So does that mean you drive the station wagon or throw the paper?
Sorry, that just popped out.
You are quite the troll, but what the hell, I'm feeling wordy. Nice reference to Nuremburg, by the way. Nothing gets your point across quite like comparing ex-SCO employees to nazis. "I was only following orders." Haha, sure. Do you really think every SCO employee has full knowledge of the tactics designed behind Darl's closed door? Considering SCO is not network news material, do you suggest that every employee is completely aware of what is going on? No and no. Therefore can you rightly compare someone from SCO to a nazi officer? Duh? Might an employee of SCO be considered somewhat ignorant as to what the company is doing? Possibly, though they can in no way be entirely blamed for such ignorance any more than you can for your presumptuous and black and white view.
Just because you would jump at the chance to risk your job for the sake of ethos does not mean the same should apply to anyone else. That is how you see things for yourself. You cannot project that onto other people (unless you're an ego maniac - but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.:)). Every individual faces a unique situation in any occurance, regardless of the steps leading to it or the projected outcome. You cannot hope to accurately presume the correct behavior for them all - especially when you know dick all about the inner workings of SCO. You know as much as the rest of us: stories we read on Slashdot or water-cooler anecdotes at the office.
You are a Chief Information Officer and you cling to a position of both ignorance and presumption? Ouch. I don't know if I would have bragged about my position, if I were you.
I'm sick and tired of people who know only about situational ethics.
Nice term. Made up, but nice. What are ethics without the situation? Nothing - a bunch of useless ideals to sit around and pat yourself on the back over. It's kinda like a rice cake. Sure, it might taste good and it might make you look enlightened in front of your yoga instructor, but what did it really do for you? Yup, not a god damned thing. The situation creates the ethic, not the other way around.
Integrity is the willingness to do what is right even when no one is looking.
If that were possible and it caught on with even mild success, you would simply see commercials integrated with the programs - kinda like back in the what, 40s? Not that the programs are much different from commercials now, anyway.
I'd imagine that on a cruise ship, phone service (and therefore internet service) is via rented satellite time at a huge premium to the company that owns the ship. Of course that would translate to extreme cost to the customer simply for the sake of convenience. While that may be a cost that you can deal with on a cruise ship in the middle of one ocean or another, WiFi for anywhere near that kind of fee is simply ridiculous. If anything, your post is not so much off-topic as it is testament to how outrageously overpriced $10/hr for WiFi is.
Of course, without getting that information from the ISP, they have no idea whom to sue, unless you can file suits against IP addresses now. I'd guess they'd need to first sue the ISP for the information, then sue the individual?
How much of this has to do with the MPAA "learning" from the RIAA's mistakes...
And how much has to do with the fact that a federal appeals court just ruled in the last few days that it is illegal for the RIAA to subpoena ISPs for customer information, thereby putting a quick end to any RIAA-styled tactics the MPAA might have employed?
Road-safety tips from the only Dukes of Hazzard character who spent more time crashing into swamps, buildings, trees, Enus (teehee) than on the road? What's next, Microsoft researching solutions to spam? Pshaw.
So while MSFT didn't invent the original HashCash concept MSFT did improve upon it. So before anyone gets the bright idea of flaming MSFT ignorantly.... know your facts!
This is exactly the same kind of idiot turn of phrase that the other post made. Secrecy is not censorship.
If you would have taken a deep breath before your knee-jerk reaction, you would have realized that I never made any claims regarding equality between secrecy and censorship. Read it again, I said that what you claimed to be secrecy was simply privacy. If you'd care to mosey on over to the correct context, I'd be glad to argue that point with you.
And, I'm sorry, but you are very wrong about censorship. Censorship takes on many more forms than simply through enforcement. Try not to look at it as though it were so black and white. Read a little deeper into my example of your hypocritcal attitude that ended your first post and understand that your intended ignorance to any further responses is, in fact, a form a censorship, whether on an individual basis or larger scale. If you are not even willing to listen to a rebuttal, you have effectively censored the speaker. Get it? Some things are not so simple that they fall cleanly within your boundaries of definition. Censorship is one of them.
If my 'bullying' were ignored, I would be annoyed. If I were the government, and my 'bullying' were ignored, the poster would go to jail or be fined.
Secrecy is saying, "I do not wish to publish my personal information."
Actually, that's privacy. Secrecy would be more like saying "You don't even know I exist." The two are not the same.
If the government wants to keep secrets, that's fine, up until the point where it uses censorship to do so.
Given the instant publicity of free speech cases, disinformation is a much better safeguard for secrets than censorship. So many of us are so hopped up about what our respective governments are doing that we'll nearly dive for any morsel of information that might enlighten us. And since it has become so easy to obtain information without research many of us have relegated to accepting what we read on a website or in some historian's account of "what really goes on" as the simple truth. In other words, few of us check to see if the pool is a mirage before we dive in head-first. With such a formula you could hide the truth about anything in plain sight and have no fears of discovery. That was a long winded way of basically saying that censorship is pretty much a red herring at this point. There are better ways to keep people guessing that have far fewer repercussions.
Until and unless you understand the difference between secrecy and censorship, and how it is possible to be completely against one while accepting of the other, there is no point in responding.
I find it hilarious that you chose to end your post with a single sentence that completely contradicts everything you had previously said. Isn't discouraging a response through an ineffectual attempt at intellectual bullying a form of censorship, mild though it may be?
I seem to remember that not more than 10 or 15 years ago, people were predicting that by the end of this decade there would be such a demand for programmers, due to every little thing in your house having a computer of some sort in it, as to cause a shortage of supply. Well, that just didn't quite happen the way we thought it would. One might say it's due to the.com bust, one might not. The twists along the way don't really matter much. Any way you look at it, the predictions were and continue to be unfulfilled. I wouldn't bet my future on this "new" one coming to pass either. I would presume that these predictions rely heavily on current or near-recent trends (especially when programming could be concerned). Who knows what the next couple of years might bring, let alone the next decade.
I'd hate to see what would happen the moment divvying the donations up among project members goes awry. How do you decide whose contribution deserves what portion? I'm not sure money is the right thing to toss into the OSS mix.
I'm sure the desired effect is no different than a highway patrolman parking his cruiser on the side of the highway. They merely gamble on whether the presence is enough of a deterrent to the potential crime. I strongly doubt anyone actually expects to catch a child abduction in the act or miraculously find that missing child that decided to show up for 3rd period Algebra. It's also a way to shut the PTA up without really doing anything. I'm sure the school board is happy to jump on any bandwagon that will get them away from rabid parents.
Slashdot Mirror
I am the CIO of my company.
:)). Every individual faces a unique situation in any occurance, regardless of the steps leading to it or the projected outcome. You cannot hope to accurately presume the correct behavior for them all - especially when you know dick all about the inner workings of SCO. You know as much as the rest of us: stories we read on Slashdot or water-cooler anecdotes at the office.
So does that mean you drive the station wagon or throw the paper?
Sorry, that just popped out.
You are quite the troll, but what the hell, I'm feeling wordy. Nice reference to Nuremburg, by the way. Nothing gets your point across quite like comparing ex-SCO employees to nazis. "I was only following orders." Haha, sure. Do you really think every SCO employee has full knowledge of the tactics designed behind Darl's closed door? Considering SCO is not network news material, do you suggest that every employee is completely aware of what is going on? No and no. Therefore can you rightly compare someone from SCO to a nazi officer? Duh? Might an employee of SCO be considered somewhat ignorant as to what the company is doing? Possibly, though they can in no way be entirely blamed for such ignorance any more than you can for your presumptuous and black and white view.
Just because you would jump at the chance to risk your job for the sake of ethos does not mean the same should apply to anyone else. That is how you see things for yourself. You cannot project that onto other people (unless you're an ego maniac - but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
You are a Chief Information Officer and you cling to a position of both ignorance and presumption? Ouch. I don't know if I would have bragged about my position, if I were you.
I'm sick and tired of people who know only about situational ethics.
Nice term. Made up, but nice. What are ethics without the situation? Nothing - a bunch of useless ideals to sit around and pat yourself on the back over. It's kinda like a rice cake. Sure, it might taste good and it might make you look enlightened in front of your yoga instructor, but what did it really do for you? Yup, not a god damned thing. The situation creates the ethic, not the other way around.
Integrity is the willingness to do what is right even when no one is looking.
Cute. I have a fortune cookie for you, too:
Judge not lest ye be judged.
Forget the resume, I'm impressed by the guy who can pronounce ";-)".
Not even 20 years old and bitter... You must be a blast at parties, bow tie and all.
If that were possible and it caught on with even mild success, you would simply see commercials integrated with the programs - kinda like back in the what, 40s? Not that the programs are much different from commercials now, anyway.
The penis party
Otherwise known as a Slashdot Meetup.
I'd imagine that on a cruise ship, phone service (and therefore internet service) is via rented satellite time at a huge premium to the company that owns the ship. Of course that would translate to extreme cost to the customer simply for the sake of convenience. While that may be a cost that you can deal with on a cruise ship in the middle of one ocean or another, WiFi for anywhere near that kind of fee is simply ridiculous. If anything, your post is not so much off-topic as it is testament to how outrageously overpriced $10/hr for WiFi is.
Of course, without getting that information from the ISP, they have no idea whom to sue, unless you can file suits against IP addresses now. I'd guess they'd need to first sue the ISP for the information, then sue the individual?
How much of this has to do with the MPAA "learning" from the RIAA's mistakes...
And how much has to do with the fact that a federal appeals court just ruled in the last few days that it is illegal for the RIAA to subpoena ISPs for customer information, thereby putting a quick end to any RIAA-styled tactics the MPAA might have employed?
Road-safety tips from the only Dukes of Hazzard character who spent more time crashing into swamps, buildings, trees, Enus (teehee) than on the road? What's next, Microsoft researching solutions to spam? Pshaw.
Ooooh, oooh, pointy sticks, eh? Well, when someone comes at you with a bunch of elderberries don't come cryin' to me!
So while MSFT didn't invent the original HashCash concept MSFT did improve upon it. So before anyone gets the bright idea of flaming MSFT ignorantly.... know your facts!
That never stopped us before!
Wow, you got even more creative with that cucumber than I would have.
That's nothing. You should see the kind of fun you can have at an airport with a cucumber wrapped in tin foil.
Yeah, we need a new genre, like maybe a first-person shooter that takes place during World War II!
This is exactly the same kind of idiot turn of phrase that the other post made. Secrecy is not censorship.
If you would have taken a deep breath before your knee-jerk reaction, you would have realized that I never made any claims regarding equality between secrecy and censorship. Read it again, I said that what you claimed to be secrecy was simply privacy. If you'd care to mosey on over to the correct context, I'd be glad to argue that point with you.
And, I'm sorry, but you are very wrong about censorship. Censorship takes on many more forms than simply through enforcement. Try not to look at it as though it were so black and white. Read a little deeper into my example of your hypocritcal attitude that ended your first post and understand that your intended ignorance to any further responses is, in fact, a form a censorship, whether on an individual basis or larger scale. If you are not even willing to listen to a rebuttal, you have effectively censored the speaker. Get it? Some things are not so simple that they fall cleanly within your boundaries of definition. Censorship is one of them.
If my 'bullying' were ignored, I would be annoyed. If I were the government, and my 'bullying' were ignored, the poster would go to jail or be fined.
And if you weren't so powerless?
Secrecy is saying, "I do not wish to publish my personal information."
Actually, that's privacy. Secrecy would be more like saying "You don't even know I exist." The two are not the same.
If the government wants to keep secrets, that's fine, up until the point where it uses censorship to do so.
Given the instant publicity of free speech cases, disinformation is a much better safeguard for secrets than censorship. So many of us are so hopped up about what our respective governments are doing that we'll nearly dive for any morsel of information that might enlighten us. And since it has become so easy to obtain information without research many of us have relegated to accepting what we read on a website or in some historian's account of "what really goes on" as the simple truth. In other words, few of us check to see if the pool is a mirage before we dive in head-first. With such a formula you could hide the truth about anything in plain sight and have no fears of discovery. That was a long winded way of basically saying that censorship is pretty much a red herring at this point. There are better ways to keep people guessing that have far fewer repercussions.
Until and unless you understand the difference between secrecy and censorship, and how it is possible to be completely against one while accepting of the other, there is no point in responding.
I find it hilarious that you chose to end your post with a single sentence that completely contradicts everything you had previously said. Isn't discouraging a response through an ineffectual attempt at intellectual bullying a form of censorship, mild though it may be?
How is this in any way better than a 64-bit integer???
Maybe because XML is easier to deal with in Visual Basic than 64 bit ints? =P
I guess we can count CowboyNeal out of this one. He'd never fit!
They know you are looking for a date
As a privacy advocate, I guess this means I'll be buying hand lotion and "reading material" in separate trips to different supermarkets!
I seem to remember that not more than 10 or 15 years ago, people were predicting that by the end of this decade there would be such a demand for programmers, due to every little thing in your house having a computer of some sort in it, as to cause a shortage of supply. Well, that just didn't quite happen the way we thought it would. One might say it's due to the .com bust, one might not. The twists along the way don't really matter much. Any way you look at it, the predictions were and continue to be unfulfilled. I wouldn't bet my future on this "new" one coming to pass either. I would presume that these predictions rely heavily on current or near-recent trends (especially when programming could be concerned). Who knows what the next couple of years might bring, let alone the next decade.
If you make everything you can as small as you can, it makes the things you can't look bigger.
An economy.
Not which projet, which members of each project.
I'd hate to see what would happen the moment divvying the donations up among project members goes awry. How do you decide whose contribution deserves what portion? I'm not sure money is the right thing to toss into the OSS mix.
I'm sure the desired effect is no different than a highway patrolman parking his cruiser on the side of the highway. They merely gamble on whether the presence is enough of a deterrent to the potential crime. I strongly doubt anyone actually expects to catch a child abduction in the act or miraculously find that missing child that decided to show up for 3rd period Algebra. It's also a way to shut the PTA up without really doing anything. I'm sure the school board is happy to jump on any bandwagon that will get them away from rabid parents.