According to the story, the engineer didn't deliberately break confidentiality. He just left the phone where he shouldn't have. Probably still going to get him fired (unless this was a deliberate leak), unless Jobs pulls a Louie de Palma and keeps him around just to abuse him.
Like plays in a chess game, those who understand what's really going on and can predict X steps ahead will put themselves in corresponding favorable positions.
Chess is a game where there are only two players, there is no element of chance, and both players have all available information about game state at any given time. Which makes it laughably simple compared to finance.
The whole credit default swap thing IMO looks most like an n-player iterated prisoners dilemma, except that the (n-dimensional) payoff matrix itself varied as the game played on, and no one player knew all that much of it.
Yes, they'll catch the obvious cheaters. They'll also catch a lot of honest people. When I was an undergrad, there were class requirements for formatting, and quite a few of us knew about "indent". So spacing and indentation would be the same. Variable names tended to be the standard i,j,k which the texts used, along with the ever-popular "answer", "sum", "result", etc. And even the some of the errors people make are pretty common -- fencepost errors, for instance. So I think you're going to catch three classes of people
1) Stupid cheaters (who copy obviously wrong programs which don't even compile) 2) Smarter cheaters (who copy perfectly good programs and change the identifying information) 3) Honest people who know what they are doing (who write programs similar to each other).
I don't see any way an automated system (or a human, even) could distinguish between 2) and 3) just by looking at the code.
If they do this, then no one will work for them and they will change names and thrive. See Blackwater (nee Xe), Anderson Consulting (nee Accenture)
Andersen Consulting changed its name as a result of a dispute with their parent company Arthur Andersen which also resulted in Andersen Consulting becoming independent of Arthur Andersen. Further, they did so prior to the discovery of Arthur Andersen's crookedness in the Enron mess. They did not change their name to attempt to cover over any wrongdoing on their part.
As an American who has still spent most of my life in the US I am not going just by what I see on TV.
So you've been sued, or you know people who have been sued in their personal capacity, for stupid things?
It's obviously not a case of everyone being a religious nut but Sarah Palin, Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh supporters are proof of growing religious extremism.
That wasn't your original claim. Your claim was that you're more likely to be attacked for holding different religious beliefs in the US. BTW, do you even know what religion Beck is?
About the only thing you can't do is go around denying the holocaust in Germany or creating games like Wolfenstien in Germany.
Or 'publishing or distributing racially inflammatory written material' in the UK.
No, I think they will sacrifice the relatively free and open Internet we have today in favour of a system they control with compulsory censorship and/or supervision, combined with laws that allow for major punishment of those who commit minor infringements without the usual safeguards and due process.
I think that even if they manage to do so, it won't stop piracy. Or even slow it down all that much.
The equivalent of counterfeiting in music, would be for some third-rate band to to a cover of a song by a famous artist, and pass it off as the real thing. For example, a Led Zeppelin cover band not admitting they were a cover band, and saying that they actually are the real Led Zeppelin.
Wait, don't pirates hire studio performers to make "greatest hits of the decade" albums, and then sell the things via mail-order, often implying that the songs are by the original performers?
I wonder if anyone has done the math on this... but if you lowered the price of Photoshop to $50... would it create more profit than at its current price $669?
Adobe has already figured that one out. The relatively price-insensitive customers (professional design shops) they gouge out the wazoo, while they sell a much cheaper program (Elements) missing just a few features (which are key to the pros but not the dabblers) to gather in money from the masses. And they sell the full programs to students for a much reduced price.
(it can be cheaper to take a design course at a community college and buy the student version than to buy the full version. Especially if you qualify for an education tax credit as a result. And it's 100% legal)
If you think the pirate community is going to overcome the entire weight of the legal profession, the political players and the big money spinners through sheer force of arrogant denial, then I suspect some time in the next two or three years, you are going to learn a painful lesson. I'm only sorry that quite a few innocent people are going to be deeply inconvenienced when the remaining healthy tissue in the limb is sacrificed to be sure the disease is contained.
You think they'll sacrifice computers and the internet to save the music and movie industry? Sorry, there's a lot of them who would like to, but it's just not going to happen. And the legal profession will fight for any side; they're hired guns in this, not interested parties.
I wonder if something that makes this volcano different than all other volcanoes is that it's erupting at a time when almost all translatlantic flying is done on two-engine planes.
Probably not. Ash has caused all engines to go out on a 747. As you say, the threat is common to all engines, whether 2,3, or 4.
The airlines have it right. All the talk has been about flights being canceled for a few days or weeks, but as far as I can tell there's no real reason the eruption couldn't continue for months, and plenty of precedent for eruptions which have. And talk about the wind shifting seems pretty much wishful thinking as well; the upper air westerlies aren't going to stop blowing eastward, nor are they likely to lose all their southward components. So a very conservative approach (no flying until the ash has dissipated) could result in most of northern Europe being a no-fly zone for months. It's probably worth the risk to find out more precisely where the conditions really are too dangerous.
"Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of Fundamentalism that SOMEONE won't mistake for the real thing. " ~ Poe
There's a corollary which states that "at least one of those someones will be a Fundamentalist who believes in the positions set forth in the parody".
You can pretend the US is some how leagues above everyone else in freedom but it doesn't make it true. You're less likely to see women walking on the beach topless in the US
It's 100% legal for a woman to walk topless down the streets of New York City.
you're more likely to get sued (in fact lawsuits the subjects of numerous TV shows)
And you believe what you see on TV?
you're more likely to be attacked for holding different religious beliefs, especially if you believe in no god.
Really? You got some figures on that?
And here are some examples of Europeans freedom of speech:
Two of the three were politicians and one of those has been convicted of a crime for his writings. Hardly great examples.
[2] I saw a video where a sword swallower said he had a bad accident when a bird sat on his shoulder unexpectedly. To me that shows he is very bad at prioritization for him to do what he does safely. When you have a sword swallowed in your throat, you do NOT turn your head no matter what. It's like the "pain box" test in Dune.
I'd think that would be a matter of suppressing a reflex rather than conscious prioritization. There'd be a lot fewer Bene Gesserit if the gom jabber test candidate wasn't told what was in the box ("Pain").
So you want to have people imprisoned (not even tried and convicted: just locked up) for proposing legislation that you dislike.
I don't like the MPAA and the RIAA either (and I favor drastic reductions in the scope of copyright), but I think I prefer them to you.
Depends on the legislation. IMO, proposing legislation that will have me thrown in jail for activities I should have every right to engage in is tantamount to assault.
Because if I can come up with a different hardware mechanism that fulfills the same task then I can still make use of the math developed, the algorithm itself.
Here is the deal - one of your sons may be prone to criminal activity. I am not going to tell you which one, so you are just going to have to "bite the bullet" and be a good father and raise both of them with love and respect.
Naa, I'll just raise them both the same until the tendency becomes readily apparent, then throw the bad egg to the wolves. Thanks for telling me the other one is OK.
I have never understood how school districts think.
On one hand they're terrified of getting sued. They have huge lists of things, even common, ordinary actions, that are not allowed to prevent even the slightest chance of getting sued.
Then, on the other hand, they take actions that random people on the street realize will cause a lawsuit. Strip searching students for searching for asprin, cancelling proms when gay students wish to attend, secretly spying on students with webcams. What the hell are they thinking?
They're control freaks. The "we could get sued" excuse for restricting actions is usually just that, an excuse; they're not actually terrified of being sued, they just know that by using that excuse they make some big bad lawyer (or often, insurance company -- "our insurance company won't allow that" is just as common) responsible and thus put their restrictions beyond challenge.
Actually, the fifth amendment right being invoked is a balancing mechanism. You're not allowed (legally) to invoke the fifth amendment for any statement that isn't self-incriminating, by definition; therefor, when you refuse to answer questions on those grounds, you indicate that you believe at least one of two things:
* You're guilty of the crime you're charged with
* You're guilty of another crime
Doesn't work that way in criminal cases. If you're the defendant, you can only invoke the Fifth Amendment at trial by refusing to testify entirely. And you don't have to answer anything the prosecutors ask you beforehand, whether or not you ultimately testify.
HP states that in foreign nations 'it is common to engage in business practices that are prohibited by laws and regulations
Thank god they specified foreign nations, cause in the US that'd be wrong
In many other nations, the distinction between the laws on paper and accepted practices is much greater than it is in the United States (except maybe in Chicago or Philadelphia...). For instance, in most of the US, if you try to bribe a cop to get out of a traffic ticket, you're going to jail most of the time. In Mexico, the bribe -- la mordida -- is pretty much expected, and you're more likely to go to jail if you DON'T offer it, even though bribery is illegal in Mexico. So HP actually has a point here.
Looks like HP made the mistake of dealing with a dishonest politician... defined as one who won't stay bought.
or maybe require the poster to prove the collatz conjecture, and define a turing machine that can verify the proof?
Last time they tried that I was a wiseguy and submitted a turing machine which would halt iff the collatz conjecture was true. Next thing you know, Slashdot went down trying to verify whether the thing halted. I don't think my post ever made it either.
I'd say not at all better than the people with rare genetic disorders being responsible and adopting if they insist on having kids.
As I understand this method, the zygote (err, excuse me, child) will not inherit the disorder. So it's not irresponsible in the sense of passing on a genetic disorder.
As for insurance costs... eh, if you hadn't insisted on government-controlled health care, it'd be up to the insurance providers whether or not to pay for treatments like this, and up to you whether you wanted to purchase such insurance or not.
Slashdot Mirror
According to the story, the engineer didn't deliberately break confidentiality. He just left the phone where he shouldn't have. Probably still going to get him fired (unless this was a deliberate leak), unless Jobs pulls a Louie de Palma and keeps him around just to abuse him.
Chess is a game where there are only two players, there is no element of chance, and both players have all available information about game state at any given time. Which makes it laughably simple compared to finance.
The whole credit default swap thing IMO looks most like an n-player iterated prisoners dilemma, except that the (n-dimensional) payoff matrix itself varied as the game played on, and no one player knew all that much of it.
Yes, they'll catch the obvious cheaters. They'll also catch a lot of honest people. When I was an undergrad, there were class requirements for formatting, and quite a few of us knew about "indent". So spacing and indentation would be the same. Variable names tended to be the standard i,j,k which the texts used, along with the ever-popular "answer", "sum", "result", etc. And even the some of the errors people make are pretty common -- fencepost errors, for instance. So I think you're going to catch three classes of people
1) Stupid cheaters (who copy obviously wrong programs which don't even compile)
2) Smarter cheaters (who copy perfectly good programs and change the identifying information)
3) Honest people who know what they are doing (who write programs similar to each other).
I don't see any way an automated system (or a human, even) could distinguish between 2) and 3) just by looking at the code.
Andersen Consulting changed its name as a result of a dispute with their parent company Arthur Andersen which also resulted in Andersen Consulting becoming independent of Arthur Andersen. Further, they did so prior to the discovery of Arthur Andersen's crookedness in the Enron mess. They did not change their name to attempt to cover over any wrongdoing on their part.
No, they don't. Did you even read them?
So you've been sued, or you know people who have been sued in their personal capacity, for stupid things?
That wasn't your original claim. Your claim was that you're more likely to be attacked for holding different religious beliefs in the US. BTW, do you even know what religion Beck is?
Or 'publishing or distributing racially inflammatory written material' in the UK.
I think that even if they manage to do so, it won't stop piracy. Or even slow it down all that much.
Maybe Dubai World can get the QE2 back into service.
Wait, don't pirates hire studio performers to make "greatest hits of the decade" albums, and then sell the things via mail-order, often implying that the songs are by the original performers?
Adobe has already figured that one out. The relatively price-insensitive customers (professional design shops) they gouge out the wazoo, while they sell a much cheaper program (Elements) missing just a few features (which are key to the pros but not the dabblers) to gather in money from the masses. And they sell the full programs to students for a much reduced price.
(it can be cheaper to take a design course at a community college and buy the student version than to buy the full version. Especially if you qualify for an education tax credit as a result. And it's 100% legal)
You think they'll sacrifice computers and the internet to save the music and movie industry? Sorry, there's a lot of them who would like to, but it's just not going to happen. And the legal profession will fight for any side; they're hired guns in this, not interested parties.
Probably not. Ash has caused all engines to go out on a 747. As you say, the threat is common to all engines, whether 2,3, or 4.
The airlines have it right. All the talk has been about flights being canceled for a few days or weeks, but as far as I can tell there's no real reason the eruption couldn't continue for months, and plenty of precedent for eruptions which have. And talk about the wind shifting seems pretty much wishful thinking as well; the upper air westerlies aren't going to stop blowing eastward, nor are they likely to lose all their southward components. So a very conservative approach (no flying until the ash has dissipated) could result in most of northern Europe being a no-fly zone for months. It's probably worth the risk to find out more precisely where the conditions really are too dangerous.
There's a corollary which states that "at least one of those someones will be a Fundamentalist who believes in the positions set forth in the parody".
It's 100% legal for a woman to walk topless down the streets of New York City.
And you believe what you see on TV?
Really? You got some figures on that?
Two of the three were politicians and one of those has been convicted of a crime for his writings. Hardly great examples.
I'd think that would be a matter of suppressing a reflex rather than conscious prioritization. There'd be a lot fewer Bene Gesserit if the gom jabber test candidate wasn't told what was in the box ("Pain").
Depends on the legislation. IMO, proposing legislation that will have me thrown in jail for activities I should have every right to engage in is tantamount to assault.
Right. Just like building a house of cards causes the foundation to shake.
Often said by patent defenders, but not true.
Only if you keep your wallet on your head.
Naa, I'll just raise them both the same until the tendency becomes readily apparent, then throw the bad egg to the wolves. Thanks for telling me the other one is OK.
Ahh, you mean due process, Pennsylvania Style.
If those judges had had this software, they'd still be getting away with it on the grounds that "The computer said the kids were dangers".
They're control freaks. The "we could get sued" excuse for restricting actions is usually just that, an excuse; they're not actually terrified of being sued, they just know that by using that excuse they make some big bad lawyer (or often, insurance company -- "our insurance company won't allow that" is just as common) responsible and thus put their restrictions beyond challenge.
Doesn't work that way in criminal cases. If you're the defendant, you can only invoke the Fifth Amendment at trial by refusing to testify entirely. And you don't have to answer anything the prosecutors ask you beforehand, whether or not you ultimately testify.
In many other nations, the distinction between the laws on paper and accepted practices is much greater than it is in the United States (except maybe in Chicago or Philadelphia...). For instance, in most of the US, if you try to bribe a cop to get out of a traffic ticket, you're going to jail most of the time. In Mexico, the bribe -- la mordida -- is pretty much expected, and you're more likely to go to jail if you DON'T offer it, even though bribery is illegal in Mexico. So HP actually has a point here.
Looks like HP made the mistake of dealing with a dishonest politician... defined as one who won't stay bought.
Last time they tried that I was a wiseguy and submitted a turing machine which would halt iff the collatz conjecture was true. Next thing you know, Slashdot went down trying to verify whether the thing halted. I don't think my post ever made it either.
As I understand this method, the zygote (err, excuse me, child) will not inherit the disorder. So it's not irresponsible in the sense of passing on a genetic disorder.
As for insurance costs... eh, if you hadn't insisted on government-controlled health care, it'd be up to the insurance providers whether or not to pay for treatments like this, and up to you whether you wanted to purchase such insurance or not.