While the idea of the dealth penalty for virus release is silly, consider this:
When the virus author releases the virus, he is really committing crimes against millions of people. I don't find it at all silly to consider these as separate crimes. Let's see: Illegal Access to Electronic Device. Up to 10 years, per offense.
That would make these virus writers think twice, yes. And yes, I personally find this idea quite just. Each victim has rights, too, you know.
A shortage of labor is a normal market force, and government should not intervene to counteract this force.
Well, except for the fact that you have it all absolutely backwards! When the shortage appears, the government, which is already intervening elects to relax its interventions.
A limited number of foreign workers (fixed number of H1-B's) is itself per se an intervention. Without this intervention, the market would freely correct itself, through unrestricted immigration.
So what we have is a market where the government defacto creates shortages (through dejure immigration controls), but occasionally lets up on the shortage-creating phenonomenon, allowing normal market dynamics to function.
Actually, he might consider writing everything down, each and every time his boss says something. It's admissible in court, and has higher value than verbal testimony. But don't take my word for it, talk to an attorney...
The worst part of this situation is that your boss is going to bad-mouth you to anyone that calls for a reference in the future. There is nothing you can do about this
Oh yes you can. Just get several people to call, each different, faking a reference request. The defamation law suit is a slam dunk, total no brainer, he's DOA.
Obviously, threatening to withhold your final paycheck for something like this is against the law.
The word you are looking for is "extortion." If this had been me, he and the company both would be hearing from my attorney. This person has made an inexecusable error and is a hazard to the other people working at the company. A firm spanking is definitely in order.
I had to think about your argument for a while, and familiarize myself with this issue. I'd never really seen it before. I believe the result will be this: the GPL has no power to enforce a company to divulge its own source code; however, it does have power to withdraw rights to the (GPL) code being used. It would appear that giving up source code is entirely voluntary (and something that a court ought not enforce), but a failure to volunteer results in the right to continue to use the GPL code.
The GPL itself says what it relies upon. "You are not required to accept this License, since you have not signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License."
This comment is explanatory. It is also the truth, and why it is that those who attempt to litigate against the GPL inevitably end up turning into ass monkeys.
I have no doubts they are totalitarian, and could get away with a lot. That, however, is a hypothetical. All I'm saying is that they're not actually communist. Not that you have to like them, or that they are particularly free.
State-owned enterprises shielded from competition is a mark of a non-capitalist economy. Central control is a mark of a non-capitalist economy. Having a communist government is a mark of a non-capitalist economy.
From my point of view, the definition of communism is collective ownership of all property, in particular land. If one can privately own land, the country simply isn't communist.
If one can freely exchange money for services and production rendered, the country simply isn't communist.
But, China is still communist.
It's totalitarian, with state ownership of some production.
An associate of mine, having spent time in and out of China since the Nixon administration, likes to quip that Chinese are "practically the *definition* of capitalists." And he'd be right.
Spend some time in China. Go. Have fun.
Your perceptions will be dramatically altered.
C//
p.s. and yes, I am aware the government is totalitarian.
It is an interesting feature of our economy that it is so incredibly flexible that whole career paths can be shipped willy-nilly to wherever a company gets the most bang for the buck.
Well I was alluding to this previously. Look, I am a free marketeer. And I won't say that this ("this" being an economy where whole career paths can be shipped around willy-nilly) is the way it is.
But if it becomes that way, clearly, presently, and obviously, I can tell you right now that the workers won't tolerate it. There'd be political repercussions: the workers could very easily reject the dynamics and force them away, by legislative fiat.
And forgetting the psycho-social aspects of it all, such a system has its problems. Planning would be dissuaded. Who'd invest for the long term (read: get post educations that require 4+ years of your life plus money) when there was a high probability of a loss to an investment so precious?
Anyway, as for your other remarks, I'm ambivalent. I believe we (the collective first world) are currently conducting an ideological/economic experiment. I can see how it might not come out how we would like. I can also see a possibility that it could come out very well.
The one thing that is indisputably true is that a domestic worker, having trained in hard to learn discipline and having found his specialty shipped overseas, isn't going to like being told that it is for the "greater good."
So you say. And yet one can discern the relative goodness of fit for a variety of amortized algorithms by calculating basic mean, standard deviation, and kurtosis and so forth, depending.
And really, inferential statistics sets up a generation of knowledge workers to think critically about data.
We have majors for "just programmers". They are granted by trade schools, like Coleman college. Computer science, however, shouldn't be dumbed down.
The world is only 24 hours around. So it's either less than or equal to 12 hours one way, or less than equal to twelve hours the other.
This does, however, remind me of a joke a coworker once said about someone else who flubbed up on a public stage. "That guy did a 180 so fast, he almost did a 360!".
This will continue until the standards of living of IT workers are roughly equal everywhere.
Inter-country competition is only a leveling factor insofar as the benefits from doing business in foreign countries outweight the costs. And there are costs.
But yes, you are right. Forces of equilibrium are currently at work, and (dare I say it?) the world is becoming a better place on the whole.
Slashdot Mirror
One first degree murder is only /one/ crime.
/millions/ of individuals. It's millions of crimes in my mind, not one crime.
Releasing a virus is a criminal offense against
Life in prison is appropriate, yes.
C//
Sounds great - so long as when a corporation commits a criminal act, each and every employee involved in that act is charged with the crime...
...one instance per every single person harmed...
This would be the right thing to do, yes. It's also the current law.
While not the current law, yes, I do believe this is the right way, yes.
C//
While the idea of the dealth penalty for virus release is silly, consider this:
When the virus author releases the virus, he is really committing crimes against millions of people. I don't find it at all silly to consider these as separate crimes. Let's see: Illegal Access to Electronic Device. Up to 10 years, per offense.
That would make these virus writers think twice, yes. And yes, I personally find this idea quite just. Each victim has rights, too, you know.
C//
A shortage of labor is a normal market force, and government should not intervene to counteract this force.
Well, except for the fact that you have it all absolutely backwards! When the shortage appears, the government, which is already intervening elects to relax its interventions.
A limited number of foreign workers (fixed number of H1-B's) is itself per se an intervention. Without this intervention, the market would freely correct itself, through unrestricted immigration.
So what we have is a market where the government defacto creates shortages (through dejure immigration controls), but occasionally lets up on the shortage-creating phenonomenon, allowing normal market dynamics to function.
C//
1980+17=1997. Patent Expired. Uhoh.
C//
Okay, I'll give you Mod +1, Geeky for that. :)
You watched the Day After Tomorrow one too many times. Subject matter: "FICTION."
C//
If there were more water, wouldn't you be suggesting that people would have to be closer to it? *wink*
This is a fantastic idea, except for one flaw. This would only work for cities near the coast.
That's a goodly majority of all humanity.
C//
*wink*
C//
Actually, he might consider writing everything down, each and every time his boss says something. It's admissible in court, and has higher value than verbal testimony. But don't take my word for it, talk to an attorney...
C//
The worst part of this situation is that your boss is going to bad-mouth you to anyone that calls for a reference in the future. There is nothing you can do about this
Oh yes you can. Just get several people to call, each different, faking a reference request. The defamation law suit is a slam dunk, total no brainer, he's DOA.
C//
Obviously, threatening to withhold your final paycheck for something like this is against the law.
The word you are looking for is "extortion." If this had been me, he and the company both would be hearing from my attorney. This person has made an inexecusable error and is a hazard to the other people working at the company. A firm spanking is definitely in order.
C//
I had to think about your argument for a while, and familiarize myself with this issue. I'd never really seen it before. I believe the result will be this: the GPL has no power to enforce a company to divulge its own source code; however, it does have power to withdraw rights to the (GPL) code being used. It would appear that giving up source code is entirely voluntary (and something that a court ought not enforce), but a failure to volunteer results in the right to continue to use the GPL code.
C//
*shrug*.
The GPL itself says what it relies upon. "You are not required to accept this License, since you have not signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License."
This comment is explanatory. It is also the truth, and why it is that those who attempt to litigate against the GPL inevitably end up turning into ass monkeys.
C//
I think once you control the company, you can force a buy-out.
C//
I have no doubts they are totalitarian, and could get away with a lot. That, however, is a hypothetical. All I'm saying is that they're not actually communist. Not that you have to like them, or that they are particularly free.
C//
State-owned enterprises shielded from competition is a mark of a non-capitalist economy. Central control is a mark of a non-capitalist economy. Having a communist government is a mark of a non-capitalist economy.
From my point of view, the definition of communism is collective ownership of all property, in particular land. If one can privately own land, the country simply isn't communist.
If one can freely exchange money for services and production rendered, the country simply isn't communist.
But, China is still communist.
It's totalitarian, with state ownership of some production.
C//
While China has started market reforms,...
They've more than "started" market reforms.
An associate of mine, having spent time in and out of China since the Nixon administration, likes to quip that Chinese are "practically the *definition* of capitalists." And he'd be right.
Spend some time in China. Go. Have fun.
Your perceptions will be dramatically altered.
C//
p.s. and yes, I am aware the government is totalitarian.
It is an interesting feature of our economy that it is so incredibly flexible that whole career paths can be shipped willy-nilly to wherever a company gets the most bang for the buck.
Well I was alluding to this previously. Look, I am a free marketeer. And I won't say that this ("this" being an economy where whole career paths can be shipped around willy-nilly) is the way it is.
But if it becomes that way, clearly, presently, and obviously, I can tell you right now that the workers won't tolerate it. There'd be political repercussions: the workers could very easily reject the dynamics and force them away, by legislative fiat.
And forgetting the psycho-social aspects of it all, such a system has its problems. Planning would be dissuaded. Who'd invest for the long term (read: get post educations that require 4+ years of your life plus money) when there was a high probability of a loss to an investment so precious?
C/
China hasn't been communist for twenty years.
Been there lately? No? Thought not.
Anyway, as for your other remarks, I'm ambivalent. I believe we (the collective first world) are currently conducting an ideological/economic experiment. I can see how it might not come out how we would like. I can also see a possibility that it could come out very well.
The one thing that is indisputably true is that a domestic worker, having trained in hard to learn discipline and having found his specialty shipped overseas, isn't going to like being told that it is for the "greater good."
C//
Statistics is one (but only one) example...
So you say. And yet one can discern the relative goodness of fit for a variety of amortized algorithms by calculating basic mean, standard deviation, and kurtosis and so forth, depending.
And really, inferential statistics sets up a generation of knowledge workers to think critically about data.
We have majors for "just programmers". They are granted by trade schools, like Coleman college. Computer science, however, shouldn't be dumbed down.
C//
The world is only 24 hours around. So it's either less than or equal to 12 hours one way, or less than equal to twelve hours the other.
:-)
This does, however, remind me of a joke a coworker once said about someone else who flubbed up on a public stage. "That guy did a 180 so fast, he almost did a 360!".
Anyway, yes, I'm quibbling bits. So there.
C//
This will continue until the standards of living of IT workers are roughly equal everywhere.
Inter-country competition is only a leveling factor insofar as the benefits from doing business in foreign countries outweight the costs. And there are costs.
But yes, you are right. Forces of equilibrium are currently at work, and (dare I say it?) the world is becoming a better place on the whole.
C//
Serverworks is currently working an AMD chipset...
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=16272
C//