The decision doesn't merely uphold a right to spam; it upholds the right to spam and make it look like someone else sent it.
No, it doesn't. It upholds the right to send out certain bulk emails anonymously. The legislature wrote a law which prohibited that, along with a whole bunch of other things that perhaps could be permissibly prohibited, but since the law also prohibited things which were a matter of free speech, it was found to be overbroad. The judges also decided it was not within their scope to try to strike down the law only in cases where it was in conflict with the First Amendment (in effect re-writing the law), saying that writing the law properly was the legislature's job.
I wrote a little app to fill the cache with screenshots of the IRS web pages. Anyone tries to investigate me, they'll have to carefully examine Publication 936, the instructions for Schedule F1, the guidelines for reporting "nanny" wages, and the like. Even if they aren't literally bored to death, they definitely won't want to look any further.
Um.. are you under some delusion that $20/hr is a LOT?
Probably is, compared to what the regular Best Buy salesdrones are getting.
I'm wondering if this is some sort of masterful plan by Steve Jobs. After the sort of "defense" Vista will get from Best Buy employees, I doubt anyone will want to buy it!
It's downright scary!! The federal government will now pursue civil matters on behalf of private entities, with the inclusion for collateral damage of seizure of entire server farms.
I don't think server farms are where they'll start. Think, instead, of raids on university dorms and private residences. The RIAA will just collect a list of IP addresses and have the cops go and collect all the computers associated with them.
With our powers combined, we STILL can't beat the juggernaut. That cynicism isn't all just hip posturing, a lot of it is bitter knowledge and/or even more bitter experience.
Eh, when I pull that page up it's entitled "iTunes 8: If Windows Vista displays a blue screen error message when connecting iPhone or iPod", but the content of the article is just "BUY A MAC, D00D" in 200-point type.
I knew someone would bite on that. Zinfandel is a strong, dry red wine, which despite being from the same grape, is not really similar to the "White Zinfandel" you're likely referring to, which is a weak, off-dry, rose wine.
This is the straw that broke the camel's back. I am going to wait until the copyreich brownshirts raid the very first webhost and seize a whole server farm. We'll see how well this goes over when a few thousand customers sue the US government for illegal seizure.
Same as it's gone over with everything else they've pulled. "Thank you sir, may I have another?"
Nobody of importance will complain. Nobody who complains will be heard from. Not until the copyright cops bust into a few wrong places and get shot; then we'll hear about how copyright infringers are terrorists, and they'll create some even WORSE laws.
Hangul is an alphabet; while each block represents a syllable, the block is made up of individual characters which represent a sound. It is those which are entered using a keyboard.
I'm not hiring you for eight hours a day only. When you're in the bar after-hours at a convention shooting the breeze, you still represent my company.
Do you pay your employees 3-4 times the rate that other companies charge because you're hiring them to represent you ALL the time? Because if not, you're being obscenely unreasonable.
I want to know your character, and I am going to get in your face(book) to find that out. I'm also going to find out your credit score and your arrest record and your civil record as well.
It's illegal in most states to deny employment based on arrest records.
Anyway, Mr. Perot, it doesn't sound like I'd really WANT to work for a control freak like you. If I wanted a job where I was on the employer's time 24/7, I'd have joined the military.
At 34 years old if drinking is important enough that you mention it in your blog (I have no idea if you do) then you probably haven't grown up.
Some possible entries: "Tried the Chateau LaFoot Snootschild '91 at the wine tasting last night. It's quite good but nowhere near worth the $200/bottle price. I prefer a California Zinfandel anyway".
"Went to Smith's party last night; he had just finished a batch of his homebrew; it's pretty good stuff. I'd love to be able to do that but my wife objects to filling the basement with fermentation tanks"
"Met up with some old friends from college, had a few beers down at our old favorite hangout. Now I've got a major hangover; guess I can't drink like I used to back in the day".
Which of these shows you haven't grown up, exactly?
I never thought of that -- you can just lie during the interview process to get the job! Why just lie about listening to a violinist though -- I'm sure you would have been a shoe-in for the job if you lie about your job experience, degree earned, etc. What a great tip -- Thanks!
Never lie at anything which can be verified. If you must lie about something which can be verified, do so in an unrecorded oral conversation only.
*communication skills on web forums, chat rooms, person web sites and so on. is not the same as in office communication skills
Yeah, can you imagine if the employer found on google the archive of some '80s BBS which happened to be put online...
"Well, we were going to hire him, but we found these messages from him that were completely incomprehensible... numbers instead of letters, Z instead of S, lots of letters dropped... the guy must be illiterate. I wonder who helped him write his resume?"
By posting on FaceBook, My Space, etc. you have just made public parts of your private life.
They may not be "private" but they are still "personal". They're probably not something I mind anyone knowing about me, but they aren't things employers should be judging me by either.
Yes, but my side career as a stripper should not affect how well I code as a programmer. Therefor should not be considered a bad mark on my application.
Unless there's a no-moonlighting rule, I agree completely.
However, I hope you understand why I never, ever, ask if you have change for a $10.
It's conjecture to a degree, yes. But to argue that your personal life never has any effect on your professional life is pointless. It can happen. And if I have 50 good candidates to sift through I'm going to do what I can to get the number down to something more manageable.
Do something else. Because you're probably throwing away most of the good candidates that way, and getting only the appropriately paranoid (who are going to act the same way on the job, 100% CYA) and the thoroughly boring.
Coming to an interview for a programming position (or some other non-client facing position) maybe it shouldn't matter that much if you come in old clothes looking unkempt. But most people don't do that, do they? They know they will be judged on that.
Sure; dressing for the interview is part of the game. Living one's life like one is always on the job or (worse) always on a job interview is not.
Why does every manager not screen all applicants? Takes 5 minutes.
Probably for the good reason that it will cause far more rejections of qualified applicants than rejections of total losers who would have otherwise made it through the process. Particularly if the one doing the screening is a bluenose. One of the complaints is that the "candidate's screen name was unprofessional"... uh, yeah. If it wasn't intended for business purposes, why should it be professional? That's like complaining that they found a picture of the candidate in ripped jeans and a T-shirt and therefore he dressed unprofessionally.
Even far "worse" stuff is a dumb reason to reject someone. Candidate drinking or using drugs? The majority of people drink; hell, it's even still legal in the US. A lot have used drugs, too, and yet have no problem at work.
Oh well, I guess I should probably do more of my online stuff under one of my handles (my slashdot user id is my real name). They'd be easy enough to associate with me for someone really investigating, but if an employer is going to investigate beyond a cursory search, and care about what he finds, I probably don't want to be working there.
2) He set all the network devices on the network to lose all info on a reboot
I wonder if this one is just a complete misunderstanding. One article says that they were set to lose configuration files on "reset". That's pretty typical -- if you have some device you don't have the password to, you can do a full factory reset and get it back to the default password, but that also wipes the configuration files. He might have told his incompetent bosses that, and they thought he meant they'd lose the files on a reboot instead.
Anyway, if this guy is what they're making him out to be, they need to completely wipe and reconfigure the network anyway; it's the only way to be sure he didn't leave a few presents for them.
And Star Wars plagiarizes many other works that precede it. Kurosawa, Heinlein, Asimov, Herbert, et.al. Perhaps "plagiarizes" is too strong a term, but maybe one day a court will decide that "inspiration" also represents copyright infringement.
Yep. One of the things which used to exist in copyright (and nominally still does) is the idea/expression distinction. Ideas cannot be copyrighted; their expression can. But then came things like copyrights on characters, and settings. And now copyrights on "fictional facts". All those are ideas, and all those are now protected by copyright, despite the letter of the law.
B and C are the same parties, but nice try attempting to portray the **AA as "mean and bad" without appearing to demean the beloved musicians.
B and C are NOT the same parties. B is the party you are copying the pattern of bits FROM. C is the copyright holder, be it the hated **AA member companies or the beloved musicians.
You may have had a hard time explaining why file-sharing isn't theft because the two are pretty close.
The only similarity is that at least one party is enriched in both cases.
The results for the "thief" are the same even if the means (and their side effects) are drastically different.
By that standard, winning a contest and stealing the prize are "pretty close".
Theft: A takes an item from B without B's consent. B has been damaged by the cost to replace the item, A has been enriched File-sharing of copyrighted material: A creates a pattern of bits the same as one B has. A has been enriched. B has been neither damaged nor enriched. Third party C claims to have been damaged to the tune of $100,000.
I mean, the nature of a thing doesn't change just because you place an A HREF tag around it.
Yes, it does. Without the A HREF tag, it's covered by the First Amendment. With the A HREF tag, it's not. Accoring to the Second Circuit Court of Appeal, anyway.
You know, that "encrypted sessions only" bit wasn't put in there just for fun. It's bad enough we have any number of things broken by design, we could at least use the security which actually _was_ designed into the system.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it doesn't. It upholds the right to send out certain bulk emails anonymously. The legislature wrote a law which prohibited that, along with a whole bunch of other things that perhaps could be permissibly prohibited, but since the law also prohibited things which were a matter of free speech, it was found to be overbroad. The judges also decided it was not within their scope to try to strike down the law only in cases where it was in conflict with the First Amendment (in effect re-writing the law), saying that writing the law properly was the legislature's job.
I wrote a little app to fill the cache with screenshots of the IRS web pages. Anyone tries to investigate me, they'll have to carefully examine Publication 936, the instructions for Schedule F1, the guidelines for reporting "nanny" wages, and the like. Even if they aren't literally bored to death, they definitely won't want to look any further.
Probably is, compared to what the regular Best Buy salesdrones are getting. I'm wondering if this is some sort of masterful plan by Steve Jobs. After the sort of "defense" Vista will get from Best Buy employees, I doubt anyone will want to buy it!
I don't think server farms are where they'll start. Think, instead, of raids on university dorms and private residences. The RIAA will just collect a list of IP addresses and have the cops go and collect all the computers associated with them.
With our powers combined, we STILL can't beat the juggernaut. That cynicism isn't all just hip posturing, a lot of it is bitter knowledge and/or even more bitter experience.
Eh, when I pull that page up it's entitled "iTunes 8: If Windows Vista displays a blue screen error message when connecting iPhone or iPod", but the content of the article is just "BUY A MAC, D00D" in 200-point type.
I knew someone would bite on that. Zinfandel is a strong, dry red wine, which despite being from the same grape, is not really similar to the "White Zinfandel" you're likely referring to, which is a weak, off-dry, rose wine.
Same as it's gone over with everything else they've pulled. "Thank you sir, may I have another?"
Nobody of importance will complain. Nobody who complains will be heard from. Not until the copyright cops bust into a few wrong places and get shot; then we'll hear about how copyright infringers are terrorists, and they'll create some even WORSE laws.
Hangul is an alphabet; while each block represents a syllable, the block is made up of individual characters which represent a sound. It is those which are entered using a keyboard.
Do you pay your employees 3-4 times the rate that other companies charge because you're hiring them to represent you ALL the time? Because if not, you're being obscenely unreasonable.
It's illegal in most states to deny employment based on arrest records.
Anyway, Mr. Perot, it doesn't sound like I'd really WANT to work for a control freak like you. If I wanted a job where I was on the employer's time 24/7, I'd have joined the military.
Some possible entries:
"Tried the Chateau LaFoot Snootschild '91 at the wine tasting last night. It's quite good but nowhere near worth the $200/bottle price. I prefer a California Zinfandel anyway".
"Went to Smith's party last night; he had just finished a batch of his homebrew; it's pretty good stuff. I'd love to be able to do that but my wife objects to filling the basement with fermentation tanks"
"Met up with some old friends from college, had a few beers down at our old favorite hangout. Now I've got a major hangover; guess I can't drink like I used to back in the day".
Which of these shows you haven't grown up, exactly?
Never lie at anything which can be verified. If you must lie about something which can be verified, do so in an unrecorded oral conversation only.
Yeah, can you imagine if the employer found on google the archive of some '80s BBS which happened to be put online...
"Well, we were going to hire him, but we found these messages from him that were completely incomprehensible... numbers instead of letters, Z instead of S, lots of letters dropped... the guy must be illiterate. I wonder who helped him write his resume?"
They may not be "private" but they are still "personal". They're probably not something I mind anyone knowing about me, but they aren't things employers should be judging me by either.
Unless there's a no-moonlighting rule, I agree completely.
However, I hope you understand why I never, ever, ask if you have change for a $10.
Do something else. Because you're probably throwing away most of the good candidates that way, and getting only the appropriately paranoid (who are going to act the same way on the job, 100% CYA) and the thoroughly boring.
Sure; dressing for the interview is part of the game. Living one's life like one is always on the job or (worse) always on a job interview is not.
Probably for the good reason that it will cause far more rejections of qualified applicants than rejections of total losers who would have otherwise made it through the process. Particularly if the one doing the screening is a bluenose. One of the complaints is that the "candidate's screen name was unprofessional"... uh, yeah. If it wasn't intended for business purposes, why should it be professional? That's like complaining that they found a picture of the candidate in ripped jeans and a T-shirt and therefore he dressed unprofessionally.
Even far "worse" stuff is a dumb reason to reject someone. Candidate drinking or using drugs? The majority of people drink; hell, it's even still legal in the US. A lot have used drugs, too, and yet have no problem at work.
Oh well, I guess I should probably do more of my online stuff under one of my handles (my slashdot user id is my real name). They'd be easy enough to associate with me for someone really investigating, but if an employer is going to investigate beyond a cursory search, and care about what he finds, I probably don't want to be working there.
Korean isn't like the others. It's an alphabet much like western languages, only with explicit organization into syllables.
I wonder if this one is just a complete misunderstanding. One article says that they were set to lose configuration files on "reset". That's pretty typical -- if you have some device you don't have the password to, you can do a full factory reset and get it back to the default password, but that also wipes the configuration files. He might have told his incompetent bosses that, and they thought he meant they'd lose the files on a reboot instead.
Anyway, if this guy is what they're making him out to be, they need to completely wipe and reconfigure the network anyway; it's the only way to be sure he didn't leave a few presents for them.
Yep. One of the things which used to exist in copyright (and nominally still does) is the idea/expression distinction. Ideas cannot be copyrighted; their expression can. But then came things like copyrights on characters, and settings. And now copyrights on "fictional facts". All those are ideas, and all those are now protected by copyright, despite the letter of the law.
Oh, please. Mosey on over to the Association of American Publishers, and ask THEM about it.
B and C are NOT the same parties. B is the party you are copying the pattern of bits FROM. C is the copyright holder, be it the hated **AA member companies or the beloved musicians.
The only similarity is that at least one party is enriched in both cases.
By that standard, winning a contest and stealing the prize are "pretty close".
Theft: A takes an item from B without B's consent. B has been damaged by the cost to replace the item, A has been enriched
File-sharing of copyrighted material: A creates a pattern of bits the same as one B has. A has been enriched. B has been neither damaged nor enriched. Third party C claims to have been damaged to the tune of $100,000.
Yes, it does. Without the A HREF tag, it's covered by the First Amendment. With the A HREF tag, it's not. Accoring to the Second Circuit Court of Appeal, anyway.
You know, that "encrypted sessions only" bit wasn't put in there just for fun. It's bad enough we have any number of things broken by design, we could at least use the security which actually _was_ designed into the system.