Even if it's to a huge troll, I'll comment. How do pay a bill of $300,000 for a surgical intervention when you earn just enough to live (but not for long without surgical intervention) ? Not everyone has an engineer's income. Think about it twice before replying.
I agree with you (well, the first part at least), but that was not my point. I was speaking of the lower part of the executive branch of the government (policemen and alike). This people are not the sames as those mentioned by B. Franklin.
The point was that maybe you can trust these people to destroy the images, but maybe you don't want these same people to look at those images in the first place, because they are human after all, with all their thoughts and feelings.
For the second part of your comment, but this is *offtopic*, some people don't have money to save for healthcare. How do you address this problem? Do they have less rights to live than other citizens?
Since employees are by far the largest expenditure (ignoring for a second the opening of a new fab), it makes sense to cut costs there. Can you explain me how to generate revenue without employees?
If the whole point of life is to propagate What makes you think that the point to life is to propagate ? It's not because we can see only species that can propagate (cf Darwin's work) that it makes it the point of the life. Propagation is no more the point of life than aggregation (due to gravity) is the point of the matter. It's more like a side effect than a goal (even hidden or driven by a "invisible hand").
I digress, but let's continue anyway:
So what's the point of life? I don't know, but why should life have a point?
Despite all that I've wrote, I still agree with your comment.
This seems a bit over the top if you ask me, but hopefully it will expose biometrics for what it is: an unchangeable, and in many cases public, password. Biometrics can only be used for identification, not authentication.
So biometrics is:
an unchangeable, and in many cases public, login.
Re:The difference between IT and other professions
on
Ethics In IT
·
· Score: 1
Well, IANAL, and I don't know the US system, but in France a sysadmin have the right to read personal data as long as it's a part of his work, but he do not have the right to tell its knowledge to someone else (like his boss) since it's an intrusion of privacy. In case of a detection of an illegal activity (child-porn...) it's duty is to tell it to his boss (then call the cops) but he can't tell him who's the suspect (because it could harm the suspect, and until he is judged, he's innocent).
Slashdot Mirror
Even if it's to a huge troll, I'll comment. How do pay a bill of $300,000 for a surgical intervention when you earn just enough to live (but not for long without surgical intervention) ? Not everyone has an engineer's income. Think about it twice before replying.
I agree with you (well, the first part at least), but that was not my point. I was speaking of the lower part of the executive branch of the government (policemen and alike). This people are not the sames as those mentioned by B. Franklin. The point was that maybe you can trust these people to destroy the images, but maybe you don't want these same people to look at those images in the first place, because they are human after all, with all their thoughts and feelings. For the second part of your comment, but this is *offtopic*, some people don't have money to save for healthcare. How do you address this problem? Do they have less rights to live than other citizens?
Because the government is run by people. Ordinary people.
I digress, but let's continue anyway:
So what's the point of life? I don't know, but why should life have a point?
Despite all that I've wrote, I still agree with your comment.
Maybe 2008 is the year for Duke Nukem Forever...
Well, IANAL, and I don't know the US system, but in France a sysadmin have the right to read personal data as long as it's a part of his work, but he do not have the right to tell its knowledge to someone else (like his boss) since it's an intrusion of privacy. In case of a detection of an illegal activity (child-porn...) it's duty is to tell it to his boss (then call the cops) but he can't tell him who's the suspect (because it could harm the suspect, and until he is judged, he's innocent).
Well, if for you "universe" can be reduced to "mankind" (and maybe "mankind" to "Americans", or "ME"), this sentence could make sense.