Used to work for a company that managed workers leave pay, and a requirement of recieving your STD/LTD/FMLA pay was signing a waiver.
Probably not legal. A worker cannot be forced to waive their rights altogether as a condition for receiving pay that is due to them.
They might need to perform a release for a specific purpose, but that would leave their rights intact.
If you didn't, we couldn't legally investigate your claim, and those you got denied. Mind you, this doesn't give us a right to be careless with your data, it just gives us the right to access information needed. I suspect the grad school needed the same waivers to investigate you past schooling, share you information with the admissions board, etc
How grad shools handle waivers with regards to letters of rec. is the student can sign the waiver, and by doing so, the letter of recommendation is sealed; the waiver is an act of the student surrendering the right to access the letter of recommendation, the text of the letter becomes confidential and part of the student's record that the student is not ever allowed to see.
By having the letter of recommendation sealed, the school will generally give it greater consideration, since the student could not read/access the letter, the letter is considered more helpful, as the author will be more candid, there is no personal recourse the student has against the author of the letter of reference; so the admission committee can relies more heavily on the letter's "authenticity", giving more weight/credibility to the recommendation.
When applying for school that requires such letters, given the option, it is pretty much always advisable for the student to do the waiver. Choose references you can trust.
When someone actually compromises an open communication over dedicated terrestrial links where they wouldn't have been able to if it were encrypted, I'll start worrying.
Compromising an open communication over such links is no problem. There are well-understood simple ways of tapping and capturing transmissions from dedicated links. The specific methods available for that type of compromise depend on the type of link.
P.S. It also has to be dimmable, (which CFLs and most LEDs are not), AND
it has to be usable in an enclosed fixture without impacting the life of the bulb or reducing brightness, because all my fixtures are enclosed.
And needs to last long enough to assure at least break-even for the amount of energy saving (against the cost of the bulb), as well as costing less than $100.
Find that product, and I will submit that people should use it when possible.
If the product doesn't exist, then the "alternative" lightbulbs market is still just a bunch of shoddy parts that have a really hard time living up to the lighting expectations that incandescents easily meet.
Don't forget newer diodes are now 95% more efficient than a typical tungsten filament bulb. 50w GU-10 micro flood replaced with a 4w LED, and you get MORE light output.
This is no good. In my experience you do get the right amount of light output with LEDs, HOWEVER the light does not scatter, the LED replacements act like damn spotlights, and and the result is you burn essentially a bright hole in one spot of the floor, while the rest of the room remains dark.
That means you need 10x as many 4w LEDs to get as much usable light dispersed around the room as that 1 35 watt Tungsten filament.... guess what 10 x 4w = 40W.
Also, I don't use 35watt Tungsten filaments, they don't produce enough light in general.
The lowest wattage I can use is 60w, and I generally use 75w or 100w.
Please show me where I can find a 100w LED replacement with the comparable light scattering characteristics and color temperature as a Tungsten incandescent that has an efficiency of 60 lumens per watt or better for less than $100.
No, consumers are not stupid. They are acting intelligently in utilizing technology that is well proven, works 100% is known safe and reliable.
Over unproven technologies that represent an inferior option, in many cases don't work as well, are not as safe, and are no more efficient;
by having no other redeeming qualities.
And sometimes aesthetics and comfort matter, especially in regards to the color and nature of light in your home.
LEDs and CFLs being particularly hard on the eyes, have many undesirable qualities in that regard, that would cause a rational person to avoid them in many situations for highly intelligent reasons.
LEDs are expensive; when materials and energy required to produce them are considered they are no more efficient than incandescents.
CFLs are expensive and dangerous, due to containing mercury, and not well studied UV emissions.
LEDs also have the disadvantage of not emitting heat; which means, in many cases, additional space heaters have to be setup where incandescents would be used instead, and installation of space header creates energy waste and fire hazard.
It may be rational to experiment with CFL and LED technologies, but there are good solid reasons to avoid them in many situations.
Really? I beg to differ. I read both extensively. But i could care less if my science fiction is scientific or not.
You don't need math.
Ok, you can read non-geeky stuff as a geek and some Sci-Fi is also fantasy (geeky); it doesn't hurt (that much) as long as you still watch mostly geeky stuff. But if you are in the Non-Sci-Fi crowd totally and read/watch a lot of mooshy fantasy and haven't seen any Sci-Fi at all, or at least News, history/crime drama stuff, then turn in your geek card; as a geek, it's absolutely essential that you can list factual innacuracies/inconsistencies in such movies and especially in the News on the back of your napkin, if you want, and if you've never seen said Sci-Fi, there's no way you could continue to prove yourself a geek.
Fantasy = Jimanji, Pinocchio, Shrek, The Lion King, Bambi, My Little Ponies, Toy Story, Spirited Away, The Godfather,... Fox News....
Sci-Fi = Star Trek, Jurassic Park, Tron, Star Wars, ET, Transformers, Terminator, The Matrix, Honey I shrunk the Kids, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Wall-E, Titanic, Indiana Jones, Resident Evil, very geeky
Of *course* it is dangerous to resist an autocracy
That depends.
The danger in resisting an autocracy is somehow related to
(1) The 'size' of the haystack -- the number of other people also resisting the autocracy
(2) How low or high a profile you keep in your resistance... how easy it is to determine you are resisting/opposing
(3) The autocracy's ability to find people resisting
Well, the danger is greater the more likely the government figures out/identifies you.
In Libya, however, the danger may be very high, even for people not resisting.
If the government doesn't seem to care much whether you [or each individual] are actually resisting or not,
explosive devices aren't very selective in their targets, and soldiers in large crowds have very limited time
to determine "who they should bother or not"; being among resisters, or otherwise being in the wrong place at the wrong time can lead to
death if you happen to be in the country, resisting or not.
I'd be very interested to learn how you would transmit video footage over POTS using UUCP in any usable amount of time....... very short highly compressed
clips perhaps:)
If this really does turn into a civil war, I would assume that the US would pick a side and then start training/arming them like the good old Cold War days.
Only if one of the US' enemies already picked a side and has been training/arming it, or intends to use the void left behind as an opportunity to invade and install their own government.
While it's not a terrible idea, it might be worth pointing out that the military may regard that as an act of war. While Lybia wouldn't have a chance against NATO in the long run, they could seriously fuck up Barcelona or Rome or some other such place with an Airstrike if they chose to.
Both Italy and Spain have an air force and significant number of combat aircraft.
If aircraft from Libya were to attempt to enter their airspace without the proper permissions, they would be subject to getting intercepted and shot down before they got anywhere near striking distance of Rome or Barcelona
Will anyone at least do something now that he's jamming regional TV and phone?
Well, I know if Qadafi makes his jamming signal powerful enough to block ESPN across the world in the US,
in the middle of a sufficiently high profile ball game, there will be millions of TV watching fans demanding Libya's jammers
be taken out by force, when the news informs them of the reason.
That would kind of hammer home the importance of the middle east and wake up the sleeping giant.
Fun stuff, but the US shouldn't be the ones firing them or it will taint the process. For people to appreciate freedom they must suffer to obtain it, and for peoples justice to be respected the people must kill their masters themselves.
Since the jamming crosses outside their countries' borders other countries are justified in responding with force on that particular issue.
Other countries can't do the job the people of Libya would need to do, but they can react to the Libya government's most heinous acts.
The Libya people are already sufferring. And other countries can do things to reduce (but not eliminate) suffering.
Hell, even the Colonies had France to help them with their revolution.
Where would we be if they had decided to just let us suffer to obtain freedom without their help.
This is what the Europeans should deploy when the jamming interferes with their radio signals.
Of course, er, taking out their jammers will be an act of war.
However, intentional jamming that disrupts other countries' radio signals in violation of the ITU assignments and other international spectrum agreements is also an act of war.
Even if that's true, they're probably banking that *fewer* people will be 'encouraged' if they manage to eventually execute him.
You think a EU member would allow anyone to be extradited to the US someone who has never set foot in the US, if they believed there was a chance the accused could be executed as a result?
In PHP... your "comments" have a way of being read/interpreted by the web server, the same system that is displaying the web pages to users.
Your comments are always in some danger of being exposed to humans (just like the source code).
Whereas, C++ programs are compiled, always. The end user never has access to comments in the source code, unless you have a very very strange compilation script that embeds some code as a string.
Also, there is the fact that PHP coders are notorious for confusing uncommented code.
Instead of swearing in the comments, they make you swear after trying to read their code,
which has zero meaningful comments, and possibly a few comments that will be just plain wrong or confuse the hell out of you.
Pragmatically... to get your mail out, either upgrade to leased lines with your own IP allocation, or subscribe to a reputable spam filtering service that offers outbound relay and filtering of spam, e.g. Postini.
The general idea is your 'outbound filtering' service will have a good reputation for mail deliverability, and they will be able to more accurately model
your mail profile and recognize spam/malicious activity than any third party not beholden to you.
Quoting Wikipedia: "fear of the vigilant and litigious Tolkien estate has heretofore prevented its publication in English". Tell me again, how exactly copyright encourages creation of new works?
It enables authors to profit, by actually having a market, which encourages publishers to pay authors and authors to write books, without banning any technology -- especially now; without copyright, there'd be not enough profit in publishing books.
After limited times, meaning a short amount of time, the duration of the copyright expires, and new works can be made based on the old work.
This is how copyright avoids stifling new works -- old works' copyright expires.
This promotes progress in the arts and sciences because there is now not much (if any) profit in rehashing old works.
Promoting progress means encouraging new works, and since copyright protections only apply to new works (that is: works that are so new,
that they are still subject to copyright), new works are encouraged.
You basically have 3 choices... (A) Have copyright, (B) Ban sale/possession of electronic/mechanic devices capable of copying or rendering books except by 'licensed publishers' (essentially -- personal computers would be banned), or (C) Have few/no books, because there's no profit un publishing to be made making and selling large books. The few books that could exist would be advertising supported.
I have yet to see one single study that finds economical benefits in using DST.
What representative cares? It's a neat way for them to flux their legislative muscle, and remind the public who is in charge of their clocks,
and that they had better behave, or they will get a workday that starts after the sun has gone down.
and it's not just because I don't have any friends
Something tells me that would mean you don't get the job, because not enough personal information can be found about you......
also, it must be a lie (as far as the hiring manager thinks).... because really.... there's no such thing as someone not having a FB account
Slashdot Mirror
Used to work for a company that managed workers leave pay, and a requirement of recieving your STD/LTD/FMLA pay was signing a waiver.
Probably not legal. A worker cannot be forced to waive their rights altogether as a condition for receiving pay that is due to them. They might need to perform a release for a specific purpose, but that would leave their rights intact.
If you didn't, we couldn't legally investigate your claim, and those you got denied. Mind you, this doesn't give us a right to be careless with your data, it just gives us the right to access information needed. I suspect the grad school needed the same waivers to investigate you past schooling, share you information with the admissions board, etc
How grad shools handle waivers with regards to letters of rec. is the student can sign the waiver, and by doing so, the letter of recommendation is sealed; the waiver is an act of the student surrendering the right to access the letter of recommendation, the text of the letter becomes confidential and part of the student's record that the student is not ever allowed to see.
By having the letter of recommendation sealed, the school will generally give it greater consideration, since the student could not read/access the letter, the letter is considered more helpful, as the author will be more candid, there is no personal recourse the student has against the author of the letter of reference; so the admission committee can relies more heavily on the letter's "authenticity", giving more weight/credibility to the recommendation.
When applying for school that requires such letters, given the option, it is pretty much always advisable for the student to do the waiver. Choose references you can trust.
When someone actually compromises an open communication over dedicated terrestrial links where they wouldn't have been able to if it were encrypted, I'll start worrying.
Compromising an open communication over such links is no problem. There are well-understood simple ways of tapping and capturing transmissions from dedicated links. The specific methods available for that type of compromise depend on the type of link.
P.S. It also has to be dimmable, (which CFLs and most LEDs are not), AND it has to be usable in an enclosed fixture without impacting the life of the bulb or reducing brightness, because all my fixtures are enclosed.
And needs to last long enough to assure at least break-even for the amount of energy saving (against the cost of the bulb), as well as costing less than $100. Find that product, and I will submit that people should use it when possible.
If the product doesn't exist, then the "alternative" lightbulbs market is still just a bunch of shoddy parts that have a really hard time living up to the lighting expectations that incandescents easily meet.
Don't forget newer diodes are now 95% more efficient than a typical tungsten filament bulb. 50w GU-10 micro flood replaced with a 4w LED, and you get MORE light output.
This is no good. In my experience you do get the right amount of light output with LEDs, HOWEVER the light does not scatter, the LED replacements act like damn spotlights, and and the result is you burn essentially a bright hole in one spot of the floor, while the rest of the room remains dark.
That means you need 10x as many 4w LEDs to get as much usable light dispersed around the room as that 1 35 watt Tungsten filament.... guess what 10 x 4w = 40W.
Also, I don't use 35watt Tungsten filaments, they don't produce enough light in general.
The lowest wattage I can use is 60w, and I generally use 75w or 100w.
Please show me where I can find a 100w LED replacement with the comparable light scattering characteristics and color temperature as a Tungsten incandescent that has an efficiency of 60 lumens per watt or better for less than $100.
Because consumers are stupid - that's why.
No, consumers are not stupid. They are acting intelligently in utilizing technology that is well proven, works 100% is known safe and reliable. Over unproven technologies that represent an inferior option, in many cases don't work as well, are not as safe, and are no more efficient; by having no other redeeming qualities.
And sometimes aesthetics and comfort matter, especially in regards to the color and nature of light in your home. LEDs and CFLs being particularly hard on the eyes, have many undesirable qualities in that regard, that would cause a rational person to avoid them in many situations for highly intelligent reasons.
LEDs are expensive; when materials and energy required to produce them are considered they are no more efficient than incandescents.
CFLs are expensive and dangerous, due to containing mercury, and not well studied UV emissions.
LEDs also have the disadvantage of not emitting heat; which means, in many cases, additional space heaters have to be setup where incandescents would be used instead, and installation of space header creates energy waste and fire hazard.
It may be rational to experiment with CFL and LED technologies, but there are good solid reasons to avoid them in many situations.
Really? I beg to differ. I read both extensively. But i could care less if my science fiction is scientific or not.
You don't need math.
Ok, you can read non-geeky stuff as a geek and some Sci-Fi is also fantasy (geeky); it doesn't hurt (that much) as long as you still watch mostly geeky stuff. But if you are in the Non-Sci-Fi crowd totally and read/watch a lot of mooshy fantasy and haven't seen any Sci-Fi at all, or at least News, history/crime drama stuff, then turn in your geek card; as a geek, it's absolutely essential that you can list factual innacuracies/inconsistencies in such movies and especially in the News on the back of your napkin, if you want, and if you've never seen said Sci-Fi, there's no way you could continue to prove yourself a geek.
Fantasy = Jimanji, Pinocchio, Shrek, The Lion King, Bambi, My Little Ponies, Toy Story, Spirited Away, The Godfather, ... Fox News....
Sci-Fi = Star Trek, Jurassic Park, Tron, Star Wars, ET, Transformers, Terminator, The Matrix, Honey I shrunk the Kids, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Wall-E, Titanic, Indiana Jones, Resident Evil, very geeky
Sci Fi rewrote its name to appeal to Non-Sci-Fi & Fantasy Geeks.
Non-Sci-Fi "Fantasy" people are the antithesis of geeks.
Being a Non-Sci-Fi fantasy watcher is mutually exclusive with being a geek; they are not geeks.
Of *course* it is dangerous to resist an autocracy
That depends. The danger in resisting an autocracy is somehow related to
(1) The 'size' of the haystack -- the number of other people also resisting the autocracy
(2) How low or high a profile you keep in your resistance... how easy it is to determine you are resisting/opposing
(3) The autocracy's ability to find people resisting
Well, the danger is greater the more likely the government figures out/identifies you.
In Libya, however, the danger may be very high, even for people not resisting. If the government doesn't seem to care much whether you [or each individual] are actually resisting or not, explosive devices aren't very selective in their targets, and soldiers in large crowds have very limited time to determine "who they should bother or not"; being among resisters, or otherwise being in the wrong place at the wrong time can lead to death if you happen to be in the country, resisting or not.
I'd be very interested to learn how you would transmit video footage over POTS using UUCP in any usable amount of time....... very short highly compressed clips perhaps :)
If this really does turn into a civil war, I would assume that the US would pick a side and then start training/arming them like the good old Cold War days.
Only if one of the US' enemies already picked a side and has been training/arming it, or intends to use the void left behind as an opportunity to invade and install their own government.
While it's not a terrible idea, it might be worth pointing out that the military may regard that as an act of war. While Lybia wouldn't have a chance against NATO in the long run, they could seriously fuck up Barcelona or Rome or some other such place with an Airstrike if they chose to.
Both Italy and Spain have an air force and significant number of combat aircraft. If aircraft from Libya were to attempt to enter their airspace without the proper permissions, they would be subject to getting intercepted and shot down before they got anywhere near striking distance of Rome or Barcelona
Will anyone at least do something now that he's jamming regional TV and phone?
Well, I know if Qadafi makes his jamming signal powerful enough to block ESPN across the world in the US, in the middle of a sufficiently high profile ball game, there will be millions of TV watching fans demanding Libya's jammers be taken out by force, when the news informs them of the reason.
That would kind of hammer home the importance of the middle east and wake up the sleeping giant.
Fun stuff, but the US shouldn't be the ones firing them or it will taint the process.
For people to appreciate freedom they must suffer to obtain it, and for peoples justice to be respected the people must kill their masters themselves.
Since the jamming crosses outside their countries' borders other countries are justified in responding with force on that particular issue.
Other countries can't do the job the people of Libya would need to do, but they can react to the Libya government's most heinous acts.
The Libya people are already sufferring. And other countries can do things to reduce (but not eliminate) suffering.
Hell, even the Colonies had France to help them with their revolution. Where would we be if they had decided to just let us suffer to obtain freedom without their help.
We'd be commonwealths of England, that's what.
This is what the Europeans should deploy when the jamming interferes with their radio signals.
Of course, er, taking out their jammers will be an act of war. However, intentional jamming that disrupts other countries' radio signals in violation of the ITU assignments and other international spectrum agreements is also an act of war.
They could be going with SIGKILL. Of course, SIGQUIT would be a nice improvement.
Hm... SIGQUIT = High-Power Electromagnetic Pulse, right?
a response he felt was 'coder-purist snobbery
More like VI/Emacs-wielding neo-luddites.
So afraid of the fancy new CMS technologies, they have to ban them, for fear their frameworks will be obsoleted by them.
Next thing you're gonna tell me... Trixul and Jako are not frameworks. And Facebook Apps don't count as applications.
Even if that's true, they're probably banking that *fewer* people will be 'encouraged' if they manage to eventually execute him.
You think a EU member would allow anyone to be extradited to the US someone who has never set foot in the US, if they believed there was a chance the accused could be executed as a result?
In PHP... your "comments" have a way of being read/interpreted by the web server, the same system that is displaying the web pages to users. Your comments are always in some danger of being exposed to humans (just like the source code).
Whereas, C++ programs are compiled, always. The end user never has access to comments in the source code, unless you have a very very strange compilation script that embeds some code as a string.
Also, there is the fact that PHP coders are notorious for confusing uncommented code. Instead of swearing in the comments, they make you swear after trying to read their code, which has zero meaningful comments, and possibly a few comments that will be just plain wrong or confuse the hell out of you.
You should be able to run your own mail server.
Pragmatically... to get your mail out, either upgrade to leased lines with your own IP allocation, or subscribe to a reputable spam filtering service that offers outbound relay and filtering of spam, e.g. Postini.
The general idea is your 'outbound filtering' service will have a good reputation for mail deliverability, and they will be able to more accurately model your mail profile and recognize spam/malicious activity than any third party not beholden to you.
Is that fantasy or sci-fi?
Eh? It's the supreme law of the land, in the US, it is written into the constitution
Quoting Wikipedia: "fear of the vigilant and litigious Tolkien estate has heretofore prevented its publication in English". Tell me again, how exactly copyright encourages creation of new works?
It enables authors to profit, by actually having a market, which encourages publishers to pay authors and authors to write books, without banning any technology -- especially now; without copyright, there'd be not enough profit in publishing books.
After limited times, meaning a short amount of time, the duration of the copyright expires, and new works can be made based on the old work. This is how copyright avoids stifling new works -- old works' copyright expires. This promotes progress in the arts and sciences because there is now not much (if any) profit in rehashing old works.
Promoting progress means encouraging new works, and since copyright protections only apply to new works (that is: works that are so new, that they are still subject to copyright), new works are encouraged.
You basically have 3 choices... (A) Have copyright, (B) Ban sale/possession of electronic/mechanic devices capable of copying or rendering books except by 'licensed publishers' (essentially -- personal computers would be banned), or (C) Have few/no books, because there's no profit un publishing to be made making and selling large books. The few books that could exist would be advertising supported.
I have yet to see one single study that finds economical benefits in using DST.
What representative cares? It's a neat way for them to flux their legislative muscle, and remind the public who is in charge of their clocks, and that they had better behave, or they will get a workday that starts after the sun has gone down.
and it's not just because I don't have any friends
Something tells me that would mean you don't get the job, because not enough personal information can be found about you...... also, it must be a lie (as far as the hiring manager thinks).... because really .... there's no such thing as someone not having a FB account
unless one of the small vendors gets a really unethical sales monkey that steals a large chunk of business from a couple of the big vendors.
Is it really unethical if the sales monkey tells the truth about big vendors' incompetence to grab a large chunk of business from big vendors?
Have you tried forcing an unexpected reboot?