The point was, either way you aren't going to get arrested.
And there are legitimate causes for concern if you are irradiated, and while you may not be breaking the law there is a possibility that you are oblivious to it, in which case you should be informed.
"Do you know that you're irradiated?" is a question I'd like to have asked of me if I didn't know i was irradiated.
So, as a member of the "flying public", you have reduced your expenditure towards that form of travel because of the scanners, and you are simultaneously claiming that the "flying public" doesn't care about scanners?
Corporations stand to lose business if they gain a reputation of being too invasive. The TSA, being a government agency does not directly rely on the people they infringe on for income. also, the TSA has managed to insert itself into every single commercial airport in the US.
Competition is a good thing, especially in this case.
This is a likewise naive remark, both legally and from a business perspective. Nothing in an NDA (at least any decent document -- paper unfortunately doesn't refuse ink, and a lot of people can put together a ridiculous argument and stamp it at the top with NDA) would create any cause of action. As to a green light to sue, once again paper doesn't refuse ink, alas -- one doesn't need a document to sue for misappropriation, common law or statutory.
My point is, any contract can give both parties grounds to sue (and a likelyhood to win) regardless of whether or not anything malicious or illegal was done.
... regardless of your de facto reservation of rights to steal from them...
So just because I don't want to sign a document that could be used against me maliciously, I'm a thief in your eyes? You just said there are laws that would make my appropriation of someone else's concept illegal. Why should there be anything more than a record of what was told to me?
So just because you might be employed in the future, you should not engage in public discourse now?
If any company specifically poached from non-NDA companies, there are already laws in place to take care of that kind of behaviour. Copyright, trademarks, antitrust, trade secrets.
Someone gets into contact with you because of your programming niche. They probably are going to present ideas that are similar to what you've worked on in the past, based on that assumption. You sign the NDA, giving them a green light to sue you while employed in your niche, because you're working on projects that are very similar to the idea that the NDA covers. It's more of a CYA move than a moralistic thing.
Hell, I wouldn't sign anything unless it gave me something in return. That mortgage, club membership, tax form etc. all present me some sort of utility in exchange of being bound by their terms.
Also, why is being idealistic bad? Compromise is a concept that's existed for quite a long time.
He's not talking about employer-employee relationships, or a business-client relationship... he's talking about signing an NDA before actually doing business is even on the table.
Sorry, but if you'd rather limit your employment options and increase liability without any real monetary recompense, it's just a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
Slashdot Mirror
Pay for the test and stick the bill on the criminal.
Baby step? Do you know what I do for gaming?
TF2 and Minecraft.
Both insanely popular.
YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP.
That's fine, but understand that your use case does not represent the majority of the market.
You should pick up Metroid if you haven't though, I'll let you borrow it and see if... you.. like it...
Until consoles fit in a CD case sized space, that is a stupid suggestion.
"Hey guys, whoever declines a job offer from facebook gets half a mil."
Then it's a contest.
Yes, violations that restrict innovation should be dealt with more harshly.
To be frank, the all-nude Swedish IT shops I've been to don't discriminate based on gender or sexual orientation.
But it is already possible :/
Seven? Talk about a late start!
What did they teach you in kindergarten, long division? *snicker*
Excuse me? A private company which I have no business with is degrading the performance of my communications between myself and another party.
Aren't denial of service attacks like that illegal?
The point was, either way you aren't going to get arrested.
And there are legitimate causes for concern if you are irradiated, and while you may not be breaking the law there is a possibility that you are oblivious to it, in which case you should be informed.
"Do you know that you're irradiated?" is a question I'd like to have asked of me if I didn't know i was irradiated.
So, as a member of the "flying public", you have reduced your expenditure towards that form of travel because of the scanners, and you are simultaneously claiming that the "flying public" doesn't care about scanners?
What?
Corporations stand to lose business if they gain a reputation of being too invasive. The TSA, being a government agency does not directly rely on the people they infringe on for income. also, the TSA has managed to insert itself into every single commercial airport in the US.
Competition is a good thing, especially in this case.
Most people don't have to ask. Out of all the comments I read, only yours had any issue with this.
I meant "they", the Slashdot editors. Just in the summaries of a couple of today's articles:
NASA: http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/04/20/2245215/canadian-bureacracy-cant-answer-simple-question-whats-this-study-with-nasa
DARPA: http://science.slashdot.org/story/12/04/20/2146258/hypersonic-test-aircraft-peeled-apart-after-3-minutes-of-sustained-mach-20-speed
You're being silly. If you're on slashdot, you already have a connection to the internet. There's no reason you can't lookup things you don't know.
Then it was already explained in your comment's GP... It's a mod for a game you hate.
It's pretty common knowledge. They never spell out DARPA or SOPA or NASA, do they?
Slashdot is falling apart with this scheme, you're right. WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!
You missed the internet when WC3 was in it's heyday. Never checked out blizzcon or the like.
You aren't between 19 and 30 i'd guess.
This is a likewise naive remark, both legally and from a business perspective. Nothing in an NDA (at least any decent document -- paper unfortunately doesn't refuse ink, and a lot of people can put together a ridiculous argument and stamp it at the top with NDA) would create any cause of action. As to a green light to sue, once again paper doesn't refuse ink, alas -- one doesn't need a document to sue for misappropriation, common law or statutory.
My point is, any contract can give both parties grounds to sue (and a likelyhood to win) regardless of whether or not anything malicious or illegal was done.
... regardless of your de facto reservation of rights to steal from them...
So just because I don't want to sign a document that could be used against me maliciously, I'm a thief in your eyes? You just said there are laws that would make my appropriation of someone else's concept illegal. Why should there be anything more than a record of what was told to me?
So just because you might be employed in the future, you should not engage in public discourse now?
If any company specifically poached from non-NDA companies, there are already laws in place to take care of that kind of behaviour.
Copyright, trademarks, antitrust, trade secrets.
Someone gets into contact with you because of your programming niche.
They probably are going to present ideas that are similar to what you've worked on in the past, based on that assumption.
You sign the NDA, giving them a green light to sue you while employed in your niche, because you're working on projects that are very similar to the idea that the NDA covers. It's more of a CYA move than a moralistic thing.
Hell, I wouldn't sign anything unless it gave me something in return. That mortgage, club membership, tax form etc. all present me some sort of utility in exchange of being bound by their terms.
Also, why is being idealistic bad? Compromise is a concept that's existed for quite a long time.
He's not talking about employer-employee relationships, or a business-client relationship... he's talking about signing an NDA before actually doing business is even on the table.
Sorry, but if you'd rather limit your employment options and increase liability without any real monetary recompense, it's just a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
I think he lets hundreds of people poke around in his innards.
I'm really not interested, but hey, First Post.