Richard Branson has some good ideas with Virgin when his divisions grow.
Once a team gets too big (I can't remember the number, 50?) he cuts the team in half and then has each team run independently with their own budgets, etc. This lets people know and meet a smaller number of people instead of having to get to know hundreds or thousands.
It also helps the people create a community they can interact with. Sure you won't have one massive community but who really wants a love-in with hundreds when you've got work to do? Instead of thinking about 1 monolithic community try and think of multiple, smaller communities that people can become involved in and feel like they actually contribute to something greater.
54 year sentence by the GP, the dude was born in 58 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Klaudt), I don't like his chances in surviving prison let alone getting a job once his out.
I think your 'plumber' or 'electrician' quote is more accurate then it appears. The Construction Industry has been called the construction industry and has been full of construction workers for a lot longer then there has been IT and people don't care too much. A foreman, an engineer or an architect are all lumped into the same industry as a labourer so they use their job itself to differentiate themselves. Or how about medicine? The medical receptionist is in the same world as a brain surgeon so they just use their titles. If this guy wants to differentiate himself he should push for a correct title to match what he does or should learn how to sell himself better and not care about the title.
So anyways. You've been modded up already but I think the mods should push you to 5, insightful
This depends on where you're from. I stayed in a 4-star hotel in our nations capital (Canberra, Australia) where they charge something like $1 first 20mb, $1 every mb after that and you pretty much only had a 256k connection so I could definitely see an accelerator being handy there.
Fabricated? Assumed would be more accurate. Every smoker I've seen roll their smokes while driving swerves. Not everytime but they do. They move their knee just that bit and swerve. Whether it be when they fumble around with the papers, lick to seal it, whatever. They all have so I assume he did. Most didn't even realise unless it was something drastic like they've found themselves more then just the tyres over the line and heading into oncoming traffic.
My biggest issue is the fact they use their knee to control the vehicle. When driving with your knee there is no way you can control the car if something drastic occurs
you're probably sarcastic but I'll bite. No consequences except for those cars you veered in front of or pushed out of the way because you didn't have complete control. Driving with your knee is stupid to say the least. If you got a blow out you'd be gone so don't think of it as fine, think of yourself as lucky
That's true. If we lived in a culture where a leash was treated as normal use then it wouldn't be so shocking. Until that day, and the day where kids will not be 'scarred' by having been on a leash, the electric leash might have to suffice
Your reply was definitely very well put. I usually make the effort to be open minded in everything so I'll definitely try to have different views instead of going for the 'children are not animals' reaction
I find that the leash would be more invasive as you're treating your child like a pet, not a fellow human. A stroller just seems more civilised even if they both give the same restrictions. Except a stroller is handy for carrying everything you need with your child, provides shade as well as giving your child a chance to rest when they get exhausted. Everyone hates that tired, noisy toddler
However if you've raised you child to stick near you, never let go of your hand, etc then the 'electric leash' is for those worst case scenarios when they are abducted or drift off somewhere at the beach (yes, bad parenting but it happens to the best, most cautios parents)
So what? There is no legal liability attached to plagiarism; copyright infringement is the only legal issue. Plagiarism is merely a moral, ethical issue that share elements of copyright infringement. And to your example, copyright infringement has a defense of independent creation. Among other things, the author would have to show access to the "infringed" work.
But isn't plagiarism the proof of copyright infringement? You have duplicated the works of the artist without express permission so you have infringed on their copyright so even if they only share elements the act of plagiarising is an act of copyright infringement. Ignoring fair use which isn't plagiarism or infringement
Of all the works in the world, works owned by a "large publisher with a huge sum of cash" is likely the minority of all copyrights.
Even though they might be the minority there would be a good chance that it's of a much higher quality so the world at large would have more to gain from these works. People whose livelihoods are at stake will more likely produce better work in as much as their life depends on it. I think we could learn more from these people then from Joe Bloggs who thought it a good idea to post his own LOLcat picture.
Besides, the point of the above plan is not to deprive people of their copyrights. It's a plan to balance to trade-offs: continued protection for those that see a continued economic value and release to the public so that others can exploit them.
And seeing the continued economic value to their work 95 years on is reasonable? Well after the person has likely died unless by some freak coincidence they produced quality work in their first year of life AND live well past national averages? So the persons family or company should then get a free ride (if it has continued economic value it will pay to renew itself) on this persons work? Give it to the community at large so that more work can be produced, so that people can evolve and adapt what has been done into something that is more suitable for modern times
Copyrights don't protect the ideas of stories. They protect the actual physical work themselves. Ultimately, this comes back around to conflating plagiarism with copyright infringement.
Copyrights do protect the ideas of stories. If it leaves the person head in a recorded way, be it printed/pressed/written in blood they still have copyright on it. If a musician releases an amazing sequence of riffs that is beyond just a sample, which they planned to make a great song with but never did, then my understanding is they still have copyright on it. Back on topic though a company might see it, buy it from the artist and then licence it out for the next 100 years as it continues to pay for itself. How does this protect the original artist? They got their pitance and the big company can afford to pay renew fees forever from it, likely more then the artist got in each renewal. If it was released into public realm then a lot more musicians could put their spin on it and release something worthy
You don't know many artists, do you?
I do. Good artists release what they deem quality work. Why would they release anything less? Their life relies on image which is created by the release of quality work so there is a lot of stuff that they don't publish or release for others to see.
So? I fail to see your point. If it isn't published no one gets the benefit of it anyway and if it is ultimately published then the same rules would apply, no harm no foul. The only questions might be over ownership of the copyright.
That's right, no-one gets the benefit from it. Until someone discovers a missing Shakespeare play and publishes that. They then get the full rights to his work for the next 100 years. Something like that would definitely be better for the world at large
To me your approach is onl
Re:Women's issues in computing workplace
on
Coders At Work
·
· Score: 1
Lack of bra . $0
Glass office for all to see in . $10,000
Woman is approached less due to coder geeks fear of naked breasts . priceless
I think that when you can show that the data will not be lost within 70 years (there was that CD article recently about CD's not lasting beyond 6) and proof that people will still be able to access it in 70+ years (who still has a 5 1/4 floppy handy from 15 years ago and PATA ports are finally phasing out) you might convince others that it is better then paper and ink which needs no decoding, regular transferring or special devices and will need something extreme like weather or fire to destroy it.
Oh yes, because a building that took several years to build and paint plus still has practical use is certainly comparable to a scuff mark in the dust and an abandoned skeleton of steel. I totally see your logic there...
But we are the future generation. If there is a way to retrieve the same data and knowledge for the other landing sites (which has been suggested) and preserving the site without stopping progression then I can definitely agree with your point. Knowing where we came from is a great thing that I embrace fully, but, for a few teary moments for some possible future generation that may find interest in our history I don't think is enough incentive to preserve the landing site.
Mod parent up. Why should we preserve it? How are we suppose to move forward (by seeing how the machines have fared and see if it is possible to use this as a launch to Mars or possible location for colonisation) if we refuse to tread on the steps of those that came before? Simply keeping the markings there for no other reason then posterity just sounds like a waste to me when there are things we can learn.
> I agree to the fact that the whole thing seems gimmicky at best, but rest assured if my generation (I'm 18) goes to the moon it will most likely be the result of a pissing contest with no value at all.
Much like how the Space Race vs Russia can be seen as?
#1 sounds like a pain for those that just don't care about voicemail. There are people that let their voicemail fill just so they don't have to deal with it.
#2 and 3 (and I think even #4) I'd have thought most companies would have by now anyways? Optus in Australia (owned by Singtel) does exactly that so what ones don't? Or at least use to but I've stopped using voicemail for a while now. Just asking for curiosity more then anything as Australia can't be forward thinking in anything technical you know, it's what some of our politicians strongly believe (*sigh*)
So the only real addition to systems already in place is #1 and I can see that being a pain in the arse when "I don't care about voicemail or not and can't be bothered to cancel the service" (not I as in me but I as in some random persons thoughts)
This sounds like a major government application. Could you imagine someone in a position to read a top secret document bopping along as they read? Then again. How hard is it to keep your head still while you read a document while listening to music? This is a non-issue.
Wasn't Billy Connelly's movie "The man who sued God" based on a true story? And now insurance companies can no longer use that as a reason to avoid the claim as that's the whole reason to get insurance?
Slashdot Mirror
Richard Branson has some good ideas with Virgin when his divisions grow.
Once a team gets too big (I can't remember the number, 50?) he cuts the team in half and then has each team run independently with their own budgets, etc. This lets people know and meet a smaller number of people instead of having to get to know hundreds or thousands.
It also helps the people create a community they can interact with. Sure you won't have one massive community but who really wants a love-in with hundreds when you've got work to do? Instead of thinking about 1 monolithic community try and think of multiple, smaller communities that people can become involved in and feel like they actually contribute to something greater.
Oh my. An AC troll without a spelling mistake and good grammar! Sorry Mr AC but you fail
54 year sentence by the GP, the dude was born in 58 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Klaudt), I don't like his chances in surviving prison let alone getting a job once his out.
I think your 'plumber' or 'electrician' quote is more accurate then it appears. The Construction Industry has been called the construction industry and has been full of construction workers for a lot longer then there has been IT and people don't care too much. A foreman, an engineer or an architect are all lumped into the same industry as a labourer so they use their job itself to differentiate themselves. Or how about medicine? The medical receptionist is in the same world as a brain surgeon so they just use their titles. If this guy wants to differentiate himself he should push for a correct title to match what he does or should learn how to sell himself better and not care about the title.
So anyways. You've been modded up already but I think the mods should push you to 5, insightful
This depends on where you're from. I stayed in a 4-star hotel in our nations capital (Canberra, Australia) where they charge something like $1 first 20mb, $1 every mb after that and you pretty much only had a 256k connection so I could definitely see an accelerator being handy there.
That's because, as a mate of mine said, European, Asian and Indian drivers are batshit insane. If everyone is batshit insane it works
Fabricated? Assumed would be more accurate. Every smoker I've seen roll their smokes while driving swerves. Not everytime but they do. They move their knee just that bit and swerve. Whether it be when they fumble around with the papers, lick to seal it, whatever. They all have so I assume he did. Most didn't even realise unless it was something drastic like they've found themselves more then just the tyres over the line and heading into oncoming traffic.
My biggest issue is the fact they use their knee to control the vehicle. When driving with your knee there is no way you can control the car if something drastic occurs
you're probably sarcastic but I'll bite. No consequences except for those cars you veered in front of or pushed out of the way because you didn't have complete control. Driving with your knee is stupid to say the least. If you got a blow out you'd be gone so don't think of it as fine, think of yourself as lucky
That's true. If we lived in a culture where a leash was treated as normal use then it wouldn't be so shocking. Until that day, and the day where kids will not be 'scarred' by having been on a leash, the electric leash might have to suffice
Your reply was definitely very well put. I usually make the effort to be open minded in everything so I'll definitely try to have different views instead of going for the 'children are not animals' reaction
I find that the leash would be more invasive as you're treating your child like a pet, not a fellow human. A stroller just seems more civilised even if they both give the same restrictions. Except a stroller is handy for carrying everything you need with your child, provides shade as well as giving your child a chance to rest when they get exhausted. Everyone hates that tired, noisy toddler
However if you've raised you child to stick near you, never let go of your hand, etc then the 'electric leash' is for those worst case scenarios when they are abducted or drift off somewhere at the beach (yes, bad parenting but it happens to the best, most cautios parents)
So what? There is no legal liability attached to plagiarism; copyright infringement is the only legal issue. Plagiarism is merely a moral, ethical issue that share elements of copyright infringement. And to your example, copyright infringement has a defense of independent creation. Among other things, the author would have to show access to the "infringed" work.
But isn't plagiarism the proof of copyright infringement? You have duplicated the works of the artist without express permission so you have infringed on their copyright so even if they only share elements the act of plagiarising is an act of copyright infringement. Ignoring fair use which isn't plagiarism or infringement
Of all the works in the world, works owned by a "large publisher with a huge sum of cash" is likely the minority of all copyrights.
Even though they might be the minority there would be a good chance that it's of a much higher quality so the world at large would have more to gain from these works. People whose livelihoods are at stake will more likely produce better work in as much as their life depends on it. I think we could learn more from these people then from Joe Bloggs who thought it a good idea to post his own LOLcat picture.
Besides, the point of the above plan is not to deprive people of their copyrights. It's a plan to balance to trade-offs: continued protection for those that see a continued economic value and release to the public so that others can exploit them.
And seeing the continued economic value to their work 95 years on is reasonable? Well after the person has likely died unless by some freak coincidence they produced quality work in their first year of life AND live well past national averages? So the persons family or company should then get a free ride (if it has continued economic value it will pay to renew itself) on this persons work? Give it to the community at large so that more work can be produced, so that people can evolve and adapt what has been done into something that is more suitable for modern times
Copyrights don't protect the ideas of stories. They protect the actual physical work themselves. Ultimately, this comes back around to conflating plagiarism with copyright infringement.
Copyrights do protect the ideas of stories. If it leaves the person head in a recorded way, be it printed/pressed/written in blood they still have copyright on it. If a musician releases an amazing sequence of riffs that is beyond just a sample, which they planned to make a great song with but never did, then my understanding is they still have copyright on it. Back on topic though a company might see it, buy it from the artist and then licence it out for the next 100 years as it continues to pay for itself. How does this protect the original artist? They got their pitance and the big company can afford to pay renew fees forever from it, likely more then the artist got in each renewal. If it was released into public realm then a lot more musicians could put their spin on it and release something worthy
You don't know many artists, do you?
I do. Good artists release what they deem quality work. Why would they release anything less? Their life relies on image which is created by the release of quality work so there is a lot of stuff that they don't publish or release for others to see.
So? I fail to see your point. If it isn't published no one gets the benefit of it anyway and if it is ultimately published then the same rules would apply, no harm no foul. The only questions might be over ownership of the copyright.
That's right, no-one gets the benefit from it. Until someone discovers a missing Shakespeare play and publishes that. They then get the full rights to his work for the next 100 years. Something like that would definitely be better for the world at large
To me your approach is onl
Lack of bra . $0
Glass office for all to see in . $10,000
Woman is approached less due to coder geeks fear of naked breasts . priceless
But sex outside you could create a porno the same way The Get Out Clause created their music clip http://www.npr.org/blogs/bryantpark/2008/05/band_uses_security_cameras_to.html
Sounds like a win - win to me.
So this satalite will be sent out to discover the universes hippys?
I think that when you can show that the data will not be lost within 70 years (there was that CD article recently about CD's not lasting beyond 6) and proof that people will still be able to access it in 70+ years (who still has a 5 1/4 floppy handy from 15 years ago and PATA ports are finally phasing out) you might convince others that it is better then paper and ink which needs no decoding, regular transferring or special devices and will need something extreme like weather or fire to destroy it.
Oh yes, because a building that took several years to build and paint plus still has practical use is certainly comparable to a scuff mark in the dust and an abandoned skeleton of steel. I totally see your logic there ...
But we are the future generation. If there is a way to retrieve the same data and knowledge for the other landing sites (which has been suggested) and preserving the site without stopping progression then I can definitely agree with your point. Knowing where we came from is a great thing that I embrace fully, but, for a few teary moments for some possible future generation that may find interest in our history I don't think is enough incentive to preserve the landing site.
Mod parent up. Why should we preserve it? How are we suppose to move forward (by seeing how the machines have fared and see if it is possible to use this as a launch to Mars or possible location for colonisation) if we refuse to tread on the steps of those that came before? Simply keeping the markings there for no other reason then posterity just sounds like a waste to me when there are things we can learn.
So on an ipod you would get instant feedback from the 'click' the clickwheel makes. Would immediate audable feedback count in this situation?
> I agree to the fact that the whole thing seems gimmicky at best, but rest assured if my generation (I'm 18) goes to the moon it will most likely be the result of a pissing contest with no value at all.
Much like how the Space Race vs Russia can be seen as?
It's porn. Women are optional
#1 sounds like a pain for those that just don't care about voicemail. There are people that let their voicemail fill just so they don't have to deal with it.
#2 and 3 (and I think even #4) I'd have thought most companies would have by now anyways? Optus in Australia (owned by Singtel) does exactly that so what ones don't? Or at least use to but I've stopped using voicemail for a while now. Just asking for curiosity more then anything as Australia can't be forward thinking in anything technical you know, it's what some of our politicians strongly believe (*sigh*)
So the only real addition to systems already in place is #1 and I can see that being a pain in the arse when "I don't care about voicemail or not and can't be bothered to cancel the service" (not I as in me but I as in some random persons thoughts)
This just in! Celebrity 1 Chinese trip cut short due to pro-tibet media reports! More, including chinese prison cell photos, at 11 ...
This sounds like a major government application. Could you imagine someone in a position to read a top secret document bopping along as they read? Then again. How hard is it to keep your head still while you read a document while listening to music? This is a non-issue.
Wasn't Billy Connelly's movie "The man who sued God" based on a true story? And now insurance companies can no longer use that as a reason to avoid the claim as that's the whole reason to get insurance?