You got me wrong. People in Germany, for example, learn and hear a LOT about the world-wars, primarily the second, but also the first. If anything, the focus in history is imho -too- much on these two wars (for understandable reasons), they are important, but so are other events...
It's just, this particular -day- isn't one that is observed much. There are several other days related to the world-wars that are much more well-known. Most of them related to WW-II.
I always go "Mr. Donald Duck". Most type it in uncritically, the few that ask, I ask if identifying oneself is a requirement for shopping at this store. Only once did someone say "yes", at which point I left the $700 worth of stuff I was trying to buy and left the store.
Completely without is probably rare, I've also seen none. But I've seen several a lot less draconian. For example, based on my (admittedly small and perhaps biased) sample of US-working friends, it seems pretty common that the claim of ownership is limited to inventions and ideas in the field of business of their company. Which makes the entire thing a lot less draconian.
I've also not seen contracts asking for ownership of ideas that you have 5 months after you quit. That's batshit insane. Yes, asking that you don't compete with your former employer for the first 6-12 months after quitting is normal. But there's a long step from saying that someone who works for Flickr, say, can't open a competing online-photo-thing in the first year after quitting, and saying that Flickr owns -ALL- ideas he has, alone or with others, for the next 6 months, even if the ideas are -completely- unrelated to whatever he did at Flickr. (let's say he has an idea for a new wheelchair)
You may not have much choice but to accept -some- kind of noncompete. That's not the same thing as saying you should accept over-the-top non-competes that are wildly out of the ordinary, even for USA.
You're rigth that some clauses may be thrown out as unenforcable. My personal policy though, is not to agree to stuff I don't agree to. That's just basic honesty for me. I'd feel dishonest if I signed something, knowing full-well that I don't intend to live up to it, because I believe it's unenforcable.
It's a shame the way things are going in USA currently. More and more like serfdom. Hell you're even getting family-empires, currently on the second helping of Bush, quite likely going on to a second helping of Clinton. Not much like the "American Dream" if you ask me. A real pity too. I love the America that you guys used to be. It breaks my heart to see it getting whittled down, destroyed a little bit more every day. I used to be able to say USA is a great defender of democracy -- with a straigth face. I long for the day where I may again manage that, but I fear it is long in coming.
You're rigth it's easier to stand up for rights when you're in a strong position of bargaining. It's -SOMEWHAT- easier to be true to your principles when you live in a country with 973 unemployed IT-workers and 7369 open IT-positions. (current numbers as of this morning) When the potential boss is the one in trouble if you quit, while you yourself have a new job within the week, *even* if you insist on striking bullshit contract-terms.
To the contrary -- WW-I is probably -more- remembered in Germany than most other places, for essentially the reason you state. The peace-treaty after WW-I was one of the things that came together and eventually led to WW-II. And Germans are spoonfed more on WW-II than any other nation for sure.
It's just that, that particular day ain'y really observed by anyone. Atleast not any significant part of the population. Are you saying a large fraction of the UK-population actually observes november 11th ? (or even know about the spesific date for that matter!)
True. But close enough for practical purposes. Your odds of ever running into a single person who remembers WW-I is lower than the odds of being struck by ligthining. Give it a few years and it'll be true in the literal sense too.
I'd never even consider it. If the company both agreed to give me 6 months after-pay, *and* we specified that any invention/technique/blabla that I develop in my own freetime with my own equipment is solely my own, then it's ok.
Afterall, if they claim to own anything I make for 6 months after I quit, it follows I can't start working for a new company, so it's perfectly reasonable for them to continue my pay for 6 months in that case.
Infact I insisted on the oposite in my work-contract: It explicitly says that stuff I make on my own outside of work belong solely to me. (but it -does- have a clause that I can't work on stuff that is directly competing with the company while working for the company, which is reasonable to me, I can't both be an employee AND a competitor at the same time, that'd be a conflict of interest) I sometime contribute to Open Source projects in my spare time, and didn't want -any- risk of my employer claiming that they have -any- rigths in those.
Sure it did. But it -is- some time ago, nearing a 100 years. Not only is everyone who'd remember it dead, pretty much everyone who have parents who remembered it is also dead. The -grandfather- of my -grandfather- would remember it, though he was only a teenager when the war went on, however not only is he dead, but all his children and all his -grandchildren- are dead.
Short story: November 11th is, in practice, a completely ignored day in Scandinavia and Germany. Despite WW-I having had very noticeable effect on those countries, particularily Germany.
In any average year there's 3791 (give or take a great gross) different "days" to observe. 99% of them are completely ignored by 99% of the population, as it has to be, you can't practically observe 10 different days on every day of the year.
My point is, many, hopefully most, parents aren't like that. And many of the parents that have a clue have no particular need for the age-ratings on games, honestly, I can judge that myself thankyouverymuch. Often I'll know the game. Sometimes I'll not, but I can take the time to play it for a few hours get a feel for it. Failing that, it's not as if it's hard to find good info on a new game online. And in any case, my kids play games on a machine in the living-room. It's not as if they're hidden away in some basement playing some game.
Okay, so that changes once the kids get older, but really, there's no substitute for parenting. Ratings may be of some help, but they're not the main point. The main point is, you need to take an interest in what your kid is doing. Plain and simple.
Been there, done that. We do have a son, in addition to the twins. He's 3.5 or thereabouts and thus since a long time capable of doing all the stuff you mention.
Sure, that's why I worte I hope people don't trust it blindly.
It's even worse for movies. The US ratings are very heavily influenced by fanatical religious people. The result is that if you see a penis or a breast, something that half the population is equipped with, and that 90% of the population see regularily, it's an instant "Teen", if not "Mature". But if you see literally dozens of humans being tortured and killed, it may still have a low age-rating -- as long as, as you say, you see little actual blood.
That's beside the point entirely. Most married people are happy, some aren't. But all of them can safely be assumed to, for example, have seen a woman naked, and any number of other things that is regularily the topic of Slashdot jokes that honestly stopped being funny a decade ago, if ever they where.
Yeah sure. It's just funny is all. Particularily since the "get a girlfriend" jokes continue unabated, regardless of the fact that it seems to me a fair percentage of the people here are long married...
It's a tricky problem. I'm not in favour of forcing people. But nor am I in favour of allowing the children of marginal parents to end up getting a sucky life because the parents can't be bothered to take an interest. I don't think there's any simple solutions.
Certainly. But I'm sure you'll agree with me that the parents of the marginal kid that really needs all the support he/she can get to manage to pull trough, is MUCH more likely not to show up than the parents of the above-average kid which doesn't tend to make trouble.
Notice the the -reason- doesn't particularily matter. If your parents haven't got the time or interest to show up at parent-teacher conferences, the result is negative for the kid -EVEN- if the reasons are perfectly understandable.
Oh, the ones who do show do learn something. That's not the issue, and wasn't my (intended) point. Perhaps I phrased myself badly.
What I meant is that, in general, the more likely it is that some perons is in need of guidance on a certain area, the less likely is it that they'll voluntarily show up for such guidance.
It's quite logical really. Those people who are -interested- in say child-nutrition tends to aquire a clue too. Those who have no interest are both more likely to feed their children unhealthily, AND more likely to not bother going to a course on a topic of no interest to them.
I'm guilty of the same thing: I *BOTH* know nothing about 15th century paintings, AND am about -zero- likely to show up for a course on same. For the simple reason that it's not something that particularily interests me.
Now, you migth argue people -SHOULD- take an interest in certain things (say the health of their children) but that's another matter alltogether.
What is the world coming to. Slashdot is turning into parents-exchange:-) I know, we've got a 3.5 year old one too, in addition to the 8month old twins. You -could- choose to say that things where hmm, lively, with us for a while.
That's the problem with -all- measures to help out parents or to improve the life of kids.
Offer free health-checks, and the ones who -aren't- coming are the ones who'd be most in need of it.
Offer courses on child-nutrition, and the ones who show up are the ones that'd feed their kids sensibly even without the course.
Arrange a course in firts-aid, focused on the kinds of accidents children have the most often. And the ones who show up are the ones who already have half a clue.
Put recommended age on video-games, and the parents who actually take the time to know what their kids are playing and evaluate if it's apropriate for them or not, perhaps with help from the recommended age (but hopefully not by trusting it blindly) are precisely the same that'd probably make a reasonable decision even in the absence of recommended minimum age.
Only one thing works for 5-week olds: A metric, hell, make that IMPERIAL, shitload of patience. If it's any comfort, I can assure you that 5-week-old *twins* are twice the fun. On the flipside, I can also report that things tend to improve quickly. The twins are 8 months now, and it's a different world. One in which they go sleep at 7pm and sleep calmly until 6am. Heaven !
Stay in there !
Re:French cooking is like this too
on
Chefs As Chemists
·
· Score: 1
It's a herb, reasonably close to Oregano, if that tells you anything. Point is, it is mild, and merely one component in a complex taste-picture, not dominating and strong like chili.
So, you could leave it out even if the recipe called for it, and nobody that didn't know that particular recipe well would even notice, or you could add triple the requested amount, and that'd likely go trough un-noticed too.
Re:French cooking is like this too
on
Chefs As Chemists
·
· Score: 1
I was responding to the spesific claim that in cooking one needs to, in general, be extremely careful with amounts, temperature, stirring, whatever.
Which ain't true. You *sometimes* need to be careful with those, and other, things. The main trick isn't learning to be generally exact. The main trick is learning when to pay attention, and when sloppiness and doing things aproximately is fine.
Sure, 80% of everything is trivial. That's just how life is.
Dunno. Nobody wears a school-uniform here in Norway. But there's a few (imho weak, but they're there) arguments in favour of school-uniforms.
Chief among them is that it is hypothesized that when everyone wears the same clothes, this source of inequality and mob-pressure to have the coolest clothes etc diminishes, so theorethically that'd be an advantage say to poorer children.
In practice it doesn't work that way, because children aren't dumb. Sure the -clothes- may be equal, but the poor child still has the suckiest bike, the least toys, etc etc etc. Children notice in a million ways, trying to/hide/ the differences is fruitless. Making the actual differences smaller would work, as would working to increase acceptance and tolerance for differentness, though.
Repeated claims that something isn't a privacy issue doesn't make it not a privacy-issue.
Children have a rigth to privacy too. Like for adults, the right isn't absolute, and theirs is invaded more often than that of adults, but that is not the same thing as saying it is zero.
Slashdot Mirror
You got me wrong. People in Germany, for example, learn and hear a LOT about the world-wars, primarily the second, but also the first. If anything, the focus in history is imho -too- much on these two wars (for understandable reasons), they are important, but so are other events...
It's just, this particular -day- isn't one that is observed much. There are several other days related to the world-wars that are much more well-known. Most of them related to WW-II.
I always go "Mr. Donald Duck". Most type it in uncritically, the few that ask, I ask if identifying oneself is a requirement for shopping at this store. Only once did someone say "yes", at which point I left the $700 worth of stuff I was trying to buy and left the store.
Completely without is probably rare, I've also seen none. But I've seen several a lot less draconian. For example, based on my (admittedly small and perhaps biased) sample of US-working friends, it seems pretty common that the claim of ownership is limited to inventions and ideas in the field of business of their company. Which makes the entire thing a lot less draconian.
I've also not seen contracts asking for ownership of ideas that you have 5 months after you quit. That's batshit insane. Yes, asking that you don't compete with your former employer for the first 6-12 months after quitting is normal. But there's a long step from saying that someone who works for Flickr, say, can't open a competing online-photo-thing in the first year after quitting, and saying that Flickr owns -ALL- ideas he has, alone or with others, for the next 6 months, even if the ideas are -completely- unrelated to whatever he did at Flickr. (let's say he has an idea for a new wheelchair)
You may not have much choice but to accept -some- kind of noncompete. That's not the same thing as saying you should accept over-the-top non-competes that are wildly out of the ordinary, even for USA.
You're rigth that some clauses may be thrown out as unenforcable. My personal policy though, is not to agree to stuff I don't agree to. That's just basic honesty for me. I'd feel dishonest if I signed something, knowing full-well that I don't intend to live up to it, because I believe it's unenforcable.
It's a shame the way things are going in USA currently. More and more like serfdom. Hell you're even getting family-empires, currently on the second helping of Bush, quite likely going on to a second helping of Clinton. Not much like the "American Dream" if you ask me. A real pity too. I love the America that you guys used to be. It breaks my heart to see it getting whittled down, destroyed a little bit more every day. I used to be able to say USA is a great defender of democracy -- with a straigth face. I long for the day where I may again manage that, but I fear it is long in coming.
You're rigth it's easier to stand up for rights when you're in a strong position of bargaining. It's -SOMEWHAT- easier to be true to your principles when you live in a country with 973 unemployed IT-workers and 7369 open IT-positions. (current numbers as of this morning) When the potential boss is the one in trouble if you quit, while you yourself have a new job within the week, *even* if you insist on striking bullshit contract-terms.
Well, atleast Quisling -would- remember WW-I, alas he is also dead, like most others who would.
To the contrary -- WW-I is probably -more- remembered in Germany than most other places, for essentially the reason you state. The peace-treaty after WW-I was one of the things that came together and eventually led to WW-II. And Germans are spoonfed more on WW-II than any other nation for sure.
It's just that, that particular day ain'y really observed by anyone. Atleast not any significant part of the population. Are you saying a large fraction of the UK-population actually observes november 11th ? (or even know about the spesific date for that matter!)
True. But close enough for practical purposes. Your odds of ever running into a single person who remembers WW-I is lower than the odds of being struck by ligthining. Give it a few years and it'll be true in the literal sense too.
I'd never even consider it. If the company both agreed to give me 6 months after-pay, *and* we specified that any invention/technique/blabla that I develop in my own freetime with my own equipment is solely my own, then it's ok.
Afterall, if they claim to own anything I make for 6 months after I quit, it follows I can't start working for a new company, so it's perfectly reasonable for them to continue my pay for 6 months in that case.
Infact I insisted on the oposite in my work-contract: It explicitly says that stuff I make on my own outside of work belong solely to me. (but it -does- have a clause that I can't work on stuff that is directly competing with the company while working for the company, which is reasonable to me, I can't both be an employee AND a competitor at the same time, that'd be a conflict of interest) I sometime contribute to Open Source projects in my spare time, and didn't want -any- risk of my employer claiming that they have -any- rigths in those.
Sure it did. But it -is- some time ago, nearing a 100 years. Not only is everyone who'd remember it dead, pretty much everyone who have parents who remembered it is also dead. The -grandfather- of my -grandfather- would remember it, though he was only a teenager when the war went on, however not only is he dead, but all his children and all his -grandchildren- are dead.
Short story: November 11th is, in practice, a completely ignored day in Scandinavia and Germany. Despite WW-I having had very noticeable effect on those countries, particularily Germany.
In any average year there's 3791 (give or take a great gross) different "days" to observe. 99% of them are completely ignored by 99% of the population, as it has to be, you can't practically observe 10 different days on every day of the year.
My point is, many, hopefully most, parents aren't like that. And many of the parents that have a clue have no particular need for the age-ratings on games, honestly, I can judge that myself thankyouverymuch. Often I'll know the game. Sometimes I'll not, but I can take the time to play it for a few hours get a feel for it. Failing that, it's not as if it's hard to find good info on a new game online. And in any case, my kids play games on a machine in the living-room. It's not as if they're hidden away in some basement playing some game.
Okay, so that changes once the kids get older, but really, there's no substitute for parenting. Ratings may be of some help, but they're not the main point. The main point is, you need to take an interest in what your kid is doing. Plain and simple.
I know that one. Read it years ago. You're much better off reading the original study, http://www.apa.org/journals/features/psp7761121.pdf rather than all the pundits commenting upon it, by the way.
It's an age-old observation anyway.
Certainly not. American I mean. I'm Norwegian.
Been there, done that. We do have a son, in addition to the twins. He's 3.5 or thereabouts and thus since a long time capable of doing all the stuff you mention.
Sure, that's why I worte I hope people don't trust it blindly.
It's even worse for movies. The US ratings are very heavily influenced by fanatical religious people. The result is that if you see a penis or a breast, something that half the population is equipped with, and that 90% of the population see regularily, it's an instant "Teen", if not "Mature". But if you see literally dozens of humans being tortured and killed, it may still have a low age-rating -- as long as, as you say, you see little actual blood.
That's beside the point entirely. Most married people are happy, some aren't. But all of them can safely be assumed to, for example, have seen a woman naked, and any number of other things that is regularily the topic of Slashdot jokes that honestly stopped being funny a decade ago, if ever they where.
Yeah sure. It's just funny is all. Particularily since the "get a girlfriend" jokes continue unabated, regardless of the fact that it seems to me a fair percentage of the people here are long married...
It's a tricky problem. I'm not in favour of forcing people. But nor am I in favour of allowing the children of marginal parents to end up getting a sucky life because the parents can't be bothered to take an interest. I don't think there's any simple solutions.
Certainly. But I'm sure you'll agree with me that the parents of the marginal kid that really needs all the support he/she can get to manage to pull trough, is MUCH more likely not to show up than the parents of the above-average kid which doesn't tend to make trouble.
Notice the the -reason- doesn't particularily matter. If your parents haven't got the time or interest to show up at parent-teacher conferences, the result is negative for the kid -EVEN- if the reasons are perfectly understandable.
Oh, the ones who do show do learn something. That's not the issue, and wasn't my (intended) point. Perhaps I phrased myself badly.
What I meant is that, in general, the more likely it is that some perons is in need of guidance on a certain area, the less likely is it that they'll voluntarily show up for such guidance.
It's quite logical really. Those people who are -interested- in say child-nutrition tends to aquire a clue too. Those who have no interest are both more likely to feed their children unhealthily, AND more likely to not bother going to a course on a topic of no interest to them.
I'm guilty of the same thing: I *BOTH* know nothing about 15th century paintings, AND am about -zero- likely to show up for a course on same. For the simple reason that it's not something that particularily interests me.
Now, you migth argue people -SHOULD- take an interest in certain things (say the health of their children) but that's another matter alltogether.
What is the world coming to. Slashdot is turning into parents-exchange :-) I know, we've got a 3.5 year old one too, in addition to the 8month old twins. You -could- choose to say that things where hmm, lively, with us for a while.
That's the problem with -all- measures to help out parents or to improve the life of kids.
Offer free health-checks, and the ones who -aren't- coming are the ones who'd be most in need of it.
Offer courses on child-nutrition, and the ones who show up are the ones that'd feed their kids sensibly even without the course.
Arrange a course in firts-aid, focused on the kinds of accidents children have the most often. And the ones who show up are the ones who already have half a clue.
Put recommended age on video-games, and the parents who actually take the time to know what their kids are playing and evaluate if it's apropriate for them or not, perhaps with help from the recommended age (but hopefully not by trusting it blindly) are precisely the same that'd probably make a reasonable decision even in the absence of recommended minimum age.
Only one thing works for 5-week olds: A metric, hell, make that IMPERIAL, shitload of patience. If it's any comfort, I can assure you that 5-week-old *twins* are twice the fun. On the flipside, I can also report that things tend to improve quickly. The twins are 8 months now, and it's a different world. One in which they go sleep at 7pm and sleep calmly until 6am. Heaven !
Stay in there !
It's a herb, reasonably close to Oregano, if that tells you anything. Point is, it is mild, and merely one component in a complex taste-picture, not dominating and strong like chili.
So, you could leave it out even if the recipe called for it, and nobody that didn't know that particular recipe well would even notice, or you could add triple the requested amount, and that'd likely go trough un-noticed too.
I was responding to the spesific claim that in cooking one needs to, in general, be extremely careful with amounts, temperature, stirring, whatever.
Which ain't true. You *sometimes* need to be careful with those, and other, things. The main trick isn't learning to be generally exact. The main trick is learning when to pay attention, and when sloppiness and doing things aproximately is fine.
Sure, 80% of everything is trivial. That's just how life is.
Dunno. Nobody wears a school-uniform here in Norway. But there's a few (imho weak, but they're there) arguments in favour of school-uniforms.
/hide/ the differences is fruitless. Making the actual differences smaller would work, as would working to increase acceptance and tolerance for differentness, though.
Chief among them is that it is hypothesized that when everyone wears the same clothes, this source of inequality and mob-pressure to have the coolest clothes etc diminishes, so theorethically that'd be an advantage say to poorer children.
In practice it doesn't work that way, because children aren't dumb. Sure the -clothes- may be equal, but the poor child still has the suckiest bike, the least toys, etc etc etc. Children notice in a million ways, trying to
Repeated claims that something isn't a privacy issue doesn't make it not a privacy-issue.
Children have a rigth to privacy too. Like for adults, the right isn't absolute, and theirs is invaded more often than that of adults, but that is not the same thing as saying it is zero.