As if 3 to 6 months were reasonable either. How long could you go without employment right now? My rent alone for that six months is one month's salary, and that's not counting expenses, etc. I suppose one could get a loan, but the whole deal seems bogus anyway.
IANAL (yet) but I feel that that's gotta be unconstitutional in some way. Basically, if you have a job at the one place and you quit, you can never work again at that job? I dunno how that could possibly be valid. You could be privy to sensitive information working as a developer almost anywhere, and chances are if search is what you know, search is what you'll look for a job doing.
Silicon Graphics. Their support is best, and their stuff works. Say what you want about the OS, it CAN be secured and has given me the least trouble out of any vendor. Shame everyone thinks they're going under and ignore them.
Apparently the person who moderated me does not use a cell phone, or is one of those people who says "not my cell phone," sorta like the parent who's got a bully for a kid and somehow manages not to realize it.
As for the similarity -- they're both undertested nonlethal weapons that deal with delivering energy to the body in order to incapacitate/temporarily injure someone. Both have the same potential for abuse -- "they aren't killing anyone, so what's the harm in using one?"
Are you that large of a troll that you don't see the similarity between tasers and the microwave cannons? My point is that non-lethal weapons have been shown to not necessarily be so. I'd think we should be erring on the side of NOT killing people here.
curtesy Audio pronunciation of "curtesy" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kûrt-s) n. pl. curtesies
The life tenure that by common law is held by a man over the property of his deceased wife if children with rights of inheritance were born during the marriage.
Or will the rioters be getting a "curtsey?" Sounds a little effeminate for police. Or do we hope they get "courtesy?" I'm so confused!
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050228-0 40910-9605r.htm...these things are supposed to be safe too. This is not the only place I've read things questioning this, and some of it has come from the law enforcement authorities themselves. I think this one is pretty obvious.
Something I'm sure you're aware of is that you cannot always talk if you're dialing emergency services. Perhaps you're injured, perhaps you're hiding from an attacker... etc. If it CAN be done in the name of improving a vital service, and it just "costs more" -- and not even a LOT more -- it should be done.
The damn government has to stop supporting the dumbing down of this country. People have no inherant right to have anyone protect them from their stupidity or their decisions. If *I* choose to use Vonage, and *I* choose to not register my address with them then *I* choose to have 911 not work.
People who are too stupid to realize that it should NOT be up to them are exactly the people who forced registration would be aimed at. Those who sign up on their own already know how important it is and wouldn't be saying shit like "they can't make me" about something as important as 911.
No, that is not true. Cell phones are horrible. I don't care what anyone says -- I use a landline and talk to friends on cells, and I'll be damned if I ever have a call of any length that doesn't cut out eventually. NO THANKS!
Is that really true? I don't think so. When my service has been disconnected in the past, it was DISCONNECTED -- ie. old phone, non-cordless, blow into it: nothing. Maybe phones without a dialtone might dial 911, but I'm not sure even about that.
This is NOT necessarily true. I gambled last time and lost. My ticket was for a failure to yield. The officer basically decided that I cut someone off (I was merging into a roadway that just got the green light, and I was still moving at ramp speed). He said that I didn't stop at the yield (not required if it isn't needed) and that was that. I brought two witnesses with me, defended myself adequately, and the judge said "that's nice, your friends attempted to be truthful, but the police officer's testimony was credible. Pay up."
I was shocked, having been in traffic court before for other bogus tickets.
This is how I've obtained most of my current equipment. They tell me that it's too old and slow and that they've purchased a new replacement computer and that maybe I could use some of the parts from the old one.
Introverted, suspicious-looking people acting strange on public transportation. What a wonderful point in history to do this!
Hey, man, I don't know about Canada, but you've clearly never ridden mass transit in the NYC area. Introverted, suspicious-looking people are nothing new to mass transit.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think it really matters if they had prior knowledge. Google didn't sign anything -- what would they be bound by?
As if 3 to 6 months were reasonable either. How long could you go without employment right now? My rent alone for that six months is one month's salary, and that's not counting expenses, etc. I suppose one could get a loan, but the whole deal seems bogus anyway.
When masturbation's lost its fun... run Windows?
Where?
(grr, shoulda read more closely -- 6 months was the limit on that -- still... 6 months is a long time to be out of work)
IANAL (yet) but I feel that that's gotta be unconstitutional in some way. Basically, if you have a job at the one place and you quit, you can never work again at that job? I dunno how that could possibly be valid. You could be privy to sensitive information working as a developer almost anywhere, and chances are if search is what you know, search is what you'll look for a job doing.
Silicon Graphics. Their support is best, and their stuff works. Say what you want about the OS, it CAN be secured and has given me the least trouble out of any vendor. Shame everyone thinks they're going under and ignore them.
Never had one myself. I call people who have various carriers, and it's still nothing but trouble trying to talk to them.
Apparently the person who moderated me does not use a cell phone, or is one of those people who says "not my cell phone," sorta like the parent who's got a bully for a kid and somehow manages not to realize it.
Is that the choice they're faced with?
v ictims_nonviolent.htm ...for example.
http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/5_of_7_taser_
As for the similarity -- they're both undertested nonlethal weapons that deal with delivering energy to the body in order to incapacitate/temporarily injure someone. Both have the same potential for abuse -- "they aren't killing anyone, so what's the harm in using one?"
Often times there's stuff in the System Folder too -- or at least was on older versions of MacOS. This is not necessarily true.
Are you that large of a troll that you don't see the similarity between tasers and the microwave cannons? My point is that non-lethal weapons have been shown to not necessarily be so. I'd think we should be erring on the side of NOT killing people here.
I wonder if I should have put that on my resume that I sent to Google to consider. ;)
So did the original poster mean:
curtesy Audio pronunciation of "curtesy" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kûrt-s)
n. pl. curtesies
The life tenure that by common law is held by a man over the property of his deceased wife if children with rights of inheritance were born during the marriage.
Or will the rioters be getting a "curtsey?" Sounds a little effeminate for police. Or do we hope they get "courtesy?" I'm so confused!
Let me give you an example:
0 40910-9605r.htm ...these things are supposed to be safe too. This is not the only place I've read things questioning this, and some of it has come from the law enforcement authorities themselves. I think this one is pretty obvious.
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050228-
Something I'm sure you're aware of is that you cannot always talk if you're dialing emergency services. Perhaps you're injured, perhaps you're hiding from an attacker... etc. If it CAN be done in the name of improving a vital service, and it just "costs more" -- and not even a LOT more -- it should be done.
The damn government has to stop supporting the dumbing down of this country. People have no inherant right to have anyone protect them from their stupidity or their decisions. If *I* choose to use Vonage, and *I* choose to not register my address with them then *I* choose to have 911 not work.
People who are too stupid to realize that it should NOT be up to them are exactly the people who forced registration would be aimed at. Those who sign up on their own already know how important it is and wouldn't be saying shit like "they can't make me" about something as important as 911.
No, that is not true. Cell phones are horrible. I don't care what anyone says -- I use a landline and talk to friends on cells, and I'll be damned if I ever have a call of any length that doesn't cut out eventually. NO THANKS!
Is that really true? I don't think so. When my service has been disconnected in the past, it was DISCONNECTED -- ie. old phone, non-cordless, blow into it: nothing. Maybe phones without a dialtone might dial 911, but I'm not sure even about that.
This is NOT necessarily true. I gambled last time and lost. My ticket was for a failure to yield. The officer basically decided that I cut someone off (I was merging into a roadway that just got the green light, and I was still moving at ramp speed). He said that I didn't stop at the yield (not required if it isn't needed) and that was that. I brought two witnesses with me, defended myself adequately, and the judge said "that's nice, your friends attempted to be truthful, but the police officer's testimony was credible. Pay up."
I was shocked, having been in traffic court before for other bogus tickets.
Unless you know what you're doing and realize that most cable ISP's work by just DHCP and don't need any special software whatsoever.
Who actually pays for Windows?
This is how I've obtained most of my current equipment. They tell me that it's too old and slow and that they've purchased a new replacement computer and that maybe I could use some of the parts from the old one.
Introverted, suspicious-looking people acting strange on public transportation. What a wonderful point in history to do this!
Hey, man, I don't know about Canada, but you've clearly never ridden mass transit in the NYC area. Introverted, suspicious-looking people are nothing new to mass transit.
I think considering the way the world works nowadays, that this was pretty amusing.