NYPD, now that explains it. Not a bunch known to exercise restraint with their service weapon!
Read the report more carefully. The guys had never been trained to properly set up a BP and there was a good deal of confusion and stress that night relating to the fact that they had to man the BP for forty minutes, instead of the usual fifteen. Add to this the fact that these were NG troops who'd taken a fair number of casualties in their four months in Iraq and it's pretty easy to agree with the itchy trigger finger scenario.
Shit, I'd have done the same, since you don't get court-martialed for killing Iraqi civilians and it might actually save your life. A no-brainer, really.
It sounds like you're being paid by the hour. More power to you.
For the majority of IT workers who aren't, the hourly wage effectively diminishes the longer they work. From that point of view, one might indeed wonder whether free meals at the cafeteria truly compensate for an extended workday.
As for the slavery comment, it might be a bit hyperbolic, but it does capture the essence of a worker's relationship to the company. Leaving isn't really an option when you have a family to support or when the local economy is tanking. It's not a particularly flexible situation, unless you were born rich or have exceptional life circumstances, such as being in your twenties.
Well said. No one who is salaried can claim with a straight face that they will not have to face outsourcing in the future. Their salaries are a drain on the profits of the investor class, and will, as such, be under constant downward pressure in an attempt to "contain costs" (i.e. maximize profit).
The employer does not operate in a social vacuum. The short-term benefits to the employer thus have to weighed against the desirability of the employer's actions from a societal point of view. This is the reason we have various equal employment, environmental and anti-trust laws, not mention a host of laws governing inter-personal behavior.
Of course, some may prefer life in Dickensian England to that in modern regulated capitalist democracies.
Please, don't disturb the self-reliant randian survivalist circle jerk an article like never fails to produce. Every pansy-ass twenty-something slashbot thinks he can become the next Larry Page with enough hard work and moral fortitude.
My guess is that's exactly what happened. As a large technology company, Google has a vested interest in perpetuating the perversion that passes for our patent system. As the company's representative, Pike could not express an opinion that would have either 1) gone against the company's stance on patents or 2) plainly stated the company's support for abusive patent legislation, thereby diminishing the company's mindshare among slashdot readership.
While not a surprise, I would've prefered Pike not to answer the question at all, rather than dismiss the excellent point with a snarky, immature remark.
CAMBRIDGE, MA, November 18, 1991 -- Rob Pike, a software designer from
AT&T Bell Labs, expected to deliver an ordinary seminar on his latest research
project. Instead, he found a room filled with programmers carrying signs to
protest the consequences of his previous project: the AT&T "backing store"
patent which AT&T has used to threaten all the members of the X Consortium,
including MIT itself...
Pike has a few misused patents to his name, and his unwillingness to answer a perfectly valid question is a good indicator of his stance on the issue.
As another poster suggested earlier, Pike really was caught between a rock and a hard place by the question: admit that he supports patents and face the wrath of the slashdot crowd or deny his past stands and expose the duplicity of his current employer. Either of the two answers might've opened some fanboy eyes around here. Too bad it didn't come to pass.
Was McCarthy self-plagiarising in the Border Trilogy? What about Abel Ferrara and the heavy-handed Christian predictability of his masterpieces? I'd much rather see copycat RPGs than what's been presented to the PC gamer in the past four or five years. A next installment of Ultima plagiarising chapter VII and Serpent Isle or a Fallout 3 would be copies I'd definitely love to play; but it's late and I should probably go dream away from the computer.
Are we at a point where the gaming masses have become so retarded as to ensure that only copycat FPS, RTS and sports games ever get produced? Plots, characters, atmosphere, it's all gone, but who gives a shit. As long as we can all get 90 fps in Doom3 and relive our favorite Monday Night Football moments, the industry'll be alright.
What a fucking waste of technology.
At least the absolute derth of quality PC games cuts short all of the asshole anti-Mac arguments.
It's not the trees, it's the lack of maintenance due to an almost total absence of liability for power companies that fail in their duties.
You should've seen Energy Secretary Abraham masterfully dodge reporters' questions regarding possible penalties for First Energy's irresponsible conduct. It was unbelievable.
So expect more trees to magically plunge you in the dark for days on end. That's our bright deregulated future, no pun intended.
That's interesting, the one complaint I have about Mozilla on MacOS X is lack of support for Java 1.4.1 applets. Mozilla is stuck using the 1.3.1 default, even if 1.4.1 is available on the machine. That bug's been open for months now, still without resolution. Safari supports 1.4.1, but, as the parent says, it is quite quirky. As an example, Hushmail doesn't work with either Mozilla's 1.3.1 or Safari's 1.4.1.
Maybe it's not an issue in Panther anymore. I'll check once I get it.
You might want to take another look at the MSDN I/O stuff. To get you started, have a look at the FileStream and BinaryReader classes, which have the functionality you're looking for.
Good luck.
Re:Requires Microsoft Visual C++
on
PHP 5 Beta 1
·
· Score: 1
The market still works the same way; those companies that are short sighted will be short lived.
I agree. A company can only sustain increasing profitability by cutting costs so long, and investors will eventually turn to more promising opportunities.
The problem in this scenario is that while the market "punishes" companies unable to demonstrate sustained profit growth, the punishment is mostly felt by the rank and file employees, for whom termination often spells financial and personal ruin. OTOH, executives are sufficiently shielded from any negative impact of their own decisions by otherworldy compensation packages ($70 mil for Carly Fiorina? What *did* she do for HP?).
Unfortunately, with few unions and lack of democratic process within the enterprise, the most vulnerable corporate constituency has very little say in its own life.
What factors (that don't lead to long-term maximization of profit) am I missing?
What you're missing is that modern capitalism is not focused on the long-term maximization of profit, hence the absence of benefits, poor relations with employees and the community as well as a dislike for capital investments. When attacking "profit", most people are likely talking about the kind of head-in-the-sand short-term profit motive that we have been seeing for the past ten to fifteen years, not the right (or duty, as the case might be) of a business to provide its owners with a return on investment.
Since all bags are also scanned (espesialy since 9/11) after they've been checked
No, they aren't. Airlines haven't invested in X-Ray machines for checked baggage, and where they have, they mostly haven't put them into use due to the "prohibitive" costs of hiring and training personnel qualified to operate them.
The new airport security measures are a sad Dostoyevskian joke.
Actually, no, there isn't a "large background check" for ground ops, especially not the cleaners or caterers who go through a myriad subcontracting layers. Even firms providing baggage screening personnel - I can't bring myself to call them security professionals - have been repeatedly found guilty of not conducting FAA-mandated background checks. The measly fines imposed by the administration must send a pretty laissez-faire message, since those violations have apparently continued after 9/11.
A personal anecdote: I was flying out of JFK a few days ago and while standing in a massive line at the security checkpoint, waiting to have my shoes removed and bags rummaged through by grubby little Mexican hands I witnessed two ground ops walk right through the screaming metal detector. Hola, Pedro! Could that be a gun you're going to give a pax at the terminal's bathroom you're carrying under that orange vest of yours? Not according to the corrupt FAA-airline cabal, apparently.
It was on the news a couple of years ago. Stories like this come up fairly often, especially in periods of hysteria whipped up by the government after actual or alleged terrorist activity. Here is some stuff to read, courtesy of google:
What bothers me the most is the continuous stream of legal obfuscation perpetrated by government agencies. How many times in the past couple of years have we heard of defense lawyers denied critical information allegedly out of "greater state interest." Some guys who were allegedly linked to the World Trade Center bombing were kept in jail, without being charged, for several years, until even the DA or whoever decides those things decided not to prosecute the case, since the government just didn't have one.
What kind of shit is this? If you're going to be violating people's property and impeding commerce, you'd better have a damn valid reason that will stand up to public scrutiny. Otherwise, we might as well get rid of trial by jury, the pesky fifth amendment or the obligation to prove one's guilt before issuing a sentence. Yeah, that's the ticket, just like in those documentaries about the Third Reich that must be the talk of the town in Quantico nowadays.
This makes me sick.
How did they know about it?
on
Real Cyber-Spying
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
What the article doesn't adequately address is the issue of just how the FBI first got wind of Regan's activity. It's an interesting question, one that should give pause to anyone considering providing information to third parties as a way of supplementing a meager government pension.
Come to think of it, the initial discovery steps are never addressed in the popular reporting of spy incidents, and since most cases either never make it to court or contain "sensitive material" that is not accessible to those not in the loop (that usually involves defense lawyers). Somehow though, I get the impression that foreign agencies are so thoroughly penetrated by American intelligence that spying against the US is a death wish. You will be sold out by your contact in Moscow or Tripoli who probably makes $100 a month and dreams of nothing better than retiring in the States with an American government pension. Either that, or the powers that be monitor all communications to an extent that even Slashdot readers would find unbelievable, so that anything even remotely secret that goes over the wire or the ether is read, catalogued and forwarded to the competent authorities.
Slashdot Mirror
NYPD, now that explains it. Not a bunch known to exercise restraint with their service weapon!
Read the report more carefully. The guys had never been trained to properly set up a BP and there was a good deal of confusion and stress that night relating to the fact that they had to man the BP for forty minutes, instead of the usual fifteen. Add to this the fact that these were NG troops who'd taken a fair number of casualties in their four months in Iraq and it's pretty easy to agree with the itchy trigger finger scenario.
Shit, I'd have done the same, since you don't get court-martialed for killing Iraqi civilians and it might actually save your life. A no-brainer, really.
The satellite story is a red herring.
It sounds like you're being paid by the hour. More power to you.
For the majority of IT workers who aren't, the hourly wage effectively diminishes the longer they work. From that point of view, one might indeed wonder whether free meals at the cafeteria truly compensate for an extended workday.
As for the slavery comment, it might be a bit hyperbolic, but it does capture the essence of a worker's relationship to the company. Leaving isn't really an option when you have a family to support or when the local economy is tanking. It's not a particularly flexible situation, unless you were born rich or have exceptional life circumstances, such as being in your twenties.
Plus the search system on their site sucks. But that, unlike a patronizingly moralistic corporate attitude, can be remedied, I presume.
What was broken with the domain system before ICANN and why did the powers that be decide ICANN was the solution to the problem?
Well said. No one who is salaried can claim with a straight face that they will not have to face outsourcing in the future. Their salaries are a drain on the profits of the investor class, and will, as such, be under constant downward pressure in an attempt to "contain costs" (i.e. maximize profit).
The employer does not operate in a social vacuum. The short-term benefits to the employer thus have to weighed against the desirability of the employer's actions from a societal point of view. This is the reason we have various equal employment, environmental and anti-trust laws, not mention a host of laws governing inter-personal behavior.
Of course, some may prefer life in Dickensian England to that in modern regulated capitalist democracies.
Please, don't disturb the self-reliant randian survivalist circle jerk an article like never fails to produce. Every pansy-ass twenty-something slashbot thinks he can become the next Larry Page with enough hard work and moral fortitude.
My guess is that's exactly what happened. As a large technology company, Google has a vested interest in perpetuating the perversion that passes for our patent system. As the company's representative, Pike could not express an opinion that would have either 1) gone against the company's stance on patents or 2) plainly stated the company's support for abusive patent legislation, thereby diminishing the company's mindshare among slashdot readership.
While not a surprise, I would've prefered Pike not to answer the question at all, rather than dismiss the excellent point with a snarky, immature remark.
More here
Pike has a few misused patents to his name, and his unwillingness to answer a perfectly valid question is a good indicator of his stance on the issue. As another poster suggested earlier, Pike really was caught between a rock and a hard place by the question: admit that he supports patents and face the wrath of the slashdot crowd or deny his past stands and expose the duplicity of his current employer. Either of the two answers might've opened some fanboy eyes around here. Too bad it didn't come to pass.
Was McCarthy self-plagiarising in the Border Trilogy? What about Abel Ferrara and the heavy-handed Christian predictability of his masterpieces? I'd much rather see copycat RPGs than what's been presented to the PC gamer in the past four or five years. A next installment of Ultima plagiarising chapter VII and Serpent Isle or a Fallout 3 would be copies I'd definitely love to play; but it's late and I should probably go dream away from the computer.
What a fucking waste of technology.
At least the absolute derth of quality PC games cuts short all of the asshole anti-Mac arguments.
It's not the trees, it's the lack of maintenance due to an almost total absence of liability for power companies that fail in their duties.
You should've seen Energy Secretary Abraham masterfully dodge reporters' questions regarding possible penalties for First Energy's irresponsible conduct. It was unbelievable.
So expect more trees to magically plunge you in the dark for days on end. That's our bright deregulated future, no pun intended.
That's interesting, the one complaint I have about Mozilla on MacOS X is lack of support for Java 1.4.1 applets. Mozilla is stuck using the 1.3.1 default, even if 1.4.1 is available on the machine. That bug's been open for months now, still without resolution. Safari supports 1.4.1, but, as the parent says, it is quite quirky. As an example, Hushmail doesn't work with either Mozilla's 1.3.1 or Safari's 1.4.1.
Maybe it's not an issue in Panther anymore. I'll check once I get it.
You might want to take another look at the MSDN I/O stuff. To get you started, have a look at the FileStream and BinaryReader classes, which have the functionality you're looking for.
Good luck.
$ grep -cE "GPL|LGPL" /cygdrive/g/Setup/eula.txt
0
What version of VS.NET are you talking about?
I agree. A company can only sustain increasing profitability by cutting costs so long, and investors will eventually turn to more promising opportunities.
The problem in this scenario is that while the market "punishes" companies unable to demonstrate sustained profit growth, the punishment is mostly felt by the rank and file employees, for whom termination often spells financial and personal ruin. OTOH, executives are sufficiently shielded from any negative impact of their own decisions by otherworldy compensation packages ($70 mil for Carly Fiorina? What *did* she do for HP?).
Unfortunately, with few unions and lack of democratic process within the enterprise, the most vulnerable corporate constituency has very little say in its own life.
What you're missing is that modern capitalism is not focused on the long-term maximization of profit, hence the absence of benefits, poor relations with employees and the community as well as a dislike for capital investments. When attacking "profit", most people are likely talking about the kind of head-in-the-sand short-term profit motive that we have been seeing for the past ten to fifteen years, not the right (or duty, as the case might be) of a business to provide its owners with a return on investment.
Raise taxes or start spending budget money on projects useful to the people. Of course that'd cut into the pork barrel, so don't hold your breath.
No, they aren't. Airlines haven't invested in X-Ray machines for checked baggage, and where they have, they mostly haven't put them into use due to the "prohibitive" costs of hiring and training personnel qualified to operate them.
The new airport security measures are a sad Dostoyevskian joke.
Actually, no, there isn't a "large background check" for ground ops, especially not the cleaners or caterers who go through a myriad subcontracting layers. Even firms providing baggage screening personnel - I can't bring myself to call them security professionals - have been repeatedly found guilty of not conducting FAA-mandated background checks. The measly fines imposed by the administration must send a pretty laissez-faire message, since those violations have apparently continued after 9/11.
A personal anecdote: I was flying out of JFK a few days ago and while standing in a massive line at the security checkpoint, waiting to have my shoes removed and bags rummaged through by grubby little Mexican hands I witnessed two ground ops walk right through the screaming metal detector. Hola, Pedro! Could that be a gun you're going to give a pax at the terminal's bathroom you're carrying under that orange vest of yours? Not according to the corrupt FAA-airline cabal, apparently.
A hero indeed.
http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/fbi m.htm
l
. html
. shtml
http://csf.colorado.edu/pen-l/2000IV/msg03767.htm
http://www.twf.org/News/Y1999/1130-SecretEvidence
http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/oct1999/ins-o22
http://www.fas.org/irp/news/1999/02/990222-in.htm
There are obvious biases involved, but I leave it up to you to figure out the current state of our democratic institutions.
What kind of shit is this? If you're going to be violating people's property and impeding commerce, you'd better have a damn valid reason that will stand up to public scrutiny. Otherwise, we might as well get rid of trial by jury, the pesky fifth amendment or the obligation to prove one's guilt before issuing a sentence. Yeah, that's the ticket, just like in those documentaries about the Third Reich that must be the talk of the town in Quantico nowadays.
This makes me sick.
What the article doesn't adequately address is the issue of just how the FBI first got wind of Regan's activity. It's an interesting question, one that should give pause to anyone considering providing information to third parties as a way of supplementing a meager government pension.
Come to think of it, the initial discovery steps are never addressed in the popular reporting of spy incidents, and since most cases either never make it to court or contain "sensitive material" that is not accessible to those not in the loop (that usually involves defense lawyers). Somehow though, I get the impression that foreign agencies are so thoroughly penetrated by American intelligence that spying against the US is a death wish. You will be sold out by your contact in Moscow or Tripoli who probably makes $100 a month and dreams of nothing better than retiring in the States with an American government pension. Either that, or the powers that be monitor all communications to an extent that even Slashdot readers would find unbelievable, so that anything even remotely secret that goes over the wire or the ether is read, catalogued and forwarded to the competent authorities.