/. is full of people who say they are geeks but are really just businessmen. Who gives a fuck whether the underprivileged guy gets the rosette?
Objecting to unjust treatment does not make one a non-geek or a businessman. Quite the opposite, actually; businessmen tend to be pragmatists, and if they complain about unfairness, it's only because they see an advantage in doing so, not because they're actually upset about it.
Do the work because you enjoy the learning and get satisfaction from the end product, not because you enjoy remuneration.
That's sucker talk. I may do work because I enjoy the learning and get satisfaction from the end product, but as soon as someone else gets to specify that work (whether through employment or through some other inducement such as the chance of winning a contest), I expect remuneration according to the terms of the inducement. So if the terms of the science fair are that the project is judged on its own merits, and it turns out the project was actually judged based on the hardships of the entrant, the entrant who loses despite having a better project has been cheated.
Ha. People don't learn the basics naturally. That's why literacy rates are historically so low. Without any training, you'll learn the language well enough to speak it, of course. If you grow up in a literate household you might even learn to read at a basic level. As far as math, you might get as far as addition and subtraction of whole numbers and fractions. Multiplication? Unlikely; you might learn to do 4 @ 25c by repeated addition, but that's it. Division, negative numbers, decimals (besides a few special cases)? Forget it.
If he'd been told his work was crap, and that he could do a lot better (he actually could), and that this kind of performance was just failing himself, then maybe he'd have tried harder. Telling someone that a piece of work is crap doesn't mean you can't help them get better, it just stops them getting that instant gratification of 'recognition and respect' for doing sub-standard and lacking work.
Sure, but now he's got a cushy government job paying close to 6 figures, and he rarely has to even show up. He bought a nice house with an ARM for zero down and got his principal "adjusted" so he isn't even going to have to pay it off. Are you doing so well? Perhaps it would have been better for you if you were told to slack off a bit, play the victim, make up some sob stories.
The term "issue of public interest" has been given a very broad interpretation. Indeed, in Nygord, Inc. v. Uusi-Kerttula (2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 1027, 1042, the court stated that for purposes of the SLAPP statute an issue of public interest is "any issue in which the public is interested." The requirement that the speech be of "public" interest is satisfied if the speech is of concern to a substantial number of people. (Rivera v. First DataBank, Inc., supra, 187 Cal.App.4th at p. 716.) Cammarata and Bright agree that there is a substantial public interest in the kind of sexually explicit videos shown on tube-sites such as Redtube.
I was bought up in India, and countless times in my history books I read how those who bombed the british rule and parliament were heroes
That's just because it was the English. They're odd that way. They've got a statue of Oliver Cromwell outside parliament. You might have heard of the gentleman; he overthrew the British monarchy, dissolved parliament (more than once) and ruled by decree, and was, after his death and the restoration of the monarchy, dug up and his corpse beheaded. Yet outside parliament, near another statue of Richard the Lion-Hearted, there's Cromwell's statue.
I'm sick of this self-perpetuating bullshit that says geeks can't be athletic or interesting or cool (where "cool" means relatively unconcerned about what other people think about them) . Geeks are fascinating. They travel. They build things. They do interesting things with electricity and power motors. They make films, design cars, hike volcanoes, enter sporting events.
"Cool" doesn't mean "relatively unconcerned about what people think about them". Lots of geeks have that. For a person to be "cool" means "people think well of them and would wish to be like them", though in a more specific sense. Of the things you've mentioned, I've travelled, hiked a volcano, and entered (and done well at) sporting events -- and non-geeks often think those things are "cool". But those aren't geeky things; those are just things this geek has happened to do. The geeky things I do generally are met with either blank looks or eye-rolls from non-geeks; building a Mythbox is probably the most likely to be "cool" to non-geeks once explained, and writing a MDL interpreter in order to play the original Zork is probably among the least.
Being socially inept does not make one a geek.
Of course not, and more to the point, being a geek doesn't require one be socially inept, but it tends to come with the territory; geeks who are highly socially skilled in larger society are the exception rather than the rule.
I may or may not be a geek, who the hell knows or cares. But I do know that labels are a sad attempt to compartmentalize *people*.
Looks to me like Amazon could fulfill the requirement by removing the "buy" option from the app entirely, and just having the app access already-bought books. Users could still buy though the web page, they just couldn't get to it directly from the app.
If the universe started with a big bang, with all matter originated in an extremely compact volume, and if it's radius can't expand faster than light, then there should be no points in the universe beyond what we can see (as limited by light speed.) What am I missing?
Special and general relativity, for starters. Just special relativity is enough to throw you for a loop. Imagine a "really tiny bang" consisting of the production of a pair of photons headed in opposite directions. 28 million years later how far is photon A from photon B? 28 million light years, of course. How far is photon A from the starting point? 28 million light years. How far is photon B from the starting point? Also 28 million light years.
General relativity makes my head hurt, so I'm not going there.
Turnspit dog wheels are no longer used, because the turnspit dog that was used to turn them is extinct.
Best I can tell it's the other way around; the turnspit dog went extinct because the roasting jack replaced the dog wheel. Assuming the whole turnspit dog thing isn't a 150-year-old hoax.
Copyrights give creative people a reason to do what they do. Writers, musicians, artists, etc. need to eat, too.
Trademarks protect the consumer as much as the business. Without trademarks what stops somebody from selling bottles of piss and marketing it as Mountain Dew?
Defamation completely throws me for a loop. You have a problem with people suing other people for making up lies about them?
You're considering the advertisement for these things rather than reality. In reality, copyrights are used to _shut down_ creative people for using the wrong three notes, or for writing the wrong computer program. Trademarks are used to remove words from the language (e.g. "monster") or to quell criticism. Defamation law is also used to quell criticism, e.g. trade libel claims against negative reviewers.
You know, I've heard this repeated so many times, but I can't even get a response from girls on dating websites despite not only having a job, but a well paying job. Yes, I'm a nerd, but still. You'd think I could at least get a response...
You probably can't change your personality, so you might want to work on the hygiene and clothing angles.
I'm going to go cry into a wad of cash now.
Or try posting this on the dating website. Though I'd be worried that anyone who responded to that would have a boyfriend with a blackjack.
My data center is held at constant temperature and humidity for electronics. I DON'T intend to stay in a data center to use a phone. In Alberta, Canada it routinely gets to -30C (as it did this morning in fact) and I expect the phone to work. Did I say, after it thaws out? No I meant in -30C weather.
Don't buy an iPhone then. It's only rated to operate down to 0C. Below -20C, it explodes, leaving a puff of vapor which forms into Steve Jobs's head, laughing at you.
Bravo, with the first sentence you just said that any amount of alcohol makes one drunk
Only if you make it a binary thing (sober v. drunk). What I said is that the first drink make you something other than sober. If I have one drink, I'm definitely not sober, but I'm not drunk in the colloquial sense either. And I've never noticed that it gets easier to have more alcohol as I get more intoxicated. Perhaps that happens to those more susceptible to alcoholism.
So you are in your cabin in the woods with your friend and you both have had a few beers, your friend manages to cut himself badly, there is no phone so you decide to drive him to the nearest hospital, but oh no your car won't allow you to drive, too bad your friend dies.
Sounds like a law school setup, though the way I remember it, "you" were stinking drunk near the cabin in the woods and had neither car nor phone (this taking place before the days of ubiqtuous cell phones) when "you" came upon a car accident. The driver was incapacitated. "You" then drove the victim (in his damaged but functional car) to the hospital where upon arriving the accident victim was treated and "you" were arrested for drunk driving. At your trial the doctors testified that the victim would not have survived much longer without treatment; driving drunk definitely saved his life. However, the verdict was guilty; drunk driving is a strict liability offense and necessity is not a defense; sorry bud, you should have let the guy die.
Supposedly based on a real case. Believe it, or not.
Seriously, so many people acting like they never experienced the effects of alcohol. Did you never notice how continuing to drink is easier once you're drunk?
Sure, when I'm sober, I can't _continue_ to drink, I have to START drinking. Aside from that, I've never noticed the phenomenon you refer to.
Somebody who is unable even to abstain from driving drunk (when two, which is apparently already enough, becomes three) seems to be quite impaired.
I believe you're confusing "unwilling" with "unable".
Slashdot Mirror
Objecting to unjust treatment does not make one a non-geek or a businessman. Quite the opposite, actually; businessmen tend to be pragmatists, and if they complain about unfairness, it's only because they see an advantage in doing so, not because they're actually upset about it.
That's sucker talk. I may do work because I enjoy the learning and get satisfaction from the end product, but as soon as someone else gets to specify that work (whether through employment or through some other inducement such as the chance of winning a contest), I expect remuneration according to the terms of the inducement. So if the terms of the science fair are that the project is judged on its own merits, and it turns out the project was actually judged based on the hardships of the entrant, the entrant who loses despite having a better project has been cheated.
If you knew science, you could build a flamethrower and reduce the work considerably.
It's the bad teachers who need to be put to work in the mines. Except that they'd just get good miners killed.
Ha. People don't learn the basics naturally. That's why literacy rates are historically so low. Without any training, you'll learn the language well enough to speak it, of course. If you grow up in a literate household you might even learn to read at a basic level. As far as math, you might get as far as addition and subtraction of whole numbers and fractions. Multiplication? Unlikely; you might learn to do 4 @ 25c by repeated addition, but that's it. Division, negative numbers, decimals (besides a few special cases)? Forget it.
YHBT, HTH, HAND.
Sure, but now he's got a cushy government job paying close to 6 figures, and he rarely has to even show up. He bought a nice house with an ARM for zero down and got his principal "adjusted" so he isn't even going to have to pay it off. Are you doing so well? Perhaps it would have been better for you if you were told to slack off a bit, play the victim, make up some sob stories.
I don't think lawyers are permitted to incorporate in the US. The general partners of a law firm have full liability for all debts of the firm.
That's just because it was the English. They're odd that way. They've got a statue of Oliver Cromwell outside parliament. You might have heard of the gentleman; he overthrew the British monarchy, dissolved parliament (more than once) and ruled by decree, and was, after his death and the restoration of the monarchy, dug up and his corpse beheaded. Yet outside parliament, near another statue of Richard the Lion-Hearted, there's Cromwell's statue.
"Cool" doesn't mean "relatively unconcerned about what people think about them". Lots of geeks have that. For a person to be "cool" means "people think well of them and would wish to be like them", though in a more specific sense. Of the things you've mentioned, I've travelled, hiked a volcano, and entered (and done well at) sporting events -- and non-geeks often think those things are "cool". But those aren't geeky things; those are just things this geek has happened to do. The geeky things I do generally are met with either blank looks or eye-rolls from non-geeks; building a Mythbox is probably the most likely to be "cool" to non-geeks once explained, and writing a MDL interpreter in order to play the original Zork is probably among the least.
Of course not, and more to the point, being a geek doesn't require one be socially inept, but it tends to come with the territory; geeks who are highly socially skilled in larger society are the exception rather than the rule.
Such compartmentalization can be quite useful.
Looks to me like Amazon could fulfill the requirement by removing the "buy" option from the app entirely, and just having the app access already-bought books. Users could still buy though the web page, they just couldn't get to it directly from the app.
Special and general relativity, for starters. Just special relativity is enough to throw you for a loop. Imagine a "really tiny bang" consisting of the production of a pair of photons headed in opposite directions. 28 million years later how far is photon A from photon B? 28 million light years, of course. How far is photon A from the starting point? 28 million light years. How far is photon B from the starting point? Also 28 million light years.
General relativity makes my head hurt, so I'm not going there.
Best I can tell it's the other way around; the turnspit dog went extinct because the roasting jack replaced the dog wheel. Assuming the whole turnspit dog thing isn't a 150-year-old hoax.
You're considering the advertisement for these things rather than reality. In reality, copyrights are used to _shut down_ creative people for using the wrong three notes, or for writing the wrong computer program. Trademarks are used to remove words from the language (e.g. "monster") or to quell criticism. Defamation law is also used to quell criticism, e.g. trade libel claims against negative reviewers.
Maybe, since they are so small, the government simply overlooked them at first when they told the major ISPs to shut down.
You probably can't change your personality, so you might want to work on the hygiene and clothing angles.
Or try posting this on the dating website. Though I'd be worried that anyone who responded to that would have a boyfriend with a blackjack.
Don't buy an iPhone then. It's only rated to operate down to 0C. Below -20C, it explodes, leaving a puff of vapor which forms into Steve Jobs's head, laughing at you.
Only if you make it a binary thing (sober v. drunk). What I said is that the first drink make you something other than sober. If I have one drink, I'm definitely not sober, but I'm not drunk in the colloquial sense either. And I've never noticed that it gets easier to have more alcohol as I get more intoxicated. Perhaps that happens to those more susceptible to alcoholism.
Twitter and Facebook are both the results of geeks figuring out a way of exploiting the mainstream for cash.
Sounds like a law school setup, though the way I remember it, "you" were stinking drunk near the cabin in the woods and had neither car nor phone (this taking place before the days of ubiqtuous cell phones) when "you" came upon a car accident. The driver was incapacitated. "You" then drove the victim (in his damaged but functional car) to the hospital where upon arriving the accident victim was treated and "you" were arrested for drunk driving. At your trial the doctors testified that the victim would not have survived much longer without treatment; driving drunk definitely saved his life. However, the verdict was guilty; drunk driving is a strict liability offense and necessity is not a defense; sorry bud, you should have let the guy die.
Supposedly based on a real case. Believe it, or not.
Sure, when I'm sober, I can't _continue_ to drink, I have to START drinking. Aside from that, I've never noticed the phenomenon you refer to.
I believe you're confusing "unwilling" with "unable".
Keep your fascist devices off my car, and stay out from in front of my hood.
<cynic>
Of course it's going to be Islamic Fascist. That's the only kind of change you get over there.
</cynic>
Unless they changed things with the PATRIOT act, the FBI is responsible for counterespionage within US jurisdiction.