Only those of the Indian race may immmigrate to India, by Indian law.
I'm not disputing your claim, indeed, I'd like to see some backup for it. I've always been under the impression that Indians were of the Caucasian race - at least that is what I was taught.
Programming is simply a commodity. I oughta know, I am a programmer. My job will go overseas sometime soon. I'm just trying to make as much money as possible beforehand, in the opes that I am prepared.
I'm a programmer too, and I find little logic in your comment. Why should a company which is based in the U.S. be allowed to benefit from the infrastructure here while offshoring jobs? Why should the company get a free ride when their employees no longer pay U.S. taxes or pay into Social Security, and the company no longer pays the mandatory matching contribution? Sure, the company might make more money in the short run (and shareholders in whatever country make a few pennies), but it is at the expense of the American taxpayer. Companies that offshore their labor should do the right thing and offshore their headquarters and management as well, so they can adequately supervise their operations.
Since U.S. executive compensation is so horribly out of whack compared to the average worker's in comparison to the rest of the world (over 500:1 at last count), why aren't the executives' jobs offshored first? That would be the most logical place to start cutting costs and improving profits. And if managerial brains are not a commodity, what is? IBM's position is: "Ooh, ooh, other companies are doing it, so we gotta do it too." I liked the old IBM better. Then they had real management that appreciated the fact that the current employees made the company what it was.
I think I'll keep my sysadmin job. They'll have a hard time replacing ME with some overseas Indian.
You should really read the trade rags (Infoworld, ComputerWorld, etc.) more often. The *consulting* companies are busy explaining to PHBs how "remote administration" can solve all their problems and replace arrogant American BOFHs with humble (and CHEAP) foreign administrators. Moving programming jobs offshore is old news. Heh, you're next.:)
. ..you have to admit that the way they're doing business these days . . . is generating plenty of illwill out there. I can't see them doing well in the long-term as a result of the last few months.
Executives these days are only interested in looting companies, not in their long-term survival. Only McBride and cohorts know exactly when the pump-and-dump is to take place, but I'd guess pretty soon.
They made a big noise about paying a small fee for a piece of paper, and a bigger noise about offering Linux *licenses*. They announced that Sun is the mystery silent partner. The real legal case won't be settled for years. Now, all they need to do is wait for a few fools with lots of money to buy licenses, and let the press take it from there. More companies figure maybe it's better to be safe, pony up, and it snowballs. (This is all provided the unknown license fees are reasonably low, otherwise the companies dump Linux, and Sun and MS are the winners.)
These sharks have figured out a new open source business model:
Join a dying company with a grant from the King of Spain.
Claim ownership of Linux.
License it to the people who own it.
Dump your SCO stock on latecoming losers.
Catch a flight to the Islands before the feds figure it out.
It's just a new twist on an old money-making idea called theft. You've got to admit, though, they certainly have big, brass balls. Who else could stand up in public and spout that nonsense with a straight face?
When the economy is in recession, it is shrinking. Because the U.S. economy is not shrinking, it cannot, by definition, be in a recession.
Although there is negative economic growth every other month, and weekly new jobless claims are about 400,000, and the unemployment numbers don't reflect the people bumped off the rolls because their benefits have been exhausted, this is great news. We have been in a jobless *recovery* for two years. We are overjoyed by the news! Many thanks. Do slashdot rules allow killing the messenger?:)
As for the alleged code that was stolen from SCO UNIX, let's assume that it is stolen. It won't terminate Linux and won't force anyone to enter into SCO's licensing scheme. Just about any self-respecting Ph.D. student in computer science at Carnegie Mellon University could easily write a clean-room verion that duplicates the functionality of the stolen code.
Why on earth would we want to involve a Piled Higher and Deeper, when we need a real coder?:)
he tax originally applied to cassette tapes. A similiar tax applies to blank video cassettes. Canada has one on all CD-Rs, the USs is only on the "audio" ones, which is why they cost more.
You've got my attention. Now, please explain how one can differentiate between "audio" and non-audio CD-R blanks. My blanks have a label indicating "700MB/80 min" which would seem to indicate they work for either.
I'm thinking about doing it very seriously. But first I'd like to knowwhat type of lawsuit I'll be able to attack SCO with when the IBM vs Linux vs SCO fud is over and SCO loses. Can they license something they don't own? In violation of a printed license they themselves shipped?
Okay, killjoy, are you trying to take all the fun out of this thread? This is SCO news, and I was having withdrawl pains after several days without a fix. Don't go getting all technical on us.:)
..with this is that they finally have to tell WHAT the license would be good for.
It doesn't make any difference what the license is good for. I have to clean the cat's litterbox tomorrow, and I have a large, padded mailing envelope. Monday, my *license fees* will be on the way to Utah.
From what you wrote, it seemed like you were arguing, "Since they did something illegal, I can't see how you think they did nothing immoral" (i.e., illegal implies immoral).
If I was unclear, I apologize. My point was that people were hurt, and, in the absence of declared war or self-defense, that would (should) be an immoral act.
As if that which is "immoral" were always so cut-and-dry! Mind you, I agree that Microsoft did (and still does) immoral things. The problem I keep running into is that everyone else seems to have different ideas about what is immoral.;)
That is certainly true, and the gray area seems to get bigger every year. The principle I try to hold to is "do no injury to others" -- aside from joining the occasional slashdotting, of course.:)
Consider this: to enter by mail, you need to buy envelopes and some kind of writing implement. To enter by calling a toll-free number you need a phone (or to pay for a pay phone). To enter this MS contest, you have to own a computer.
You're losing me here. If I enter a postcard contest or a phone contest, I wouldn't have to buy Microsoft postcards or a Microsoft telephone. This contest requires that you own a computer running Microsoft Windows, i.e., a purchase, no?
Well, this could be because of the slight tilt of the job market in the employers favor, but that's just a guess.
Well, I'm working for a company that has traditionally rewarded its employees with stock options that vest in four years. Due to the recent market, past options are underwater and likely to stay there, and employees don't have any feeling of "reward". Granting stock instead of stock options is an admission that there is no short-term hope of stock price increase IMHO.
Yes, indeed. It looks like owning MSFT will continue to be a huge mistake. I weep for those poor investors.
Well, MS no longer considers MS stock options to be a reward for their employees. If I owned MS stock, I'd be doing some serious thinking on the subject. Just a thought.
What he is stating is that illegal does not imply immoral.
No. The original poster said that what Microsoft did was not immoral.
Notice that Webster's definition has nothing to do with legality. You are arguing your opponent's point.
You are missing the point: What MS did was both illegal and immoral by definition. I never said something that was illegal had to be immoral (although it is usually so if you buy into the social compact thing). My objection is to people who regurgitate this newly discovered corporate amorality spiel. It's nothing more than a convenient cop-out for corporate management, which is trying to excuse it's unethical, immoral behavior.
No one has the right to anyone else's medical records unless they have a specific need, specifically to provide healthcare or accurate billing.
Well, apparently your records are the only things in a hospital that are private. They want you to walk down the hall with your butt hanging out of that bass-ackwards "gown". Then there are the rookie nurses on the night shift that are convinced you need a catheter. *shudder* I swear they just wanted to check it out, play with the K-Y, and cause pain. THAT is the kind of abuse that needs to be stopped, the hell with my records!
It's very easy for beginners to write erroneous SQL which will access every record in a table.
Not just beginners. Half of the reporting and maintenance querries are likely to hit their trick records. They'd be constantly responding to false positives.
breaking the law does NOT mean they did something immoral. . . what MS is doing isn't moral, but it isn't immoral either.
Lemme get this straight. Even though MS was convicted of committing illegal actions that financially injured other companies and the people who worked for those companies, that is not immoral? Webster's definition of immoral: "not in conformity with accepted principles of right and wrong behavior." I can't even begin to guess how you arrived at your opinion.
No kidding? I tried that first, thanks very much. Tcl wasn't allowed the hardware access that was needed. That was only available through the Windows API.
You don't write "real" applications in TCL/TK _or_ VB.
Spare me. I don't do language holy wars. I use the proper tool for the job, and I use quite a few. If the customer wants a one-off utility with a GUI in a hurry, you use what meets your needs.
The Windows API is _much_ richer than your average Unix API, though of course it's easier for Windows since there's only one version.
Substitute "bloated and verbose" for richer, and then you've got it right.
Slashdot Mirror
Only those of the Indian race may immmigrate to India, by Indian law.
I'm not disputing your claim, indeed, I'd like to see some backup for it. I've always been under the impression that Indians were of the Caucasian race - at least that is what I was taught.
Basically, the world does not revolve around anyone except big CEOs. Hey, maybe you could change majors.
Wow, I guess those sci-fi stories about brain implants were true after all. All hail the CEO! Rollerball, anyone? You scare me. Seriously.
Programming is simply a commodity. I oughta know, I am a programmer. My job will go overseas sometime soon. I'm just trying to make as much money as possible beforehand, in the opes that I am prepared.
I'm a programmer too, and I find little logic in your comment. Why should a company which is based in the U.S. be allowed to benefit from the infrastructure here while offshoring jobs? Why should the company get a free ride when their employees no longer pay U.S. taxes or pay into Social Security, and the company no longer pays the mandatory matching contribution? Sure, the company might make more money in the short run (and shareholders in whatever country make a few pennies), but it is at the expense of the American taxpayer. Companies that offshore their labor should do the right thing and offshore their headquarters and management as well, so they can adequately supervise their operations.
Since U.S. executive compensation is so horribly out of whack compared to the average worker's in comparison to the rest of the world (over 500:1 at last count), why aren't the executives' jobs offshored first? That would be the most logical place to start cutting costs and improving profits. And if managerial brains are not a commodity, what is? IBM's position is: "Ooh, ooh, other companies are doing it, so we gotta do it too." I liked the old IBM better. Then they had real management that appreciated the fact that the current employees made the company what it was.
I think I'll keep my sysadmin job. They'll have a hard time replacing ME with some overseas Indian.
You should really read the trade rags (Infoworld, ComputerWorld, etc.) more often. The *consulting* companies are busy explaining to PHBs how "remote administration" can solve all their problems and replace arrogant American BOFHs with humble (and CHEAP) foreign administrators. Moving programming jobs offshore is old news. Heh, you're next. :)
You really know how to beat a joke to death. I take it you've had lots of practice. :)
. . .you have to admit that the way they're doing business these days . . . is generating plenty of illwill out there. I can't see them doing well in the long-term as a result of the last few months.
Executives these days are only interested in looting companies, not in their long-term survival. Only McBride and cohorts know exactly when the pump-and-dump is to take place, but I'd guess pretty soon.
They made a big noise about paying a small fee for a piece of paper, and a bigger noise about offering Linux *licenses*. They announced that Sun is the mystery silent partner. The real legal case won't be settled for years. Now, all they need to do is wait for a few fools with lots of money to buy licenses, and let the press take it from there. More companies figure maybe it's better to be safe, pony up, and it snowballs. (This is all provided the unknown license fees are reasonably low, otherwise the companies dump Linux, and Sun and MS are the winners.)
These sharks have figured out a new open source business model:
Join a dying company with a grant from the King of Spain.
Claim ownership of Linux.
License it to the people who own it.
Dump your SCO stock on latecoming losers.
Catch a flight to the Islands before the feds figure it out.
It's just a new twist on an old money-making idea called theft. You've got to admit, though, they certainly have big, brass balls. Who else could stand up in public and spout that nonsense with a straight face?
Yeah, I'm still waiting for my $5 from the RIAA pricefixing lawsuit.
$5! I thought it was $13 or a Celine Dionne CD. Yeah, I'm still waiting too.
When the economy is in recession, it is shrinking. Because the U.S. economy is not shrinking, it cannot, by definition, be in a recession.
Although there is negative economic growth every other month, and weekly new jobless claims are about 400,000, and the unemployment numbers don't reflect the people bumped off the rolls because their benefits have been exhausted, this is great news. We have been in a jobless *recovery* for two years. We are overjoyed by the news! Many thanks. Do slashdot rules allow killing the messenger? :)
As for the alleged code that was stolen from SCO UNIX, let's assume that it is stolen. It won't terminate Linux and won't force anyone to enter into SCO's licensing scheme. Just about any self-respecting Ph.D. student in computer science at Carnegie Mellon University could easily write a clean-room verion that duplicates the functionality of the stolen code.
Why on earth would we want to involve a Piled Higher and Deeper, when we need a real coder? :)
he tax originally applied to cassette tapes. A similiar tax applies to blank video cassettes. Canada has one on all CD-Rs, the USs is only on the "audio" ones, which is why they cost more.
You've got my attention. Now, please explain how one can differentiate between "audio" and non-audio CD-R blanks. My blanks have a label indicating "700MB/80 min" which would seem to indicate they work for either.
I'm thinking about doing it very seriously. But first I'd like to knowwhat type of lawsuit I'll be able to attack SCO with when the IBM vs Linux vs SCO fud is over and SCO loses. Can they license something they don't own? In violation of a printed license they themselves shipped?
Okay, killjoy, are you trying to take all the fun out of this thread? This is SCO news, and I was having withdrawl pains after several days without a fix. Don't go getting all technical on us. :)
It doesn't make any difference what the license is good for. I have to clean the cat's litterbox tomorrow, and I have a large, padded mailing envelope. Monday, my *license fees* will be on the way to Utah.
Nope, you can get the MSN Messenger client for Mac OS X as well. So, you're not required to actually buy any Microsoft program at all.
Unless you're using Unix, Linux, OS/2, etc.
From what you wrote, it seemed like you were arguing, "Since they did something illegal, I can't see how you think they did nothing immoral" (i.e., illegal implies immoral).
If I was unclear, I apologize. My point was that people were hurt, and, in the absence of declared war or self-defense, that would (should) be an immoral act.
As if that which is "immoral" were always so cut-and-dry! Mind you, I agree that Microsoft did (and still does) immoral things. The problem I keep running into is that everyone else seems to have different ideas about what is immoral. ;)
That is certainly true, and the gray area seems to get bigger every year. The principle I try to hold to is "do no injury to others" -- aside from joining the occasional slashdotting, of course. :)
Consider this: to enter by mail, you need to buy envelopes and some kind of writing implement. To enter by calling a toll-free number you need a phone (or to pay for a pay phone). To enter this MS contest, you have to own a computer.
You're losing me here. If I enter a postcard contest or a phone contest, I wouldn't have to buy Microsoft postcards or a Microsoft telephone. This contest requires that you own a computer running Microsoft Windows, i.e., a purchase, no?
Well, this could be because of the slight tilt of the job market in the employers favor, but that's just a guess.
Well, I'm working for a company that has traditionally rewarded its employees with stock options that vest in four years. Due to the recent market, past options are underwater and likely to stay there, and employees don't have any feeling of "reward". Granting stock instead of stock options is an admission that there is no short-term hope of stock price increase IMHO.
Oh wait, Microsoft must be testing out a new business plan:
;)
10 Spam
20 Collect more email addresses
30 Spam some more!
40 ?
50 GOTO 40
60 Profit!
No, it can't be, it's flawed... 60 Profit! can never be reached!
Like always, you're going to have to wait for version 3.1 before it actually works.
You don't pay anything, you do have to use their software, but I don't see how that would fall under a no purchase necessary provision.
But if you have to purchase their OS (one way or another) in order to use said software . . . Purchase, once-removed, is okay?
Yes, indeed. It looks like owning MSFT will continue to be a huge mistake. I weep for those poor investors.
Well, MS no longer considers MS stock options to be a reward for their employees. If I owned MS stock, I'd be doing some serious thinking on the subject. Just a thought.
What he is stating is that illegal does not imply immoral.
No. The original poster said that what Microsoft did was not immoral.
Notice that Webster's definition has nothing to do with legality. You are arguing your opponent's point.
You are missing the point: What MS did was both illegal and immoral by definition. I never said something that was illegal had to be immoral (although it is usually so if you buy into the social compact thing). My objection is to people who regurgitate this newly discovered corporate amorality spiel. It's nothing more than a convenient cop-out for corporate management, which is trying to excuse it's unethical, immoral behavior.
No one has the right to anyone else's medical records unless they have a specific need, specifically to provide healthcare or accurate billing.
Well, apparently your records are the only things in a hospital that are private. They want you to walk down the hall with your butt hanging out of that bass-ackwards "gown". Then there are the rookie nurses on the night shift that are convinced you need a catheter. *shudder* I swear they just wanted to check it out, play with the K-Y, and cause pain. THAT is the kind of abuse that needs to be stopped, the hell with my records!
It's very easy for beginners to write erroneous SQL which will access every record in a table.
Not just beginners. Half of the reporting and maintenance querries are likely to hit their trick records. They'd be constantly responding to false positives.
breaking the law does NOT mean they did something immoral. . . what MS is doing isn't moral, but it isn't immoral either.
Lemme get this straight. Even though MS was convicted of committing illegal actions that financially injured other companies and the people who worked for those companies, that is not immoral? Webster's definition of immoral: "not in conformity with accepted principles of right and wrong behavior." I can't even begin to guess how you arrived at your opinion.
So if I email you a random linux binary, you'll just run it on your machine?
Nope. And I don't have to worry about my email client being helpful and running it for me.
You could have used Tcl/TK on Windows, of course.
No kidding? I tried that first, thanks very much. Tcl wasn't allowed the hardware access that was needed. That was only available through the Windows API.
You don't write "real" applications in TCL/TK _or_ VB.
Spare me. I don't do language holy wars. I use the proper tool for the job, and I use quite a few. If the customer wants a one-off utility with a GUI in a hurry, you use what meets your needs.
The Windows API is _much_ richer than your average Unix API, though of course it's easier for Windows since there's only one version.
Substitute "bloated and verbose" for richer, and then you've got it right.