small cable company? where? every place I have lived in the last 15 years you had a single choice for high speed internet. A large national cable provider. Either comcast or cox.
Also, miscounted in such tails are many people like me, who actually have a cable subscription , but only because it is the cheaper way to get a fast internet service. If I could get internet.50 cheaper by dumping cable it would be gone in a heart beat, because I neither use it or have any interest in it.
Sure, but even inborn rights have limitsome and a certain order as I pointed out. For instance your right to self defense can be limited by the potential for collateral damage in the means you choose to defend yourself. So my question was, does the Internet have the same limits as everyday speech or should there be stronger limits and greater responsibility for its use because of the extra power it imparts to you communication ?
Interesting, but not really what I was asking? Does the use of the Internet come with a greater responsibility then normal speech because of the way it amplifieshould your speach and audience.
The definition of which is 'intentionally ignorant'.
I dislike so many things about both the Republicans and the Democrats. The Rupukelicans just make me sick, with ugly,disingenuous and downright dangerous responses to environmental issues, utter lack of love when it comes to desperate people trying to escape the country they live in and total disregard for the what's actually good for the bulk of the people living in the middle classes. In general I like the Deamoncrats less because they undermine true human freedom at every turn , from centralizing control, to promoting an environment where people use each other,especially vulnerable women and children on a sexual level and promoting the killing of children.
Any body else want a law making it illegal to create a entity that has as it's purpose getting people elected unless it is associated with a specific candidate and is disencorporated at the end of the campaign? ( I know fat chance of getting it passed, but it's on my list of wouldn't it be nice).
I know that some people on slashdot might be able to have some interesting ideas on this. So I was thinking about it and thought I would pose the question.
Is there a difference between the right to freedom of speech ( which is to say the right to say what you want without punishment or restriction). and The right to use public broadcast equipment like the internet to exercise that right.
Specifically I'm thinking about the internet as a tool that amplifies the effects of ones actions. As another example of what I'm pondering , few people argue against the right to self defense, although most people would put limits on the power and strength of that defense. As and example most people would think it wrong to defend yourself against a knife attack by spraying a machine gun into a crowded room.
So, given the amplifying power of the internet over speech, making every careless statement a broadcast to hundreds or millions with all kinds of possible unintended consequences. What if any reasonable limits are there to speech on the internet or are they identical to the normal limits put on speech , like 'not inciting to riot'.
Interesting theory. How do you define right? Legal rights come from the law. If other rights exist independent of the law how do we know what they are and everest do they come from?;
would be if the congress would take the time to understand the issue and bass and amendment to the copy rite act that would address many of these digital concerns so that judges who aren't competent could stop guessing.
Of course it would be pretty cool if someone would mass market a flying car that you didn't need a piolets license for and cost less the $20K Lots of thing would be pretty cool i guess;)
Right... like that law about how everyone should have a right to vote. Oh, and don't forget all those laws about making sure people get fed so they don't starve on tax money... and those horrible laws that stop 'the little guy' from selling tainted meat and medicine that poisons people. I got you, every law is against the little guy, he never gets a fair shake , we need to go out and pull down those ivory towers comrade. Just remember what happens to the horse in the end of animal farm. https://simple.wikipedia.org/w...
I have news for you, there is only one group of people who a rational reason that the powerful shouldn't eat the poor and it's not Darwinist.
yep, let the congress pass the laws, the president enforce them and the courts do there level best to interpret them to mean what they meant at the time they were passed. If someone doesn't like the way things are 'rinse and repeat'. We seriously need to start finding ways to take the president to task for not enforcing the laws ( like ignoring immigration law -Obama ) or ( ignoring health car laws - Trump) , we seriously need to take the judiciary to task for 'finding' new 'rights' in the law that the people who passed them never meant to be there. Then we can start expecting the legislatures to pass the laws they were elected to pass or get booted.
First off, I said thought experiment, which by definition means I don't think it is entirely realistic. 2nd isn't it basically a more transparent way of doing what everyone already does? Isn't any wage basically a small percentage of the company profit?.001% or so? The difference being risk is shared based on either loss of employment or salary reduction? This has the advantage of 1) keeping salaries in a fixed and transparent relationship to profits 2) providing a greater sense of risk / reward as a motivation for employees. 3) might,depending on implementation, disentangle a lot of benefit problems, because you could expect all employees to cover thier own insurance and workman'so comp etc. Or pay a fee to a third party processor to handle thoseverything payroll and tax issues.
So you have outdated 'tech/software' 'holding you back'?
Can you show me the plan you made when you installed said tech and software for it's maintenance / convalescence? Including expected budget for upgrades and replacements in a reasonable and timely fashion?
Did you ensure you would be able to migrate all important data from that proprietary vendor format to whatever the new best thing would be to avoid vendor lock in? Do you have everything sufficiently documented so that someone else can take over when your expert retires? Did you spend the money and time to do these things right?
NO? That sounds like a MANAGEMENT problem. Would you have done that with little planning with any other kind of company resource? Company vehicles? Buildings?.... hmm... no?
So I looked up getting a ca drivers license. Assuming having one gets you a car tag like most states. They require 1 residency document. Your lease will do, it must have your first and last name on it. So the only thing you really need to get a driver's liscense issued in any name you like w your picture on it is a lease. Not saying anything actual apt. Just the paper w the agreement and a name you claim is yours.
also, certain kinds of anti missile laser weapons are forbidden according to certain anti-nuclear treaties, but if you want to know what happens when you ignore such treaties investigate the Reagan era 'star wars' program, where the president ordered exactly such a treaty be ignored. "I'm sure you are as familiar with the terrible fallout of that decision as I am, specifically and exactly _nothing_ happened, except of coarse all players become more cynical about he effectiveness of treaties".
Basically any large country can ignore any part of any treaty they feel like with little chance of real consequences.
I guess that should probably read 'legal residency status'. When it comes to that most states require some kind of insurance, don't the insurance companies require you prove you live in the area?
Being kind of ignorant about these things but how does one go about getting a state issued licensed place without establishing identity? how is it possible to establish identity without establishing place of birth and legal citizenship status?
Sounds like a neat trick to know, just in case I ever need it.
As someone who ( living in the U.S.A) and having only worked for american companies. I'd say 'your mileage may very'. I' I've worked for some companies that are exactly as you described, and other that are not. However, I would say that if a company is large enough to have footprint overseas they are more likely to fit the category you describe. A lot of that has to do with the stock market. If a company is public, it is controlled by it's stockholder, many american companies are held primarily by funds as part of managed retirement programs. The funds manager care nothing for the company, little loan the employees, they care about the value of the stock going up , even if long term the decision are bad for the company, because they are looking at it is 1 line of thousands on a spreadsheet.Public companies are required to follow the directives of their stockholders.
interesting, I fit almost exactly that profile.I have never in my life spent more then 6 months out of work since college, even my longest stint was partially voluntary. Now, mind you, I've always been willing to move wherever the work was and work for whatever was median 'going wage' for my skill set even if it meant taking a pay cut. I also don't hold myself is such high esteem as to think I'm better then any else or somehow 'deserve' something. ( not saying you do , but one could imply it from your writing, just saying an attitude of thankfulness and cheerfully rolling up your sleeves goes a long way in most work places). I know exactly the type of interviews you're talking about, I've been to something like 20 of them. (I've also held positions and 7 different companies in my 20 year career.
My advise would be, if you are having trouble finding work. First , post your updated resume on every job board you can, apply for everything it looks like you could do. Updating your resume gets the headhunters excited. Find 10 listed positions you like. Tell everyone you are looking for a salary that is in the middle of that and you will move anywhere go get it, although it would be good a bonus if they can help with moving expensiveness. Do be realistic about what you need.
Also, take some time to develop the skill of interviewing. Understand before each interview, what the company does, ask questions like. If I start working for you tomorrow, how would you expect my skillet to be most helpful? Show up 'slightly' better dressed then you expect your interviewers to be. If the place is 'business casual' show up in a suit and tie. If they place is jeans and t-shirts, show up in business casual. Weather or not we like it, all the nuances of human communication are about 45% of being and effective programmer/ developer so you are being tested and interviewed for that as soon as you walk through the door, because an employee is of no value to a manger if they can not able to communicate with one another what needs to be done, when and how.
Slashdot Mirror
small cable company? where? every place I have lived in the last 15 years you had a single choice for high speed internet. A large national cable provider. Either comcast or cox.
Also, miscounted in such tails are many people like me, who actually have a cable subscription , but only because it is the cheaper way to get a fast internet service. If I could get internet .50 cheaper by dumping cable it would be gone in a heart beat, because I neither use it or have any interest in it.
Sure, but even inborn rights have limitsome and a certain order as I pointed out. For instance your right to self defense can be limited by the potential for collateral damage in the means you choose to defend yourself. So my question was, does the Internet have the same limits as everyday speech or should there be stronger limits and greater responsibility for its use because of the extra power it imparts to you communication ?
Interesting, but not really what I was asking? Does the use of the Internet come with a greater responsibility then normal speech because of the way it amplifieshould your speach and audience.
Or the plo could have used the Internet to organize a larger more clandestine
attack
The definition of which is 'intentionally ignorant'.
I dislike so many things about both the Republicans and the Democrats. The Rupukelicans just make me sick, with ugly ,disingenuous and downright dangerous responses to environmental issues, utter lack of love when it comes to desperate people trying to escape the country they live in and total disregard for the what's actually good for the bulk of the people living in the middle classes. In general I like the Deamoncrats less because they undermine true human freedom at every turn , from centralizing control, to promoting an environment where people use each other ,especially vulnerable women and children on a sexual level and promoting the killing of children.
Any body else want a law making it illegal to create a entity that has as it's purpose getting people elected unless it is associated with a specific candidate and is disencorporated at the end of the campaign? ( I know fat chance of getting it passed, but it's on my list of wouldn't it be nice).
I know that some people on slashdot might be able to have some interesting ideas on this.
So I was thinking about it and thought I would pose the question.
Is there a difference between the right to freedom of speech ( which is to say the right to say what you want without punishment or restriction).
and
The right to use public broadcast equipment like the internet to exercise that right.
Specifically I'm thinking about the internet as a tool that amplifies the effects of ones actions. As another example of what I'm pondering , few people argue against the right to self defense, although most people would put limits on the power and strength of that defense. As and example most people would think it wrong to defend yourself against a knife attack by spraying a machine gun into a crowded room.
So, given the amplifying power of the internet over speech, making every careless statement a broadcast to hundreds or millions with all kinds of possible unintended consequences. What if any reasonable limits are there to speech on the internet or are they identical to the normal limits put on speech , like 'not inciting to riot'.
Correct and until they do one can expect the excessive ambiguity to be abused by the executive
Interesting theory. How do you define right? Legal rights come from the law. If other rights exist independent of the law how do we know what they are and everest do they come from?;
My apologies dyslexia is a pain and spell checkers don't always work. So I guess public school if you can go so far as to say I learned at all ;)
would be if the congress would take the time to understand the issue and bass and amendment to the copy rite act that would address many of these digital concerns so that judges who aren't competent could stop guessing.
Of course it would be pretty cool if someone would mass market a flying car that you didn't need a piolets license for and cost less the $20K ;)
Lots of thing would be pretty cool i guess
Right ... like that law about how everyone should have a right to vote. ...
Oh, and don't forget all those laws about making sure people get fed so they don't starve on tax money
and those horrible laws that stop 'the little guy' from selling tainted meat and medicine that poisons people.
I got you, every law is against the little guy, he never gets a fair shake , we need to go out and pull down those ivory towers comrade.
Just remember what happens to the horse in the end of animal farm.
https://simple.wikipedia.org/w...
I have news for you, there is only one group of people who a rational reason that the powerful shouldn't eat the poor and it's not Darwinist.
yep, let the congress pass the laws, the president enforce them and the courts do there level best to interpret them to mean what they meant at the time they were passed. If someone doesn't like the way things are 'rinse and repeat'. We seriously need to start finding ways to take the president to task for not enforcing the laws ( like ignoring immigration law -Obama ) or ( ignoring health car laws - Trump) , we seriously need to take the judiciary to task for 'finding' new 'rights' in the law that the people who passed them never meant to be there. Then we can start expecting the legislatures to pass the laws they were elected to pass or get booted.
if I see too many 'testing' messages, they become useless because I will likely stop paying attention to them.
First off, I said thought experiment, which by definition means I don't think it is entirely realistic. 2nd isn't it basically a more transparent way of doing what everyone already does? Isn't any wage basically a small percentage of the company profit? .001% or so? The difference being risk is shared based on either loss of employment or salary reduction? This has the advantage of ,depending on implementation, disentangle a lot of benefit problems, because you could expect all employees to cover thier own insurance and workman'so comp etc. Or pay a fee to a third party processor to handle thoseverything payroll and tax issues.
1) keeping salaries in a fixed and transparent relationship to profits
2) providing a greater sense of risk / reward as a motivation for employees.
3) might
what about the corrupt stalkers who are also polices? Cum on I've seen the movies !!?
wow 48% huh? I never would have thought it was that high.
no budget is called poor planning or poor management unless your company is going broke.
So you have outdated 'tech/software' 'holding you back'?
Can you show me the plan you made when you installed said tech and software for it's maintenance / convalescence? Including expected budget for upgrades and replacements in a reasonable and timely fashion?
Did you ensure you would be able to migrate all important data from that proprietary vendor format to whatever the new best thing would be to avoid vendor lock in?
Do you have everything sufficiently documented so that someone else can take over when your expert retires? Did you spend the money and time to do these things right?
NO? That sounds like a MANAGEMENT problem. Would you have done that with little planning with any other kind of company resource? Company vehicles? Buildings? .... hmm... no?
So I looked up getting a ca drivers license. Assuming having one gets you a car tag like most states. They require 1 residency document. Your lease will do, it must have your first and last name on it. So the only thing you really need to get a driver's liscense issued in any name you like w your picture on it is a lease. Not saying anything actual apt. Just the paper w the agreement and a name you claim is yours.
also, certain kinds of anti missile laser weapons are forbidden according to certain anti-nuclear treaties, but if you want to know what happens when you ignore such treaties investigate the Reagan era 'star wars' program, where the president ordered exactly such a treaty be ignored. "I'm sure you are as familiar with the terrible fallout of that decision as I am, specifically and exactly _nothing_ happened, except of coarse all players become more cynical about he effectiveness of treaties".
Basically any large country can ignore any part of any treaty they feel like with little chance of real consequences.
I guess that should probably read 'legal residency status'. When it comes to that most states require some kind of insurance, don't the insurance companies require you prove you live in the area?
Being kind of ignorant about these things but how does one go about getting a state issued licensed place without establishing identity? how is it possible to establish identity without establishing place of birth and legal citizenship status?
Sounds like a neat trick to know, just in case I ever need it.
As someone who ( living in the U.S.A) and having only worked for american companies. I'd say 'your mileage may very'. I' I've worked for some companies that are exactly as you described, and other that are not. However, I would say that if a company is large enough to have footprint overseas they are more likely to fit the category you describe. A lot of that has to do with the stock market. If a company is public, it is controlled by it's stockholder, many american companies are held primarily by funds as part of managed retirement programs. The funds manager care nothing for the company, little loan the employees, they care about the value of the stock going up , even if long term the decision are bad for the company, because they are looking at it is 1 line of thousands on a spreadsheet.Public companies are required to follow the directives of their stockholders.
interesting, I fit almost exactly that profile.I have never in my life spent more then 6 months out of work since college, even my longest stint was partially voluntary. Now, mind you, I've always been willing to move wherever the work was and work for whatever was median 'going wage' for my skill set even if it meant taking a pay cut. I also don't hold myself is such high esteem as to think I'm better then any else or somehow 'deserve' something. ( not saying you do , but one could imply it from your writing, just saying an attitude of thankfulness and cheerfully rolling up your sleeves goes a long way in most work places). I know exactly the type of interviews you're talking about, I've been to something like 20 of them. (I've also held positions and 7 different companies in my 20 year career.
My advise would be, if you are having trouble finding work. First , post your updated resume on every job board you can, apply for everything it looks like you could do. Updating your resume gets the headhunters excited. Find 10 listed positions you like. Tell everyone you are looking for a salary that is in the middle of that and you will move anywhere go get it, although it would be good a bonus if they can help with moving expensiveness. Do be realistic about what you need.
Also, take some time to develop the skill of interviewing. Understand before each interview, what the company does, ask questions like. If I start working for you tomorrow, how would you expect my skillet to be most helpful? Show up 'slightly' better dressed then you expect your interviewers to be. If the place is 'business casual' show up in a suit and tie. If they place is jeans and t-shirts, show up in business casual.
Weather or not we like it, all the nuances of human communication are about 45% of being and effective programmer/ developer so you are being tested and interviewed for that as soon as you walk through the door, because an employee is of no value to a manger if they can not able to communicate with one another what needs to be done, when and how.