Completely wrong. The narrower the targets of surveillance, the more important it is to the investigation that the targets not know they are being targeted because if they know, they can evade a narrowly targeted search. Knowing doesn't help them evade a broad search nearly as much, so it is less apt to disrupt the investigations if the targets of a broad search know they are being watched -- along with everybody else.
We have already reached that state. So now, many many people have completely unnecessary jobs. Nail salons. Fast food. Video game programmers. Telemarketers. Everybody that works at almost every website.
The claim was never that Columbus or anyone was the first PERSON to "discover America." The question is who was the first EUROPEAN to discover it and make it known to Western civilization.
Lief Erikson was the first European to discover it, but he didn't end up making its existence known outside of Iceland and maybe Norway. Then the knowledge got buried.
When Cristorforo Colombo discovered the Americas, they stayed discovered permanently and their existence became common knowledge across Eurasia.
And it's worth noting that while the Native Americans knew of the existence of the Americas, they didn't know of the existence of Eurasia or Africa. If they had built ships and sailed the other way and carried the knowledge back to their homelands and that became part of their cultural knowledge, they'd have been credited by their people with discovering Europe and Asia. As far as we know, they didn't and weren't because a few centuries ago, European sailing know-how was the best in the world and enabled Europeans to sail farther (and return) than anybody else.
How are you going to distinguish the incredibly creative C student from the average non creative C student? And what makes anyone think that college is going to be a good learning environment for someone who has trouble with succeeding in an academic environment?
What? We don't need none of your European Socialism over here, buddy.
Honestly, it's a fact people that promote more worker-friendly policies and the government stepping in to make people less dependent on employers are accused (and yes that's the right word) of supporting European Socialism -- as if that were a BAD thing.
In light of there being a general pattern of women being paid less than men for the same jobs and being passed up for promotion in favor of men, it may be more of a problem for women than for men.
Small companies often have barely enough to pay employees that are present. To be paying for employees on leave is something else, male or female. I recently had to take leave and if it wasn't for my insurance I wouldn't have gotten a dime. At the same time all the tech companies I have worked at treated everyone fairly and had policies about 'poisoned workplace'. Sure there are people who have discriminatory attitude, but in a healthy work place they shouldn't be staying long.
As for pay I don't know enough about the realities and individual cases to know the truth. What I do know is companies will often give you a pay that you negotiated, which may be worse than you are worth. A good company will try give up something fair knowing that unfair salary if it becomes knowledge hurts them more. My current company makes it a fireable offence to talk salary. Other companies I have worked for have a ladder according to position.
Good colleagues come in many shapes, form, sexuality, culture and variations of gended, just as do the bad colleagues. We all screw up sometimes, but we should endeavour to treat each other fairly and with respect.
If your current company that makes it a fireable offense is in the USA, and I assume it is because your use of English seems American, it's breaking US employment law. Only managerial employees can be restricted in how they talk about pay.
But these 716 women who had made it past all that shit and were working in the tech sector found that once you get there, it sucks to be in a job where you're treated poorly because you're a woman, or you feel isolated because everybody else is a guy.
There are exceptions. My sister is a successful electronics engineer. But she works in a big company where she's not the only woman. She might have left the industry too if she had worked her first job in a smaller company where it was all men except her.
Women seem just as capable of sitting at a desk pounding a keyboard as men.
I suppose I could hand-wave up an argument that men's more object oriented approach to language might be more amenable to being adapted to write code compared to womens' more personal-perspective oriented approach (http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.5.1172). But I don't believe it. Male and female brains are both wonderfully adaptive and there are plenty of brilliant women out there. (Leave aside the fact that you only have to be moderately intelligent to write code.) Also, there's no evidence yet that men and women use language differently innately as opposed to having learned different uses of grammar along with their gender roles.
Having not used a Microsoft product since DOS 6 upgrade, this is a reason I can not buy an android phone. However, I have a excellent Jolla phone so not a major problem. http://stevesstats.blogspot.co...
Microsoft should sue Google if they believe they are being hard dun by, and not blackmail.
Why? Google's including Microsoft patented technologies in Android isn't a big deal to Microsoft because Google doesn't sell Android. It's the selling the using and the selling that's protected by patent law. Device manufacturers are selling it, so they need to license it. Google's also a seller, but they're small time in that regard, so less important to sue. And if they're paying their license fees or have cross-licensing agreements, all is well for Microsoft.
There are two ways they might get out from under Microsoft patents: 1. Have those patents invalidated. 2. Develop alternatives to the technologies they're now licensing.
Or even developing the web pages and apps you use on your iPad.
Of course, there's Macs and Linux (for now). But business prefers Windows. You avoid the Apple equipment-provider lock-in but get to use pretty much any software you want.
My company's position (it's not that large, only about a $2.5B company) is that patents are for defensive purposes. They don't seem to really think they could use them to keep the competition from copying one of our products. They're much more concerned that we can't develop products without infringing on somebody's patent and being vulnerable to being sued and they want to have a big collection of patents they could use to negotiate better licensing terms or stave off a suit.
I think it's the latter. While marijuana production and even growing your own is legal under state law, it's still heavily regulated -- but much less so than it was before legalization.
Then he would be acting as an unlicensed reseller on behalf of the company he owns. Also illegal. What makes you imagine that the Iowa legislature didn't think of every way a manufacturer could get around the law?
When it's a remote prospect, they say they'd go. If you actually had a ship ready to leave next month, you might find it's more like 1 in 100 at those odds.
I would assume that most lightning injuries wouldn''t have any observable effects on personality, because more often than not they're not going to hit the brain. But that could be a wrong impression. Maybe a high voltage jolt to the peripheral nervous system always carries back to the brain along nerve fibers and does damage there.
Slashdot Mirror
Completely wrong. The narrower the targets of surveillance, the more important it is to the investigation that the targets not know they are being targeted because if they know, they can evade a narrowly targeted search. Knowing doesn't help them evade a broad search nearly as much, so it is less apt to disrupt the investigations if the targets of a broad search know they are being watched -- along with everybody else.
How is this modded "insightful?" A person with insight would have realized that the technology to do what you're describing didn't exist then.
We have already reached that state. So now, many many people have completely unnecessary jobs. Nail salons. Fast food. Video game programmers. Telemarketers. Everybody that works at almost every website.
The claim was never that Columbus or anyone was the first PERSON to "discover America." The question is who was the first EUROPEAN to discover it and make it known to Western civilization.
Lief Erikson was the first European to discover it, but he didn't end up making its existence known outside of Iceland and maybe Norway. Then the knowledge got buried.
When Cristorforo Colombo discovered the Americas, they stayed discovered permanently and their existence became common knowledge across Eurasia.
And it's worth noting that while the Native Americans knew of the existence of the Americas, they didn't know of the existence of Eurasia or Africa. If they had built ships and sailed the other way and carried the knowledge back to their homelands and that became part of their cultural knowledge, they'd have been credited by their people with discovering Europe and Asia. As far as we know, they didn't and weren't because a few centuries ago, European sailing know-how was the best in the world and enabled Europeans to sail farther (and return) than anybody else.
How are you going to distinguish the incredibly creative C student from the average non creative C student? And what makes anyone think that college is going to be a good learning environment for someone who has trouble with succeeding in an academic environment?
What? We don't need none of your European Socialism over here, buddy.
Honestly, it's a fact people that promote more worker-friendly policies and the government stepping in to make people less dependent on employers are accused (and yes that's the right word) of supporting European Socialism -- as if that were a BAD thing.
In light of there being a general pattern of women being paid less than men for the same jobs and being passed up for promotion in favor of men, it may be more of a problem for women than for men.
I believe that sale is not complete yet.
That is retaliation for a legally protected act and it's also against the law.
We were talking about the WORKPLACE.
Small companies often have barely enough to pay employees that are present. To be paying for employees on leave is something else, male or female. I recently had to take leave and if it wasn't for my insurance I wouldn't have gotten a dime. At the same time all the tech companies I have worked at treated everyone fairly and had policies about 'poisoned workplace'. Sure there are people who have discriminatory attitude, but in a healthy work place they shouldn't be staying long.
As for pay I don't know enough about the realities and individual cases to know the truth. What I do know is companies will often give you a pay that you negotiated, which may be worse than you are worth. A good company will try give up something fair knowing that unfair salary if it becomes knowledge hurts them more. My current company makes it a fireable offence to talk salary. Other companies I have worked for have a ladder according to position.
Good colleagues come in many shapes, form, sexuality, culture and variations of gended, just as do the bad colleagues. We all screw up sometimes, but we should endeavour to treat each other fairly and with respect.
If your current company that makes it a fireable offense is in the USA, and I assume it is because your use of English seems American, it's breaking US employment law. Only managerial employees can be restricted in how they talk about pay.
But these 716 women who had made it past all that shit and were working in the tech sector found that once you get there, it sucks to be in a job where you're treated poorly because you're a woman, or you feel isolated because everybody else is a guy.
There are exceptions. My sister is a successful electronics engineer. But she works in a big company where she's not the only woman. She might have left the industry too if she had worked her first job in a smaller company where it was all men except her.
Women seem just as capable of sitting at a desk pounding a keyboard as men.
I suppose I could hand-wave up an argument that men's more object oriented approach to language might be more amenable to being adapted to write code compared to womens' more personal-perspective oriented approach (http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.5.1172). But I don't believe it. Male and female brains are both wonderfully adaptive and there are plenty of brilliant women out there. (Leave aside the fact that you only have to be moderately intelligent to write code.) Also, there's no evidence yet that men and women use language differently innately as opposed to having learned different uses of grammar along with their gender roles.
Having not used a Microsoft product since DOS 6 upgrade, this is a reason I can not buy an android phone. However, I have a excellent Jolla phone so not a major problem. http://stevesstats.blogspot.co...
Microsoft should sue Google if they believe they are being hard dun by, and not blackmail.
Why? Google's including Microsoft patented technologies in Android isn't a big deal to Microsoft because Google doesn't sell Android. It's the selling the using and the selling that's protected by patent law. Device manufacturers are selling it, so they need to license it. Google's also a seller, but they're small time in that regard, so less important to sue. And if they're paying their license fees or have cross-licensing agreements, all is well for Microsoft.
There are two ways they might get out from under Microsoft patents:
1. Have those patents invalidated.
2. Develop alternatives to the technologies they're now licensing.
Or even developing the web pages and apps you use on your iPad.
Of course, there's Macs and Linux (for now). But business prefers Windows. You avoid the Apple equipment-provider lock-in but get to use pretty much any software you want.
My company's position (it's not that large, only about a $2.5B company) is that patents are for defensive purposes. They don't seem to really think they could use them to keep the competition from copying one of our products. They're much more concerned that we can't develop products without infringing on somebody's patent and being vulnerable to being sued and they want to have a big collection of patents they could use to negotiate better licensing terms or stave off a suit.
I think it's the latter. While marijuana production and even growing your own is legal under state law, it's still heavily regulated -- but much less so than it was before legalization.
Nobody can do that.
Then he would be acting as an unlicensed reseller on behalf of the company he owns. Also illegal. What makes you imagine that the Iowa legislature didn't think of every way a manufacturer could get around the law?
Regular coffee is too cheap for them?
When it's a remote prospect, they say they'd go. If you actually had a ship ready to leave next month, you might find it's more like 1 in 100 at those odds.
I'm sorry. I didn't know that programming was something that only Americans were allowed to do. We'll just keep it a secret, then.
I would assume that most lightning injuries wouldn''t have any observable effects on personality, because more often than not they're not going to hit the brain. But that could be a wrong impression. Maybe a high voltage jolt to the peripheral nervous system always carries back to the brain along nerve fibers and does damage there.
Who's going to stop them? The federal government?