Dangit... I really wish slashdot had an edit button for at least a minute or two after posting. I meant to suggest that such a perk would be for the top seller each month.
You can pay them a salary, or a wage at your option... the only requirement being that it is an amount compliant with local minimum wage laws.
You incentivize the employees to sell as hard as they can in such a case with non-monetary perks for each month, such as the right to pick their own shifts for the upcoming month.
Obviously, employees that fail to sell well enough to justify the expense of paying them are terminated.
While you'd still need either lightning headphones or a dongle to connect to regular headphones, you could then at least still listen while charging (plus you might even gain the ability to charge twice as fast if both lightning ports were plugged in at the same time, but I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't some important logistical reasons why that wouldn't happen... I'm bringing it up only because I can imagne it as a possibility)
Without the ability to listen while charging , the mod is basically worthless. It saves only the difference in price between lightning headphones and a regular set, which is more than lost by the monetary investment of completing this mod.
... file a criminal slander/libel lawsuit against the US government?
At that point, the only way the government can come out of it clean is to either reveal the basis for their conclusions (which to the best of my knowledge, they do not want to do), or else go on the record as stating that it is in their opinion only.
If Kapersky wins the lawsuit, then the US government could be compelled to officially retract all relevant libelous statements, and may (?) even create a precedent for Kapersky to be able to sue them for lost income.
I would suggest that email is any text-based electronic message which is composed to be specifically addressed either to one or more particular people, or else to an organization or particular representatives of that organization, where the addressee receives the electronic message in its digital form, as opposed to a telegram, where a third party collects the transmission and prints it for the addressee.
Graphics and other media are possible in email because even though the message contains non-textual elements, they are still built upon the same text-based framework as email itself, and they must be interpreted to be displayed.
.... characterized by an inability to pay attention or to concentrate on anything. It is a chemical imbalance in the brain that necessitates a certain higher level of stimulation than what is considered typical in order for concentration to be maintained. This is why certain types of medications can be helpful in treating the symptoms of ADD... artificially inducing the stimulation that is needed for the individual to concentrate. They work... to a limited extent, but they are usually not without side effects, addiction often being among them, so its usage should of course be carefully monitored by those close to the individual and any situations reported to a medical authority quickly.
You cannot give yourself ADD by anything that you do. At most all you can do after you are born is develop lazy habits that might superficially imitate it. From what I've heard, the imbalance that causes ADD is formed in the womb, and by the time a person is born, that aspect of their mental state has long since been solidified.
Of course, a person with ADD can often still learn skills over their life that can help them mitigate their neurological disposition and function in society in a conventional manner.
.... to the commercial enterprise, I don't really see any big problems with this. Otherwise, the only objection I can imagine people using against this would be driven by a distrust of thins that are new or otherwise were not available for teaching them when they were children. That's less of an ethical issue and more a reflection of simple personal bias.
No, sorry, if you do what you love for a job, you end up fucking hate that TOO !!!
I know for a fact that is not even remotely true... and in all honesty, sounds like a rationalization that gives oneself permission to be lazy about the matter, and to settle for whatever they can find (after all, if you believe that you can't be happy even doing what you love for a living, then there's no point in putting in the effort required, right?)
I am not suggesting that doing what you love will mean that one will never have days or sometimes even extended periods where they might get frustrated with their job and sometimes even almost want to quit (goodness knows it has happened to me at times), but the willingness and drive to stick it out and keep persevering despite such times can often only come from loving what one does (because if it were driven only by the fear of losing their job, they would just search for another job as soon as they felt any such feelings of frustration)
I love what I do, and I can't imagine doing anything else without always wanting to come back to what I do right now.
Based on our research, one of the reasons girls and underrepresented minorities are not pursuing computer science is because of the negative perception of computer scientists...
The problem I have with this statement is that it seems equivalent to saying that "girls and underrepresented minorities" are somehow more likely to care what other people think about them if they otherwise did try to pursue a field that they believed was interesting, to such a degree that they will not try to pursue such a field in the first place if they feel that they may be negatively perceived because of it. Of course, one may argue that they are more likely to care about it because of all the other discrimination against them, and I do not wish to be dismissive of such unjust discrimination, but in the end, it still amounts to them caring more about what other people think.
Which, to be blunt... and I hate to sound insensitive here, is really their own effing problem. If the only real thing stopping you from pursuing a field, regardless of what it is, is the fear of what other people are going to think of you if you did, then I'm pretty darn sure that you probably wouldn't be a good fit for that field in the first place.
Find something that you love to do enough that it won't matter what other people are going to think, or else you will never be happy. That much is going to be true for both men and women, and people of all races and demographics.
To be fair, the article doesn't actually say where to submit any "entries". In all likelihood, anybody who *did* find an efficient way of solving the problem (and for what it's worth, I believe that such a way exists... at least for finding *a* solution, not necessarily all possible ones) would probably be disqualified from receiving the prize on the technicality that they hadn't actually counted the total number of ways it can be solved, but simply generated a single correct solution.
I would think that the sheer number of job available that need it is what is contributing to it's "perceived popularity".
But of course, the number of jobs in which one would use a programming language is certainly a piss-poor indicator of any true merit it might have, right?
Perhaps you had failed to notice that I had said never mind in the above reply to my own post. I realized what they were talking about after I had already posted the first comment. Slashdot doesn't allow deletion of posts, so....
Clearly I should have paid more attention before posting, but I would have figured that my previous comment would make it obvious that I was aware of that mistake.
Anyways, telling me to shut up after I already admitted my bad is at best only making you look like you are too darn lazy to actually read posts that you bother to reply to.... or do you just have some sort of sort of inexplicable compulsion to rub people's mistakes in their faces even after they've already admitted them?
Nm... answered my question. They want a P solution.... the algorithm I wrote I never tried for anything 1000x1000 before, so I don't know how it would do.
Or you could just show them the old-fashioned way, and show them the pattern that you found that exists on their own cards, and then elaborate on that by adding that if a person with nefarious intent were to notice this pattern, that in only a relatively small number of attempts, and with perhaps only a handful of actual gift cards and the aid of a computer, that person may be able to guess the numbers of many cards they do not possess which may have a balance on them, and you wouldn't have to write any software at all (not to mention that the mere act of writing such software could make you liable for damages that you are not equipped to disprove that your software had nothing to do with, as your admission that you developed the software at all may be sufficient to incriminate you). Add that you were not even particularly deliberately trying to discover this pattern when you first noticed it, and suggest that it is is quite far from unlikely that somebody with any intent to commit fraud will not be able to do this, if they have not done so already.
[With a prepaid card], If a retailer gets compromised, you lose just that min holding balance,
That wasn't my point... that it isn't a lot of money is irrelevant, you still lose it.
I've never had to miss a day of work to file dispute forms because of fraudulent activity on my card, which thankfully has not happened often... only twice in my entire life. The first time was in the early 90's when I reported my card lost to the credit card company after noticing that I didn't have it one night when I had got home. There were apparently already charges on it that I had not authorized, all within just the past day. The credit card company reimbursed me right then and there, I never saw any of those charges on my monthly statement, and they issued me a replacement card. The second time my card was compromised, I hadn't lost my card or known anything about my card's number being used without my consent, but apparently there was a transaction that I didn't authorize which somehow triggered the bank's own fraud detection system and they contacted *ME*. I don't know how that works, exactly... but it was kinda cool to know they are watching my back.
Total time spent on the phone dealing with the situation: ~ 10 minutes.
If your reloadable credit card gets drained because it was compromised somehow, you are usually SOL for the money that was on it that you did not use. Maybe that might not amount to a lot of money, but it's still something... and it's beside the point. If your regular credit card is compromised because of some company's poor security practices that you had no previous reason to suspect, a respectable credit card company will not charge you even a penny for the fraudulent activity.
Seriously... what the fuck difference does it make that it's easy to do? It's still fucking illegal. Speeding is easy to do too, easier, I would dare say, by no less than at least an order of magnitude than this hack, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't be responsible for it if you do it.
What's really sad about this is that the guy went out of his way to *deliberately* find a way to do something that anyone with half a brain should know is illegal.
Slashdot Mirror
Dangit... I really wish slashdot had an edit button for at least a minute or two after posting. I meant to suggest that such a perk would be for the top seller each month.
You can pay them a salary, or a wage at your option... the only requirement being that it is an amount compliant with local minimum wage laws.
You incentivize the employees to sell as hard as they can in such a case with non-monetary perks for each month, such as the right to pick their own shifts for the upcoming month.
Obviously, employees that fail to sell well enough to justify the expense of paying them are terminated.
... any VC backed company that has not yet achieved a positive ROI.
Not being sedentary can limit the effects of being sedentary.
(sigh)
I am reminded of the Tautology club, where the first rule of the tautology club was the first rule of the tautology club.
Immune, at best, to a civil lawsuit, not a criminal one.
While you'd still need either lightning headphones or a dongle to connect to regular headphones, you could then at least still listen while charging (plus you might even gain the ability to charge twice as fast if both lightning ports were plugged in at the same time, but I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't some important logistical reasons why that wouldn't happen... I'm bringing it up only because I can imagne it as a possibility)
Without the ability to listen while charging , the mod is basically worthless. It saves only the difference in price between lightning headphones and a regular set, which is more than lost by the monetary investment of completing this mod.
At that point, the only way the government can come out of it clean is to either reveal the basis for their conclusions (which to the best of my knowledge, they do not want to do), or else go on the record as stating that it is in their opinion only.
If Kapersky wins the lawsuit, then the US government could be compelled to officially retract all relevant libelous statements, and may (?) even create a precedent for Kapersky to be able to sue them for lost income.
I would suggest that email is any text-based electronic message which is composed to be specifically addressed either to one or more particular people, or else to an organization or particular representatives of that organization, where the addressee receives the electronic message in its digital form, as opposed to a telegram, where a third party collects the transmission and prints it for the addressee.
Graphics and other media are possible in email because even though the message contains non-textual elements, they are still built upon the same text-based framework as email itself, and they must be interpreted to be displayed.
You cannot give yourself ADD by anything that you do. At most all you can do after you are born is develop lazy habits that might superficially imitate it. From what I've heard, the imbalance that causes ADD is formed in the womb, and by the time a person is born, that aspect of their mental state has long since been solidified.
Of course, a person with ADD can often still learn skills over their life that can help them mitigate their neurological disposition and function in society in a conventional manner.
Normal human greed, primarily. The people who typically benefit the most from socialism are the poor.
I'm pretty sure that the rich don't want socialism either.
I know for a fact that is not even remotely true... and in all honesty, sounds like a rationalization that gives oneself permission to be lazy about the matter, and to settle for whatever they can find (after all, if you believe that you can't be happy even doing what you love for a living, then there's no point in putting in the effort required, right?)
I am not suggesting that doing what you love will mean that one will never have days or sometimes even extended periods where they might get frustrated with their job and sometimes even almost want to quit (goodness knows it has happened to me at times), but the willingness and drive to stick it out and keep persevering despite such times can often only come from loving what one does (because if it were driven only by the fear of losing their job, they would just search for another job as soon as they felt any such feelings of frustration)
I love what I do, and I can't imagine doing anything else without always wanting to come back to what I do right now.
The problem I have with this statement is that it seems equivalent to saying that "girls and underrepresented minorities" are somehow more likely to care what other people think about them if they otherwise did try to pursue a field that they believed was interesting, to such a degree that they will not try to pursue such a field in the first place if they feel that they may be negatively perceived because of it. Of course, one may argue that they are more likely to care about it because of all the other discrimination against them, and I do not wish to be dismissive of such unjust discrimination, but in the end, it still amounts to them caring more about what other people think.
Which, to be blunt... and I hate to sound insensitive here, is really their own effing problem. If the only real thing stopping you from pursuing a field, regardless of what it is, is the fear of what other people are going to think of you if you did, then I'm pretty darn sure that you probably wouldn't be a good fit for that field in the first place.
Find something that you love to do enough that it won't matter what other people are going to think, or else you will never be happy. That much is going to be true for both men and women, and people of all races and demographics.
To be fair, the article doesn't actually say where to submit any "entries". In all likelihood, anybody who *did* find an efficient way of solving the problem (and for what it's worth, I believe that such a way exists... at least for finding *a* solution, not necessarily all possible ones) would probably be disqualified from receiving the prize on the technicality that they hadn't actually counted the total number of ways it can be solved, but simply generated a single correct solution.
I would think that the sheer number of job available that need it is what is contributing to it's "perceived popularity".
But of course, the number of jobs in which one would use a programming language is certainly a piss-poor indicator of any true merit it might have, right?
(eye-roll)
Perhaps you had failed to notice that I had said never mind in the above reply to my own post. I realized what they were talking about after I had already posted the first comment. Slashdot doesn't allow deletion of posts, so....
Clearly I should have paid more attention before posting, but I would have figured that my previous comment would make it obvious that I was aware of that mistake.
Anyways, telling me to shut up after I already admitted my bad is at best only making you look like you are too darn lazy to actually read posts that you bother to reply to.... or do you just have some sort of sort of inexplicable compulsion to rub people's mistakes in their faces even after they've already admitted them?
Nm... answered my question. They want a P solution.... the algorithm I wrote I never tried for anything 1000x1000 before, so I don't know how it would do.
Serious question... I've written something like that before, and although it wasn't speedy... I don't recall it being particularly long either.
Also, does it have to come up with all solutions quickly, or just one?
Well, we know what happened to Doctor Reginald Bushroot was trying to do something similar....
Or you could just show them the old-fashioned way, and show them the pattern that you found that exists on their own cards, and then elaborate on that by adding that if a person with nefarious intent were to notice this pattern, that in only a relatively small number of attempts, and with perhaps only a handful of actual gift cards and the aid of a computer, that person may be able to guess the numbers of many cards they do not possess which may have a balance on them, and you wouldn't have to write any software at all (not to mention that the mere act of writing such software could make you liable for damages that you are not equipped to disprove that your software had nothing to do with, as your admission that you developed the software at all may be sufficient to incriminate you). Add that you were not even particularly deliberately trying to discover this pattern when you first noticed it, and suggest that it is is quite far from unlikely that somebody with any intent to commit fraud will not be able to do this, if they have not done so already.
That wasn't my point... that it isn't a lot of money is irrelevant, you still lose it.
I've never had to miss a day of work to file dispute forms because of fraudulent activity on my card, which thankfully has not happened often... only twice in my entire life. The first time was in the early 90's when I reported my card lost to the credit card company after noticing that I didn't have it one night when I had got home. There were apparently already charges on it that I had not authorized, all within just the past day. The credit card company reimbursed me right then and there, I never saw any of those charges on my monthly statement, and they issued me a replacement card. The second time my card was compromised, I hadn't lost my card or known anything about my card's number being used without my consent, but apparently there was a transaction that I didn't authorize which somehow triggered the bank's own fraud detection system and they contacted *ME*. I don't know how that works, exactly... but it was kinda cool to know they are watching my back.
Total time spent on the phone dealing with the situation: ~ 10 minutes.
If your reloadable credit card gets drained because it was compromised somehow, you are usually SOL for the money that was on it that you did not use. Maybe that might not amount to a lot of money, but it's still something... and it's beside the point. If your regular credit card is compromised because of some company's poor security practices that you had no previous reason to suspect, a respectable credit card company will not charge you even a penny for the fraudulent activity.
News at 11. Who would have thought it, huh?
Seriously... what the fuck difference does it make that it's easy to do? It's still fucking illegal. Speeding is easy to do too, easier, I would dare say, by no less than at least an order of magnitude than this hack, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't be responsible for it if you do it.
What's really sad about this is that the guy went out of his way to *deliberately* find a way to do something that anyone with half a brain should know is illegal.
I have no words....
Welding glasses/goggles can be perfectly safe for viewing the sun, as long as they are shade 14 or darker.