I have been meaning to do this for a while, and have just not got around to it.
Anyone, while they have money at the time, should look into doing this. Setup a company and be able and willing to bill thru it at a moments notice. That way when you get laid off, you can say you are an employee of YourCompany, LLC, at the time, and not be lieing.
This would go for helping out friends companies etc after hours, or the same situation you mentioned. You could really bill any time through the company.
There are also a lot of companies that are willing to hire you as a contractor for 6 months that aren't willing to hire a new employee. This makes it easier to get such positions.
This is like the old joke about the doctor and lawyer playing golf. Another golfer runs up and asks the doctor some medical question. The doctor gives some advice and the man runs off. The doctor asks the lawyer if he ever has similar problems. The lawyer responds, "Not so much anymore. I used to have people asking for free legal advice all the time, then I started sending them bills. They don't ask me for advice so much anymore." The doctor responded that he'd have to start doing that also. A week later the doctor got a bill in the mail from the lawyer for services rendered.
You might not expect (i.e. probably can't force them) to get paid, but it does send the message that you are willing to help in the future, but you aren't going to do for free anymore.
The problem with this is that the whole system has to interoperate together. The system is only as secure as the total of all its components working together.
You can say the same thing for a bridge. It will only stand if all the parts of construction are good, which the developer (not the engineer) are in control of. If the design is inherently flawed, the engineering firm will liable. If the construction is flawed, the developer is liable.
The difference between software and your analogy is that the engineer/developer has complete control over the whole system. Developers don't. Microsoft doesn't. If the user of that same bridge goes and replaces all the rivets used, the developer can hardly be blamed when the bridge fails because of this.
If I build a huge structure right in the middle, and you build another, and CowboyNeal builds a third, much smaller building, and suddenly the bridge collapses, whose fault is that? The bridge developer? Me for starting the trend? CowboyNeal even though his was the smallest?
and then when we bring security into play, that is a whole different ball game. The engineer doesn't have to worry about people activly trying to make his bridge fail. If someone (say a tterrorist) plants shaped charges to destroy the main supports, and the bridge collapses under its own weight, no one would even think about sueing the engineer (except for maybe the lady that dumped coffee in her own lap, and somehow thought McDonalds was at fault).
In software systems we rely on everyone else to be well behaved. We also rely on the combination of everyone elses systems not interfering with our systems in unexpected ways. A system of mine could run fine without a single crash. A system of yours could run without a single crash. Together they might get spurious crashes. I have never had a crash on a fresh install of Windows while playing Freecell before I install anything else.
The same idea of liability can't be applied to software systems.
This is really offtopic, but se4emed like a good place to put it.
I just got a flyer in the mail for LinuxWorldExpo.
I normally just throw these away, they aren't worth my time or energy to go.
Of note were the sponsors.
The cornerstone sponsor was HP, the former employer of pundit Bruce Perens, until he slighted MS too much. Also the company that can't decide how to distribute Linux (or did they resolve that?) on their PC's.
Also, the silver sponsor was Macrovision.
I just thought it was appropriate that these two companies were sponsoring an expo. Neither of these two companies really are anti-Linux, but the/. crowd doesn't really have any use for them, do they? Just struck me as funny, thought I would make the observation out loud.
"They should be called GNU/3d Documents, because if it wasn't for the GNU/Linux OS to become a relic, no one would have thought to make somehting else. It is obvious that this technology only exists because GNU caused the creator to come up with the idea."
In the long run, you can't buy support from a company that doesn't exist.
If you read his essay, he already concedes that projects like Linux are exempt, because you can buy support from someone like Red Hat.
He is talking about the more userland side of things that tend not to have companies behind them.
Sure you can say RTFS, but that is why the support costs are high, you have to hire a consultant or a full time programmer to RTFS of each new project you use. He takes time to read the source, then debug the source, instead of calling a company for an update that exists because several customers have already had the same complaint.
I was going to use my old platinum on my bsd box so I could have a truly headless server in my closet, but never got around to it.
I got ptelnet working with my linux box with mixed results. It was a fun daliance, but I am just wondering if you can use it with the new USB cradles, and if Linux/BSD/OSX allows console access via a USB port.
a) a lie carefully crafted to get cooperation from large multi-nationals that would otherwise probably eat the loss to not lose face, or
b) a new scheme by the government to set up little fat guys they don't want around. If you don't know what systems were violated, it would be that much more difficult to prove you didn't and the volumes of data that the prosecuter is going to try to confuse the jury with is fake.
A lopsided payout will be noticed, not because someone one, people always win in a properly booked race/game/whatever, it is that the payout was disproportionate to the take.
If you make your book properly, you aren't making money off of people losing their bets, you make money off of the vig. Your payouts and take should roughly be equal if you did your books right.
A horse isn't a 100:1 long shot because the book maker thinks its a bad horse. The horse is a 100:1 long shot, because off all the betting dollars, only 1 out of every 100 dollars was bet on that horse.
The only way the house wins is to avoid making stupid bets. How does the house avoid making stupid bets? By nt betting. If I make sure that the other 99 dollars are going to cover your 1 dollar bet, and I collect the 10% vig from the losers, I make money, and don't have to worry about the long shot.
Legalized horse betting does the same thing, except since they can't charge a vig to the losers, they don't make a 100% payout. That way, no matter who wins, they have made sure they can cover the bets, and still make a profit. In this scenerio, the winner pays the vig in the shape of the odds aren't as high as they should have been, the winner didn't win as much as was proportionally alloted to him.
The reason why this was a dumb scheme, and the reason why they got caught is pure math. The track paid out more money then they took in, and immediately knew something was amiss. If the systems worked properly, that can't happen. Long shots hit all the time, even 100:1 long shots, but if your computer system adjusted the odds according to the bets made before post, you won't lose money.
The fact that they changed the bet afterward means that the odds were wrong. Of course most people don't realize these subtelties to book making, so probably thought it wasn't a dumb mistake.
Intel should thumb their noses at both patent law, and this other company, and just scrap the project.
Since the hammer is already better, backward campatible, and unhampered by patent problems (AMD paid their bill without whining?) they should just can the project, recall anything that they have already sold, and give a big "Screw you" to all parties involved.
Of course from a PR standpoint, I would cry and moan about how hard it is to be me. But I wouldn't be paying out an extra 100-250M to have a loser on my hands.
then, since AMD would be sitting on their laurels, compete with your own tech that you can't sell. Take some time to really do up the next generation good, and come back with a big punch.
Would not having the next gen be better or worse than having the poorer of the next gen?
(For the sake of discussion assume AMD was winning, as I think they were, but they are both vaporish)
Generally it is all classwork that belongs to the University, not _all_ IP. Anything that you did with their labs, their equipment, etc.
Not to mention most dorms aren't really associated with the school for other legal reasons. When I went to school, the dorms weren't even technically on state property, and run by some management company. This allowed for strict rules in the dorms that the university could pretend to not be able to do anything about, among other things. I wonder where this leaves these entrepreneuers.
You'd have to read the fine print on several different contracts, and not only the ones you signed, but the dorm with the university, etc.
If you order something from a company outside of your taxing body, your taxing body can charge you taxes on it, and in fact, generally do.
If the state you are ordering from decides to charge you sales tax also, then you can get hit twice.
The problem for the states is that they don't have an efficient way to track those purchases, and don't have the where-with-all to go after you for money.
Specifically, slashdot doesn't educate, it just points to places that aren't in the business to educate.
Slashdot, and those participants that acutally have a clue, know that slashdot sole business model is to get people see their advertising. Although they do get people to respond to news about the latest breakthrough in particle accelerators, they realize that more people view pages if they are encited.
So they bait the lesser intelligence among us (and I post a lot, so I am obviously in this group) with baseless flattery (news for NERDS). Then they keep us around by offering less than stimulating, but generally highly charged religious discussions.
In other words, your post was obviously a troll. What aren't obvious trolls, but are definitely trolls, are the majority of articles that make the front page. Welcome to every newspaper, tv news program, or radio program that is profitable.
I understand this, and I still show up daily to get my blood pressure up about a bunch of shit that doesn't matter. One of these days I will burst my aorta, or get a clue. Either way, I will stop reading slashdot... One of these days.
There used to be a company that sold a monitor that rotated. When rotated, the drivers would change the resolution, and the display geometry.
they were marketing it specifically for people browsing the web, or working on large documents. This was back when people still used the web to diseminate knowledge, instead of having flash movies, or jpegs of text.
all the adds show them as autonomous. You just apply them to the bathroom surface, and they zoom around like they were at a 1970's skate park. According to the ads, they do a pretty good job to.
I always wondered why they didn't use these as the basis for nano-technology.
Everyone has a car for the 300m trips. After that commuter flights, or flights are real cheap, and faster than rail ever could get. How long does a flight from NY to LA take? How much does it cost? Are you ever going to get that price/performance with rail (and still get some sort of performance)?
That is why there isn't the infrastructure investment. No one rides them. That is why AmTrack, as heavily subsidized as it is, slowly whittles its lines away year after year.
Flights are just too damn cheap, or you have a car (or can rent one). Gas is cheap, cars are cheap, flights are cheap in relation to other areas of the world. No one cares about rail anymore in this area. That is why we don't spend the money.
One thing that everyone doesn't seem to get is that consumers would love Div-X if it was the only way to watch a movie.
The fact that they can just go buy a movie on DVD for less than they can buy a music CD killed Div-X. Div-X didn't kill itself.
If the only thing that MS supports is a palladium computer, and of course the only OS that your office will run is MS, then your office will buy new palladium computers.
You can then chose to run WinXY at home, so you can steal your office applications and be compatible, or you can stay back on clunky old WinXP.
Intel and AMD are both already working on in. You won't be able to bypass it with Linux because of the DMCA. You will have to stock pile old hardware just to run Linux. You won't have a choice to chose non-palladium if MS has its way. The consumers will vote resoundingly for palladium.
Sort of like the free election in Iraq. Of course Saddam will get 100% of the vote, he is the only one on the ticket.
Wouldn't the winner of that contest (assuming your computer is a major part of performance) immediatly label themselves as being the least productive person at work.
So when it comes time for the axe, your boss, who isn't as dumb as he looks, has everyones SETI account profiles on his desk as he calls everyone in one at a time.
I might be more inclined to care what he has to say if he wasn't such a hypocrite.
Sure it seems cute to use today's copyright laws to protect his anti-copyright license.
But all his ranting about GNU/blah proves that he does believe in intelectual property rights. He wants to be recognized for HIS work.
Is he the only one that deserves some sort of property rights, since he is the father of open source? No, you either believe in property rights, and all that entails, or you believe in exercising your property rights (in what ever fashion) is immoral.
Why is information garnered by computer somehow more incideous than information garnered by more traditional means?
The government already has the information, or will have recieved it anyway. They are using the certificates to give you access to your information, and not leave it available to other people. Even the information you will give or update would have been given to the government sooner or later.
I don't see a way for the government to abuse your privacy with this anymore than if a data entry clerk had entered your request for a change of address at the local post office.
Slashdot Mirror
I have been meaning to do this for a while, and have just not got around to it.
Anyone, while they have money at the time, should look into doing this. Setup a company and be able and willing to bill thru it at a moments notice. That way when you get laid off, you can say you are an employee of YourCompany, LLC, at the time, and not be lieing.
This would go for helping out friends companies etc after hours, or the same situation you mentioned. You could really bill any time through the company.
There are also a lot of companies that are willing to hire you as a contractor for 6 months that aren't willing to hire a new employee. This makes it easier to get such positions.
This is like the old joke about the doctor and lawyer playing golf. Another golfer runs up and asks the doctor some medical question. The doctor gives some advice and the man runs off. The doctor asks the lawyer if he ever has similar problems. The lawyer responds, "Not so much anymore. I used to have people asking for free legal advice all the time, then I started sending them bills. They don't ask me for advice so much anymore." The doctor responded that he'd have to start doing that also. A week later the doctor got a bill in the mail from the lawyer for services rendered.
You might not expect (i.e. probably can't force them) to get paid, but it does send the message that you are willing to help in the future, but you aren't going to do for free anymore.
The problem with this is that the whole system has to interoperate together. The system is only as secure as the total of all its components working together.
You can say the same thing for a bridge. It will only stand if all the parts of construction are good, which the developer (not the engineer) are in control of. If the design is inherently flawed, the engineering firm will liable. If the construction is flawed, the developer is liable.
The difference between software and your analogy is that the engineer/developer has complete control over the whole system. Developers don't. Microsoft doesn't. If the user of that same bridge goes and replaces all the rivets used, the developer can hardly be blamed when the bridge fails because of this.
If I build a huge structure right in the middle, and you build another, and CowboyNeal builds a third, much smaller building, and suddenly the bridge collapses, whose fault is that? The bridge developer? Me for starting the trend? CowboyNeal even though his was the smallest?
and then when we bring security into play, that is a whole different ball game. The engineer doesn't have to worry about people activly trying to make his bridge fail. If someone (say a tterrorist) plants shaped charges to destroy the main supports, and the bridge collapses under its own weight, no one would even think about sueing the engineer (except for maybe the lady that dumped coffee in her own lap, and somehow thought McDonalds was at fault).
In software systems we rely on everyone else to be well behaved. We also rely on the combination of everyone elses systems not interfering with our systems in unexpected ways. A system of mine could run fine without a single crash. A system of yours could run without a single crash. Together they might get spurious crashes. I have never had a crash on a fresh install of Windows while playing Freecell before I install anything else.
The same idea of liability can't be applied to software systems.
This is really offtopic, but se4emed like a good place to put it.
/. crowd doesn't really have any use for them, do they? Just struck me as funny, thought I would make the observation out loud.
I just got a flyer in the mail for LinuxWorldExpo.
I normally just throw these away, they aren't worth my time or energy to go.
Of note were the sponsors.
The cornerstone sponsor was HP, the former employer of pundit Bruce Perens, until he slighted MS too much. Also the company that can't decide how to distribute Linux (or did they resolve that?) on their PC's.
Also, the silver sponsor was Macrovision.
I just thought it was appropriate that these two companies were sponsoring an expo. Neither of these two companies really are anti-Linux, but the
When can we get this, so RMS can shut up?
I, for one , can't wait.
"They should be called GNU/3d Documents, because if it wasn't for the GNU/Linux OS to become a relic, no one would have thought to make somehting else. It is obvious that this technology only exists because GNU caused the creator to come up with the idea."
Ok, maybe he won't shut up.
In the long run, you can't buy support from a company that doesn't exist.
If you read his essay, he already concedes that projects like Linux are exempt, because you can buy support from someone like Red Hat.
He is talking about the more userland side of things that tend not to have companies behind them.
Sure you can say RTFS, but that is why the support costs are high, you have to hire a consultant or a full time programmer to RTFS of each new project you use. He takes time to read the source, then debug the source, instead of calling a company for an update that exists because several customers have already had the same complaint.
can you use ptelnet from your palm via usb?
Anyone ever try this?
I was going to use my old platinum on my bsd box so I could have a truly headless server in my closet, but never got around to it.
I got ptelnet working with my linux box with mixed results. It was a fun daliance, but I am just wondering if you can use it with the new USB cradles, and if Linux/BSD/OSX allows console access via a USB port.
If you aren't doing anything illegal, why do you insist on privacy. What are you hiding?
Don't we have a right to face our accusers?
This sounds like it is either:
a) a lie carefully crafted to get cooperation from large multi-nationals that would otherwise probably eat the loss to not lose face, or
b) a new scheme by the government to set up little fat guys they don't want around. If you don't know what systems were violated, it would be that much more difficult to prove you didn't and the volumes of data that the prosecuter is going to try to confuse the jury with is fake.
The problem is that betting is all pool driven.
A lopsided payout will be noticed, not because someone one, people always win in a properly booked race/game/whatever, it is that the payout was disproportionate to the take.
If you make your book properly, you aren't making money off of people losing their bets, you make money off of the vig. Your payouts and take should roughly be equal if you did your books right.
A horse isn't a 100:1 long shot because the book maker thinks its a bad horse. The horse is a 100:1 long shot, because off all the betting dollars, only 1 out of every 100 dollars was bet on that horse.
The only way the house wins is to avoid making stupid bets. How does the house avoid making stupid bets? By nt betting. If I make sure that the other 99 dollars are going to cover your 1 dollar bet, and I collect the 10% vig from the losers, I make money, and don't have to worry about the long shot.
Legalized horse betting does the same thing, except since they can't charge a vig to the losers, they don't make a 100% payout. That way, no matter who wins, they have made sure they can cover the bets, and still make a profit. In this scenerio, the winner pays the vig in the shape of the odds aren't as high as they should have been, the winner didn't win as much as was proportionally alloted to him.
The reason why this was a dumb scheme, and the reason why they got caught is pure math. The track paid out more money then they took in, and immediately knew something was amiss. If the systems worked properly, that can't happen. Long shots hit all the time, even 100:1 long shots, but if your computer system adjusted the odds according to the bets made before post, you won't lose money.
The fact that they changed the bet afterward means that the odds were wrong. Of course most people don't realize these subtelties to book making, so probably thought it wasn't a dumb mistake.
Intel should thumb their noses at both patent law, and this other company, and just scrap the project.
Since the hammer is already better, backward campatible, and unhampered by patent problems (AMD paid their bill without whining?) they should just can the project, recall anything that they have already sold, and give a big "Screw you" to all parties involved.
Of course from a PR standpoint, I would cry and moan about how hard it is to be me. But I wouldn't be paying out an extra 100-250M to have a loser on my hands.
then, since AMD would be sitting on their laurels, compete with your own tech that you can't sell. Take some time to really do up the next generation good, and come back with a big punch.
Would not having the next gen be better or worse than having the poorer of the next gen?
(For the sake of discussion assume AMD was winning, as I think they were, but they are both vaporish)
Generally it is all classwork that belongs to the University, not _all_ IP. Anything that you did with their labs, their equipment, etc.
Not to mention most dorms aren't really associated with the school for other legal reasons. When I went to school, the dorms weren't even technically on state property, and run by some management company. This allowed for strict rules in the dorms that the university could pretend to not be able to do anything about, among other things. I wonder where this leaves these entrepreneuers.
You'd have to read the fine print on several different contracts, and not only the ones you signed, but the dorm with the university, etc.
Most people simply don't pay them.
If you order something from a company outside of your taxing body, your taxing body can charge you taxes on it, and in fact, generally do.
If the state you are ordering from decides to charge you sales tax also, then you can get hit twice.
The problem for the states is that they don't have an efficient way to track those purchases, and don't have the where-with-all to go after you for money.
No news media outlet is in business to educate.
Specifically, slashdot doesn't educate, it just points to places that aren't in the business to educate.
Slashdot, and those participants that acutally have a clue, know that slashdot sole business model is to get people see their advertising. Although they do get people to respond to news about the latest breakthrough in particle accelerators, they realize that more people view pages if they are encited.
So they bait the lesser intelligence among us (and I post a lot, so I am obviously in this group) with baseless flattery (news for NERDS). Then they keep us around by offering less than stimulating, but generally highly charged religious discussions.
In other words, your post was obviously a troll. What aren't obvious trolls, but are definitely trolls, are the majority of articles that make the front page. Welcome to every newspaper, tv news program, or radio program that is profitable.
I understand this, and I still show up daily to get my blood pressure up about a bunch of shit that doesn't matter. One of these days I will burst my aorta, or get a clue. Either way, I will stop reading slashdot... One of these days.
There used to be a company that sold a monitor that rotated. When rotated, the drivers would change the resolution, and the display geometry.
they were marketing it specifically for people browsing the web, or working on large documents. This was back when people still used the web to diseminate knowledge, instead of having flash movies, or jpegs of text.
So German press reports that Germany has a freer press than USA. Then we get an article about their censorship.
Germany has a more open press, as long as you don't talk about anything that might upset someone?
What they meant to say is 83% of land that is inhabited, or owned is used by humans.
They didn't study any of the land that didn't have a clear owner, as they couldn't be sure of the data.
Get those scribbing bubbles by Dow.
all the adds show them as autonomous. You just apply them to the bathroom surface, and they zoom around like they were at a 1970's skate park. According to the ads, they do a pretty good job to.
I always wondered why they didn't use these as the basis for nano-technology.
Everyone has a car for the 300m trips. After that commuter flights, or flights are real cheap, and faster than rail ever could get. How long does a flight from NY to LA take? How much does it cost? Are you ever going to get that price/performance with rail (and still get some sort of performance)?
That is why there isn't the infrastructure investment. No one rides them. That is why AmTrack, as heavily subsidized as it is, slowly whittles its lines away year after year.
Flights are just too damn cheap, or you have a car (or can rent one). Gas is cheap, cars are cheap, flights are cheap in relation to other areas of the world. No one cares about rail anymore in this area. That is why we don't spend the money.
One thing that everyone doesn't seem to get is that consumers would love Div-X if it was the only way to watch a movie.
The fact that they can just go buy a movie on DVD for less than they can buy a music CD killed Div-X. Div-X didn't kill itself.
If the only thing that MS supports is a palladium computer, and of course the only OS that your office will run is MS, then your office will buy new palladium computers.
You can then chose to run WinXY at home, so you can steal your office applications and be compatible, or you can stay back on clunky old WinXP.
Intel and AMD are both already working on in. You won't be able to bypass it with Linux because of the DMCA. You will have to stock pile old hardware just to run Linux. You won't have a choice to chose non-palladium if MS has its way. The consumers will vote resoundingly for palladium.
Sort of like the free election in Iraq. Of course Saddam will get 100% of the vote, he is the only one on the ticket.
Wouldn't the winner of that contest (assuming your computer is a major part of performance) immediatly label themselves as being the least productive person at work.
So when it comes time for the axe, your boss, who isn't as dumb as he looks, has everyones SETI account profiles on his desk as he calls everyone in one at a time.
I might be more inclined to care what he has to say if he wasn't such a hypocrite.
Sure it seems cute to use today's copyright laws to protect his anti-copyright license.
But all his ranting about GNU/blah proves that he does believe in intelectual property rights. He wants to be recognized for HIS work.
Is he the only one that deserves some sort of property rights, since he is the father of open source? No, you either believe in property rights, and all that entails, or you believe in exercising your property rights (in what ever fashion) is immoral.
Why is information garnered by computer somehow more incideous than information garnered by more traditional means?
The government already has the information, or will have recieved it anyway. They are using the certificates to give you access to your information, and not leave it available to other people. Even the information you will give or update would have been given to the government sooner or later.
I don't see a way for the government to abuse your privacy with this anymore than if a data entry clerk had entered your request for a change of address at the local post office.
is it me, or are most dino remains, tracks, etc. found in the western hemisphere?
Is no one else looking, or were they predominantly here?
I thought the first working prototype of DeCSS was written for windwos?
Hiding the lookup tables in PNGs and the like aside, wasn't the first viewer written for Windows?