Maybe you should become a defense lawyer - a few years of law school would let you give an informed opinion on this instead of talking out of your ass.
But if he wasn't talking out of his ass, how could he be a lawyer?
Last I checked your defense lawyer (which is what OP put as the subject of the post), is not the government.
Now, I agree with your points about AA to a fair degree, however if I was a lawyer, I'd still advise my client in a case like this to sign up. It's a clear indication that you realize you screwed up and are determined not to let it happen again. Which is certainly going to help your case more than going out partying.
This isn't about the government telling you what to do. It's about you doing the right thing for yourself.
I think everyone agrees that the guy is being a jerk. And from what I originally read, I thought he was probably a criminal too. However, this makes it sounds like he might not be.
Refusing to do what your boss says to do isn't a crime. Getting fired for it and then refusing to do what your former boss said to do isn't a crime. Since the situation before that was considered satisfactory by his former employers (because they were so naÃve to trust one guy with the keys to the whole thing), I honestly can't see what the crime this guy committed was.
I'm not lauding him for it. In many ways it seems the law is at fault, perhaps there should be a way for an employer to compel their (former) employees to give over passwords to devices that the company controls. But I don't know of any law that requires that (and I'm not actually proposing one), so it seems like he's actually clean.
I can only hope (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 07, @10:08PM (#24093325)
that he is repeatedly raped in prison and catches AIDS. He deserves a long and painful death.
Re:I can only hope (Score:2)
by JebusIsLord (566856) on Monday July 07, @10:19PM (#24093487) Homepage
How very human of you.
Fixed that for you. Being a decent person has very little to do with religion.
That might have been the point of the comment. The more cynical among us might argue that the OP's original vitriolic ranting fits rather nicely with a worldview where those who don't worship the right god get tortured for all eternity after they die.
As such, perhaps it actually was a very Christian comment.
Since you're asking, I'd suggest Avast. I used it for a few years when I still used a PC and found it to be excellent. The registration process was simple enough to be painless, so my biggest complaint would be the horribly skinned main interface window (which they may have gotten rid of by now).
All of those possible factors are interesting, but somewhat beside the point from insurers point of view. If people die less in bigger cars, then they die less. Whether that's because of the mass of the cars, or changes in driver behavior caused by the larger cars is not important.
The key point here is that while larger cars are better for crashing into things, there are other factors about SUVs that haven't been considered in the above report. While SUVs are generally safer for two vehicle crashes, I seem to recall that SUVs have a nasty tendency to roll over, not to mention all the kids who have been backed over in their own driveways...
In short, I wouldn't question the conclusions of the report (since it's only finding a correlation, not a method of action), but ask what other conclusions should be considered.
If there was a benevolent alien race the first thing it would do is find sentient life and enlighten it or exterminate it depending its views of what constitutes suffering.
Why are those the only two options? This seems to be a very Western/Christian view on the whole issue. They'll either be door-knockers with pamphlets on the 'Good News' or they'll be 'convert or die' types.
What if they're more like Buddhists? Content having reached their present level of enlightenment, yet unwilling to go out and explain their beliefs/knowledge to others unless they come and ask about it.
I realize that by bringing religion into this, I'm heading for flamewar territory, but the similarities seemed worth pointing out.
The average drive temperature in the typical home PC would be *at least* 40 degrees, if not higher. While it's been some time since I checked, I seem to recall the drive in my mum's G5 iMac was around 50 degrees when the machine was _idle_. Just for the record, that's really not the case with current Macs. My MacBook's HDD is currently sitting on 34C and remains around the same temperature when the machine is under load. I can't speak to other machines, but I consider that rather impressive given how tiny the MacBooks are.
C'mon, that's just unfair. It's like racing a tweaked up sports car against a family sedan, and then deciding you're going to make things fair by attaching a giant concrete block to the sedan.
If they're not distinguishable by features, then choose on price.
And you know about those features how? Packaging? Oh, that would be marketing's job.
For example there is rational argument to be made for fashion.
There is? Do tell.
Apologies, as you've probably realized, I meant to say there is no rational argument to be made for fashion.
True, but soap choice is hardly an important decision for one to make.
Unless you're a soap maker. But still, let's look at something like cars then. Marketed to project an emotion because they essentially an emotional purchase. That's what people actually want from their cars. You can't provide much in the way of a full description of features in a 30 second ad, so you focus one or two and explain how that will make someone feel (leather seats make you feel comfortable, high performance makes you excited, hybrid engine makes you feel environmentally conscious), because at the end of the day, you can get the feeling across more quickly than you can make the argument. But then you go to the dealership get a pamphlet that explains all the features of the car and lists things in a point-by-point fashion for people to make their rational choices with. I suspect you think that people are far more rational than they actually are. And before you blame that on marketing eroding people's reasoning skills I suggest you look at all of human history.
Full disclosure: I work in advertising
This is for you.
I guess I have to go back to using my usual disclaimer. Talk about predictable, I didn't even have to click on the link to know what it was. Also, don't be a dick about things. Even if you're doing it by proxy.
Slashdot Mirror
this is blatant harassment and possibly borderline terrorism.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Will the FSF complain when Apple releases a software update that makes every Apple machine hit the FSF servers every couple of minutes?
I mean, if you're going to start a DDoS fight, don't complain when someone steps up and gives you the same treatment.
Maybe you should become a defense lawyer - a few years of law school would let you give an informed opinion on this instead of talking out of your ass.
But if he wasn't talking out of his ass, how could he be a lawyer?
Last I checked your defense lawyer (which is what OP put as the subject of the post), is not the government.
Now, I agree with your points about AA to a fair degree, however if I was a lawyer, I'd still advise my client in a case like this to sign up. It's a clear indication that you realize you screwed up and are determined not to let it happen again. Which is certainly going to help your case more than going out partying.
This isn't about the government telling you what to do. It's about you doing the right thing for yourself.
I think everyone agrees that the guy is being a jerk. And from what I originally read, I thought he was probably a criminal too. However, this makes it sounds like he might not be.
Refusing to do what your boss says to do isn't a crime. Getting fired for it and then refusing to do what your former boss said to do isn't a crime. Since the situation before that was considered satisfactory by his former employers (because they were so naÃve to trust one guy with the keys to the whole thing), I honestly can't see what the crime this guy committed was.
I'm not lauding him for it. In many ways it seems the law is at fault, perhaps there should be a way for an employer to compel their (former) employees to give over passwords to devices that the company controls. But I don't know of any law that requires that (and I'm not actually proposing one), so it seems like he's actually clean.
Fixed that for you. Being a decent person has very little to do with religion.
That might have been the point of the comment. The more cynical among us might argue that the OP's original vitriolic ranting fits rather nicely with a worldview where those who don't worship the right god get tortured for all eternity after they die.
As such, perhaps it actually was a very Christian comment.
Since you're asking, I'd suggest Avast. I used it for a few years when I still used a PC and found it to be excellent. The registration process was simple enough to be painless, so my biggest complaint would be the horribly skinned main interface window (which they may have gotten rid of by now).
Just my 2c.
Clearly you never saw a little documentary called Weekend at Burnie's.
It's just a little disturbing that I apparently have a wife and child I wasn't aware of.
Can't you post some links or something?
I'd post my email address, but I'm worried that people might fill up my inbox with something other than beastiality porn.
The key point here is that while larger cars are better for crashing into things, there are other factors about SUVs that haven't been considered in the above report. While SUVs are generally safer for two vehicle crashes, I seem to recall that SUVs have a nasty tendency to roll over, not to mention all the kids who have been backed over in their own driveways...
In short, I wouldn't question the conclusions of the report (since it's only finding a correlation, not a method of action), but ask what other conclusions should be considered.
In future you may be able to use such a device all by yourself without posting inane comments on /.
Why are those the only two options? This seems to be a very Western/Christian view on the whole issue. They'll either be door-knockers with pamphlets on the 'Good News' or they'll be 'convert or die' types.
What if they're more like Buddhists? Content having reached their present level of enlightenment, yet unwilling to go out and explain their beliefs/knowledge to others unless they come and ask about it.
I realize that by bringing religion into this, I'm heading for flamewar territory, but the similarities seemed worth pointing out.
Pissing off a large number of powerful people who own shares results in politicians not getting any money to get re-elected. As such, it won't happen.
C'mon, that's just unfair. It's like racing a tweaked up sports car against a family sedan, and then deciding you're going to make things fair by attaching a giant concrete block to the sedan.
Hey, I'm just glad I didn't get modded off topic for it by people who've never heard Singlish before.
Oh damn. Didn't read the other replies. Guess I'm not as original as I thought.
Sorry, I know that in bad taste, but I couldn't resist.
Yes. I was a psych major. I know all that. Which is why I included a list of physical differences between the products...