"'I think it will actually be a long time, maybe never, when actual Stanford degrees would be given for fully online work by anyone who wishes to register for the courses."
Makes sense, but what would be cool is if they had some way built in to "scout" promising students, where if you do well enough in the online courses it gives you some sort of in to get into the school itself.
At a place i used to work there was this one room that had a camera on a 2 axis pivot/drive. it was creepy when it would turn on and swing around to point right at you.
As someone whose job has frequently involved spending way too much time reading board of directors minutes for large corporations, you are completely correct.
That's not how it works; you pay a little down to put a lawyer on retainer so when you have to litigate they are available and ready to start right away. Once they start litigating they'll bill you for the time worked and that will typically dwarf the original retainer by several orders of magnitude.
I always thought that teaching someone to code at a young age would be a great way to give someone first-rate analytical, quantitative, and abstract reasoning skills. Unfortunately, it just doesn't seem to be the case; I've met first-rate programmers and while they were all smart nothing they really knew about coding carried over to other fields.
Not all seaweed is food; actually as far as I can tell a small number of species are digestible by human beings. In fact, seaweed is tough enough and has enough chemical defenses that very few marine organisms can eat it either.
You're not speaking very precisely. "Erase" implies that it exists and they are trying to pretend it doesn't. Offering evidence to refute the hypothesis that there was a medieval warming period isn't "erasing." This is why AGW deniers lack credibility; they are all about subjecting the science to rigorous challenge, part of the scientific method, blah blah blah, unless it's something that they want to believe, in which case the scientific method is bad.
I agree with everything you said except for your example of Ribbon. Ribbon is just terrible, primarily because so many of the actions are miscategorized and make no sense where they're placed.
This guy wants to make money from selling movies. He can't make the movies himself. So he wants the right to sell other people's movies without compensating them for their work. Seems pretty straightforward.
Wonder how many hypocrites who previously excoriate all climatologists who caution about global warming as corrupt and biased instantly trumpeting that these brilliant, honest, decent climatologists have to be right because the end result is one that they want.
NASA was doing small science on a big science budget, and was notoriously risk adverse, avoiding innovation in order to run the same tired old experiments.
Steve Jobs was frankly, not known for his sense of humor or for being self-deprecating; he was obsessed with his own image and I think he would have been far too pompous to laugh this off.
"For one, Steve was deeply private about his personal life. I know a lot of people who didn't even know he had children."
Going so far as to deny his own daughter was his was apparently one way of making sure people didn't know he had children. Nice guy.
He cared about Apple deeply; it was more then just a job. Apple was the face and engine of what he envisioned. I would be shocked and offended if Apple did not seek to protect his image and interests even after his death
Irrelevant. You use the courts to enforce the law, not what you would assume would be some dead narcissist's wishes. If Apple doesn't have the right to his image, and I can't imagine they can, then threatening legal action over it is unethical.
Steve built Apple: were it to do anything but defend him to the utmost of its ability would be nothing short of a betrayal by the company he built of the family he loved.
Steve Jobs loved Steve Jobs; ask the people he fired capriciously because they took the elevator with him what it was like being part of a "family."
Right, it's all a giant hoax. I bet this Columbia geologist only got his PhD because he knew that years later there would be fracking projects he could sabotage.
I once ate at a well-regarded vegan restaurant that made the tastiest vegan food you could eat. It still wasn't that good. Vegan food is never going to be as good as non-vegan food, vegans just brainwash themselves into thinking so. I say that as someone who has sworn off fast food, eats red meat maybe once every two weeks, and eats a lot of stuff that vegans do (whole grains, vegetables, etc.). I eat this because I am worried about my health, not because it tastes good. I would love a bacon cheeseburger but it's not worth the health effects, even though it tastes much better.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, Apple is dying too, they can't pay dividends either.
"'I think it will actually be a long time, maybe never, when actual Stanford degrees would be given for fully online work by anyone who wishes to register for the courses."
Makes sense, but what would be cool is if they had some way built in to "scout" promising students, where if you do well enough in the online courses it gives you some sort of in to get into the school itself.
At a place i used to work there was this one room that had a camera on a 2 axis pivot/drive. it was creepy when it would turn on and swing around to point right at you.
Did you work at the front gate of Jabba's palace?
Also, when a company does do something wrong, it will be planned in a language that most "hacktivists" don't understand.
As someone whose job has frequently involved spending way too much time reading board of directors minutes for large corporations, you are completely correct.
That's not how it works; you pay a little down to put a lawyer on retainer so when you have to litigate they are available and ready to start right away. Once they start litigating they'll bill you for the time worked and that will typically dwarf the original retainer by several orders of magnitude.
This is about Steve Jobs throwing a tantrum because Google had the audacity to try and compete with the iphone with Android.
I always thought that teaching someone to code at a young age would be a great way to give someone first-rate analytical, quantitative, and abstract reasoning skills. Unfortunately, it just doesn't seem to be the case; I've met first-rate programmers and while they were all smart nothing they really knew about coding carried over to other fields.
Not all seaweed is food; actually as far as I can tell a small number of species are digestible by human beings. In fact, seaweed is tough enough and has enough chemical defenses that very few marine organisms can eat it either.
You're not speaking very precisely. "Erase" implies that it exists and they are trying to pretend it doesn't. Offering evidence to refute the hypothesis that there was a medieval warming period isn't "erasing." This is why AGW deniers lack credibility; they are all about subjecting the science to rigorous challenge, part of the scientific method, blah blah blah, unless it's something that they want to believe, in which case the scientific method is bad.
"I became a skeptic when they tried to erase the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age."
Which climatologists did this exactly?
The quoted law does not use the word "copy," it says "infringe," and it's worded very broadly.
Yup. I'd take a 50% salary cut if that meant I could do 50% of the work.
I agree with everything you said except for your example of Ribbon. Ribbon is just terrible, primarily because so many of the actions are miscategorized and make no sense where they're placed.
This guy wants to make money from selling movies. He can't make the movies himself. So he wants the right to sell other people's movies without compensating them for their work. Seems pretty straightforward.
I had people to play with, and believe it or not I may have had more fun reading the rulebooks and sourcebooks. They were pretty fun.
Wonder how many hypocrites who previously excoriate all climatologists who caution about global warming as corrupt and biased instantly trumpeting that these brilliant, honest, decent climatologists have to be right because the end result is one that they want.
NASA was doing small science on a big science budget, and was notoriously risk adverse, avoiding innovation in order to run the same tired old experiments.
Steve Jobs was frankly, not known for his sense of humor or for being self-deprecating; he was obsessed with his own image and I think he would have been far too pompous to laugh this off.
"For one, Steve was deeply private about his personal life. I know a lot of people who didn't even know he had children."
Going so far as to deny his own daughter was his was apparently one way of making sure people didn't know he had children. Nice guy.
He cared about Apple deeply; it was more then just a job. Apple was the face and engine of what he envisioned. I would be shocked and offended if Apple did not seek to protect his image and interests even after his death
Irrelevant. You use the courts to enforce the law, not what you would assume would be some dead narcissist's wishes. If Apple doesn't have the right to his image, and I can't imagine they can, then threatening legal action over it is unethical.
Steve built Apple: were it to do anything but defend him to the utmost of its ability would be nothing short of a betrayal by the company he built of the family he loved.
Steve Jobs loved Steve Jobs; ask the people he fired capriciously because they took the elevator with him what it was like being part of a "family."
That leaving technology lawmaking to them will bring its own set of problems.
Technology experts are frequently completely clueless about the law.
Right, it's all a giant hoax. I bet this Columbia geologist only got his PhD because he knew that years later there would be fracking projects he could sabotage.
Presumably you also criticized GWB, who literally took 3 times as many vacation days as Obama, right?
I once ate at a well-regarded vegan restaurant that made the tastiest vegan food you could eat. It still wasn't that good. Vegan food is never going to be as good as non-vegan food, vegans just brainwash themselves into thinking so. I say that as someone who has sworn off fast food, eats red meat maybe once every two weeks, and eats a lot of stuff that vegans do (whole grains, vegetables, etc.). I eat this because I am worried about my health, not because it tastes good. I would love a bacon cheeseburger but it's not worth the health effects, even though it tastes much better.