What happened to this guy's lawsuit?
on
From Bess to Worse
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
In all of these long-winded, mostly pointless posts from "Frequent Slashdot contributor Bennett Haselton" (Gee, making subjective judgements about the content of every page of the entire freaking Internet has an incomplete consensus rate? Ya think?) the only interesting thing was his lawsuit against a woman he went out with to recoup half the cost of his date. Can we get an update on that? My understanding is that the courts have taken a dim view of those cases for as long as disappointed men have been trying to press them.
This blurb SEEMS to clear him of accusations of purposeful contamination and just making up the existence of neutrons.
A New York Times article with more detail suggests they didn't even clear him of that, just of passing off his own work as independent replication. It sounds like no one's interests have been especially well-served here.
You're trying to equate someone who is willing to spend ZERO dollars on something to someone who's willing to spend $20 or even a quarter.
You're missing the point -- the Pirate Bay guys and their halfwit fanboys have invested their lives and selves in paying ZERO dollars for the entertainment industry's products. That's a far higher market value than $20 (OK, at least a bit more than $20), which makes it even sillier when they complain about the quality of the products they steal.
Maybe studios lose money because they're so f'ing out of touch with reality that people are entertaining themselves on their own terms.
Maybe, but the existence of people whose lives, group identity, self-esteem, moronic ethics and sub-moronic economic theories revolve around stealing Hollywood products suggests the movie and music producers are still producing things someone desperately wants.
Regardless, I think the best course would be to absolve motorists of 100% contributory negligence in accidents with pedestrians who are otherwise electronic-gadget engaged while crossing a street or intersection.
Why even do that? If the pedestrian has the right of way, he has the right to wear headphones. If he doesn't, than the accident is his fault, headphones or no.
Anyway, the two groups of people I'd single out as particularly strong Darwin Award candidates are 1) bicyclists who wear headphones and 2) the Bostonians who walk down the street reading books.
As he says, we really should have two different words for the "feeling of security" and "security".
Not a bad point, but it somewhat flies in the face of the idea that Bruce Schneier is an expert on any topic (neurophysiology, today) that remotely pertains to any definition of "security".
While trying to reconcile this 20% with the claim of 49% of attacks by married insiders (short answer: the AC is correct and the 49% is the percent of insiders that were married)...
The two above comments are dead-on. Note that the average age of a new professor in biomedical research is 37 for MDs and 38 for PhDs! You'll be living off ramen until you're 50 -- and universities aren't exactly rolling out the red carpet for 50-year-old new hires.
At the same time, the scientific programming positions the parent mentions would probably be a great fit for you, if you don't mind trading some income for interesting work and a less-regimented pace.
IBM got wind of Intel's announcement and rushed out their own. The end.
I was skeptical that there really were people who saw them and wondered "Wow, engineers in both companies made these discoveries today?", but a look at the Slashdot story shows the first comment (in my display, anyway) asking "Two breakthroughs in one day?" (Score:5, Insightful)
Par value is a non-zero value that the stock needs for regulatory reasons. It's as meaningless as, well, cautionary statements made in a 10K filing. It has nothing to do with how much profit any stockholder has made.
If a large part of the cost of computers in schools is the software and the continual upgrades that come with it, wonder what can be done for schools that already have computers...
Schools get extremely steep discounts, and aren't exactly Gentoo-ish in their upgrades. I doubt if there's a huge amount of money to be saved.
As for OLPC, their distribution scheme (selling hardware only to people with no money, relying on children who have never seen a computer before as software developers) is so bizarre, it's hard to suggest sensible ways to supplement it.
...almost requiring a law officer to have a 'smoking camcorder' in the hands of the accused.
Sorry, but I just arrived from a 15 minute walk between buildings and my brain is frozen. (Which, I believe, is also Canada's fault.) Could someone please make the appropriate Sony battery-related comment?
In all seriousness -- I understand why RPN was advantageous decades ago. But given that nowadays there's no problem carrying enough computer power to handle any problem you might realistically key in, using [whatever normal notation is called], is there any reason to use RPN besides masochism?
I think the point (to the degree that it even makes sense to demand justification of a phrase given completely out of context) is that if government-funded research is required to be published in open access journals, that effectively destroys any other publishers. So the analogy to stem cell research isn't that bad.
There's that, but an earlier step that's also missing in almost all of these questions is -- did you ask anyone before flying off the handle and coming here? In this case, did you go back to the recruiter and ask him what's going on and whether he can untangle it?
I realize this may separate me from some fellow privacy advocates, and some of the things I've done may make them uncomfortable. In one case, I had invited a girl to a charity luncheon where the tickets were $100 apiece, and when she showed up she had "forgotten her checkbook" and needed to borrow the money.
A little basic etiquette here -- you invite her, you pay. Her "forgotten her checkbook" was just a polite way of saying "Hell, no, you cheapskate dork."
I suppose that when you live in a world of "a video of giant penises attacking his wife's avatar/character", suing your date for not paying half isn't that dysfunctional, but still...
I've been waiting for a way to run Linux that managed to simultaneously involve Microsoft, Novell and Wal-Mart! Do you think they can get Lotus Notes into the mix as well?
That gives you a file manager, but kdesktop and kicker don't work properly. (In theory, kdesktop has an option that allows it to run as true root, but it's never worked for me.) Same for the GNOME counterparts.
With kfm, you could start it and basically get the KDE "desktop" in WindowMaker.
p.s. Now if they ever made a real desktop out of WindowMaker, I would be all over it like kraut on brots!
My all-time favorite Unix desktop environment was in the days of KDE 1 when you could run kfm within Window Maker or any other window manager to get desktop icons. Once both KDE and GNOME shifted to a fake "desktop window" on top of the real root, it never works properly anymore. (Note: I know you can change the window manager within KDE or GNOME -- that's the reverse of what I want.)
Money has this curious way of interfering with most people's thoughts and consciences.
Sure, but Wikipedia doesn't require saintliness from its contributors. (Not that obsessives and kooks are necessarily more saintly than employees, anyway.) As long as the guy is technically sound and is being paid to make technically sound edits, he seems like the least of Wikipedia's problems. If there are problems with his edits, he and the submitter can slug it out like any other arguing contributors do.
However, in true conspiracy theory form, this is exactly what he would claim, suggest, and appear if he really were some goon born and raised in Redmond. He probably isn't. But why should I trust him any more than anyone else?
I'm proceeding on the assumption that O'Reilly doesn't just hand out blogs on its site to any random person Microsoft sent over -- if they do, that's a bigger story than the one we have here. Anyway, three years of posting technical pieces on XML folowed by publically disclosing your new connection to Microsoft seems like a rather inefficient use of conspiracy resources.
Slashdot Mirror
In all of these long-winded, mostly pointless posts from "Frequent Slashdot contributor Bennett Haselton" (Gee, making subjective judgements about the content of every page of the entire freaking Internet has an incomplete consensus rate? Ya think?) the only interesting thing was his lawsuit against a woman he went out with to recoup half the cost of his date. Can we get an update on that? My understanding is that the courts have taken a dim view of those cases for as long as disappointed men have been trying to press them.
A New York Times article with more detail suggests they didn't even clear him of that, just of passing off his own work as independent replication. It sounds like no one's interests have been especially well-served here.
This guy was uploading content before it was televised. That's why Fox is going so heavy on him.
You're missing the point -- the Pirate Bay guys and their halfwit fanboys have invested their lives and selves in paying ZERO dollars for the entertainment industry's products. That's a far higher market value than $20 (OK, at least a bit more than $20), which makes it even sillier when they complain about the quality of the products they steal.
Maybe, but the existence of people whose lives, group identity, self-esteem, moronic ethics and sub-moronic economic theories revolve around stealing Hollywood products suggests the movie and music producers are still producing things someone desperately wants.
Why even do that? If the pedestrian has the right of way, he has the right to wear headphones. If he doesn't, than the accident is his fault, headphones or no.
Anyway, the two groups of people I'd single out as particularly strong Darwin Award candidates are 1) bicyclists who wear headphones and 2) the Bostonians who walk down the street reading books.
Not a bad point, but it somewhat flies in the face of the idea that Bruce Schneier is an expert on any topic (neurophysiology, today) that remotely pertains to any definition of "security".
...I fell over laughing while reading this. (Go to slide 31)
At the same time, the scientific programming positions the parent mentions would probably be a great fit for you, if you don't mind trading some income for interesting work and a less-regimented pace.
I was skeptical that there really were people who saw them and wondered "Wow, engineers in both companies made these discoveries today?", but a look at the Slashdot story shows the first comment (in my display, anyway) asking "Two breakthroughs in one day?" (Score:5, Insightful)
Par value is a non-zero value that the stock needs for regulatory reasons. It's as meaningless as, well, cautionary statements made in a 10K filing. It has nothing to do with how much profit any stockholder has made.
Schools get extremely steep discounts, and aren't exactly Gentoo-ish in their upgrades. I doubt if there's a huge amount of money to be saved.
As for OLPC, their distribution scheme (selling hardware only to people with no money, relying on children who have never seen a computer before as software developers) is so bizarre, it's hard to suggest sensible ways to supplement it.
2) The OP's point is entirely correct, semantic nitpicking or no.
Sorry, but I just arrived from a 15 minute walk between buildings and my brain is frozen. (Which, I believe, is also Canada's fault.) Could someone please make the appropriate Sony battery-related comment?
In all seriousness -- I understand why RPN was advantageous decades ago. But given that nowadays there's no problem carrying enough computer power to handle any problem you might realistically key in, using [whatever normal notation is called], is there any reason to use RPN besides masochism?
Thanks!!! Clearing the cache fixed it. ''''!
I think the point (to the degree that it even makes sense to demand justification of a phrase given completely out of context) is that if government-funded research is required to be published in open access journals, that effectively destroys any other publishers. So the analogy to stem cell research isn't that bad.
Anyway, the issue here isn`t* for-profit versus non-profit, it`s whether open access is economically sustainable for either of them.
* Any idea why Firefox has suddenly decided that the single-quote key should take me to search instead of typing the character?
There's that, but an earlier step that's also missing in almost all of these questions is -- did you ask anyone before flying off the handle and coming here? In this case, did you go back to the recruiter and ask him what's going on and whether he can untangle it?
A little basic etiquette here -- you invite her, you pay. Her "forgotten her checkbook" was just a polite way of saying "Hell, no, you cheapskate dork."
I suppose that when you live in a world of "a video of giant penises attacking his wife's avatar/character", suing your date for not paying half isn't that dysfunctional, but still...
I've been waiting for a way to run Linux that managed to simultaneously involve Microsoft, Novell and Wal-Mart! Do you think they can get Lotus Notes into the mix as well?
With kfm, you could start it and basically get the KDE "desktop" in WindowMaker.
My all-time favorite Unix desktop environment was in the days of KDE 1 when you could run kfm within Window Maker or any other window manager to get desktop icons. Once both KDE and GNOME shifted to a fake "desktop window" on top of the real root, it never works properly anymore. (Note: I know you can change the window manager within KDE or GNOME -- that's the reverse of what I want.)
Sure, but Wikipedia doesn't require saintliness from its contributors. (Not that obsessives and kooks are necessarily more saintly than employees, anyway.) As long as the guy is technically sound and is being paid to make technically sound edits, he seems like the least of Wikipedia's problems. If there are problems with his edits, he and the submitter can slug it out like any other arguing contributors do.
However, in true conspiracy theory form, this is exactly what he would claim, suggest, and appear if he really were some goon born and raised in Redmond. He probably isn't. But why should I trust him any more than anyone else?
I'm proceeding on the assumption that O'Reilly doesn't just hand out blogs on its site to any random person Microsoft sent over -- if they do, that's a bigger story than the one we have here. Anyway, three years of posting technical pieces on XML folowed by publically disclosing your new connection to Microsoft seems like a rather inefficient use of conspiracy resources.
Heh, I wouldn't worry too much on that score... :-)