You didn't read the whole post, did you? The GP had an NDA which forbade him from divulging passwords to anyone, offered any access the super needed and asked for clarification. Sounds like a stand up guy to me.
Moron. $28k is enough to hurt, but not enough to justify a $10k lawyer and 1-2 years of your time (the cruise line has a team of lawyers on staff). A lawsuit will screw you even if you win. Best thing to do is tell ATT to pound sand and that you were in Miami when those charges were made. Let ATT fight with the cruise line.
Did read it; I'm referring to a separate study which looked at how spending habits change with increased income. A large payout such as money from an ipo is less likely to result in corresponding consumption versus a gradual increase to a high income. Rich people have middle class spending habits because that's how they started and that helps them by not expending money looking rich.
Self made rich people tend to have had a large payoff on top of a middle class salary. When the annual salary is huge (like for a heart surgeon), their lifestyle tends to expand with it. What you describe is relatively rare, even among the highly paid.
Rolls Royce doesn't make airplanes anymore (that's a separate company), and anyway, I'd be surprised if any of those companies use the same motor on planes as cars. I've got a Subaru, and yes they do.
That'd never happen - if I could make more at McD's, I would work there rather than do computer admin stuff. At least once you turn off the fryer and go home, it stays put - computer work tends to follow you home.
The purpose of H1B is to increase the number of A and B level tech workers so that the wage pressure is relieved. As a nice side benefit, H1Bs are less mobile, so you can drive them harder.
Yeah, basically. Age lines are imperfect, but they beat letting the government decide on a person by person basis who gets certain rights. You know, like voting tests?
They're interfering with my usage of a product I paid money for and that they no longer own. How does that possibly not fit into your definition of wrong?
How so? Apple never claimed to allow all comers to the app store. How is that interfering with your usage of the phone? Seriously, the product is designed such that you need to go through the app store to install apps (generally), and you don't have any right to demand that apple allow some random app to use taht store (their service, not yours). There's a difference between a legitimate offense and apple doing something you don't like.
Id doesn't make it wrong either - Apple has no obligation to behave in any way aside from being legal. That's all. Don't like it? You can persuade them or set up a competing product, but you can't make them do anything.
It might help if we had an objective way to measure someone's ability to have informed consent.
That would never fly - jim crow laws are still too fresh in the cultural memory.
At the same time, once someone is an "adult" -- which we've arbitrarily defined as 18 -- it doesn't matter if it's informed or not. Yes means yes.
I'd like to add a law that states that trying someone as an adult confers on them the rights of an adult - drinking, driving, and screwing (not at the same time). This means that if you try someone as an adult and they get off, they can vote.
The barrier to entry is for setting up another phone/app walled garden. This hasn't changed much, and there are a couple up and comers (I assume G1 and Ballmer's thing). And yes, Ballmer being a hypocrite doesn't mean he isn't right, but it does mean he has no basis for complaint - pot, kettle, black.
sure, but they never went out and deliberately prevented Mozilla or Opera from creating and publishing their own browsers.
MS produces an OS that can be targeted by anyone with a dev kit; Apple has decided not to allow this for their phone - calling this monopolistic is kind of silly, as you have to declare it a monopoly on what software runs on apple's phone. You may as well call Nintendo monopolistic for deciding who can write games for the Wii. Besides, it's not like there's a high barrier to entry for a new iphone competitor (at least, no more than before). It's just that Apple makes something compelling that people want.
No, the rules are different when you're a monopoly. Anyway, Ballmer loves to call for openness in other peoples' markets, but try and suggest that MS allow openness in their stuff (for instance, by bundling Firefox) and see what they say.
Slashdot Mirror
You didn't read the whole post, did you? The GP had an NDA which forbade him from divulging passwords to anyone, offered any access the super needed and asked for clarification. Sounds like a stand up guy to me.
It was his network to run - that was his job. We are defending this guy because he's being railroaded, and that could affect us in the future.
He maintained access to a system which he had no right to access
You sure? The means to access are not the same as access.
A TRO from what, exactly? There's no evidence that Childs behaved maliciously.
This is true, but only to a point - the heart surgeon supporting his extended family comes to mind as someone who takes things way too far.
Moron. $28k is enough to hurt, but not enough to justify a $10k lawyer and 1-2 years of your time (the cruise line has a team of lawyers on staff). A lawsuit will screw you even if you win. Best thing to do is tell ATT to pound sand and that you were in Miami when those charges were made. Let ATT fight with the cruise line.
Did read it; I'm referring to a separate study which looked at how spending habits change with increased income. A large payout such as money from an ipo is less likely to result in corresponding consumption versus a gradual increase to a high income. Rich people have middle class spending habits because that's how they started and that helps them by not expending money looking rich.
he should've gone after the cruise line when he found out it was *their* fault.
What's he going to do, sue them?
Self made rich people tend to have had a large payoff on top of a middle class salary. When the annual salary is huge (like for a heart surgeon), their lifestyle tends to expand with it. What you describe is relatively rare, even among the highly paid.
The other real wtf is that the guy's cell phone didn't preferentially connect to a local rate cell network when given the choice.
trickle-down economics *works*.
Yeah, it got Reagan elected. As an economic theory, it's bunk - rich people are rich because they spend a lot less than they earn.
Rolls Royce doesn't make airplanes anymore (that's a separate company), and anyway, I'd be surprised if any of those companies use the same motor on planes as cars. I've got a Subaru, and yes they do.
Who cares if he's competent? Nobody wants to work with a jackass.
That'd never happen - if I could make more at McD's, I would work there rather than do computer admin stuff. At least once you turn off the fryer and go home, it stays put - computer work tends to follow you home.
You gotta have hobbies - my car was made by a company that builds airplane engines.
The purpose of H1B is to increase the number of A and B level tech workers so that the wage pressure is relieved. As a nice side benefit, H1Bs are less mobile, so you can drive them harder.
Yeah, basically. Age lines are imperfect, but they beat letting the government decide on a person by person basis who gets certain rights. You know, like voting tests?
They're interfering with my usage of a product I paid money for and that they no longer own. How does that possibly not fit into your definition of wrong?
How so? Apple never claimed to allow all comers to the app store. How is that interfering with your usage of the phone? Seriously, the product is designed such that you need to go through the app store to install apps (generally), and you don't have any right to demand that apple allow some random app to use taht store (their service, not yours). There's a difference between a legitimate offense and apple doing something you don't like.
Id doesn't make it wrong either - Apple has no obligation to behave in any way aside from being legal. That's all. Don't like it? You can persuade them or set up a competing product, but you can't make them do anything.
It might help if we had an objective way to measure someone's ability to have informed consent.
That would never fly - jim crow laws are still too fresh in the cultural memory.
At the same time, once someone is an "adult" -- which we've arbitrarily defined as 18 -- it doesn't matter if it's informed or not. Yes means yes.
I'd like to add a law that states that trying someone as an adult confers on them the rights of an adult - drinking, driving, and screwing (not at the same time). This means that if you try someone as an adult and they get off, they can vote.
The barrier to entry is for setting up another phone/app walled garden. This hasn't changed much, and there are a couple up and comers (I assume G1 and Ballmer's thing). And yes, Ballmer being a hypocrite doesn't mean he isn't right, but it does mean he has no basis for complaint - pot, kettle, black.
They lose (or by all right should lose) all rights as to what I can and cannot install on the thing, and where I can and cannot buy applications from.
Doesn't mean they have to expend effort to enable that.
they don't get to prevent other people from having their own competing stores.
No they don't, but good luck getting it onto the iPhone.
sure, but they never went out and deliberately prevented Mozilla or Opera from creating and publishing their own browsers.
MS produces an OS that can be targeted by anyone with a dev kit; Apple has decided not to allow this for their phone - calling this monopolistic is kind of silly, as you have to declare it a monopoly on what software runs on apple's phone. You may as well call Nintendo monopolistic for deciding who can write games for the Wii. Besides, it's not like there's a high barrier to entry for a new iphone competitor (at least, no more than before). It's just that Apple makes something compelling that people want.
It's apple's product and marketplace, okay? Apple set the thing up, they get to set the rules.
No, the rules are different when you're a monopoly. Anyway, Ballmer loves to call for openness in other peoples' markets, but try and suggest that MS allow openness in their stuff (for instance, by bundling Firefox) and see what they say.