He wasn't blowing a whistle, he was making conversation.
As an employee, he's required to follow the organization's policies, one of which is that releases of information go through information-release channels, at least for approval.
If he'd asked for approval, and been denied, but decided it was an ethical problem that could only be resolved by releasing the info anyway, he might be protected by whistleblower laws. If merely applying for approval might have compromised his safety or rights, he might be protected by whistleblower laws.
Neither was the case here. He just yapped without checking.
Which is just sloppy corporate citizenry.
Rule 1: if you don't want to follow rule 2, stop reading the job application now.
>I can't imagine how terrible being in his situation would be, sounds worse than jail.
Possibly, but that "situation" PLUS jail would certainly be worse than jail, and is the only appropriate action for the rest of us to take regarding his case.
The child's other parent could help us by beating this fucking idiot with a baseball bat. That's up to him/her.
Given that the essential problem is that "taste" is a fairly unscientific word, "other physicochemical effect" pretty much fits in.
We do most "tasting" with our olfactory system, not our tongues.
Clearly these guys are saying, specifically, the tongue can detect fat.
It's unquestioned that anyone can "taste" fat using their entire physiochemical food-analysis system, if they aren't so enmired in the fast-food culture that they don't know what something without fat tastes like.
But the question this raises is, can people tell fake fat from real fat? Are gummy fillers never going to be right until someone finds a way to fake-out these taste receptors?
Those were indeed the days where compatibility was king. You either had all-Microsoft or all-Apple. Accomodating anyone on the other platform was an efficiency sink akin to having a methane-breathing alien working in the office.
But MS-DOS users wanted mice and icons and cursors and popups and other stuff they saw those Apple users getting away with.
So the only choice for Microsoft-tethered offices was to get Windows. And that didn't really happen until Windows 3.1, when Microsoft somehow convinced us that it wasn't-broken enough to be productive. I don't remember the features they fixed/added/removed vs. 3.0. I'm sure someone here can help us.
And unless I RFA'd wrongly, they had to map the SPARC to an FPGA in VHDL so they could be sure their assumptions about multipliers being the critical path would remain correct.
Because if their glitching of the power supply is inducing bit-flip errors in anything other than the multiplier, they're probably going to crash the core, and they won't get the thousands of samples they need to reach 50% probability of pwning the private key in polynomial time.
I.e., it is vanishingly unlikely that you are going to be able to pull this off by putting a variac on your RSA-chipped Commodore 64.
Extortion isn't about physical threats, it's about entitlement to the money for doing or not doing the act.
If you commit a crime, and I say "pay me or I'll call the cops," and you pay me (actually getting the money is necessary here), then I have committed extortion.
I'm not entitled to the money, so I'm extorting you. No physical threat required.
Microsoft, however, owns the patents and is entitled to the money, so when it says "pay me or I'll tell the courts you're using my patents", it's perfectly legal, provided the amount they demand is reasonably fair.
Not very moral or ethical, given that they probably shouldn't own the patents, but money doesn't give a flying fuck about moral or ethical, it makes happen whatever is possible.
No, he's saying that since nobody ever sets the field it's of limited current use. It can be replaced by a single bit which, when set to 1, would invoke processing of another version field. But his argument is begging the question, as the field is there clearly to allow for more than one version, so the designers had prescience in that regard. He's saying they shouldn't have bothered. But if they hadn't, he'd probably be asking what happens if someone wants to use a different version.
If they had used a single bit to indicate a version-field extension was present, he would have had nothing to complain about, but since nobody designs packet headers that way, it's almost unthinkable that anyone would have done it that way in the first place.
Most of his objections are correct in detail, but pointless in gross. It's clear to anyone watching that the inner workings of file formats are not of economic interest to the end user. They are only too happy to download files in a dozen formats, totally ignorant of these petty inefficiencies, but getting furious when the player refuses to render them.
So everyone should just shut up and implement the ogg decoder we have, along with every other decoder necessary to read every file format in existence, because to do otherwise ranks you with the weak, lame, and lazy.
National icons that actually belong to the public are a gray area. Can the government prevent the public (corporations) from using images of public property? That'd be a question.
Can the owner of a copyright of an object whose corpus is public property and displayed in public enforce his copyright? That isn't gray in the slightest. Protecting individuals from government theft is one of the reasons for all law. He owns the copyright, and the government and the public can't just steal it from him. There's zero justification for a claim of eminent domain, here, as there's no compelling public need for the property. He wins. No question at all.
1. Not if his contract said he keeps the copyright.
2. Nice. Commit assault and battery just because you don't like how the law treated you. That makes you one of those...whatchamacallits...terrists.
3. Which 500? The 500 with poor educations who would agree this guy doesn't deserve the protections of the rule of law, or the 500 who actually understand the Constitution?
That's what happens when you sign on that dotted line. Your rights are suspended until you are released from service, which is not the same thing as being released from active duty, or reserve duty.
Yes, it's an enormous hypocrisy that the people who fight for the Constitution are not protected by it.
I've been voting to get us to where we can fix that ever since I got out of the Army, myself.
You might want to check with your employer, as well. I'm betting that buried in the fine print of your employment agreement is a statement that they own the IP rights to everything you create while you earn a paycheck from them. Not just at work, but 24/7/365.
Never trust a corporation. I for one applaud this guy for keeping something he created. He's also keeping it from being diluted or perverted without his creative input.
One of the amplifiers of value in collections is completeness.
So once you start down the road of being a collector, and the greed factor kicks in, you have to have the completeness points or you're not winning the game.
"improperly" implies that something that was actually wrong under the law occurred.
If you don't like "erronneously," then how about "unwisely" or "negligently" or "incompetently".
Or how about my favorite: "legally".
The government struck its bargain and the parties agreed. Screwing this guy out of his property just because internet gadflies enjoy misreading sensationalist headlines isn't the way to rectify the situation.
If the USPS wants to sell the stamp, they should make the guy a good-faith offer for a license to the image they stole.
No, if the contract he signed says he keeps the copyright, then he keeps the copyright, no matter who owns the work or where it is displayed.
Commemorating people by stealing artwork is not a free pass around the law.
If they want to use pictures of his statue in their commemoration, they will have to (a) get his permission and (b) probably pay him for usage rights for the images.
given that the 7 TeV kinetic energy of a proton in the LHC is about the same as a that of mosquito in a dive, i'm not sure that a collision in the LHC can be heard over the hum from the UPS under the receptionist's desk, much less incite plate-tectonic motion
Newton did invent gravity. Or rather, what is now known as the Classical Model of Gravity.
You think inventors do anything other than discover things that were there anyway?
Like the interaction of high-velocity electrons with metallic masses (X-rays) or that a long thing coupled to a short thing placed on a stable thing can move big things with small input forces (the lever) or that you can change a piece of information to give special privileged access status to a person who doesn't normally have that level of privilege (the setuid bit)?
I'll agree Linus didn't invent the Unix structural and behavioral requirements that he tried to follow when he invented Linux, but he did invent a new way to solve the problem of following them, and named it after himself, unlike Newton, who apparently never took Marketing Sarcasm 101 and had to wait a few hundred years for some sycophants standing on his shoulders to back-port the SI (metric) unit of force to him.
A variant, yes, but without the high energy cost of ionizing the fuel during thrusting. Also not much need for accelerating structures. if the article is accurate, the reaction mass is pre-ionized and locked into the structure. When you need thrust you pretty much just release it and it pushes you away. Neat trick, if the article is accurate.
On the other hand, a 20-digit randomized Product Key for registering your purchase is no big deal.
Print the password on the box and make it mandatory to enter it before use. Users will get the clue and online h4xx0rs won't have a backdoor into 99% of links.
Slashdot Mirror
He wasn't blowing a whistle, he was making conversation.
As an employee, he's required to follow the organization's policies, one of which is that releases of information go through information-release channels, at least for approval.
If he'd asked for approval, and been denied, but decided it was an ethical problem that could only be resolved by releasing the info anyway, he might be protected by whistleblower laws. If merely applying for approval might have compromised his safety or rights, he might be protected by whistleblower laws.
Neither was the case here. He just yapped without checking.
Which is just sloppy corporate citizenry.
Rule 1: if you don't want to follow rule 2, stop reading the job application now.
>I can't imagine how terrible being in his situation would be, sounds worse than jail.
Possibly, but that "situation" PLUS jail would certainly be worse than jail, and is the only appropriate action for the rest of us to take regarding his case.
The child's other parent could help us by beating this fucking idiot with a baseball bat. That's up to him/her.
Since BMI isn't proportional to body composition, I say you're full of McNuggets.
Given that the essential problem is that "taste" is a fairly unscientific word, "other physicochemical effect" pretty much fits in.
We do most "tasting" with our olfactory system, not our tongues.
Clearly these guys are saying, specifically, the tongue can detect fat.
It's unquestioned that anyone can "taste" fat using their entire physiochemical food-analysis system, if they aren't so enmired in the fast-food culture that they don't know what something without fat tastes like.
But the question this raises is, can people tell fake fat from real fat? Are gummy fillers never going to be right until someone finds a way to fake-out these taste receptors?
The scientists, or their 5 peer-reviewers on the panel assembled by the publisher when it received their submission.
(We can now devolve into a harangue on the talents and diligence of the average peer reviewer...)
> Our brain needs fat to fuel itself
Wrong. Your brain runs on carbohydrates, not fat.
Now put down the McNuggets and back away slowly.
Those were indeed the days where compatibility was king. You either had all-Microsoft or all-Apple. Accomodating anyone on the other platform was an efficiency sink akin to having a methane-breathing alien working in the office.
But MS-DOS users wanted mice and icons and cursors and popups and other stuff they saw those Apple users getting away with.
So the only choice for Microsoft-tethered offices was to get Windows. And that didn't really happen until Windows 3.1, when Microsoft somehow convinced us that it wasn't-broken enough to be productive. I don't remember the features they fixed/added/removed vs. 3.0. I'm sure someone here can help us.
And unless I RFA'd wrongly, they had to map the SPARC to an FPGA in VHDL so they could be sure their assumptions about multipliers being the critical path would remain correct.
Because if their glitching of the power supply is inducing bit-flip errors in anything other than the multiplier, they're probably going to crash the core, and they won't get the thousands of samples they need to reach 50% probability of pwning the private key in polynomial time.
I.e., it is vanishingly unlikely that you are going to be able to pull this off by putting a variac on your RSA-chipped Commodore 64.
Extortion isn't about physical threats, it's about entitlement to the money for doing or not doing the act.
If you commit a crime, and I say "pay me or I'll call the cops," and you pay me (actually getting the money is necessary here), then I have committed extortion.
I'm not entitled to the money, so I'm extorting you. No physical threat required.
Microsoft, however, owns the patents and is entitled to the money, so when it says "pay me or I'll tell the courts you're using my patents", it's perfectly legal, provided the amount they demand is reasonably fair.
Not very moral or ethical, given that they probably shouldn't own the patents, but money doesn't give a flying fuck about moral or ethical, it makes happen whatever is possible.
No, he's saying that since nobody ever sets the field it's of limited current use. It can be replaced by a single bit which, when set to 1, would invoke processing of another version field. But his argument is begging the question, as the field is there clearly to allow for more than one version, so the designers had prescience in that regard. He's saying they shouldn't have bothered. But if they hadn't, he'd probably be asking what happens if someone wants to use a different version.
If they had used a single bit to indicate a version-field extension was present, he would have had nothing to complain about, but since nobody designs packet headers that way, it's almost unthinkable that anyone would have done it that way in the first place.
Most of his objections are correct in detail, but pointless in gross. It's clear to anyone watching that the inner workings of file formats are not of economic interest to the end user. They are only too happy to download files in a dozen formats, totally ignorant of these petty inefficiencies, but getting furious when the player refuses to render them.
So everyone should just shut up and implement the ogg decoder we have, along with every other decoder necessary to read every file format in existence, because to do otherwise ranks you with the weak, lame, and lazy.
Eff the quakes.
I want to know where all the quisps went.
National icons that actually belong to the public are a gray area. Can the government prevent the public (corporations) from using images of public property? That'd be a question.
Can the owner of a copyright of an object whose corpus is public property and displayed in public enforce his copyright? That isn't gray in the slightest. Protecting individuals from government theft is one of the reasons for all law. He owns the copyright, and the government and the public can't just steal it from him. There's zero justification for a claim of eminent domain, here, as there's no compelling public need for the property. He wins. No question at all.
1. Not if his contract said he keeps the copyright.
2. Nice. Commit assault and battery just because you don't like how the law treated you. That makes you one of those...whatchamacallits...terrists.
3. Which 500? The 500 with poor educations who would agree this guy doesn't deserve the protections of the rule of law, or the 500 who actually understand the Constitution?
They signed away their rights when they enlisted.
No, seriously.
That's what happens when you sign on that dotted line. Your rights are suspended until you are released from service, which is not the same thing as being released from active duty, or reserve duty.
Yes, it's an enormous hypocrisy that the people who fight for the Constitution are not protected by it.
I've been voting to get us to where we can fix that ever since I got out of the Army, myself.
You might want to check with your employer, as well. I'm betting that buried in the fine print of your employment agreement is a statement that they own the IP rights to everything you create while you earn a paycheck from them. Not just at work, but 24/7/365.
Never trust a corporation. I for one applaud this guy for keeping something he created. He's also keeping it from being diluted or perverted without his creative input.
One of the amplifiers of value in collections is completeness.
So once you start down the road of being a collector, and the greed factor kicks in, you have to have the completeness points or you're not winning the game.
The magnitude of it, though...5.4 million?
"improperly" implies that something that was actually wrong under the law occurred.
If you don't like "erronneously," then how about "unwisely" or "negligently" or "incompetently".
Or how about my favorite: "legally".
The government struck its bargain and the parties agreed. Screwing this guy out of his property just because internet gadflies enjoy misreading sensationalist headlines isn't the way to rectify the situation.
If the USPS wants to sell the stamp, they should make the guy a good-faith offer for a license to the image they stole.
How does protecting this guy's rights mock their sacrifice?
Your inability to allow the man to own what he owns is what mocks their sacrifice.
He and the government signed a contract, and that contract is binding. If you don't like the terms the government got, you know where to vote.
No, if the contract he signed says he keeps the copyright, then he keeps the copyright, no matter who owns the work or where it is displayed.
Commemorating people by stealing artwork is not a free pass around the law.
If they want to use pictures of his statue in their commemoration, they will have to (a) get his permission and (b) probably pay him for usage rights for the images.
They're kosher, as long as you kill and cook the bird properly.
The average number of 7.0+ quakes per year since year 1900 AD is 17.
The number of 7.0 quakes in 2009 was 17. The number in 2008 was 12.
There were 18 in 2007, and 4 of those were 8.0+ quakes.
given that the 7 TeV kinetic energy of a proton in the LHC is about the same as a that of mosquito in a dive, i'm not sure that a collision in the LHC can be heard over the hum from the UPS under the receptionist's desk, much less incite plate-tectonic motion
> Sounds like this is the second coming of Einstein.
He's gone around the universe already?
Newton did invent gravity. Or rather, what is now known as the Classical Model of Gravity.
You think inventors do anything other than discover things that were there anyway?
Like the interaction of high-velocity electrons with metallic masses (X-rays) or that a long thing coupled to a short thing placed on a stable thing can move big things with small input forces (the lever) or that you can change a piece of information to give special privileged access status to a person who doesn't normally have that level of privilege (the setuid bit)?
I'll agree Linus didn't invent the Unix structural and behavioral requirements that he tried to follow when he invented Linux, but he did invent a new way to solve the problem of following them, and named it after himself, unlike Newton, who apparently never took Marketing Sarcasm 101 and had to wait a few hundred years for some sycophants standing on his shoulders to back-port the SI (metric) unit of force to him.
A variant, yes, but without the high energy cost of ionizing the fuel during thrusting. Also not much need for accelerating structures. if the article is accurate, the reaction mass is pre-ionized and locked into the structure. When you need thrust you pretty much just release it and it pushes you away. Neat trick, if the article is accurate.
On the other hand, a 20-digit randomized Product Key for registering your purchase is no big deal.
Print the password on the box and make it mandatory to enter it before use. Users will get the clue and online h4xx0rs won't have a backdoor into 99% of links.