That is not what normally happens when there is a surplus of workers, normally workers rights and wages just go right out the window when there are too many workers.
Never understood this username=anonymous argument. I do not want to be anonymous on line. And it is for this reason that I prefer to use my username and NOT my real name. First off no real name comes with 1/100 of enough information to make someone using it known. You do not know age, country, state, town, address, and no more then a guess at race. While if I use my username, which is unique, you can find out everything about me with Google searches.
say I tell you my name is John Smith, Mohammed, or Peter Pettigrew. How is this not being anonymous in every single case for every single name? While a moderate amount of people use the same username on multiple sites, and using it is far more UNanonymous then even using a real name in RL in many ways.
The standard is already a decade ahead of the implementation of the standard, what is the point of developing it faster? And the idea of having a constantly changing standard is ridiculous, make a static standard so that eventually everyone can have a working version based in the same standard. That is the point of a standard after all.
Well, the HTML5 standard is so big that I have my doubts that any browser will comply to the entire thing. And nothing will even come close for something approaching a decade I hear.
But the CDs and DVDs that are pressed still need to follow some formatting guidelines in how information is on the disk. I imagine, for the most part, pressed CDs are CD-R formatted. And pressed DVDs will be either + or - R formatted.
It might not be technically right to call pressed CDs CD-R, but it does not seem wrong either.
Free online course material is not supposed to be a competitive market. And I doubt that the people at MIT are really coming up with strategies to crush their "competition".
Consumers do not want big screens, they just want what ever the new fad is. A few years ago that was smaller and smaller phones, now it is bigger and bigger screens.
Yes instead of productive farmland, and animal teaming forests we have deserts and toxic waste-lands. But the exact same amount of land, except for the thousands of acres lost to glacier melt.
Providing a service that he got paid for is not making your money off the backs of the working class, weather it is illegal or not. Dismantling companies and peoples pensions for profit, paying low wages, company towns, and monopolies are taking advantage of the working class.
Just spent a little while looking this up. There are a lot of opinions both ways, but all the scientific studies I could fine (for example: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18842774) implied/proved/gave evidence that night-time eating did in fact produce significantly more weight gain then the same amount eaten during the daytime.
wrong and illegal are two different things and Apple obviously wanted and allowed people to installed software on computers. And these unsuspecting people were already being monitored and taped by Apples own security cameras.
Yes, but it sounds like installing software was an expected part of playing with it in this case and he never signed a contract restricting what type of software he could install.
The computers sounds like they were left on, open, and with privileges such that you could do this. He (and all there other customers) obviously did not have to sign a contract such that they were granted use of the computers but were forbidden from installing keyloggers and other spying software. So it sounds like installing software on the computers was allowed. As for taking pictures of unaware people, they were in public and this is exactly the same as if they were captured by any normal hand held camera in public.
SO I could see how Apple might beef up security after this and get mad at him but how was any of it illegal?
"He says if you’re going to 'give up four billion dollars to avoid a one in seven chance of killing an astronaut, you’re basically saying an astronaut’s life is worth twenty-eight billion dollars.'" Not at all. The mission needs astronaut’s to succeed. If everyone dies (or even just one or two) the chance of a completely failed mission (as well as a loss of public and monetary support) increases dramatically. You cannot just hire new guys mid mission.
Also tons of training and testing has gone into there guys, yes you probably could get some illegal immigrant to take the job for half minimum wage if you really wanted to, but you would still have to spend a lot of money and time to get him ready for space-flight.
I had originally put quotes around "Victim", but thought it saver to just call her a victim. I simply used that language, because that is what the law believes.
The idea is that even if she just has cyber sex with him she is still victimised and psychophysically scared or some shit.
They are called Grooming Laws (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_grooming). But at least the wiki summery seems to imply that the law is not that extreme, it is possible it was overturned. All I can say for certain is like 4 years ago (right after a court case where a pedo who never intended to meet his victim got off) I read a Yahoo news article that stated, with quotes from judges, the general all encompassing law I laid out in my original comment.
No, Canada has just made it so if you are online the judge can label you a paedophile completely at his discretion. The idea is that it can be used to arrest undesirables that do not break any other laws, because at least for now the government is afraid enough of the people to not be completely unjust.
It was made to close a "loophole" in previous laws that allowed this one man in particular to get off scot free when he proved that he never planed to meet the under-aged girl he was having internet sex with.
Depends on the country. In Canada we have a law that states talking to a under-age person online in such a way that gains there trust and theoretically would put you in a good position to proposition them in the future is illegal (note: even if you had proof that you never planned to meet them in person, it still counts as illegal [and at least technically they do not need proof that you ever planed on doing anything beyond being nice]).
Slashdot Mirror
That is not what normally happens when there is a surplus of workers, normally workers rights and wages just go right out the window when there are too many workers.
So you are telling me that we are getting back our manufacturing plants, but are not going to see any more jobs or other benefits, just the negatives?
Never understood this username=anonymous argument.
I do not want to be anonymous on line.
And it is for this reason that I prefer to use my username and NOT my real name.
First off no real name comes with 1/100 of enough information to make someone using it known. You do not know age, country, state, town, address, and no more then a guess at race.
While if I use my username, which is unique, you can find out everything about me with Google searches.
say I tell you my name is John Smith, Mohammed, or Peter Pettigrew. How is this not being anonymous in every single case for every single name? While a moderate amount of people use the same username on multiple sites, and using it is far more UNanonymous then even using a real name in RL in many ways.
The standard is already a decade ahead of the implementation of the standard, what is the point of developing it faster?
And the idea of having a constantly changing standard is ridiculous, make a static standard so that eventually everyone can have a working version based in the same standard. That is the point of a standard after all.
Well, the HTML5 standard is so big that I have my doubts that any browser will comply to the entire thing. And nothing will even come close for something approaching a decade I hear.
But the CDs and DVDs that are pressed still need to follow some formatting guidelines in how information is on the disk.
I imagine, for the most part, pressed CDs are CD-R formatted. And pressed DVDs will be either + or - R formatted.
It might not be technically right to call pressed CDs CD-R, but it does not seem wrong either.
There is actually a CD format that is just called CD? I know for DVD you only get DVD+R, -R, RW, RAM, probably a few others.
Easy for someone without a drug addiction perhaps.
Free online course material is not supposed to be a competitive market.
And I doubt that the people at MIT are really coming up with strategies to crush their "competition".
But there is a grey area between forcing you, and phoning you, asking you if you want any, and agreeing to sell you some.
Consumers do not want big screens, they just want what ever the new fad is. A few years ago that was smaller and smaller phones, now it is bigger and bigger screens.
But not always, jury's have the right to ignore law and pass whatever sentence they wish, within reason.
Except there are far far more examples of species we drove to extinction because we liked them.
Land: "The part of the earth's surface that is not covered by water,"
Yes instead of productive farmland, and animal teaming forests we have deserts and toxic waste-lands.
But the exact same amount of land, except for the thousands of acres lost to glacier melt.
Providing a service that he got paid for is not making your money off the backs of the working class, weather it is illegal or not.
Dismantling companies and peoples pensions for profit, paying low wages, company towns, and monopolies are taking advantage of the working class.
Just spent a little while looking this up. There are a lot of opinions both ways, but all the scientific studies I could fine (for example: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18842774) implied/proved/gave evidence that night-time eating did in fact produce significantly more weight gain then the same amount eaten during the daytime.
wrong and illegal are two different things and Apple obviously wanted and allowed people to installed software on computers. And these unsuspecting people were already being monitored and taped by Apples own security cameras.
Yes, but it sounds like installing software was an expected part of playing with it in this case and he never signed a contract restricting what type of software he could install.
The computers sounds like they were left on, open, and with privileges such that you could do this. He (and all there other customers) obviously did not have to sign a contract such that they were granted use of the computers but were forbidden from installing keyloggers and other spying software. So it sounds like installing software on the computers was allowed. As for taking pictures of unaware people, they were in public and this is exactly the same as if they were captured by any normal hand held camera in public.
SO I could see how Apple might beef up security after this and get mad at him but how was any of it illegal?
"He says if you’re going to 'give up four billion dollars to avoid a one in seven chance of killing an astronaut, you’re basically saying an astronaut’s life is worth twenty-eight billion dollars.'"
Not at all. The mission needs astronaut’s to succeed. If everyone dies (or even just one or two) the chance of a completely failed mission (as well as a loss of public and monetary support) increases dramatically.
You cannot just hire new guys mid mission.
Also tons of training and testing has gone into there guys, yes you probably could get some illegal immigrant to take the job for half minimum wage if you really wanted to, but you would still have to spend a lot of money and time to get him ready for space-flight.
I had originally put quotes around "Victim", but thought it saver to just call her a victim.
I simply used that language, because that is what the law believes.
The idea is that even if she just has cyber sex with him she is still victimised and psychophysically scared or some shit.
They are called Grooming Laws (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_grooming).
But at least the wiki summery seems to imply that the law is not that extreme, it is possible it was overturned. All I can say for certain is like 4 years ago (right after a court case where a pedo who never intended to meet his victim got off) I read a Yahoo news article that stated, with quotes from judges, the general all encompassing law I laid out in my original comment.
No, Canada has just made it so if you are online the judge can label you a paedophile completely at his discretion. The idea is that it can be used to arrest undesirables that do not break any other laws, because at least for now the government is afraid enough of the people to not be completely unjust.
It was made to close a "loophole" in previous laws that allowed this one man in particular to get off scot free when he proved that he never planed to meet the under-aged girl he was having internet sex with.
Depends on the country. In Canada we have a law that states talking to a under-age person online in such a way that gains there trust and theoretically would put you in a good position to proposition them in the future is illegal (note: even if you had proof that you never planned to meet them in person, it still counts as illegal [and at least technically they do not need proof that you ever planed on doing anything beyond being nice]).