So would it be ethical to charge more for my services as a developer if I don't also work harder? Or should I charge what I think I can get and see if I'm right? Perhaps you don't grok capitalism.
If you're going to use a car analogy, consider this: I can go get a 1995 impreza L (110 hp, boring car) and drop in an engine and tranny and brakes from a 2007 STI (fast, evil car) with minimal hassle. There are a pile of kits for dropping performance engines into older (or wildly inappropriate) cars such as VW bugs, miatas, and so on. Basically, with cars you can do it if your pocketbook allows it, while with computers and electronics, you often can't.
The BSA does all sorts of nasty things (like claiming that a company that makes detection equipment was hoarding explosives), but when they come after you, you're frequently guilty, and even their balls to the walls fines don't compare to the current $18k/song madness we've been seeing.
Even though automatic firearms are illegal for people without the proper permits, gang members still obtain and use them.
To be fair, they're cheaper on the black market, and gang bangers probably want them for things that would be a felony anyway. Would you spend $15k on an AK instead of $300 from a smuggler if you were planning to shoot up your enemy's house?
AFAIK we don't know for sure whether mobile phone radiation can cause lasting damage, especially to children.
Yes we do, and no it doesn't. 2GHz is the right frequency to warm your body slightly (at 2-3W during xmit, woohoo), but it can't cause cancer like the sun does. Meanwhile, those who worry about cell phones killing them probably like being outside.
Revealing classified information is against the law.
Revealing classified information that you discover independently is perfectly fine, and it sounds like this is an example of that. Anyway, do the cops even have the power to classify docs?
What evidence? I didn't see anything about a warrant. In the future, without a warrant, lock the session you're in and step away from the computer. Or hit the EPO button, I don't care.
I turned to my GF and said "I bet he don't want to go to the hoe squad!" and sure enough, he stops when he crosses the border and the Ark State Police give him the usual "what are you crazy! Are you trying to get yourself and others killed?" and he says "I did crime In Tenn and I'll confess! I just wasn't gonna stop til I made it here because I ain't gonna go back to the damned hoe squad!"
Sounds like your example is busted: the guy still got rearrested, he just didn't want to go to that jail. Give him some job training and maybe he won't be back to any jail.
People who've grown up in the heat and whose ancestors have done so for time immemorial have different sweat responses than someone who's grown up with AC. Even so, the heat is probably a leading cause of death in afghanistan.
It might be that if more jails/prisons were run this way, we might have fewer return trips
Yeah, of the "I'm not going back.", BANG BANG variety. Making jail unpleasant does little to address the reason people end up there (and never mind that people awaiting trial get the same treatment). You want them to not come back? Give them a way to make a life on the up and up.
I dont think that prisoners should have access to TV or weight lifting equipment or be allowed to form gangs or get drugs while in prison.
They aren't allowed to get drugs, they just do. As to the rest of that screed, no weights, no tv, no socialisation - sounds like a great way to drive people insane. How about we just shoot them instead - it'd be more humane.
Turn about is fair play. Let's say you give a fake SSN and ruin someone's credit. Then that person hunts you down and figures out your SSN. Then they figure out some way to do the same thing to you. That would be awesome. And you'd deserve it, too!
Hardly. If I give a fake ssn with my real info, it's up to the CRA to perform some DD and verify that the info applies to me and not whomever owns the SSN - they can't blindly apply it both places and expect that it's someone else's problem that they don't do validation.
I find it interesting that Selmer assumes an absolute morality - your religious nutjob will of course view the killing of infidels as unpleasant but necessary. I don't really buy the whole harm for its own sake thing, though - if someone is like that, they're called a sociopath or psycopath, not evil. Evil in my mind is simply an extreme lack of interest in the welfare of others: would you firebomb an orphanage so you can sell the land to developers? Run someone over to make the traffic light? Sell someone into slavery for a buck? Evil people are more complex than snidely whiplash.
That increases the possibilities quite a bit, but current computers are exponentially more powerful than the 400MHz PII I tested on.
No they're not. At best, they're 10-20x faster per core, which gives you at best a 80x speedup. Exponential doesn't mean "lots", it is a growth curve, and ours has flattened somewhat.
because they only added the SSN requirement recently. Before that, some people would claim multiple dependents that they didn't have, or list pet names.
California has had a law since 2002 that requires any business holding personally identifiable information to disclose any security breaches regarding that info to anyone possibly affected. Businesses screamed holy hell when it was enacted.
Maybe they could just stop collecting personal information:). That'd solve their whole legal exposure problem. Unless the law also includes stuff like street addresses.
Almost every insurance company requires it to process your claim. Now, whether the insurance companies should be able to do that is a whole different argument.
For fun, try having twins and have the insurance agency disallow the second child as duplicate service.
Slashdot Mirror
fucking mute point
What, is it a horny mime?
you sue them for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practice Act and collect your statutory damages.
So would it be ethical to charge more for my services as a developer if I don't also work harder? Or should I charge what I think I can get and see if I'm right? Perhaps you don't grok capitalism.
Of course, the standard for this article is 'less reviled'. Hardly asking the world, are we?
If you're going to use a car analogy, consider this: I can go get a 1995 impreza L (110 hp, boring car) and drop in an engine and tranny and brakes from a 2007 STI (fast, evil car) with minimal hassle. There are a pile of kits for dropping performance engines into older (or wildly inappropriate) cars such as VW bugs, miatas, and so on. Basically, with cars you can do it if your pocketbook allows it, while with computers and electronics, you often can't.
The BSA does all sorts of nasty things (like claiming that a company that makes detection equipment was hoarding explosives), but when they come after you, you're frequently guilty, and even their balls to the walls fines don't compare to the current $18k/song madness we've been seeing.
Even though automatic firearms are illegal for people without the proper permits, gang members still obtain and use them.
To be fair, they're cheaper on the black market, and gang bangers probably want them for things that would be a felony anyway. Would you spend $15k on an AK instead of $300 from a smuggler if you were planning to shoot up your enemy's house?
AFAIK we don't know for sure whether mobile phone radiation can cause lasting damage, especially to children.
Yes we do, and no it doesn't. 2GHz is the right frequency to warm your body slightly (at 2-3W during xmit, woohoo), but it can't cause cancer like the sun does. Meanwhile, those who worry about cell phones killing them probably like being outside.
I'm pretty sure the law decides what is legal, and your rights are confined to those legal bounds.
No, the law decides what is illegal and your rights are things the government is restricted from infringing.
It's like the right to healthcare and the right to welfare.
Dude, healthcare thread is somewhere else.
yah, these rights are firmly installed in the Constitution AND the Bible.
They are part of anti-trust. Or do you expect the supreme document to detail every last thing that we do in this country? Seems excessive.
Revealing classified information is against the law.
Revealing classified information that you discover independently is perfectly fine, and it sounds like this is an example of that. Anyway, do the cops even have the power to classify docs?
keep in mind that bookstores pay something like 50-60% cover price.
What evidence? I didn't see anything about a warrant. In the future, without a warrant, lock the session you're in and step away from the computer. Or hit the EPO button, I don't care.
My expectation is that if you're in a CO2 dump capable room, they have masks available. Either that or you always keep the exit door in view :)
I turned to my GF and said "I bet he don't want to go to the hoe squad!" and sure enough, he stops when he crosses the border and the Ark State Police give him the usual "what are you crazy! Are you trying to get yourself and others killed?" and he says "I did crime In Tenn and I'll confess! I just wasn't gonna stop til I made it here because I ain't gonna go back to the damned hoe squad!"
Sounds like your example is busted: the guy still got rearrested, he just didn't want to go to that jail. Give him some job training and maybe he won't be back to any jail.
People who've grown up in the heat and whose ancestors have done so for time immemorial have different sweat responses than someone who's grown up with AC. Even so, the heat is probably a leading cause of death in afghanistan.
What if there's incriminating evidence in those e-mail exchanges the Sheriff needs and wants to protect from tampering?
Well, he apparently didn't have a warrant, so I guess he's fucked either way.
It might be that if more jails/prisons were run this way, we might have fewer return trips
Yeah, of the "I'm not going back.", BANG BANG variety. Making jail unpleasant does little to address the reason people end up there (and never mind that people awaiting trial get the same treatment). You want them to not come back? Give them a way to make a life on the up and up.
I dont think that prisoners should have access to TV or weight lifting equipment or be allowed to form gangs or get drugs while in prison.
They aren't allowed to get drugs, they just do. As to the rest of that screed, no weights, no tv, no socialisation - sounds like a great way to drive people insane. How about we just shoot them instead - it'd be more humane.
Turn about is fair play. Let's say you give a fake SSN and ruin someone's credit. Then that person hunts you down and figures out your SSN. Then they figure out some way to do the same thing to you. That would be awesome. And you'd deserve it, too!
Hardly. If I give a fake ssn with my real info, it's up to the CRA to perform some DD and verify that the info applies to me and not whomever owns the SSN - they can't blindly apply it both places and expect that it's someone else's problem that they don't do validation.
this why I hear about people who are twins with birthdates recorded a day apoart
I find it interesting that Selmer assumes an absolute morality - your religious nutjob will of course view the killing of infidels as unpleasant but necessary. I don't really buy the whole harm for its own sake thing, though - if someone is like that, they're called a sociopath or psycopath, not evil. Evil in my mind is simply an extreme lack of interest in the welfare of others: would you firebomb an orphanage so you can sell the land to developers? Run someone over to make the traffic light? Sell someone into slavery for a buck? Evil people are more complex than snidely whiplash.
That increases the possibilities quite a bit, but current computers are exponentially more powerful than the 400MHz PII I tested on.
No they're not. At best, they're 10-20x faster per core, which gives you at best a 80x speedup. Exponential doesn't mean "lots", it is a growth curve, and ours has flattened somewhat.
because they only added the SSN requirement recently. Before that, some people would claim multiple dependents that they didn't have, or list pet names.
California has had a law since 2002 that requires any business holding personally identifiable information to disclose any security breaches regarding that info to anyone possibly affected. Businesses screamed holy hell when it was enacted.
Maybe they could just stop collecting personal information :). That'd solve their whole legal exposure problem. Unless the law also includes stuff like street addresses.
Almost every insurance company requires it to process your claim. Now, whether the insurance companies should be able to do that is a whole different argument.
For fun, try having twins and have the insurance agency disallow the second child as duplicate service.