Not illegal at all - my company does it in MA and NH, and DC at the least. You simply have to mark your "week" correctly. Our week for 9/80 starts and ends at "mid-shift" (whatever that is for you, but must be fixed and not change week to week) on Friday. So week 1 starts Monday and ends mid-shift on Friday: 40 hours. Week 2 starts mid-shift that day, ends the next Thursday: 40 hours.
First off, I thought only the US had rampant violent crime? What are they combating in the UK? Less than polite purse-snatchers?
But the main thing I wanted to say bears more consideration for US folks than for UK folks, because of our Constitution and Bill of Rights: If it were even possible to *prevent* crimes from being committed, do we have the right to do so?
What is freedom? When it first started out, our criminal code was pretty much all about actions - actually committing a crime: a murder, a robbery, a rape. However, ever since we've been slowly adding crimes of less than actions: conspiring to commit a crime, planning to commit a crime (even if never actually committed), accomplice after the fact, withholding information, lying to police/FBI. Property and funds can now be seized on just the suspicion of illegal use - without any kind of proof or even a proper legal recourse.
All of which restricts our freedom - and I will go out on a limb here and state that true freedom (such as we are supposed to have in the US) includes the freedom to break the law. Our legal system is there to prosecute and punish offenders - it was not ever designed to prevent offenses from occurring, We live by those laws, we obey those laws because we choose to. For most of us the alternative is bad enough we never seriously consider not obeying, but consider it we can.
To use a car analogy, we have the freedom to speed - I can drive my car 110 mph to get a badly injured person to an emergency room. I can choose to do that. I can take that risk, and if I mess up, I will surely have very bad consequences. But *I* get to make that choice, today. I can face the consequences of my actions freely, prepared to pay the price to save that person's life, because I have the freedom to make that choice - to accept those consequences *I* determine are less than what I have gained.
We can, technology-wise, make it impossible to speed. Governor on the engine paired with GPS. Simple. We can make it impossible for me to speed - to break that law - but only by taking away my freedoms.
Is it really worth it? How many freedoms are we prepared to give up? I'm a law abiding citizen - because I choose to abide by them - not because I am under scrutiny for maybe being willing to break them. Something to think about.
I think the point that sycodon was getting at is that we have an imperfect system, we are fallible as humans, and not every iota of evidence in every case is back and white. Shit happens, some innocents will be wrongly imprisoned.
Do we want it to happen? No! Do we do what we can to try and prevent it? Yes! Do we acknowledge that it will, on occasion, happen anyway? Well, yes.
No. Not it won't. If the corner store has to pay its stockboys double, then the increase needed on each item of low-margin stuff they sell has to go up by the component of the selling price of that low-margin that represents the stockboy's labor for that item. It sure as hell isn't 100%.
Let me give you a car analogy. A 40 foot tractor trailer is shipping your goods across country. You have 10,000 items in there you can sell for $100 each - and it costs $0.40 to ship each one ($4000 total for the truck). Now the shipping price doubles! OMG! What that does that do to your prices? You have to account for another $0.40 for each item.
Increasing rain fall in California would be, at first glance, all plus, no minus. Remember that the eastern side of California is the Rockies - rain comes from the ocean to the west, does not (AFAIK) go north or south from there, and will absolutely stop at the eastern border of California anyway. Sounds like a REAL good reason to build a shit load of wind farms in California - they can use all the rain they can get.
No - not really. It has already been floated around that it would be legally / constitutionally permissible to set the term for copyright to "forever minus 1 day" since technically (and thus legally) it is still a "limited term".
Violates the spirit of the Constitution, but not the letter of it.
This is CYA plain and simple. IF someday this kid goes off the deep end and does something really stupid, and it gets out that there was THIS hint that something was up (even if not illegal) then the school authorities could be sued 10 ways to Sunday. If they bring some bogus charge and nothing comes of it they have successfully passed the buck. "See - we DID SOMETHING back then - so it's not OUR fault [for whatever the kid did later]".
Actually, this turns out not to be the case. At least I've heard about it - there would be bookies near some of the high stakes poker games before they were in casinos. And they would let you "insure" your hand of cards against a huge raise. Like anything, the player loses a bit either way, and the insurer comes out ahead in the long run. Basically a footnote in history now, but it did reportedly exist.
Actually it IS pretty odd. If I were the DoD shopping for cloud services I'd want to be 50%+ of their revenue. Make sure you have them by the short hairs from day 1 - and that they'll jump through any hoops to keep you happy (and them in business).
And a mandatory re-bid every 4 years. Keeps them on their toes staying current.
Whoa there! 300 out of 5000? So 1 in 16? Of ALL priests in PA? And you are like, "no big deal, about the same as in public schools".
If I thought that 1 out of 16 teachers in public schools was raping children I'd be out there with my torch, pitchfork, and noose egging on the mob (or leading them).
Dude - No one is deleting your input here. I read it just now. And I must say that it is posts like this, that (I assume you're being truthful here) tell it like it is, that keep me coming back after all these years. Sorry you had to give up something you enjoyed doing. But no-one will know if no one says anything, so thanks for that.
Idiots. Of course there is - scan the memory of the App on the phone, record the binary. Compile the App from the supplied source code, then load that on the phone. Scan the memory again. Same binary, there's your proof. Different binary, different source. What's so hard about that?
Not trying to troll, but I am genuinely puzzled by this:
"Even aside from the economic considerations, there's really no doubt that current US copyright and patent law is implemented in a fashion that violates the Bill of Rights. The dual rights to ethical government and ethical practice of law can be asserted under the 9th Amendment (rights retained by the people), and the 10th Amendment (rights reserved to the people). Current patent law violates both rights, and current copyright law violates the right to ethical practice of law.
In short, the Constitutional authority of the federal government to promote the useful arts and sciences has been implemented in an illegal fashion."
Can you please explain how you think they are illegally implemented? Or point me somewhere that explains it?
Actually, it IS possible to remove the barriers. You need to plant ringers in both the guard and prisoner group. Then you can have your 'ringer' guard assault the 'ringer' prisoner. That will appear to break the barriers and get you into territory that is not allowed.
Not sure how you keep a lid on the situation from there, but you certainly can make it as real as you want - even down to having only ONE real test subject among 20 guards/prisoners.
Would be a pretty sick study, and could cause some emotional scars depending on how far you push things, but it could be done.
I think he's referring to the now a days common practice of using 2x4 framing, then using particle board or MDF for sheathing. Sheathing used to be 3/4 inch plywood (and often 2x6 for framing). That went down to 1/2 inch plywood (still good). But now the sheathing is particle board, which is crappy material, starts to disintegrate if it ever gets wet, and does not add to the structural integrity (plywood does).
An old well-framed house with 3/4 inch plywood was darn near indestructible (relatively). The new crap I see builders put up everywhere? No.
Note, I am not in construction, so take this with a grain of salt.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, since it is 000, that means it is FALSE
Not illegal at all - my company does it in MA and NH, and DC at the least. You simply have to mark your "week" correctly. Our week for 9/80 starts and ends at "mid-shift" (whatever that is for you, but must be fixed and not change week to week) on Friday. So week 1 starts Monday and ends mid-shift on Friday: 40 hours. Week 2 starts mid-shift that day, ends the next Thursday: 40 hours.
Lawyering at its finest.
First off, I thought only the US had rampant violent crime? What are they combating in the UK? Less than polite purse-snatchers?
But the main thing I wanted to say bears more consideration for US folks than for UK folks, because of our Constitution and Bill of Rights: If it were even possible to *prevent* crimes from being committed, do we have the right to do so?
What is freedom? When it first started out, our criminal code was pretty much all about actions - actually committing a crime: a murder, a robbery, a rape. However, ever since we've been slowly adding crimes of less than actions: conspiring to commit a crime, planning to commit a crime (even if never actually committed), accomplice after the fact, withholding information, lying to police/FBI. Property and funds can now be seized on just the suspicion of illegal use - without any kind of proof or even a proper legal recourse.
All of which restricts our freedom - and I will go out on a limb here and state that true freedom (such as we are supposed to have in the US) includes the freedom to break the law. Our legal system is there to prosecute and punish offenders - it was not ever designed to prevent offenses from occurring, We live by those laws, we obey those laws because we choose to. For most of us the alternative is bad enough we never seriously consider not obeying, but consider it we can.
To use a car analogy, we have the freedom to speed - I can drive my car 110 mph to get a badly injured person to an emergency room. I can choose to do that. I can take that risk, and if I mess up, I will surely have very bad consequences. But *I* get to make that choice, today. I can face the consequences of my actions freely, prepared to pay the price to save that person's life, because I have the freedom to make that choice - to accept those consequences *I* determine are less than what I have gained.
We can, technology-wise, make it impossible to speed. Governor on the engine paired with GPS. Simple. We can make it impossible for me to speed - to break that law - but only by taking away my freedoms.
Is it really worth it? How many freedoms are we prepared to give up? I'm a law abiding citizen - because I choose to abide by them - not because I am under scrutiny for maybe being willing to break them. Something to think about.
I think the point that sycodon was getting at is that we have an imperfect system, we are fallible as humans, and not every iota of evidence in every case is back and white. Shit happens, some innocents will be wrongly imprisoned.
Do we want it to happen? No! Do we do what we can to try and prevent it? Yes! Do we acknowledge that it will, on occasion, happen anyway? Well, yes.
No justification happening here.
Washington?
No. Not it won't. If the corner store has to pay its stockboys double, then the increase needed on each item of low-margin stuff they sell has to go up by the component of the selling price of that low-margin that represents the stockboy's labor for that item. It sure as hell isn't 100%.
Let me give you a car analogy. A 40 foot tractor trailer is shipping your goods across country. You have 10,000 items in there you can sell for $100 each - and it costs $0.40 to ship each one ($4000 total for the truck). Now the shipping price doubles! OMG! What that does that do to your prices? You have to account for another $0.40 for each item.
Not the end of the world.
Increasing rain fall in California would be, at first glance, all plus, no minus. Remember that the eastern side of California is the Rockies - rain comes from the ocean to the west, does not (AFAIK) go north or south from there, and will absolutely stop at the eastern border of California anyway. Sounds like a REAL good reason to build a shit load of wind farms in California - they can use all the rain they can get.
No - not really. It has already been floated around that it would be legally / constitutionally permissible to set the term for copyright to "forever minus 1 day" since technically (and thus legally) it is still a "limited term".
Violates the spirit of the Constitution, but not the letter of it.
Inverting the boolean test has yet another handy use (at least in Java):
if( myString.equals("hello") ) will blow up if myString is NULL
if( helloString.equals(myString) ) will simply return false if myString is NULL
This is CYA plain and simple. IF someday this kid goes off the deep end and does something really stupid, and it gets out that there was THIS hint that something was up (even if not illegal) then the school authorities could be sued 10 ways to Sunday. If they bring some bogus charge and nothing comes of it they have successfully passed the buck. "See - we DID SOMETHING back then - so it's not OUR fault [for whatever the kid did later]".
Just CYA
Actually, this turns out not to be the case. At least I've heard about it - there would be bookies near some of the high stakes poker games before they were in casinos. And they would let you "insure" your hand of cards against a huge raise. Like anything, the player loses a bit either way, and the insurer comes out ahead in the long run. Basically a footnote in history now, but it did reportedly exist.
Actually it IS pretty odd. If I were the DoD shopping for cloud services I'd want to be 50%+ of their revenue. Make sure you have them by the short hairs from day 1 - and that they'll jump through any hoops to keep you happy (and them in business).
And a mandatory re-bid every 4 years. Keeps them on their toes staying current.
You forgot hypergolic and flesh dissolving - like with fuming red nitric acid. Then you've got a party!
Whoa there! 300 out of 5000? So 1 in 16? Of ALL priests in PA? And you are like, "no big deal, about the same as in public schools".
If I thought that 1 out of 16 teachers in public schools was raping children I'd be out there with my torch, pitchfork, and noose egging on the mob (or leading them).
Dude - No one is deleting your input here. I read it just now. And I must say that it is posts like this, that (I assume you're being truthful here) tell it like it is, that keep me coming back after all these years. Sorry you had to give up something you enjoyed doing. But no-one will know if no one says anything, so thanks for that.
No ACID compliance for one.
Idiots. Of course there is - scan the memory of the App on the phone, record the binary. Compile the App from the supplied source code, then load that on the phone. Scan the memory again. Same binary, there's your proof. Different binary, different source. What's so hard about that?
And if *I* were the one to do the hacking..... I'd ... get ALL the points (!!!)
Cue the evil cackling - I think we're on to something here!
Not to worry! When winter comes all the Gorillas will freeze to death.
I hear ya. I read a series a while ago that had the best nickname I've seen for M-16 and its NATO friendly ilk. Barbie Guns.
Not trying to troll, but I am genuinely puzzled by this:
"Even aside from the economic considerations, there's really no doubt that current US copyright and patent law is implemented in a fashion that violates the Bill of Rights. The dual rights to ethical government and ethical practice of law can be asserted under the 9th Amendment (rights retained by the people), and the 10th Amendment (rights reserved to the people). Current patent law violates both rights, and current copyright law violates the right to ethical practice of law.
In short, the Constitutional authority of the federal government to promote the useful arts and sciences has been implemented in an illegal fashion."
Can you please explain how you think they are illegally implemented? Or point me somewhere that explains it?
Your wish has been granted! There are now solar shingles available - just google them.
You're welcome
Actually, it IS possible to remove the barriers. You need to plant ringers in both the guard and prisoner group. Then you can have your 'ringer' guard assault the 'ringer' prisoner. That will appear to break the barriers and get you into territory that is not allowed.
Not sure how you keep a lid on the situation from there, but you certainly can make it as real as you want - even down to having only ONE real test subject among 20 guards/prisoners.
Would be a pretty sick study, and could cause some emotional scars depending on how far you push things, but it could be done.
Of course what Comcast didn't say was "Well, we're not throttling them any LESS either".
I think he's referring to the now a days common practice of using 2x4 framing, then using particle board or MDF for sheathing. Sheathing used to be 3/4 inch plywood (and often 2x6 for framing). That went down to 1/2 inch plywood (still good). But now the sheathing is particle board, which is crappy material, starts to disintegrate if it ever gets wet, and does not add to the structural integrity (plywood does).
An old well-framed house with 3/4 inch plywood was darn near indestructible (relatively). The new crap I see builders put up everywhere? No.
Note, I am not in construction, so take this with a grain of salt.