but of course the advanced tech we will have in 100-150 years will look like magic from our prospective.
Ehh...I'm not sure about that. If you look at the technology now vs. the technology of 30 years ago, there isn't that much of a jump. It's possible we're approaching the end of big technological jumps, and instead just looking at refinement over the rest of human history.
I find the fact that medical and lawyer exams are based on multiple choice rather disturbing. As an engineer almost all of my test were long answer.
It's done the exact same way for engineers as doctors and lawyers; what they're talking about here is the professional licensing exam, not the exams given in school. The exams in law school (and I believe medical school) tend not to be multiple choice.
Law school exams, for example, tend to revolve around very long, very hard, very convoluted essays. They also are generally 3-4 hours long, and you're writing that entire time (and you inevitably run out of time, your goal is to get as much down on the paper as you can before time runs out)
From what I understand the professional engineering licensure exam is multiple choice as well.
MHO there are only two reasons why the well-qualified and knowledgeable fail such exams.* They didn't study or they studied the wrong materials. We have all had that one exam we did REALLY poorly on and we would like to blame someone other than ourselves for our bad grade. This post merely plays to those emotions with anecdotal evidence. Mod me as troll if you like, but you know its true.
I don't think that's true at all; some people are naturally poor test takers. I know people I went to law school with who were naturally smart people, studied greatly for the bar exam (and they studied what they were supposed to), yet still have failed more than once.
Meanwhile I slacked off in law school, and started seriously studying for the bar exam only 2 weeks before, and I got an astronomically high score--I just am very, very good at standardized tests. I didn't deserve my grade, and I didn't have an especially strong grasp of the material, I just sort of instinctively know what answer they look for. It's not especially fair.
Well 98% isn't being too selective. You seem to be focusing your anger on trial lawyers, more specifically plaintiff's lawyers, which comprise a small percentage of the lawyers practicing out there--I'm not sure what the exact percentage is, but its certainly a lot smaller than 98%.
Where do we "need" to be, and for what reason? I've never heard this anti-environmental remark before, I'm burning with curiosity to find out what this "need" is.
It's not theft, you dumb motherf*cker, it's fraud.
It's both, you halfwit.
It's the perpetual destruction of someone's public identity, something that cannot be easily repaired or returned. There's a world of difference. It's personal.
So it should be punished by death? DEATH? The ULTIMATE sanction against someone? What the hell is the matter with you. Are you a psychopath?
Or are you just a jackass who didn't think things through before slamming your fingers down on a no doubt drool-soaked keyboard and typing out the above idiocy?
Oh really? According to *you*, and certainly many other people. But don't go around parading like what you said is some kind of absolute truth, unless you're willing to back it up with adequate proof.
Once again, the Justice System has proven itself to be broken. If I were the victim, there would have been no living body to sentence. Let the corpse do probation, that's what she deserves.
So the punishment for theft should be death. You don't see anything wrong with that?
Doctor's salaries and lawsuits are both just scapegoats for the high cost of medicine in the U.S. It's the HMOs, drug companies, and insurance companies who deserve most of the blame.
The fact of the matter is they need some GOOD exclusive to bring this system from near death. Sure its a Blue-Ray movie player, cheaper than normal players even, but its supposed to be a game system first.
Eh, I'm buying one, and I think gaming comes in last (BD first, linux box/media center for my HDTV second, games third).
Keep in mind this is a magistrate judge, which is one step below a trial court judge (who is already generally below 2 levels of appeals courts). Magistrate judges work on a very fact-specific level, so I don't think this ruling would make even persuasive authority. I think I cited a magistrate judge like once, and that was just because the subject was so obscure I couldn't find anything else...
I cannot believe how many people wrote serious responses to a non-serious post.
I was originally going to put in an "its a joke" disclaimer at the bottom, but I thought that would be silly, nobody would think I was serious, so I instead made the "I am a genius" subject line to indicate that it was meant to be humorous.
If you can't tell dumb physics jokes on Slashdot, then I guess you really can't tell them anywhere.
If I stood on some of this matter that was flying out of a sun, and shot a bullet in the direction I was going, that bullet would break the speed of light!
While I understand his frustration with Sun's glacial pace, he needs to remember that Linux usage would be nowhere near where it is today if not for several key contributions by Sun.
Hell, he needs to remember that if Sun had released OpenSolaris back in the early 90s (well, I guess it would have been OpenSunOS then), Linux would be a footnote. Linux succeeded because there wasn't really any competition in the beginning.
There is nothing like media pitting two public figures against one another
I know, this is obviously going to drive Paris back to page 7 of the tabloids. We'll just have to suffer through the 24/7 news coverage on all the cable news channels until this explosive story dies out. I feel bad for Torvalds and Schwartz for having to put up with the constant paparazzi swarming around them, but if you live so much in the public eye like them it's something you just have to deal with.
Seriously, every time we've asked a lawyer about anything IT related the answer has been a definitive "maybe".
Well that's the nature of the law, every time someone asks me a legal question it starts up a little dialogue in my head; "Well I think the law says this. But what if the other side argues that other thing. And could there be a statutory claim there? Wait, that one issue is federal, could they remove the case to federal court? Damn, this guy is expecting an answer. Well I guess I can say maybe but that usually annoys them. Is it lunchtime yet?"
This can only mean:
Microsoft is adhering to its deal with the DOJ and they have investigated the matter and find Google's complaint without merit
- or -
The DOJ is trying to keep the state Attorneys General from getting involved in what they regard as a Federal matter
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
-or more likely-
The anti-trust division of the DOJ is run by libertarian free-market zealots who have no problem disregarding the law to further their own ideology.
I signed up for orkut a few years ago, but stopped using it when it was shown to be slow and unreliable to the point of ridiculous, something which continued after google bought it. If google doesn't care enough about it to provide a reasonable infrastructure for their own social networking site, then I don't know why anyone else would be willing to use it.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a top-tier UNIX support guy
At least you have healthy self-esteem there...
but of course the advanced tech we will have in 100-150 years will look like magic from our prospective.
Ehh...I'm not sure about that. If you look at the technology now vs. the technology of 30 years ago, there isn't that much of a jump. It's possible we're approaching the end of big technological jumps, and instead just looking at refinement over the rest of human history.
I find the fact that medical and lawyer exams are based on multiple choice rather disturbing. As an engineer almost all of my test were long answer.
It's done the exact same way for engineers as doctors and lawyers; what they're talking about here is the professional licensing exam, not the exams given in school. The exams in law school (and I believe medical school) tend not to be multiple choice.
Law school exams, for example, tend to revolve around very long, very hard, very convoluted essays. They also are generally 3-4 hours long, and you're writing that entire time (and you inevitably run out of time, your goal is to get as much down on the paper as you can before time runs out)
From what I understand the professional engineering licensure exam is multiple choice as well.
MHO there are only two reasons why the well-qualified and knowledgeable fail such exams.* They didn't study or they studied the wrong materials. We have all had that one exam we did REALLY poorly on and we would like to blame someone other than ourselves for our bad grade. This post merely plays to those emotions with anecdotal evidence. Mod me as troll if you like, but you know its true.
I don't think that's true at all; some people are naturally poor test takers. I know people I went to law school with who were naturally smart people, studied greatly for the bar exam (and they studied what they were supposed to), yet still have failed more than once.
Meanwhile I slacked off in law school, and started seriously studying for the bar exam only 2 weeks before, and I got an astronomically high score--I just am very, very good at standardized tests. I didn't deserve my grade, and I didn't have an especially strong grasp of the material, I just sort of instinctively know what answer they look for. It's not especially fair.
No, I am a "selective lawyer hater". :-)
Well 98% isn't being too selective. You seem to be focusing your anger on trial lawyers, more specifically plaintiff's lawyers, which comprise a small percentage of the lawyers practicing out there--I'm not sure what the exact percentage is, but its certainly a lot smaller than 98%.
I am not a lawyer hater, I just think 98% are trash money chasers and are totally screwing up our legal system.
Then I think that means you're a lawyer hater.
where we need to be!
Where do we "need" to be, and for what reason? I've never heard this anti-environmental remark before, I'm burning with curiosity to find out what this "need" is.
It's not theft, you dumb motherf*cker, it's fraud.
It's both, you halfwit.
It's the perpetual destruction of someone's public identity, something that cannot be easily repaired or returned. There's a world of difference. It's personal.
So it should be punished by death? DEATH? The ULTIMATE sanction against someone? What the hell is the matter with you. Are you a psychopath?
Or are you just a jackass who didn't think things through before slamming your fingers down on a no doubt drool-soaked keyboard and typing out the above idiocy?
Opposed to Sony's excellent method of selling at a staggeringly high price and *still* making a loss on each unit sold. Genius.
Worked well for the PS2, didn't it?
Oh really? According to *you*, and certainly many other people. But don't go around parading like what you said is some kind of absolute truth, unless you're willing to back it up with adequate proof.
So you're a moral relativist?
Once again, the Justice System has proven itself to be broken. If I were the victim, there would have been no living body to sentence. Let the corpse do probation, that's what she deserves.
So the punishment for theft should be death. You don't see anything wrong with that?
And the occasional game of knifey-spooney.
If you were on the jury and the victim had beaten the thief to death... would you convict? I'm not sure I would.
I probably would. Life is more important than property, even if the property is yours and the thief is a horrible person.
Doctor's salaries and lawsuits are both just scapegoats for the high cost of medicine in the U.S. It's the HMOs, drug companies, and insurance companies who deserve most of the blame.
The fact of the matter is they need some GOOD exclusive to bring this system from near death. Sure its a Blue-Ray movie player, cheaper than normal players even, but its supposed to be a game system first.
Eh, I'm buying one, and I think gaming comes in last (BD first, linux box/media center for my HDTV second, games third).
Keep in mind this is a magistrate judge, which is one step below a trial court judge (who is already generally below 2 levels of appeals courts). Magistrate judges work on a very fact-specific level, so I don't think this ruling would make even persuasive authority. I think I cited a magistrate judge like once, and that was just because the subject was so obscure I couldn't find anything else...
Oh. My. God.
I cannot believe how many people wrote serious responses to a non-serious post.
I was originally going to put in an "its a joke" disclaimer at the bottom, but I thought that would be silly, nobody would think I was serious, so I instead made the "I am a genius" subject line to indicate that it was meant to be humorous.
If you can't tell dumb physics jokes on Slashdot, then I guess you really can't tell them anywhere.
If I stood on some of this matter that was flying out of a sun, and shot a bullet in the direction I was going, that bullet would break the speed of light!
While I understand his frustration with Sun's glacial pace, he needs to remember that Linux usage would be nowhere near where it is today if not for several key contributions by Sun.
Hell, he needs to remember that if Sun had released OpenSolaris back in the early 90s (well, I guess it would have been OpenSunOS then), Linux would be a footnote. Linux succeeded because there wasn't really any competition in the beginning.
There is nothing like media pitting two public figures against one another
I know, this is obviously going to drive Paris back to page 7 of the tabloids. We'll just have to suffer through the 24/7 news coverage on all the cable news channels until this explosive story dies out. I feel bad for Torvalds and Schwartz for having to put up with the constant paparazzi swarming around them, but if you live so much in the public eye like them it's something you just have to deal with.
If one is street legal, fully taxed diesel; how does Johnny Law prove that this guy was running on the untaxed grease at the time of the arrest?
By the french fry smell.
Seriously, every time we've asked a lawyer about anything IT related the answer has been a definitive "maybe".
Well that's the nature of the law, every time someone asks me a legal question it starts up a little dialogue in my head; "Well I think the law says this. But what if the other side argues that other thing. And could there be a statutory claim there? Wait, that one issue is federal, could they remove the case to federal court? Damn, this guy is expecting an answer. Well I guess I can say maybe but that usually annoys them. Is it lunchtime yet?"
How appropriate, you fight like a cow.
This can only mean: Microsoft is adhering to its deal with the DOJ and they have investigated the matter and find Google's complaint without merit - or - The DOJ is trying to keep the state Attorneys General from getting involved in what they regard as a Federal matter It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
-or more likely-
The anti-trust division of the DOJ is run by libertarian free-market zealots who have no problem disregarding the law to further their own ideology.
It's strange that of all the places on teh Intarwebs Slashdot (or at least a part of its readers) is oblivious to Orkut.
Alright, it's ridiculous to assert that Slashdot is somehow oblivious to Orkut just because one slashdot poster characterized it as obscure.
I signed up for orkut a few years ago, but stopped using it when it was shown to be slow and unreliable to the point of ridiculous, something which continued after google bought it. If google doesn't care enough about it to provide a reasonable infrastructure for their own social networking site, then I don't know why anyone else would be willing to use it.