My point--in the manual worker's world, there are industry standards he can rely on and will be followed. You mention a case where there are two different standards and you have to follow the right one. In IT you may never see the same standards twice.
That is indeed a cogent argument in favor of BYOD. In fact, it's my opinion it's the best argument in favor of it. But to my mind, it fails because a computer needs to be more closely integrated to the employer's systems then a manual worker's tool--a fact which is only made worse by the fact that those systems aren't standardized the way building hardware is. Even if an IT worker is moving from job to job the way a manual laborer does--and admittedly some do--the different set ups from job to job means he can't use the same tools the way the laborer does. And a worker's tools don't involve his personal information.
Because they'll look pretty silly showing up at the work site without them, because then they won't have any tools to work with. This is the standard for any physical laborer or mechanic. This works for them, since there's no need for the worker to link his tools to anything of the employer, and the worker does better with tools he has selected and is familiar with. Doesn't work that well for IT, where the tools need to mesh closely with the employer's setup to work.
And when such a scheme launched, pretty much all the execs dropped their company BB and started using the Android or iPhone they already owned. In some companies the Blackberries all but disappeared in a few short monts.
So, because the execs are technical idiots who don't understand that they're handing over the keys to their personal life at their own expense, I should do the same?
Then don't you mean "yes, the risks outweigh the benefits"?
BTW, I agree with you from the employee side of the matter. My company provides me a phone. It is theirs. I have my own phone. It is mine. This arrangement suits me very well. As long as the company wants me to have a phone to use on company business, they will need to continue to provide me with one.
Oldsmobile was picked up by GM in 1909 (which was the year GM was founded--GM started out with only Buick and Oldsmobile was their first major acquisition.) Pontiac was always a GM nameplate--GM brought out the first Pontiac in 1926. I think you're a little dismissive of Studebaker; while it's true their sales figures didn't match the Big Three, they did all right until the 1950s.
And then, of course, there's the flipside of power consumption: heat production. He's not only got to provide the current, he's going to have to provide cooling for this little bonfire he's contructed.
What the fuck does NAFTA or the WTO have to do with how the US taxes US businesses?
Everything. These trade organizations require their members to tax and regulate trade items the same regardless of whether they are foreign-made or domestic. The nationality of who owns the factory that makes them is irrelevant.
It's because you're experiencing a disconnect between your sight and your inner ear. Your eyes tell you you're moving, but your inner ear (where your sense of motion and balance is located) says you're not. The same thing happens in cars. The car's ride is smooth but not entirely motionless, so your inner ear's sense doesn't match up with what you're seeing out the window or what you're seeing on the inside of the car. This disconnect produces what we call "motion sickness". Various external factors can make it more or less intense, and some people are just naturally more susceptible to it than others. Just about anybody can become motion sick if the disconnect becomes severe enough, though.
"Dark side" was used in the sense that it was unknown to us, like "Darkest Africa" (Africa also used to be known as "The Dark Continent"). "Far side" has become preferred because people misinterpreted "Dark Side", and anyways it's not unknown anymore.
I think you mean that in 182.5 days the moon would rotate around the earth and we would be able to see them.
Achievements in ignorance. The Moon is tidally locked and always presents the same side to the Earth. Due to the fact that the Moon's orbit is not perfectly circular, there is some wobble, but about 41 percent of the Moon's surface is never seen from the Earth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Uh, the crusaders didn't protect Constantinople-- they sacked it.
Well, I said it was the original motivation. I didn't say they were good at it. They did sort of lose focus there--particularly the Fourth Crusade, which, as you state, would be the one that sacked Constantinople.
One should note that Islam won the Crusades. In the end, all the crusader kingdoms were permanently evicted from the Middle East and its surrounds. In the final act, even Constantinople finally fell (remember that the rescue of the Byzantine Empire was the original motivation for the Crusades--the whole thing was ignited by the Byzantine disaster at Manzikert, after all.)
Actually, the early Caliphate didn't practice conversion by the sword. What did happen is that non-Muslims had to pay a tax. Said tax was a hefty slice of the Caliphate's income, and they started to have monetary difficulties when people started voluntarily converting, in fact.
Slashdot Mirror
Do they fight the Robotallies?
My point--in the manual worker's world, there are industry standards he can rely on and will be followed. You mention a case where there are two different standards and you have to follow the right one. In IT you may never see the same standards twice.
That is indeed a cogent argument in favor of BYOD. In fact, it's my opinion it's the best argument in favor of it. But to my mind, it fails because a computer needs to be more closely integrated to the employer's systems then a manual worker's tool--a fact which is only made worse by the fact that those systems aren't standardized the way building hardware is. Even if an IT worker is moving from job to job the way a manual laborer does--and admittedly some do--the different set ups from job to job means he can't use the same tools the way the laborer does. And a worker's tools don't involve his personal information.
Because they'll look pretty silly showing up at the work site without them, because then they won't have any tools to work with. This is the standard for any physical laborer or mechanic. This works for them, since there's no need for the worker to link his tools to anything of the employer, and the worker does better with tools he has selected and is familiar with. Doesn't work that well for IT, where the tools need to mesh closely with the employer's setup to work.
So, because the execs are technical idiots who don't understand that they're handing over the keys to their personal life at their own expense, I should do the same?
Then don't you mean "yes, the risks outweigh the benefits"?
BTW, I agree with you from the employee side of the matter. My company provides me a phone. It is theirs. I have my own phone. It is mine. This arrangement suits me very well. As long as the company wants me to have a phone to use on company business, they will need to continue to provide me with one.
All we have to do is check to see if the evil bit is set!
...they got ad blocked.
YEEEEEAAAAAHHHHH!
Oldsmobile was picked up by GM in 1909 (which was the year GM was founded--GM started out with only Buick and Oldsmobile was their first major acquisition.) Pontiac was always a GM nameplate--GM brought out the first Pontiac in 1926. I think you're a little dismissive of Studebaker; while it's true their sales figures didn't match the Big Three, they did all right until the 1950s.
I would note that Oldsmobile and Pontiac were GM nameplates--the names may be gone, but GM's still here.
I believe the logical selection will be the Ministry of Love. We can call is MiniLuv for short.
And then, of course, there's the flipside of power consumption: heat production. He's not only got to provide the current, he's going to have to provide cooling for this little bonfire he's contructed.
What the fuck does NAFTA or the WTO have to do with how the US taxes US businesses?
Everything. These trade organizations require their members to tax and regulate trade items the same regardless of whether they are foreign-made or domestic. The nationality of who owns the factory that makes them is irrelevant.
By imposing a tarriff when they enter the country, I would assume. Of course, that would be in contravention of about half-a-dozen trade treaties...
Because the term "Frankenfood" used in almost every anti-GMO statement is a good way to focus on the nuances of how GMO is used.
Except that it breaks about half-a-dozen treaties, of course.
It's because you're experiencing a disconnect between your sight and your inner ear. Your eyes tell you you're moving, but your inner ear (where your sense of motion and balance is located) says you're not. The same thing happens in cars. The car's ride is smooth but not entirely motionless, so your inner ear's sense doesn't match up with what you're seeing out the window or what you're seeing on the inside of the car. This disconnect produces what we call "motion sickness". Various external factors can make it more or less intense, and some people are just naturally more susceptible to it than others. Just about anybody can become motion sick if the disconnect becomes severe enough, though.
"Dark side" was used in the sense that it was unknown to us, like "Darkest Africa" (Africa also used to be known as "The Dark Continent"). "Far side" has become preferred because people misinterpreted "Dark Side", and anyways it's not unknown anymore.
Achievements in ignorance. The Moon is tidally locked and always presents the same side to the Earth. Due to the fact that the Moon's orbit is not perfectly circular, there is some wobble, but about 41 percent of the Moon's surface is never seen from the Earth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I thought that's what it was too.
I bet people running Three-Card Monte games don't welcome being "dissed" either.
Well, I said it was the original motivation. I didn't say they were good at it. They did sort of lose focus there--particularly the Fourth Crusade, which, as you state, would be the one that sacked Constantinople.
One should note that Islam won the Crusades. In the end, all the crusader kingdoms were permanently evicted from the Middle East and its surrounds. In the final act, even Constantinople finally fell (remember that the rescue of the Byzantine Empire was the original motivation for the Crusades--the whole thing was ignited by the Byzantine disaster at Manzikert, after all.)
Actually, the early Caliphate didn't practice conversion by the sword. What did happen is that non-Muslims had to pay a tax. Said tax was a hefty slice of the Caliphate's income, and they started to have monetary difficulties when people started voluntarily converting, in fact.
"What is a week-end?"