Averaging the heights/widths/depths of people doesn't necessarily mean most people are close to the average.
I think height and width are highly variable quantities, and many many people aren't close to the average.
"Assuming the average" is naive.
It seems high weight should be considered no different than any other disability -- and reasonable accomodations should be required just as planes can't kick out people who don't walk, or people who are blind on that basis.
If the point of copyright protection is to increase the number of works available to the public, in both quantity of titles and the availability of those works, it would seem like the only form of work that requires substantial investment, in 2010, is movies.
Copyright is not about quantity of works.
Copyright is about promoting progress in the sciences and the useful arts.
You can have a lot of works of low quality, or a lot of works that are cheap knock-offs of each other, but that is not progress.
Progress consists of new works of high quality that contain substantial creativity, originality, and progress from past work.
Arguably: fewer works, but higher quality and greater usefulness to society, represent more progress, then a massive number of low-quality works someone lazilly compiled one afternoon.
The cost of developing original high-quality works (especially ones that require research or involve science) remains high, because doing the research isn't getting any cheaper.
The usefulness of Fictional books and Movies are debatable, but some hold educational value, and others can inspire people resulting in progress.
Paradoxically the courts have given much stronger protections against "fair use" to works that are fictional or pure acts of creativity by the author, playwright, musician, or film maker than works which are strongly factual. Factual works that contain independently verifiable information and research results are more subject to being reused, for analysis, or criticism, than fictional works.
It's in keeping with the purpose of the law to promote progress.
But it's still interesting that the works that do the least to promote progress get stronger protections, that probably are not even deserved.
Plagiarism is bad because it's been ruled to be bad in the past. Why is it bad per se if the result is informative or entertaining?
Because it robs from the uniqueness and distinct character of the original work and ascribes the author's hard work to someone else who doesn't necessarily deserve that..
That said... sampling can be a good thing.
Maybe that other author wrote volumes of garbage.
Noone in their right mind will ever read it all.
Sampling the actually interesting or useful bits exposes more people to enlightenment, enjoyable, or informative material.
A few works sampling other works could provide much better coverage (in some cases) then all the good works related to a subject put together...
I just wish someone would sample all the slashdot comments and post all the good ones to a 2 page text.
It would save hours of reading time:)
Most of these machines require no more input than logging in and starting up a single app... thus no reason to install special software on them.
Then, something would break, and I would have to read logs, and/or code on the actual box that had the exact problem. Spending an hour installing apps to do my job would be an unacceptable use of my time, and delay the build unnecessarily.
"Then something would break" contradicts the earlier statement "no more input than logging in"
The fact that something is likely to break, and you will need to troubleshoot it, should be reason enough in itself to install some (small) convenient, unobtrusive troubleshooting tools, as standard practice, and as part of the standard initial installs for those servers, to make troubleshooting faster and not require software installations or elaborate practices when things do break.
One goes to the book store and buys an overpriced $50 book that includes an Ubuntu CD with it.
Or knocks on random people's doors until he can find someone willing to download and burn a copy of Ubuntu to a provided CD blank for $10:)
If really desperate, ones goes to the library or other place that has working computers (hopefully with CD-R drive).
Universities have plenty of computer labs, finding a machine that can burn a disk shouldn't be a problem, and the school might even already have Ubuntu disks that can be loaned out...
It is if you advocate a movement that involves the federal government sending troops into SC
to overthrow the state government using troops and (if necessary) violence, in order to restore certain rights of the people.
And I don't see any secular value to having two days of rest, or any "time off". Plenty of people work seven days a week and show no harm in it.
Plenty of people see value in it, and have significant benefits and enjoyment out of 2 non-work days each week. Some people who practice religion utilize personal time during the two days for religious purposes, but the vast majority do not normally use any time during the two days for religious purposes (even if they are Catholic).
I want mail delivered 7 days a week, and I want to be able to go to DMV on Sunday.
Your desires are unreasonable, and impose undue cost on the government, and other taxpayers, who don't want to pay the higher salaries required to have 56 hours per week per worker instead of 40.
Secularly there is no reason to have those two be not like the other five, and by assigning them to the Religious sabbath of Christians and Jews is just a holdover from those belief systems.
Yes, there is a secular reason, it is cultural in nature.
The standard business work week in the US is Monday through Friday.
This is the standard custom, and commonly very well established practice
This is true of most businesses, even ones that don't have catholics or christians on staff, work 5 day weeks.
If in fact it were a religious practice being respected, we should see a pattern of religious organizations taking those 2 days off for their employees, and secular organizations utilizing 7-day work weeks.
Offering some time off during the week is an obvious choice.
If the government were to adopt a 7-day work week,
it would be highly irregular, and completely contrary to common customs and business practices.
AI has already passed up the intelligence level of some humans.
In fact, I think some slashdot posters might be AIs.... esp ones that parrot "first post" over and over.
Also, the internet is full of barely-intelligible blog posts by both humans and machines, one-line offtopic comments advertising links of clearly zero value.
Google is just as unable to control export as Firefox is.
IP-based "Geolocation" is completely ineffective.
Anyone from a "banned" country can simply establish communications through a VPN service, proxy system, or onion router system such as TOR
And banned persons are impossible to detect without requiring every downloader somehow prove their identity, which is impossible without using strong encryption...
Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all.
Windows Vista voice recognition issues?
You must mean: reply at top level with subject "first post" body "pls kill first post", to try and get the editors'/moderators' attention.
You may need to send e-mail to persuade.
I hear some people like viagra, send editors some links to some web sites, and they'll probably be happy to delete.
J/K. (Slashdot posts are more or less set in stone, unless you can get the RIAA et al., Google, or perhaps the government of Syria to send/. a takedown notice for the post)
Actually... it's very obvious that there is secular value in those holidays.
The other part of the 1st ammendment says congress can't prohibit the free exercise of religion either.
That means (for religions that require attending worship or conducting no work), the employees who are members of that religion would have to be allowed to partake in those activities.
There is secular value in giving employees 2 days off per week, is to allow them time to relax, relieve stress, improve their health and productivity.
Same thing for christmas.
However, the exact dates should be negotiable or specific to the employee.
Except there is a secular reason for picking a common date for some Holidays... (1) it is convenient to have all employees off at the same time, in order to minimize disruptions during the year, and for the purposes of administrative convenience.
December 25 - Jan 1 are probably good dates, because they are at the very end of the year, and very easy to remember.
Also, for "weekly off time", the most expedient dates to pick are probably Saturday and Sunday,
only because a majority of workers would pick those two dates.
I see no immediate reason (though), that different government offices couldn't pick different days according to the preferences of their employees, and costs involved in whatever extra time needs to be given to employees to take off each week (in order to respect their religion), assuming that they make up for that time in some way.
Coming up with definitions of "established religion" doesn't change the meaning of the establishment clause.
The establishment clause forbids government
respecting the establishment of religions
That does not just mean a ban on establishing a state religion, respecting state-established religions, or even just respecting religions that have already been established.
It also means laws respecting independently established religions, whether well-known churches under a formal banner, or groups of people with common religious views (such as christians).
All of these are to do with the establishment of religions.
Laws respecting the establishment of any religion(s) whether state-sponsored or not, violate the establishment clause.
Why don't you go look up Lemon vs. Kurtzman, and in particular, the Lemon test, which is most often used by the courts to determine constitutionality under the Establishment clause.
The case itself found it was unconstitutional for the local government to reimburse for salaries of teachers at non-public schools who tought only secular courses, only because most of the students attending private schools were attending catholic schools, and thus >90% of the salary reimbursments ended up getting spent at Catholic schools.
First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; finally, the statute must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion."
And any number of court actions, where it was shown to be unconstitutional for there to be school-official lead prayer (even by a christian not a member of any church, or of a form not specific to any particular "religion"), and also unconstitutional to display 10 commandments (in several cases involving the ACLU).
If a religion, or group of religions are a primary beneficiary of any law, it can be found unconstitutional on this basis.
Sure you would... all you need to do is reproduce the issue on the supported system, which should be no problem if the systems are running an identical kernel, and you are patching them simultaneously anyways.
Also, this is not unlike the manner in which patches are typically applied.
Patches are normally applied on test systems prior to the production system that is actually going to receive the patch.
By reproducing the problem on an identical test system, you know it will be an issue on the production system, and you can raise the support issue at that point.
Having X+1 versus just X identical systems doesn't effect your support needs as far as a patch solution is concerned, in any way.
For the law explicitly states that this applies to groups who advocate violence to their grievances.
Which is still a violation of the people's right to peaceably assemble, because even advocating violence of some sort is protected speech.
And political speech and assembly, such as advocating changing the government is among the most strongly protected.
Anyways, the full quote is:
which directly or indirectly advocates, advises, teaches or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States, of this State or of any political subdivision thereof by force or violence or other unlawful means;
"By force" means different things to different people. But apparently it's not violence (because violence is mentioned separately).
other unlawful means is the most obvious violation of 1st ammendment rights, however.
Example of means that could be deemed unlawful:
Encouraging informants to leak information about government abuse to the public.
E.g. information about abuse of warrantless wiretaps.
Or information that a national security letter or another instrument placed the recipient under gag order.
It doesn't have to be a specific religion.
Just because an old blue law hasn't been taken to court yet, doesn't mean it's constitutional.
Respecting the establishment of religions (plural) or religion in general will do.
So whether you regard Christianity as a group of religions or as a religion in itself (which it can be regarded as, even if there are multiple denominations of the christian religion),
the establishment clause still applies to it.
There are any number of religions that the Sunday alcohol ban could be respecting, a good number of christian religions involve worship on Sunday, so it could be put forth that it's respecting any or all of the ones that were highly influential (religions of representativeis, and church lobbyists, etc) at the time the law was passed.
Slashdot Mirror
Averaging the heights/widths/depths of people doesn't necessarily mean most people are close to the average.
I think height and width are highly variable quantities, and many many people aren't close to the average.
"Assuming the average" is naive.
It seems high weight should be considered no different than any other disability -- and reasonable accomodations should be required just as planes can't kick out people who don't walk, or people who are blind on that basis.
Explain yourself. What's wrong with CentOS?
The software is essentially identical. They are just different distributions of the same OS.
Somehow, I doubt that "erase" destroys the previous version beyond forensic analysis.
Key points that are missing:
How many servers and network devices. Total amps each unit is pulling.
Total peak watts power usage of each server power supply.
If you need 10000vA and 20000 watts, you're in a totally different ballgame than if you need 500vA and 1000 watts.
Total peak vA of apparent power usage of each server power supply.
For redundant power supply configurations, peak should be double the average.
Pick a UPS that is rated for an amount at least 20% above the peak load, and has the rated run-time for each set of server PSUs it will be powering.
For redundant power configs, two UPS should be used.
You need to get sizing right before being concerned about fancy features like auto-shutdown.
Which most enterprise-grade UPS should provide in some form (may require extra add-in module).
If the point of copyright protection is to increase the number of works available to the public, in both quantity of titles and the availability of those works, it would seem like the only form of work that requires substantial investment, in 2010, is movies.
Copyright is not about quantity of works.
Copyright is about promoting progress in the sciences and the useful arts.
You can have a lot of works of low quality, or a lot of works that are cheap knock-offs of each other, but that is not progress.
Progress consists of new works of high quality that contain substantial creativity, originality, and progress from past work. Arguably: fewer works, but higher quality and greater usefulness to society, represent more progress, then a massive number of low-quality works someone lazilly compiled one afternoon.
The cost of developing original high-quality works (especially ones that require research or involve science) remains high, because doing the research isn't getting any cheaper.
The usefulness of Fictional books and Movies are debatable, but some hold educational value, and others can inspire people resulting in progress.
Paradoxically the courts have given much stronger protections against "fair use" to works that are fictional or pure acts of creativity by the author, playwright, musician, or film maker than works which are strongly factual. Factual works that contain independently verifiable information and research results are more subject to being reused, for analysis, or criticism, than fictional works.
It's in keeping with the purpose of the law to promote progress. But it's still interesting that the works that do the least to promote progress get stronger protections, that probably are not even deserved.
Plagiarism is bad because it's been ruled to be bad in the past. Why is it bad per se if the result is informative or entertaining?
Because it robs from the uniqueness and distinct character of the original work and ascribes the author's hard work to someone else who doesn't necessarily deserve that..
That said... sampling can be a good thing. Maybe that other author wrote volumes of garbage. Noone in their right mind will ever read it all. Sampling the actually interesting or useful bits exposes more people to enlightenment, enjoyable, or informative material.
A few works sampling other works could provide much better coverage (in some cases) then all the good works related to a subject put together...
I just wish someone would sample all the slashdot comments and post all the good ones to a 2 page text. It would save hours of reading time :)
That's funny.
He's probably Employee ID #1. }:>
I don't believe it's actually possible for "we index our codebase to make it searchable" to be a proprietary secret, anyways.
"Then something would break" contradicts the earlier statement "no more input than logging in"
The fact that something is likely to break, and you will need to troubleshoot it, should be reason enough in itself to install some (small) convenient, unobtrusive troubleshooting tools, as standard practice, and as part of the standard initial installs for those servers, to make troubleshooting faster and not require software installations or elaborate practices when things do break.
He's too busy writing a GUI interface in visual basic to see if he can track the killer's IP address.
What about a majors attending the college of: Parties, Beer, and Women studies?
One goes to the book store and buys an overpriced $50 book that includes an Ubuntu CD with it.
Or knocks on random people's doors until he can find someone willing to download and burn a copy of Ubuntu to a provided CD blank for $10 :)
If really desperate, ones goes to the library or other place that has working computers (hopefully with CD-R drive).
Universities have plenty of computer labs, finding a machine that can burn a disk shouldn't be a problem, and the school might even already have Ubuntu disks that can be loaned out...
It is if you advocate a movement that involves the federal government sending troops into SC to overthrow the state government using troops and (if necessary) violence, in order to restore certain rights of the people.
Lincoln's great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfathered in though, so he doesn't have to register
And I don't see any secular value to having two days of rest, or any "time off". Plenty of people work seven days a week and show no harm in it.
Plenty of people see value in it, and have significant benefits and enjoyment out of 2 non-work days each week. Some people who practice religion utilize personal time during the two days for religious purposes, but the vast majority do not normally use any time during the two days for religious purposes (even if they are Catholic).
I want mail delivered 7 days a week, and I want to be able to go to DMV on Sunday.
It sounds like you want a pony, anyways.
Your desires are unreasonable, and impose undue cost on the government, and other taxpayers, who don't want to pay the higher salaries required to have 56 hours per week per worker instead of 40.
Secularly there is no reason to have those two be not like the other five, and by assigning them to the Religious sabbath of Christians and Jews is just a holdover from those belief systems.
Yes, there is a secular reason, it is cultural in nature.
The standard business work week in the US is Monday through Friday. This is the standard custom, and commonly very well established practice
This is true of most businesses, even ones that don't have catholics or christians on staff, work 5 day weeks.
If in fact it were a religious practice being respected, we should see a pattern of religious organizations taking those 2 days off for their employees, and secular organizations utilizing 7-day work weeks.
Offering some time off during the week is an obvious choice.
If the government were to adopt a 7-day work week, it would be highly irregular, and completely contrary to common customs and business practices.
Which are purely secular considerations.
No, it has a very specific definition under the law. You should look it up.
Different courts interpret the word force differently.
AI has already passed up the intelligence level of some humans.
In fact, I think some slashdot posters might be AIs.... esp ones that parrot "first post" over and over.
Also, the internet is full of barely-intelligible blog posts by both humans and machines, one-line offtopic comments advertising links of clearly zero value.
Google is just as unable to control export as Firefox is.
IP-based "Geolocation" is completely ineffective. Anyone from a "banned" country can simply establish communications through a VPN service, proxy system, or onion router system such as TOR
And banned persons are impossible to detect without requiring every downloader somehow prove their identity, which is impossible without using strong encryption...
Will they still do that even now? Or rather send them to be "re-educated" ?
Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all.
Windows Vista voice recognition issues?
You must mean: reply at top level with subject "first post" body "pls kill first post", to try and get the editors'/moderators' attention. You may need to send e-mail to persuade. I hear some people like viagra, send editors some links to some web sites, and they'll probably be happy to delete.
J/K. (Slashdot posts are more or less set in stone, unless you can get the RIAA et al., Google, or perhaps the government of Syria to send /. a takedown notice for the post)
So shouldn't they go get the Exemption Firefox got, or replace their crypto code with Firefox's code?
Or (since Chrome is Windows-only)... use the CSPs in Windows for crypto operations, instead of shipping crypto code with their browser..
Sorry, the US Law excuse doesn't really hold water here.
Actually... it's very obvious that there is secular value in those holidays. The other part of the 1st ammendment says congress can't prohibit the free exercise of religion either.
That means (for religions that require attending worship or conducting no work), the employees who are members of that religion would have to be allowed to partake in those activities.
There is secular value in giving employees 2 days off per week, is to allow them time to relax, relieve stress, improve their health and productivity.
Same thing for christmas.
However, the exact dates should be negotiable or specific to the employee.
Except there is a secular reason for picking a common date for some Holidays... (1) it is convenient to have all employees off at the same time, in order to minimize disruptions during the year, and for the purposes of administrative convenience.
December 25 - Jan 1 are probably good dates, because they are at the very end of the year, and very easy to remember.
Also, for "weekly off time", the most expedient dates to pick are probably Saturday and Sunday, only because a majority of workers would pick those two dates.
I see no immediate reason (though), that different government offices couldn't pick different days according to the preferences of their employees, and costs involved in whatever extra time needs to be given to employees to take off each week (in order to respect their religion), assuming that they make up for that time in some way.
Coming up with definitions of "established religion" doesn't change the meaning of the establishment clause.
The establishment clause forbids government respecting the establishment of religions
That does not just mean a ban on establishing a state religion, respecting state-established religions, or even just respecting religions that have already been established.
It also means laws respecting independently established religions, whether well-known churches under a formal banner, or groups of people with common religious views (such as christians). All of these are to do with the establishment of religions.
Laws respecting the establishment of any religion(s) whether state-sponsored or not, violate the establishment clause.
Why don't you go look up Lemon vs. Kurtzman, and in particular, the Lemon test, which is most often used by the courts to determine constitutionality under the Establishment clause.
The case itself found it was unconstitutional for the local government to reimburse for salaries of teachers at non-public schools who tought only secular courses, only because most of the students attending private schools were attending catholic schools, and thus >90% of the salary reimbursments ended up getting spent at Catholic schools.
And any number of court actions, where it was shown to be unconstitutional for there to be school-official lead prayer (even by a christian not a member of any church, or of a form not specific to any particular "religion"), and also unconstitutional to display 10 commandments (in several cases involving the ACLU).
If a religion, or group of religions are a primary beneficiary of any law, it can be found unconstitutional on this basis.
Sure you would... all you need to do is reproduce the issue on the supported system, which should be no problem if the systems are running an identical kernel, and you are patching them simultaneously anyways.
Also, this is not unlike the manner in which patches are typically applied.
Patches are normally applied on test systems prior to the production system that is actually going to receive the patch.
By reproducing the problem on an identical test system, you know it will be an issue on the production system, and you can raise the support issue at that point.
Having X+1 versus just X identical systems doesn't effect your support needs as far as a patch solution is concerned, in any way.
For the law explicitly states that this applies to groups who advocate violence to their grievances.
Which is still a violation of the people's right to peaceably assemble, because even advocating violence of some sort is protected speech. And political speech and assembly, such as advocating changing the government is among the most strongly protected. Anyways, the full quote is:
"By force" means different things to different people. But apparently it's not violence (because violence is mentioned separately).
other unlawful means is the most obvious violation of 1st ammendment rights, however.
Example of means that could be deemed unlawful:
Encouraging informants to leak information about government abuse to the public.
E.g. information about abuse of warrantless wiretaps.
Or information that a national security letter or another instrument placed the recipient under gag order.
It doesn't have to be a specific religion. Just because an old blue law hasn't been taken to court yet, doesn't mean it's constitutional.
Respecting the establishment of religions (plural) or religion in general will do.
So whether you regard Christianity as a group of religions or as a religion in itself (which it can be regarded as, even if there are multiple denominations of the christian religion), the establishment clause still applies to it.
There are any number of religions that the Sunday alcohol ban could be respecting, a good number of christian religions involve worship on Sunday, so it could be put forth that it's respecting any or all of the ones that were highly influential (religions of representativeis, and church lobbyists, etc) at the time the law was passed.