1: How can a judge force you to sign away your Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination to release this information? Just say no.
This is a civil, not criminal case. Discovery is part of a civil suit.
2: How is it so hard to argue that you have a reasonable expection of privacy in your comments rendering them inadmissible in court? After all, if they hadn't been private then the opposing lawyers wouldn't have needed court to force them to be revealed.
You post things on Facebook which allows a lot of people access and you expect privacy?
3: People lie in Facebook. Wow, that's news. People lie in real life too. It's all about keeping up appearances. Why isn't the case being made that what I said on FB was all lies intended towards keeping up appearances among my friends? Pictures? Yeah I can smile through the pain for a 1/60th of a second - so what?
That'd be your lawyers job - each side is trying to decide what idea they want to stick in a jury's mind when they deliberate. The lawyer's job is to make sure their story is the one that sticks so when they the jury gets into deliberations they have formed an opinion that will result a favorable verdict. Remember "If it don't fit you must acquit?" Winning is not about presenting a clear set of facts that a jury can analyze and reach an informed verdict; it's about getting the jury to focus on the one idea that will sway them. The best lawyers in the courtroom are the best story tellers because they can convince a jury to believe them..
I just wouldn't want to make someone overconfident, thinking, "I have backups, so I'm pretty safe." Backups are a necessity for a variety of reasons, but they're not *much* protection against a rogue admin, especially if that admin is the one administering the backups.
i agree - which is why two person oversight of backups is important - even if there isn't a rogue admin. People forget to do backups, go on vacation, etc. having redundant checks to be sure everything is OK is a good way to help keep things working. Having a method to ensure you are reliably backing up your data is important. Just having an auto backup may just be a false sense of security.
Backups are a pretty good answer, but there are some problems to consider. First, deleting files is not the only thing an admin can do. They can screw with your data without deleting it. They can configure something so that it will fail spectacularly at an inopportune moment. They can screw with your backups and make them inaccessible. They can leave access for themselves back into your network so they can sabotage things later.
True, you can never eliminate the threat of deliberate human action. All you can do is make it very difficult and have redundancy built into you backups to have a good chance of restoring things after the fact.
What is you backup method. Many more things can happen than a rogue admin messing up files. Disks fail, equipment gets stolen, users accidentally delete items - all of which point to having a robust, redundant backup strategy. Absent that, rogue admins are the least of your worries.
We've kept rolling backups - i.e several weeks worth, on duplicate media. On-site for fast access and off site for ensuring its availability if something happens on-site. I know others that mirror the entire operation to another secure location.
My suggestion - figure out how much data needs to be backed up, how often does it change, and then develop a redundant backup strategy with teh ability to roll back several generations.
You can't protect against any and all employee actions, but at least you can make it hard to totally destroy your data.
Also - as others pointed out - find out why people leave mad and fix the underlying cause.
In my experience, anyone losing to the superior minded in any game involving strategy (they almost all do, including FPS and "dumb" RPGs) will eventually call it cheating.
I agree. I used to play alot of Hearts online and invariably you get a player who, despite their large point score, had no clue how to play. When the get beat the yell "you CHEATED" and get all upset if they are too stupid to realize you are finessing the Queen and let you do it repeatedly then maybe they need to actually learn how to play. Generally they get their high scores by playing in low level rooms a beat lower point players to farm points so they can compensate for other shortcomings.
It doesn't has to be a binary cheat. Many game companies label abusing well-known bugs in the released program as cheating.
Easier that fixing the damn games apparently
Yes, companies should fix bugs. However, exploiting a bug to get an advantage is an asshat way to play; and generally makes you unwelcome.
For example, a very old football arcade game had a bug that if you crossed the line of scrimmage the defenders would drop out of rush coverage and move in to stop the run. Every now and then you'd have someonexwho would deliberately do that to complete a pass and score a touchdown and sat "hey it's part of the game". The solution? Walk away from the game, and people watching would not play them. The alternative was to do it right back and time the game so you score last so the asshat would not get to stay on the game. Not a very elegant solution since you lower yourself to their level.
The cost of the film is irrelevant - a film is just a way to transfer tons of money from the backers to the studio and distribution change. Every possible cost is put into a film so you can extract as much profit from it without worrying if it ever makes money. Every why you want a cut of the gross, not the net? Because Hollywood accounting ensures there won't be a net for a long time, if ever.
Sure, some indies can produce a decent low budget movie; just as some indies can produce a decent game. Of course, if they are the.1% that is really good, they'll probably move to the mainstream - because that's where the money is. Someone pointed out you can get talent for free - if the talent want's to build a resume. Why do they want a resume - to make real money later. never underestimate the power of profit.
Re:My, won't Dr. Cooper be pleased
on
Comics Code Dead
·
· Score: 1
that's Dr. Hofstadter, Dr. Koothrappali aand Mr. Wolowitz.
I prefer more of a western European model, with a socially liberal atmosphere and little or no censorship, nude beaches etc, and governments that concern themselves with making sure people have food, housing, good jobs, and health care, and education, rather than obsesssing over imposing arbitrary ideologies on people. As a social libertatian, that is what we believe in and leads to a truly safe society.
While there is much that I like about Europe, the idea that there is little or no censorship is not correct. They have their own types of censorship that center on what *they* believe is bad; just as the US does. Neither is necessarily better; just different.
Let's see, there are two possibilities that come to mind since this was done in the proximity of the female Icelandic MP with connection to wikileaks:
The member of parliament who is a friend of wikileaks is in on this and wikileaks conducted the spying as is being ignorantly claimed
Agents on behalf of the US government conducted this in order to spy on the icelandic MP and others nearby because of her connection to wikileaks
Obviously we can throw out #1 because it does not at all fit with wikileaks modus operandi and cannot be carried out by their infrastructure. They're set up to anonymously accept documents and disseminate them, they're not spies. Moreover the icelandic MP in question would be risking much to do this only to access documents she probably already has access to.
So #2 becomes the most obvious culprit.
In this case, the most obvious culprit is the fallacy of your argument’s logic.
If the kids had found a Sawzall in the basement and used it to trash the house do you think the homeowner could hold Milwaukee Electric Tool liable?
You wouldn't think so, but then you see things like the Louisville Slugger case, where the manufacturers of a baseball bat were found liable for the death of someone hit by a batted ball, and you realize anything can happen in the court system.
Without getting into weather or not the verdict was correct, the argument was that aluminum bats are much less safe than wood and H&B should have known that when they started making and selling them. I think similar arguments will be made (and no doubt have been) for robotic devices as they start causing problems. Defective or negligent design is the responsibility of the manufacturer; of course the definition of defective or negligent is open to interpretation.
Larry Niven wrote a series of novels with consistent backstory, physics, and an evolution over time -- the Known Space series. J. K. Rowling knew there would be 7 Harry Potter books, and J. Michael Straczyinski (sp) planned Bablyon 5 to have a story arc over 5 seasons. Asimov intended the Foundation Trilogy as a cohesive whole; I think that his later additions to that universe, including the tie-ins to the "I Robot" universe were motivated more by publishers than by his original vision.
Perhaps Dan O'Bannon never wanted to create a universe, or a self-consistent backstory... he just wanted to make a scary movie with a surprising powerful alien. The second movie also worked as a suspense/thriller, even though we knew what the aliens' abilities were.
The real difference is each of those authors were in much more control over the franchise than most movie director/writers/producers are. Authors generally don't have to worry about what a star wants, dealing with ego of a big producer who has his or her own 'vision', etc. They also have the luxury of not having to tell a story in a little over an hour. TV shows may be easier because you can build a story arc - and it has been successful even if individual episodes are weak - such as in the Sopranos and The Wire - so it's less of a sell; where as each movie is a one shot deal that stands on its own.
While I generally agree, I have to point out that the spies we traded them for were Russian citizens who spied for the US - so your argument doesn't really hold.
Well, in that case it came down to they had something we wanted for something they wanted so we made a deal. What kind of a deal? A deal deal.
Nobody wants Walker et al, and Israel may want Pollard but really have noting to offer in trade that's worth the political fallout so there's no deal. In the Russian case, they wanted their people bad enough to do a deal.
The military and intelligence communities didn't seem to mind the recent release of Russian agents. Maybe they didn't transfer any valuable secrets, but they were working for Russia.
It's quite normal to do that; often in exchange for our spies there, which is what happened in this case. Spying for your own country is not treason; and there are accepted norms for how to treat foreign agents. Pollard, Walker, et.al. were Americans entrusted with our secrets and sold themselves out. That is very different than a foreign agent coming to the US to spy.
What is even more scary was some dipsheit professional lawyer actually took the case on for this moron. Talk about who's the biggest idiot - the lawyer or the trailer park resident?
Not necessarily - he could have filed the papers all by himself. It makes for a funny headline on a slow news day, but won't see the light of day in court.
Congress required that the new heavy lift vehicle maximize the reuse of space shuttle components as part of its budget battle with President Obama last year
So congress made engineering decisions for NASA. They told NASA to reuse some parts from something else. And does Congress even know if that actually saves money? There have been plenty of times I've been told to develop something and to reuse an existing piece of code, and I've had to disappoint someone by pointing out that reusing their old COBOL EXE does not actually shrink the timeline.:-( In mechanical engineering, I've learned that reusing parts often adds a lot of work.
Maybe that isn't the case here, but Congress should instead have set constraints and let NASA decide how best to implement it. No doubt the new request also tells them what vendors to use, and what state to by them from, and where to eat lunch so that the money gets spread around to their own pet projects.
No, Congress doesn't make engineering decisions. They make budget decisions, i.e., they ensure money get spent in their district by defining what to buy. If Congress made engineering decisions and something went wrong, they might get blamed and that would not be a good thing.
>I also have a theory that every generation has a way of trying to class a group of males as totally unfit. Men and women are born in approximately equal numbers, but in fact we are somewhat polygynous in our actual behavior. This requires getting a large number of males either killed, or out of the dating pool.
We already have the later - they're called/. readers...
If this is true, then Apple is adding colorful backgrounds to the icon text in the dock. Also, the icon itself was bigger looking with smaller corners and the margins were closer. I don't quite believe it, but it was a shaky video.
Apple could have given somewhat different screen mockups to various manufacturers - that way, if one leaked they'd know the source. Making subtle changes to documents so you can identify whose they were is an old trick.
You lose the connect and need to reconnect. I tethered with VZW a few years ago - every time a call came in it broke the data connection - just like pulling an ethernet plug. A real PITA.
There's no such thing as "abandonware".
You've invented a term that is popular but doesn't actually exist in legal parlance. There's copyrighted work like 1928's Steamboat Willie, and then there's uncopyrighted work like 1946's It's A Wonderful Life (the license was not renewed) AKA public domain. Since this MTR program is only 10 years, the copyright has Not run out yet.
Actually - it's bait more complicated - some of the material in It's a Wonderful Life is still has copyright protection - even though the actual pictures may be public domain, the underlying story on which it is based and thus a derivative work, is still copyrighted. As a result, IAWL is only aired by stations who pay for it. Yea, copyright law is a mess.
I have never met a single person who actually likes stylus input. Apple did the right thing by not including one. For the very few people out there who feel they need such a thing, styluses are sold by various vendors which worth with an ipad.
Having used a Newton, stylus input done right is very useful. Short-cut inputs, such as Palm’s Graffiti, and the Newton's screen size made it a viable note taking and writing device.
You can't build a "natural immunity" to the flu. That's why there's a new vaccine every year. And doctors already only recommend flu shots for "at risk" people, such as those with weak immune systems where the flu can be deadly.
While I agree with much of what you said; my experience is flu shots are generally recommended for most people, with at risk groups being encouraged to get them early or having priority if vaccines are in short supply. Also, you can get limited immunity due to earlier exposure to similar strains; such as was recently the case where people alive in the 50's had some immunity from exposure to an earlier strain simile to the rhen current one
Apparently they run the Department of the Interior like the Air Force. I remember waiting four weeks and paying $80 for three ounces of a very specific lithium grease for some of our equipment that had an extremely similar clone at Lowe's for $4.
An "extremely similar clone" is often not a good replacement - equipment may be designed to certain specs that seemingly similar, but much cheaper, parts don't meet and using them may result in unexpected or catastrophic results. I could buy 10 cent bolts and nuts, or various lubricants, at Lowes that look just like the ones used on our reactor, but there is no assurance they would work properly, unlike the much more expensive ones in the supply system.
You obviously missed when I said I get so focused on the professor's lecture that I have missed calls. So no vibrate doesn't work for me.
Then set the phone on the desk where you can hear it vibrate. You don't have to be disruptive.
Not everyone is the same, and hopefully you learn that before to long. I do the exact same thing at conferences and professional business presentations as well. When I ran my own business, I'll be damned if anyone is going to tell me I can't take a call during a conference lecture. I will get up and leave the room, but I absolutely am going to take that call because my office knew not to call me unless it was very important.
That's your problem, an you use it as an excuse to impact on other's in the classroom.
I am not going to leave it on vibrate because I have missed so many calls doing that. I don't always feel the phone vibrating. That is how it works in the real world and I was not the only one who did this. You will see this type of behavior all the time at conferences, especially when large percentages of those in attendance own their own business.
Yea, people are rude in the real world as well.
That is how the real world works, and professors at universities should realize that and adapt.
You keep talking about the real world but I don't think you know what that means. I've worked in environments where having a cell phone ring was considered bad; and could be career limiting if it happened too often. We've kicked people off of projects because they can't seem to follow basic rules and show consideration for other's time and efforts. That's also the real world.
You are establishing a reputation in school; and I've known classmates who won't do business with other classmates because of how the behaved in school. That's also the real world.
As for complaining to the Uni's president, most, in the US at least, would politely listen and then toss your complaint in the trash where it belonged; and don't ever bother asking the professor for a recommendation or advice. That's also the real world.
Read this article when it appeared in the Post and couldn't help but wonder - how do they use the DMCA to have brain dumps taken down? If I recall and summarize a question in my own words and the answer - whay is this an issue? Is it not a derivative work?
Because it works. As long as they can get the questions down to get through the test cycle they are good to go; so buy the time you fight the notice they've won. ETS, IAR, publishes books of exam questions as study guides; what they don't want is for someone to know the actual questions currently being used.
Slashdot Mirror
1: How can a judge force you to sign away your Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination to release this information? Just say no.
This is a civil, not criminal case. Discovery is part of a civil suit.
2: How is it so hard to argue that you have a reasonable expection of privacy in your comments rendering them inadmissible in court? After all, if they hadn't been private then the opposing lawyers wouldn't have needed court to force them to be revealed.
You post things on Facebook which allows a lot of people access and you expect privacy?
3: People lie in Facebook. Wow, that's news. People lie in real life too. It's all about keeping up appearances. Why isn't the case being made that what I said on FB was all lies intended towards keeping up appearances among my friends? Pictures? Yeah I can smile through the pain for a 1/60th of a second - so what?
That'd be your lawyers job - each side is trying to decide what idea they want to stick in a jury's mind when they deliberate. The lawyer's job is to make sure their story is the one that sticks so when they the jury gets into deliberations they have formed an opinion that will result a favorable verdict. Remember "If it don't fit you must acquit?" Winning is not about presenting a clear set of facts that a jury can analyze and reach an informed verdict; it's about getting the jury to focus on the one idea that will sway them. The best lawyers in the courtroom are the best story tellers because they can convince a jury to believe them..
I just wouldn't want to make someone overconfident, thinking, "I have backups, so I'm pretty safe." Backups are a necessity for a variety of reasons, but they're not *much* protection against a rogue admin, especially if that admin is the one administering the backups.
i agree - which is why two person oversight of backups is important - even if there isn't a rogue admin. People forget to do backups, go on vacation, etc. having redundant checks to be sure everything is OK is a good way to help keep things working. Having a method to ensure you are reliably backing up your data is important. Just having an auto backup may just be a false sense of security.
Backups are a pretty good answer, but there are some problems to consider. First, deleting files is not the only thing an admin can do. They can screw with your data without deleting it. They can configure something so that it will fail spectacularly at an inopportune moment. They can screw with your backups and make them inaccessible. They can leave access for themselves back into your network so they can sabotage things later.
True, you can never eliminate the threat of deliberate human action. All you can do is make it very difficult and have redundancy built into you backups to have a good chance of restoring things after the fact.
What is you backup method. Many more things can happen than a rogue admin messing up files. Disks fail, equipment gets stolen, users accidentally delete items - all of which point to having a robust, redundant backup strategy. Absent that, rogue admins are the least of your worries.
We've kept rolling backups - i.e several weeks worth, on duplicate media. On-site for fast access and off site for ensuring its availability if something happens on-site. I know others that mirror the entire operation to another secure location.
My suggestion - figure out how much data needs to be backed up, how often does it change, and then develop a redundant backup strategy with teh ability to roll back several generations.
You can't protect against any and all employee actions, but at least you can make it hard to totally destroy your data.
Also - as others pointed out - find out why people leave mad and fix the underlying cause.
In my experience, anyone losing to the superior minded in any game involving strategy (they almost all do, including FPS and "dumb" RPGs) will eventually call it cheating.
I agree. I used to play alot of Hearts online and invariably you get a player who, despite their large point score, had no clue how to play. When the get beat the yell "you CHEATED" and get all upset if they are too stupid to realize you are finessing the Queen and let you do it repeatedly then maybe they need to actually learn how to play. Generally they get their high scores by playing in low level rooms a beat lower point players to farm points so they can compensate for other shortcomings.
It doesn't has to be a binary cheat. Many game companies label abusing well-known bugs in the released program as cheating.
Easier that fixing the damn games apparently
Yes, companies should fix bugs. However, exploiting a bug to get an advantage is an asshat way to play; and generally makes you unwelcome.
For example, a very old football arcade game had a bug that if you crossed the line of scrimmage the defenders would drop out of rush coverage and move in to stop the run. Every now and then you'd have someonexwho would deliberately do that to complete a pass and score a touchdown and sat "hey it's part of the game". The solution? Walk away from the game, and people watching would not play them. The alternative was to do it right back and time the game so you score last so the asshat would not get to stay on the game. Not a very elegant solution since you lower yourself to their level.
The cost of the film is irrelevant - a film is just a way to transfer tons of money from the backers to the studio and distribution change. Every possible cost is put into a film so you can extract as much profit from it without worrying if it ever makes money. Every why you want a cut of the gross, not the net? Because Hollywood accounting ensures there won't be a net for a long time, if ever. Sure, some indies can produce a decent low budget movie; just as some indies can produce a decent game. Of course, if they are the .1% that is really good, they'll probably move to the mainstream - because that's where the money is. Someone pointed out you can get talent for free - if the talent want's to build a resume. Why do they want a resume - to make real money later. never underestimate the power of profit.
that's Dr. Hofstadter, Dr. Koothrappali aand Mr. Wolowitz.
I prefer more of a western European model, with a socially liberal atmosphere and little or no censorship, nude beaches etc, and governments that concern themselves with making sure people have food, housing, good jobs, and health care, and education, rather than obsesssing over imposing arbitrary ideologies on people. As a social libertatian, that is what we believe in and leads to a truly safe society.
While there is much that I like about Europe, the idea that there is little or no censorship is not correct. They have their own types of censorship that center on what *they* believe is bad; just as the US does. Neither is necessarily better; just different.
Let's see, there are two possibilities that come to mind since this was done in the proximity of the female Icelandic MP with connection to wikileaks:
Obviously we can throw out #1 because it does not at all fit with wikileaks modus operandi and cannot be carried out by their infrastructure. They're set up to anonymously accept documents and disseminate them, they're not spies. Moreover the icelandic MP in question would be risking much to do this only to access documents she probably already has access to.
So #2 becomes the most obvious culprit.
In this case, the most obvious culprit is the fallacy of your argument’s logic.
You wouldn't think so, but then you see things like the Louisville Slugger case, where the manufacturers of a baseball bat were found liable for the death of someone hit by a batted ball, and you realize anything can happen in the court system.
Without getting into weather or not the verdict was correct, the argument was that aluminum bats are much less safe than wood and H&B should have known that when they started making and selling them. I think similar arguments will be made (and no doubt have been) for robotic devices as they start causing problems. Defective or negligent design is the responsibility of the manufacturer; of course the definition of defective or negligent is open to interpretation.
Larry Niven wrote a series of novels with consistent backstory, physics, and an evolution over time -- the Known Space series. J. K. Rowling knew there would be 7 Harry Potter books, and J. Michael Straczyinski (sp) planned Bablyon 5 to have a story arc over 5 seasons. Asimov intended the Foundation Trilogy as a cohesive whole; I think that his later additions to that universe, including the tie-ins to the "I Robot" universe were motivated more by publishers than by his original vision. Perhaps Dan O'Bannon never wanted to create a universe, or a self-consistent backstory... he just wanted to make a scary movie with a surprising powerful alien. The second movie also worked as a suspense/thriller, even though we knew what the aliens' abilities were.
The real difference is each of those authors were in much more control over the franchise than most movie director/writers/producers are. Authors generally don't have to worry about what a star wants, dealing with ego of a big producer who has his or her own 'vision', etc. They also have the luxury of not having to tell a story in a little over an hour. TV shows may be easier because you can build a story arc - and it has been successful even if individual episodes are weak - such as in the Sopranos and The Wire - so it's less of a sell; where as each movie is a one shot deal that stands on its own.
While I generally agree, I have to point out that the spies we traded them for were Russian citizens who spied for the US - so your argument doesn't really hold.
Well, in that case it came down to they had something we wanted for something they wanted so we made a deal. What kind of a deal? A deal deal.
Nobody wants Walker et al, and Israel may want Pollard but really have noting to offer in trade that's worth the political fallout so there's no deal. In the Russian case, they wanted their people bad enough to do a deal.
The military and intelligence communities didn't seem to mind the recent release of Russian agents. Maybe they didn't transfer any valuable secrets, but they were working for Russia.
It's quite normal to do that; often in exchange for our spies there, which is what happened in this case. Spying for your own country is not treason; and there are accepted norms for how to treat foreign agents. Pollard, Walker, et.al. were Americans entrusted with our secrets and sold themselves out. That is very different than a foreign agent coming to the US to spy.
What is even more scary was some dipsheit professional lawyer actually took the case on for this moron. Talk about who's the biggest idiot - the lawyer or the trailer park resident?
Not necessarily - he could have filed the papers all by himself. It makes for a funny headline on a slow news day, but won't see the light of day in court.
Congress required that the new heavy lift vehicle maximize the reuse of space shuttle components as part of its budget battle with President Obama last year
So congress made engineering decisions for NASA. They told NASA to reuse some parts from something else. And does Congress even know if that actually saves money? There have been plenty of times I've been told to develop something and to reuse an existing piece of code, and I've had to disappoint someone by pointing out that reusing their old COBOL EXE does not actually shrink the timeline. :-( In mechanical engineering, I've learned that reusing parts often adds a lot of work.
Maybe that isn't the case here, but Congress should instead have set constraints and let NASA decide how best to implement it. No doubt the new request also tells them what vendors to use, and what state to by them from, and where to eat lunch so that the money gets spread around to their own pet projects.
No, Congress doesn't make engineering decisions. They make budget decisions, i.e., they ensure money get spent in their district by defining what to buy. If Congress made engineering decisions and something went wrong, they might get blamed and that would not be a good thing.
>I also have a theory that every generation has a way of trying to class a group of males as totally unfit. Men and women are born in approximately equal numbers, but in fact we are somewhat polygynous in our actual behavior. This requires getting a large number of males either killed, or out of the dating pool.
We already have the later - they're called /. readers...
If this is true, then Apple is adding colorful backgrounds to the icon text in the dock. Also, the icon itself was bigger looking with smaller corners and the margins were closer. I don't quite believe it, but it was a shaky video.
Apple could have given somewhat different screen mockups to various manufacturers - that way, if one leaked they'd know the source. Making subtle changes to documents so you can identify whose they were is an old trick.
You lose the connect and need to reconnect. I tethered with VZW a few years ago - every time a call came in it broke the data connection - just like pulling an ethernet plug. A real PITA.
There's no such thing as "abandonware". You've invented a term that is popular but doesn't actually exist in legal parlance. There's copyrighted work like 1928's Steamboat Willie, and then there's uncopyrighted work like 1946's It's A Wonderful Life (the license was not renewed) AKA public domain. Since this MTR program is only 10 years, the copyright has Not run out yet.
Actually - it's bait more complicated - some of the material in It's a Wonderful Life is still has copyright protection - even though the actual pictures may be public domain, the underlying story on which it is based and thus a derivative work, is still copyrighted. As a result, IAWL is only aired by stations who pay for it. Yea, copyright law is a mess.
I have never met a single person who actually likes stylus input. Apple did the right thing by not including one. For the very few people out there who feel they need such a thing, styluses are sold by various vendors which worth with an ipad.
Having used a Newton, stylus input done right is very useful. Short-cut inputs, such as Palm’s Graffiti, and the Newton's screen size made it a viable note taking and writing device.
You can't build a "natural immunity" to the flu. That's why there's a new vaccine every year. And doctors already only recommend flu shots for "at risk" people, such as those with weak immune systems where the flu can be deadly.
While I agree with much of what you said; my experience is flu shots are generally recommended for most people, with at risk groups being encouraged to get them early or having priority if vaccines are in short supply. Also, you can get limited immunity due to earlier exposure to similar strains; such as was recently the case where people alive in the 50's had some immunity from exposure to an earlier strain simile to the rhen current one
Apparently they run the Department of the Interior like the Air Force. I remember waiting four weeks and paying $80 for three ounces of a very specific lithium grease for some of our equipment that had an extremely similar clone at Lowe's for $4.
An "extremely similar clone" is often not a good replacement - equipment may be designed to certain specs that seemingly similar, but much cheaper, parts don't meet and using them may result in unexpected or catastrophic results. I could buy 10 cent bolts and nuts, or various lubricants, at Lowes that look just like the ones used on our reactor, but there is no assurance they would work properly, unlike the much more expensive ones in the supply system.
You obviously missed when I said I get so focused on the professor's lecture that I have missed calls. So no vibrate doesn't work for me.
Then set the phone on the desk where you can hear it vibrate. You don't have to be disruptive.
Not everyone is the same, and hopefully you learn that before to long. I do the exact same thing at conferences and professional business presentations as well. When I ran my own business, I'll be damned if anyone is going to tell me I can't take a call during a conference lecture. I will get up and leave the room, but I absolutely am going to take that call because my office knew not to call me unless it was very important.
That's your problem, an you use it as an excuse to impact on other's in the classroom.
I am not going to leave it on vibrate because I have missed so many calls doing that. I don't always feel the phone vibrating. That is how it works in the real world and I was not the only one who did this. You will see this type of behavior all the time at conferences, especially when large percentages of those in attendance own their own business.
Yea, people are rude in the real world as well.
That is how the real world works, and professors at universities should realize that and adapt.
You keep talking about the real world but I don't think you know what that means. I've worked in environments where having a cell phone ring was considered bad; and could be career limiting if it happened too often. We've kicked people off of projects because they can't seem to follow basic rules and show consideration for other's time and efforts. That's also the real world.
You are establishing a reputation in school; and I've known classmates who won't do business with other classmates because of how the behaved in school. That's also the real world.
As for complaining to the Uni's president, most, in the US at least, would politely listen and then toss your complaint in the trash where it belonged; and don't ever bother asking the professor for a recommendation or advice. That's also the real world.
Read this article when it appeared in the Post and couldn't help but wonder - how do they use the DMCA to have brain dumps taken down? If I recall and summarize a question in my own words and the answer - whay is this an issue? Is it not a derivative work?
Because it works. As long as they can get the questions down to get through the test cycle they are good to go; so buy the time you fight the notice they've won. ETS, IAR, publishes books of exam questions as study guides; what they don't want is for someone to know the actual questions currently being used.