"Right or just" has little to do with running a business in any country. There are a vast host of things that you are forced to do that are not right or just. That's business. The test is not "right or just" (unless it's a legitimate religious issue or somesuch), the test is "unduly burdensome". If you can cheaply deal with the requirement, add it to the cost of doing business and move one.
It doesn't matter - that's why you pay for insurance. It's crazy nonsense - that's why you pay for insurance. It's outright harmful BS. That's why, well, you get it. I have $1 M in personal liability protection, just in case someone break into my house, injures themselves in the process, and sues me. Silly? Happens all the damn time. But that insurance costs me next to nothing because the insurance companies are skilled at fighting nonsense suits efficiently.
If I ever publish any software under my own name, I'll add the business insurance. Not as cheap, but as long as you're not in the kind of business where customers enter your property, it's still nothing as far as business expenses go. (OTOH, I can't imagine what the guys who run martial arts studios for kids pay, eesh.)
If you're wondering why responses seem like non-sequiturs, it's because you are blindly and repeatedly asserting that a NC is nothing like slavery. You're not actually arguing for your position, so all anyone can do is simply assert the contrary.
A NC is very much like an indentured servitude contract. Sure, it's not identical, as you can still flip burgers, but it's pretty close: you can't earn a professional living in your field.
I understand the reasoning, but the reasoning was horribly flawed, as MS simply didn't have the power they though they did to force such a change. That kind of strategic mistake leads to termination for executives and general managers, and the fact that the Chairman, CEO, Division VP, and a couple levels below that are all gone or reassigned to somewhere harmless is a sign that maybe MS has a future after all.
Seriously, just abandon the word "sport". It's not helping in any way. Trying to avoid "gaming" is understandable, as it means "illegal gambling" to many people, and in many laws, but there's got to be a better word than "sport".
"eSports" is trying to come down on the wrong side of the great jock-geek divide. Why do that?
Fortunately for Brazil, the underworld is saturated with stolen account info. The bottleneck for actual "hacker" money theft worldwide is finding new money mules to take the loss when the transfer is inevitably reversed. The world is flooded with malware, but the cops are pretty good at following the money, and so the bottleneck is there.
Most stolen account info is never acted on for lack of a way to get the cash. Of course, that's one clever criminal idea away from shifting, and it will be very ugly if that ever happens.
Microsoft's owners (the shareholders) realized the old Microsoft was a dead end. Everyone involved with putting Windows 8 out over the objections of the usability studies is gone now, up to and including Bill Gates. The asshole who used to be in charge of Xbone who was badmouthing customers? Gone. The message that MS can't dictate terms anymore was heard - not by management, but by shareholders.
So, yeah, it is a new Microsoft. Better? Almost certainly - even at random that's almost sure to be true. But they seem to realize now how quickly their user base is shrinking, and how desperately they need to succeed on new platforms.
So now we get Android phone sold by MS, and embrace of open source, and especially an attempt to make Xbone everything they possibly can in the living room. Without a low-end tablet or TV OS, the Xbone is their only chance for a presence in the new world of computing.
That's the law in a couple of states, IIRC, as the interpretation there is a non-compete without (ongoing) compensation doesn't meet a requirement to be a contract (both parties must benefit).
So what legal protections do you believe should exist for trade secrets? Should it be legal for large corporations to steal trade secrets by just buying out employees? Almost everyone can be bribed, and, honestly, no employee should have that much corporate loyalty.
You seem confused by the difference between an NDA and a non-compete. Neither TFA nor the post you replied to disputed NDAs. The issue at hand is non-competes, which seem unnecessary (given an NDA) and possibly illegal. Explicitly illegal in Cali, IIRC, but not in WA.
Slavery (and indentured servitude) is not the condition of working without being paid, but the condition of having no choice of employer. A contract that amounts to indentured servitude is an illegal contract. How much you think anon-compete looks like indentured servitude is the matter in dispute - if you can't do X, but you can still flip burgers, does that count?
He's a sales guy. The confidential information is specific customer lists and future pricing strategy if he knew any. Much like if you're a dev, using your skills and best practices is what you're hired for, but don't take the actual source code or roadmaps from your previous employer.
And of course the non-competes are BS. Wasn't there an Amendment that ended slavery and indenture servitude a while back? Bit of a dispute about that one IIRC - what say we leave it settled?
Look at the RSS Data. The satellite data fits the null hypothesis well enough. It's only with the "adjustments" to the land stations that you get pronounced warming over the past 100 years. (You can cherry pick your own data set for entertainment, but it's far less alarming than the BS land data in any case.)
But the interesting point isn't really is the Earth warming - certainly at some time scale it is. The interesting point isn't how much is human activity affecting this, vs the normal climate cycle (which I'm not believing anyone on till the models accurately predict divergence form the null hypothesis). The interesting question is do we want it warmer or colder. Funny how the left mostly lives on the coasts, where warming is more threatening (well, I'm in Seattle, and so I'm screwed either way - the glaciers were quite a bit south of here last time around IIRC).
On top of that you can't ignore the heat stored in the oceans and that hasn't slowed down at all.
Is that heat we can't measure, but must be stored in the oceans otherwise we'd be wrong?
There's been no warming for 17 years. My "global warming is a hoax" model is also still within it's uncertainty range. I'll be the first to admit it's a crappy model, but hey, it's equally as predictive and that's what matters to science.
Tax em all! As the US goes broke, anything and everything than can be changed to tax people more will be changed (yes, even the rich will be taxed more when we're broke enough, not that that will help much). What? Spend less instead? Which politician is going to give up those wonderful tax dollars flowing to his donors? The left? The right? Didn't think so.
Hey, no worries. In another 30 years, I'll have no objections whatsoever to climate change science no all the politics it's driving. (Also, I'll be dead, but that's mere coincidence.)
Just because you can only protest in the Free Speech Zone doesn't mean your rights are limited! They're not limited because your masters say they're not limited; now back to work, drone! Not limited means not limited, friend.
They never just look at the real world temperature records or precipitation records and say "Let's tweak this to make it fit the curve better."
Yes, of course they do. That's the sort of thing I'm complaining about. Papers with titles about adjusting radiative forcing parameters to account for real world temperatures and whatnot.
Climate models are projecting 30 year trends so it takes that long to totally test them
It used to be "10 years", but the 10-year predictions missed. Then it was "15 years", but the 15-year predictions missed. Now it's "give me money for my whole career, and I promise I'll be right in the end". Pardon my skepticism.
It's worth noting a pattern of "adjusting" the data that predominately favors the leading theories. That's some seriously questionable stuff in an field. Fortunately for the climate change guys, you can just ignore the ground station data entirely and still have a reasonable conversation about this stuff.
I'm far, far more concerned with constant tuning of the models to meet the data then vice versa. That may sound backwards, but ask anyone who's made a model to predict the stock market based on fitting his model to all historical data how that worked out. Descriptive power is not a significant reason to expect predictive power from a hypothesis (necessary, but very far from sufficient). And every time you tinker, you reset the clock on knowing if you have any predictive power.
It takes many years to test the predictive power of a climate model. 15? 20? Depends on who you ask, but the better part of a career. The models from 15 years ago failed pretty hard, prediction-wise. We're a long way from anyone having the right to be arrogant about this stuff, and every time someone adjusts their model to make it match observations, that's one more model reset, one less chance to move from hand-wavy descriptivism to a tested theory.
I'm sure there's some ISP out there that ridiculous, but I've never seen one that would change your IP unless you rebooted your Cable/DSL modem (or they had some sort of outage to the same effect) - how would they even know you rebooted your server? There was a time when many people reached the Pirate Bay by hitting a forum for this week's IP address. There was a time when most gamers reached their server by checking a forum/BBS for the server's current IP.
But, hey, if the only ISP with service to Mom's basement is that evil, I understand, this must really suck for you! Just remember to be careful if you get so bored that you wander out into the Blue Room - remember, the Day Star will burn unprotected skin!
Well, fuck. No-IP going down? A million basement virgins lose access to their favorite minecraft server, and nothing of value was lost.
But, dammit MS, you proved APK right about something. That karmic burden is on you guys now. That bell can't be un-rung. You've got to carry that forever now.
Chic Fil'A is far ahead on the leftist "boycott" vs rightwing "Chic Fil'A day" war. Far, far ahead. Partly because the right tends to have more money, but mostly because their food is actually pretty good, and people who ate there as a stunt became regular customers.
Hobby Lobby is also ahead in this game.
But what does any of this have to do with "misogyny"? I don't see it. They pay a bit better than most in their industry from what I hear - certainly enough where a woman who needs a non-covered procedure every year or two still comes out ahead relative to other crappy retail jobs. Who care how your compensation is structured as long as you get what you need?
One question; How does "free speech" translate into "depriving people of medical benefits"?
Interesting, if completely irrelevant question. There are two ways a company can provide an employee with access to a type of medical care. The company can provide coverage in some sort of insurance program, or the government can give the employee money, in wages, money that can be exchanged for goods and services including, shockingly, medical services.
If we were talking about a quarter-million-dollar cancer treatment or something, then you might have an argument that by refusing to cover that procedure the company was not enabling access to the procedure. Not "depriving", as companies don't have police officers to arrest you if your family or a charity would cover it, but at least you could argue something. But a procedure costing a few hundred bucks? A company is in no way "depriving" an employee of medical care by refusing to cover that procedure specifically in the insurance plan. Just fork over the cash. Damn, how hard is that you figure out?
But if you really want to take this issue off the table, get employers completely out of the health insurance providing game. No, letting the government choose what to cover is no better, that's just handing your leash to a different master. Health insurance needs to be like car insurance - just buy it retail; done. Full power to the individual, none to the bosses. Like car insurance, you'd want a high-risk pool that the government would need to force insurers to cover at a loss, but we manage that just fine with car insurance.
I love the way the left is trying to divide people into two groups: those who have full rights of political expression, and those who have limited/no rights to political expressions. Of course, the left wants to choose the "voluntary" ways you end up in which group, but giving that power to the currently-leftwing government. Short sighted at best.
Do you really want to give the government the power to in any way influence or decide who has the right to political expression? Really? Any branch of the government seem safe to you for the next 100 years? Perfectly safe from abuse? I can see no flaw with this plan.
Slashdot Mirror
"Right or just" has little to do with running a business in any country. There are a vast host of things that you are forced to do that are not right or just. That's business. The test is not "right or just" (unless it's a legitimate religious issue or somesuch), the test is "unduly burdensome". If you can cheaply deal with the requirement, add it to the cost of doing business and move one.
It doesn't matter - that's why you pay for insurance. It's crazy nonsense - that's why you pay for insurance. It's outright harmful BS. That's why, well, you get it. I have $1 M in personal liability protection, just in case someone break into my house, injures themselves in the process, and sues me. Silly? Happens all the damn time. But that insurance costs me next to nothing because the insurance companies are skilled at fighting nonsense suits efficiently.
If I ever publish any software under my own name, I'll add the business insurance. Not as cheap, but as long as you're not in the kind of business where customers enter your property, it's still nothing as far as business expenses go. (OTOH, I can't imagine what the guys who run martial arts studios for kids pay, eesh.)
If you're wondering why responses seem like non-sequiturs, it's because you are blindly and repeatedly asserting that a NC is nothing like slavery. You're not actually arguing for your position, so all anyone can do is simply assert the contrary.
A NC is very much like an indentured servitude contract. Sure, it's not identical, as you can still flip burgers, but it's pretty close: you can't earn a professional living in your field.
I understand the reasoning, but the reasoning was horribly flawed, as MS simply didn't have the power they though they did to force such a change. That kind of strategic mistake leads to termination for executives and general managers, and the fact that the Chairman, CEO, Division VP, and a couple levels below that are all gone or reassigned to somewhere harmless is a sign that maybe MS has a future after all.
Whatever old people want it to be.
Seriously, just abandon the word "sport". It's not helping in any way. Trying to avoid "gaming" is understandable, as it means "illegal gambling" to many people, and in many laws, but there's got to be a better word than "sport".
"eSports" is trying to come down on the wrong side of the great jock-geek divide. Why do that?
Fortunately for Brazil, the underworld is saturated with stolen account info. The bottleneck for actual "hacker" money theft worldwide is finding new money mules to take the loss when the transfer is inevitably reversed. The world is flooded with malware, but the cops are pretty good at following the money, and so the bottleneck is there.
Most stolen account info is never acted on for lack of a way to get the cash. Of course, that's one clever criminal idea away from shifting, and it will be very ugly if that ever happens.
Microsoft's owners (the shareholders) realized the old Microsoft was a dead end. Everyone involved with putting Windows 8 out over the objections of the usability studies is gone now, up to and including Bill Gates. The asshole who used to be in charge of Xbone who was badmouthing customers? Gone. The message that MS can't dictate terms anymore was heard - not by management, but by shareholders.
So, yeah, it is a new Microsoft. Better? Almost certainly - even at random that's almost sure to be true. But they seem to realize now how quickly their user base is shrinking, and how desperately they need to succeed on new platforms.
So now we get Android phone sold by MS, and embrace of open source, and especially an attempt to make Xbone everything they possibly can in the living room. Without a low-end tablet or TV OS, the Xbone is their only chance for a presence in the new world of computing.
That's the law in a couple of states, IIRC, as the interpretation there is a non-compete without (ongoing) compensation doesn't meet a requirement to be a contract (both parties must benefit).
So what legal protections do you believe should exist for trade secrets? Should it be legal for large corporations to steal trade secrets by just buying out employees? Almost everyone can be bribed, and, honestly, no employee should have that much corporate loyalty.
You seem confused by the difference between an NDA and a non-compete. Neither TFA nor the post you replied to disputed NDAs. The issue at hand is non-competes, which seem unnecessary (given an NDA) and possibly illegal. Explicitly illegal in Cali, IIRC, but not in WA.
Slavery (and indentured servitude) is not the condition of working without being paid, but the condition of having no choice of employer. A contract that amounts to indentured servitude is an illegal contract. How much you think anon-compete looks like indentured servitude is the matter in dispute - if you can't do X, but you can still flip burgers, does that count?
He's a sales guy. The confidential information is specific customer lists and future pricing strategy if he knew any. Much like if you're a dev, using your skills and best practices is what you're hired for, but don't take the actual source code or roadmaps from your previous employer.
And of course the non-competes are BS. Wasn't there an Amendment that ended slavery and indenture servitude a while back? Bit of a dispute about that one IIRC - what say we leave it settled?
Look at the RSS Data. The satellite data fits the null hypothesis well enough. It's only with the "adjustments" to the land stations that you get pronounced warming over the past 100 years. (You can cherry pick your own data set for entertainment, but it's far less alarming than the BS land data in any case.)
But the interesting point isn't really is the Earth warming - certainly at some time scale it is. The interesting point isn't how much is human activity affecting this, vs the normal climate cycle (which I'm not believing anyone on till the models accurately predict divergence form the null hypothesis). The interesting question is do we want it warmer or colder. Funny how the left mostly lives on the coasts, where warming is more threatening (well, I'm in Seattle, and so I'm screwed either way - the glaciers were quite a bit south of here last time around IIRC).
On top of that you can't ignore the heat stored in the oceans and that hasn't slowed down at all.
Is that heat we can't measure, but must be stored in the oceans otherwise we'd be wrong?
Everyone's rich since we adopted the leaf as our currency!
There's been no warming for 17 years. My "global warming is a hoax" model is also still within it's uncertainty range. I'll be the first to admit it's a crappy model, but hey, it's equally as predictive and that's what matters to science.
Tax em all! As the US goes broke, anything and everything than can be changed to tax people more will be changed (yes, even the rich will be taxed more when we're broke enough, not that that will help much). What? Spend less instead? Which politician is going to give up those wonderful tax dollars flowing to his donors? The left? The right? Didn't think so.
Hey, no worries. In another 30 years, I'll have no objections whatsoever to climate change science no all the politics it's driving. (Also, I'll be dead, but that's mere coincidence.)
Just because you can only protest in the Free Speech Zone doesn't mean your rights are limited! They're not limited because your masters say they're not limited; now back to work, drone! Not limited means not limited, friend.
They never just look at the real world temperature records or precipitation records and say "Let's tweak this to make it fit the curve better."
Yes, of course they do. That's the sort of thing I'm complaining about. Papers with titles about adjusting radiative forcing parameters to account for real world temperatures and whatnot.
Climate models are projecting 30 year trends so it takes that long to totally test them
It used to be "10 years", but the 10-year predictions missed. Then it was "15 years", but the 15-year predictions missed. Now it's "give me money for my whole career, and I promise I'll be right in the end". Pardon my skepticism.
It's worth noting a pattern of "adjusting" the data that predominately favors the leading theories. That's some seriously questionable stuff in an field. Fortunately for the climate change guys, you can just ignore the ground station data entirely and still have a reasonable conversation about this stuff.
I'm far, far more concerned with constant tuning of the models to meet the data then vice versa. That may sound backwards, but ask anyone who's made a model to predict the stock market based on fitting his model to all historical data how that worked out. Descriptive power is not a significant reason to expect predictive power from a hypothesis (necessary, but very far from sufficient). And every time you tinker, you reset the clock on knowing if you have any predictive power.
It takes many years to test the predictive power of a climate model. 15? 20? Depends on who you ask, but the better part of a career. The models from 15 years ago failed pretty hard, prediction-wise. We're a long way from anyone having the right to be arrogant about this stuff, and every time someone adjusts their model to make it match observations, that's one more model reset, one less chance to move from hand-wavy descriptivism to a tested theory.
I'm sure there's some ISP out there that ridiculous, but I've never seen one that would change your IP unless you rebooted your Cable/DSL modem (or they had some sort of outage to the same effect) - how would they even know you rebooted your server? There was a time when many people reached the Pirate Bay by hitting a forum for this week's IP address. There was a time when most gamers reached their server by checking a forum/BBS for the server's current IP.
But, hey, if the only ISP with service to Mom's basement is that evil, I understand, this must really suck for you! Just remember to be careful if you get so bored that you wander out into the Blue Room - remember, the Day Star will burn unprotected skin!
Well, fuck. No-IP going down? A million basement virgins lose access to their favorite minecraft server, and nothing of value was lost.
But, dammit MS, you proved APK right about something. That karmic burden is on you guys now. That bell can't be un-rung. You've got to carry that forever now.
Chic Fil'A is far ahead on the leftist "boycott" vs rightwing "Chic Fil'A day" war. Far, far ahead. Partly because the right tends to have more money, but mostly because their food is actually pretty good, and people who ate there as a stunt became regular customers.
Hobby Lobby is also ahead in this game.
But what does any of this have to do with "misogyny"? I don't see it. They pay a bit better than most in their industry from what I hear - certainly enough where a woman who needs a non-covered procedure every year or two still comes out ahead relative to other crappy retail jobs. Who care how your compensation is structured as long as you get what you need?
s/the government can give the employee/the company can give the employee/g
now the left's got me doing it too!
One question;
How does "free speech" translate into "depriving people of medical benefits"?
Interesting, if completely irrelevant question. There are two ways a company can provide an employee with access to a type of medical care. The company can provide coverage in some sort of insurance program, or the government can give the employee money, in wages, money that can be exchanged for goods and services including, shockingly, medical services.
If we were talking about a quarter-million-dollar cancer treatment or something, then you might have an argument that by refusing to cover that procedure the company was not enabling access to the procedure. Not "depriving", as companies don't have police officers to arrest you if your family or a charity would cover it, but at least you could argue something. But a procedure costing a few hundred bucks? A company is in no way "depriving" an employee of medical care by refusing to cover that procedure specifically in the insurance plan. Just fork over the cash. Damn, how hard is that you figure out?
But if you really want to take this issue off the table, get employers completely out of the health insurance providing game. No, letting the government choose what to cover is no better, that's just handing your leash to a different master. Health insurance needs to be like car insurance - just buy it retail; done. Full power to the individual, none to the bosses. Like car insurance, you'd want a high-risk pool that the government would need to force insurers to cover at a loss, but we manage that just fine with car insurance.
I love the way the left is trying to divide people into two groups: those who have full rights of political expression, and those who have limited/no rights to political expressions. Of course, the left wants to choose the "voluntary" ways you end up in which group, but giving that power to the currently-leftwing government. Short sighted at best.
Do you really want to give the government the power to in any way influence or decide who has the right to political expression? Really? Any branch of the government seem safe to you for the next 100 years? Perfectly safe from abuse? I can see no flaw with this plan.