I think it's in quotes because some of us outside the USA think it's odd that huge sections of the population apparently aren't happy being American, but instead have to attach some other nationality - african/american, irish/american, italian/american etc. etc. Why not just American and proud of it?
Now if they had invited Bill Gates to speak, now that would be worth seeing.
Has anyone else noticed that Bill Gates sounds like Kermit The Frog? I really can't see how anyone can listen to one of his speeches with a straight face.
Having an expo that excludes Windows isn't necessarily anti-Windows zealotry, it's simply pro-alternatives. Would you describe an alternative medicines show as being "anti medical profession zealotry"? Probably not, it's just appealing to a particular market segment. This show wants to attract a niche market, not the wider world of ALL oses. Nothing wrong with that, in the same way as there is nothing wrong with a Windows-only show if that is what you want to go to. Let the public choose.
I go to interviews to see if I *want* to work for the company, not just to see if I get the job. I wouldn't sign an NDA before an interview. I would after I have the job. The difference? Once i have the job I am an employee and owe the employer certain duties. At the interview I owe them nothing. I feel (quite strongly) that they have no right to expect me to sign an NDA just to go ahead with an initial interview.
The company also needs to convince the prospective employee that they are going to be a good employer, and it will be a good place to work, good atmosphere, etc. etc. Forcing a candidate to sign an NDA just for the interview is not going to achieve that!
If I understand your "recruitment tactic" Company A is trying to force me to join them simply because I have agreed to an interview with them? So I go along to the interview and from that point onwards cannot work for a competitor for fear of legal action? I don't think that would stand up in UK law (I hope it wouldn't!).
That's fine if you are certain you want someone to work for you (as in Linus' case presumably), or once you've interviewed them and built a short list. As you say, it shouldn't be a general rule though.
Surely a company should not be giving out business/technology sensitive information to a person before they know whether or not they want to employ them?
Let's GPL that weed over there growing at the edge of the field!
Considering an American company has patented Basmati Rice (odd that, I could have sworn it was invented over centuries by some people living in or around India), that's actually not a bad idea. In a country where you can patent something someone else invented (centuries ago), GPLing (or an equivalent) everything possible begins to look good.
Thanks - I thought it might be, but wasn't sure. Good stuff. I like StarOffice, but it's just too big and slow to get into to knock up a quick fax (or dig out a phone number from the company phone list [in word format]).
Go ask the people who are looking into video on demand what they use. Mainframes have internal data bandwidth that makes personal computers look like the toys they are.
Yes, the debate of personal computing vs mainframes was over years ago. Unfortunately then the world turned client/server, and mainframes started looking good again.
As far as I understand it, the DVD format is neither PAL not NTSC. The player translates the format as it sees fit. Thus an NTSC player will produce an NTSC signal from any disk that it can play. Regional coding has nothing to do with the output format.
I don't wish to get into a flame war, but your concept of copyright infringement is flawed - you seem to be claiming that copyright is somehow different depending on whether or not the infringer is making a profit. Just try copying and giving away Microsoft's software on CD. You'll find copyright is just as strong even if you are not profiting from breaking it.
Also, I still contend that hyperlinks are not altering the content of the message. They are adding references. Possibly irrelevant references, but references just the same.
Finally, I would presume most of the people complaining use DejaNews on occasion (correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to be fair to assume people are complaining because they too are DejaNews users). If this is the case then it is a little hypocritical. "We want the service, but we don't want to pay for it, and don't you dare try and raise revenue indirectly".
To be honest, I couldn't care - as long as they haven't altered my words, the links are of little interest. I don't like HTML mail or news anyway, what's wrong with plain text. If everyone used plain text, then it would be obvious that any links were NOT the authors.
Also, they are not doing what they want with a 3rd party's copyright - you have given usenet servers the right to reproduce and distribute your work and dejanews has the right to do that. As long as they are not altering the content or meaning it's trivial. As I said, if people don't like it, they will leave dejanews. No people reading dejanews means no revenue from that form of advertising.
They go ahead and modify the contents of *your* post (sent from wherever by whatever means, not necessarily through deja) without asking first and present the modified version as yours, you have to actively prohibit them from doing so by using the (not-yet-implemented) header stuff. If there's such a thing as copyright, I'd see this as a clear violation.
They haven't actually changed the content of the post (as it is displayed). They have added extra references. You might not agree with them doing so, but I think you'd have a tough time claiming this was copyright infringement. If it is, the whole concept of usenet is flawed!
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't dejanews a free service they provide to people? In which case aren't they entitled to do do what they want with it? If you don't like it, use a different news feed. Blane.
If you're relying on European privacy laws to protect your communications with Australia as they travel through who knows what other countries, then you're going to be disappointed. That's as bad as American tourists who travel to Singapore and are surprised to find that the harsher criminal law applies to them.
If you re-read my message, I said suppose my e-mail is to a friend elsewhere in Europe - that is Europe-Europe communications. Please pay attention!
If you think I am naive, you are mistaken. I have been involved in datacomms in the UK for 15 years.
Also, for your information, governments tend to take a DIM view on other governments snooping on their citizens.
This poses a few interesting questions, even for those of us outside the US. It is quite possible (and in some cases quite likely) for my email to be routed via the US on it's way from my UK based ISP to some other (non US) ISP (for obvious reasons the UK-US links are generally bigger and better than UK-somewhere else). Now, if the FBI 'accidentally' snoop my message to (say) someone in Australia, what happens? A US agency has (illegally?) snooped on email between two non-US citizens, both located outside the USA. Surely that's a matter for governmental concern (US and otherwise).
Suppose my mail is to a friend elsewhere in Europe, this would surely contravene European privacy laws. Where does the legislation end? Is it purely a case of where (all) the intermediate servers are, or on the end points of the communication?
Re:SCO isn't great but it's as good an OS as Linux
on
Endgame For SCO
·
· Score: 1
Can't comment on the installation - I've never installed SCO. I've installed Linux on a fair range of PC's, and whilst it's not perfect, it's improved to the point where I can quite happily give a CD to most people and expect them to get it up and running if they have a reasonable knowledge of PC's. Funnily enough the same is true of most versions of Windows - I installed Win'98 on a clone with an Intel 740 video card. Did Windows recognise it? No. Did I have to open the case, work out the manufacturer, and manually download and install the drivers? Yes. Nothings perfect!
The server I have is an old OpenServer 5 (5.04? Not sure) running an accounts package. It trundles along and does it's job ok, but I was disappointed with the lack of polish to the command line etc. Maybe I was naieve, but I expected a commercial Unix to sparkle!
Re:SCO isn't great but it's as good an OS as Linux
on
Endgame For SCO
·
· Score: 1
I disagree to a certain extent - we use SCO at work, and on a PPro 200 with 128Mb RAM it runs pretty slow (subjectively much slower than Linux on a Pentium 150 with 64mb RAM). It's also very unfriendly at the command line in comparison to Linux (command line editing etc).
Linux actually looks like a much more polished, professional product than SCO (OpenServer 5 I think?). It does the job, but it's pretty ugly.
Yup, you're a rebel without a clue! Hey, I live in the UK, and guess what. Not a single CCTV camera within miles of me.
And in case you didn't know, the UK is a democracy, and we are citizens of the UK and also Europe. The Queen has a ceremonial role within UK law, because we have a longer history than the US (I almost wrote because we have a history, but that would be disrespectful).
Guess what else? We DON'T WANT guns in the UK. That's why we have far fewer gun related deaths in the UK.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it's in quotes because some of us outside the USA think it's odd that huge sections of the population apparently aren't happy being American, but instead have to attach some other nationality - african/american, irish/american, italian/american etc. etc. Why not just American and proud of it?
Now if they had invited Bill Gates to speak, now that would be worth seeing.
Has anyone else noticed that Bill Gates sounds like Kermit The Frog? I really can't see how anyone can listen to one of his speeches with a straight face.
Ok, I'll bite the troll
Having an expo that excludes Windows isn't necessarily anti-Windows zealotry, it's simply pro-alternatives. Would you describe an alternative medicines show as being "anti medical profession zealotry"? Probably not, it's just appealing to a particular market segment. This show wants to attract a niche market, not the wider world of ALL oses. Nothing wrong with that, in the same way as there is nothing wrong with a Windows-only show if that is what you want to go to. Let the public choose.
I go to interviews to see if I *want* to work for the company, not just to see if I get the job. I wouldn't sign an NDA before an interview. I would after I have the job. The difference? Once i have the job I am an employee and owe the employer certain duties. At the interview I owe them nothing. I feel (quite strongly) that they have no right to expect me to sign an NDA just to go ahead with an initial interview.
How if I am not an employee?
The company also needs to convince the prospective employee that they are going to be a good employer, and it will be a good place to work, good atmosphere, etc. etc. Forcing a candidate to sign an NDA just for the interview is not going to achieve that!
If I understand your "recruitment tactic" Company A is trying to force me to join them simply because I have agreed to an interview with them? So I go along to the interview and from that point onwards cannot work for a competitor for fear of legal action? I don't think that would stand up in UK law (I hope it wouldn't!).
That's fine if you are certain you want someone to work for you (as in Linus' case presumably), or once you've interviewed them and built a short list. As you say, it shouldn't be a general rule though.
Surely a company should not be giving out business/technology sensitive information to a person before they know whether or not they want to employ them?
Let's GPL that weed over there growing at the edge of the field!
Considering an American company has patented Basmati Rice (odd that, I could have sworn it was invented over centuries by some people living in or around India), that's actually not a bad idea. In a country where you can patent something someone else invented (centuries ago), GPLing (or an equivalent) everything possible begins to look good.
Thanks - I thought it might be, but wasn't sure. Good stuff. I like StarOffice, but it's just too big and slow to get into to knock up a quick fax (or dig out a phone number from the company phone list [in word format]).
Well, maybe with a bit of luck it will lead to a more componentalised StarOffice rather than the huge monolithic version at the moment.
Even if it just brings better Office file compatability via a set of standard libraries it would be a good thing.
Blane.
actually we use sgi boxes.
'We' being anonymous cowards I presume?
Go ask the people who are looking into video on demand what they use. Mainframes have internal data bandwidth that makes personal computers look like the toys they are.
Yes, the debate of personal computing vs mainframes was over years ago. Unfortunately then the world turned client/server, and mainframes started looking good again.
As far as I understand it, the DVD format is neither PAL not NTSC. The player translates the format as it sees fit. Thus an NTSC player will produce an NTSC signal from any disk that it can play. Regional coding has nothing to do with the output format.
I don't wish to get into a flame war, but your concept of copyright infringement is flawed - you seem to be claiming that copyright is somehow different depending on whether or not the infringer is making a profit. Just try copying and giving away Microsoft's software on CD. You'll find copyright is just as strong even if you are not profiting from breaking it.
Also, I still contend that hyperlinks are not altering the content of the message. They are adding references. Possibly irrelevant references, but references just the same.
Finally, I would presume most of the people complaining use DejaNews on occasion (correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to be fair to assume people are complaining because they too are DejaNews users). If this is the case then it is a little hypocritical. "We want the service, but we don't want to pay for it, and don't you dare try and raise revenue indirectly".
To be honest, I couldn't care - as long as they haven't altered my words, the links are of little interest. I don't like HTML mail or news anyway, what's wrong with plain text. If everyone used plain text, then it would be obvious that any links were NOT the authors.
Also, they are not doing what they want with a 3rd party's copyright - you have given usenet servers the right to reproduce and distribute your work and dejanews has the right to do that. As long as they are not altering the content or meaning it's trivial. As I said, if people don't like it, they will leave dejanews. No people reading dejanews means no revenue from that form of advertising.
They go ahead and modify the contents of *your* post (sent from wherever by whatever means, not necessarily through deja) without asking first and present the modified version as yours, you have to actively prohibit them from doing so by using the (not-yet-implemented) header stuff. If there's such a thing as copyright, I'd see this as a clear violation.
They haven't actually changed the content of the post (as it is displayed). They have added extra references. You might not agree with them doing so, but I think you'd have a tough time claiming this was copyright infringement. If it is, the whole concept of usenet is flawed!
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't dejanews a free service they provide to people? In which case aren't they entitled to do do what they want with it? If you don't like it, use a different news feed. Blane.
If you re-read my message, I said suppose my e-mail is to a friend elsewhere in Europe - that is Europe-Europe communications. Please pay attention!
If you think I am naive, you are mistaken. I have been involved in datacomms in the UK for 15 years.
Also, for your information, governments tend to take a DIM view on other governments snooping on their citizens.
This poses a few interesting questions, even for those of us outside the US. It is quite possible (and in some cases quite likely) for my email to be routed via the US on it's way from my UK based ISP to some other (non US) ISP (for obvious reasons the UK-US links are generally bigger and better than UK-somewhere else). Now, if the FBI 'accidentally' snoop my message to (say) someone in Australia, what happens? A US agency has (illegally?) snooped on email between two non-US citizens, both located outside the USA. Surely that's a matter for governmental concern (US and otherwise).
Suppose my mail is to a friend elsewhere in Europe, this would surely contravene European privacy laws. Where does the legislation end? Is it purely a case of where (all) the intermediate servers are, or on the end points of the communication?
Can't comment on the installation - I've never installed SCO. I've installed Linux on a fair range of PC's, and whilst it's not perfect, it's improved to the point where I can quite happily give a CD to most people and expect them to get it up and running if they have a reasonable knowledge of PC's. Funnily enough the same is true of most versions of Windows - I installed Win'98 on a clone with an Intel 740 video card. Did Windows recognise it? No. Did I have to open the case, work out the manufacturer, and manually download and install the drivers? Yes. Nothings perfect!
The server I have is an old OpenServer 5 (5.04? Not sure) running an accounts package. It trundles along and does it's job ok, but I was disappointed with the lack of polish to the command line etc. Maybe I was naieve, but I expected a commercial Unix to sparkle!
I disagree to a certain extent - we use SCO at work, and on a PPro 200 with 128Mb RAM it runs pretty slow (subjectively much slower than Linux on a Pentium 150 with 64mb RAM). It's also very unfriendly at the command line in comparison to Linux (command line editing etc).
Linux actually looks like a much more polished, professional product than SCO (OpenServer 5 I think?). It does the job, but it's pretty ugly.
Yup, you're a rebel without a clue! Hey, I live in the UK, and guess what. Not a single CCTV camera within miles of me.
And in case you didn't know, the UK is a democracy, and we are citizens of the UK and also Europe. The Queen has a ceremonial role within UK law, because we have a longer history than the US (I almost wrote because we have a history, but that would be disrespectful).
Guess what else? We DON'T WANT guns in the UK. That's why we have far fewer gun related deaths in the UK.
No ID cards in the UK. (not yet anyway).