Estonia has used ID cards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estonian_ID_card) for some time and I am seriously surprised that more governments are not following the same footsteps. While the cards may introduce new security concerns, imagine the amount of bureaucracy that can be reduced if citizens can pay everything from traffic tickets to taxes using a simple card.
I forgot which Russian author stated this, but I can see how the statement "swear words are weapons of the intelligent as opposed to sticks and stones of the masses" can be true. And if you do not dilute your language with "fucks" and "shits" (like college students and drunken sailors do), then swearing will underline your emotions. Unfortunately too many people do not realize it and instead of teaching their kids how to swear properly, they demand censorship of TV and radio programming. As a result we raise mindless generations who will overuse swear words which in its turn will prompt more parents to ask for censorship. I guess this is done by the same people who have not read anything outside their high school English curriculum...
Omega is should stop whining and follow footsteps of companies like Rolex.
In the world of luxury watches it is all about prestige. Rolex watches cost probably around $500 to make and yet the cheapest models sell for 10x. On top of that Rolex will refuse to service any watch with non-Rolex parts. Combine this with regular prices increases and you can produce millions of watches which are sold at a high price. Sure, laws vary from country to country but I dare you to find brand new authentic Rolex watches that are 40% cheaper than comparable models sold at authorized dealers.
Omega wants to expand the market and they sell their timepieces around the globe. The market is flooded with cheap authentic Omegas to the point where authorized dealers will give you 20% off MSRP right away without any negotiation. And honestly I don't see why not. Why should I, a person living in the US spend $2K on a watch that is sold for $1K in a different world country. If Omega really wants to get a free market, then it should treat every consumer equally regardless of where consumers live. If they cannot do it, then they should stop bitching about gray markets.
It is not the Omega logo that is being questioned. Omega has a symbol on the back of the watch that has nothing to do with the Greek letter. It is a symbol that was designed to allow the company to enforce the copyright law. From the article:
Costco lawyers at Robbins, Russell, Englert, Orseck & Untereiner write in their brief that in 2003, Omega began to stamp its Seamaster watches with a small globe design, less than 5 millimeters across, "for the express purpose of invoking the Copyright Act to restrict the resale of its products."
I am with MSFT on this one -- Google's stand on privacy have always been questionable at best because Mountain View jockeys need your personal data to make money. Google may release an OS, a browser and a phone but most of the company's revenue is generated by ads. And quality ads require data about users: Your queries, e-mails, locations, etc. can be used for targeted advertising.
Also, let's not forget the privacy terms. For every query log Google keeps a cookie and an IP address along with the query. The cookie will become anonymous within 9 months. The last octet of the IP will be removed while leaving the first three in place. MSFT removes the full IP from the logs after several months. Google has stated that you can remove the cookie yourself but how many non-geeks know how to do it?
Yet another article about the revenge of the nerds. Seriously folks, if you don't like the way you're treated you have to do something about it. Life is not fair and adaptation is the key to success regardless where you stand on a socioeconomic ladder. Also, it is a pity that Hodgeman misses one critical point: Geeks or whatever you call people who use brains for living are already paid well enough.
I've met really smart people in my life. Some of them were way to close to either of the ends of autism spectrum. Those folks were different by nature and to pick on them would be wrong from a purely moral standpoint. Also I have met plenty of geeks who -- for the lack of better expression -- called for a wrong kind of attention. Showing up to work wearing the same t-shirt they wore when painting the house a week ago, having no hygiene habits, screaming "Linux!" every time somebody asks for a solution (even if the question is not IT related). Add a superiority complex on that and you get an individual that is not very nice to deal with. I tend to avoid those people simply because I know that shit won't stink if you do not touch it. However, there may be people who intentionally would go out of their way to annoy these outliers...
And finally of salaries... If you take a look at the degrees which lead to best paid entry level positions you will see that those degrees are in tech and sciences. Thus a person who gets a good start in the field of science can further move up and earn more money if they combine science with business down the road. No, you won't earn millions of dollars for throwing a ball but being a lead scientist or a guy who writes top notch trading software is a pretty good thing to have on your resume. Those positions will be bullet proof careers in the next century. Too bad football and baseball players can't say the same thing:)
Post like yours make me question why I spend time on Slashdot to begin with. I am sorry, but your post is nothing but a rant and I do not understand how somebody could possible mod it up to "Informative."
Have you ran Windows 7? As somebody who has been running Mac OS X and Linux I was a bit skeptical about the latest release of Windows OS. Then I installed it last year and it has been pretty stable since day one. In fact it crashed fewer times than my Mac OS X (0 vs. 2).
You know, credit should be given where credit is due and all I can say to MSFT folks is "Bravo!" and "Well done!" I do not know what they did to make Windows 7 to be what it is but it is a darn good operating system and for the love of sweet breakfast please stop spitting out one-liners and rally the Linux base.
And for the record, can you tell us what Windows 7 bugs are really bothering you? Constructive criticism is always welcome.
This only shows that Yahoo is like a puppy -- eager to bark but not eager to bite. Show some balls and stop apologizing for something that is indeed pretty cool, out-of-the-box, and pretty damn creative for a tech conference.
First of all, this did not happen in a blue county in the United States. It happened in a country with a different set of norms. Have you ever tried doing business in Asia without entertaining your clients? If so, I'd be curious to know how that worked out. Every freaking meeting is a party! Secondly a lap dance is completely freaking harmless especially when the dancers are fully clothed and when they barely touch your body.
Well, it was a great idea but Yahoo did lobotomize it with the apology.
I vote with my dollars. Why would I want to support a company that fucks with images to make models look skinnier and then goes after the guys who have exposed the photoshop job?
There is a reason why I do not shop at many places; avoiding giving my hard earned money to assholes is one of them.
I have always considered RL to be one of the greatest American designers and I am impartial to some of his stuff. However, this law suit makes me question my beliefs. And if you want to avoid prosecution next time, take a screen shot of the desktop that shows the ad.
Perhaps technology helps us to take literacy to the next level but handwriting of many tech-savvy teens sucks nowadays. Do they not teach cursive in schools any more?
According to the results of the survey aimed to determine the most happiest countries Japan was number 90 (as opposed to the United States at position 114). In fact most of the developed countries did rather poorly due to the fact that consumer oriented economies eventually turn people into unhappy slaves. We constantly need to chase the results of the next quarter and increase productivity. At some point people stop giving shit about the actual meaning of life and proceed to exist. Existence, if you ask me, is not a happy state and some industries have to force individuals to smile. Is this the answer? Fuck no.
If you want me to smile and be happy, give me an extra day off, a bonus or guarantee the fact that I can see a doctor even if I don't have insurance. You can take the 5-bedroom 3-garage houses back to late 90s because life called and it wants me back.
If tax applies only to cars and trucks, then let's ride motorcycles. It is fun and fuel efficient. Many motorcycles come with heated grips, ABS and other stuff that makes two-wheel travel more civilized and if it can help me to avoid taxes that's great. Plus brand new motorcycles are way cheaper than brand new cars. You can have a nice top of the line touring BMW bike for under $20K OTD. How much does the entry level 3 series cost?
The alternative is to stick with older cars unless gov't decides to put a GPS in every vehicle on the road. Even then I'll start bicycling or walking.
Not 100% true. The problem with Boston and its greater area is age. The metro area was designed with nothing in mind. As a result a simple commute can turn into a nightmare if something goes wrong. there are not too many alternative routes once you get downtown because of the one-way streets that will exercise your patience to the point of no return. Also Boston is home to thousands of free-loading college students who make commutes on Friday and Saturday nights even more painful.
I lived many blocks away from Fenway and yet every game turned my community and traffic around it into a clusterfuck. I worked next to AT&T stadium in SF and the side effects associated with each game were nothing compared to what I've experienced in Boston.
+1. If it were not for my SO, I would totally move. After living in many states and traveling around the U.S. I am convinced that any city out there is a bad place. Suburbs are even worse because you have to maintain your house, your lawn and do other dog tricks in order to remain a good neighbor. I understand that: Nobody wants to live next to a guy who has 2 cars on bricks and an moved lawn. But reality bites and trying to keep up with your neighbors is a royal pain in the ass especially if you don't have any slightest wish to do so.
I would love to live in a remote place where I can get a decent chunk of land so I don't have to watch my neighbors wash their cars and throw kid parties every weekend. Give me a salary I can live on w/o issues, a satellite dish, and a house. I will gladly commute to work on a horse, go fishing, and do night photography on weekends in a place where you can actually see stars. As far as I am concerned suburbs and metro areas are slow death.
I worked for several Fortune 50 companies and every NDA included at least one thing: The company was to be my sole for-profit employer. One of the companies put a restriction on non-profit, e.g. Open Source, work. Do I bitch about it? Absolutely not. First of all, most of the time I am way too busy to do anything outside my work. Secondly, the benefits and the salary justify the NDA. Living in the state of California helps since courts here have been quite libertarian when it comes to NDAs if I need to fight it in court. So yeah, as you can imagine I have not had a problem with it. Sorry, but you have missed my point.
The person asked about getting a second gig as a part-time development job. It sounds like the OP has cushy position which sucks in terms of organizational politics. In this case I'll strongly recommend looking for a new job or sitting where you are now while trying to cut some costs. At the very very very least you want to establish an LLC in order to avoid working as a private contractor. Of course, that may go against the NDA as well so you will have to choose what is best. And for the love of god please stop this stupid approach of taking every argument sentence by sentence. Say something meaningful, will ya?
The state of the economy has little to do with the fact that things need to be done. The number of job openings will always be greater than the number of competent people who have enough skills to perform these jobs. Don't believe me? Take a look at your co-workers and see how many of them are really worth their salaries. If anything recession is a great time for consultants. Most of the time companies shred "fancy suits" and other workers who were not needed to begin with. Of course, I am an optimist. The rest of you can run around screaming about the end of the world. But if you really really want a new gig, you will do something about it.
I have not done this myself because some of my friends have. When I saw what they were going through I decided to avoid the idea altogether for several reasons.
First of all, if your job is stable you may want to read the contract or the NDA that the company had you sign when you became employed. Many companies forbid you from working for profit or working at all. Wanna risk your well paid job? Be my guest.
Another good reason for not accepting the second job is because it is not going to be a second job for you. In the eyes of your client, your second job is going to be his primary or the only job. This means the client will not expect less from you by any means. Calls at work during business hours, meeting during weekends and weekdays, etc. Are you ready for it? And if you for some reason manage your time well and actually get both of the jobs done then say good-bye to your free time.
I have observed a friend of mine who made a good hourly rate at his part time job. No time to relax led to constant family troubles which are NOT worth anything in the long run. The extra money that he had made on the side essentially went to family therapy of the 21st century: Shopping sprees, vacations one can barely afford, etc. The net income was zero if you don't count the lost nerve cells. That's why I recommend you to look the other way and if you do need to save some money review your family budget.
Finally somewhere in your post you mentioned that your current organization is not the best fit for you. Are you sure you want to get a part-time gig? It sounds like you are bored and you'd like a new job. Why not get a new position that pays more? I know that we are in a recession but if you're any good I am sure there will be a job opening. If anything, I'd consider doing some Open Source development work and that way you can put something on your resume later on. At least that way you will have to work on your schedule without having to answer to a pissed off client.
What the fuck is wrong with this country? Seriously, instead of fixing the problem at its core we come up with an idea that is so fucking ridiculous that I want to cry. Let's track in-state driving habits so we can charge road consumption tax... You can't be serious!
First of all, if you want to raise money have toll roads. You can't drive anywhere in MA without dropping a dollar or two. If you don't like that idea, raise the gas tax. And if you don't like even that, raise sales tax on the vehicles that have the most potential to damage roads (SUVs). And finally why not just say "Look, we have no money to fix the roads and thus we are raising the states sale's tax." If you don't have any sources that you can tax, legalize weed and prostitution. Tax that. But please for the love of God do not track private citizens across the state in order to raise pennies on the dollar you have spend on the system.
People will simply buy older cars that do not have the tracking equipment and hang on to those cars for longer periods of time. Also there is a famous option of buying a car out-of-state and having your insurance information sent to a P.O. Honestly, I am all for environment protection and better usage of natural resource but I am not willing to give up any of my liberties in favor of a law that is so wrong.
Nice rant dude. Who the fuck rated it "insightful?" Seriously, you're so full of it you may need a new shovel for Christmas. I read some of your posts and it seems like you're lacking something. Some people just want to get shit done on their computers and it does not matter what they use. Must you piss on people just because they choose laptops over desktops?
I have stopped using desktops a while ago for one simple reason: I do enough stuff on a computer that it is worth brining it with me everywhere I go. E-mail, digital photography, deveopment, web browsing -- a modern laptop is capable of doing all of this. You can buy a pre-build Linux laptop from Dell for less than a grand. What is the reason for having a desktop again? Of course, if you're a fucking haxor who wants RAID 1+0, 15K RPM SAS drives and the rest of the stuff, be my guest. For the rest of us a laptop will do fine. But what about security?
Well, what about it? A desktop can be stolen just as easy as a laptop provided that somebody really wants to steal it. I bet in many cases laptops are "stolen" because their owners forget them in coffee shops or cabs. In the digital age there is no excuse not to have whole disk encryption combined with permissions and things like File Vault (if you're on Mac OS X). Have a look at list of the wonderful software that can help you. In fact if most laptop vendors install and force users to use encryption laptop theft is not going to be a problem provided that these machines can be backed up in a secure manner. Also, an organization may require all laptop users to use software as service, e.g. Google Apps., in order to avoid loss of data due to theft. If these steps are taken then lost laptops simply become a matter of personal responsibility.
Finally, the only thing that still makes me want to use a desktop at work is the fact that my 15" bulky laptop is a bitch to carry back and forth (we are required to bring all our laptops home). Make it smaller, lighter and more rugged and I will forget that desktop existed.
Google is not the only offender. In fact if you read TOS and privacy policies for many other companies, like AOL (owns ICQ), you will see that many popular products are quite dangerous to anybody who is concerned about privacy. For example, an ICQ account cannot be deleted. You can only remove information in the account and that is that. However, since Google is just a major player it simply shows on the tip of the iceberg.
I bet most people who read/. know that there is no such thing as privacy on the Internet. Privacy is only limited by the amount of resources available to private companies or federal agencies and in fact most of the network traffic can be recorded if necessary. Of course whether such recordings will be useful is not clear, but it is still possible. If a DA has thousands of well paid investigators and a budget to enforce every single law, you bet your sweet ass many of us will be wiretapped and charged with stupid shit like violation of TOS (horray for Lori Drew's case, the PATRIOT act and other sweet by-products of 9/11.). The only question is what you, a private citizen, can do about this?
Ideally, I would like every service provide to clearly state that personal data about me will be stored on their system and for how long. If anything, users should have an option to permanently delete their information without a trace. Also, inactive accounts should be automatically deleted. This already happens in real life where stores are required to shred credit cards lost on their premises if the owner of the card does not claim it within a reasonable amount of time. Unfortunately these policies will only add additional burden on companies and not being able to mine your private data is going to be a disaster for some.
Let me make a wild guess... The AC is not a natural born U.S. citizen and thus he has no paranoia about his legal status. If you know a thing or two about immigration law you will realize that unless you have U.S. citizenship by birth, then your legal status in this country is still up in the air even if you become a naturalized citizen and never leave your home state for 80 years after that.
Our country has pretty open departation policies and even if one becomes a naturalized U.S. citizen that person can be denaturalized via a judicial process; the process can be started at any point after naturalization until the person dies. Moreover, a naturalized citizen can be deported for crimes that took place before naturalization even if the individual was not aware of such crimes during application process. A resident alien can be deported for any crime that contains elements of moral turpitude. NIS and BIA have to show only one thing: A person was inadmissible due to a crime or because the person lacked good moral character.
Let's say that you do something questionable. If you're a permanent resident this questionable act can be turned into a crime of moral turpitude and you have your one way ticket back home. It does not matter how many years you have lived in the states or if you're a well known philantropist/community leader. If such questionable action took place before you became a citizen and a federal judge says that this as a crime of moral turpitude then you may kiss your naturalization application good-bye becuase you were not a person of good morals, a requirement for becoming a U.S. citizen, before applying for citizenship. This does not happen often but it has been done at least several times in the past. The last time it hit a 56 year old Haitian immigrant who, according to undercover cops, "knew where to buy crack cocaine." The guy got 5 years on conspiracy charges and when he got out he faced deportation proceedings. The fact that the person was indicted and convicted after becoming a U.S. citizen did not play any role because the judges ruled that the defendant was not a person of good morals to begin with. So please answer me this: What is the chance that this is not going to happen to another immigrant?
If you start some shit or express your political views in one way or another, you may hit a wrong radar and then you'll have to attend a bunch of hearings and listen to people debating about your morals. Who says that they will rule in your favor? For many immigrants who have no home other than the United States the sole question of returning to where they came from may mean life and death. Would you want to risk that? I think not. Oh and by the way stating your opinion in public media may just very well fall against you. Take a look at a deportation case against Frank Costello.
If you have not considered getting involved with ACLU, then now it is the perfect time. There is much more at stake here than just a law. From the article:
SAN FRANCISCO - The Bush administration on Tuesday will try to convince a federal judge to let stand a law granting retroactive legal immunity to the nation's telecoms, which are accused of transmitting Americans' private communications to the National Security Agency without warrants.
This is retoractive! First of all, it means that the companies cannot be sued for breaking the law. Secondly, this action opens the door for other retroactive cases. If we can grant immunity for something that has happened in the past we can sure as hell find a way to sue for something that has happned many years ago as well. What will this action mean for cases with expired statutes of limitations? Will the gov't be able to put you behind the bars just because you have done something long-long time ago? Given some of the recent cases, like the MySpace.com guilty verdict, stuff like this raises hair on my back. What strikes me the most is that most of the laws are pro-active. This means that if a prisoner is serving the time for an action that has recently became legal or has been downgraded (e.g. felony became a misdemeanor), it is not likely that the prisoner will be released out of jail without any serious judicial proceedings and yet companies get a get-out-of-jail card.
Slashdot Mirror
Estonia has used ID cards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estonian_ID_card) for some time and I am seriously surprised that more governments are not following the same footsteps. While the cards may introduce new security concerns, imagine the amount of bureaucracy that can be reduced if citizens can pay everything from traffic tickets to taxes using a simple card.
I forgot which Russian author stated this, but I can see how the statement "swear words are weapons of the intelligent as opposed to sticks and stones of the masses" can be true. And if you do not dilute your language with "fucks" and "shits" (like college students and drunken sailors do), then swearing will underline your emotions. Unfortunately too many people do not realize it and instead of teaching their kids how to swear properly, they demand censorship of TV and radio programming. As a result we raise mindless generations who will overuse swear words which in its turn will prompt more parents to ask for censorship. I guess this is done by the same people who have not read anything outside their high school English curriculum...
Omega is should stop whining and follow footsteps of companies like Rolex.
In the world of luxury watches it is all about prestige. Rolex watches cost probably around $500 to make and yet the cheapest models sell for 10x. On top of that Rolex will refuse to service any watch with non-Rolex parts. Combine this with regular prices increases and you can produce millions of watches which are sold at a high price. Sure, laws vary from country to country but I dare you to find brand new authentic Rolex watches that are 40% cheaper than comparable models sold at authorized dealers.
Omega wants to expand the market and they sell their timepieces around the globe. The market is flooded with cheap authentic Omegas to the point where authorized dealers will give you 20% off MSRP right away without any negotiation. And honestly I don't see why not. Why should I, a person living in the US spend $2K on a watch that is sold for $1K in a different world country. If Omega really wants to get a free market, then it should treat every consumer equally regardless of where consumers live. If they cannot do it, then they should stop bitching about gray markets.
It is not the Omega logo that is being questioned. Omega has a symbol on the back of the watch that has nothing to do with the Greek letter. It is a symbol that was designed to allow the company to enforce the copyright law. From the article:
Costco lawyers at Robbins, Russell, Englert, Orseck & Untereiner write in their brief that in 2003, Omega began to stamp its Seamaster watches with a small globe design, less than 5 millimeters across, "for the express purpose of invoking the Copyright Act to restrict the resale of its products."
I am with MSFT on this one -- Google's stand on privacy have always been questionable at best because Mountain View jockeys need your personal data to make money. Google may release an OS, a browser and a phone but most of the company's revenue is generated by ads. And quality ads require data about users: Your queries, e-mails, locations, etc. can be used for targeted advertising.
Also, let's not forget the privacy terms. For every query log Google keeps a cookie and an IP address along with the query. The cookie will become anonymous within 9 months. The last octet of the IP will be removed while leaving the first three in place. MSFT removes the full IP from the logs after several months. Google has stated that you can remove the cookie yourself but how many non-geeks know how to do it?
Yet another article about the revenge of the nerds. Seriously folks, if you don't like the way you're treated you have to do something about it. Life is not fair and adaptation is the key to success regardless where you stand on a socioeconomic ladder. Also, it is a pity that Hodgeman misses one critical point: Geeks or whatever you call people who use brains for living are already paid well enough.
I've met really smart people in my life. Some of them were way to close to either of the ends of autism spectrum. Those folks were different by nature and to pick on them would be wrong from a purely moral standpoint. Also I have met plenty of geeks who -- for the lack of better expression -- called for a wrong kind of attention. Showing up to work wearing the same t-shirt they wore when painting the house a week ago, having no hygiene habits, screaming "Linux!" every time somebody asks for a solution (even if the question is not IT related). Add a superiority complex on that and you get an individual that is not very nice to deal with. I tend to avoid those people simply because I know that shit won't stink if you do not touch it. However, there may be people who intentionally would go out of their way to annoy these outliers...
And finally of salaries... If you take a look at the degrees which lead to best paid entry level positions you will see that those degrees are in tech and sciences. Thus a person who gets a good start in the field of science can further move up and earn more money if they combine science with business down the road. No, you won't earn millions of dollars for throwing a ball but being a lead scientist or a guy who writes top notch trading software is a pretty good thing to have on your resume. Those positions will be bullet proof careers in the next century. Too bad football and baseball players can't say the same thing :)
Post like yours make me question why I spend time on Slashdot to begin with. I am sorry, but your post is nothing but a rant and I do not understand how somebody could possible mod it up to "Informative."
Have you ran Windows 7? As somebody who has been running Mac OS X and Linux I was a bit skeptical about the latest release of Windows OS. Then I installed it last year and it has been pretty stable since day one. In fact it crashed fewer times than my Mac OS X (0 vs. 2).
You know, credit should be given where credit is due and all I can say to MSFT folks is "Bravo!" and "Well done!" I do not know what they did to make Windows 7 to be what it is but it is a darn good operating system and for the love of sweet breakfast please stop spitting out one-liners and rally the Linux base.
And for the record, can you tell us what Windows 7 bugs are really bothering you? Constructive criticism is always welcome.
This only shows that Yahoo is like a puppy -- eager to bark but not eager to bite. Show some balls and stop apologizing for something that is indeed pretty cool, out-of-the-box, and pretty damn creative for a tech conference.
First of all, this did not happen in a blue county in the United States. It happened in a country with a different set of norms. Have you ever tried doing business in Asia without entertaining your clients? If so, I'd be curious to know how that worked out. Every freaking meeting is a party! Secondly a lap dance is completely freaking harmless especially when the dancers are fully clothed and when they barely touch your body.
Well, it was a great idea but Yahoo did lobotomize it with the apology.
I vote with my dollars. Why would I want to support a company that fucks with images to make models look skinnier and then goes after the guys who have exposed the photoshop job? There is a reason why I do not shop at many places; avoiding giving my hard earned money to assholes is one of them.
I have always considered RL to be one of the greatest American designers and I am impartial to some of his stuff. However, this law suit makes me question my beliefs. And if you want to avoid prosecution next time, take a screen shot of the desktop that shows the ad.
Perhaps technology helps us to take literacy to the next level but handwriting of many tech-savvy teens sucks nowadays. Do they not teach cursive in schools any more?
According to the results of the survey aimed to determine the most happiest countries Japan was number 90 (as opposed to the United States at position 114). In fact most of the developed countries did rather poorly due to the fact that consumer oriented economies eventually turn people into unhappy slaves. We constantly need to chase the results of the next quarter and increase productivity. At some point people stop giving shit about the actual meaning of life and proceed to exist. Existence, if you ask me, is not a happy state and some industries have to force individuals to smile. Is this the answer? Fuck no.
If you want me to smile and be happy, give me an extra day off, a bonus or guarantee the fact that I can see a doctor even if I don't have insurance. You can take the 5-bedroom 3-garage houses back to late 90s because life called and it wants me back.
If tax applies only to cars and trucks, then let's ride motorcycles. It is fun and fuel efficient. Many motorcycles come with heated grips, ABS and other stuff that makes two-wheel travel more civilized and if it can help me to avoid taxes that's great. Plus brand new motorcycles are way cheaper than brand new cars. You can have a nice top of the line touring BMW bike for under $20K OTD. How much does the entry level 3 series cost?
The alternative is to stick with older cars unless gov't decides to put a GPS in every vehicle on the road. Even then I'll start bicycling or walking.
Not 100% true. The problem with Boston and its greater area is age. The metro area was designed with nothing in mind. As a result a simple commute can turn into a nightmare if something goes wrong. there are not too many alternative routes once you get downtown because of the one-way streets that will exercise your patience to the point of no return. Also Boston is home to thousands of free-loading college students who make commutes on Friday and Saturday nights even more painful.
I lived many blocks away from Fenway and yet every game turned my community and traffic around it into a clusterfuck. I worked next to AT&T stadium in SF and the side effects associated with each game were nothing compared to what I've experienced in Boston.
+1. If it were not for my SO, I would totally move. After living in many states and traveling around the U.S. I am convinced that any city out there is a bad place. Suburbs are even worse because you have to maintain your house, your lawn and do other dog tricks in order to remain a good neighbor. I understand that: Nobody wants to live next to a guy who has 2 cars on bricks and an moved lawn. But reality bites and trying to keep up with your neighbors is a royal pain in the ass especially if you don't have any slightest wish to do so.
I would love to live in a remote place where I can get a decent chunk of land so I don't have to watch my neighbors wash their cars and throw kid parties every weekend. Give me a salary I can live on w/o issues, a satellite dish, and a house. I will gladly commute to work on a horse, go fishing, and do night photography on weekends in a place where you can actually see stars. As far as I am concerned suburbs and metro areas are slow death.
The guy is right. Losing $80K/year in order to earn $12/year is not smart at all...
I worked for several Fortune 50 companies and every NDA included at least one thing: The company was to be my sole for-profit employer. One of the companies put a restriction on non-profit, e.g. Open Source, work. Do I bitch about it? Absolutely not. First of all, most of the time I am way too busy to do anything outside my work. Secondly, the benefits and the salary justify the NDA. Living in the state of California helps since courts here have been quite libertarian when it comes to NDAs if I need to fight it in court. So yeah, as you can imagine I have not had a problem with it. Sorry, but you have missed my point.
The person asked about getting a second gig as a part-time development job. It sounds like the OP has cushy position which sucks in terms of organizational politics. In this case I'll strongly recommend looking for a new job or sitting where you are now while trying to cut some costs. At the very very very least you want to establish an LLC in order to avoid working as a private contractor. Of course, that may go against the NDA as well so you will have to choose what is best. And for the love of god please stop this stupid approach of taking every argument sentence by sentence. Say something meaningful, will ya?
The state of the economy has little to do with the fact that things need to be done. The number of job openings will always be greater than the number of competent people who have enough skills to perform these jobs. Don't believe me? Take a look at your co-workers and see how many of them are really worth their salaries. If anything recession is a great time for consultants. Most of the time companies shred "fancy suits" and other workers who were not needed to begin with. Of course, I am an optimist. The rest of you can run around screaming about the end of the world. But if you really really want a new gig, you will do something about it.
I have not done this myself because some of my friends have. When I saw what they were going through I decided to avoid the idea altogether for several reasons.
First of all, if your job is stable you may want to read the contract or the NDA that the company had you sign when you became employed. Many companies forbid you from working for profit or working at all. Wanna risk your well paid job? Be my guest.
Another good reason for not accepting the second job is because it is not going to be a second job for you. In the eyes of your client, your second job is going to be his primary or the only job. This means the client will not expect less from you by any means. Calls at work during business hours, meeting during weekends and weekdays, etc. Are you ready for it? And if you for some reason manage your time well and actually get both of the jobs done then say good-bye to your free time.
I have observed a friend of mine who made a good hourly rate at his part time job. No time to relax led to constant family troubles which are NOT worth anything in the long run. The extra money that he had made on the side essentially went to family therapy of the 21st century: Shopping sprees, vacations one can barely afford, etc. The net income was zero if you don't count the lost nerve cells. That's why I recommend you to look the other way and if you do need to save some money review your family budget.
Finally somewhere in your post you mentioned that your current organization is not the best fit for you. Are you sure you want to get a part-time gig? It sounds like you are bored and you'd like a new job. Why not get a new position that pays more? I know that we are in a recession but if you're any good I am sure there will be a job opening. If anything, I'd consider doing some Open Source development work and that way you can put something on your resume later on. At least that way you will have to work on your schedule without having to answer to a pissed off client.
What the fuck is wrong with this country? Seriously, instead of fixing the problem at its core we come up with an idea that is so fucking ridiculous that I want to cry. Let's track in-state driving habits so we can charge road consumption tax... You can't be serious!
First of all, if you want to raise money have toll roads. You can't drive anywhere in MA without dropping a dollar or two. If you don't like that idea, raise the gas tax. And if you don't like even that, raise sales tax on the vehicles that have the most potential to damage roads (SUVs). And finally why not just say "Look, we have no money to fix the roads and thus we are raising the states sale's tax." If you don't have any sources that you can tax, legalize weed and prostitution. Tax that. But please for the love of God do not track private citizens across the state in order to raise pennies on the dollar you have spend on the system.
People will simply buy older cars that do not have the tracking equipment and hang on to those cars for longer periods of time. Also there is a famous option of buying a car out-of-state and having your insurance information sent to a P.O. Honestly, I am all for environment protection and better usage of natural resource but I am not willing to give up any of my liberties in favor of a law that is so wrong.
Nice rant dude. Who the fuck rated it "insightful?" Seriously, you're so full of it you may need a new shovel for Christmas. I read some of your posts and it seems like you're lacking something. Some people just want to get shit done on their computers and it does not matter what they use. Must you piss on people just because they choose laptops over desktops?
I have stopped using desktops a while ago for one simple reason: I do enough stuff on a computer that it is worth brining it with me everywhere I go. E-mail, digital photography, deveopment, web browsing -- a modern laptop is capable of doing all of this. You can buy a pre-build Linux laptop from Dell for less than a grand. What is the reason for having a desktop again? Of course, if you're a fucking haxor who wants RAID 1+0, 15K RPM SAS drives and the rest of the stuff, be my guest. For the rest of us a laptop will do fine. But what about security?
Well, what about it? A desktop can be stolen just as easy as a laptop provided that somebody really wants to steal it. I bet in many cases laptops are "stolen" because their owners forget them in coffee shops or cabs. In the digital age there is no excuse not to have whole disk encryption combined with permissions and things like File Vault (if you're on Mac OS X). Have a look at list of the wonderful software that can help you. In fact if most laptop vendors install and force users to use encryption laptop theft is not going to be a problem provided that these machines can be backed up in a secure manner. Also, an organization may require all laptop users to use software as service, e.g. Google Apps., in order to avoid loss of data due to theft. If these steps are taken then lost laptops simply become a matter of personal responsibility.
Finally, the only thing that still makes me want to use a desktop at work is the fact that my 15" bulky laptop is a bitch to carry back and forth (we are required to bring all our laptops home). Make it smaller, lighter and more rugged and I will forget that desktop existed.
Google is not the only offender. In fact if you read TOS and privacy policies for many other companies, like AOL (owns ICQ), you will see that many popular products are quite dangerous to anybody who is concerned about privacy. For example, an ICQ account cannot be deleted. You can only remove information in the account and that is that. However, since Google is just a major player it simply shows on the tip of the iceberg.
I bet most people who read /. know that there is no such thing as privacy on the Internet. Privacy is only limited by the amount of resources available to private companies or federal agencies and in fact most of the network traffic can be recorded if necessary. Of course whether such recordings will be useful is not clear, but it is still possible. If a DA has thousands of well paid investigators and a budget to enforce every single law, you bet your sweet ass many of us will be wiretapped and charged with stupid shit like violation of TOS (horray for Lori Drew's case, the PATRIOT act and other sweet by-products of 9/11.). The only question is what you, a private citizen, can do about this?
Ideally, I would like every service provide to clearly state that personal data about me will be stored on their system and for how long. If anything, users should have an option to permanently delete their information without a trace. Also, inactive accounts should be automatically deleted. This already happens in real life where stores are required to shred credit cards lost on their premises if the owner of the card does not claim it within a reasonable amount of time. Unfortunately these policies will only add additional burden on companies and not being able to mine your private data is going to be a disaster for some.
Let me make a wild guess... The AC is not a natural born U.S. citizen and thus he has no paranoia about his legal status. If you know a thing or two about immigration law you will realize that unless you have U.S. citizenship by birth, then your legal status in this country is still up in the air even if you become a naturalized citizen and never leave your home state for 80 years after that.
Our country has pretty open departation policies and even if one becomes a naturalized U.S. citizen that person can be denaturalized via a judicial process; the process can be started at any point after naturalization until the person dies. Moreover, a naturalized citizen can be deported for crimes that took place before naturalization even if the individual was not aware of such crimes during application process. A resident alien can be deported for any crime that contains elements of moral turpitude. NIS and BIA have to show only one thing: A person was inadmissible due to a crime or because the person lacked good moral character.
Let's say that you do something questionable. If you're a permanent resident this questionable act can be turned into a crime of moral turpitude and you have your one way ticket back home. It does not matter how many years you have lived in the states or if you're a well known philantropist/community leader. If such questionable action took place before you became a citizen and a federal judge says that this as a crime of moral turpitude then you may kiss your naturalization application good-bye becuase you were not a person of good morals, a requirement for becoming a U.S. citizen, before applying for citizenship. This does not happen often but it has been done at least several times in the past. The last time it hit a 56 year old Haitian immigrant who, according to undercover cops, "knew where to buy crack cocaine." The guy got 5 years on conspiracy charges and when he got out he faced deportation proceedings. The fact that the person was indicted and convicted after becoming a U.S. citizen did not play any role because the judges ruled that the defendant was not a person of good morals to begin with. So please answer me this: What is the chance that this is not going to happen to another immigrant?
If you start some shit or express your political views in one way or another, you may hit a wrong radar and then you'll have to attend a bunch of hearings and listen to people debating about your morals. Who says that they will rule in your favor? For many immigrants who have no home other than the United States the sole question of returning to where they came from may mean life and death. Would you want to risk that? I think not. Oh and by the way stating your opinion in public media may just very well fall against you. Take a look at a deportation case against Frank Costello.
If you have not considered getting involved with ACLU, then now it is the perfect time. There is much more at stake here than just a law. From the article:
SAN FRANCISCO - The Bush administration on Tuesday will try to convince a federal judge to let stand a law granting retroactive legal immunity to the nation's telecoms, which are accused of transmitting Americans' private communications to the National Security Agency without warrants.
This is retoractive! First of all, it means that the companies cannot be sued for breaking the law. Secondly, this action opens the door for other retroactive cases. If we can grant immunity for something that has happened in the past we can sure as hell find a way to sue for something that has happned many years ago as well. What will this action mean for cases with expired statutes of limitations? Will the gov't be able to put you behind the bars just because you have done something long-long time ago? Given some of the recent cases, like the MySpace.com guilty verdict, stuff like this raises hair on my back. What strikes me the most is that most of the laws are pro-active. This means that if a prisoner is serving the time for an action that has recently became legal or has been downgraded (e.g. felony became a misdemeanor), it is not likely that the prisoner will be released out of jail without any serious judicial proceedings and yet companies get a get-out-of-jail card.