At least in the US, it would not be at all worthwhile for the school to sue the child / the child's parents; such a thing would cost far more than replacing the window. And, chances are, the parents would simply sue the school back for not supervising the kid.
It's possible that it might be worth it for the school to sue for damages in the UK, but from what I've heard about their legal system, it's at least as bad as ours.
Sure, the majority of people don't like Wal-Mart...
No, the majority of slashdotters don't like Wal-Mart. The majority of people, in general, either like it or don't have any feelings for it one way or another. Same with Microsoft, SCO, and the RIAA.
A friend of mine notes that it seems that what defines what a vegan/vegetarian won't eat is whether or not is has cute babies.
This isn't exactly limited to vegetarians. Most people in the US would think you were barbaric if you were to eat a cat or a dog, even though they're perfectly happy to eat a pig or a chicken.
Yes, I know that libel is illegal, and that people and businesses are sued over it quite frequently. They tend to win the cases rather less frequently, as most nations tend to place a rather large burden of proof on the person who claims to have been libeled. However, I repeat my statement:
You think that it's libel or slander to publish a list of businesses that you think are trustworthy? I challenge you to come up with a single court decision that would support that.
I would like to see any evidence that publishing a list of businesses you think are trustworthy could conceivably be considered libel, not that libel is illegal. Libel is generally considered to be false statements that are presented as fact which harm the reputation of the person or organization being libeled. I really don't see how that could apply, and that's why I would like to see either a court decision or a specific section of the law that would apply.
But in most jurisdictions, there are laws about things like libel and slander. I'd think that such laws might be easily used in this case.
You think that it's libel or slander to publish a list of businesses that you think are trustworthy? I challenge you to come up with a single court decision that would support that. I really doubt that you can find one.
Microsoft is trying to make themselves an authority on something they have absolutely no business being involved in. Their scope is to provide an operating system, and secure that operating system.
Microsoft's scope is anywhere that they see a need and people are willing to pay for. If I choose to believe that Microsoft's whitelist really represents reputable sites, I should be allowed to do so.
I think this is the REAL issue here. Microsoft didn't know for sure it worked on win2k, and this guy doesn't either. He hasn't rigourously tested it in any fashion. He just installs it, runs it a few times and proclaims 'Hey, it works!'.
Not only that, but even if Microsoft has tried it and verified that it "works," they almost certainly did not go through a full test cycle on these products using Windows 2000. Although the "if it compiles and runs, ship it!" mentality might work for small OSS programs, it's a recipe for disaster for something on as wide a scale as this.
For me (an experienced C coder, and one who has never used Python), the first one is obviously the "right way" to do it. Assuming that it does what it's supposed to do, I might as well choose the way that I will understand easiest when reading it tomorrow.
"There's more than one way to do it" might be mantra in the world of Perl, but that's a silly concept.
Why, because then somebody else's code might look a little different than yours?
The truly sad thing is that they push WPA, WGA, DRM, Trusted Computing, overly-restrictive licensing, etc., and think that a simple junket and a couple of freebies can make up for treating customers like crap.
The original poster in this thread presumably values reliability over cost savings based upon his negative experience with CDs.
Presumably not, as he says "A bunch of my CDRs are in cheapo binders. The plastic or vinyl or whatever the binders are made of get stuck to the CDs and kind of smear them and make them cloudy." If he spent a few pennies more on media and storage, he probably wouldn't be having the problems that he does.
Imagine if another student had tasered the rent-a-cop to get them to stop tasering the student over and over.
The video was posted on slashdot; it involved a few (real) cops tasering someone who wouldn't cooperate while they were arresting him. If a student had tasered an officer, he would have probably been shot.
Even a high income doesn't go too far when you're heavily in debt. A huge number of college graduates leave school with >$100k in student loans and a significant amount of credit card debt. Even a high income can shrink significantly when you factor in a few large payments due every month.
True. You need to start budgeting before you dig yourself into debt that deep.
I have heard someone (seriously) argue that copy protecting a CD is worse than mass murder, because copy protection harms everyone while a murderer only harms a few. Granted, that person was an idiot, but I'm sure that some people agree with it.
Based on a search for OS, I conclude that Oregon Steel Mills has the OS monopoly.
Or, looking for results that pertain to operating systems, would you like to guess which major desktop OS is left off of the first page? A hint: both OS X and Linux are represented. When searching for "operating system" instead, Windows makes the first page, though still below those two.
We're a journalism and film school, now, how can our students be eligible to internships if they don't have Adobe Pagemaker, Adobe InDesign, Adobe Premiere and Final Cut Pro to learn?
Well, obviously, you go to the companies and tell them that the people on Slashdot say that you don't need to use those tools. I'm sure they'll do an immediate about-face.
What if in fact Perot had been running this last presidential election? Is it so impossible to think he would have won - handily?
Yes it is impossible, but not because the people would dislike him. Since the 2000 elections, the whole "a vote for is a vote for " idea has been parroted so many times that people actually believe it. Until we get rid of this stupidity where elections are about voting against candidates rather than voting for them, we're stuck with the idiots we have now.
The £105,000 saving that the report says would have resulted from going with Windows XP has also come under question as it was calculated using the special discounted licence rate that Microsoft offers councils - something critics argue is a calculated effort to prevent public bodies from building up technical knowledge of open source offerings.
How could the savings be "under question" because of the discounted rate? What, do you expect them to calculate the savings while pretending that they would have had to pay full price? If so, Microsoft would have rightly stated that they were massaging the numbers just to make open source look good.
What's more interesting is whether their numbers for open source included the costs of Windows XP, as they didn't actually install any Linux systems. (Not exactly a big win for Linux there, either.) How do you spend £534,710 on installing OpenOffice and Firefox on 230 Windows computers, and playing around with Suse for a year, anyway?
Imagine if things were different and only cyrillic characters were allowed, you would have to switch keyboard layout every time you want to go to
No, I wouldn't. I'd type "slashdot" into google, and then click on the cyrillic-character domain name to get here. And, of course, such things would be done automatically in the next generation of browsers.
All DNS really is is a method of translating readable names into IP addresses. I don't see any real need to shove this stuff into the existing system when it could be done more easily and less riskily with a new parallel or higher-level system.
The decision was definiately in the spirit of the law, even if it does mean "bending" the letter of the law.
I don't even know that this is really bending the law. Mail is just a system of sending messages, and so instant messaging definitely qualifies as "electronic mail" in the general sense of the term. Some instant messaging services even save messages on central servers to be delivered when the recipient is available -- in that case, even the function of the instant message is essentially the same as e-mail. Does the law actually specify the protocol being used, or does it just leave it at electronic mail?
Slashdot Mirror
At least in the US, it would not be at all worthwhile for the school to sue the child / the child's parents; such a thing would cost far more than replacing the window. And, chances are, the parents would simply sue the school back for not supervising the kid.
It's possible that it might be worth it for the school to sue for damages in the UK, but from what I've heard about their legal system, it's at least as bad as ours.
I have to say, I thought that I'd seen everything, but this is the stupidest Ask Slashdot ever.
For me (an experienced C coder, and one who has never used Python), the first one is obviously the "right way" to do it. Assuming that it does what it's supposed to do, I might as well choose the way that I will understand easiest when reading it tomorrow.
Why, because then somebody else's code might look a little different than yours?
OK, that's reasonable. My sarcasm detector must have been broken this morning.
The OP characterized anyone who disagrees with him as stupid. He didn't say that they were just unqualified to comment on it, or something like that.
Regardless of whether the GPLv3 is good or not, claiming that everyone who doesn't like it is stupid is ... well, stupid.
defend v.tr.
1. To make or keep safe from danger, attack, or harm.
Shooting someone who is trying to hurt you certainly qualifies.
I have heard someone (seriously) argue that copy protecting a CD is worse than mass murder, because copy protection harms everyone while a murderer only harms a few. Granted, that person was an idiot, but I'm sure that some people agree with it.
Based on a search for OS, I conclude that Oregon Steel Mills has the OS monopoly.
Or, looking for results that pertain to operating systems, would you like to guess which major desktop OS is left off of the first page? A hint: both OS X and Linux are represented. When searching for "operating system" instead, Windows makes the first page, though still below those two.
Just an interesting observation, is all.
How could the savings be "under question" because of the discounted rate? What, do you expect them to calculate the savings while pretending that they would have had to pay full price? If so, Microsoft would have rightly stated that they were massaging the numbers just to make open source look good.
What's more interesting is whether their numbers for open source included the costs of Windows XP, as they didn't actually install any Linux systems. (Not exactly a big win for Linux there, either.) How do you spend £534,710 on installing OpenOffice and Firefox on 230 Windows computers, and playing around with Suse for a year, anyway?
No, I wouldn't. I'd type "slashdot" into google, and then click on the cyrillic-character domain name to get here. And, of course, such things would be done automatically in the next generation of browsers.
All DNS really is is a method of translating readable names into IP addresses. I don't see any real need to shove this stuff into the existing system when it could be done more easily and less riskily with a new parallel or higher-level system.