Yeah. First thing I do on new Linux installs is disable SELinux. Linux does satisfactory job protecting against the common problems (like buffer overflows) without SELinux. SELinux adds hassle well past the point of diminishing returns for improvement to security.
Boss, most government contractors can't even *think* about H-1B's lest their government customer catch wind of it and grow nervous. Given my career, I would know.
Like I said, if it appears to you that the majority of companies want H-1B's, you're simply looking in the wrong place. You won't find a good job hanging with the day laborers out by the highway. That isn't where the good jobs are.
A sales engineer is not a salesman. The salesman and sales engineer are a team. The sales engineer's job is to help both the customer _and_ the salesman understand which products in what combination do the things the customer wants to do. In fact, he's usually the one who helps the customer understand what exactly it is that the customer wants to do. The customer starts with only a vague idea.
He doesn't have to convince the customer to buy. That's the salesman's job. And he doesn't tend to do the nitty-gritty engineering work either. But he puts a huge stamp on what the customer deliverable looks like. He's the guy who first draws it out on the back of a napkin over lunch.
If you like technology AND you like people AND people find you easy to understand, sales engineer is a pretty fun job.
Personally, I find people to be exhausting. Sales engineer is not the job for me. But it's awfully hard to be a teacher if being around people wears you out, so I make the assumption that you find the interaction enjoyable.
Sounds to me like you're looking in the wrong places.
I live in the Washington DC area where virtually every fast food cashier is hispanic and most speak around 10 words of English. During a McDonalds lunch some time ago, I happened to overhear a job interview. The kid was clearly unmotivated but his allowance wasn't cutting it. Towards the end, the manager ask to see paperwork with his social security number or a birth certificate or whatever, the documents on the government list for proof of citizenship. The kid didn't have any. The manager asked what his social security number was. The kid didn't know. So the manager told him to go get those things from his parents and come back.
When the kid left, the manager called over one of the assistant managers and began filling him in on the interview. He explained: "if the kid comes back, we'll probably hire him because he can speak English."
You wanna compete with the day laborers hanging out by the highway, of course you're going to lose. The day bosses in the pickup trucks aren't looking for white guys. Apply to a company that isn't in the 10% of the bottom feeders.
You must work somewhere that's really stingy with the job titles. Senior Sysadmins are Lieutenants not Lieutenant Generals. A technical degree and half a decade of experience gets you senior sysadmin if you're any good at the work.
Sure, but the H1-B's can barely speak English at all, let alone in a way that the customer will understand.
Guy says he want's to be more in to the technology. Tech writing is at about the same proximity as teaching.
Don't waste any attention on the certificate treadmill. The only jobs which require it are the ones which royally suck to work for many other reasons. Treat certificate requirements as a first-line weedout for prospective employers. If they won't judge you for you in the interview then they won't judge you for you when it comes time for promotions, vacation, office space or anything else.
System Administration needs people the customer can understand. But do you really want to compete with 22 year old junior sysadmins? Have you been running a data center out of your basement they way they have?
There's also value in the sales engineer. But do you have enough of the engineer part? The customer has to be able to understand the sales engineer, that's pivotal, but the sales engineer also has to rough out the system design with the correct company products and come up with a credible cost estimate.
They don't have to do it at a reasonable price just as long as they can do it NOW and, for expensive parts, I can return it if it's defective or the wrong one.
That's the secret to Best Buy's success. You can always beat the price, usually by a lot, if you're willing to wait a couple days and have a return hassle if there's a problem.
As another poster noted, if I have to wait for any part of my project then I'll order it all online and wait.
Radioshack is too small for its hobbyist demographic. They can't carry enough stuff. With arduino and its ilk, and the rise of the new maker demographic, the required selection of parts has greatly expanded.
The mall locations are killing them too: the hobbyist shopper is a destination shopper not a walk-in. Having the store in a mall adds cost and limits space with no up side.
They won't be able to sustain cell phone sales in a mall either, not in direct competition with the apple store, the verizon store, etc.
No, his memory is failing. The Trash-80 had a cassette tape with a 5.25" drive as an option. 8 inch drives never made it to consumer use. They were only for the big computers of the day. Things like newspaper typesetting machines.
Maintenance staff already have badges and if they don't it's just another key on the ring. Filter out their codes when you audit the logs.
For emergencies: use maglocked doors and include a big red button by the badge reader that both cuts power to the lock (releasing the door) and sets off an alarm ('cause it's an emergency, right?)
Not locking doors for "safety" reasons is absurd. If there's a genuine safety concern, you put a big red button near the badge reader which both releases the maglock and sets off an alarm.
Hate to burst your bubble but most "Sea Salt" comes from the exact same mine as your table salt. You have to understand: it *was* a sea back when the salt was deposited there, so it's not even slightly disingenuous to call it sea salt.
The only difference between sea salt and table salt is that they skip the last step of the refining process and deliver it crushed but otherwise unchanged from when they dug it out of the ground.
No offense taken. But you might want to read the statute. The statute is the authoritative source.
And you should know that the 9th has a reputation as the most frequently reversed circuit. In fact, one term in the 1990s saw 27 of its 28 decisions reversed or vacated by the supreme court. This sort of BS is why.
I'm not familiar with UK copyright law. In the US where this case happened, it's whoever puts the work into a fixed form.
Also, you can't sign away a copyright before it exists, at least in US law. That trips up a number of people too. If you sign a contract which says, "bob is assigned all copyrights I produce under this contract" but the contract isn't for one of the nine classes of work identified by congress, bob gets nothing. That line of the contract is void. Instead you write the contract to say, "I agree to assign all copyrights I produce under this contract to bob." Now you have a contractual obligation to sign your copyrights over to bob after you create them. Bob doesn't own the copyrights until you assign them, but he owns your promise to sign them over which is functionally the same thing.
Let's be clear: the author is the person who puts the work into a fixed form. Period. There's no subtlety here, no room for confusion. The actor in a movie would not be an author even if he was in every frame and the only person captured on the film.
You go to a concert and tape it, you are the author of that tape. In fact, you have a copyright interest in that tape. As it happens, the singer already had a copyright on a previous recording which makes your tape a -derivative work-. So you can't do anything without his permission. However, the singer could not take your tape and sell it without your permission. That would violate your copyright as the author of that tape.
Are you tracking me now? The author, in whom the copyright vests by default, is the person who puts the work into a fixed form. No one else.
Very well. Then had she any copyright in the work to begin with, it would have vested in her. Unfortunately, she didn't have any copyright to anything.
At least read the circular from the copyright office with the short version of how and to whom copyright vests:
"Copyright law protects a work from the time it is created in a fixed form. From the moment it is set in a print or electronic manuscript, a sound recording, a computer software program, or other such concrete medium, the copyright becomes the property of the author who created it. Only the author or those deriving rights from the author can rightfully claim copyright."
Garcia isn't the author here. The cameraman is. He's the one who "created" the film.
Also, he's almost certainly wrong about it not being a work made for hire since work that is commissioned for use "as part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work" is one of the nine things congress explicitly calls out as a work made for hire under copyright law. So even if he wasn't already wrong about her having created a copyright in the first place, he'd still be wrong about it not being a work made for hire.
I've read the article. I've also read the statute. And the part of the constitution where it says congress alone is authorized to set intellectual property law.
Kozinski is wrong. Not about it not being a work for hire... were that relevant it might be correct. It's not relevant.
No copyright vests in the performer. Ever. It vests in whoever records the performance or in his employer if he is an employee.
Garcia could not "retain" a copyright because she never created a copyright in the first place! That was done by the cameraman!
If you read the article, you know that it didn't make any sense to the article's author either. The judge envisioned a copyright out of thin air with no supporting law. The constitution explicitly forbids judges from making commonlaw copyrights yet that's just what this joker tried to do.
A performance does not have a copyright. Only things fixed in a tangible medium can have a copyright. The film of a performance can have a copyright. But that copyright vests in (drumroll) the photographer -- the individual who fixed it into a tangible medium. Not the actor.
It's the plain language of the law man. Look it up.
The actors don't have a copyright unless rights are granted by the film maker. The script writers have a copyright (unless they're W2 employees) and the cameramen have a copyright (unless they're W2 employees) but the actors have nothing. Copyright vests in whoever puts the work into a fixed form or in their W2 employer if they are acting as an employee. There are a dozen or so exceptions but "actor" isn't one of them.
Slashdot Mirror
This leaves me with one question: What's an ESR?
For a complete and immediate answer, click the first link in the first sentence of the article.
Yeah. First thing I do on new Linux installs is disable SELinux. Linux does satisfactory job protecting against the common problems (like buffer overflows) without SELinux. SELinux adds hassle well past the point of diminishing returns for improvement to security.
Boss, most government contractors can't even *think* about H-1B's lest their government customer catch wind of it and grow nervous. Given my career, I would know.
Like I said, if it appears to you that the majority of companies want H-1B's, you're simply looking in the wrong place. You won't find a good job hanging with the day laborers out by the highway. That isn't where the good jobs are.
Howdy,
A sales engineer is not a salesman. The salesman and sales engineer are a team. The sales engineer's job is to help both the customer _and_ the salesman understand which products in what combination do the things the customer wants to do. In fact, he's usually the one who helps the customer understand what exactly it is that the customer wants to do. The customer starts with only a vague idea.
He doesn't have to convince the customer to buy. That's the salesman's job. And he doesn't tend to do the nitty-gritty engineering work either. But he puts a huge stamp on what the customer deliverable looks like. He's the guy who first draws it out on the back of a napkin over lunch.
If you like technology AND you like people AND people find you easy to understand, sales engineer is a pretty fun job.
Personally, I find people to be exhausting. Sales engineer is not the job for me. But it's awfully hard to be a teacher if being around people wears you out, so I make the assumption that you find the interaction enjoyable.
Sounds to me like you're looking in the wrong places.
I live in the Washington DC area where virtually every fast food cashier is hispanic and most speak around 10 words of English. During a McDonalds lunch some time ago, I happened to overhear a job interview. The kid was clearly unmotivated but his allowance wasn't cutting it. Towards the end, the manager ask to see paperwork with his social security number or a birth certificate or whatever, the documents on the government list for proof of citizenship. The kid didn't have any. The manager asked what his social security number was. The kid didn't know. So the manager told him to go get those things from his parents and come back.
When the kid left, the manager called over one of the assistant managers and began filling him in on the interview. He explained: "if the kid comes back, we'll probably hire him because he can speak English."
You wanna compete with the day laborers hanging out by the highway, of course you're going to lose. The day bosses in the pickup trucks aren't looking for white guys. Apply to a company that isn't in the 10% of the bottom feeders.
You must work somewhere that's really stingy with the job titles. Senior Sysadmins are Lieutenants not Lieutenant Generals. A technical degree and half a decade of experience gets you senior sysadmin if you're any good at the work.
Sure, but the H1-B's can barely speak English at all, let alone in a way that the customer will understand.
Guy says he want's to be more in to the technology. Tech writing is at about the same proximity as teaching.
Don't waste any attention on the certificate treadmill. The only jobs which require it are the ones which royally suck to work for many other reasons. Treat certificate requirements as a first-line weedout for prospective employers. If they won't judge you for you in the interview then they won't judge you for you when it comes time for promotions, vacation, office space or anything else.
You think the writers and IT staff are pad. That's funny.
System Administration needs people the customer can understand. But do you really want to compete with 22 year old junior sysadmins? Have you been running a data center out of your basement they way they have?
There's also value in the sales engineer. But do you have enough of the engineer part? The customer has to be able to understand the sales engineer, that's pivotal, but the sales engineer also has to rough out the system design with the correct company products and come up with a credible cost estimate.
They don't have to do it at a reasonable price just as long as they can do it NOW and, for expensive parts, I can return it if it's defective or the wrong one.
That's the secret to Best Buy's success. You can always beat the price, usually by a lot, if you're willing to wait a couple days and have a return hassle if there's a problem.
As another poster noted, if I have to wait for any part of my project then I'll order it all online and wait.
Radioshack is too small for its hobbyist demographic. They can't carry enough stuff. With arduino and its ilk, and the rise of the new maker demographic, the required selection of parts has greatly expanded.
The mall locations are killing them too: the hobbyist shopper is a destination shopper not a walk-in. Having the store in a mall adds cost and limits space with no up side.
They won't be able to sustain cell phone sales in a mall either, not in direct competition with the apple store, the verizon store, etc.
No, his memory is failing. The Trash-80 had a cassette tape with a 5.25" drive as an option. 8 inch drives never made it to consumer use. They were only for the big computers of the day. Things like newspaper typesetting machines.
Maintenance staff already have badges and if they don't it's just another key on the ring. Filter out their codes when you audit the logs.
For emergencies: use maglocked doors and include a big red button by the badge reader that both cuts power to the lock (releasing the door) and sets off an alarm ('cause it's an emergency, right?)
Not locking doors for "safety" reasons is absurd. If there's a genuine safety concern, you put a big red button near the badge reader which both releases the maglock and sets off an alarm.
I don't want sea salt.
Hate to burst your bubble but most "Sea Salt" comes from the exact same mine as your table salt. You have to understand: it *was* a sea back when the salt was deposited there, so it's not even slightly disingenuous to call it sea salt.
The only difference between sea salt and table salt is that they skip the last step of the refining process and deliver it crushed but otherwise unchanged from when they dug it out of the ground.
If they don't know how they'll do it, how do they know it'll take 40 years and 15 billion dollars?
No offense taken. But you might want to read the statute. The statute is the authoritative source.
And you should know that the 9th has a reputation as the most frequently reversed circuit. In fact, one term in the 1990s saw 27 of its 28 decisions reversed or vacated by the supreme court. This sort of BS is why.
http://blogs.findlaw.com/ninth...
I'm not familiar with UK copyright law. In the US where this case happened, it's whoever puts the work into a fixed form.
Also, you can't sign away a copyright before it exists, at least in US law. That trips up a number of people too. If you sign a contract which says, "bob is assigned all copyrights I produce under this contract" but the contract isn't for one of the nine classes of work identified by congress, bob gets nothing. That line of the contract is void. Instead you write the contract to say, "I agree to assign all copyrights I produce under this contract to bob." Now you have a contractual obligation to sign your copyrights over to bob after you create them. Bob doesn't own the copyrights until you assign them, but he owns your promise to sign them over which is functionally the same thing.
Let's be clear: the author is the person who puts the work into a fixed form. Period. There's no subtlety here, no room for confusion. The actor in a movie would not be an author even if he was in every frame and the only person captured on the film.
You go to a concert and tape it, you are the author of that tape. In fact, you have a copyright interest in that tape. As it happens, the singer already had a copyright on a previous recording which makes your tape a -derivative work-. So you can't do anything without his permission. However, the singer could not take your tape and sell it without your permission. That would violate your copyright as the author of that tape.
Are you tracking me now? The author, in whom the copyright vests by default, is the person who puts the work into a fixed form. No one else.
Very well. Then had she any copyright in the work to begin with, it would have vested in her. Unfortunately, she didn't have any copyright to anything.
At least read the circular from the copyright office with the short version of how and to whom copyright vests:
http://www.copyright.gov/circs...
"Copyright law protects a work from the time it is created in a fixed form. From the moment it is set in a print or electronic manuscript, a sound recording, a computer software program, or other such concrete medium, the copyright becomes the property of the author who created it. Only the author or those
deriving rights from the author can rightfully claim copyright."
Garcia isn't the author here. The cameraman is. He's the one who "created" the film.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
'nuff said.
Also, he's almost certainly wrong about it not being a work made for hire since work that is commissioned for use "as part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work" is one of the nine things congress explicitly calls out as a work made for hire under copyright law. So even if he wasn't already wrong about her having created a copyright in the first place, he'd still be wrong about it not being a work made for hire.
I've read the article. I've also read the statute. And the part of the constitution where it says congress alone is authorized to set intellectual property law.
Kozinski is wrong. Not about it not being a work for hire... were that relevant it might be correct. It's not relevant.
No copyright vests in the performer. Ever. It vests in whoever records the performance or in his employer if he is an employee.
Garcia could not "retain" a copyright because she never created a copyright in the first place! That was done by the cameraman!
If you read the article, you know that it didn't make any sense to the article's author either. The judge envisioned a copyright out of thin air with no supporting law. The constitution explicitly forbids judges from making commonlaw copyrights yet that's just what this joker tried to do.
A performance does not have a copyright. Only things fixed in a tangible medium can have a copyright. The film of a performance can have a copyright. But that copyright vests in (drumroll) the photographer -- the individual who fixed it into a tangible medium. Not the actor.
It's the plain language of the law man. Look it up.
The actors don't have a copyright unless rights are granted by the film maker. The script writers have a copyright (unless they're W2 employees) and the cameramen have a copyright (unless they're W2 employees) but the actors have nothing. Copyright vests in whoever puts the work into a fixed form or in their W2 employer if they are acting as an employee. There are a dozen or so exceptions but "actor" isn't one of them.