You state that if the law is too one sided, then
that is a recipe for fewer lawsuits. You offer
no proof. I can very easily claim the _opposite_
is true. The more unfair (one-sided)a law is,
the more people will fight it (more lawsuits).
Then you say that the ABA wants the law to have
maximum ambiguity. You once again offer no proof.
However, using your reasoning it would be safe to
say that programmers only want other programmers
to write buggy code. That way they are kept in
business.
I won't comment on your shots at
1) Democrats
2) Trial Lawyers
3) Patient bill of rights.
Hopefully you will be able to reason these
arguments out a little more after having
given them a little thought.
I went to a chiropractor for my
consistent neck/upper back pain.
After about 5 adjustment sessions
and starting a regular exercise program
(he recommended dumbbell presses in
my case), I have been pain-free.
> You can't get a bad report unless you don't pay
> your bills on time
Or your college fails to file the necessary
paperwork for you school loan deferrment.
Then giving up after fighting for a year to have
the 'late payment' charge corrected on your credit
report.
Ever try to coordinate between two beaurocracies?
Its damn near impossible.
> As for denied housing, well look at cheap
> location
'Cheap' isn't the issue. You need credit to rent.
> As for Denied education, well you should have
> studied harder
Again, not the issue. The issue is credit.
If you have bad credit, you can't qualify for
any financial assistance.
> Why hire someone that can't manage their money
"I don't think you are investing your money
wisely. YOUR FIRED! I don't care if your job
was to cut the grass, YOUR FIRED!"
See the flaw?
> Personaly I perfer to hire people that have
> failed once with thier own company
Too bad. They were screened by HR for having
lousy credit records.
> corp can be held liable for the release of that
> information
Your dreaming if you think that law is going
to protect your privacy. Who do you think defines
'outside the normal requirements'?
Who is going to report it anyway?
Unfortunately this is the Libertarian
party line. TRUE libertarians (Chomsky)
are known as anarchists (misleading, at best)
or libertarian socialists (equally misleading).
You must not be a consumer.
Who hasn't been screwed by a company?
> People own... As a stock owner and a consumer
You don't own every company.
I mainly own index funds, but that doesn't mean
I have a say when Acme company decides not to
give me my rebate. Get real.
Take a break from your conservative talk
radio there buddy. You shouldn't let
conservatives define what liberalism is
any more than you should let liberals define
what conservatism is.
> We have earned our rights. The liberals have earned nothing
People usually think they are immune to
layoffs because they have 'skills'.
Here is what happens in a layoff:
1. Keep 2 or 3 of the very best (the designers).
2. Fill in the ranks with the lowest paid
(usually younger people with little experience) .
A lot of people with 'skills' just lost out.
> FileMaker-based database solution wasn't working
Why is it not working? Can't you fix it?
> As DBA, I recommended a MySQL server with a
> Perl or PHP-based front end
Did you really 'recommend' it? Did you show
him examples of a front end? Did you list out
the pros and cons? Did you list them out in
his terms or your terms? Why DID you recommend it?
> insisting that I develop everything with Access
> as a front end
Despite what every single person seems to be
saying in this thread, Access is NOT a front
end. It is a relational database. Most of what
the user sees is visual basic forms. Have
you explained to your boss that the server can
be distinct from the client?
> good documentation on connecting Access to Non-
> Microsoft DB servers in general, and MySQL in
> particular?
You are thinking in terms of products instead of
solutions. Try this instead:
Think of what has to be done.
Think of the best solution to implement what
has to be done. Think of a couple of other
solutions. Flesh a couple of them out before
you decide which one is 'best'.
After you have done this, you should be able
to convince your boss that Access is not the
solution (or yourself that it is).
>No, they stated that it was too late to
>establish clear guidelines followed by
>implementing the guidelines to count votes. They
>gave no opinion on what the guidelines should be.
Thats exactly what I said. Sorry if I didn't
make myself clear.
>It is simply my opinion that any guideline that
>requires a subjective opinion on the part of a
>counter is a bogus guideline
If a panel can't agree on a vote, then yes it
should be discarded.
Say you have a ballot that requires you to place
an 'X' in a box. Some guy comes along and
instead circles the box. If you showed that
ballot to 100 people, all 100 would agree on
who he meant to vote for. His choice is clearly
circled. The machine however, is designed to
only recognize an 'X' in a box, so his vote
would not be counted.
You said above that in this situation, the vote
should be counted. Well, if there were any
undervotes where clear intent could have been
discerned, they weren't.
Ever take a test on a scantron? They are green
sheets for taking multiple choice tests. To
choose an answer, you pencil in the corresponding
box. These sheets are never 100% accurate.
The teacher will always give you an answer key
to catch any mistakes that the machine makes.
What guideline does any teacher use?
Clear intent. There aren't any established
guidelines.
> And every vote that had unequivocal evidence
> was counted
An undervote occurs when the machine does not
record a vote on the ballot. There were 40,000+
undervotes in Florida that _WERE_NOT_COUNTED_.
That was what the lawsuit was about. Don't
you think that out of those 40,000 undervotes,
clear intent could have been found on at least
a few???
> Frankly, I find it astounding that anyone would
> argue that ambiguous votes should count
No one advocates that. The point is, out of
all of those 40,000+ undervotes, there were
probably a few of them where there was clear
intent on who the person wanted to vote for.
Slashdot Mirror
hmmm.... market forces....
so vague...
Have you ever bought something and not
understood the legal ramifications behind it?
I did when I bought my first computer that
had windows installed.
You state that if the law is too one sided, then
that is a recipe for fewer lawsuits. You offer
no proof. I can very easily claim the _opposite_
is true. The more unfair (one-sided)a law is,
the more people will fight it (more lawsuits).
Then you say that the ABA wants the law to have
maximum ambiguity. You once again offer no proof.
However, using your reasoning it would be safe to
say that programmers only want other programmers
to write buggy code. That way they are kept in
business.
I won't comment on your shots at
1) Democrats
2) Trial Lawyers
3) Patient bill of rights.
Hopefully you will be able to reason these
arguments out a little more after having
given them a little thought.
goodbye.
Those damn lawyers are nothing but a bunch
of tree-hugging liberals!
Oh wait, they're doing something for consumers?
Never mind....
I went to a chiropractor for my
consistent neck/upper back pain.
After about 5 adjustment sessions
and starting a regular exercise program
(he recommended dumbbell presses in
my case), I have been pain-free.
If you criticize business, the
freepers will label you a COMMUNIST!
you wouldn't want _that_ would you?
Well said. But will it be lost on the /. audience?
> what they would miss most if forced to use C++
> instead of Java
wow, harsh. what if they said "nothing"?
remember, someone at sun wrote your fancy
java library in c.
This shouldn't be that exciting.
Take up a hobby.
just kidding.
> You can't get a bad report unless you don't pay > your bills on time Or your college fails to file the necessary paperwork for you school loan deferrment. Then giving up after fighting for a year to have the 'late payment' charge corrected on your credit report. Ever try to coordinate between two beaurocracies? Its damn near impossible. > As for denied housing, well look at cheap > location 'Cheap' isn't the issue. You need credit to rent. > As for Denied education, well you should have > studied harder Again, not the issue. The issue is credit. If you have bad credit, you can't qualify for any financial assistance. > Why hire someone that can't manage their money "I don't think you are investing your money wisely. YOUR FIRED! I don't care if your job was to cut the grass, YOUR FIRED!" See the flaw? > Personaly I perfer to hire people that have > failed once with thier own company Too bad. They were screened by HR for having lousy credit records. > corp can be held liable for the release of that > information Your dreaming if you think that law is going to protect your privacy. Who do you think defines 'outside the normal requirements'? Who is going to report it anyway?
Right, corporations would provide for us.
The 'free' market tends torwards monopoly.
> The corporation they work for, with its
> innocent and noble aim of making money, beats
> the crap out of people.
They only beat the crap out of people when
they couldn't get away with killing them.
> its this kind of nonsense
Unfortunately this is the Libertarian
party line. TRUE libertarians (Chomsky)
are known as anarchists (misleading, at best)
or libertarian socialists (equally misleading).
> Libertarianism is flawed
That is why its not treated seriously in
philosophical circles.
well said.
> Corporations don't abuse us
... As a stock owner and a consumer
You must not be a consumer.
Who hasn't been screwed by a company?
> People own
You don't own every company.
I mainly own index funds, but that doesn't mean
I have a say when Acme company decides not to
give me my rebate. Get real.
>It's a rare industry that allows you to treat
>your customers badly and get away with it
Not in an oligopoly.
Most u.s. industries are oligopolies.
Take a break from your conservative talk
radio there buddy. You shouldn't let
conservatives define what liberalism is
any more than you should let liberals define
what conservatism is.
> We have earned our rights. The liberals have earned nothing
I doubt you've earned shit there, freedom fighter
well put
> Java language instead of the previous TCL language
Holy shit! Phil used to go off on java.
TCL this, TCL that. I wonder what the hell
happened?
People usually think they are immune to layoffs because they have 'skills'. Here is what happens in a layoff: 1. Keep 2 or 3 of the very best (the designers). 2. Fill in the ranks with the lowest paid (usually younger people with little experience) . A lot of people with 'skills' just lost out.
> FileMaker-based database solution wasn't working
Why is it not working? Can't you fix it?
> As DBA, I recommended a MySQL server with a
> Perl or PHP-based front end
Did you really 'recommend' it? Did you show
him examples of a front end? Did you list out
the pros and cons? Did you list them out in
his terms or your terms? Why DID you recommend it?
> insisting that I develop everything with Access
> as a front end
Despite what every single person seems to be
saying in this thread, Access is NOT a front
end. It is a relational database. Most of what
the user sees is visual basic forms. Have
you explained to your boss that the server can
be distinct from the client?
> good documentation on connecting Access to Non-
> Microsoft DB servers in general, and MySQL in
> particular?
You are thinking in terms of products instead of
solutions. Try this instead:
Think of what has to be done.
Think of the best solution to implement what
has to be done. Think of a couple of other
solutions. Flesh a couple of them out before
you decide which one is 'best'.
After you have done this, you should be able
to convince your boss that Access is not the
solution (or yourself that it is).
Because all I ever do is sit in front of
my computer. 8am - 5pm. Then I go home
and sit at my computer some more.
Why would I need a social life?
Please. Get real.
> socialism forces people at penalty of hard
x .h tml
> labor, inprisonment, execution or all of the
> above
Thats not socialism. Check out these links
for some good information:
Socialism in a nutshell:
http://home.vicnet.net.au/~dmcm/#Nutshell
Misconceptions about capitalism/communism/
socialism:
http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~brians/hum_303/misinde
>No, they stated that it was too late to
>establish clear guidelines followed by
>implementing the guidelines to count votes. They
>gave no opinion on what the guidelines should be.
Thats exactly what I said. Sorry if I didn't
make myself clear.
>It is simply my opinion that any guideline that
>requires a subjective opinion on the part of a
>counter is a bogus guideline
If a panel can't agree on a vote, then yes it
should be discarded.
Say you have a ballot that requires you to place
an 'X' in a box. Some guy comes along and
instead circles the box. If you showed that
ballot to 100 people, all 100 would agree on
who he meant to vote for. His choice is clearly
circled. The machine however, is designed to
only recognize an 'X' in a box, so his vote
would not be counted.
You said above that in this situation, the vote
should be counted. Well, if there were any
undervotes where clear intent could have been
discerned, they weren't.
Ever take a test on a scantron? They are green
sheets for taking multiple choice tests. To
choose an answer, you pencil in the corresponding
box. These sheets are never 100% accurate.
The teacher will always give you an answer key
to catch any mistakes that the machine makes.
What guideline does any teacher use?
Clear intent. There aren't any established
guidelines.
> And every vote that had unequivocal evidence
> was counted
An undervote occurs when the machine does not
record a vote on the ballot. There were 40,000+
undervotes in Florida that _WERE_NOT_COUNTED_.
That was what the lawsuit was about. Don't
you think that out of those 40,000 undervotes,
clear intent could have been found on at least
a few???
> Frankly, I find it astounding that anyone would
> argue that ambiguous votes should count
No one advocates that. The point is, out of
all of those 40,000+ undervotes, there were
probably a few of them where there was clear
intent on who the person wanted to vote for.
Are you just being a troll?