And I want to retain that copyright, because in 20 years, they might come back to me for reprints.
They might anyway. Or if not, other people will. You are not allowed to make reprints of wedding photos taken by another photographer. Since a lot of the photographers are now retired, and are hard to track down, this may be impossible. The industry is actually losing money from a long copyright.
Besides, most of your income is based on the prints from the day. Nobosdy could run a business that didn't have a return for 20 years.
The only reason people keep them around is that they're too lazy to delete them themselves. Not because they want to refer back to them.
It's a hell of a lot more irritating that email doesn't get through because your mailbox is full then it is if you lose the email of the latest oversized video file people were sending a year ago.
If that's their reason for sticking with it, then that's fair enough. But how much work does it take to learn the differences between IE and Firefox? None at all! The buttons are even in the same places
It's simply becaues IE comes with Windows, and no smallwited user would know that there's alternatives, at all.
Sigh. I've noticed this. People don't even realise it's separate from Windows (come to think of it, a lot of them think Word and Windows are the same thing).
Even some of my friends who are aware that you can have another browser seem reluctant to change for bizarre, and really quite stupid reasons. It's difficult to convince them of the delights of tabbed browsing and gestures.
Indeed. Many complicated issues have a simple solution, and many apparently simple issues are very complex to solve. But there's another part of the argument that people are missing.
Printing out a piece of paper addresses some of the security concerns. In fact it addresses most of them. those that are not covered will have to be identified, but they can be dealt with separately.
Not everyone can start companies. Not everyone can invent things. Heck, not everyone can deal with people or design algorithms. What do they do now?
There are many other semi-skilleed and unskilled jobs that yu can do. Of course, you could always agree to work for a lower salary. You'd be quite competitive if you worked for minimum wage.
Again, showing your complete ignorance. What's your position in the workforce? Judging by your posts I'm guessing you're an unemployed kid out of uni who is now considering that job offer from MacDonalds.
2 years in semiconductors followed by 4 years consumer applications development.
Plus some odd non-tech jobs on the side.
No, you implied that they went because the jobs are so low skilled. You must be thinking of call centre jobs, because programming jobs are definitely not low skilled.
Some of them are. If all you're doing is production line code, then you are low skilled. My job requires that I work from a very general spec, expand, talk to the designers, propose solutions, flesh it out, design an algorithm, and implement it.
Makes me wonder why I did that degree after all when I could have just spent those three years smoking weed then turned up to a computer company and asked for a job.
Me too. You clearly wasted it doing menial janitorial codemonkey work.
Since you are clearly not equipped with brains let me spell it out for you: they outsource jobs to other countries because it reduces costs and increases profits.
Erm... yes. That is correct. I never said they didn't.
It's nothing to do with how hard the jobs are to perform or the tech requirements of the position,
Yes it is. If it was difficult to find the staff, they wouldn't outsource, because they couldn't outsource.
Yes, because if your job, and it is your job while you are doing it is moved offshore then you have a very real and tangible loss on your hands.
Get another job then.
Your people need employees argument is astonishing in its naivety, there is no Fairy Job Mother who waves her wand and creates employment when she sees free workers.
Nope. It's called a free market. There are more free workers, therefore people are willing to work for less. There are also people who find that the only way to make money is to set up their own business.
There will always be other jobs, its just now there are more unemployed people and fewer jobs. After spending years in education and gaining professional experience the majority of people are not able or willing to don a McDonalds uniform and flip burgers.
Not able to flip burgers? That is impressively incompetent. What about other jobs? Tech support, other areas of engineering?
Of course they could follow your suggestion and find a job that requires skill and talent, such as brain surgery, I'm sure they wont mind the time and cost of another 8 years of school and a decade to gain experience.
Yes, because if there are no database frontend programming jobs, the only possible option is brain surgery. This was an even greater problem before the invention of the computer, because there were several million brain surgeons, and only a handful of people needing brain surgery.
You could always try something that's a bit easier. For example, where I live, there is a shortage of plumbers. In my area, for all it's dirtiness, plumbing is a good career move. You're your own boss, and can charge more per hour that a legal professional. You know what; It takes less training than brain surgery as well.
Yes, the trained monkey was an exaggeration. However, if it was that hard, then they wouldn't dare outsource it to another company, let alone another country.
There is a big attitude that ofshoring is taking away people's jobs.
What bull! Of course, These jobs don't belong to you in the first place, but that's missing an important point. There are always more jobs. Many of them will NOT be offshored. People need employees. People will create jobs when there are some free workers. If you can't get a job writing tedious code that a trained monkey can do, learn to do something that requires real skill and talent.
All kinds of things have different meanings for differnt folks.
That's the problem! We need to stick to the things that have the same meaning to different folks. Otherwise I might as well start talking a different language.
The analogy can be a great help to bring all in line.
Fine. Find a decent analogy then. Preferably one that indicates the fine line between what is and isn't censorship rather than one that has nothing to do with it.
The bible already understood this thousands of years ago
Yes, indeed. They were used to illustrate a point. This si what they are intended for. They work very well in that regard. You can't prove something by anaology.
And an important part of the American Legal System is based on it in the shape of, among others, "precedent".
Yes. When using precedent, the differences are also taken into account.
They already have to contact the customer over that, so they might as well ask for a counter-notice while they're at it. It adds almost zero overhead to the process.
Well, they should do. In practice, I think they tend not to do this by the book, and instead of informing the customer correctly, and telling the customer of their legal rights, they refer them to their T&Cs (Or just senda message to the effect "This account has been terminated. You can't do a thing about it")
Even if they don't though, if a customer notices the content deleted, they can send a counter-notice on their own initiative, and if they do the ISP *must* (by force of law, non-compliance is.. well.. a DMCA violation) reinstate the page, unless the complaining party launches a Federal suit.
This is very a good point. I have to wonder why Black Box Voting didn't use this when Diebold sent the takedown notice (or did they?).
the ISP isn't forced to take it down, but they take it down because it is more financial responsable than getting into a leagle battle, over something that was posted by somebody the ISP doesn't really have any contact with.
So they're forced to either enter a long winded legal battle, or take it down.
Likewise, totalitarian states don't force people to print only what they deam acceptable. People just do because it's easier than getting executed.
Slashdot Mirror
And I want to retain that copyright, because in 20 years, they might come back to me for reprints.
They might anyway. Or if not, other people will. You are not allowed to make reprints of wedding photos taken by another photographer. Since a lot of the photographers are now retired, and are hard to track down, this may be impossible. The industry is actually losing money from a long copyright.
Besides, most of your income is based on the prints from the day. Nobosdy could run a business that didn't have a return for 20 years.
Really?
How often do Yahoo back up their server? Do they keep offsite backups? What guarentees do they offer that your email will not be deleted?
They evidently have a lot more faith in dotcoms than I have.
Oh,come on. How many people seriously expect their webmail to last more than a few months?
Yes? If they like me that much, they'll go to my POP3 account, not my disposable webmail.
I take it you record conversations.
Otherwise, what do you do with particularly nice or significant talks?
License keys
I keep these in a single file. A webmail inbox is a silly place to keep them
Particularly nice or significant email messages
Never got one I wanted to keep yet.
Evidence that someone actually said something & can't deny it later
I've tend not to get into arguments about what someone said several years ago.
For future reference
Yes, just in case I want to check that someone did thank me for that peresnt.
Automatically delete messages over a certain age.
The only reason people keep them around is that they're too lazy to delete them themselves. Not because they want to refer back to them.
It's a hell of a lot more irritating that email doesn't get through because your mailbox is full then it is if you lose the email of the latest oversized video file people were sending a year ago.
First thing it did when I turned it on was predict the destruction of the liberator.
If that's their reason for sticking with it, then that's fair enough. But how much work does it take to learn the differences between IE and Firefox? None at all! The buttons are even in the same places
It's simply becaues IE comes with Windows, and no smallwited user would know that there's alternatives, at all.
Sigh. I've noticed this. People don't even realise it's separate from Windows (come to think of it, a lot of them think Word and Windows are the same thing).
Even some of my friends who are aware that you can have another browser seem reluctant to change for bizarre, and really quite stupid reasons. It's difficult to convince them of the delights of tabbed browsing and gestures.
All we needed to do was send Bruce Willis up there with a team of roughnecks.
This is old news.
Who says we can't have a simple solution?
Indeed. Many complicated issues have a simple solution, and many apparently simple issues are very complex to solve. But there's another part of the argument that people are missing.
Printing out a piece of paper addresses some of the security concerns. In fact it addresses most of them. those that are not covered will have to be identified, but they can be dealt with separately.
Not sure. Next time I'm out of work, I'll ring around, and see if there's anyone willing to train me up in exchange for a free assistant.
Not everyone can start companies. Not everyone can invent things. Heck, not everyone can deal with people or design algorithms. What do they do now?
There are many other semi-skilleed and unskilled jobs that yu can do. Of course, you could always agree to work for a lower salary. You'd be quite competitive if you worked for minimum wage.
Again, showing your complete ignorance. What's your position in the workforce? Judging by your posts I'm guessing you're an unemployed kid out of uni who is now considering that job offer from MacDonalds.
2 years in semiconductors followed by 4 years consumer applications development.
Plus some odd non-tech jobs on the side.
No, you implied that they went because the jobs are so low skilled. You must be thinking of call centre jobs, because programming jobs are definitely not low skilled.
Some of them are. If all you're doing is production line code, then you are low skilled. My job requires that I work from a very general spec, expand, talk to the designers, propose solutions, flesh it out, design an algorithm, and implement it.
It's called innovation.
Makes me wonder why I did that degree after all when I could have just spent those three years smoking weed then turned up to a computer company and asked for a job.
Me too. You clearly wasted it doing menial janitorial codemonkey work.
Since you are clearly not equipped with brains let me spell it out for you: they outsource jobs to other countries because it reduces costs and increases profits.
Erm... yes. That is correct. I never said they didn't.
It's nothing to do with how hard the jobs are to perform or the tech requirements of the position,
Yes it is. If it was difficult to find the staff, they wouldn't outsource, because they couldn't outsource.
Yes, because if your job, and it is your job while you are doing it is moved offshore then you have a very real and tangible loss on your hands.
Get another job then.
Your people need employees argument is astonishing in its naivety, there is no Fairy Job Mother who waves her wand and creates employment when she sees free workers.
Nope. It's called a free market. There are more free workers, therefore people are willing to work for less. There are also people who find that the only way to make money is to set up their own business.
There will always be other jobs, its just now there are more unemployed people and fewer jobs. After spending years in education and gaining professional experience the majority of people are not able or willing to don a McDonalds uniform and flip burgers.
Not able to flip burgers? That is impressively incompetent. What about other jobs? Tech support, other areas of engineering?
Of course they could follow your suggestion and find a job that requires skill and talent, such as brain surgery, I'm sure they wont mind the time and cost of another 8 years of school and a decade to gain experience.
Yes, because if there are no database frontend programming jobs, the only possible option is brain surgery. This was an even greater problem before the invention of the computer, because there were several million brain surgeons, and only a handful of people needing brain surgery.
You could always try something that's a bit easier. For example, where I live, there is a shortage of plumbers. In my area, for all it's dirtiness, plumbing is a good career move. You're your own boss, and can charge more per hour that a legal professional. You know what; It takes less training than brain surgery as well.
Yes, the trained monkey was an exaggeration. However, if it was that hard, then they wouldn't dare outsource it to another company, let alone another country.
There is a big attitude that ofshoring is taking away people's jobs.
What bull! Of course, These jobs don't belong to you in the first place, but that's missing an important point. There are always more jobs. Many of them will NOT be offshored. People need employees. People will create jobs when there are some free workers. If you can't get a job writing tedious code that a trained monkey can do, learn to do something that requires real skill and talent.
All kinds of things have different meanings for differnt folks.
That's the problem! We need to stick to the things that have the same meaning to different folks. Otherwise I might as well start talking a different language.
The analogy can be a great help to bring all in line.
Fine. Find a decent analogy then. Preferably one that indicates the fine line between what is and isn't censorship rather than one that has nothing to do with it.
The bible already understood this thousands of years ago
Yes, indeed. They were used to illustrate a point. This si what they are intended for. They work very well in that regard. You can't prove something by anaology.
And an important part of the American Legal System is based on it in the shape of, among others, "precedent".
Yes. When using precedent, the differences are also taken into account.
They already have to contact the customer over that, so they might as well ask for a counter-notice while they're at it. It adds almost zero overhead to the process.
Well, they should do. In practice, I think they tend not to do this by the book, and instead of informing the customer correctly, and telling the customer of their legal rights, they refer them to their T&Cs (Or just senda message to the effect "This account has been terminated. You can't do a thing about it")
Even if they don't though, if a customer notices the content deleted, they can send a counter-notice on their own initiative, and if they do the ISP *must* (by force of law, non-compliance is.. well.. a DMCA violation) reinstate the page, unless the complaining party launches a Federal suit.
This is very a good point. I have to wonder why Black Box Voting didn't use this when Diebold sent the takedown notice (or did they?).
Dunno. Why is your lawn in any way related to my website?
the ISP isn't forced to take it down, but they take it down because it is more financial responsable than getting into a leagle battle, over something that was posted by somebody the ISP doesn't really have any contact with.
So they're forced to either enter a long winded legal battle, or take it down.
Likewise, totalitarian states don't force people to print only what they deam acceptable. People just do because it's easier than getting executed.