I am getting really sick of surveys and studies that start with the answer, then search for the question. How about doing some unbiased research, then after studying the results, announcing the results and maybe inferring a conclusion or two?
I wish the press just wouldn't cover these kinds of publicity stunts. Next week: Gartner advises world to buy Microsoft because of results of microsoft funded, microsoft staffed antiopensource lab research findings...
"let's overthrow the government, and a good way to do that is if you make your own bombs! Click here!" The statement "let's overthrow the government." might be ok by itself. In this context, it would be on the treasonous side of not ok.
No, it's your choice as an employer to allow a problem employee to remain employeed. The titanic story assumes you can't get off the ship when you notice it's going a little too fast in cold seas at night. You can always divorce the company from the problem employee. And even if it's inconveinient for a few weeks, you can always replace people - no matter how much they think they know, or how high up they are in the company.
Perhaps you can explain how an employer can determine that a potential future employee will not be a source of management problems?
1) Make sure you are 100% certain you have the right person. 2) Check background, references, and use testing tools for skills and personality. (use HR professional if you don't know how to do these things legally) 3) If someone is a management problem or you are saying, "this person will work out with a little work" in the first 90 days, let them go.
I try my hardest to find self-managing people. When I do, I fight tooth and nail to keep and reward them. When a joker gets on to the team, we get rid of them in a hurry. I owe it to the people who work hard.
What exactly is the problem, then? If they use it for making sure that kids aren't being screwed out of an education by the system, there isn't a problem. Something tells me they'll find a way to abuse this, though.
I want a feature that prevents my password from being disclosed after my second 60 day sentence for contempt of court for not disclosing the passphrase for the secure IDE...
management has the right to set rules about what is not acceptable behaviour.
Of that, there is little doubt. I wonder though what the value is of treating 20-70 year old adults like children is. Moral of the story: hire people you don't have to manage, then you don't have to deal with this. And people will use tools to be more effective, not to waste on the clock time.
I always recommend having the sales prevention department run your marketing program. It's a lot like having accounting handle merchandising or sales run R&D...
Copy protection or "DRM" is nothing new. The software industry tried it in the 80s with different floppy based tricks. The whole idea died when:
* The pundits started trashing the concepte because it really, really sucked when you couldn't re-install Lotus 1-2-3 which cost $295 (that's about 595 in today's $). Now were talkin a $20 CD.
* Central Point Software made a killing on a product called Coppy II PC which would basically autohack copy protected stuff ranging from dBase to Lotus 1-2-3 to Apache and Broderbund's games.
* Companies like Borland would steal market share from the big players by highlighting their stuff wasn't copy protected and had a "paperback" license where you could install on as many machines as you want, but only user one installation.
* Software publishers did a cost-benefit analysis and realized that they would loose 3-5% in sales and pick up 5-10% in profit margin by not licensing copy protection.
* It took a constitutional crisis to get rid of punch card ballots. Noone cared until the direction of our country was in question. They still don't care enough in most states to pay to fix the problem.
* Voter turnout is typically less than 50% in most elections.
I'm just trying to "even the playing field", you attacked democrats and defended republicans, All I did is point out some differences in the tendencies between parties. Unfortunately, until there's a need for the extremes to come togather, we're going to get the worst kind of partisan politics for a while. I'm not real happy with either party right now.
I'm glad you play an active part in your child(ren)'s education, we need more people to do that. Next time, before requesting that we require better teachers, request that we require better parents. I used to think this was the solution. That position doesn't recognize the brutal fact of reality: the way children are raised has changed.
* Both parents work. Like it or not, parents are outsourcing raising their kids to daycare/preschools, then to elementary, middle and high schools. Most kids are home from 5:30PM-7:00AM. When I was a kid, most kids were home from 3:30PM-8:00AM. That's about 400 hours per year more time with one or more parents, or 10 work weeks (not accounting for the increase in number of school days).
* Single parent families. Most single parents try *very* hard. But it's the same time problem as above, compounded by lack of 50% of the parenting equation. (In some cases, one parent is far better than one good/one abusive)
Schools really are becoming parenting solutions for busy families (tm). Our educators are equipped horribly for this role. Until recently, I would hear teachers lament parenting as the problem. Now I'm starting to see some recognition that the teaching profession and the role of schools is changing.
BTW - Public schools especially struggle with this new role because they are can't address a plethora of issues without facing lawsuits that parents *have to* address with their children. Privatization (vouchers and the like) may be the *only* solution to this problem as the courts have made parenting way to risky for public schools. In other words, they really can't be good at what they need to be good at to succeed.
I AM NOT A DEMOCRAT, NOR AM I A REPUBLICAN Just a question: then why are you spending your effort defending Democrats and attacking Republicans in your post?
Any teacher (public or private) will tell you that enforced standards are a terrible thing
Should we be surprised by this? Most teachers have a lot to loose if they held accountable for their performance, because on average, schools are performing horribly. Incidentally, I have been very near to schools - I have children and I'm paying quite a bit of money (plus my property tax contribution to the local public schools even though my kids don't use them) to put my kids in a school that is accountable. If my kids don't learn, I take my money elsewhere.
" GOP is pro-rich, pro-big corporations, and pro-personal interest." I think this is a misconception. On issues of commerce, economics, and foreign policy there is exactly doodly-squat difference between Democrats and Republicans. On intellectual property, ALL OF THEM SUCK! NONE OF THEM GET IT! Say what you will, but if a Democrat was president there would have been a war in Iraq. Wars are started years before the shooting starts, economic malaise is paid for four to eight years before the recession.
There are substantial differences between the parties on the following issues:
* Social welfare and entitlements: Republicans oppose, Democrats like. This is why Republicans come across as meanies. * Personal Rights: Democrats generally drive erosion of rights, such as the right to keep and bear arms, the right to petition the government, free speech (anti-protest laws), Democrats were the driving force behind Jim Crow... etc... Republicans really aren't that much better in this area... But they did free the slaves, pushed ADA, etc... * Education: Democrats = massive spending on public education with no accountability, Republicans = vouchers, privatization and enforced performance standards for schools. * Taxation: Democrat governments generally equal tax increases, Republicans generally hold the line on tax rates or lower them.
Funny thing is that good policy is usually found between the extremes and our system is wonderful at causing compromise.
People, copyrights exist to control copying. Like it or not, just because you buy a CD, that doesn't make you the owner of the song, and fair use doesn't allow for wholesale copying of songs or albums or whatever.
Cringly's idea is really bad. Instead of trying to find loopholes, let's get to the three issues that matter with RIAA:
* Because of the degree of control over distribution, competition in the music industry, at least as far as price goes don't exist. * Unfair contracts to artists. * There's no incentive for innovation or new material for derivative work because old stuff doesn't ever move to the public domain.
The Bill of Rights generally limits the power of Government.
Statutes that outlaw theft, extortion, blackmail, illegal or forced entry and tresspass generally limit the ability of an organization like RIAA to do what they do. Here's the kicker, though: if they get the evidence, it may be allowed in court even if it were attained through illegal means.
If we allow the media to go the way we allowed civilian airliner manufacturing to go, we'll have one manufacturere in about ten years in the US. Competition is essential for a free market to work. When you see price gouging and the like it isn't it's a lot like a system crash due to bad sysadmin work. The system is only as good as the maintainer.
Good work congress. now do the same yeoman's job on ip laws and turn the clock back to say 1780.
We need to fight fire with fire at this point. Please as you speak, write or post about the SCO situation use the following terms. They have stronger meaning, and are "stickier" ideas - that is they are more likely to be reproduced:
* Use the SCO scam to refer to the situation and use extortion letter to refer to correspondence for SCO to a company.
* always use unproven allegation and unsubstantiated claim before the mentioning copyright.
* Describe SCO's letter: a letter that demands payment for a product I simply don't use. or this letter is asking me to pay a lot of money, speculating that they might win a lawsuit one day and then come after me. or this letter demands payment without any basis at all!
* Be quick to point out that Linux was not written by IBM, it was written by individual programmers all over the world.
* Point out that no industry group, supports SCO's unsubstantiated claims.
* On SCO's motivation: SCO is failing and is desperate to make money by any means. And, SCO's core product which is being replaced by a more cost-effective solution Finally: SCO is attemting to hijack Linux because their core product can't compete.
Finally, if you get a letter from SCO, send a copy and a cover letter the situation to your state's attorney general and secretary of state. One state AG or SecState has the budget, resources and clout to pull the plug on the SCO Copyright Scam nationally. Believe me, SCO is not the Tobacco Industry...
actually i dont think america has any particular agency like the ACCC. Actually, there are two places to go:
* Your state's secretary of state. * Your state's attorney general
Both of these officers typically have powers that matter. State has control of the registration of businesses to do business and is usually responsible for securities fraud investigation. The AG has a more traditional "protect the citizens" role. They also have big budgets.
Slashdot Mirror
I am getting really sick of surveys and studies that start with the answer, then search for the question. How about doing some unbiased research, then after studying the results, announcing the results and maybe inferring a conclusion or two?
I wish the press just wouldn't cover these kinds of publicity stunts. Next week: Gartner advises world to buy Microsoft because of results of microsoft funded, microsoft staffed antiopensource lab research findings...
"let's overthrow the government, and a good way to do that is if you make your own bombs! Click here!"
The statement "let's overthrow the government." might be ok by itself. In this context, it would be on the treasonous side of not ok.
No, it's your choice as an employer to allow a problem employee to remain employeed. The titanic story assumes you can't get off the ship when you notice it's going a little too fast in cold seas at night. You can always divorce the company from the problem employee. And even if it's inconveinient for a few weeks, you can always replace people - no matter how much they think they know, or how high up they are in the company.
Perhaps you can explain how an employer can determine that a potential future employee will not be a source of management problems?
1) Make sure you are 100% certain you have the right person.
2) Check background, references, and use testing tools for skills and personality. (use HR professional if you don't know how to do these things legally)
3) If someone is a management problem or you are saying, "this person will work out with a little work" in the first 90 days, let them go.
I try my hardest to find self-managing people. When I do, I fight tooth and nail to keep and reward them. When a joker gets on to the team, we get rid of them in a hurry. I owe it to the people who work hard.
What exactly is the problem, then?
If they use it for making sure that kids aren't being screwed out of an education by the system, there isn't a problem. Something tells me they'll find a way to abuse this, though.
I want a feature that prevents my password from being disclosed after my second 60 day sentence for contempt of court for not disclosing the passphrase for the secure IDE...
management has the right to set rules about what is not acceptable behaviour.
Of that, there is little doubt. I wonder though what the value is of treating 20-70 year old adults like children is. Moral of the story: hire people you don't have to manage, then you don't have to deal with this. And people will use tools to be more effective, not to waste on the clock time.
management has made this clear to all employees, then somebody who willfully flouts the rules deserves to be sacked.
Is thinking prohibitied on the job, too?
the legal team is now the marketing team
I always recommend having the sales prevention department run your marketing program. It's a lot like having accounting handle merchandising or sales run R&D...
Copy protection or "DRM" is nothing new. The software industry tried it in the 80s with different floppy based tricks. The whole idea died when:
* The pundits started trashing the concepte because it really, really sucked when you couldn't re-install Lotus 1-2-3 which cost $295 (that's about 595 in today's $). Now were talkin a $20 CD.
* Central Point Software made a killing on a product called Coppy II PC which would basically autohack copy protected stuff ranging from dBase to Lotus 1-2-3 to Apache and Broderbund's games.
* Companies like Borland would steal market share from the big players by highlighting their stuff wasn't copy protected and had a "paperback" license where you could install on as many machines as you want, but only user one installation.
* Software publishers did a cost-benefit analysis and realized that they would loose 3-5% in sales and pick up 5-10% in profit margin by not licensing copy protection.
Consumers want stuff they can use.
* It took a constitutional crisis to get rid of punch card ballots. Noone cared until the direction of our country was in question. They still don't care enough in most states to pay to fix the problem.
* Voter turnout is typically less than 50% in most elections.
* Accountability is a boring concept.
WAY OFF TOPIC POST FOLLOWS:
I'm just trying to "even the playing field", you attacked democrats and defended republicans,
All I did is point out some differences in the tendencies between parties. Unfortunately, until there's a need for the extremes to come togather, we're going to get the worst kind of partisan politics for a while. I'm not real happy with either party right now.
I'm glad you play an active part in your child(ren)'s education, we need more people to do that. Next time, before requesting that we require better teachers, request that we require better parents.
I used to think this was the solution. That position doesn't recognize the brutal fact of reality: the way children are raised has changed.
* Both parents work. Like it or not, parents are outsourcing raising their kids to daycare/preschools, then to elementary, middle and high schools. Most kids are home from 5:30PM-7:00AM. When I was a kid, most kids were home from 3:30PM-8:00AM. That's about 400 hours per year more time with one or more parents, or 10 work weeks (not accounting for the increase in number of school days).
* Single parent families. Most single parents try *very* hard. But it's the same time problem as above, compounded by lack of 50% of the parenting equation. (In some cases, one parent is far better than one good/one abusive)
Schools really are becoming parenting solutions for busy families (tm). Our educators are equipped horribly for this role. Until recently, I would hear teachers lament parenting as the problem. Now I'm starting to see some recognition that the teaching profession and the role of schools is changing.
BTW - Public schools especially struggle with this new role because they are can't address a plethora of issues without facing lawsuits that parents *have to* address with their children. Privatization (vouchers and the like) may be the *only* solution to this problem as the courts have made parenting way to risky for public schools. In other words, they really can't be good at what they need to be good at to succeed.
$G
I AM NOT A DEMOCRAT, NOR AM I A REPUBLICAN
Just a question: then why are you spending your effort defending Democrats and attacking Republicans in your post?
Any teacher (public or private) will tell you that enforced standards are a terrible thing
Should we be surprised by this?
Most teachers have a lot to loose if they held accountable for their performance, because on average, schools are performing horribly. Incidentally, I have been very near to schools - I have children and I'm paying quite a bit of money (plus my property tax contribution to the local public schools even though my kids don't use them) to put my kids in a school that is accountable. If my kids don't learn, I take my money elsewhere.
" GOP is pro-rich, pro-big corporations, and pro-personal interest."
I think this is a misconception. On issues of commerce, economics, and foreign policy there is exactly doodly-squat difference between Democrats and Republicans. On intellectual property, ALL OF THEM SUCK! NONE OF THEM GET IT! Say what you will, but if a Democrat was president there would have been a war in Iraq. Wars are started years before the shooting starts, economic malaise is paid for four to eight years before the recession.
There are substantial differences between the parties on the following issues:
* Social welfare and entitlements: Republicans oppose, Democrats like. This is why Republicans come across as meanies.
* Personal Rights: Democrats generally drive erosion of rights, such as the right to keep and bear arms, the right to petition the government, free speech (anti-protest laws), Democrats were the driving force behind Jim Crow... etc... Republicans really aren't that much better in this area... But they did free the slaves, pushed ADA, etc...
* Education: Democrats = massive spending on public education with no accountability, Republicans = vouchers, privatization and enforced performance standards for schools.
* Taxation: Democrat governments generally equal tax increases, Republicans generally hold the line on tax rates or lower them.
Funny thing is that good policy is usually found between the extremes and our system is wonderful at causing compromise.
The way I was taught is this:
Preponderance of the Evidence = 51%
Beyond reasonable doubt = 99 44/100% certain
Actually this is different. If you dl from Cringly's service, a new copy is created. CleanFilms actually buys, edits then rents. It does not copy.
People, copyrights exist to control copying. Like it or not, just because you buy a CD, that doesn't make you the owner of the song, and fair use doesn't allow for wholesale copying of songs or albums or whatever.
Cringly's idea is really bad. Instead of trying to find loopholes, let's get to the three issues that matter with RIAA:
* Because of the degree of control over distribution, competition in the music industry, at least as far as price goes don't exist.
* Unfair contracts to artists.
* There's no incentive for innovation or new material for derivative work because old stuff doesn't ever move to the public domain.
The Bill of Rights generally limits the power of Government.
Statutes that outlaw theft, extortion, blackmail, illegal or forced entry and tresspass generally limit the ability of an organization like RIAA to do what they do. Here's the kicker, though: if they get the evidence, it may be allowed in court even if it were attained through illegal means.
If we allow the media to go the way we allowed civilian airliner manufacturing to go, we'll have one manufacturere in about ten years in the US. Competition is essential for a free market to work. When you see price gouging and the like it isn't it's a lot like a system crash due to bad sysadmin work. The system is only as good as the maintainer.
Good work congress. now do the same yeoman's job on ip laws and turn the clock back to say 1780.
Actually, RIAA exists to ensure their members make a profit. By their client's recent financial performance, RIAA sucks at their rasion d'etre.
$G
Don't forget the Secretary of State as SCO may be balooning their stock value with false statements.
We need to fight fire with fire at this point. Please as you speak, write or post about the SCO situation use the following terms. They have stronger meaning, and are "stickier" ideas - that is they are more likely to be reproduced:
* Use the SCO scam to refer to the situation and use extortion letter to refer to correspondence for SCO to a company.
* always use unproven allegation and unsubstantiated claim before the mentioning copyright.
* Describe SCO's letter: a letter that demands payment for a product I simply don't use. or this letter is asking me to pay a lot of money, speculating that they might win a lawsuit one day and then come after me. or this letter demands payment without any basis at all!
* Be quick to point out that Linux was not written by IBM, it was written by individual programmers all over the world.
* Point out that no industry group, supports SCO's unsubstantiated claims.
* On SCO's motivation: SCO is failing and is desperate to make money by any means. And, SCO's core product which is being replaced by a more cost-effective solution Finally: SCO is attemting to hijack Linux because their core product can't compete.
Finally, if you get a letter from SCO, send a copy and a cover letter the situation to your state's attorney general and secretary of state. One state AG or SecState has the budget, resources and clout to pull the plug on the SCO Copyright Scam nationally. Believe me, SCO is not the Tobacco Industry...
actually i dont think america has any particular agency like the ACCC.
Actually, there are two places to go:
* Your state's secretary of state.
* Your state's attorney general
Both of these officers typically have powers that matter. State has control of the registration of businesses to do business and is usually responsible for securities fraud investigation. The AG has a more traditional "protect the citizens" role. They also have big budgets.
I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that the concept of "owning" ideas is simply not in the interest of humanity.
Um... expression doesn't involve bamboozling a kid into doing some pretty sick stuff.
I think you are confusing the print/distribution of depictions of a criminal act with expression.