Oh, Look. No argument from me. My post wasn't to dispute yours at all. (It's clear I'm not the OP, right?). I just want to understand the reason why.
Friends say the reality *is* the reason why, and I should accept that the stated reason is just an excuse made up afterwards. Well, maybe, but I prefer (trying) to understand the context and motivation.
I've always wondered about this. I get the bit about 'assemble to petition the government' but how is money = speech any more than 'sexual favours' = speech, or blackmail = speech, or kneecapping = speech? Each is providing extra 'persuasion' based on a person or groups' extra resources.
It makes sense as a way to privelege one type of achievement over another and "one man one vote" doesn't cut it anymore, i.e. if in capitalism those who earn more really do deserve more political representation. But IIRC the US Constitution isn't meant to do so. Any other explanations?
Oh, and can we put lobbyists in chain-link 'free speech zones' like at the NY convention?
It might make more sense to think of this the other way 'round. All fungi spray chemical signals all over the place all the time. A type of fungus that happens to win the lotto and get itself zombie insect hosts is a dead cert to be way more successful than other fungi types, to spread and to stay around for us to learn about it.
On your analogy. Say a thousand families learn how to make gold from lead, and only one is lucky enough to have it's children learn how as well. That one family is gonna get richer, and stay richer, than the other 999 families.
What do you think it means when politicians say they "created" $n jobs? (Hint: it's not usually because they've hired that many staffers).
My boss "invented" my job, but he maybe couldn't have done it without government funding, or infrastructure, or just a business-friendly tax system. I don't see how it's any different, that's how politicians create stuff.
2. How much IE code did Bill Gates write? If you help provide the conditions for others to build something, you're contributing to it. As another poster mentioned, Marc Andreesen(sp) seems to think the funding was pivotal.
The jury award was "insane", but the amount originally asked for, $20,000, was quite reasonable.
Besides, it appears the defendant got the high amount after alienating an initially friendly jury; the actual penalty paid was much less than the jury asked for; and most importantly the case successfully put an end to years of similar injuries. Where is the bad here?
You might be wrong. With English as a first language, warm welcome for investment and low wages compared to Britain, many U.S. tech companies base their European operations in Ireland.
According to MS' website, in three divisions their Irish campus has 1200 employees and 400 contractors.
I recall Intel has some substantial fab plants there too.
it would be a common occurance for some one driving their old heap to purposely get in front of a line of smart cars and slowly reduce speed to a crawl. The system would not be usable. The people in the smart cars would switch to self drive mode to get around the jerk in front of them
Heh. Or the smartcars would identify such a person as a problem and use a couple of vehicles to box the problem in while all the other smartcars go by.
Generally I find that the pro-nuclear power people have arguments backed by hard facts, whether physics or history, and the anti-nuclear power people have nothing but hysterical ranting.
really? IME the 'pro-nuclear power people' argue a bunch of fine-sounding details to which the 'anti-nuclear power people' say "uh-huh, but that's what you said last time".
I'm finding Far Cry, when played at high enough difficulty, to have that Half-Life kind of intensity. Sure some characters were silly, and the main guy wasn't sympathetic at all, but for the game that just worked.
On too low a difficulty you can just frag everyone and FarCry becomes a normal FPS. Many games on too high a difficulty just become twitchy deathtraps and you get no time to _try_ anything. In Half-Life, and Far Cry, you just have to get _really_ careful.
Do people still fall for this ? Back at my ISP helldesk job I'd frequently get people saying they worked for/ lunched with/ gotten permission from my CEO, and I'd better make exceptions for them or else.
I even once had some PHB's PA say 'the boss does not call Tech Support' and I should give her the password. I said "If (PHBname) doesn't like the way we handle security, I'm sure he'll change company policy and communicate it to us as per normal". I expected to get flak for it, and I fully expected my manager to support. In fact I never heard about it again.
So above, when you say:
"...Do you want to find yourself cleaning the latrines in the chinese resturaunt down the street?"
I would reply "The fastest way for that to happen is if my CO learns I ignore regs for some random voice on the phone. Thank you for calling."
The best response to spam I've heard of is to visit the pages they give links to, and the sub-pages on their site. ATM I pay to read their email, but by doing this the spammer would pay for serving their page. (Think of it as a gentle slashdotting). I got two questions.
(1) Are there drastic problems with this approach that I'm not seeing ? Care to redo your list ?
(2) Is there software that will do this for me (basically: given mails I mark as spam, spider the linked page)?
cheers,
Shane
p.s. If someone can point me to who first suggested this idea, I'll be happy to give credit.
Re:But the bad guys have the source code!! (Whimpe
on
Why PHBs Fear Linux
·
· Score: 1
How is he with analogies ? I would explain that deadbolts and door locks are basically "open-source". Everybody knows how they work, and I can even buy a deadbolt of my own to mess with, but that doesn't really help me get past _your_ deadbolt.
Dictionary.com defines "prequel" as "A literary, dramatic, or cinematic work whose narrative takes place before that of a
preexisting work or a sequel." It doesn't state that it needs to have been written later
Surely that is what 'preexisting' (sic) does state. Am I missing something or did you just contradict your own quoted definition ?
All the way through, tho, I kept feeling like it was referring to or even fully parodying some famous piece of English lit. I'd never heard of, and so I was missing helf the jokes.
Is this so ? Does anyone know the original and is it worth reading ?
In essence, you seem to say "We don't know all the dangers, problems and threats in the underlying system, and we can't quantify all those we do know. So let's just Throw In Some More!" This security policy worries me a little bit. Do you write code for Windows ?
Seriously, you mention taking 'the long view'. The OPs point is exactly that we should take the long view _before_ stuffing things up, rather than quibbling/ranting about the exact 'tiny dosages' to accept before doing any risk minimization at all.
So you're, what, suggesting that he believed that the police were actually smurfs from under clover hill, trying to dupe him out of his duty to collect money from individuals in another country?
The article doesn't say, but I wonder how he was prepped for intervention by the authorities. Controlling expectations is a very important part of any long-term con*: "When people find out, they won't like this. They'll say I'm trying to get you to do something illegal or wrong. But you have a lawyer, you've seen the documents..." etc. Then when the police show up, they just play into the role. "yep, my nigerian friend said you'd say that".
I think the FBI could/should use a previous victim to give testimonial. "Hi Rupert, I'm Shane. I was taken in by these same people 6 years ago..." This also makes it less embarassing to admit the truth.
* Also vital in giving tech support.
More than one way to skin a cat
on
Linux Toys
·
· Score: 1
Ok, I'll bite..so to speak. Though it seems a little off topic.
What are the best ways to skin a cat?
Way #37: Crazy glue and a toothbrush (Attribution lost in time)
I always go subs too. Except...
Have you seen the dubbed Spirited Away? There's so many little asides/off-screen comments that the subtitles completely ignore. Half the charm of the bathhouse "extras" was missing without it, IMHO.
cheers,
Shane
It doesn't say exactly what procedures will be in place, but AFAICT they've done everything The Right Way(TM) until now, so I suppose they'll handle this as well.
That's what's weird. If I was setting up a backdoor or planning to scam the system some way, I'd make sure everything else looked clean as a whistle, to allay suspicion so people wouldn't watch too closely.
Which is what I don't get about the e-voting system problems in the U.S. They really don't seem to care, or understand, how bad it looks.
Maybe the saddest thing I heard in my three years at S*** V*** PC tech support, were the calls I got from the retired ex-VP who set up their original "Lifetime, Free, no-waiting" tech support and now had to call and struggle through the new Cost-Containment, script-driven, if-we-make-this-hurt-enough-you-might-go-away policy his replacement put in. Explaining that "lifetime" and "free" were now considered relative terms was certainly no fun.
And implying they'd lose you as a customer ? They just laugh or hang up on you, or both.
Working for Intel, OTOH, was a real eye-opener.
We'd give people the S*** brush off we were used to giving, and inside 3 mins we'd have our supervisor asking "what the ^&$ are you doing? Intel just chewed me out! Get that customer back and give them a solution!" whether the problem was with our product or not.
The "worst" thing working at Intel was that anytime we found an easy fix to shorten calls, they'd automate it and release it as a patch.
It may be just fear of lawsuits, but those folks took customer service and product quality seriously.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, Look. No argument from me. My post wasn't to dispute yours at all. (It's clear I'm not the OP, right?). I just want to understand the reason why.
Friends say the reality *is* the reason why, and I should accept that the stated reason is just an excuse made up afterwards. Well, maybe, but I prefer (trying) to understand the context and motivation.
It makes sense as a way to privelege one type of achievement over another and "one man one vote" doesn't cut it anymore, i.e. if in capitalism those who earn more really do deserve more political representation. But IIRC the US Constitution isn't meant to do so. Any other explanations?
Oh, and can we put lobbyists in chain-link 'free speech zones' like at the NY convention?
On your analogy. Say a thousand families learn how to make gold from lead, and only one is lucky enough to have it's children learn how as well. That one family is gonna get richer, and stay richer, than the other 999 families.
did you send her picture to the Mayor describing how helpful she had been?
What do you think it means when politicians say they "created" $n jobs? (Hint: it's not usually because they've hired that many staffers).
My boss "invented" my job, but he maybe couldn't have done it without government funding, or infrastructure, or just a business-friendly tax system. I don't see how it's any different, that's how politicians create stuff.
2. How much IE code did Bill Gates write? If you help provide the conditions for others to build something, you're contributing to it. As another poster mentioned, Marc Andreesen(sp) seems to think the funding was pivotal.
Besides, it appears the defendant got the high amount after alienating an initially friendly jury; the actual penalty paid was much less than the jury asked for; and most importantly the case successfully put an end to years of similar injuries. Where is the bad here?
link here found on snopes.
Sorry Joe, just a segue. No offense meant.
According to MS' website, in three divisions their Irish campus has 1200 employees and 400 contractors.
I recall Intel has some substantial fab plants there too.
infodump courtesy of: http://www.microsoft.com/ireland/about/ ;)
really? IME the 'pro-nuclear power people' argue a bunch of fine-sounding details to which the 'anti-nuclear power people' say "uh-huh, but that's what you said last time".
On too low a difficulty you can just frag everyone and FarCry becomes a normal FPS. Many games on too high a difficulty just become twitchy deathtraps and you get no time to _try_ anything. In Half-Life, and Far Cry, you just have to get _really_ careful.
cheers,
Shane
I even once had some PHB's PA say 'the boss does not call Tech Support' and I should give her the password. I said "If (PHBname) doesn't like the way we handle security, I'm sure he'll change company policy and communicate it to us as per normal". I expected to get flak for it, and I fully expected my manager to support. In fact I never heard about it again.
So above, when you say:
I would reply "The fastest way for that to happen is if my CO learns I ignore regs for some random voice on the phone. Thank you for calling."cheers,
Shane
(1) Are there drastic problems with this approach that I'm not seeing ? Care to redo your list ?
(2) Is there software that will do this for me (basically: given mails I mark as spam, spider the linked page)?
cheers,
Shane
p.s. If someone can point me to who first suggested this idea, I'll be happy to give credit.
see www.dilbert.com, where it's from, for examples
How is he with analogies ? I would explain that deadbolts and door locks are basically "open-source". Everybody knows how they work, and I can even buy a deadbolt of my own to mess with, but that doesn't really help me get past _your_ deadbolt.
All the way through, tho, I kept feeling like it was referring to or even fully parodying some famous piece of English lit. I'd never heard of, and so I was missing helf the jokes.
Is this so ? Does anyone know the original and is it worth reading ?
cheers,
Shane
How much is that? You mean "all of it" ?
oooh. spooky.
In essence, you seem to say "We don't know all the dangers, problems and threats in the underlying system, and we can't quantify all those we do know. So let's just Throw In Some More!" This security policy worries me a little bit. Do you write code for Windows ?
Seriously, you mention taking 'the long view'. The OPs point is exactly that we should take the long view _before_ stuffing things up, rather than quibbling/ranting about the exact 'tiny dosages' to accept before doing any risk minimization at all.
The article doesn't say, but I wonder how he was prepped for intervention by the authorities. Controlling expectations is a very important part of any long-term con*: "When people find out, they won't like this. They'll say I'm trying to get you to do something illegal or wrong. But you have a lawyer, you've seen the documents..." etc. Then when the police show up, they just play into the role. "yep, my nigerian friend said you'd say that".
I think the FBI could/should use a previous victim to give testimonial. "Hi Rupert, I'm Shane. I was taken in by these same people 6 years ago..." This also makes it less embarassing to admit the truth.
* Also vital in giving tech support.
Way #37: Crazy glue and a toothbrush
(Attribution lost in time)
I always go subs too. Except... Have you seen the dubbed Spirited Away? There's so many little asides/off-screen comments that the subtitles completely ignore. Half the charm of the bathhouse "extras" was missing without it, IMHO. cheers, Shane
That's what's weird. If I was setting up a backdoor or planning to scam the system some way, I'd make sure everything else looked clean as a whistle, to allay suspicion so people wouldn't watch too closely.
Which is what I don't get about the e-voting system problems in the U.S. They really don't seem to care, or understand, how bad it looks.
cheers,
Shane
--
Oprah for Prez.
no, really.
Maybe the saddest thing I heard in my three years at S*** V*** PC tech support, were the calls I got from the retired ex-VP who set up their original "Lifetime, Free, no-waiting" tech support and now had to call and struggle through the new Cost-Containment, script-driven, if-we-make-this-hurt-enough-you-might-go-away policy his replacement put in. Explaining that "lifetime" and "free" were now considered relative terms was certainly no fun.
And implying they'd lose you as a customer ? They just laugh or hang up on you, or both.
Working for Intel, OTOH, was a real eye-opener. We'd give people the S*** brush off we were used to giving, and inside 3 mins we'd have our supervisor asking "what the ^&$ are you doing? Intel just chewed me out! Get that customer back and give them a solution!" whether the problem was with our product or not.
The "worst" thing working at Intel was that anytime we found an easy fix to shorten calls, they'd automate it and release it as a patch.
It may be just fear of lawsuits, but those folks took customer service and product quality seriously.