Everone so far is missing the point - companies use computer applications BECAUSE of EEO.
If there is a person taking an application, that person can always be accused of bias. Theoretically, a machine doesn't CARE the race/gender/whatever of the applicant. It doesn't know what that info is, and if it does ask (for EEO reporting purposes)sure as shit the code has been audited/certified by the vendor supplying it.
Their machine was broken. Take it at face value. Believe it or not, you don't have a right to be given a job - only the right not to be denied a job based on certain characteristics. Being a litigious jerk is not one of them.
You missed the first part of it - workers who say "I can't find work that pays me a living wage" mean "I can't find work that pays me to sit on my ass and do jack shit all day."
Not all employers are evil cheapskates, and not all unemployed persons are noble and hardworking. Grow up a little.
PS it was the "living wage" bullshit that tipped your hand.
I was just at Legoland with my 6yo son, and was waiting in the line for the boat ride. This "lady" gets into the boat with her son - probably 4 - behind the wheel, and immediately pulls out her cell and dials. Not even out of the starting gate.
Now, the cool thing about Legoland is that a lot of the attractions that kids drive are NOT tethered. These boats' steering worked, and there is no guide keeping the boats on track. So now the boat with the cell phone yakking bimbo is now weaving back and forth, the kid trying to steer and Mommy reaching over with one hand "helping" him - to crash into the guard rails repeatedly.
After I made the comment about "not being able to stay off the cell phone to spend 5 minutes with her kid" the lady behind me said "Yeah, and that's probably how she drives on the freeway, too".
She was probably the one who almost ran the parent poster down.
Another item is that David Boise (sp), the "B" in BSF, left the law firm representing IBM, which left some hard feelings. Although I can't imagine IBM's law firm giving less than 100% to the effort, this might be providing a little extra motivation to kick Boise's ass.
The problem governments have with the.xxx domain is that, while it may make reguilation of porn easier (doubtful, by setting aside a domain for pornography, it _legitimatizes_ it. The govt would be in the uncomfortable position of saying that obscenity/pornography is bad, but here's a government approved place for it.
It's analogous to the situation in Pennsylvania (and Montgomery County MD, where I live) with "states stores". In order to better regulate the sale of hard liquor (presumably more dangerous than beer), sales are only allowed through government owned stores. But this now makes the government the purveyor of a substance which can have dangerous consequences and bad societal results - alcoholism and drunk driving. And when this is pointed out, and the effectiveness of the "regulation" is called to question, the unspoken truth is that the State of PA and MontgoCo are as addicted to the money from sales as alcoholics are to what is sold.
So Bush doesn't want.xxx to go into effect because it would be endorsing something he wants to eradicate; after all, if porn was gone,.xxx wouldn't be needed. If the next president is a Democrat,.xxx will be endorsed "for our protection" - along with hefty fees to pay for the implementation of said regulation. (e-rate, anyone?)
Representing yourself against an opponent with a lawyer is like bringing a knife to a gunfight: a knife may be cheaper, and there is a small chance you will win, but it's not the way to bet.
Lawyers are tools, just like computers or pencils. Use the right tool for the job.
Has anyone considered the possibility that the FCC really doesn't like being the Morality Police. If we assume this is true, the FCC is in a bad position: enforcing laws they don't agree with, with oversight by the jackasses in Congress of both parties.
So what is a bureaucrat to do? How about going the other direction - enforcing the hell out of the regulations. If the FCC keeps upping the ante with ever larger fines, they can appease Congress and inevitably SOMEONE is going to push back. (Personally, I think they were hoping Infinity would push back over the Howard Stern fine)
If SCOTUS overturns the rules, the FCC can then wash their hands of being the Morality Police and throw it back on Congress.
The point he was tyrying to make is that the standard advise of ripping up credit card offers is worthless if any random person can tape the pieces together and apply for credit in your name fraudulently. That's why he applied in his father's name - he put in a fradulent application and it was accepted.
I know I'm going to be more careful to shred them all, but if you still think it's useless, that's fine by me. Send all of your ripped up CC applications to me, and I'll dispose of them.
"Janet Reno did that with Australia and they caved soon after"
You must be mistaken. Janet Reno was the Attorney General in the Clinton Administration, and since only the Bush Administartion suppresses human rights and eats babies for brunch, she couldn't possibly have applied the pressure you attribute to her.
There is also a major egotistical attrarction to conspiracy theories. But their very nature, the proponent of a conspiracy theory is the ONLY ONE who sees the "truth". they are superior to the rest of the populace in being totally clear headed and immune to propaganda.
It's in interesting form of solipsism: a conspiracy theorist believes,not that the truth only exists in his mind, but that there IS an objective truth, but ONLY they can see it.
The superintendent on many of the sites I worked had pink loaner hardhats for workers who "forgot" theirs. The results were: 1. Big burly construction worker wears pink hardhat for 1 day and never forgets it again, or 2. Worker says "fuck you, I won't wear it", gets kicked off site and doesn't get to come back.
Baen has also put out a number of CD's bound in with hardcopies of books. Licensing: You can do whatever you want with it, EXCEPT sell it. I've been making copies and giving them to fellow readers. Which is the point - effective promotion via word of mouth and free goodies.
"I think that open formats as ogg should have a better future if manufactures would offer more support to them."
I think that open formats as ogg should have a better future if people stopped giving them stupid names like Ogg. WTF is it with Open Source and "cute" names that only work as an inside joke or some other obscure reference?
Hint to developers from prospective users: the name of a software program/format/whatever doesn't have to MEAN anything other than the name of the product. If it does have some meaning, don't make it obscure or subject to ridicule.
There is a different meaning of compulsory that all of your examples do not illustrate. To be truly, legally, "compulsory", one would have to carry an ID, PERIOD. It would be illegal not to carry one, regardless of the things you could or couldn't do without an ID.
Think the USSR and internal passports. THAT is compulsory ID.
"go in for high-speed access with the people above or below you, and run your own cable. Just make a no-uploading rule or you'll find your pipe clogged in no time.
Slashdot Mirror
Everone so far is missing the point - companies use computer applications BECAUSE of EEO.
If there is a person taking an application, that person can always be accused of bias. Theoretically, a machine doesn't CARE the race/gender/whatever of the applicant. It doesn't know what that info is, and if it does ask (for EEO reporting purposes)sure as shit the code has been audited/certified by the vendor supplying it.
Their machine was broken. Take it at face value. Believe it or not, you don't have a right to be given a job - only the right not to be denied a job based on certain characteristics. Being a litigious jerk is not one of them.
You missed the first part of it - workers who say "I can't find work that pays me a living wage" mean "I can't find work that pays me to sit on my ass and do jack shit all day."
Not all employers are evil cheapskates, and not all unemployed persons are noble and hardworking. Grow up a little.
PS it was the "living wage" bullshit that tipped your hand.
"And secondly, no one can multitask. There are simply people who can very poorly perform many tasks at once."
My wife was recently diagnosed with adult ADD. Her comment was "All these years I thought I was multitasking."
I was just at Legoland with my 6yo son, and was waiting in the line for the boat ride. This "lady" gets into the boat with her son - probably 4 - behind the wheel, and immediately pulls out her cell and dials. Not even out of the starting gate.
Now, the cool thing about Legoland is that a lot of the attractions that kids drive are NOT tethered. These boats' steering worked, and there is no guide keeping the boats on track. So now the boat with the cell phone yakking bimbo is now weaving back and forth, the kid trying to steer and Mommy reaching over with one hand "helping" him - to crash into the guard rails repeatedly.
After I made the comment about "not being able to stay off the cell phone to spend 5 minutes with her kid" the lady behind me said "Yeah, and that's probably how she drives on the freeway, too".
She was probably the one who almost ran the parent poster down.
Come on - tell me no one else thought of that?
Another item is that David Boise (sp), the "B" in BSF, left the law firm representing IBM, which left some hard feelings. Although I can't imagine IBM's law firm giving less than 100% to the effort, this might be providing a little extra motivation to kick Boise's ass.
The problem governments have with the .xxx domain is that, while it may make reguilation of porn easier (doubtful, by setting aside a domain for pornography, it _legitimatizes_ it. The govt would be in the uncomfortable position of saying that obscenity/pornography is bad, but here's a government approved place for it.
.xxx to go into effect because it would be endorsing something he wants to eradicate; after all, if porn was gone, .xxx wouldn't be needed. If the next president is a Democrat, .xxx will be endorsed "for our protection" - along with hefty fees to pay for the implementation of said regulation. (e-rate, anyone?)
It's analogous to the situation in Pennsylvania (and Montgomery County MD, where I live) with "states stores". In order to better regulate the sale of hard liquor (presumably more dangerous than beer), sales are only allowed through government owned stores. But this now makes the government the purveyor of a substance which can have dangerous consequences and bad societal results - alcoholism and drunk driving. And when this is pointed out, and the effectiveness of the "regulation" is called to question, the unspoken truth is that the State of PA and MontgoCo are as addicted to the money from sales as alcoholics are to what is sold.
So Bush doesn't want
Representing yourself against an opponent with a lawyer is like bringing a knife to a gunfight: a knife may be cheaper, and there is a small chance you will win, but it's not the way to bet.
Lawyers are tools, just like computers or pencils. Use the right tool for the job.
Then I remember a story Spider Robinson told about a cheap digital watch that died on him. He was pretty pissed off, but then he remembered that:
a) it was originall a Crackerjack prize or some other freebie.
b) it was 5 years into it's projected one year battery life.
At this point he gave it a solemn memorial service and kept it in a revered place (I think he may have buried it).
Whenever they finally die, I hope that they find an honored place in whatever museum the future Mars colonists decide to set up.
R2.0
Has anyone considered the possibility that the FCC really doesn't like being the Morality Police. If we assume this is true, the FCC is in a bad position: enforcing laws they don't agree with, with oversight by the jackasses in Congress of both parties.
So what is a bureaucrat to do? How about going the other direction - enforcing the hell out of the regulations. If the FCC keeps upping the ante with ever larger fines, they can appease Congress and inevitably SOMEONE is going to push back. (Personally, I think they were hoping Infinity would push back over the Howard Stern fine)
If SCOTUS overturns the rules, the FCC can then wash their hands of being the Morality Police and throw it back on Congress.
"Can someone explain to me why a PO Box is not acceptable as an address?"
One reason, which has nothing to do with your problems, is that UPS/FedEx/etc. cannot deliver to PO boxes.
Call it TruMandriva or somesuch, and all his adherents will follow him.
Let the legal goodness commence!
The point he was tyrying to make is that the standard advise of ripping up credit card offers is worthless if any random person can tape the pieces together and apply for credit in your name fraudulently. That's why he applied in his father's name - he put in a fradulent application and it was accepted.
I know I'm going to be more careful to shred them all, but if you still think it's useless, that's fine by me. Send all of your ripped up CC applications to me, and I'll dispose of them.
"Janet Reno did that with Australia and they caved soon after"
You must be mistaken. Janet Reno was the Attorney General in the Clinton Administration, and since only the Bush Administartion suppresses human rights and eats babies for brunch, she couldn't possibly have applied the pressure you attribute to her.
Wait...did I just type that out loud?
There is also a major egotistical attrarction to conspiracy theories. But their very nature, the proponent of a conspiracy theory is the ONLY ONE who sees the "truth". they are superior to the rest of the populace in being totally clear headed and immune to propaganda.
It's in interesting form of solipsism: a conspiracy theorist believes,not that the truth only exists in his mind, but that there IS an objective truth, but ONLY they can see it.
First impulse: Troll (-1)
Second Thought: Paranoid Schizophrenia (-1)
Conclusion: High Comedy! (+5 Funny)
The superintendent on many of the sites I worked had pink loaner hardhats for workers who "forgot" theirs. The results were:
1. Big burly construction worker wears pink hardhat for 1 day and never forgets it again, or
2. Worker says "fuck you, I won't wear it", gets kicked off site and doesn't get to come back.
We never had one go missing, that's for sure.
Baen has also put out a number of CD's bound in with hardcopies of books. Licensing: You can do whatever you want with it, EXCEPT sell it. I've been making copies and giving them to fellow readers. Which is the point - effective promotion via word of mouth and free goodies.
I'd take you more seriously if you were aware that it's a "press corps", not "press core".
"I think that open formats as ogg should have a better future if manufactures would offer more support to them."
I think that open formats as ogg should have a better future if people stopped giving them stupid names like Ogg. WTF is it with Open Source and "cute" names that only work as an inside joke or some other obscure reference?
Hint to developers from prospective users: the name of a software program/format/whatever doesn't have to MEAN anything other than the name of the product. If it does have some meaning, don't make it obscure or subject to ridicule.
"(the current administration likes optimistic oil figures). "
Yopu are aware that all of the dates in the post are BEFORE the current administration?
Nice try, though.
There is a different meaning of compulsory that all of your examples do not illustrate. To be truly, legally, "compulsory", one would have to carry an ID, PERIOD. It would be illegal not to carry one, regardless of the things you could or couldn't do without an ID.
Think the USSR and internal passports. THAT is compulsory ID.
"go in for high-speed access with the people above or below you, and run your own cable. Just make a no-uploading rule or you'll find your pipe clogged in no time.
No cable: get utorrent and download shows."
I think there's a contradiction there.
"The surest way to cut political corruption in half is to cut Congress in half."
If you make the cut vertically, you only lose half. If you cut Congress in half HORIZONTALLY, however....