Every soldier in every Western army - including the US Army - has had it drummed into him that he has a duty to refuse unlawful orders, and that nothing can protect him from War Crimes prosecution if he doesn't
You have to obey the orders of the Commander-in-Chief above all. If the order "Do not disobey this order, at all costs, which is to disobey any unlawful order" comes in, as long as they follow that order they are safe.
Otherwise, they are disobeying orders and are not safe.
No, you have not illustrated this. You have illustrated that you are ignorant about the facts of the matter.
Yes, I have illustrated this. You are choosing to not understand that setting up a filter, whitelist, or blacklist takes 5 minutes. It doesn't cost you money, either.
Consider for one second someone who cannot set up a filter because filters can trash mail that should have been read. As such, filtering is not a solution.
Then they are a fucking idiot who shouldn't have a mail server.
Now please read up on some of the facts at hand before you continue your flow of misplaced attacks.
Sorry, how many mail servers to you admin? I'm currently building a whitelist challenge/response signed email system for exim. What are you working on?
They don't effectively differentiate that act of unauthorized copying from that of property theft because they're just minor modifications of the words "theft" and "stole"-- words which imply property crime.
Sorry, you are breaking a law. Whether or not you agree with that law doesn't mean you arne't doing it. I disagree with not being able to shoot people in the kneecap for being stupid, but it doesn't mean it is right if I do it.
"Copyright Infringement" is a complicated term because the whole notion of copyrights is a convoluted balancing act between content creators deserving remuneration and the public's right to freely exchange and expand upon common cultural artifacts.
When the discussion centers common cultural artifacts, maybe I'll give this argument some thought.
Theft" and "stealing" are so simple because property rights are based on posession of physical items-- a car, a collection of stamps, a piece of land, etc.
Funny how the dictionary says that property doesn't have to be tangible. Only those who think that they are somehow given the right to get music for free.
What copyright is meant to do is give the creator a limited monopoly on the distribution of copies, thus giving them a means of paying the rent.
And you are stealing that monopoly. And it isn't the creator, it is whoever is designated as the copyright holder. You are stealing their copyright title.
It's really very important to understand that property law and copyright law are two totally unrelated things.
But taking them when you aren't allowed to is both morally and legally wrong.
No, the reason why we don't like spam is because it's annoying, costs us time and money, and because it is being forced down our throats. It's got nothing to do with free speech either. Banning spam does not affect free speech.
It costs you time and money if you are a fucking idiot, as I've illustrated. A monkey with cerebral palsy can setup spam filtering that works. If you can't do it, well, I think that's pretty clear.
The time and money argument is just a stale, overused, but factually incorrect argument. Pick a different one.
You don't even seem to understand that I don't like spam, but the reason why people bitch about it on Slashdot is just retarded. I'm pretty sure that nobody on Slashdot who bitches about the time and money aspect of it actually maintains email servers large enough to care.
Just FYI, so far today I have worked with C, C++, Perl, Python and asm for Win32 NT/2K/XP, WinCE 2002, WinCE.NET, Symbian series 60 native, Symbian UIQ native, Symbian series 60 wins emulator, Symbian UIQ wins emulator, and I'm just about to start on some linux fixes.
Then I guess you should actually know what moc does instead of being an illiterate dipshit? Or maybe you should read what people write before trying to criticize them.
But, ooh, gosh, you've used g++ and VC6, so I'd better shut the fuck up, eh, sparky?
It's better to keep your mouth shut and let everyone wonder if you are an idiot, than open it and prove it.
Just because I posted a difference between g++ and VC6 doesn't mean that's all I've used.
I think you are full of shit though, as anybody who needs to use that many languages/platforms in that short of a time period is bullshitting.
Feel free to prove me wrong.
Because today I've used COBOL, Pascal, Smalltalk, Squirrel, Brainfuck, Perl, C++, C, ASM for x86, on an AS/400, i686, i586, ia64, with Windows, Linux, every BSD under the sun, while making a double latte with a twist of lemon.
Please don't blame her for the value of the settlement, it was jurors that chose the punitive damages.
My mistake. I thought the initial damages was for $1M and the punitive damages were much higher. I didn't realize the punitive damages were the amazingly high figure.
yes, I know how the case ended up, with coffee over a certain temperature being banned. It was still her fault she spilt it over herself though.
The law of beverages was there before hand. McDonalds violated that. It was therefor negligence on their part. If they had followed the rules, her spilling coffee on herself would have resulted in ruined clothes -- not severe burns in her lap.
I guess you can always find a reason why it is someone else's fault (or liability...), never your own.
I've been sued twice in my life. Once, they actually had grounds, the other they didn't. People are sue happy. I know someone who should sue the county but isn't. He broke his back during a car accident that was his fault. He was driving on an unfamiliar road that has a blind corner that is unmarked, with no guard rail, and has an average of 5 fatal single-vehicle accidents a year.
He did the same thing those 5 do, and missed the second corner and rolled down the hill next to the road. He was the first to live this year, with 2 fatalities this year.
The county still hasn't put up any caution signs or a guard rail, and probably wont until someone sues them.
Except I could probably sue you for harassment. But if not, it still isn't the same because you would have to pay for sending those postcards.
Now, what if I got to send free postcards if the other side of them had an advertisement on? And also, you need to look up the definition of harassment.
When spammers spam me, I pay for my own bandwidth, and I have to spend a lot of time filtering and working to get rid of the spam.
Setup a whitelist. And how much do you pay for bandwidth that even the most spamfilled months require? Probably $0.00 because you don't ever go over your bandwidth cap, or it's ran off of your homeline.
If you are really worried about bandwidth, you are getting ripped off by your providor.
This is my beef with the anti-Spam arguments: They're all bullshit. It takes about 5 minutes to setup a spam filter. If you can actually setup a proper email (SMTP) server, than you can setup a spam filter. If you can't, you have no business having your own email server. 5 minutes is so much time, and your precious bandwidth is a bullshit argument.
Pick a new one. The real reason why we don't like spam is because it's annoying. End of story.
Even if you don't agree to your company's ethic, you are working for the company, so in a moral way you are making the company's ethic your own. Don't argue with financial needs. All servants to morally questionable entities had financial needs as their primary excuse. Just imagine how many tyrannies would have been doomed from the beginning if people weren't dropping their ethics because they had families to support.
I agree, but I also believe that you have a right ot your family before yourself. Although, selling out to a cause you don't believe in is a horrible example to set for your children.
I would rather have poor children that have a strong moral conviction than well-off children who have no morals.
But spammers won't stop sending me mail, and they even try to get around my filters. How you can even compare these is beyond me.
You can stop checking your mail.
You can stop visiting Slashdot.
Shit, was it that hard? Your email address belongs to the people running the domain. They can change it, turn it off, make it forward to something else. An email address is not a piece of property, it is purely a label.
Do you own your address? No. You own the property the address points to. You can't stop someone from sending you letters, either.
If a daft woman who stuck a full cup of coffee between her legs, and drive off, spilling it all over the place, and they *successfully* sue mcDonalds because 'it was too hot', then anyone caught by the RIAAs can sue Kazaa because 'they made it too easy to steal'.
First, the lawsuit was appealed and McDonalds won and then she appealed that decision and it was a big ordeal. I think the final payout to her was several hundred thousand.
Second, you cannot serve beverages over a certain temperature due to this. Unless the customer explicitely asks for it. McDonalds served her a beverage over that temperature, as was evident by the burns sustained from the coffee spilling.
She was asking for way too much money, but it was a valid lawsuit.
I propose a new word, that is easier than "Copyright Infringement" and as catchy as "theft" and "stealing"
We can go with the dot-Com method, and call it "e-theft" or, perhaps, "iTheft" (Sorry Steve)
Or, we can go with the US Government acronym-crazy method and call it "USTOLE": Unauthorized (Stolen) Transmission Of Licensed Entities.
Option number 3 is the catchy, inventive new words so common because all the domain names that make sense are taken and resorting to using dead languages: Furax (Latin, for being inclined to steal)
That's all I can think of, feel free to add your own.
Man, I've already read so many whiney your-a-prick-chrisd posts it's making me sick.
Sorry, I know chris in person. He is a prick. He's a self-important, egocentric dick.
Do you understand the implications of hiring a former SCO employer? From reading your piss-and-whine posts you obviously don't.
You obviously haven't read a lot of my other posts. I'm saying they are perfectly fine doing it, I just think it's stupid and a publicity stunt.
Man! I feel like I'm at church, and all of the pious fucks are looking down their noses and whispering about something while looking over at some kid not wearing a tie...
Well, at least you realizing you are acting like you belong in Sunday School.
Damage don't care which division you work in, or whether you were even remotely involved in the whole debacle. They'll happily discriminate against you if you worked on something that didn't involve the "suspect" code in the slightest.
Go look and see how many employees SCO had after May 2003, and what their jobs were.
Just go back and look at the layoff history, and staff. It was pretty much people who were involved, hence why Chris put the May 2003 cut-off in there.
As a side note: I hardly see that one (small) company refusing to employ SCO people is newsworthy. Even if chrisd is on the board and a geek website notible. Now if it was a fortune 100 or FTSE 100 company - then that would be something to talk about.
It's because Slashdot editors are self-important egocentric people who get free publicity for their pie-in-the-sky ventures.
When the Nazis were tried (in Nuremberg IIRC) it was concluded that the soldiers were responsible for their actions and could not justify their actions based on the explanation that they were just following orders.
There is a level of reasonability here though. The Nazi soldiers were actually killing people.
SCOs coders are writing code (well, they were till they got laid off), not promoting the lawsuit.
This is why there is the Geneva convention, as well as RoE -- to prevent those in charge making soldiers do things they can't. As long as the soldier follows orders, along with following the Geneva and RoE rules, they're in the clear.
Please don't invoke Godwins law.
Bah, it was a great point you made. Too many people just like to abuse Godwins law.
You're defending moc when your parent was dissing C++.
He was even dissing the variances in multiple C++ compilers. That is the reason for moc. You need moc to make sure that it all compiles no matter what your compiler is. There are still a lot of things that are different between compilers (g++ supports array indexing with unsigned longs, VC6 doesn't, for example) and moc takes care of a lot of those.
It makes C++ easier for doing cross platform development.
Tell you what, next time I hear someone slagging off the Windows kernel, I'll explain at great length why Windows Media Player isn't as bad as they're making it out to be.
The only reason why you would be doing that is because you don't understand what moc does.
You do not persecute a soldier for following orders. While I think that legally, and idealistically, they (Damage Studios) have every right to do it, I think it really is just a childish act. If it were IBM, or a "real" company I would probably complain about it.
The only reason why Damage is even known is because Chris used to work for VA, and was an editor on Slashdot. Having shitty concept art doesn't make a game.
I believe this could be considered discrimination, and companies are required to keep all resumes they receive on file.
Companies are only required to keep resumes on file that meet their submission guidelines. If you clearly state, "This is the only way you can send a resume" than you only need to store those that come in that way.
Any EOE experts to give some clarification?
I'm not an expert, but I pretend on Slashdot. This is just speculation, so treat it as such.
From Damage Studio's Point of View they are filtering their applicants based upon previous documented work ethics. You can filter applicants based on past history, without it being discrimination. For example, would the SEC hire someone from the financial department at Enron? Probably not, as they have a history of supporting false claims.
Same thing. SCO employees are supporting false claims, as well as bogus lawsuits. This is something Damage doesn't want to get involved with, so they are opting to not hire people who have worked for a company who is very well known for doing that.
Discrimination usually means things you can't help, too. Nobody is forcing anybody to work at SCO.
There are limitation as to what somebody can send you in the mail.
Because you can cause physical harm, or mail fraud (which is illegal, through the USPS) and such. If email just had to be delivered by a person in a blue suit, there would be limitations on that, too. But then again, email wouldn't be free then, either.
Also 99% of all spam is fraudulant in nature. Those pills will not make your dick bigger and there is no money secreted away in nigeria.
The nigeria scam would be considered mail fraud if someone mailed that to you. The dick enlargment wouldn't, as it's an advertisement for a non-FDA approved herbal remedy. You can probably buy the same herb at your local drug store.
If the govt put the same restrictions on spam that they do n mail and telemarketing I would be very happy.
You are comparing apples and oranges.
It breaks down like this: If you run a mail server, aggressively filter out spam. If you don't, setup aggressive spam filters.
I would be happy if I could pursue civil action, but making it a criminal offense is wrong. Civil action exists, so it's perfectly fine.
The system works, you lazy SOBs just need to start suing more spammers.
Are you the average majority, ridden with random apps and spyware and sporting 7000 icons on the desktop?
Eh, probably. I play games on that box. It isn't trusted on the network. I don't really care about it much. I can format it and reinstall my games and be fine.
How is this +5 informative?
You see, Slashdot distributes tokens for potential moderators. When enough tokens are acheived by any user, they get moderation "privledges." The ability to moderate comes partially at random, but depends on what type of activities you do. After being chosen to be a moderator, you have five moderation points to be used. My guess is that 4 people agreed to moderate it up, and the last one decided to moderate it up +1, Informative. I hope this clears the air for you.
Unless there is an exploit for DNS or ftp auth I'd say you're kinda safe. Of course exotic needs demanding exotic firewall configurations might differ. Using windows update doesn't make it amazingly secure, it just stirs the shit
Or if you don't setup your firewall rules correctly, and allow someone to gain access to the masq boxes or quite a few other things that can happen.
People who think that Windows == Insecure and Non-Windows == Secure tend to not know what Secure and Insecure really are.
So is your address and telephone number. And yet there are laws limiting telemarketing.
No laws via your address, as long as it is legitimate mail (not a fraud offer.) Telemarketing is different though, because it interupts your daily life. Like dinner. If email had to make an annoying ringing sound and your only option were to miss all your emails or deal with your computer ringing all through dinner, there would be laws against it.
Obviously you don't develop Windows applications. On W2K, I have had two "critical updates" and SP2 break one of our homegrown applications.
I have one Windows application that is out, but no, primarily I am a unix developer. I haven't had any problems with it under Win2K but we keep all our systems in sync.
I really don't know jack shit about it, as my app is written in Qt and does most of the stuff on a UNIX server.
I choose to come to slashdot, where his opinion is stored, and get it (even if I filter it on server-side).
You choose to get an email address, or an email server, and have that email address available to people who might send you unsolicited email. Much like you will receive unsolicited comments here.
This is not quite the same as him trying to push it onto my system without my permission.
Apparently it is you who doesn't understand SMTP. By running an SMTP server, you are granting permission to anybody to send an email to an address. There is no ToS for SMTP, and unless you setup a white list, it is a publicly accessible system for delivery of email.
If you setup a webserver, do you bitch that people will visit?
You don't get free storage on my machine or free bandwith without my permission.
You give me permission by running an SMTP server that is accessible over the internet. The SMTP server you run is doing exactly what it was designed to do. The people sending you spam are sending you exactly what the SMTP server is expecting it to get. The email you check is email that was delivered according to the guidelines on your email server.
So quit with the over-dramatic bullshit and do server-side filtering if you don't want spam.
Slashdot Mirror
Every soldier in every Western army - including the US Army - has had it drummed into him that he has a duty to refuse unlawful orders, and that nothing can protect him from War Crimes prosecution if he doesn't
You have to obey the orders of the Commander-in-Chief above all. If the order "Do not disobey this order, at all costs, which is to disobey any unlawful order" comes in, as long as they follow that order they are safe.
Otherwise, they are disobeying orders and are not safe.
No, you have not illustrated this. You have illustrated that you are ignorant about the facts of the matter.
Yes, I have illustrated this. You are choosing to not understand that setting up a filter, whitelist, or blacklist takes 5 minutes. It doesn't cost you money, either.
Consider for one second someone who cannot set up a filter because filters can trash mail that should have been read. As such, filtering is not a solution.
Then they are a fucking idiot who shouldn't have a mail server.
Now please read up on some of the facts at hand before you continue your flow of misplaced attacks.
Sorry, how many mail servers to you admin? I'm currently building a whitelist challenge/response signed email system for exim. What are you working on?
They don't effectively differentiate that act of unauthorized copying from that of property theft because they're just minor modifications of the words "theft" and "stole"-- words which imply property crime.
Sorry, you are breaking a law. Whether or not you agree with that law doesn't mean you arne't doing it. I disagree with not being able to shoot people in the kneecap for being stupid, but it doesn't mean it is right if I do it.
"Copyright Infringement" is a complicated term because the whole notion of copyrights is a convoluted balancing act between content creators deserving remuneration and the public's right to freely exchange and expand upon common cultural artifacts.
When the discussion centers common cultural artifacts, maybe I'll give this argument some thought.
Theft" and "stealing" are so simple because property rights are based on posession of physical items-- a car, a collection of stamps, a piece of land, etc.
Funny how the dictionary says that property doesn't have to be tangible. Only those who think that they are somehow given the right to get music for free.
What copyright is meant to do is give the creator a limited monopoly on the distribution of copies, thus giving them a means of paying the rent.
And you are stealing that monopoly. And it isn't the creator, it is whoever is designated as the copyright holder. You are stealing their copyright title.
It's really very important to understand that property law and copyright law are two totally unrelated things.
But taking them when you aren't allowed to is both morally and legally wrong.
No, the reason why we don't like spam is because it's annoying, costs us time and money, and because it is being forced down our throats. It's got nothing to do with free speech either. Banning spam does not affect free speech.
It costs you time and money if you are a fucking idiot, as I've illustrated. A monkey with cerebral palsy can setup spam filtering that works. If you can't do it, well, I think that's pretty clear.
The time and money argument is just a stale, overused, but factually incorrect argument. Pick a different one.
You don't even seem to understand that I don't like spam, but the reason why people bitch about it on Slashdot is just retarded. I'm pretty sure that nobody on Slashdot who bitches about the time and money aspect of it actually maintains email servers large enough to care.
Just FYI, so far today I have worked with C, C++, Perl, Python and asm for Win32 NT/2K/XP, WinCE 2002, WinCE .NET, Symbian series 60 native, Symbian UIQ native, Symbian series 60 wins emulator, Symbian UIQ wins emulator, and I'm just about to start on some linux fixes.
Then I guess you should actually know what moc does instead of being an illiterate dipshit? Or maybe you should read what people write before trying to criticize them.
But, ooh, gosh, you've used g++ and VC6, so I'd better shut the fuck up, eh, sparky?
It's better to keep your mouth shut and let everyone wonder if you are an idiot, than open it and prove it.
Just because I posted a difference between g++ and VC6 doesn't mean that's all I've used.
I think you are full of shit though, as anybody who needs to use that many languages/platforms in that short of a time period is bullshitting.
Feel free to prove me wrong.
Because today I've used COBOL, Pascal, Smalltalk, Squirrel, Brainfuck, Perl, C++, C, ASM for x86, on an AS/400, i686, i586, ia64, with Windows, Linux, every BSD under the sun, while making a double latte with a twist of lemon.
Please don't blame her for the value of the settlement, it was jurors that chose the punitive damages.
My mistake. I thought the initial damages was for $1M and the punitive damages were much higher. I didn't realize the punitive damages were the amazingly high figure.
Thanks for correcting it.
yes, I know how the case ended up, with coffee over a certain temperature being banned. It was still her fault she spilt it over herself though.
The law of beverages was there before hand. McDonalds violated that. It was therefor negligence on their part. If they had followed the rules, her spilling coffee on herself would have resulted in ruined clothes -- not severe burns in her lap.
I guess you can always find a reason why it is someone else's fault (or liability...), never your own.
I've been sued twice in my life. Once, they actually had grounds, the other they didn't. People are sue happy. I know someone who should sue the county but isn't. He broke his back during a car accident that was his fault. He was driving on an unfamiliar road that has a blind corner that is unmarked, with no guard rail, and has an average of 5 fatal single-vehicle accidents a year.
He did the same thing those 5 do, and missed the second corner and rolled down the hill next to the road. He was the first to live this year, with 2 fatalities this year.
The county still hasn't put up any caution signs or a guard rail, and probably wont until someone sues them.
Except I could probably sue you for harassment. But if not, it still isn't the same because you would have to pay for sending those postcards.
Now, what if I got to send free postcards if the other side of them had an advertisement on? And also, you need to look up the definition of harassment.
When spammers spam me, I pay for my own bandwidth, and I have to spend a lot of time filtering and working to get rid of the spam.
Setup a whitelist. And how much do you pay for bandwidth that even the most spamfilled months require? Probably $0.00 because you don't ever go over your bandwidth cap, or it's ran off of your homeline.
If you are really worried about bandwidth, you are getting ripped off by your providor.
This is my beef with the anti-Spam arguments: They're all bullshit. It takes about 5 minutes to setup a spam filter. If you can actually setup a proper email (SMTP) server, than you can setup a spam filter. If you can't, you have no business having your own email server. 5 minutes is so much time, and your precious bandwidth is a bullshit argument.
Pick a new one. The real reason why we don't like spam is because it's annoying. End of story.
Oh dont worry, we'll be able to find tattered burlap bags which we will inevitably make into skin-tight garments.
Please, don't ever say that again.
Ever.
That is more scary than the Ring.
Also, mail and web are still different in that I choose which pages to open, while I cannot choose which mails to receive.
How the hell can you not choose which mails to receive? Ever hear of a whitelist? Or a blacklist? Or filtering?
And I can stop people from sending me snail mail advertising.
I can send you a postcard every day for the rest of your life saying, "Hi, I hope you are doing well today." and you cannot stop me.
Even if you don't agree to your company's ethic, you are working for the company, so in a moral way you are making the company's ethic your own. Don't argue with financial needs. All servants to morally questionable entities had financial needs as their primary excuse. Just imagine how many tyrannies would have been doomed from the beginning if people weren't dropping their ethics because they had families to support.
I agree, but I also believe that you have a right ot your family before yourself. Although, selling out to a cause you don't believe in is a horrible example to set for your children.
I would rather have poor children that have a strong moral conviction than well-off children who have no morals.
Great post, thanks for contributing it.
But spammers won't stop sending me mail, and they even try to get around my filters. How you can even compare these is beyond me.
You can stop checking your mail.
You can stop visiting Slashdot.
Shit, was it that hard? Your email address belongs to the people running the domain. They can change it, turn it off, make it forward to something else. An email address is not a piece of property, it is purely a label.
Do you own your address? No. You own the property the address points to. You can't stop someone from sending you letters, either.
If a daft woman who stuck a full cup of coffee between her legs, and drive off, spilling it all over the place, and they *successfully* sue mcDonalds because 'it was too hot', then anyone caught by the RIAAs can sue Kazaa because 'they made it too easy to steal'.
First, the lawsuit was appealed and McDonalds won and then she appealed that decision and it was a big ordeal. I think the final payout to her was several hundred thousand.
Second, you cannot serve beverages over a certain temperature due to this. Unless the customer explicitely asks for it. McDonalds served her a beverage over that temperature, as was evident by the burns sustained from the coffee spilling.
She was asking for way too much money, but it was a valid lawsuit.
I propose a new word, that is easier than "Copyright Infringement" and as catchy as "theft" and "stealing"
We can go with the dot-Com method, and call it "e-theft" or, perhaps, "iTheft" (Sorry Steve)
Or, we can go with the US Government acronym-crazy method and call it "USTOLE": Unauthorized (Stolen) Transmission Of Licensed Entities.
Option number 3 is the catchy, inventive new words so common because all the domain names that make sense are taken and resorting to using dead languages: Furax (Latin, for being inclined to steal)
That's all I can think of, feel free to add your own.
Man, I've already read so many whiney your-a-prick-chrisd posts it's making me sick.
Sorry, I know chris in person. He is a prick. He's a self-important, egocentric dick.
Do you understand the implications of hiring a former SCO employer? From reading your piss-and-whine posts you obviously don't.
You obviously haven't read a lot of my other posts. I'm saying they are perfectly fine doing it, I just think it's stupid and a publicity stunt.
Man! I feel like I'm at church, and all of the pious fucks are looking down their noses and whispering about something while looking over at some kid not wearing a tie...
Well, at least you realizing you are acting like you belong in Sunday School.
Damage don't care which division you work in, or whether you were even remotely involved in the whole debacle. They'll happily discriminate against you if you worked on something that didn't involve the "suspect" code in the slightest.
Go look and see how many employees SCO had after May 2003, and what their jobs were.
Just go back and look at the layoff history, and staff. It was pretty much people who were involved, hence why Chris put the May 2003 cut-off in there.
As a side note: I hardly see that one (small) company refusing to employ SCO people is newsworthy. Even if chrisd is on the board and a geek website notible. Now if it was a fortune 100 or FTSE 100 company - then that would be something to talk about.
It's because Slashdot editors are self-important egocentric people who get free publicity for their pie-in-the-sky ventures.
When the Nazis were tried (in Nuremberg IIRC) it was concluded that the soldiers were responsible for their actions and could not justify their actions based on the explanation that they were just following orders.
There is a level of reasonability here though. The Nazi soldiers were actually killing people.
SCOs coders are writing code (well, they were till they got laid off), not promoting the lawsuit.
This is why there is the Geneva convention, as well as RoE -- to prevent those in charge making soldiers do things they can't. As long as the soldier follows orders, along with following the Geneva and RoE rules, they're in the clear.
Please don't invoke Godwins law.
Bah, it was a great point you made. Too many people just like to abuse Godwins law.
You're defending moc when your parent was dissing C++.
He was even dissing the variances in multiple C++ compilers. That is the reason for moc. You need moc to make sure that it all compiles no matter what your compiler is. There are still a lot of things that are different between compilers (g++ supports array indexing with unsigned longs, VC6 doesn't, for example) and moc takes care of a lot of those.
It makes C++ easier for doing cross platform development.
Tell you what, next time I hear someone slagging off the Windows kernel, I'll explain at great length why Windows Media Player isn't as bad as they're making it out to be.
The only reason why you would be doing that is because you don't understand what moc does.
moc generates C++ code, sparky.
I agree with you.
You do not persecute a soldier for following orders. While I think that legally, and idealistically, they (Damage Studios) have every right to do it, I think it really is just a childish act. If it were IBM, or a "real" company I would probably complain about it.
The only reason why Damage is even known is because Chris used to work for VA, and was an editor on Slashdot. Having shitty concept art doesn't make a game.
I believe this could be considered discrimination, and companies are required to keep all resumes they receive on file.
Companies are only required to keep resumes on file that meet their submission guidelines. If you clearly state, "This is the only way you can send a resume" than you only need to store those that come in that way.
Any EOE experts to give some clarification?
I'm not an expert, but I pretend on Slashdot. This is just speculation, so treat it as such.
From Damage Studio's Point of View they are filtering their applicants based upon previous documented work ethics. You can filter applicants based on past history, without it being discrimination. For example, would the SEC hire someone from the financial department at Enron? Probably not, as they have a history of supporting false claims.
Same thing. SCO employees are supporting false claims, as well as bogus lawsuits. This is something Damage doesn't want to get involved with, so they are opting to not hire people who have worked for a company who is very well known for doing that.
Discrimination usually means things you can't help, too. Nobody is forcing anybody to work at SCO.
There are limitation as to what somebody can send you in the mail.
Because you can cause physical harm, or mail fraud (which is illegal, through the USPS) and such. If email just had to be delivered by a person in a blue suit, there would be limitations on that, too. But then again, email wouldn't be free then, either.
Also 99% of all spam is fraudulant in nature. Those pills will not make your dick bigger and there is no money secreted away in nigeria.
The nigeria scam would be considered mail fraud if someone mailed that to you. The dick enlargment wouldn't, as it's an advertisement for a non-FDA approved herbal remedy. You can probably buy the same herb at your local drug store.
If the govt put the same restrictions on spam that they do n mail and telemarketing I would be very happy.
You are comparing apples and oranges.
It breaks down like this: If you run a mail server, aggressively filter out spam. If you don't, setup aggressive spam filters.
I would be happy if I could pursue civil action, but making it a criminal offense is wrong. Civil action exists, so it's perfectly fine.
The system works, you lazy SOBs just need to start suing more spammers.
Are you the average majority, ridden with random apps and spyware and sporting 7000 icons on the desktop?
Eh, probably. I play games on that box. It isn't trusted on the network. I don't really care about it much. I can format it and reinstall my games and be fine.
How is this +5 informative?
You see, Slashdot distributes tokens for potential moderators. When enough tokens are acheived by any user, they get moderation "privledges." The ability to moderate comes partially at random, but depends on what type of activities you do. After being chosen to be a moderator, you have five moderation points to be used. My guess is that 4 people agreed to moderate it up, and the last one decided to moderate it up +1, Informative. I hope this clears the air for you.
Unless there is an exploit for DNS or ftp auth I'd say you're kinda safe. Of course exotic needs demanding exotic firewall configurations might differ. Using windows update doesn't make it amazingly secure, it just stirs the shit
Or if you don't setup your firewall rules correctly, and allow someone to gain access to the masq boxes or quite a few other things that can happen.
People who think that Windows == Insecure and Non-Windows == Secure tend to not know what Secure and Insecure really are.
So is your address and telephone number. And yet there are laws limiting telemarketing.
No laws via your address, as long as it is legitimate mail (not a fraud offer.) Telemarketing is different though, because it interupts your daily life. Like dinner. If email had to make an annoying ringing sound and your only option were to miss all your emails or deal with your computer ringing all through dinner, there would be laws against it.
Obviously you don't develop Windows applications. On W2K, I have had two "critical updates" and SP2 break one of our homegrown applications.
I have one Windows application that is out, but no, primarily I am a unix developer. I haven't had any problems with it under Win2K but we keep all our systems in sync.
I really don't know jack shit about it, as my app is written in Qt and does most of the stuff on a UNIX server.
Sorry I can't feel your pain.
Not even close.
Oh really?
I choose to come to slashdot, where his opinion is stored, and get it (even if I filter it on server-side).
You choose to get an email address, or an email server, and have that email address available to people who might send you unsolicited email. Much like you will receive unsolicited comments here.
This is not quite the same as him trying to push it onto my system without my permission.
Apparently it is you who doesn't understand SMTP. By running an SMTP server, you are granting permission to anybody to send an email to an address. There is no ToS for SMTP, and unless you setup a white list, it is a publicly accessible system for delivery of email.
If you setup a webserver, do you bitch that people will visit?
You don't get free storage on my machine or free bandwith without my permission.
You give me permission by running an SMTP server that is accessible over the internet. The SMTP server you run is doing exactly what it was designed to do. The people sending you spam are sending you exactly what the SMTP server is expecting it to get. The email you check is email that was delivered according to the guidelines on your email server.
So quit with the over-dramatic bullshit and do server-side filtering if you don't want spam.