Here, the first cut is the harshest and it doesn't matter where your degree is from. When reviewing applicants for a position take the top half of the resume stack and dump it in the trash: avoid hiring unlucky people.
I never said the US stock exchanges going to decimal had anything to do with metric. It is just an example of how long it takes for the US institutions (government or otherwise) to switch from an old arcaic standard to a more modern one that is in line with the rest of the planet. Pieces of Eight are so pirate... and we all know zombies are the new pirate.
I suppose you'd say that in Europe someone needs to cut a pie into ten equal slices? Get real.
The real has already been gotten! I never said metric == decimal, it was a standard adoption comparison. No metric pies here, just real ones.
Actually, Metric is the standard in the US since President Gerald R. Ford signed the Metric Conversion Act of 1975. However, conversion to metric was/is entirely voluntary (there used to be a 10 year deadline but it got dropped) so no-one actually switched.
The Metric Conversion Act of 1975 established the U.S. Metric Board to coordinate and plan the increasing use and voluntary conversion to the metric system. However, the Act was devoid of any target dates for metric conversion. In 1982 President Ronald Reagan disbanded the U.S. Metric Board and canceled its funding.
If there are any doubts about the sluggish pace of adopting the metric system in the US, the major US stock exchanges switched from fractions to decimals a scant 3 years ago.
I'm still getting MyDoom.o emails. It spread like wildfire inside the company I work at. No update pushed to McAfee on workstations until the next day after the infection. After... the barn door is already open and horses are gone. Be sure to shut that barn door after everything is compromised.
On this Windows box at work I'm protected from thousands upon thousands of viruses except the one that gets written tomorrow and the idiot that opens its brilliantly socially-engineered email attachment.
This is rhetorical and wishful: when are we going to get some anti-virus software that protects us before an outbreak?
(please don't say don't run Windows, it is realistic but not realistic today right here)
I appreciate, understand, and respect the need for anonymity in elections. However, if you don't know whether your vote was counted or not (forget about who for) how would you know if you were disenfranchised or not?
You forget that an election is supposed to be 100% anonymous.
But is there no way to let me just verify my vote was counted? Forget about who I voted for, can I at least get an anonymous confirmation that my vote was even counted? I don't know, like each ballot in a district having unique serial numbers where I can go check online if that serial number's vote was counted with a simple true/false.
I'd rather take the chance that my vote may not be counted due to machine/process flaws than potentially letting politicians, corporations, and political activist groups knowing who I voted for.
They all already know what political party I'm registered with (your state may not have this), where I live, where I work, how much money I make, how I spend my money, who my family is, who I communicate with. Is a person's voting record the camel-back-breaking straw to the US "social contract" that keeps us from total political corruption?
Who did you vote for in the last election that you participated in? Can you prove it? Can they prove it? Why can't I verify if my vote was even counted let alone who they recorded it for? Why is there no verification or personal audit trail available for elections?
Yeah, I should have done xvid myself. I believe the divx banner thing is only for the player that comes in the bundle which you don't even have to install. I installed just the codec. 13 media players are enough for me already.
I have no idea about IV41. I'm not too into video, just enough to want to play some trailers/teasers.
Email worm Mydoom.o breaks out infecting Windows boxes across the planet. Part of the payload are searches against Google, Lycos, Yahoo, and Altavista (but not Microsoft) for email addresses from an infected domain. http://vil.nai.com/vil/content/v_127033.htm
Internet users report google.com hit hard by virus activity. Google starts blocking searches from infected domains/regions. Users also report that other search engines like Yahoo have significantly degraded performance. http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum3/25010.htm
Its always the case. The Brits invent the prototype, then the Americans refine it, market it, and take the credit. From Democracy to Computers, from Trains to Planes.
Now wait a second. We Americans have invented some pretty useful stuff like the light bulb, the telephone, and the automobile. You can't take those away from us!
It would appear that someone has very thin skin and likes to blow things way out of proportion. I can't believe people are still following this thread that has now gotten way off-topic. PJ and her fanboys need to let it go. Ya'll will enjoy life a lot more.
Because your post was authored as an AC I have no idea who you are but if you say you're PJ I'll bite.
The parts you left out were not written by me
Then why do you care?
you really have no authority to cut anything out
Actually I do. The content on groklaw was posted under the Creative Commons License which states:
You are free:
to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work
to make derivative works (I think this applies)
Under the following conditions:
Attribution. You must give the original author credit. (I did so by linking to the original article at the top with source's name included)
Noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes. (if I make any money from posting on slashdot please let me know)
without so indicating
I did (see above) and I explained what I did in the subject line and in the first line of the body. However I did neglect to include the Creative Commons License in my original post but a helpful person did point out and correct my oversight in a follow-up.
so I'm glad you made a note to show the parts you edited, even if after the fact
Huh? I didn't show them all, only a couple choice ones. Do a diff to find the 10 edits.
I am used to unkind and unfair criticism, personally, so I don't much care, but there is no reason to write nasty things about two people
HUH??? Then why are you posting to my obscure post on slashdot if you don't care? I didn't even attack (if you can call it that) or say nasty things about either you or eggplant37 (assuming you're different people). I don't even know who you are. I was communicating my opinion on the content of the report -- I didn't say word one about any of the people involved. So what if I find distracting subjective commentary cruft to be annoying? Apparently others do too. It isn't a personal attack nor is it nasty. We're all free to disagree with each other and express our opinions. Don't take it personally. Sheesh.
If you are the person who put that all together then I'd like to say thanks. Reading the reports brightened my day. This thread however, has not. Cheers and have a great rest of the week.
Um, dude, PJ's commentary is not a bug, it's a feature."
If this was an op-ed column then great. Others (by way of moderation) find opinions in news to be annoying and completely unnecessary. More to the point: unprofessional. Lines blurred between blog and non-blog? Probably. You do have a point though for I was moderated down as well as up. For those to lazy to RTFA, here's a couple excepts that I left out...
"Mark Heise reminded me of Superman actor Chris Reeves in appearance. Ryan Tibbits reminded me of a big, blocky Marine drill instructor as to his appearance."
"Judge Chabot is a petite woman with a very short, close-cropped hairdo..."
"... this shows that Judge Chabot is one speedy lady..."
"I could almost hear the screaming all the way from Utah."
SCO v DC was 18th of 22 cases on the motion callsheet for the morning. At 0841, the clerk called the SCO v DC attorneys up for a brief discussion, during which I was able to overhear the clerk tell them that he would "like to get [them] in and out."
At 0850, the clerk came over to the SCO side of the bench and spoke briefly with them, telling them "five minutes", I think stating the amount of time that each side would be granted for arguments. DC's attorneys came over and confirmed with the SCO attorneys what the clerk had to say.
SCO v DC was called at 0942. Barry Rosenbaum arguing for SCO and James Feeny arguing for Daimler, and motions were heard to admit Heise and Steven Prout?? pro hac vice for SCO, and also to admit Mark Masuchak from Massachussetts pro hac vice for Daimler, which the Judge granted.
Mr. Rosenbaum argued Daimler's summary dispo motion, noting from the outset that this was a more technical case, dealing with software and licensing agreements, and that he would frame the case briefly, in about 30 seconds. Chrysler says that the case is about whether or not section 2.05 of the SA requires a certification of compliance with detailed enumeration of extraneous facts outside the agreeement, or whether it simply requires a brief certification that licensee has complied with the terms of the license agreement.
Mr. Rosenbaum then went on to recite the language of Section 2.05. He stated that the letter requesting the certification from SCO went quite far outside the unambiguous language in section 2.05 when it asked to enumerate information regarding DC's use of Linux. Daimler didn't file the certification until after SCO filed it's lawsuit, which on its face appeared to be about the contract provisions being breached due to DC not giving SCO their compliance certification in a timely fashion.
Mr. Rosenbaum then went on to recite paragraphs 2 & 3 of DC's response letter, stating that there were no cpu's running SCO's software, that not providing a list of cpu's that weren't in existence and hadn't been used in more than 7 years was more than sufficient to comply with the language of 2.05. Since the language of 2.05 is unambiguous, there is sufficient grounds to grant summary judgement on all assertions in SCO's complaint.
Mr. Rosenbaum finished by stating that the original letter didn't request a list of CPU's running SCO's software. Since there were no CPU's running SCO's products, DC felt it was immaterial as to whether or not they responded within 30 days.
At 0951, Mark Heise then argued the SCO side of the case. He felt that DC's SA gave them full access to the source code and that DC had been given the right to use, modify and create derivatives for their own internal use, and that the SA required that they keep the software confidential, that it should not be exported outside the US -- which in this case seems to be a concern since Chrysler's recent merger with Daimler Benz of Germany.
Heise went on to argue the point that DC's answer to the request for certification was not timely nor was it adequate in that SCO has fears that the source code still lives on disk on some computer somewhere at DC and they are entitled to know where it's stored. He also stated that DC is not alleviated from the terms of the SA once they have decided to take the CD's or tapes or whatever of the source code and toss them in a closet somewhere, and that they needed full certification that the software had been held in confidence by DC.
He went on to recite the terms of section 6.02 of the SA, stating that Chrysler, upon ceasing use of the software, was bound to either destroy all copies or return the software and to notify SCO that they did same. Again, he expressed his concern that in DC's use of the Linux software they were worried that they may b
This may be picking nits and I'm sure some English major will correct me but shouldn't it be Queen's English? There hasn't been a king in England for quite some time.
(BTW, if I'm right then must be a mac user cause I have a 17" iMac. If I'm wrong then I'm a PC user because I have a Dell as well. If I get flamed for either I do have a linux box or two under the desk.)
Losing fan base doesn't hurt a company. Losing customer base does. Red Hat is definitely losing status as the favored distro among people with servers in their basement. We'll see if they can manage with the folks who have servers in a datacenter.
When the company I work for started looking at a linux solution 2 years ago back then I was surprised at who they chose and who they didn't choose. Two years later after everything that has happened I am now surprised at the foresight of the decision. I can't name names but let's just say who you would have thought 2 years ago wasn't picked and who you wouldn't have 2 years ago but would now was picked. I wonder if they knew...
Slashdot Mirror
Here, the first cut is the harshest and it doesn't matter where your degree is from. When reviewing applicants for a position take the top half of the resume stack and dump it in the trash: avoid hiring unlucky people.
I never said the US stock exchanges going to decimal had anything to do with metric. It is just an example of how long it takes for the US institutions (government or otherwise) to switch from an old arcaic standard to a more modern one that is in line with the rest of the planet. Pieces of Eight are so pirate... and we all know zombies are the new pirate.
I suppose you'd say that in Europe someone needs to cut a pie into ten equal slices? Get real.
The real has already been gotten! I never said metric == decimal, it was a standard adoption comparison. No metric pies here, just real ones.
Cheers!Actually, Metric is the standard in the US since President Gerald R. Ford signed the Metric Conversion Act of 1975. However, conversion to metric was/is entirely voluntary (there used to be a 10 year deadline but it got dropped) so no-one actually switched.
The Metric Conversion Act of 1975 established the U.S. Metric Board to coordinate and plan the increasing use and voluntary conversion to the metric system. However, the Act was devoid of any target dates for metric conversion. In 1982 President Ronald Reagan disbanded the U.S. Metric Board and canceled its funding.
If there are any doubts about the sluggish pace of adopting the metric system in the US, the major US stock exchanges switched from fractions to decimals a scant 3 years ago.
Great response, thanks!
On this Windows box at work I'm protected from thousands upon thousands of viruses except the one that gets written tomorrow and the idiot that opens its brilliantly socially-engineered email attachment.
This is rhetorical and wishful: when are we going to get some anti-virus software that protects us before an outbreak?
(please don't say don't run Windows, it is realistic but not realistic today right here)
I appreciate, understand, and respect the need for anonymity in elections. However, if you don't know whether your vote was counted or not (forget about who for) how would you know if you were disenfranchised or not?
You forget that an election is supposed to be 100% anonymous.
But is there no way to let me just verify my vote was counted? Forget about who I voted for, can I at least get an anonymous confirmation that my vote was even counted? I don't know, like each ballot in a district having unique serial numbers where I can go check online if that serial number's vote was counted with a simple true/false.
I'd rather take the chance that my vote may not be counted due to machine/process flaws than potentially letting politicians, corporations, and political activist groups knowing who I voted for.
They all already know what political party I'm registered with (your state may not have this), where I live, where I work, how much money I make, how I spend my money, who my family is, who I communicate with. Is a person's voting record the camel-back-breaking straw to the US "social contract" that keeps us from total political corruption?
Who did you vote for in the last election that you participated in? Can you prove it? Can they prove it? Why can't I verify if my vote was even counted let alone who they recorded it for? Why is there no verification or personal audit trail available for elections?
Yeah, I should have done xvid myself. I believe the divx banner thing is only for the player that comes in the bundle which you don't even have to install. I installed just the codec. 13 media players are enough for me already.
I have no idea about IV41. I'm not too into video, just enough to want to play some trailers/teasers.
poo and cubicle-taupe
+1 Insightful. This is the new it.slashdot.org. All I see all day at work is poo and cubicle-taupe so now my slashdot blends right in.
It's divx, get the codec here (windows/mac).
grazie
I'm only getting the audio from the avi. Am I missing a codec? If so, which one?
http://money.cnn.com/2004/07/26/technology/google
Fake DNS registration for google.com by gandi.net.0 3037
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=115798&cid=98
Email worm Mydoom.o breaks out infecting Windows boxes across the planet. Part of the payload are searches against Google, Lycos, Yahoo, and Altavista (but not Microsoft) for email addresses from an infected domain.
http://vil.nai.com/vil/content/v_127033.htm
Internet users report google.com hit hard by virus activity. Google starts blocking searches from infected domains/regions. Users also report that other search engines like Yahoo have significantly degraded performance.
http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum3/25010.htm
Mainstream press picks up the news of Google's issues._ site/index.htm?cnn=yes
http://money.cnn.com/2004/07/26/technology/google
You can't buy this kind of competitor slamming and market cornering on Internet searching in one day... or can you?
(I know this is off-topic but I'll take the potential karma hit for the joke only a couple people might get.)
Its always the case. The Brits invent the prototype, then the Americans refine it, market it, and take the credit. From Democracy to Computers, from Trains to Planes.
Now wait a second. We Americans have invented some pretty useful stuff like the light bulb, the telephone, and the automobile. You can't take those away from us!
Your post and its failings remind me of a cliche image from photoshop contests on fark.com. Its says, "Arguing on the Internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded."
Did you win or are you going to keep arguing?
The parts you left out were not written by me
Then why do you care?
you really have no authority to cut anything out
Actually I do. The content on groklaw was posted under the Creative Commons License which states:
You are free:
- to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work
- to make derivative works (I think this applies)
Under the following conditions:- Attribution. You must give the original author credit. (I did so by linking to the original article at the top with source's name included)
- Noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes. (if I make any money from posting on slashdot please let me know)
without so indicatingI did (see above) and I explained what I did in the subject line and in the first line of the body. However I did neglect to include the Creative Commons License in my original post but a helpful person did point out and correct my oversight in a follow-up.
so I'm glad you made a note to show the parts you edited, even if after the fact
Huh? I didn't show them all, only a couple choice ones. Do a diff to find the 10 edits.
I am used to unkind and unfair criticism, personally, so I don't much care, but there is no reason to write nasty things about two people
HUH??? Then why are you posting to my obscure post on slashdot if you don't care? I didn't even attack (if you can call it that) or say nasty things about either you or eggplant37 (assuming you're different people). I don't even know who you are. I was communicating my opinion on the content of the report -- I didn't say word one about any of the people involved. So what if I find distracting subjective commentary cruft to be annoying? Apparently others do too. It isn't a personal attack nor is it nasty. We're all free to disagree with each other and express our opinions. Don't take it personally. Sheesh.
If you are the person who put that all together then I'd like to say thanks. Reading the reports brightened my day. This thread however, has not. Cheers and have a great rest of the week.
Thanks for correcting my oversight.
Um, dude, PJ's commentary is not a bug, it's a feature."
If this was an op-ed column then great. Others (by way of moderation) find opinions in news to be annoying and completely unnecessary. More to the point: unprofessional. Lines blurred between blog and non-blog? Probably. You do have a point though for I was moderated down as well as up. For those to lazy to RTFA, here's a couple excepts that I left out..."Mark Heise reminded me of Superman actor Chris Reeves in appearance. Ryan Tibbits reminded me of a big, blocky Marine drill instructor as to his appearance."
"Judge Chabot is a petite woman with a very short, close-cropped hairdo..."
"... this shows that Judge Chabot is one speedy lady..."
"I could almost hear the screaming all the way from Utah."
The following is the eyewitness account report #1 by eggplant37 from the groklaw article but without the stupid commentary.
SCO v DC was 18th of 22 cases on the motion callsheet for the morning. At 0841, the clerk called the SCO v DC attorneys up for a brief discussion, during which I was able to overhear the clerk tell them that he would "like to get [them] in and out."
At 0850, the clerk came over to the SCO side of the bench and spoke briefly with them, telling them "five minutes", I think stating the amount of time that each side would be granted for arguments. DC's attorneys came over and confirmed with the SCO attorneys what the clerk had to say.
SCO v DC was called at 0942. Barry Rosenbaum arguing for SCO and James Feeny arguing for Daimler, and motions were heard to admit Heise and Steven Prout?? pro hac vice for SCO, and also to admit Mark Masuchak from Massachussetts pro hac vice for Daimler, which the Judge granted.
Mr. Rosenbaum argued Daimler's summary dispo motion, noting from the outset that this was a more technical case, dealing with software and licensing agreements, and that he would frame the case briefly, in about 30 seconds. Chrysler says that the case is about whether or not section 2.05 of the SA requires a certification of compliance with detailed enumeration of extraneous facts outside the agreeement, or whether it simply requires a brief certification that licensee has complied with the terms of the license agreement.
Mr. Rosenbaum then went on to recite the language of Section 2.05. He stated that the letter requesting the certification from SCO went quite far outside the unambiguous language in section 2.05 when it asked to enumerate information regarding DC's use of Linux. Daimler didn't file the certification until after SCO filed it's lawsuit, which on its face appeared to be about the contract provisions being breached due to DC not giving SCO their compliance certification in a timely fashion.
Mr. Rosenbaum then went on to recite paragraphs 2 & 3 of DC's response letter, stating that there were no cpu's running SCO's software, that not providing a list of cpu's that weren't in existence and hadn't been used in more than 7 years was more than sufficient to comply with the language of 2.05. Since the language of 2.05 is unambiguous, there is sufficient grounds to grant summary judgement on all assertions in SCO's complaint.
Mr. Rosenbaum finished by stating that the original letter didn't request a list of CPU's running SCO's software. Since there were no CPU's running SCO's products, DC felt it was immaterial as to whether or not they responded within 30 days.
At 0951, Mark Heise then argued the SCO side of the case. He felt that DC's SA gave them full access to the source code and that DC had been given the right to use, modify and create derivatives for their own internal use, and that the SA required that they keep the software confidential, that it should not be exported outside the US -- which in this case seems to be a concern since Chrysler's recent merger with Daimler Benz of Germany.
Heise went on to argue the point that DC's answer to the request for certification was not timely nor was it adequate in that SCO has fears that the source code still lives on disk on some computer somewhere at DC and they are entitled to know where it's stored. He also stated that DC is not alleviated from the terms of the SA once they have decided to take the CD's or tapes or whatever of the source code and toss them in a closet somewhere, and that they needed full certification that the software had been held in confidence by DC.
He went on to recite the terms of section 6.02 of the SA, stating that Chrysler, upon ceasing use of the software, was bound to either destroy all copies or return the software and to notify SCO that they did same. Again, he expressed his concern that in DC's use of the Linux software they were worried that they may b
king's English
This may be picking nits and I'm sure some English major will correct me but shouldn't it be Queen's English? There hasn't been a king in England for quite some time.
(BTW, if I'm right then must be a mac user cause I have a 17" iMac. If I'm wrong then I'm a PC user because I have a Dell as well. If I get flamed for either I do have a linux box or two under the desk.)
Losing fan base doesn't hurt a company. Losing customer base does. Red Hat is definitely losing status as the favored distro among people with servers in their basement. We'll see if they can manage with the folks who have servers in a datacenter.
When the company I work for started looking at a linux solution 2 years ago back then I was surprised at who they chose and who they didn't choose. Two years later after everything that has happened I am now surprised at the foresight of the decision. I can't name names but let's just say who you would have thought 2 years ago wasn't picked and who you wouldn't have 2 years ago but would now was picked. I wonder if they knew...
tell me about it.. I'm no karma watcher but I was modded -1 Offtopic less than a minute after posting, it makes me wonder