Bzzt! Sorry but my responsibility ends at the font change. I believe that Timothy is the one who added those words, as some of the intervening comments also state. Hey that's it, I can sue Slashdot for defamation of character. Just think, I could win my own weight in.mp3s...
Great! So now I've got the government out of my life but I have to get my birth certificate from ICANN??? Now that's a giant leap sideways for crab-kind...
(Yeah Offtopic) There's a bar here in Boston that serves Theakston's Old Peculier chilled in frosted mugs. I can't wait to find out what they think of that in Masham...
Here's a site which will give you opinions and feedback on a wide variety of tools. QA Forums. Scroll on down until you get to the Testing Tools forum.
This has been touched on in various places, but it is key to my view of Attack of the Clones.
Who is the hero? Or at least who are the characters that the audience can identify with?
In ep 4-6, we had Luke (a farm boy of mysterious heritage who is going off to find adventure and girls), Han (a scoundrel who finds his moral core) and Leia (a kick-ass princess fighting for everything she holds dear; her planet is destroyed near the end of the first reel, the bad guys are out to kill her...).
In ep 1-2, we've got Anakin (who grows up to be evil), Padme (whose "handmaidens" are related to the red-shirted security guys in Star Trek) and Jar-Jar (stupid, annoying, gullible, annoying).
I liked Spiderman because I could (somewhat) identify with Peter Parker -- heck, if he were real, he'd probably be on/. somewhere! I was interested in how he developed, and what was happening even though there were few surprises in the movie. I cared about him.
I was left cold by AOTC because I was watching characters that I didn't really care about (did they ever feel like they were in danger to you? (see Tomb Raider for another example)) doing things about which I already knew the outcome. I understand that ATOC was "Act II", which is essentially plot exposition and more setbacks in the great scheme of things, but I just didn't care.
And where does Lucas come up with the names? Dooku? As well as the similarity of "Padme" and "Padewan"? But I would love to see Samuel Jackson as "Darth Shaft" (a mean Jedi mother-f...er)
B. The invention was created at least partially using company equipment.
is the bitch. Can you prove that you never
used company resources in support of it (including using your office-provided computer to email someone about your neat new software, to post to bulletin boards/newsgroups or to boast about it on/.)
wrote/diagrammed it on your office whiteboard
wrote/designed/sketched it on your office notepads (paper, some people still use it)
worked on it during company time (including chatting about it to co-workers)
worked on it at home, but using office supplies or materials provided by the company (includes that box of stolen highlighters)
Bear in mind that this is contract law, so the usual assertions of civil rights, constitutional rights or strong statements of "This is America, danm it" may have less weight than you imagine.
If you are working on the next great thing (GNU/C# for example), then you have to be able to demonstrate/document that all the work was conducted on your personal time on your personal equipment. And this may well include your "lunch hour" or "break time" if you are on company property (ie the lunch room). It's somewhat analagous to the misery that the IRS puts you through to claim part of your home as an office!
Now many companies won't be pricks about it; but if you piss someone off in your corporate hierarchy, beware. Be very ware.
My experiences were in MA several years ago, but I don't think it's gotten a lot easier.
Another problem in corporate America is the strong corporate aversion to product liability lawsuits.
Without getting off on the usual rant here, many companies (eg Cessna (or whoever owns them now)) are moving out of product innovation because the risk of being sued is too great. I know there's a reasonable line at which the "assumption of risk" becomes paramount, but I think that a lot of litigation here in the US is viewed by the plaintiffs as a version of the Lottery.
So as America becomes risk-averse, we will fall behind the more innovative and daring parts of the world, especially Europe, Japan, and to an extent China.
Seems like most of the true innovation in the last few years has been in weapons development. Hey, at least we'll get to use it eventually!!
Go read Cem Kaner, who has written and spoken extensively on the subject of liability and computer software.
Go look under "Computer Law" and read some of the papers there. He talks a lot about UCITA and the whole liability question. Actually, if you get a chance, go listen to him speak. Cem is a very entertaining and informative speaker.
Err, the MPAA is an organization of lobbyists. They (and primarily Valenti in recent years) have carved off a fair amount of control of the movie distribution process.
As far as movie makers are concerned, any involvement with MPAA is voluntary. You don't need to get your movie rated to be released. However, various large movie chain operators (for the safety of the children, you understand) will only show movies with an MPAA rating. So MPAA has flexed its muscles, especially with smaller filmmakers, on the lines of "make the cuts we want or your picture will never be shown". . It's a protection racket of sorts; I've often considered whether it would be worth prosecuting MPAA under RICO -- any lawyers slumming it on Slashdot care to answer?
And YES, I do know about Stone and Parker and the battles over "South Park: Bigger, Longer, Uncut". The movie maker sort of won that one; wonder how well their next film will be received by the MPAA?
And if you're interested, here's a brief description of MPAA from their website. I would have posted a pointer, but I felt honor-bound to copy it instead.
The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and its international counterpart, the Motion Picture Association (MPA) serve as the voice and advocate of the American motion picture, home video and television industries, domestically through the MPAA and internationally through the MPA.
Today, these associations represent not only the world of theatrical film, but serve as leader and advocate for major producers and distributors of entertainment programming for television, cable, home video and future delivery systems not yet imagined.
Founded in 1922 as the trade association of the American film industry, the MPAA has broadened its mandate over the years to reflect the diversity of an expanding industry. The initial task assigned to the association was to stem the waves of criticism of American movies, then silent, while sometimes rambunctious and rowdy, and to restore a more favorable public image for the motion picture business.
The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) serves its members from its offices in Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. On its board of directors are the Chairmen and Presidents of the seven major producers and distributors of motion picture and television programs in the United States.
IMNSHO follows:
I'm sorry, but this is ludicrous. It is a remarkable insight into modern small-time America that this nut could affect the world around him, as opposed to being laughed out of town.
Are we now in an America where everyone is allergic to something? This is the logical end of the progression that started with "nut allergies" and "perfume allergies"; can you say psychosomatic? I knew you could.
What's next? RMS claiming that he's allergic/sensitive to Windows?
In Indiana Jones and the Quest for the World, our hero has all but retired. It's the late 60s, and he's been selling off old artifacts to supplement his social security.
One night, while walking down the beach, Indiana meets a young man called Will (played by Ashton Kutcher, who was so good in Dude, Where's my Car?). Indy befriends this young man, and listens to his tales of woe. To help his new friend, Indiana goes off on one more quest, to find a mythic stone which clouds men's minds.
He finds the stone, after a series of hair-rasing adventures and returns it to Will. Will is so pleased, he makes Indiana a partner in his new "software" company (much humor as Will explains to Indiana what software is) and the movie ends with Indy moving to Redmond, WA.
Well, it looks as though Neil got an unsolicted email message, which he then reported as "spam" to the originating ISP.
Was it spam? Personally, I think that Neil suffered from premature ejaculation on this one, but he didn't do anything too bad. I think that the ISP has the role of determining whether this complaint was justified and of then doing nothing or taking some action.
Presumably, if Neil's had been the only complaint, nothing would have happened.
"It seems that you've been living two lives. One life, you're Bilbo Baggins, respected landowner in the Shire. In the other life, you are a Ringbearer. One of these lives has a future, Mr Baggins, and one of them does not."
That is until you realize that, like designing a house, if you don't know what you're doing the whole thing is going to fall apart the instant you look at it funny.
Consider the folliwing:
When we planned the addition on our house, we engaged the services of an architect. He took us through the design, starting with extracting our requirements/needs/wants (my list also had to go through the wife filter, but that's a separate story) and sketched out a couple of proposed designs on the spot. We spent a fair amount of time just suggesting random things/improvements/modifications to his design, and eventually he went away with a big pile of notes.
The architect came back with a proposed design, and took us through it, including explaining relevant building codes and material issues, as well as adding a certain amount of value just from his knowledge. After a couple of iterations of this, we approved the plan, and got quotes from contractors to build it.
At various points during the construction, issues came up and we worked with the contractor to resolve them (usually by writing a bigger check). And we got a nice addition which looked very much like the one we wanted!
So why does it work so well in the real world, and less well in the software world?
Communication. We had a clearly defined specification, produced by the architect and approved by us. At various times during construction, we were told about issues and given choices. We were given the cost of each.
Visibility. We were able to see the work progressing, so (when they brought the wrong window and tried to install it) we were able to say "Hang on, that's not what we agreed to.
Accountability (1). Waving the big stick (check for completion) gave us a lot of leverage with the contractor if he was going in the wrong direction.
Accountability (2). Conversely, we were told that the contractor could do anything we wanted, but it would cost time and money, especially money. Any work done over and above the original contract was documented and signed off on.
So can you do this in software? Yes, but you need a couple of (rare) things:
A Manager/Project Leader (of either gender) with Big Brass Balls who can stand up to various people and say "Here's the impact of doing that".
Agreed-on goals/requirements, with key people accountable for both ensuring that they are met and for communicating them to the key players.
Communication amongst the developers and between the developers and the other stakeholders.
Something of a sense that the end-customer isn't a "luser"
You know, there's a better solution here.
Don't boycott. Sign up for the service, and repeatedly try to use it. Get your friends to use it.
Once Passport Control (or the Zone or whatever) gets Slashdotted, start sending emails of complaint (see Jerry Pournelle's article for example) to the Zone, to Microsoft and wherever demanding that they either provide the service they claim or that they close your account and refund your money.
When (if?) they refuse, start talking to the gaming magazines, to the media, to the Attorneys-General. Don't come across as a Unix haX0r ("MicroScrod Sucks again!") but as an outraged consumer ("They advertized this service, it doesn't work, I've never been able to play...") -- heck, we might be able to talk to the Better Business Bureau.
Keep it up for a while. This could be entertaining. Think of it as an opportunity.
And on your local television station...
on
The Hype of the Rings
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Sci-Fi channel is also running a one hour "Making of LOTR" program which is really quite good. I think that Peter Jackson has "got it", although I'm waiting in dubious anticipation for the lists of "All the things that suck about this movie". A whole new generation of drooling fanboys lurks.
It opens next Wednesday -- wanna try to/. a movie theatre???
One thing that did not make any sense was when Gene Hackman called the aircraft carrier a "boat."
Navy aviators refer to the aircraft carrier as a "boat" mostly to piss off the non-aviators. I've read this in a number of books about the training of navy pilots.
I read mine tonight -- well, I figured I'd better read the damned thing before claiming to know what it said ( I know that's not how things work on/., but what the heck...)
Interestingly, there doesn't seem to be an embargo on hooking up the neighbours, or running a radio LAN for my apartment building.
Well, there is the following which says I can give it away, but not charge for it...:
Reselling. You agree not to resell RCN services or products without an express written agreement with RCN to do so.
And this one, which seems reasonable, but I hadn't realised it was written into the service agreement:
Support Abuse. You agree not to harass, threaten or abuse authorized representatives of RCN, including but not limited to tech support representatives, customer relations representatives, and sales representatives, or otherwise abuse RCN's support services.
I also found the following which confused me (under "Abuses")
Scrolling.You agree not to cause the screen to "scroll" faster than other subscribers or users are able to type to it, or any action to a similar disruptive effect on or through the Access Service.
They use an oscillating or vibrating saw (also for amputations and autopsies (probably not the same saw)).
The idea is that the saw-blades move a short distance back and forth. The skin or flesh is flexible for the short distance that the blade oscillates, so isn't cut. Bone however is not flexible so the teeth cut into the bone.
I was trying to find a good reference using Google, but made the mistake of looking at some of the pictures on the medical sites...
Slashdot Mirror
Bzzt! .mp3s...
Sorry but my responsibility ends at the font change. I believe that Timothy is the one who added those words, as some of the intervening comments also state.
Hey that's it, I can sue Slashdot for defamation of character. Just think, I could win my own weight in
Great! So now I've got the government out of my life but I have to get my birth certificate from ICANN???
Now that's a giant leap sideways for crab-kind...
(Yeah Offtopic)
There's a bar here in Boston that serves Theakston's Old Peculier chilled in frosted mugs.
I can't wait to find out what they think of that in Masham...
Here's a site which will give you opinions and feedback on a wide variety of tools.
QA Forums.
Scroll on down until you get to the Testing Tools forum.
"Hey Jimmy, the coffee tastes awful today..."
Who is the hero? Or at least who are the characters that the audience can identify with?
In ep 4-6, we had Luke (a farm boy of mysterious heritage who is going off to find adventure and girls), Han (a scoundrel who finds his moral core) and Leia (a kick-ass princess fighting for everything she holds dear; her planet is destroyed near the end of the first reel, the bad guys are out to kill her...).
In ep 1-2, we've got Anakin (who grows up to be evil), Padme (whose "handmaidens" are related to the red-shirted security guys in Star Trek) and Jar-Jar (stupid, annoying, gullible, annoying).
I liked Spiderman because I could (somewhat) identify with Peter Parker -- heck, if he were real, he'd probably be on /. somewhere! I was interested in how he developed, and what was happening even though there were few surprises in the movie. I cared about him.
I was left cold by AOTC because I was watching characters that I didn't really care about (did they ever feel like they were in danger to you? (see Tomb Raider for another example)) doing things about which I already knew the outcome. I understand that ATOC was "Act II", which is essentially plot exposition and more setbacks in the great scheme of things, but I just didn't care.
And where does Lucas come up with the names? Dooku? As well as the similarity of "Padme" and "Padewan"? But I would love to see Samuel Jackson as "Darth Shaft" (a mean Jedi mother-f...er)
Well, here's a place...
Tiger Lady
used company resources in support of it (including using your office-provided computer to email someone about your neat new software, to post to bulletin boards/newsgroups or to boast about it on /.)
wrote/diagrammed it on your office whiteboard
wrote/designed/sketched it on your office notepads (paper, some people still use it)
worked on it during company time (including chatting about it to co-workers)
worked on it at home, but using office supplies or materials provided by the company (includes that box of stolen highlighters)
Bear in mind that this is contract law, so the usual assertions of civil rights, constitutional rights or strong statements of "This is America, danm it" may have less weight than you imagine.
If you are working on the next great thing (GNU/C# for example), then you have to be able to demonstrate/document that all the work was conducted on your personal time on your personal equipment. And this may well include your "lunch hour" or "break time" if you are on company property (ie the lunch room). It's somewhat analagous to the misery that the IRS puts you through to claim part of your home as an office!
Now many companies won't be pricks about it; but if you piss someone off in your corporate hierarchy, beware. Be very ware.
My experiences were in MA several years ago, but I don't think it's gotten a lot easier.
Without getting off on the usual rant here, many companies (eg Cessna (or whoever owns them now)) are moving out of product innovation because the risk of being sued is too great. I know there's a reasonable line at which the "assumption of risk" becomes paramount, but I think that a lot of litigation here in the US is viewed by the plaintiffs as a version of the Lottery.
So as America becomes risk-averse, we will fall behind the more innovative and daring parts of the world, especially Europe, Japan, and to an extent China.
Seems like most of the true innovation in the last few years has been in weapons development. Hey, at least we'll get to use it eventually!!
Go look under "Computer Law" and read some of the papers there. He talks a lot about UCITA and the whole liability question. Actually, if you get a chance, go listen to him speak. Cem is a very entertaining and informative speaker.
As far as movie makers are concerned, any involvement with MPAA is voluntary. You don't need to get your movie rated to be released. However, various large movie chain operators (for the safety of the children, you understand) will only show movies with an MPAA rating. So MPAA has flexed its muscles, especially with smaller filmmakers, on the lines of "make the cuts we want or your picture will never be shown". . It's a protection racket of sorts; I've often considered whether it would be worth prosecuting MPAA under RICO -- any lawyers slumming it on Slashdot care to answer?
And YES, I do know about Stone and Parker and the battles over "South Park: Bigger, Longer, Uncut". The movie maker sort of won that one; wonder how well their next film will be received by the MPAA?
And if you're interested, here's a brief description of MPAA from their website. I would have posted a pointer, but I felt honor-bound to copy it instead.
Hotdogs are made of the same thing as /. ???
curriculum vitae is Latin. Means something like "the race of my life" and is used in England where resume is used in the US.
Are we now in an America where everyone is allergic to something? This is the logical end of the progression that started with "nut allergies" and "perfume allergies"; can you say psychosomatic? I knew you could.
What's next? RMS claiming that he's allergic/sensitive to Windows?
One night, while walking down the beach, Indiana meets a young man called Will (played by Ashton Kutcher, who was so good in Dude, Where's my Car?). Indy befriends this young man, and listens to his tales of woe. To help his new friend, Indiana goes off on one more quest, to find a mythic stone which clouds men's minds.
He finds the stone, after a series of hair-rasing adventures and returns it to Will. Will is so pleased, he makes Indiana a partner in his new "software" company (much humor as Will explains to Indiana what software is) and the movie ends with Indy moving to Redmond, WA.
Was it spam? Personally, I think that Neil suffered from premature ejaculation on this one, but he didn't do anything too bad. I think that the ISP has the role of determining whether this complaint was justified and of then doing nothing or taking some action.
Presumably, if Neil's had been the only complaint, nothing would have happened.
"It seems that you've been living two lives. One life, you're Bilbo Baggins, respected landowner in the Shire. In the other life, you are a Ringbearer. One of these lives has a future, Mr Baggins, and one of them does not."
Now that was the Australians, true, but I have difficulty telling these former British colonies apart...
Consider the folliwing:
When we planned the addition on our house, we engaged the services of an architect. He took us through the design, starting with extracting our requirements/needs/wants (my list also had to go through the wife filter, but that's a separate story) and sketched out a couple of proposed designs on the spot. We spent a fair amount of time just suggesting random things/improvements/modifications to his design, and eventually he went away with a big pile of notes.
The architect came back with a proposed design, and took us through it, including explaining relevant building codes and material issues, as well as adding a certain amount of value just from his knowledge. After a couple of iterations of this, we approved the plan, and got quotes from contractors to build it.
At various points during the construction, issues came up and we worked with the contractor to resolve them (usually by writing a bigger check). And we got a nice addition which looked very much like the one we wanted!
So why does it work so well in the real world, and less well in the software world?
Communication. We had a clearly defined specification, produced by the architect and approved by us. At various times during construction, we were told about issues and given choices. We were given the cost of each.
Visibility. We were able to see the work progressing, so (when they brought the wrong window and tried to install it) we were able to say "Hang on, that's not what we agreed to.
Accountability (1). Waving the big stick (check for completion) gave us a lot of leverage with the contractor if he was going in the wrong direction.
Accountability (2). Conversely, we were told that the contractor could do anything we wanted, but it would cost time and money, especially money. Any work done over and above the original contract was documented and signed off on.
So can you do this in software? Yes, but you need a couple of (rare) things:
A Manager/Project Leader (of either gender) with Big Brass Balls who can stand up to various people and say "Here's the impact of doing that".
Agreed-on goals/requirements, with key people accountable for both ensuring that they are met and for communicating them to the key players.
Communication amongst the developers and between the developers and the other stakeholders.
Something of a sense that the end-customer isn't a "luser"
Of course, that's my opinion -- I could be wrong.
You know, there's a better solution here.
Don't boycott. Sign up for the service, and repeatedly try to use it. Get your friends to use it.
Once Passport Control (or the Zone or whatever) gets Slashdotted, start sending emails of complaint (see Jerry Pournelle's article for example) to the Zone, to Microsoft and wherever demanding that they either provide the service they claim or that they close your account and refund your money.
When (if?) they refuse, start talking to the gaming magazines, to the media, to the Attorneys-General. Don't come across as a Unix haX0r ("MicroScrod Sucks again!") but as an outraged consumer ("They advertized this service, it doesn't work, I've never been able to play...") -- heck, we might be able to talk to the Better Business Bureau.
Keep it up for a while. This could be entertaining. Think of it as an opportunity.
It opens next Wednesday -- wanna try to /. a movie theatre???
Navy aviators refer to the aircraft carrier as a "boat" mostly to piss off the non-aviators. I've read this in a number of books about the training of navy pilots.
Sometimes refers to the suits at Paramount, who tend to make decisions based on their view of economic reality or business sense.
Interestingly, there doesn't seem to be an embargo on hooking up the neighbours, or running a radio LAN for my apartment building. Well, there is the following which says I can give it away, but not charge for it...:
Reselling. You agree not to resell RCN services or products without an express written agreement with RCN to do so.
And this one, which seems reasonable, but I hadn't realised it was written into the service agreement:
Support Abuse. You agree not to harass, threaten or abuse authorized representatives of RCN, including but not limited to tech support representatives, customer relations representatives, and sales representatives, or otherwise abuse RCN's support services.
I also found the following which confused me (under "Abuses")
Scrolling. You agree not to cause the screen to "scroll" faster than other subscribers or users are able to type to it, or any action to a similar disruptive effect on or through the Access Service.
What the hell is "scrolling" in this context??
The idea is that the saw-blades move a short distance back and forth. The skin or flesh is flexible for the short distance that the blade oscillates, so isn't cut. Bone however is not flexible so the teeth cut into the bone.
I was trying to find a good reference using Google, but made the mistake of looking at some of the pictures on the medical sites...