All this means is that it wasn't fraud. It doesn't mean that the votes were cast as intended, which (AFAIK) is a perfectly valid reason to challenge for a new election.
Think this through. In every election, the partisans on the losing side would simply assert that there were votes that were not cast as intended. No election would ever be resolved.
...the software that runs the equipment has be inspected by dozens of different hospitals, each of which is putting their own pocketbooks on the line (there's no one else to point a finger at. They have the code, the should review it before using it.)
That's the problem. Why should the hospital assume this risk? They're not in the software business, nor do they want to be. They certainly do not want to become expert, at a code level, with every in-house application. If they are anything less than expert, how can they be sure their review was productive?
(Bear in mind that "LC" and "LDC" are not formal acronyms to my knowledge. IIRC, we used "local service provider" (LSP) in place of "LC", and never really referred to any LDP other than ourselves.)
s/LC/LEC/g s/LDC/IXC/g BR&g t;Actually knowing the meaning of these acronyms is left as an exercise for the reader.:)
Re:Companies will stab you in the back,...
on
Me-Commerce
·
· Score: 1
It basically means that you work at the will of your employer.
It also means that you can resign at any time for any reason. It works both ways.
...it is a reflection of corporate america's stranglehold on government policy.
4) Either The Man realizes what's going on, and pays you off, or they suffer the negative press as everyone realizes that they don't give a FUCK* about the artists.
Is there anyone left who doesn't realize that already? Also, since The Man is The Man, why should he give a rat's about negative press, anyway?
I find it rather strange that Microsoft should be backing this, considering that their case was really rather non-technical. It was more about business practices than actual technical minutæ.
That's exactly why MS would be backing this. They were hosed from a business practices point of view, as the verdict ultimately showed, so they muddy the water by claiming that the "real" issues are too difficult for a layman to understand.
Re:Who really needs a lesson
on
Lawsuits Suck
·
· Score: 1
It's difficult, but all you need to practice law legally is to have passed that Bar exam
The requirements for practicing law vary by state (in the United States). In the state of Nevada, for example,
"Each applicant is required to have completed all requirements for graduation with a J.D. or LL.B. degree from a law school approved by the American Bar Association. Neither private study, correspondence study or law office training, nor age or experience may be substituted for law school education."
The above is probably the most reasonable post in this whole topic.
There is no guarantee that the companies that prospered during the first wave of net commerce will prosper forever. Now that eBay is the incumbent, it has an incentive to preserve the status quo. When you're making money today, you want to make sure that the changes to come in the near future are not "that" near. (I don't know off the top of my head whether eBay is profitable or not, but they are certainly generating a lot of revenue.)
Reasonable people can disagree on whether that be a wise move in the long- or medium-term. I think anything other than short-term planning is becoming more and more of a lost art. Either way, I also say, "Let 'em!"
James T. Kirk already resolved this issue. Yes, people must physically die in order for the combat to come to a conclusion. The conclusion is reached when one side finds it too painful to carry on.
Theoretically, the value of your site (or of anything) is the amount that the highest bidder will pay. If you're only dealing with one buyer, the best that can be determined is the value of the site to that buyer.
Being shocked at the original asking price is part of the negotiation process.
I first read this book, by Gary Zukav, quite a few years ago. A quote:
"The Wu Li Masters know that 'science' and 'religion' are only dances, and that those who follow them are dancers. The dancers may claim to follow 'truth' or claim to seek 'reality', but the Wu Li Masters know better. They know that the true love of all dancers is dancing."
I never really guessed but I guess it could be possible considering that Jupiter is almost a star in and of itself because of the massive volume of gas the is within it.
Jupiter is star-like with respect to volume of gas, but isn't the radiation associated with a star the result of the nuclear reaction(s) within? Jupiter isn't supposed to light up until 2010, right?:)
You're absolutely correct. This is not a good way to approach truth.
My point is that lack of evidence is not necessarily that damaging to a paranoid argument. Look at the accusations that were made by both sides during the recent impeachment attempt. Many had no evidence to back them up, but people who were already inclined to believe them took lack of evidence as proof of how dirty the other side was really playing. "They must have covered their tracks."
Religously minded political orginizations fear the internet because it is a forum of reason, and much of it goes against their morals based on blind faith.
Can we have an example, please?
Corporations fear the internet.
Again, can we have an example?
Today any country is frowned upon for regulating books. Now is the time we must speak up, and secure the rights on the internet, that we have for printed materials.
Look here for many examples of the regulation of books.
One of the things that has not yet been decided, in my view, is whether the legal structures that have grown up around printed material, for instance, are appropriate for the Internet. I would say "no", but many would disagree.
We must speak up. We must also be aware that a long process has just begun (not necessarily in elapsed time, but in issues to be resolved), the outcome of which is far from clear.
If you try to trademark or patent something that isn't eligible, and you are turned down, aren't you already losing 100% of the revenues you would have gained from having a monopoly?
How about if you had to make a sizable (I know, define sizable) deposit that would be forfeited if your application were turned down? That would tend to discourage the opportunists.
Here's an article that talks about these points, as well as some others. IMHO, you may be able to exist as bits, but you won't be the "you" you are now.
Slashdot Mirror
Surely you're aware that it was the Louisiana Homeland Security Department that kept the Red Cross out, right?
The Feds are certainly not blameless in this affair, but let's give credit and blame where it is actually due.
Compare that attitude with Firestone's policy of deny and cover-up when people's lives were at stake
So, is Firestone's Japanese parent focused on the customer?
All this means is that it wasn't fraud. It doesn't mean that the votes were cast as intended, which (AFAIK) is a perfectly valid reason to challenge for a new election.
Think this through. In every election, the partisans on the losing side would simply assert that there were votes that were not cast as intended. No election would ever be resolved.
...the software that runs the equipment has be inspected by dozens of different hospitals, each of which is putting their own pocketbooks on the line (there's no one else to point a finger at. They have the code, the should review it before using it.)
That's the problem. Why should the hospital assume this risk? They're not in the software business, nor do they want to be. They certainly do not want to become expert, at a code level, with every in-house application. If they are anything less than expert, how can they be sure their review was productive?
(Bear in mind that "LC" and "LDC" are not formal acronyms to my knowledge. IIRC, we used "local service provider" (LSP) in place of "LC", and never really referred to any LDP other than ourselves.)
:)
s/LC/LEC/g
s/LDC/IXC/g
BR&g t;Actually knowing the meaning of these acronyms is left as an exercise for the reader.
It basically means that you work at the will of your employer.
...it is a reflection of corporate america's stranglehold on government policy.
It also means that you can resign at any time for any reason. It works both ways.
How so?
4) Either The Man realizes what's going on, and pays you off, or they suffer the negative press as everyone realizes that they don't give a FUCK* about the artists.
Is there anyone left who doesn't realize that already? Also, since The Man is The Man, why should he give a rat's about negative press, anyway?
I find it rather strange that Microsoft should be backing this, considering that their case was really rather non-technical. It was more about business practices than actual technical minutæ.
That's exactly why MS would be backing this. They were hosed from a business practices point of view, as the verdict ultimately showed, so they muddy the water by claiming that the "real" issues are too difficult for a layman to understand.
It's difficult, but all you need to practice law legally is to have passed that Bar exam
The requirements for practicing law vary by state (in the United States). In the state of Nevada, for example,
"Each applicant is required to have completed all requirements for graduation with a J.D. or LL.B. degree from a law school approved by the American Bar Association. Neither private study, correspondence study or law office training, nor age or experience may be substituted for law school education."
Note also that his work is being funded by Caterpillar. Any possible fortunes to be made are probably already addressed in the fine print.
Both Gore and Bush have publicly stated that they are against these proceedings. Once they put in their own AG it's all over.
Hasn't Gore said all along that he thought this should be settled in family court?
No, wait...
...the stock market on Nasdaq after hours is howing MSFT up 3/4 to 71 1/4 as I am typing this.
That's because financial markets prefer certainty to uncertainty. The speculation surrounding this ruling has now ended.
The above is probably the most reasonable post in this whole topic.
There is no guarantee that the companies that prospered during the first wave of net commerce will prosper forever. Now that eBay is the incumbent, it has an incentive to preserve the status quo. When you're making money today, you want to make sure that the changes to come in the near future are not "that" near. (I don't know off the top of my head whether eBay is profitable or not, but they are certainly generating a lot of revenue.)
Reasonable people can disagree on whether that be a wise move in the long- or medium-term. I think anything other than short-term planning is becoming more and more of a lost art. Either way, I also say, "Let 'em!"
James T. Kirk already resolved this issue. Yes, people must physically die in order for the combat to come to a conclusion. The conclusion is reached when one side finds it too painful to carry on.
Theoretically, the value of your site (or of anything) is the amount that the highest bidder will pay. If you're only dealing with one buyer, the best that can be determined is the value of the site to that buyer.
Being shocked at the original asking price is part of the negotiation process.
I first read this book, by Gary Zukav, quite a few years ago. A quote:
"The Wu Li Masters know that 'science' and 'religion' are only dances, and that those who follow them are dancers. The dancers may claim to follow 'truth' or claim to seek 'reality', but the Wu Li Masters know better. They know that the true love of all dancers is dancing."
you must be knew here.
remember, this is slashdot. he must be GNU here.
Is it just me, or do both of those pictures look like background images you could find on the Web?
Trust no one.
I never really guessed but I guess it could be possible considering that Jupiter is almost a star in and of itself because of the massive volume of gas the is within it.
:)
Jupiter is star-like with respect to volume of gas, but isn't the radiation associated with a star the result of the nuclear reaction(s) within? Jupiter isn't supposed to light up until 2010, right?
You're absolutely correct. This is not a good way to approach truth.
My point is that lack of evidence is not necessarily that damaging to a paranoid argument. Look at the accusations that were made by both sides during the recent impeachment attempt. Many had no evidence to back them up, but people who were already inclined to believe them took lack of evidence as proof of how dirty the other side was really playing. "They must have covered their tracks."
What he fails to do is provide *any* factual evidence at all that links the NSA or any government agency to this.
If one is advancing a conspiracy theory, lack of evidence is a Good Thing. It only proves how well the conspiracy has been designed and executed!
Religously minded political orginizations fear the internet because it is a forum of reason, and much of it goes against their morals based on blind faith.
Can we have an example, please?
Corporations fear the internet.
Again, can we have an example?
Today any country is frowned upon for regulating books. Now is the time we must speak up, and secure the rights on the internet, that we have for printed materials.
Look here for many examples of the regulation of books.
One of the things that has not yet been decided, in my view, is whether the legal structures that have grown up around printed material, for instance, are appropriate for the Internet. I would say "no", but many would disagree.
We must speak up. We must also be aware that a long process has just begun (not necessarily in elapsed time, but in issues to be resolved), the outcome of which is far from clear.
If you try to trademark or patent something that isn't eligible, and you are turned down, aren't you already losing 100% of the revenues you would have gained from having a monopoly?
How about if you had to make a sizable (I know, define sizable) deposit that would be forfeited if your application were turned down? That would tend to discourage the opportunists.
Here's an article that talks about these points, as well as some others. IMHO, you may be able to exist as bits, but you won't be the "you" you are now.
Upside Today