They were not forced to quit. Read the fucking article you posted.
They CHOSE to quit, rather than face the embarrassment of being fired.
If they wanted to fight this, they should have stuck around, let the company fire them, then bring a court case. The way they've done it only makes it easier for companies to continue this.
Of course, that's a good thing if it gets people to quit smoking. In case you didn't know, smoking kills you! And when you go and fuck your body for 30 years, don't expect my tax dollars to support your medical care, you self-abusive leech.
You never read the back of Popular Science in the 80s, did you? It was FULL of ads like this -- "MAKE MILLIONS RECYCLING SCRAP ELECTRONICS!!!!"
It's not even remotely feasible on even a neighbourhood scale. It's like trying to extract gold from a graveyard -- sure, it's there (in the corpses' teeth), but getting it out is going to be a lot more trouble than it's really worth.
You have to grind up the boards with a giant grinder, then you need either
1) a good way to separate out most of the metal, or 2) a really good fume hood and scrubber to get rid of the toxic gases given off by heating the PCBs to iron-smelter temperatures
Once you've recovered the metal, you then need to separate out the good stuff from the crap. Unfortunately, gold makes great alloys with silver, tin, and other components common in computers. Not real easy to separate it.
Economy of scale plays a HUGE factor here. If you can treat it like a large mining operation, you can make it work, but otherwise, forget about it.
Those four people weren't fired for smoking at home. RTFA you posted.
They quit, and they quit because they would have been fired for failing a company drug test, which has recently been expanded to include the use of cigarettes. (Whether they can tell that you've been smoking versus chewing tobacco or using a nicotine patch or gum is another matter.)
IANAL, but IMO, the company is perfectly justified in telling its employees that nicotine will now be tested for (and used as grounds for dismissal) in routine drug testing. What the employees do in response to that is up to them.
I do think the "nice" thing to do would be to offer smokers the option of simply paying for their own health insurance; after all, why should the company offer a benefit it can't afford to someone who is deliberately fucking up their body?
Actually, that's exactly what OnStar is -- a cell fone with a speakerfone. It just happens to be hooked into some sensors that tell it to fone home in "emergency" mode if certain sensors are triggered. But it has the capability to act as a normal cell fone, too. The minutes/service are just fantastically expensive, so you never hear about it.
(FWIW, Verizon is now offering OnStar coverage piggybacked onto a regular Verizon plan for an extra $10/month.)
The bad thing about RealPlayer is you can't take the content with you on an iPod (or, TTBOMK, any other portable player). Being able to take broadcasts with me on the iPod is a big part of why I like the RadioShark, in spite of its absolutely AWFUL software.
Dude, no offence, but the RadioShark software is probably just as bad, if not worse. I've got one, and the software is absolutely atrocious. I enjoy it in spite of the software, not because of it.
Fortunately, I didn't pay anything for it, because I'd be returning it if I had.
Outlawing them in the name of Section 508 compliance would be well within the bounds of *current* law. They fail the ADA test miserably, and any official governmental Web site (and possibly commercial ones) is *required by law* to be accessible to visually impaired users.
The accessibility provisions of the ADA are rarely enforced on Web sites, but when they are, it's typically very nasty for the site owner. I can't recall a single instance of a challenge that the site owner won.
I agree, but I think the ideal definition of "minimum" and the real-world definition of "minimum" are probably further apart than either one of us would like.
But if the bug in Gecko can be triggered with standards-compliant code (no matter how unrealistic), then the bug needs to be fixed.
Also, the realities of the Internet dictate that a browser needs to render buggy, nasty, ugly HTML "right" in the sense that it should look approximately how its designer intended it to. It's called "quirks mode," and nearly every browser has one.
still can't parse Slash code for shit, but that's just a hurdle to be overcome soon
You do realise that's a problem* with the Gecko rendering engine, not Firefox, right?
*To pedants: yeah, it's really a problem with Slashdot's implementation of Slash code. But at this point, I think it would be easier to fix Gecko than to fix Slashdot.
Take a look at the image search: This too is breach of copyright.
No, it's not. Google doesn't show (or store) the full-res images; they "quote" the images (an image thumbnail is a reasonable analogy to a quote of text), which is an established "fair use," and they use this quote to provide a link to the original source, just as with their text searches.
I haven't used their BT mice, though I am aware (as many people may not be) that there have been a LOT of problems with the driver software, and I suspect this may be in part to blame. The build quality on the wired 3-button version I have is good; while it doesn't have the same weight as the Apple Pro Mouse, it's certainly not falling apart, either.
NB: I wouldn't *buy* anything from those guys. I got my mouse for free.
Seven years? Are you kidding me? There have been two-button mice available on the Mac since the debut of the original Kensington Turbo Mouse trackball in about 1990.
Seven years since Apple singlehandedly created the market for USB peripherals with the introduction of the iMac, maybe, but two-button mice have been available for the Mac for over twice that long.
Ah, to be a newbie with absolutely no sense of history. Must be nice.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, I'll say this one more time.
They were not forced to quit. Read the fucking article you posted.
They CHOSE to quit, rather than face the embarrassment of being fired.
If they wanted to fight this, they should have stuck around, let the company fire them, then bring a court case. The way they've done it only makes it easier for companies to continue this.
Of course, that's a good thing if it gets people to quit smoking. In case you didn't know, smoking kills you! And when you go and fuck your body for 30 years, don't expect my tax dollars to support your medical care, you self-abusive leech.
p
None of those is anywhere near as dangerous as smoking (except being overweight, but people choose to smoke) in the long term.
Not that if there was an easy test available for them, companies wouldn't start testing for those behaviours too...
p
Dude, it's San Fran. A man dressed like that is in trouble. A woman dressed like that would probably be left alone...
p
No.
p
You never read the back of Popular Science in the 80s, did you? It was FULL of ads like this -- "MAKE MILLIONS RECYCLING SCRAP ELECTRONICS!!!!"
It's not even remotely feasible on even a neighbourhood scale. It's like trying to extract gold from a graveyard -- sure, it's there (in the corpses' teeth), but getting it out is going to be a lot more trouble than it's really worth.
You have to grind up the boards with a giant grinder, then you need either
1) a good way to separate out most of the metal, or
2) a really good fume hood and scrubber to get rid of the toxic gases given off by heating the PCBs to iron-smelter temperatures
Once you've recovered the metal, you then need to separate out the good stuff from the crap. Unfortunately, gold makes great alloys with silver, tin, and other components common in computers. Not real easy to separate it.
Economy of scale plays a HUGE factor here. If you can treat it like a large mining operation, you can make it work, but otherwise, forget about it.
p
Those four people weren't fired for smoking at home. RTFA you posted.
They quit, and they quit because they would have been fired for failing a company drug test, which has recently been expanded to include the use of cigarettes. (Whether they can tell that you've been smoking versus chewing tobacco or using a nicotine patch or gum is another matter.)
IANAL, but IMO, the company is perfectly justified in telling its employees that nicotine will now be tested for (and used as grounds for dismissal) in routine drug testing. What the employees do in response to that is up to them.
I do think the "nice" thing to do would be to offer smokers the option of simply paying for their own health insurance; after all, why should the company offer a benefit it can't afford to someone who is deliberately fucking up their body?
p
Actually, that's exactly what OnStar is -- a cell fone with a speakerfone. It just happens to be hooked into some sensors that tell it to fone home in "emergency" mode if certain sensors are triggered. But it has the capability to act as a normal cell fone, too. The minutes/service are just fantastically expensive, so you never hear about it.
(FWIW, Verizon is now offering OnStar coverage piggybacked onto a regular Verizon plan for an extra $10/month.)
p
The bad thing about RealPlayer is you can't take the content with you on an iPod (or, TTBOMK, any other portable player). Being able to take broadcasts with me on the iPod is a big part of why I like the RadioShark, in spite of its absolutely AWFUL software.
p
Dude, no offence, but the RadioShark software is probably just as bad, if not worse. I've got one, and the software is absolutely atrocious. I enjoy it in spite of the software, not because of it.
Fortunately, I didn't pay anything for it, because I'd be returning it if I had.
p
Using salt for this will produce chlorine in addition to oxygen.
Use baking soda or sodium hydroxide instead. Either electrolyte will give off substantially less-dangerous byproducts.
p
Outlawing them in the name of Section 508 compliance would be well within the bounds of *current* law. They fail the ADA test miserably, and any official governmental Web site (and possibly commercial ones) is *required by law* to be accessible to visually impaired users.
The accessibility provisions of the ADA are rarely enforced on Web sites, but when they are, it's typically very nasty for the site owner. I can't recall a single instance of a challenge that the site owner won.
p
I agree, but I think the ideal definition of "minimum" and the real-world definition of "minimum" are probably further apart than either one of us would like.
p
You don't need an extension for that.
Go to the Keyboard control panel. Check the checkbox in the Keyboard tab.
You're done.
p
If Slashdot would fix their HTML, it's highly likely that the fixed HTML would no longer exhibit the bug.
It is *possible* that the fixed HTML would continue to exhibit the bug, which is indeed a bug in Gecko.
But it is very very very unlikely.
p
Well, yes.
But if the bug in Gecko can be triggered with standards-compliant code (no matter how unrealistic), then the bug needs to be fixed.
Also, the realities of the Internet dictate that a browser needs to render buggy, nasty, ugly HTML "right" in the sense that it should look approximately how its designer intended it to. It's called "quirks mode," and nearly every browser has one.
p
1984? No wonder Apple was tops!
p
still can't parse Slash code for shit, but that's just a hurdle to be overcome soon
You do realise that's a problem* with the Gecko rendering engine, not Firefox, right?
*To pedants: yeah, it's really a problem with Slashdot's implementation of Slash code. But at this point, I think it would be easier to fix Gecko than to fix Slashdot.
p
Take a look at the image search: This too is breach of copyright.
No, it's not. Google doesn't show (or store) the full-res images; they "quote" the images (an image thumbnail is a reasonable analogy to a quote of text), which is an established "fair use," and they use this quote to provide a link to the original source, just as with their text searches.
p
1) A *lot*.
2) A *lot*.
3) Almost everyone in the Southeastern U.S.
I would be mildly surprised if Kleenex and Xerox are not the dominant brands in their markets. I know Coke is. Grandparent has a pretty good point.
p
If those officials weren't willing to be bought off, the corruption wouldn't exist.
p
*I'm* a troll?
The morons who wrote the article and think two-button mice have only been available for seven years are the trolls, you fucking ignorant mods.
p
I haven't used their BT mice, though I am aware (as many people may not be) that there have been a LOT of problems with the driver software, and I suspect this may be in part to blame. The build quality on the wired 3-button version I have is good; while it doesn't have the same weight as the Apple Pro Mouse, it's certainly not falling apart, either.
NB: I wouldn't *buy* anything from those guys. I got my mouse for free.
p
Not that I'm endorsing this product in any way, but this is a three-button mouse that doesn't look awful.
p
Right, because until the iMac was introduced, USB was catching on so fast.
Of course, if you had something intelligent to say, you wouldn't have posted as AC.
p
Seven years? Are you kidding me? There have been two-button mice available on the Mac since the debut of the original Kensington Turbo Mouse trackball in about 1990.
Seven years since Apple singlehandedly created the market for USB peripherals with the introduction of the iMac, maybe, but two-button mice have been available for the Mac for over twice that long.
Ah, to be a newbie with absolutely no sense of history. Must be nice.
p