I was placed in my current job by a guy from Winter Wyman. The company isn't doing too well, but I've been here almost three years (since 12/02), and it was an absolute joy working with him. There was no bullshit, he worked with my resume instead of padding it, and actively went out to find jobs for me (instead of waiting until something came across his desk that I would fit, unlike a certain other agency I tried to use).
Within two weeks of calling him, I had been on at least half a dozen interviews and had three separate offers.
Another thing to keep in mind, the Executive appoints the members of the Supreme court.
Unless the Democrats decide they don't like those appointments, which is why they've been delaying every single one of Bush's nominations to the federal courts. They're trying to hold off on any more conservative federal judges until a liberal president takes office, at which time the Democrats will rubber-stamp the appointment of liberal judges -- and if the conservatives try to stall, the liberals will whine about partisanship.
Tell me something, how the fuck did humans live without toxic chemicals for the last 100,000 years then?
They didn't. Life has been exposed to toxic chemicals from nature since life started on Earth. As another poster wisely pointed out, every chemical is toxic in enough concentrations (including water). Yet modern science seems to believe that water is good for you. Zinc, calcium, and iron, in high enough concentrations, are bad for you, yet the public routinely consumes vitamins to get their daily supply. Why are water, zinc, calcium, and iron any different than any other substance?
"Writing an efficient, lean, fast program" is not the goal of AppleScript either.
In which case a "learn this in 24 hours" book is fine (assuming it's written properly, which the review doesn't seem to think this one is).
However, the original poster of this mini-thread was ranting against "learn [foo] in 24 hours" books in general, so my response was generalized as well.
Programming is not as highly skilled a task as you seem to think it is. Anyone with the desire can learn to do it, and start accomplishing what they need quickly. [snip] You're not as important as you think, anyone could do your job.
The issue is that most people do not have the desire to learn it to do it properly. No doubt I can read a book on dog grooming in 24 hours, and start snipping away the next day, but does that mean I'll do a good job? Know the best techniques? Have anything other than the most basic clue?
Yes, anybody can program a computer. Writing an efficient, lean, fast program takes more knowledge and education than you can derive from a "Learn Programming in 24 Hours!"-type book.
The GPL only requires that you release the source code, not binaries.
But the only time the GPL kicks in is when you release binaries; if you don't distribute the binaries, you don't have to distribute your changes, either.
IANAL, so this may be rubbish. but, if the GPL is declared invalid in court, wouldn't most of the code be technically unlicensed?Yes, but.
Copyright applies to all software. The GPL says, "This software is copyrighted, BUT we're going to allow you to do some things that copyright normally doesn't allow." If the GPL is found to be invalid, then GPL-licensed code is now technically unlicensed. However, that means that normal copyright kicks in. IANAL myself, but it seems to me that if something like Samba is no longer GPLed, then SCO has no rights to modify or distribute the code, since they have not made alternative licensing arrangements with the people who own/control Samba.
If that's true, then SCO is shooting themselves in the foot. Once the GPL is declared invalid, then SCO loses the ability to use any GPLed software until they make other licensing arrangements with the people who control/own that GPLed software.
Spreading copies around within your own internal organization doesn't qualify as "distributing" according to the GPL. It's only "distributing" if you distribute outside your organization.
Let's say there's investigating company X for something. A related hypothetical might be, "Let's say you found company X guilty of Y, but there was some other factor Z involved; doesn't Z invalidate your accusation of Y?"
Control Panel -> Add/Remove Programs > Add/Remove Windows Components > Uncheck IE > Click on OK
Nope. All you've done is hide the shortcuts for IE. Both the help viewer and the Explorer windows are "integrated" with IE, and if you were to actually remove IE from your computer, those components would break (which is why, if you use 98Lite to get truly uninstall IE, you need to have older versions of Explorer that don't integrate with IE).
Online reviews such as those at imdb.com, amazon.com, etc.. are usually the best for me.
The problem with online reviews for games and other technical/electronic items is that, in many cases, the people writing reviews have absolutely no clue as to what they're talking about.
For instance, go look up wireless routers on Amazon.com, and read some of the reviews. In many cases, it's quite evident that these people have no concept of the limitations that can reduce signal strength on a wireless router, so you get these stories along the lines of, "One star!! This product is awful! I installed the wireless router in the backroom of my all-concrete basement, and I wasn't able to get 'excellent' quality signal strength on the third floor of my friends house next door! And [company name] told me that was expected!"
Or you get game reviews along the lines of, "One star! I purchased [brand new game which requires top-of-the-line graphics card to run at high res with decent framerate], but it doesn't run on my practically-brand-new computer. I mean, I bought my system in 1999 and it has a PIII 800 with a GeForce2 -- I can't believe how bad this game runs on my system!"
It's actually surprisingly hard to find unbiased reviews from people who are actually qualified to review the product in question (meaning, people who understand the limitations and can present a realistic portrait of the products strengths and weaknesses).
That sort of sentiment is why disarmament and other peaceful processes get stopped in their tracks. One must make a moral committment to voluntary action towards peace.
First of all, that quote is a Jack Handy quote -- the Jack Handy from Saturday Night Live, a category that includes other quotes like, "If you ever drop your keys in a river of lava, forget about them, becuase man they're GONE" and "".
Second, "moral committment to voluntary action towards peace" sounds nice and flowery, but you're omitting the part that makes that work -- the part about BOTH PARTIES making that moral committment. Peace doesn't work when one party makes that moral committment, and the other party doesn't.
How is peace possible if party X says, "we want peace," but party Y says, "fuck peace -- let's go bomb X!"?
Do you think newbies will bother after the first disaster?
It depends on who the newbie in question is.
If the newbie is coming to Linux because he wants to learn Linux, and doesn't mind commiting some time and effort to it, then yes, that newbie will persist.
If the newbie is coming to Linux because he think it's Microsoft's next operating system, or because it was mentioned in PC Gamer, than no, that user probably won't stick with it.
...or just to have the same amount of text, but much sharper due the the increased resolution.
It may be sharper, but it's going to be much smaller.
My coworker bought a Dell not too long ago that has a 15.0" screen with a screen resolution of 1600x1200 (for the purposes of software development, natch). It's very hard to read at more than a few inches.
On the other hand, I have a Gateway laptop with a 15.7" screen at its native 1280x1024. Now, I'll grant you that I can't cram the same amount of stuff on the screen as my coworker can. However, it's significantly easier to read my screen -- especially from more than a few inches -- that it is to read the screen on the other laptop.
Watch Lexmark cut the size of the cartridges as well.
They don't need to. There's been long-standing accusations that the ink cartridge manufacturers don't completely fill the cartridges they sell, so the ink doesn't last as long and the consumer has to buy refills more frequently.
Disclaimer, I moved to FBSD for 'server land' a while ago, due to the progressively fragmenting Linux desktop community..
Wait a sec. You changed what you used as a server based on the fragmenting desktop? I don't get that. Why change servers if the desktop situation is wierd?
Don't know what kind of difference that would make.
Not a ton. Assuming the GPL is tossed out, that means Castle gets only the standard set of rights that copyright grants, which still denies them the ability to use this code (since they didn't ask permission of the copyright holder).
So the only way Castle can really win is to prove they didn't use the code in question.
But... we'll never know, will we, because the hearings checking to see if they are illegal are held in secret. Do you know what "justice must be seen to be done" actually means? Are these just words to you?
Do you really think that the media wouldn't be ALL OVER an instance where the government has taken a legitimate citizen? Do you really think the media wouldn't be putting that out as the first newscast, the front page, top billing? Do you really think that person's relatives would keep silent if Joe Blow, US Citizen, was taken by federal agents in the middle of the night?
I didn't expect to get this sort of reply on Slashdot. I feel like I've turned over a rock and found my very own Lesser Spotted American Blinkered Bushbaby.
"This sort of reply"? What, somebody who is opposed to the thousands of illegal immigrants who stream into this country every day -- and who is actually glad something is being done about it?
That feels like such a hollow thing to say when thousands have disappeared from US streets to be held secretly (and legally) in internment camps.
Yes, thousands of... illegal aliens, who have no right being in this country in the first place. If you want to get into the US, you do it legally -- you fill out the proper visa forms, you get the approval of the INS, and you immigrate according to the legal structure. Can't afford it? Government won't let you? Tough cookies.
Slashdot Mirror
We also don't purchase a police officer to gaurd our neighborhood.
Ahem. Taxes.
I assume that by 12/02 you mean you started in dec of 2002?
Blasted typos. I mean 12/00 -- December, 2000.
I was placed in my current job by a guy from Winter Wyman. The company isn't doing too well, but I've been here almost three years (since 12/02), and it was an absolute joy working with him. There was no bullshit, he worked with my resume instead of padding it, and actively went out to find jobs for me (instead of waiting until something came across his desk that I would fit, unlike a certain other agency I tried to use).
Within two weeks of calling him, I had been on at least half a dozen interviews and had three separate offers.
Another thing to keep in mind, the Executive appoints the members of the Supreme court.
Unless the Democrats decide they don't like those appointments, which is why they've been delaying every single one of Bush's nominations to the federal courts. They're trying to hold off on any more conservative federal judges until a liberal president takes office, at which time the Democrats will rubber-stamp the appointment of liberal judges -- and if the conservatives try to stall, the liberals will whine about partisanship.
Tell me something, how the fuck did humans live without toxic chemicals for the last 100,000 years then?
They didn't. Life has been exposed to toxic chemicals from nature since life started on Earth. As another poster wisely pointed out, every chemical is toxic in enough concentrations (including water). Yet modern science seems to believe that water is good for you. Zinc, calcium, and iron, in high enough concentrations, are bad for you, yet the public routinely consumes vitamins to get their daily supply. Why are water, zinc, calcium, and iron any different than any other substance?
"Writing an efficient, lean, fast program" is not the goal of AppleScript either.
In which case a "learn this in 24 hours" book is fine (assuming it's written properly, which the review doesn't seem to think this one is).
However, the original poster of this mini-thread was ranting against "learn [foo] in 24 hours" books in general, so my response was generalized as well.
Programming is not as highly skilled a task as you seem to think it is. Anyone with the desire can learn to do it, and start accomplishing what they need quickly. [snip] You're not as important as you think, anyone could do your job.
The issue is that most people do not have the desire to learn it to do it properly. No doubt I can read a book on dog grooming in 24 hours, and start snipping away the next day, but does that mean I'll do a good job? Know the best techniques? Have anything other than the most basic clue?
Yes, anybody can program a computer. Writing an efficient, lean, fast program takes more knowledge and education than you can derive from a "Learn Programming in 24 Hours!"-type book.
The GPL only requires that you release the source code, not binaries.
But the only time the GPL kicks in is when you release binaries; if you don't distribute the binaries, you don't have to distribute your changes, either.
IANAL, so this may be rubbish. but, if the GPL is declared invalid in court, wouldn't most of the code be technically unlicensed?Yes, but.
Copyright applies to all software. The GPL says, "This software is copyrighted, BUT we're going to allow you to do some things that copyright normally doesn't allow." If the GPL is found to be invalid, then GPL-licensed code is now technically unlicensed. However, that means that normal copyright kicks in. IANAL myself, but it seems to me that if something like Samba is no longer GPLed, then SCO has no rights to modify or distribute the code, since they have not made alternative licensing arrangements with the people who own/control Samba.
If that's true, then SCO is shooting themselves in the foot. Once the GPL is declared invalid, then SCO loses the ability to use any GPLed software until they make other licensing arrangements with the people who control/own that GPLed software.
Spreading copies around within your own internal organization doesn't qualify as "distributing" according to the GPL. It's only "distributing" if you distribute outside your organization.
Where does the GPL say this?
fairly right wing
How politicized can you get debunking urban legends?
Let's say there's investigating company X for something. A related hypothetical might be, "Let's say you found company X guilty of Y, but there was some other factor Z involved; doesn't Z invalidate your accusation of Y?"
Control Panel -> Add/Remove Programs > Add/Remove Windows Components > Uncheck IE > Click on OK
Nope. All you've done is hide the shortcuts for IE. Both the help viewer and the Explorer windows are "integrated" with IE, and if you were to actually remove IE from your computer, those components would break (which is why, if you use 98Lite to get truly uninstall IE, you need to have older versions of Explorer that don't integrate with IE).
Online reviews such as those at imdb.com, amazon.com, etc.. are usually the best for me.
The problem with online reviews for games and other technical/electronic items is that, in many cases, the people writing reviews have absolutely no clue as to what they're talking about.
For instance, go look up wireless routers on Amazon.com, and read some of the reviews. In many cases, it's quite evident that these people have no concept of the limitations that can reduce signal strength on a wireless router, so you get these stories along the lines of, "One star!! This product is awful! I installed the wireless router in the backroom of my all-concrete basement, and I wasn't able to get 'excellent' quality signal strength on the third floor of my friends house next door! And [company name] told me that was expected!"
Or you get game reviews along the lines of, "One star! I purchased [brand new game which requires top-of-the-line graphics card to run at high res with decent framerate], but it doesn't run on my practically-brand-new computer. I mean, I bought my system in 1999 and it has a PIII 800 with a GeForce2 -- I can't believe how bad this game runs on my system!"
It's actually surprisingly hard to find unbiased reviews from people who are actually qualified to review the product in question (meaning, people who understand the limitations and can present a realistic portrait of the products strengths and weaknesses).
Just like the people on guantanamo.
All of whom are non U.S. citizens, and therefore do not qualify for the protections afforded to United States citizens under the Constitution.
Maybe you'd like to make a human rights argument, but as far as the Constitutional argument goes, you're out of luck.
That sort of sentiment is why disarmament and other peaceful processes get stopped in their tracks. One must make a moral committment to voluntary action towards peace.
First of all, that quote is a Jack Handy quote -- the Jack Handy from Saturday Night Live, a category that includes other quotes like, "If you ever drop your keys in a river of lava, forget about them, becuase man they're GONE" and "".
Second, "moral committment to voluntary action towards peace" sounds nice and flowery, but you're omitting the part that makes that work -- the part about BOTH PARTIES making that moral committment. Peace doesn't work when one party makes that moral committment, and the other party doesn't.
How is peace possible if party X says, "we want peace," but party Y says, "fuck peace -- let's go bomb X!"?
Do you think newbies will bother after the first disaster?
It depends on who the newbie in question is.
If the newbie is coming to Linux because he wants to learn Linux, and doesn't mind commiting some time and effort to it, then yes, that newbie will persist.
If the newbie is coming to Linux because he think it's Microsoft's next operating system, or because it was mentioned in PC Gamer, than no, that user probably won't stick with it.
...or just to have the same amount of text, but much sharper due the the increased resolution.
It may be sharper, but it's going to be much smaller.
My coworker bought a Dell not too long ago that has a 15.0" screen with a screen resolution of 1600x1200 (for the purposes of software development, natch). It's very hard to read at more than a few inches.
On the other hand, I have a Gateway laptop with a 15.7" screen at its native 1280x1024. Now, I'll grant you that I can't cram the same amount of stuff on the screen as my coworker can. However, it's significantly easier to read my screen -- especially from more than a few inches -- that it is to read the screen on the other laptop.
Watch Lexmark cut the size of the cartridges as well.
They don't need to. There's been long-standing accusations that the ink cartridge manufacturers don't completely fill the cartridges they sell, so the ink doesn't last as long and the consumer has to buy refills more frequently.
Disclaimer, I moved to FBSD for 'server land' a while ago, due to the progressively fragmenting Linux desktop community..
Wait a sec. You changed what you used as a server based on the fragmenting desktop? I don't get that. Why change servers if the desktop situation is wierd?
Don't know what kind of difference that would make.
Not a ton. Assuming the GPL is tossed out, that means Castle gets only the standard set of rights that copyright grants, which still denies them the ability to use this code (since they didn't ask permission of the copyright holder).
So the only way Castle can really win is to prove they didn't use the code in question.
PS/2 USB converter
Where? I would kill to get a couple of these, but I can't find them!
But... we'll never know, will we, because the hearings checking to see if they are illegal are held in secret. Do you know what "justice must be seen to be done" actually means? Are these just words to you?
Do you really think that the media wouldn't be ALL OVER an instance where the government has taken a legitimate citizen? Do you really think the media wouldn't be putting that out as the first newscast, the front page, top billing? Do you really think that person's relatives would keep silent if Joe Blow, US Citizen, was taken by federal agents in the middle of the night?
I didn't expect to get this sort of reply on Slashdot. I feel like I've turned over a rock and found my very own Lesser Spotted American Blinkered Bushbaby.
"This sort of reply"? What, somebody who is opposed to the thousands of illegal immigrants who stream into this country every day -- and who is actually glad something is being done about it?
That feels like such a hollow thing to say when thousands have disappeared from US streets to be held secretly (and legally) in internment camps.
Yes, thousands of... illegal aliens, who have no right being in this country in the first place. If you want to get into the US, you do it legally -- you fill out the proper visa forms, you get the approval of the INS, and you immigrate according to the legal structure. Can't afford it? Government won't let you? Tough cookies.
Any relation to Danger Mouse?