Another issue is employees will invest much less in training since another employee can simply hire them away and avoid the training costs and offer a higher salary as well As a result, if job hopping becomes the norm employees will need to recoup training costs much quicker through lower salaries, agreements to repay costs if they leave early, etc. Job hopping to get ahead sounds good until you find out TINSTAAFL. Sure, people with skills in high demand can do it but for most workers it won't be a workplace reality.
I love the modern idea that works of fiction, specifically written to advance a particular point of view, are somehow indicative of how reality works. It's a movie, it's entertainment.
Except for Star Trek. it's real; unlike Star Wars, which even has the fighters cast shadows in the vacuum of space.
And yet they have to hire risk management people to basically blow the whistle on the company before things deteriorate.
No one said what companies do make sense.
If the person has shown previous judgment in the past, not hiring them is an illegal discriminatory tactic. THAT is a lawsuit waiting to happen.
First, it would be hard to prove the reason your resume was ignored was because a web search turned up your lawsuit; even so whistleblowers are not a protected class for hiring.
If they think twice because you successfully blew the whistle on illegal activity, it's because they fear you'll expose their illegal activities as well. Consider it a great way to filter out the scum employers. It would be in their self-interest to hire whistle-blowers and use them to help clean up the company before they get hit with lawsuits.
Unfortunately, most employers don't think that way. It's not necessarily that they are going anything illegal, they may simply wonder what will this person take exception to, even if it is legal, and cause us a great big hassle? It's simply easier to not hire them than take a risk.
So you blow the whistle, they sue you, it's now on the court docket and the public record that they sued you to try to shut you up because of their alleged unethical activities.
Kind of defeats the whole purpose of the exercise.
I'm surprised this isn't the first reaction to anyone confronted with such a situation. Anti-disparagement clauses are there to avoid bad publicity. If you go public, the existence of such a clause just invites them to shoot themselves in the foot.
It's like any form of blackmail. Once you go public with it, and whatever they had on you, it no longer works.
While I agree with you, the problem is everyone also knows you sued and thus are likely to think twice about hiring you. It's often best simply for both sides to move on; and non-disparagement works both ways, it's pretty standard for US companies to boot say anything about a former employee except verify dates of employment. When I worked corporate jobs we'd get periodic reminders from HR that any inquiries about a former employee were to be directed to them. They didn't want to get sued because someone said something that caused them to lose a job or suffer other harm; even if it were true, facts are open to dispute in a court.
Why bother. Just mark it as spam. Eventually they'll need to reset their password or otherwise confirm their identity, and fail. If they ever contact you when they realize their mistake, mark that as spam too. They'll be like the protagonist in "I have no mouth and I must scream." Never heard again.
I generally do that, if its a random site, to flip the Cordwainer Bird at them. I also get emails that look important to the sender, such as business documents, legal documents, price quotes, etc. In that case I send a polite note back saying "you got the wrong person." In all but one case
i got a thank you back; except for the idiot (in IT no less) that insisted he had the right email address. After I explained the issue trying to fix stupid, something you can't do, I sent a note back and cc'd the principal (it was a school) that any I did not agree to disclaimer on their emails and by sending me any emails they agreed that they became my property to use as I saw fit. The emails stopped after that.
Just to quantify your statement that "some red states" also contribute to the federal budget. Good on you, Kansas.
.
I never made any statement relative to a state's dependency on federal money; although I agree the red states with their harping on big government stand the most to lose and it would serve them right to be hoist by their own petard. My point was state, local income tax and charitable donations deductions, which was the thrust of TFA goes beyond a red state / blue state issue.
While I agree with you in concept, the LA Times article is a bit overblown in terms of impact. Many red states have large tax bites as well, and charities that depend on donations which may drop if they are not tax deductible. Take away the state and local tax deduction in say Georgia or even Ohio and I imaging people will be pissed come tax day...
I hope they are successful. Interestingly, the first reaction you get when you see the MCR for the first time is "Wow, it's small." A wide angle lens at the rear makes it look bigger than it is.
Correct, but in this case tehy apparently stole the die and machine; and used the patented and copyrighted technology as well.
If anyone can buy it, then it's easy to figure out what the remedy is. If you can only license it, then the situation becomes more complicated. Which is the case for this software?
Who knows. From various articles this appears to be a complicated situation involving some major figures as well as a bunch of off shore companies.
If I get a sale Ford fender stamping machine and started to sell fenders
Not sure what exactly you're trying to say here, but you're describing every third party aftermarket part maker ever. Unless you are stamping "Ford" onto the fender, then you're violating trademark law.
I'm saying if someone stole (I just saw autocorrect turned my misspelling of stolen into sale and hence the confusion) Ford's stamping machine and you used to to make parts Ford could get an injunction stopping the sale of those parts. I realize it is legal to make aftermarket parts, using your own technology as long as you don't violate design patents; but that is not what appears to have happened here.
If you get a cheap used Ford fender stamping die, you are well within your legal rights to use it (along with your own stamping machine) to make sloppy-ass new fenders from that worn-out die. You're not free to use the other die that they use to stamp their logo onto the fender without their permission, because of trademark and copyright law, but you're explicitly allowed to make copies of automobile parts so long as they are not protected by patent and if they sell you the die, then the die is yours.
Correct, but in this case tehy apparently stole the die and machine; and used the patented and copyrighted technology as well.
If the contract between two businesses states that the company should get royalties or attribution for works produced by the software, then it's entirely possible that they are due royalties
You can't have a contract with someone and hope to enforce that contract on the 3rd party. Otherwise let's you and me sign a contract right now saying that any money earned by any of your neighbors is mine forever. Rearden LLC had a licensing agreement with one or more Chinese firms. Disney might have "borrowed" software from said Chinese firms. Said Chinese firms might even be liable TO DISNEY for not warning Disney about their arrangement with Rearden LLC. Disney never made any arrangements with Rearden LLC. Rearden LLC can go after the Chinese firms to try to enforce said contract. GOOD LUCK enforcing it with Disney.
Except Rearden is claiming Disney knew the machine may have been stolen, based on previous contracts with Reardon, and still used it; so they should have been aware of the contractual agreements and thus acted in bad faith.
No. They are trying to hijack the ownership rights of works created using software. If this passes legal muster, the implications are very ugly. Like "copyrights on APIs" kind of ugly.
Not really. They are saying Disney used a stolen device to produce those works and thus they are not entitled to distribute any of the resulting products. They don't claim to own the product, just that Disney should not be allowed to benefit from their actions until the issue is resolved. To use a car analogy, If I get a sale Ford fender stamping machine and started to sell fenders Ford would get an injunction to stop that. Just because this is a software product doesn't make the idea any different.
The militry stockpiles a lot of drugs and has been looking at how long drugs are good in an effort to save costs while ensuring the drugs were still good.
Blast from the past. We used to the same thing at parties. Once you knew the TV band we'd find a remote, bring it to the party and change the channel. When the host would change it back as soon as they turned around we'd switch it again. After a few times they'd be convinced their turning around caused the remote to malfunction. They'd slowly back away and hilarity ensued. Tip of the hat to you.
That's old school hacking, using technical knowledge to do something funny that causes no real damage; although fans of the Docter might disagree. John Draper's Nixon hack is another classic. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... Scroll down to the Legends section.
Where I live a hangup call or not understandable one gets police, fire and ambulance. Rather than send the wrong response they cover all bases. The police even recommend doing a hangup if you are afraid to speak rather than putting yourself at risk; they said the fire department generally arrives first and if the sirens and lights don't scare off an intruder multiple fire fighters with pickaxes generally do.
I'm an old person. But back when I was a teenager, I used to record stuff off the radio to listen to--the AM Radio. Why? Because it's free. Yeah, the quality sucked. Yeah, I sometimes ended up with some DJ talking up the song. But I was willing to forgo all that because it was free.
I assume it's a similar thing here.
We used to do that as well. Later I ripped satellite radio simply to be able to listen to it off line. In either case QA quality didn't matter.
We also made party tapes in college by recording songs onto reel to reel tape so we had hours of music with a mix of slow and fast. Making them took time bevause we would try to fade smoothly from one song to the other with two turntables as a source, and rotating the album so the song start would pickup as soon as we started the turntable, much like DJs did.
Headline says the power plants were targeted, summary says the companies were targeted.
The headline is BS. The Wolf Creek plant controls were not involved at all, just the corporate business network which is completely separate. The headline intentionally implies something that didn't happen.
Taking headquarters out of the loop would be the best thing to happen to the plant, says this former operator.
My point is, in the future the tools used in software development may not even use the same concepts that have always been used up to this point. As opposed to coding up detailed procedural steps, it may instead resemble writing documentation and training material for human readers, so focusing on traditional reading and writing skills may be a better use of time than learning today's computer languages.
I'm not sure why you felt the need to tack on an apparent pointless insult.
Good point; and I agree with your focus on traditional skills. I was pointing out if you understand fundamental concepts you can apply them in a changing environment versus learning a specific skill that may not be valuable in the future. My retirement comment wasn't meant as a gratuitous insult, but rather a comment on how today's education impacts all of us and reflects a comment I have often heard from teachers. The humor didn't come across, unfortunately; sorry about that...
Slashdot Mirror
Another issue is employees will invest much less in training since another employee can simply hire them away and avoid the training costs and offer a higher salary as well As a result, if job hopping becomes the norm employees will need to recoup training costs much quicker through lower salaries, agreements to repay costs if they leave early, etc. Job hopping to get ahead sounds good until you find out TINSTAAFL. Sure, people with skills in high demand can do it but for most workers it won't be a workplace reality.
I love the modern idea that works of fiction, specifically written to advance a particular point of view, are somehow indicative of how reality works. It's a movie, it's entertainment.
Except for Star Trek. it's real; unlike Star Wars, which even has the fighters cast shadows in the vacuum of space.
And yet they have to hire risk management people to basically blow the whistle on the company before things deteriorate.
No one said what companies do make sense.
If the person has shown previous judgment in the past, not hiring them is an illegal discriminatory tactic. THAT is a lawsuit waiting to happen.
First, it would be hard to prove the reason your resume was ignored was because a web search turned up your lawsuit; even so whistleblowers are not a protected class for hiring.
If they think twice because you successfully blew the whistle on illegal activity, it's because they fear you'll expose their illegal activities as well. Consider it a great way to filter out the scum employers. It would be in their self-interest to hire whistle-blowers and use them to help clean up the company before they get hit with lawsuits.
Unfortunately, most employers don't think that way. It's not necessarily that they are going anything illegal, they may simply wonder what will this person take exception to, even if it is legal, and cause us a great big hassle? It's simply easier to not hire them than take a risk.
So you blow the whistle, they sue you, it's now on the court docket and the public record that they sued you to try to shut you up because of their alleged unethical activities.
Kind of defeats the whole purpose of the exercise.
I'm surprised this isn't the first reaction to anyone confronted with such a situation. Anti-disparagement clauses are there to avoid bad publicity. If you go public, the existence of such a clause just invites them to shoot themselves in the foot.
It's like any form of blackmail. Once you go public with it, and whatever they had on you, it no longer works.
While I agree with you, the problem is everyone also knows you sued and thus are likely to think twice about hiring you. It's often best simply for both sides to move on; and non-disparagement works both ways, it's pretty standard for US companies to boot say anything about a former employee except verify dates of employment. When I worked corporate jobs we'd get periodic reminders from HR that any inquiries about a former employee were to be directed to them. They didn't want to get sued because someone said something that caused them to lose a job or suffer other harm; even if it were true, facts are open to dispute in a court.
Why bother. Just mark it as spam. Eventually they'll need to reset their password or otherwise confirm their identity, and fail. If they ever contact you when they realize their mistake, mark that as spam too. They'll be like the protagonist in "I have no mouth and I must scream." Never heard again.
I generally do that, if its a random site, to flip the Cordwainer Bird at them. I also get emails that look important to the sender, such as business documents, legal documents, price quotes, etc. In that case I send a polite note back saying "you got the wrong person." In all but one case i got a thank you back; except for the idiot (in IT no less) that insisted he had the right email address. After I explained the issue trying to fix stupid, something you can't do, I sent a note back and cc'd the principal (it was a school) that any I did not agree to disclaimer on their emails and by sending me any emails they agreed that they became my property to use as I saw fit. The emails stopped after that.
Just to quantify your statement that "some red states" also contribute to the federal budget. Good on you, Kansas.
.
I never made any statement relative to a state's dependency on federal money; although I agree the red states with their harping on big government stand the most to lose and it would serve them right to be hoist by their own petard. My point was state, local income tax and charitable donations deductions, which was the thrust of TFA goes beyond a red state / blue state issue.
While I agree with you in concept, the LA Times article is a bit overblown in terms of impact. Many red states have large tax bites as well, and charities that depend on donations which may drop if they are not tax deductible. Take away the state and local tax deduction in say Georgia or even Ohio and I imaging people will be pissed come tax day...
I hope they are successful. Interestingly, the first reaction you get when you see the MCR for the first time is "Wow, it's small." A wide angle lens at the rear makes it look bigger than it is.
Correct, but in this case tehy apparently stole the die and machine; and used the patented and copyrighted technology as well.
If anyone can buy it, then it's easy to figure out what the remedy is. If you can only license it, then the situation becomes more complicated. Which is the case for this software?
Who knows. From various articles this appears to be a complicated situation involving some major figures as well as a bunch of off shore companies.
If I get a sale Ford fender stamping machine and started to sell fenders
Not sure what exactly you're trying to say here, but you're describing every third party aftermarket part maker ever. Unless you are stamping "Ford" onto the fender, then you're violating trademark law.
I'm saying if someone stole (I just saw autocorrect turned my misspelling of stolen into sale and hence the confusion) Ford's stamping machine and you used to to make parts Ford could get an injunction stopping the sale of those parts. I realize it is legal to make aftermarket parts, using your own technology as long as you don't violate design patents; but that is not what appears to have happened here.
If you get a cheap used Ford fender stamping die, you are well within your legal rights to use it (along with your own stamping machine) to make sloppy-ass new fenders from that worn-out die. You're not free to use the other die that they use to stamp their logo onto the fender without their permission, because of trademark and copyright law, but you're explicitly allowed to make copies of automobile parts so long as they are not protected by patent and if they sell you the die, then the die is yours.
Correct, but in this case tehy apparently stole the die and machine; and used the patented and copyrighted technology as well.
If the contract between two businesses states that the company should get royalties or attribution for works produced by the software, then it's entirely possible that they are due royalties
You can't have a contract with someone and hope to enforce that contract on the 3rd party. Otherwise let's you and me sign a contract right now saying that any money earned by any of your neighbors is mine forever. Rearden LLC had a licensing agreement with one or more Chinese firms. Disney might have "borrowed" software from said Chinese firms. Said Chinese firms might even be liable TO DISNEY for not warning Disney about their arrangement with Rearden LLC. Disney never made any arrangements with Rearden LLC. Rearden LLC can go after the Chinese firms to try to enforce said contract. GOOD LUCK enforcing it with Disney.
Except Rearden is claiming Disney knew the machine may have been stolen, based on previous contracts with Reardon, and still used it; so they should have been aware of the contractual agreements and thus acted in bad faith.
No. They are trying to hijack the ownership rights of works created using software. If this passes legal muster, the implications are very ugly. Like "copyrights on APIs" kind of ugly.
Not really. They are saying Disney used a stolen device to produce those works and thus they are not entitled to distribute any of the resulting products. They don't claim to own the product, just that Disney should not be allowed to benefit from their actions until the issue is resolved. To use a car analogy, If I get a sale Ford fender stamping machine and started to sell fenders Ford would get an injunction to stop that. Just because this is a software product doesn't make the idea any different.
The militry stockpiles a lot of drugs and has been looking at how long drugs are good in an effort to save costs while ensuring the drugs were still good.
"Daddy what does wanker mean?"
Simple answer "Wait until you are married and your partner is pissed at you. Then you'll understand. "
Blast from the past. We used to the same thing at parties. Once you knew the TV band we'd find a remote, bring it to the party and change the channel. When the host would change it back as soon as they turned around we'd switch it again. After a few times they'd be convinced their turning around caused the remote to malfunction. They'd slowly back away and hilarity ensued. Tip of the hat to you.
That's old school hacking, using technical knowledge to do something funny that causes no real damage; although fans of the Docter might disagree. John Draper's Nixon hack is another classic. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... Scroll down to the Legends section.
Where I live a hangup call or not understandable one gets police, fire and ambulance. Rather than send the wrong response they cover all bases. The police even recommend doing a hangup if you are afraid to speak rather than putting yourself at risk; they said the fire department generally arrives first and if the sirens and lights don't scare off an intruder multiple fire fighters with pickaxes generally do.
Taking headquarters out of the loop would be the best thing to happen to the plant, says this former operator.
We're from fleet, and we're here to help.
And we're glad to have you. The two biggest lies in the Navy.
But also understand that the recording industry, themselves, are just as guilty—they blame you for what they, themselves do.
When you do it it's called a crime, when they do it it's called business as usual.
Except that this isn't actually illegal. So now I wonder how many other apps services are incorrectly called "illegal" by this group.
Probably everyone they think is a threat to their business model.
Depends.
I'm an old person. But back when I was a teenager, I used to record stuff off the radio to listen to--the AM Radio. Why? Because it's free. Yeah, the quality sucked. Yeah, I sometimes ended up with some DJ talking up the song. But I was willing to forgo all that because it was free.
I assume it's a similar thing here.
We used to do that as well. Later I ripped satellite radio simply to be able to listen to it off line. In either case QA quality didn't matter. We also made party tapes in college by recording songs onto reel to reel tape so we had hours of music with a mix of slow and fast. Making them took time bevause we would try to fade smoothly from one song to the other with two turntables as a source, and rotating the album so the song start would pickup as soon as we started the turntable, much like DJs did.
Headline says the power plants were targeted, summary says the companies were targeted.
The headline is BS. The Wolf Creek plant controls were not involved at all, just the corporate business network which is completely separate. The headline intentionally implies something that didn't happen.
Taking headquarters out of the loop would be the best thing to happen to the plant, says this former operator.
My point is, in the future the tools used in software development may not even use the same concepts that have always been used up to this point. As opposed to coding up detailed procedural steps, it may instead resemble writing documentation and training material for human readers, so focusing on traditional reading and writing skills may be a better use of time than learning today's computer languages.
I'm not sure why you felt the need to tack on an apparent pointless insult.
Good point; and I agree with your focus on traditional skills. I was pointing out if you understand fundamental concepts you can apply them in a changing environment versus learning a specific skill that may not be valuable in the future. My retirement comment wasn't meant as a gratuitous insult, but rather a comment on how today's education impacts all of us and reflects a comment I have often heard from teachers. The humor didn't come across, unfortunately; sorry about that...