock the breaks once you reach 50 mph?
Don't answer, I know you would have read all about it in the manual that you downloaded from the garages website.
My point (besides from wanting to make a stretched car analogy) is that for a home user, an update usually only tightens security, with other changes being rare. During all the time I've used IP networks I have never even heard of this crappy type of behaviour (in a router that is:-). I would not have expected it, but then again I did not expect the spanish inquisition either.
ADSL24(#2 from the top of the list) received 922 votes with an average rating of 9.40
Orange received 973 votes with an average rating of 4.05
Sky Broadband received 1179 with an average rating of 7.43
The list does show that Orange is crappier than most others on the list.
Slashdot Mirror
This entire discussion sounds so much like the ones on self censorship with regards to the government/other evil entity listening in on our conversations. You change your behaviour on the mere suspicion that something could happend, which is a really bad thing. That way the red-team wins on walk-over.
In this specific case, people fail to pursue the american dream, of creating value for themselves and society on the basis that a company they used to work for might go after them in court.
Does anyone know if/how often lawsuits like this actually does happend to real people? What US states enforce non-compete clauses without any compensation to the signee?
More than one-third said torture was acceptable under some conditions, and fewer than half said they would report a colleague for unethical [battlefield] behavior.
If this is the reason for using robots instead of human soldiers, we should also get Robo-Rumsfelts and Robo-Cheneys.
Dr WHOs on first base?
WHO?
That's the man's name.
1. I am a lawyer.
2. My advice to you is that you believe everything your read on slashdot and that you act on it.
Should this advice cause you to end up dead or in jail, your family can take comfort in the fact that lying and giving terrible advice like this on a public website, is still not illegal in the free world.
You are obviously and intelligent guy with morals, but I hope to think this is true for me to.
I have turned away customers whom I do not wish to be associated with and have also walked away from money on the table, when things seem forced or when you just feel something is "off".
Regarding my accused fraudulent behaviour, I would not send the customer a credit invoice simply because this would mean that they now have overpaid even more. The invoice is just U-OWE-ME documentation. The money sent should match the documentation or one of the parties now owe the other guy some money. The paperwork must balance the real money and if you have too much money in the bankaccount, there will simply be some other account in your bookkeeping that has increased, showing that you now owe your customer.
I would never cash a check this way, in part because it is inefficent and we only deal with direct bank transfers, but more importantly because something is obviously wrong here. Still, A long time ago, when transactions took several days, I have had customers (old trusted japanese company) who overpaid us. I then contacted them, told them of the situation and was told "the next time we buy something, we will pay as much less as you now received in surplus". It is kind of like being the bank for this customer.
The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to the lazy.
Is this what your father used to do?
More like 30 seconds to boot + another 29:30 taking a coffee break and chatting with coworkers.
Why would anyone stare at their computer screens while the machine is booting and you are not even paid to do it?
If people really are that lazy as this spin-doctor/attorney Richard Rosenblatt (from TFA) is making them out to be... Why not fire them? If employees where really this lazy, wouldn't you expect them to at least be consistent in their personalities and not just confine their lazyness to the first unpaid 30 minutes of the day? If they really where this lazy, I would expect them to waste a couple of hours in the morning and some in the afternoon as well, when they where at least getting paid.
They let ships in elevators these days?
Yes they do. Now you know the reason for the expression:
"I won't go down with this ship".
Trust in paper documents seems to be lagging way behind the ability to forge them. How hard is it to scan/photoshop/print a utility bill these days?
I would say very hard.
Let me present to you, the HP PSC 2355, combined printer/scanner/hairdrier.
It won't scan unless I have toner in the printer. In addition, some errors present themselves, requiring you to press the ok button. Once you do this, it presents the same info again, requiring you to press the ok button...
The HP PSC 2355: "you just can't reason with it, and it simply will not stop until you are dead"
If someone simply lies to you and rips you off, that's not a "con". That's just fraud. If you are careful, you can avoid most fraud, but "cons" always rely on greed.
Although english isn't my first language, I suspect that fraud is a legal term and that "con" is just another word for an elaborate trick. In my opinion, nothing to do with greed in the victim, although common.
I have two examples of "honesty cons" I've seen myself:
* A girl approached us at Liverpool trainstation, very upset, claiming that her jealous boyfriend had left her stranded in the city without any money. She asked for a pound or two in order to call her dad. I told her I could make the call for her, but strangely she lost interest in us. Several hours later, as we where going back to Manchester, I saw this unfortunate girl again, and she was still trying to "call her dad". Interestingly enough, she did not recognize us from before and asked again.
* When I was food shopping, a man asked me very politely for some money for his hungry kids. He was new to the country, the social office had messed up his payment and their office was now closed. (The horrible thing about this type of lie is that it leeches on peoples kindness, making society worse.) Even though a part of me actually believed him, I did not give him any money because I thought it was a con. Later I saw the same guy leaving with some really crappy expensive ready made kidsfood and a box of cigarettes. Had he bought flour, eggs, sugar and yeast he could have feed the family for a week for the same amount of money. I'm still not sure if it was a trick or if he was just really stupid. Either way he deserves death, for lying and killing my trust or for buying cigarettes when his kids are starving.
If you want to make the sale so badly that you'll take the wrong payment just because the buyer is in a hurry... ask the IRS how honest you are in your accounting and bookkeeping. It's not honest to knowingly sell a $10 thing for $100 now and "fix it later."
You don't know what you are talking about. Do you honestly believe that the IRS would mind if your customers pays you too much? If you pay back the surplus amount, nothing is wrong in your books. Do you think the IRS would drag you to jail if I sent $1000 to your bank account for no reason?
I actually run a business and as long as your transactions are documented you are in the clear with the tax authorities. Basically, you would owe the overshooting amount to this customer in your own records. Still, any respectable business owner would repay overpayments when discovered. Regardless if you have any moral or not, the customer in question would discover this himself later and would have lost any trust he had in you, for not letting him know of his mistake.
I was so in the tinfoil hat mindset, I happened to post anonymously.
They really ship elevators in a box ?
Yes, but only ship-elevators.
Please explain how you make money selling something that others will inevitably give away (legally) for free.
Are you talking about prostitution or software? Either way one answer is branding.
How about the Pirate Bay?
Running a yellow pages service for torrents is still not illegal in the free world.
However, I'm quite sure that the guys running TPB would be arrested should they ever visit the USA.
Stop caring, and they will stop buggin'.
That is just what they'll be expecting!
"What they are saying is that evolution is not entirely random, as Darwin believed"
Survival of the fittest is not random.
Regarding the discovery, it sounds like normal evolution applied to evolution -> better adaptability -> survival.
The problem is that if you only force them to buy heavier equipment, they will just increase taxes and people will have to pay even more to be spied upon.
I believe a working solution must force them to use a silly amount of manpower since they have "an unlimited supply of money".
Reverse spam (reason):
As the cost of listening in on private communication is getting lowerer, we are seeing an effect similar to what we saw when mass-communication was made simple and cheap by email. The marginal cost of listening in on you as well, is close to zero, just as the cost of sending an additional email is close to zero for a spammer who has already sent a large amount of spam.
When that cost is sufficiently low, government has no reason to abstain from listening in. After all, if you look at every individual, you are bound to cover every criminal/hindu/terrorist/addict/pedofile/political opponent/whatever voter negative phrase.
We need to raise that cost in terms of the labour required. If they can not automate it, they will be forced to focus on the real enemies.
You do make some really interesting points. Let me append a little story about behavioural change that has to do with similar principles, but the punishment in this story is completly different, being financial rather than physical.
I read a case of an Israeli daycare center where some parents on occation picked up their twaddlers 30 minutes late, allways apologizing (but it was still a randomly reoccuring event).
The daycare came up with the great idea of placing an extra fee for people who picked up their kids late. This idea worked and very few parents where ever late.
Since the problem was solved, the daycare center now removed the late fee and... many more parents than initially had, now started picking up ther kids late. What had happened? Previously the parents hurried in order not to inconvenience others. Now they knew that picking up their kid late was comparable to a small fee which they could put up with since it did not happend that often. The parents had been taught to focus on monetary inconvenience instead the people taking care of their kids.
I see similarities to teaching kids that they will get beaten if they do something wrong, instead of teaching them correct values in that they see what is right and what is wrong. One technique will only work when someone is watching.
Feel free to argue as long as you don't actually do it.
Doesn't anyone find it funny that in a society where you are not allowed to vote in an election, you are not allowed to have sex and you are not allowed to drink alcohol.... (wait for it)... you should be considered mature enough to handle tools of death? I am of course only talking about cars :-)
What happens when you are in an awful car accident and need to free your family?
So you think that ones capacity to cope with mutilated corpses is higher if one is beaten as a child? Anyone, regardless of childhood would either deal with the situation or natural selection would take out his/her blood line.
Besides, I know from my military service that it is often completely unexpected people who "step up to the plate" when things do get serious.
True story to prove my point
At one time, a guy in my platoon caught fire. Most people just froze including all members of the rough crowd (people with the proposed type of childhood beatings and who enjoyed guns just a little bit more than was healthy). Afterwards large parts of the company talked about the incident and after a while, it seemed like an entire football team had been involved in helping out. We where only two people involved. What was really interesting is that peoples self images, made them imagine that they had been involved in saving this guy. It was not just PR. They actually belived they had been involved. It was like their minds could not cope with them not helping out, so in their minds they had helped out. Still, the two of us who did put out the fire, both saw some of these people sitting perhaps 5 meters away after the fire was out and things got a bit less stressed. What they did before the fire was out is unclear to me, but they where not helping us put out the fire.
My point is that you never know who is going to cope with a situation. Had it been something else, perhaps I would have frozen, but in this situation I acted. I was never beaten as a child, but I coped a whole lot better than most other people on site.
I realize that this is just a single data point, but you offered none.
Up to a certain age, spanking(used sparingly as appropriate) shows the misbehaver that savage behavior will be responded to with savage behavior.
Why limit yourself when it comes to age? Would you not appreciate the learning experience of being beaten by someone who had your best in mind? If it is good for the kids, it is good for everyone.
Please explain why adults should not be beaten when misbehaving. Why this artificial age limit?
So after you get your car back from the garage, you would be prepared for it to lock the breaks once you reach 50 mph?
:-). I would not have expected it, but then again I did not expect the spanish inquisition either.
Don't answer, I know you would have read all about it in the manual that you downloaded from the garages website.
My point (besides from wanting to make a stretched car analogy) is that for a home user, an update usually only tightens security, with other changes being rare. During all the time I've used IP networks I have never even heard of this crappy type of behaviour (in a router that is
I just checked the list against your theory:
ADSL24(#2 from the top of the list) received 922 votes with an average rating of 9.40
Orange received 973 votes with an average rating of 4.05
Sky Broadband received 1179 with an average rating of 7.43
The list does show that Orange is crappier than most others on the list.