Removing the water cooler isn't enough! You need to get rid of drinking fountains, coffee makers, vending machines, shared refrigerators, wet bars... any place where liquid refreshments might be dispensed. For added security, photocopiers, fax machines, and any other equipment which people might stand in line for or loiter nearby, should also be eliminated. In sensitive environments and military installations, elevators should be replaced by single-file escalators. And water cannons should be used on the smokers who assemble outside. (Not just for security, but for their own good.) It's a jungle in here, people!
Ah. I understand now. But I suspect the same pattern applies to most academic disciplines: you get a minority who go on to further develop that field of knowledge, and the majority go on to actually do something practical.:)
That isn't trolling, just pointing out that your reasoning is fundamentally flawed. Some very non-reputable companies spend a lot of money on advertising... quite often because they have bad reputations.
... aside for the minority who come out of high end schools and are lucky to find a job as a computer scientist (where they most likely wont do -any- programming), virtually all computer science graduates end up programmers.
They do? I have a CS degree, and despite spending a lot of time coding in college, I don't do much of it today. Other than hacking a little HTML and PHP, my job is mostly system administration, network maintenance, training, support, and building the occasional system out of spare parts. I'm about as fluent in C as I am in Spanish (which I haven't used since college either). Looking through my CS department's alumni database, I do see a lot of people in programming jobs, but plenty of other positions as well. Not that I'm complaining that my college education was inapplicable (the skill of problem-solving is always applicable), but I'm neither a programmer nor any kind of "real" Computer Scientist (e.g. research, theory, teaching). I'm a CS grad whose jobs have all involved hardware and people more than code. And I'm far from the only one out here.
Ever heard of search engine spamming? Even the best page ranking algorithm cannot guarantee that the policies and practises of the company being linked to are compatible with yours.
Ever heard of contextual advertising?
Ever heard of a company using the money they get from ripping off their customers to attract more customers to rip off?
Just choose one of the bigger names and you are safe, if you want a smaller, there are many other things to check their reputability.
If you feel you can't trust them after they give notice, how can you trust them the day before? The only thing that's changed is that the you no longer have the threat of termination to use against them. If that's the only basis you have for "trusting" them, you've got bigger problems with your business management than employees who've given notice.
You're right that giving notice is not legally required. But it's usually a smart thing to do.
See, not everyone quits their job out of spite. Last time, I simply found something I liked a lot better. Giving two weeks' notice allowed me time to explain to my co-workers (many of whom I liked) what projects they were going to have to take over, and gave my boss (whom I didn't hate) a little bit of a head start on finding a replacement for me. As for them not trusting me, on my last day I was asked to close up for the weekend and leave the keys on my boss' desk. And a year later, when my new employer assigned me to work on a joint project with the old employer, things went very smoothly. Just an example of how these sorts of things can be civilized and amicable, and basic courtesy can be a good idea. Maybe you can quit your way and get "good" references ("Yes, he was qualified and performed his duties well."), but when I quit I get great references.
At least with a car, there is an MSRP that says what it is worth.
And with a suborbital space flight, there's a web site that says what it's worth.
Sure, some millionaire might pay $25 million for it, but how much would the average Joe pay.
Um, the average Joe wouldn't pay anything, because he can't afford it. But the price he would pay is {checks web site} $102,000, because they don't offer an "average Joe" discount.
U.S. income tax is not a tax on cash received, but on income. Whether you're paid in dollars, stock options, room and board, sexual favors, or magic beans, they want you to pay tax on the value of that income. If they only taxed income in the form of money, employees would start requesting their pay in the form of gift certificates, merchandise, and other not-money substitutes as loopholes to get around it. That would not only hurt tax revenues, but undermine the dollar as a monetary system, which the federal government definitely does not want to happen. So it's a tax on the dollar value of your income, not just the dollars.
There's no justification at all for keeping.BV; Bouvet is not only uninhabited, but uninhabitable. It never should have been given a TLD in the first place.
.SJ can make a better case for remaining, as it has a substantial permanent population, and has some limited autonomy from Norwegian government. Of course the fact that the TLD is not in use argues against it.
While these are being reviewed,.HM for Australia's Heard and MacDonald Islands deserves a look. They're uninhabited, and even though they're more hospitable than Bouvet, they're a wilderness preserve, so no human habitation is allowed. France's Southern Territories (.TF) are home to researchers, but no permanent residents.
Mod parent up. These kinds of filings always contain statements of potential doom that you'll never find in any press release. If they're in a legal dispute, they have to say what the consequences will be if they lose... even if they sincerely and correctly expect to win. So it's not an admission that their case is weak, only of the fact that they are involved in litigation whose outcome is still pending.
But I just want an mpeg file. That is hardly implausible.
In this universe it is. Entertainment publishers aren't going to start handing out files with no DRM attached, because (as you point out) there are so many P2P networks out there where it will immediately be distributed to the world. They're not going to trust consumers with plain standard MPEGs, because consumers have shown that they can't be trusted.
Uh, how about the fact that I'd like to watch the show on my TV, and be able to re-watch it as I desire (for no additional charge). Watching it in low-res on a 15" PC monitor doesn't quite cut it.
So it's their fault that you bought a puny monitor for your PC, and your graphics card lacks a video-out jack? And who's stopping you from re-watching shows?
Nor does a set-top box that stops working the day I stop paying some fee, or which expires the shows 10 days after I download them. I'm just not willing to pay for shows that I can't do anything with other than watch one time in a web-browser in one OS.
Sorry, but I don't even know what crap services you're talking about here. I was talking about the iTunes model, which has none of these shortcomings.
Only problem is that the download services are all DRM'ed to death and incompatible with mythtv.
So what? None of that provides any real obstacle to watching the show (which is the point of television, I thought). Yeah, DRM systems are bad, and it'd be swell if everything worked seamlessly with everyone's favorite playback system. Wouldn't it be neat if first-run movies played on my home TV, and there were no commercials on anything, and I could call up epsidoes of All in the Family to watch at will? I'd also like to have a pony. Downloading TV shows for a fee meets my needs, as well as can be expected, at a price I find reasonable. Complaining that it doesn't match an implausible ideal seems pointless.
While I think $1.99 is a bit too high a price, I'm happy to pay that for each episode of Battlestar Galactica and Monk that I download from the iTunes Store. (Which means it isn't really "too high", I suppose.) At it's very worst (a month with new episodes of both series every week), it would cost me $19.90, which is cheaper than it would cost me to subscribe to a cable or satellite service that includes both programs. Over the course of a year, it costs me an average of only $7.30 a month. And if I get tired of watching Baltar cry, I can cancel the service at will.
If I were to discover a few more series that I can't get over the air and start buying them from iTunes, the economics might start to shift, but it's not as if I'm sitting around wishing I had more teevee to occupy my time. For someone who watches about an hour a day of TV, most of which is available free over the air, the iTunes model makes perfect sense, and a cable/satellite subscription makes none.
I've read about stores that tried getting rid of pennies by setting their prices strategically to come out as multiples of 5 cents, but because of sales tax (which rounds to the nearest cent differently depending on whether you buy items together or separately) they couldn't make it work. I already find store clerks quietly rounding to the nearest nickel when making change, especially if it's in the customer's favor; they don't even bother with the penny cup. But some stores that have tried to go penny-free and round prices to the nearest nickel at the cash register as a matter of policy, have had to deal with the occasional idiot who doesn't grasp how completely trivial a cent or two is, and that it all evens out over time. Which is why we probably need the legislature to sanction it. The UK did it with the ha'penny not that long ago (England also had the sense to discontinue the one-pound note after they introduced the coin). They caught some grief from the people who were still mourning the loss of the shilling, but most people realized the ha'penny was worthless and were happy to be rid of it.
Why not just discontinue the one-cent coin and be done with it? The fact that their face value is less than the value of the metal is just one more indicator that they aren't worth bothering with anymore. Stores routinely put out penny cups for people to add/remove them to make exact change at the cashier, because they're required to conduct transactions to the nearest cent. But if we'd just discontinue the penny and round cash transactions to the nearest five cents, it'd all come out equal in the long term and we'd save a lot of juggling of zinc/copper disks.
The only negatives I can see to doing this are: 1) We wouldn't have a coin with Lincoln's picture on it. Big deal, he's still on the five dollar note. 2) The grocery store near me that for the past half century has had a mechanical horse kids can ride for a penny would have to raise the price.
Slashdot Mirror
It may surprise you to learn that PHP can be run on a Windows system using Microsoft's IIS as its web server.
Removing the water cooler isn't enough! You need to get rid of drinking fountains, coffee makers, vending machines, shared refrigerators, wet bars... any place where liquid refreshments might be dispensed. For added security, photocopiers, fax machines, and any other equipment which people might stand in line for or loiter nearby, should also be eliminated. In sensitive environments and military installations, elevators should be replaced by single-file escalators. And water cannons should be used on the smokers who assemble outside. (Not just for security, but for their own good.) It's a jungle in here, people!
I'm still waiting for a material stiffer than my middle-aged spine.
Ah. I understand now. But I suspect the same pattern applies to most academic disciplines: you get a minority who go on to further develop that field of knowledge, and the majority go on to actually do something practical. :)
That isn't trolling, just pointing out that your reasoning is fundamentally flawed. Some very non-reputable companies spend a lot of money on advertising... quite often because they have bad reputations.
What's mysterious about this? Did anyone actually expect people uploading other people's material to YouTube to be ethical?
If you feel you can't trust them after they give notice, how can you trust them the day before? The only thing that's changed is that the you no longer have the threat of termination to use against them. If that's the only basis you have for "trusting" them, you've got bigger problems with your business management than employees who've given notice.
You're right that giving notice is not legally required. But it's usually a smart thing to do.
See, not everyone quits their job out of spite. Last time, I simply found something I liked a lot better. Giving two weeks' notice allowed me time to explain to my co-workers (many of whom I liked) what projects they were going to have to take over, and gave my boss (whom I didn't hate) a little bit of a head start on finding a replacement for me. As for them not trusting me, on my last day I was asked to close up for the weekend and leave the keys on my boss' desk. And a year later, when my new employer assigned me to work on a joint project with the old employer, things went very smoothly. Just an example of how these sorts of things can be civilized and amicable, and basic courtesy can be a good idea. Maybe you can quit your way and get "good" references ("Yes, he was qualified and performed his duties well."), but when I quit I get great references.
U.S. income tax is not a tax on cash received, but on income. Whether you're paid in dollars, stock options, room and board, sexual favors, or magic beans, they want you to pay tax on the value of that income. If they only taxed income in the form of money, employees would start requesting their pay in the form of gift certificates, merchandise, and other not-money substitutes as loopholes to get around it. That would not only hurt tax revenues, but undermine the dollar as a monetary system, which the federal government definitely does not want to happen. So it's a tax on the dollar value of your income, not just the dollars.
Patent leather, of course.
Note: This contest is only open to residents of the UK.
So no need to worry about the IRS demanding a share... just Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs.
I doubt .IO is in danger, since it technically isn't part of the UK, and therefore couldn't be folded into .UK.
There's no justification at all for keeping .BV; Bouvet is not only uninhabited, but uninhabitable. It never should have been given a TLD in the first place.
.SJ can make a better case for remaining, as it has a substantial permanent population, and has some limited autonomy from Norwegian government. Of course the fact that the TLD is not in use argues against it.
.HM for Australia's Heard and MacDonald Islands deserves a look. They're uninhabited, and even though they're more hospitable than Bouvet, they're a wilderness preserve, so no human habitation is allowed. France's Southern Territories (.TF) are home to researchers, but no permanent residents.
While these are being reviewed,
The 2004 election itself was stolen, but apparently the campaign wasn't.
Mod parent up. These kinds of filings always contain statements of potential doom that you'll never find in any press release. If they're in a legal dispute, they have to say what the consequences will be if they lose... even if they sincerely and correctly expect to win. So it's not an admission that their case is weak, only of the fact that they are involved in litigation whose outcome is still pending.
While I think $1.99 is a bit too high a price, I'm happy to pay that for each episode of Battlestar Galactica and Monk that I download from the iTunes Store. (Which means it isn't really "too high", I suppose.) At it's very worst (a month with new episodes of both series every week), it would cost me $19.90, which is cheaper than it would cost me to subscribe to a cable or satellite service that includes both programs. Over the course of a year, it costs me an average of only $7.30 a month. And if I get tired of watching Baltar cry, I can cancel the service at will.
If I were to discover a few more series that I can't get over the air and start buying them from iTunes, the economics might start to shift, but it's not as if I'm sitting around wishing I had more teevee to occupy my time. For someone who watches about an hour a day of TV, most of which is available free over the air, the iTunes model makes perfect sense, and a cable/satellite subscription makes none.
I don't know. Why don't you try it?
I've read about stores that tried getting rid of pennies by setting their prices strategically to come out as multiples of 5 cents, but because of sales tax (which rounds to the nearest cent differently depending on whether you buy items together or separately) they couldn't make it work. I already find store clerks quietly rounding to the nearest nickel when making change, especially if it's in the customer's favor; they don't even bother with the penny cup. But some stores that have tried to go penny-free and round prices to the nearest nickel at the cash register as a matter of policy, have had to deal with the occasional idiot who doesn't grasp how completely trivial a cent or two is, and that it all evens out over time. Which is why we probably need the legislature to sanction it. The UK did it with the ha'penny not that long ago (England also had the sense to discontinue the one-pound note after they introduced the coin). They caught some grief from the people who were still mourning the loss of the shilling, but most people realized the ha'penny was worthless and were happy to be rid of it.
Why not just discontinue the one-cent coin and be done with it? The fact that their face value is less than the value of the metal is just one more indicator that they aren't worth bothering with anymore. Stores routinely put out penny cups for people to add/remove them to make exact change at the cashier, because they're required to conduct transactions to the nearest cent. But if we'd just discontinue the penny and round cash transactions to the nearest five cents, it'd all come out equal in the long term and we'd save a lot of juggling of zinc/copper disks.
The only negatives I can see to doing this are: 1) We wouldn't have a coin with Lincoln's picture on it. Big deal, he's still on the five dollar note. 2) The grocery store near me that for the past half century has had a mechanical horse kids can ride for a penny would have to raise the price.
I never needed anything more than a TI-55.