Interesting point - in the article, a therapist tells Ms. Moser that it would be unethical for her to have kids. This makes her very upset, understandably. But is he/she right? If you know that any children of yours are likely to have a short life and a protracted, horrible death, is it wrong to reproduce?
Would they *deserve* to get sued? Eh, maybe. But if I were general counsel for Starbucks, I'd advise against it very, very strongly. In addition to their activism, Oxfam does a lot of straight-up humanitarian work, for which they've earned a great deal of respect. Even if Starbucks were to prevail to court, do you really want to be the faceless corporation that's taking money from a non-profit that feeds starving children?
This sounds like a really neat gadget - unobtrusive, simple and potentially quite useful. I'd be willing to pay $100 to use it on my current bluetooth-enabled phone (a razr). I believe a lot of people would be. The problem is that, according to the article, this watch will cost $250, and work only with Sony Ericson phones. This is going to doom the nifty new Caller ID watches, I think.
IANAL, but I'm starting law school in the fall. Folks, being a forceful advocate for one's client does not necessitate being a jackass - which seems a reasonable description of Ms. Abadala, based upon TFA. One can be persuasive, dedicated and hard-working without blowing people off - and it's a good idea to do so. Eventually, you *will* screw up a memo, or miss a deadline, or something like that. Whether you have a reputation for being a good, solid sort after that can determine what happens next.
I would also point out that judges do *not* like arrogant, condescending lawyers.
Frankly, I have all the sympathy in the world for the guy Ms. Abadala walked out on. It seems like he made a strong effort to be professional and courteous, and she made every possible effort to push his buttons for the hell of it.
Let me close on this point: This woman was *not* acting like a lawyer, and what she was doing was not what being a lawyer is about. She was being a twit.
Are you sure of this? I know that this is questionable as a citation, but I attended a screening of the film "Chernobyl Heart" in Washington during the environmental film festival- this film examines the spread of radioactive materials from the plant through Belarus, and the resulting rise in birth defects, cancers, etc. It even shows schoolchildren being tested for contamination, with alarming results.
For what it's worth, the Belarussion government has enthusiastically signed off on this work - their ambassador to the United States attended the screening, answered questions during the Q and A, and urged greater international involvement and aid. Of course, President Lykoshenko's government is something less than a beacon of honesty and light - but still, the consensus on the wide-spread health impact of chernobyl does seem to be impressive.
"On my computer here I run about 15 different applications on a regular basis. There are probably another 20 or 30 installed that I use every couple of months or so. I still don't understand why operating systems are so dumb that they let any old virus or piece of spyware execute without even asking me."
The author has a point here, but answer to his question is very simple - his computer doesn't ask for permission to execute most programs because most users would absolutely panic if their computer regularly asked for their input.
I base this on my own experience as a college tech, which is necessarily limited. That said, two points to consider:
I have never, ever seen a student running in a non-administrator account on their Windows PC, even though XP supports this feature. This would prevent much malicious software from running, and avoids the "default permit" behavior that the article author finds so odious. However, users do *not* want to see error messages when they try to run things, nor do they want to log into a different account to install their p2p flavor of the week. They want things to "just work". So, non-administrator accounts are fantastically unpopular.
Another example: Zonealarm. My school encourages students - in fact, tells students they are *required* to - install ZoneAlarm. So what happens? Zonealarm asks them if they want to let, say, AIM or Weatherbug access their network connect - and the user freaks out. They think it's an error, that their computer is busted, etc.
In short- desktop machines tend to be default-permit because desktop users are completely unwilling to deal with an alternative arrangement.
One of the things that makes Linux so mind-bogglingly great as a desktop OS is that there's not just one "Linux" - I can install the distro that meets my needs more or less exactly. Might Microsoft be trying to match that experience?
Yes, global warming, terrible shame, that. On the other hand, supposedly there may be considerable mineral and oil deposits in Siberia- this may make them more accessible. If so, the Russians may not be in that big a hurry to contain the "problem".
I figure that I can't be the only political science nerd on slashdot, so I'll post about some good polisci internships - my apologies if this is too far off-topc.
I've spent the past few months interning in the Governor's Citizen Services office in New Hampshire. I'd highly recommend it for anyone in-state - you work with a good, small group of people, and much of the work is interesting. Yah, you do a lot of data-entry and phone-answering, but there's also interesting research work if you want it. I've written summaries of several state bills - I even briefed the Governor on one. The only real downside is that there is *no* possibility of getting paid - check to see if your school offers summer grants. Oh - and there often aren't enough computers to go around. Bring a laptop, get used to working in the state library, or think about "telecommuting" on research-heavy days.
In the spring semester, I interned with COLEAD in Washington - the Coalition for American Leadership Abroad. It's a two-person advocacy group that tries to coordinate NGOs that want Congress to spend more money on foreign affairs. This is *not* a "mover and shaker* internship, but it's educational -of necessity, you end up learning a lot about NGOs and the cognressional budgetary process.
Speaking as a campus PC tech, it would make my life a lot easier if students couldn't install bonzi-crap on their machines. Ideally, I'd like to just hand them a Mepis CD and have them install that - better still, I'd like to have some "temporary" techs install it at the start of the year, and set up the root account without giving the machine owner the password. That'd be sweet.
I'm a little surprised that the submitter mentioned academic journals accepting advertisements. I know some fairly "high-end" magazine like "Foreign Affairs" do, but I know that the journal "International Security" does not - never has, most likely never will. Is International Security unique in this?
If I may ask, why "shouldn't" the customers be locked in? It's hardly a secret that Microsoft's software uses proprietary file formats by default. If I don't want to get "locked in" to these format, I can either make a point of saving my MS Office files in something other than Word format, or I can use OpenOffice.org and avoid the problem entirely. So long as I have the option of not using Microsoft's formats, or even their software, why should I care how proprietary their formats are?
Off-topic, but: I gotta say, your sig makes Soviet Russia appear quite pleasant. I'd certainly like to be welcomed by new overlords. I say we urge Putin to bring back the USSR.
Agreed, certainly. That's why I mentioned the World Bank is moving away from "one-size-fits-all" macroeconomic adjustment programs. But the general rule does seem to be that free trade and reduction in government spending is the way to go. One reason for this is probably that while some states - like Argentina - may use government spending to improve infrastructure, and thus create a better climate for investment (as well as aiding human development), others tend to blow it on bullshit. Corruption, infrastructure projects that are being built more due to political connections than the merits of the project, and so on. The other nice thing about austerity programs is that they necessitate greater transparency - hugely important in fighting the sort of corruption that can really hinder development.
So yeah, you're right that there are exceptions - but as I rule, I'd argue that a *degree* of austerity measures (adjusted on a case-by-case basis) tends to make sense more often than not.
You've also touched on another interesting point - the "debt crisis" in the developing world, and the harmful effect that the interest on all those lovely loans can have. It's certainly unpleasant, but it's hard to think of a way around the problem - few developed states are willing to simply give the money away.
The World Bank's proper name is "the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD)". It's called that because, well, that's what it does - and it's done that ever since it was started following World War 2 to assist in the rebuilding of a war-ravaged Europe. Are some World Bank projects questionable? Sure - in the 1980s, there were *huge* protests over the World Bank's willingness to ignore environmental concerns in funding development projects - but since then, it's developed entire programs dedicated to biodiversity and other environmentalist concerns - hell, you can walk into the World Bank and grab a free book on biodiversity projects in South Africa. Yes, the linked article discusses a proposed dam. But the sorry truth is - dam construction is not an unmitigated evil. You need to balance the needs of environmental concerns against development needs, or find ways to combine the two - but environmental issues are very much on the table.
The other big (legitimate) gripe people have with the World Bank is that loans tend to come with strings attached - market liberalization, government asset privatization and reduced government spending, free capital flows, and so on. This is bitter economic medicine, though mostly necessary in the long run (even committed free-traders like Jagdish Bhagwati admit that free capital flows, without regulation, can do great harm - see the Asian financial crisis.) But these standards (known as the Washington Consensus) are subject to constant revision and review, and the World Bank is starting to move away from "one-size-fits-all" macroeconomic solutions attached to loans.
In short - the World Bank does a great deal of good. Are there problems? Certainly. But those problems can and should be discussed and solved without simply dismissing the World Bank as simply dedicated to "world capitalism...blind to the plight of the people that it is ostensibly supposed to benifit." This is a disservice to the men and women who work there, and to the institution itself.
Incidentally - was it Animaniacs or Tiny Toons that introduced Pinky and the Brain? I'd think the Brain would make an acceptable Trek villain. Hell, look at "Nemesis" and "Insurrection" - compared to that tripe, he'd make a *superb* villain.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you mean Quake. :)
You're right, that is more like Europa than Titan is.
Except for Titan. Attempt no landing there.
Interesting point - in the article, a therapist tells Ms. Moser that it would be unethical for her to have kids. This makes her very upset, understandably. But is he/she right? If you know that any children of yours are likely to have a short life and a protracted, horrible death, is it wrong to reproduce?
I tend to think it is, but that's me.
Would they *deserve* to get sued? Eh, maybe. But if I were general counsel for Starbucks, I'd advise against it very, very strongly. In addition to their activism, Oxfam does a lot of straight-up humanitarian work, for which they've earned a great deal of respect. Even if Starbucks were to prevail to court, do you really want to be the faceless corporation that's taking money from a non-profit that feeds starving children?
A rebuttal makes sense - a lawsuit doesn't.
I doubt that - but you might wear out the bearings faster.
This sounds like a really neat gadget - unobtrusive, simple and potentially quite useful. I'd be willing to pay $100 to use it on my current bluetooth-enabled phone (a razr). I believe a lot of people would be. The problem is that, according to the article, this watch will cost $250, and work only with Sony Ericson phones. This is going to doom the nifty new Caller ID watches, I think.
IANAL, but I'm starting law school in the fall. Folks, being a forceful advocate for one's client does not necessitate being a jackass - which seems a reasonable description of Ms. Abadala, based upon TFA. One can be persuasive, dedicated and hard-working without blowing people off - and it's a good idea to do so. Eventually, you *will* screw up a memo, or miss a deadline, or something like that. Whether you have a reputation for being a good, solid sort after that can determine what happens next.
I would also point out that judges do *not* like arrogant, condescending lawyers.
Frankly, I have all the sympathy in the world for the guy Ms. Abadala walked out on. It seems like he made a strong effort to be professional and courteous, and she made every possible effort to push his buttons for the hell of it.
Let me close on this point: This woman was *not* acting like a lawyer, and what she was doing was not what being a lawyer is about. She was being a twit.
Didn't pepsi do this about ten years ago? I'm a staunch Coke advocate, myself, but let's give credit where credit is due. :)
I have to say, I was more impressed with "Windows Live" when it was called the Google Personalized Homepage.
Are you sure of this? I know that this is questionable as a citation, but I attended a screening of the film "Chernobyl Heart" in Washington during the environmental film festival- this film examines the spread of radioactive materials from the plant through Belarus, and the resulting rise in birth defects, cancers, etc. It even shows schoolchildren being tested for contamination, with alarming results.
For what it's worth, the Belarussion government has enthusiastically signed off on this work - their ambassador to the United States attended the screening, answered questions during the Q and A, and urged greater international involvement and aid. Of course, President Lykoshenko's government is something less than a beacon of honesty and light - but still, the consensus on the wide-spread health impact of chernobyl does seem to be impressive.
From the article:
"On my computer here I run about 15 different applications on a regular basis. There are probably another 20 or 30 installed that I use every couple of months or so. I still don't understand why operating systems are so dumb that they let any old virus or piece of spyware execute without even asking me."
The author has a point here, but answer to his question is very simple - his computer doesn't ask for permission to execute most programs because most users would absolutely panic if their computer regularly asked for their input.
I base this on my own experience as a college tech, which is necessarily limited. That said, two points to consider:
I have never, ever seen a student running in a non-administrator account on their Windows PC, even though XP supports this feature. This would prevent much malicious software from running, and avoids the "default permit" behavior that the article author finds so odious. However, users do *not* want to see error messages when they try to run things, nor do they want to log into a different account to install their p2p flavor of the week. They want things to "just work". So, non-administrator accounts are fantastically unpopular.
Another example: Zonealarm. My school encourages students - in fact, tells students they are *required* to - install ZoneAlarm. So what happens? Zonealarm asks them if they want to let, say, AIM or Weatherbug access their network connect - and the user freaks out. They think it's an error, that their computer is busted, etc.
In short- desktop machines tend to be default-permit because desktop users are completely unwilling to deal with an alternative arrangement.
One of the things that makes Linux so mind-bogglingly great as a desktop OS is that there's not just one "Linux" - I can install the distro that meets my needs more or less exactly. Might Microsoft be trying to match that experience?
Wage? You mean, money? As in, government-issued coins or bills (or electronic equivalents) that can be freely exchanged for goods and/or services?
Lucky bastard.
Yes, global warming, terrible shame, that. On the other hand, supposedly there may be considerable mineral and oil deposits in Siberia- this may make them more accessible. If so, the Russians may not be in that big a hurry to contain the "problem".
I figure that I can't be the only political science nerd on slashdot, so I'll post about some good polisci internships - my apologies if this is too far off-topc.
I've spent the past few months interning in the Governor's Citizen Services office in New Hampshire. I'd highly recommend it for anyone in-state - you work with a good, small group of people, and much of the work is interesting. Yah, you do a lot of data-entry and phone-answering, but there's also interesting research work if you want it. I've written summaries of several state bills - I even briefed the Governor on one. The only real downside is that there is *no* possibility of getting paid - check to see if your school offers summer grants. Oh - and there often aren't enough computers to go around. Bring a laptop, get used to working in the state library, or think about "telecommuting" on research-heavy days.
In the spring semester, I interned with COLEAD in Washington - the Coalition for American Leadership Abroad. It's a two-person advocacy group that tries to coordinate NGOs that want Congress to spend more money on foreign affairs. This is *not* a "mover and shaker* internship, but it's educational -of necessity, you end up learning a lot about NGOs and the cognressional budgetary process.
Speaking as a campus PC tech, it would make my life a lot easier if students couldn't install bonzi-crap on their machines. Ideally, I'd like to just hand them a Mepis CD and have them install that - better still, I'd like to have some "temporary" techs install it at the start of the year, and set up the root account without giving the machine owner the password. That'd be sweet.
A man can dream, can't he?
I'm curious - do you see any potential objections to this idea? Any at all? How about potential abuses?
Were I less well-caffeinated, I'd probably create an instance of Godwin's Law right now. As it is, I'll just point and laugh.
*points and laughs*
I'm a little surprised that the submitter mentioned academic journals accepting advertisements. I know some fairly "high-end" magazine like "Foreign Affairs" do, but I know that the journal "International Security" does not - never has, most likely never will. Is International Security unique in this?
Fair enough.
If I may ask, why "shouldn't" the customers be locked in? It's hardly a secret that Microsoft's software uses proprietary file formats by default. If I don't want to get "locked in" to these format, I can either make a point of saving my MS Office files in something other than Word format, or I can use OpenOffice.org and avoid the problem entirely. So long as I have the option of not using Microsoft's formats, or even their software, why should I care how proprietary their formats are?
Off-topic, but: I gotta say, your sig makes Soviet Russia appear quite pleasant. I'd certainly like to be welcomed by new overlords. I say we urge Putin to bring back the USSR.
Agreed, certainly. That's why I mentioned the World Bank is moving away from "one-size-fits-all" macroeconomic adjustment programs. But the general rule does seem to be that free trade and reduction in government spending is the way to go. One reason for this is probably that while some states - like Argentina - may use government spending to improve infrastructure, and thus create a better climate for investment (as well as aiding human development), others tend to blow it on bullshit. Corruption, infrastructure projects that are being built more due to political connections than the merits of the project, and so on. The other nice thing about austerity programs is that they necessitate greater transparency - hugely important in fighting the sort of corruption that can really hinder development.
So yeah, you're right that there are exceptions - but as I rule, I'd argue that a *degree* of austerity measures (adjusted on a case-by-case basis) tends to make sense more often than not.
You've also touched on another interesting point - the "debt crisis" in the developing world, and the harmful effect that the interest on all those lovely loans can have. It's certainly unpleasant, but it's hard to think of a way around the problem - few developed states are willing to simply give the money away.
Really? Nothing beyond the cause of World Capitalism?
Silly me. I thought that the World Bank works on project such as an urgently needed sewage treatment plant in Gaza,
post-secondary education funding in Ethiopia,
and rural electrification in Cambodia.
The World Bank's proper name is "the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD)". It's called that because, well, that's what it does - and it's done that ever since it was started following World War 2 to assist in the rebuilding of a war-ravaged Europe. Are some World Bank projects questionable? Sure - in the 1980s, there were *huge* protests over the World Bank's willingness to ignore environmental concerns in funding development projects - but since then, it's developed entire programs dedicated to biodiversity and other environmentalist concerns - hell, you can walk into the World Bank and grab a free book on biodiversity projects in South Africa. Yes, the linked article discusses a proposed dam. But the sorry truth is - dam construction is not an unmitigated evil. You need to balance the needs of environmental concerns against development needs, or find ways to combine the two - but environmental issues are very much on the table.
The other big (legitimate) gripe people have with the World Bank is that loans tend to come with strings attached - market liberalization, government asset privatization and reduced government spending, free capital flows, and so on. This is bitter economic medicine, though mostly necessary in the long run (even committed free-traders like Jagdish Bhagwati admit that free capital flows, without regulation, can do great harm - see the Asian financial crisis.) But these standards (known as the Washington Consensus) are subject to constant revision and review, and the World Bank is starting to move away from "one-size-fits-all" macroeconomic solutions attached to loans.
In short - the World Bank does a great deal of good. Are there problems? Certainly. But those problems can and should be discussed and solved without simply dismissing the World Bank as simply dedicated to "world capitalism...blind to the plight of the people that it is ostensibly supposed to benifit." This is a disservice to the men and women who work there, and to the institution itself.
Thank you, man. That made my day.
Incidentally - was it Animaniacs or Tiny Toons that introduced Pinky and the Brain? I'd think the Brain would make an acceptable Trek villain. Hell, look at "Nemesis" and "Insurrection" - compared to that tripe, he'd make a *superb* villain.