I'm going to reserve judgement until the exact text of the e-mail is published. He can't remember what he wrote? BS. There will be a copy in his Sent E-mail folder.
I'm guessing he did a lot more than call the POS a bad name. He probably included some threats, veiled or not, and that is the real reason he was paid a visit and banned from entering the country.
But until we know what the e-mail says, we can't tell if the reaction was proportionate to the action.
Basically, it's a chance for political bashing. Worthless journalism.
Instead of protecting the device proactively by using some sort of AV, application whitelist, or other device control, you want to let them keep getting infected, over and over, so your users have to keep using the USB device to remove the malware infections over and over?
Brilliant.
You can also lose a lot of weight on the cocaine diet, but it, like Atkins, is also not healthy in the long run.
But hey, I'm sure your peer-reviewed paper on fatty acids puts the whole debate to rest, right?
Pop... hiss... sizzle... makes me think of Bacon. Could this be the common subconscious factor that defines a preference in music? Music most like Bacon comes out ahead? I think so!
If you care enough to want to make a difference, then why not hold a fundraiser or get some big corporate donations? Do you think you should be able to dictate US policy by whining into a phone or sending an e-mail?
I'm voting for Obama and proud of it. How often do you get a chance to support a candidate that not only uses technology to its fullest potential, but also runs a positive campaign based not on mudslinging and personal attacks, but on a REAL platform?
You're wrong about one key point; they are not creating an artificial demand. They are running at full capacity and believe me, they'd sell more if they could. Maybe last year you could make this claim, but they are losing sales to MS and Sony because they can't keep units stocked.
It's a nice conspiracy theory, but like most, only sounds good when you don't apply logic or look deeply into the issues:) Throw in a Sheeple, and you're 90% troll! (And Maybe I just got trolled!)
You've got it wrong; women aren't avoiding computer science because they don't want to be seen as "nerds." Women are avoiding science because they believe that to be successful, you have to be a "nerd." And these women do not identify themselves as being such, they conclude (understandibly) that they will not be good at CS.
And you are wrong about interest level; overall CS admissions are on a major dowhnward trend. If schools don't start reaching out to a wider audience for their CS programs, we'll have major problems with a gap in our IT/computer science knowledge in the US.
I guess my point is based on the assumption that a credit rating is only a *single factor* in the employment decision. No company is going to say "Hire anyone with a FICO over 740" and leave it at that. If they find a good candidate, and then they find they have a bad credit score, if they're interested, they'll ask. If not, it's a loss for the company, right?
And in many ways, it can actually give advantages to responsible people. I suspect that for a typical job, relatively same-classed people will be applying (say lower, middle, upper class). If a lower-class person has an excellent credit rating, shouldn't that count for something? They're done well with what they have, and I'm sure they'd want that to be considered for employment.
1. Yup, this sucks, but it's the reality. If you are in a terrible car accident, it can take months to recover. It's reality; sucks sometime, but it's how it is. Same thing here: Your identity gets stolen, there are repercussions. Which leads to me second point...
2. If you have it stolen and you apply for a new job, just *tell* them it happened. You're not interviewing with some malicious person who wants a reason not to hire you. You're dealing with a company with a need, and people are very understanding about identity theft. If you think otherwise, you are mistaken. And the credit check is a way to get impartial information, verify your identity, etc.
Financial status has no impact on credit. I know people who live at/below the poverty line but have fine credit. And, I know people with 6-digit incomes who have terrible credit.
Poor != bad credit.
Unable to control spending and poor risk management == bad credit
What's wrong about discriminating against people with a history of making bad choices?
1. You can recover from identity theft. It's not easy, but you can get all the activity from the theft purged from your credit history and it will be restored to what it should be. So a year/two later, (maybe shorter), it would be a non-even credit history-wise.
2. You can explain this fact to your employer. I certainly would if they asked to check my credit history.
Nope. If Mr. Smith mazes out all his credit cards because he didn't buy proper insurance for little Suzy, and had zero savings, and then can't afford the minimum payments because he bought too much home and a new car, then he doesn't get a new job.
Credit scores are actually a decent way to judge someone's ability to judge risk and handle finances. It rewards a conservative attitude, but also penalizes those who avoid credit totally.
Seems a pretty legit factor for employment to me.
I live in Indiana, and I'm surprised at the comments in the Slashback. It seems people try REALLY hard to justify living in California, even if most arguments are invalid.
My favorite ones are the job security... the classic argument, "If you lose your job, you'll be SOL!" Well, in California, if there are literally hundreds of experienced professionals ready to take your place if your performance drops. So say goodbye to job security!
I still say the Midwest is the US's best kept secret.
You're kidding... right?
You are paying for the privilege of learning from an expert in a subject. If something is interfering with her teaching, she has every right to remove it from her classroom.
It's nice that you're a Graduate Student and all, but you've obviously not learned proper respect for your professors yet. Grow up!
Wow, what a blind, snobbish vision you have! It's really refreshing to see that people not in the US feel they are just as superior to us as we feel we are of them.
There is a lot of talk out of Europe, especially, about the lack of a US "culture". The problem is, many of those people mistakehistory, rituals, and traditions with Culture. The fact is, the United States has just as much "culture" as any other country in the world, it's just a different culture. It's all a matter of perspective.
The US is unique in that 1. It's the world's largest superpower (although China is making inroads), 2. It's huge geographically, and 3. It's a very young country. We have resources, high standards of living, and askew a lot of the traditions and rituals of Europe. Because of that, I think a lot of Europeans resent us. And maybe are even... dare I say it... jealous?
That resentment is clear in this poster's rant. Personally, I'll take the US's "lack of culture" over any other country's "culture" any day. I live a great life in the US, as do many more!
That explains a lot... like why my unwanted phone calls about tripled *after* I registered my phone number with the DNC call. Sometimes I wish could ditch my phone entirely!
I would rather not have the technology, and spend the $1 Trillian (with a Capital T) on something more useful for American citizens.
Right now the system is dubious at best, and if technology exists that can defeat it, all that money was wasted.
So you are right on one point, this will take care of one small threat. But then we won't have any money left to address the big ones! That's not where I'd like to be.
Nope, it doesn't. General CS admission dropping may be an effect, but why would the *ratio* of men to women drop? You provide no clear explanation to why this would be.
Your second statement is more telling. How are women treated (or raised) differently, that they don't seem to like pogramming as much as men? Somewhere there lies the real answer.
Wow, you're wrong in so, so many ways... You seem to think that stations make all their profit from the cable companies, but that's not just true. They get a lot of revenue from advertising. And offering channels for $0 answers most of your issues.
First of all, why can't a channel allow itself to be "sold" for under $1? In fact, many channels might want to be priced at $0 so they have the largest possible viewership. If you could select channels for $0, would you?
"[Fledgling] channels will be gone under a-la-carte pricing, because they will be forced to pay their own way from day one, and they will not be able to command the prices required for them to operate profitably."
Again, if they got sponsership from another channel with bundles, why would that stop for a-la-carte? They'd still get funding, offer the channel for $0, and the viewership, again, would be the same.
Only the people who "opt-out" of these channels won't get them, and they probably would never watch anyways.
And finally, you suggest that the only successful channels will be determined by the "lowest common denominator." That's how it is today, buddy. Allowing people to pick their own channels won't change their viewing habits, and no show that already has a large following will suffer. And no show that has a small group of very dedicated fans will suffer, either.
What I like about this is that I can make my TV decent. I could finally get rid of all that profane religious garbage, stop my children from being damaged by seeing senseless Disney cartoons, and not have to channel flip by the sound-byte happy conservative news stations:) (Not actually, but I'm trying to get a point across, the road goes both ways).
How good of an education did he get is he thinks he can defy gravity? Seriously, brilliant physicists who have been studying their entire lives don't think that's possible.
Another case of someone who thinks they can memorize test answers gets accelerated through school. This will probably be the last time we hear about this kid, and he'll probably fail out and, with any luck, live a normal, happy life. Unless his parents get in the way...
Slashdot Mirror
If I do, that would at least be a real news story! But yes, I meant POTUS.
I'm going to reserve judgement until the exact text of the e-mail is published. He can't remember what he wrote? BS. There will be a copy in his Sent E-mail folder. I'm guessing he did a lot more than call the POS a bad name. He probably included some threats, veiled or not, and that is the real reason he was paid a visit and banned from entering the country. But until we know what the e-mail says, we can't tell if the reaction was proportionate to the action. Basically, it's a chance for political bashing. Worthless journalism.
Instead of protecting the device proactively by using some sort of AV, application whitelist, or other device control, you want to let them keep getting infected, over and over, so your users have to keep using the USB device to remove the malware infections over and over? Brilliant.
You can also lose a lot of weight on the cocaine diet, but it, like Atkins, is also not healthy in the long run. But hey, I'm sure your peer-reviewed paper on fatty acids puts the whole debate to rest, right?
Pop... hiss... sizzle... makes me think of Bacon. Could this be the common subconscious factor that defines a preference in music? Music most like Bacon comes out ahead? I think so!
If you care enough to want to make a difference, then why not hold a fundraiser or get some big corporate donations? Do you think you should be able to dictate US policy by whining into a phone or sending an e-mail?
I'm voting for Obama and proud of it. How often do you get a chance to support a candidate that not only uses technology to its fullest potential, but also runs a positive campaign based not on mudslinging and personal attacks, but on a REAL platform?
You're wrong about one key point; they are not creating an artificial demand. They are running at full capacity and believe me, they'd sell more if they could. Maybe last year you could make this claim, but they are losing sales to MS and Sony because they can't keep units stocked. It's a nice conspiracy theory, but like most, only sounds good when you don't apply logic or look deeply into the issues :) Throw in a Sheeple, and you're 90% troll! (And Maybe I just got trolled!)
You've got it wrong; women aren't avoiding computer science because they don't want to be seen as "nerds." Women are avoiding science because they believe that to be successful, you have to be a "nerd." And these women do not identify themselves as being such, they conclude (understandibly) that they will not be good at CS.
And you are wrong about interest level; overall CS admissions are on a major dowhnward trend. If schools don't start reaching out to a wider audience for their CS programs, we'll have major problems with a gap in our IT/computer science knowledge in the US.
Sounds like somebody has a bad credit rating... sorry to hurt your feelings :'(
I guess my point is based on the assumption that a credit rating is only a *single factor* in the employment decision. No company is going to say "Hire anyone with a FICO over 740" and leave it at that. If they find a good candidate, and then they find they have a bad credit score, if they're interested, they'll ask. If not, it's a loss for the company, right?
And in many ways, it can actually give advantages to responsible people. I suspect that for a typical job, relatively same-classed people will be applying (say lower, middle, upper class). If a lower-class person has an excellent credit rating, shouldn't that count for something? They're done well with what they have, and I'm sure they'd want that to be considered for employment.
To address your points...
1. Yup, this sucks, but it's the reality. If you are in a terrible car accident, it can take months to recover. It's reality; sucks sometime, but it's how it is. Same thing here: Your identity gets stolen, there are repercussions. Which leads to me second point...
2. If you have it stolen and you apply for a new job, just *tell* them it happened. You're not interviewing with some malicious person who wants a reason not to hire you. You're dealing with a company with a need, and people are very understanding about identity theft. If you think otherwise, you are mistaken. And the credit check is a way to get impartial information, verify your identity, etc.
Financial status has no impact on credit. I know people who live at/below the poverty line but have fine credit. And, I know people with 6-digit incomes who have terrible credit.
Poor != bad credit.
Unable to control spending and poor risk management == bad credit
What's wrong about discriminating against people with a history of making bad choices?
Not really a valid point, for two reasons:
1. You can recover from identity theft. It's not easy, but you can get all the activity from the theft purged from your credit history and it will be restored to what it should be. So a year/two later, (maybe shorter), it would be a non-even credit history-wise.
2. You can explain this fact to your employer. I certainly would if they asked to check my credit history.
Nope. If Mr. Smith mazes out all his credit cards because he didn't buy proper insurance for little Suzy, and had zero savings, and then can't afford the minimum payments because he bought too much home and a new car, then he doesn't get a new job. Credit scores are actually a decent way to judge someone's ability to judge risk and handle finances. It rewards a conservative attitude, but also penalizes those who avoid credit totally. Seems a pretty legit factor for employment to me.
I live in Indiana, and I'm surprised at the comments in the Slashback. It seems people try REALLY hard to justify living in California, even if most arguments are invalid. My favorite ones are the job security... the classic argument, "If you lose your job, you'll be SOL!" Well, in California, if there are literally hundreds of experienced professionals ready to take your place if your performance drops. So say goodbye to job security! I still say the Midwest is the US's best kept secret.
auctions.google.com
Maybe it IS time for a real eBay competitor?
Because with only 2, there is *less* risk of engine failure.
Having 7 drives increases your risk of failure by a factor of seven. Unless you mirror every drive, but then, you now have 14 disks v 2...
You're kidding... right? You are paying for the privilege of learning from an expert in a subject. If something is interfering with her teaching, she has every right to remove it from her classroom. It's nice that you're a Graduate Student and all, but you've obviously not learned proper respect for your professors yet. Grow up!
Wow, what a blind, snobbish vision you have! It's really refreshing to see that people not in the US feel they are just as superior to us as we feel we are of them. There is a lot of talk out of Europe, especially, about the lack of a US "culture". The problem is, many of those people mistakehistory, rituals, and traditions with Culture. The fact is, the United States has just as much "culture" as any other country in the world, it's just a different culture. It's all a matter of perspective. The US is unique in that 1. It's the world's largest superpower (although China is making inroads), 2. It's huge geographically, and 3. It's a very young country. We have resources, high standards of living, and askew a lot of the traditions and rituals of Europe. Because of that, I think a lot of Europeans resent us. And maybe are even... dare I say it... jealous? That resentment is clear in this poster's rant. Personally, I'll take the US's "lack of culture" over any other country's "culture" any day. I live a great life in the US, as do many more!
That explains a lot... like why my unwanted phone calls about tripled *after* I registered my phone number with the DNC call. Sometimes I wish could ditch my phone entirely!
I would rather not have the technology, and spend the $1 Trillian (with a Capital T) on something more useful for American citizens.
l )
Right now the system is dubious at best, and if technology exists that can defeat it, all that money was wasted.
So you are right on one point, this will take care of one small threat. But then we won't have any money left to address the big ones! That's not where I'd like to be.
(Source for figure: http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/nmd/fullcost.htm
Nope, it doesn't. General CS admission dropping may be an effect, but why would the *ratio* of men to women drop? You provide no clear explanation to why this would be.
Your second statement is more telling. How are women treated (or raised) differently, that they don't seem to like pogramming as much as men? Somewhere there lies the real answer.
Wow, you're wrong in so, so many ways... You seem to think that stations make all their profit from the cable companies, but that's not just true. They get a lot of revenue from advertising. And offering channels for $0 answers most of your issues. First of all, why can't a channel allow itself to be "sold" for under $1? In fact, many channels might want to be priced at $0 so they have the largest possible viewership. If you could select channels for $0, would you? "[Fledgling] channels will be gone under a-la-carte pricing, because they will be forced to pay their own way from day one, and they will not be able to command the prices required for them to operate profitably." Again, if they got sponsership from another channel with bundles, why would that stop for a-la-carte? They'd still get funding, offer the channel for $0, and the viewership, again, would be the same. Only the people who "opt-out" of these channels won't get them, and they probably would never watch anyways. And finally, you suggest that the only successful channels will be determined by the "lowest common denominator." That's how it is today, buddy. Allowing people to pick their own channels won't change their viewing habits, and no show that already has a large following will suffer. And no show that has a small group of very dedicated fans will suffer, either. What I like about this is that I can make my TV decent. I could finally get rid of all that profane religious garbage, stop my children from being damaged by seeing senseless Disney cartoons, and not have to channel flip by the sound-byte happy conservative news stations :) (Not actually, but I'm trying to get a point across, the road goes both ways).
How good of an education did he get is he thinks he can defy gravity? Seriously, brilliant physicists who have been studying their entire lives don't think that's possible.
Another case of someone who thinks they can memorize test answers gets accelerated through school. This will probably be the last time we hear about this kid, and he'll probably fail out and, with any luck, live a normal, happy life. Unless his parents get in the way...