As long as everyone's reasonable, and things are defined sufficiently well, there's no need for lawyers (although you might do well to have one to look over written agreements). When people get unreasonable, or agreements are fuzzy, getting a lawyer can be a good move.
The ex-employee isn't responsible for possibly malicious incompetence by his ex-employer, but tying his personal email account to the school's gmail account was his own failure.
Look on the bright side. If you'd gone to Ottawa and pled your case in court, it would have been your word against the police officer's and you would have spend money, taken time, and undergone stress for the exact same result.
Yup. I've seen questions about what I want at my funeral. It seems to me that that is very definitely Not My Problem. I'll make suggestions about my birthday party or what I want for Christmas or things like that, that I'm likely to be present for.
The company probably didn't order the sysadmin to have their gmail administration linked with his personal email. That is sabotage. They have no right to ask the guy to do anything other than compensate for his malfeasance on the job.
I had a manager once who said that he had no objections to a lottery pool as long as he was included. If all of us called in rich one morning, he didn't want to have to go to work and cope.
That depends on the company. Some companies have the attitude that they'll take care of their employees, and their employees will take care of them, and get better work for it. However, you can never count on it continuing, particularly in a publicly held company.
The measure of a man is at least related to what the guy does when nobody's looking, not what the guy thinks. I like thinking up ways to scam the system, and I'd never carry them out.
It's the only way a national economy could ever work.
Showing that you have no imagination, no knowledge of history, and no knowledge of what's actually happening in the world. For most people, their pay depends more on how expensive it would be to replace them than what they deliver.
Seriously, we need children in society. Right now, fertility rates in most developed countries are below replacement level, which suggests to me that having and raising children is useful to society. Bearing and raising children is hard work.
You probably want to have a functioning economy when you retire. To keep the economy functioning over that time, people are going to have to continue to have children. If you intend to rely on other people making certain expensive choices, you've got a big entitlement complex there. You are being a defector in a large Prisoner's Dilemma game.
indicating that you want to revoke a woman's choice in degree fields
You're assuming that women make the STEM/not-STEM choice completely freely and without social pressures making one choice or another difficult. If there are pressures against a woman going into STEM, it isn't an entirely free choice.
Seriously, can't you tell the difference between making sure women have good choices available and forcing them into things?
And why do they do that? Are women feeling pushed into different choices? Would we all be happier if we encouraged different choices?
Seriously, women face different choices with different social pressures than they used to. This stuff is at least partly cultural, and there's no reason to assume that we've gotten the culture to some optimum point. It's almost certain that people a century from now will look back on US society of 2017 and saying how much it's improved since then.
The difference between Sweden now and then is that now he's of less interest to the US, and would have to face charges.
I'm not implying guilt. I don't know exactly what happened. I've read statements, but I don't trust them.
Extradition does not prove guilt. Extradition proves that a person is alleged to have committed a certain act that is a crime in both countries, and usually that the allegation has some evidence behind it. It's proof that there is a reasonable accusation of criminal acts.
So far, I see nothing to contradict the prima facie account that Assange moved to Sweden, thinking he was reasonably safe, had sexual intercourse with two women, was accused of rape (specifically, of acts the UK considers rape), left for the UK, and is simply trying to avoid facing Swedish courts. I don't trust his honesty, and his talk of the US is just talk on his part, not backed up by anything I've seen.
I am biologically male. I also dress and act more or less like men are expected to do in this culture. Those are two separate statements, and neither implies the other.
I've got the diagnoses. Therefore, I'm mentally ill, although it usually doesn't show. I also have some physical illnesses you won't notice by looking at me. I'm reasonably healthy for my age, and I know a lot of contemporaries who are worse off, but I'm not in perfect health.
I'm emphasizing this because I really hate "mentally ill" being used as an insult, and it often is. APK does not necessarily have a mental illness; APK might just be an asshole, which is not a category in DSM-V. There are mentally healthy people I wouldn't trust with a burned-out match.
In other words, you completely agree with me that nobody's been criminally prosecuted for doing what Clinton did. I'm aware of cases of losing a job and/or a security clearance, but not ones involving criminal prosecution. I'm not sure exactly who your last reference was, but if it's who I think it is he agreed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, but didn't have to (Clinton probably had something to do with that). That's not criminal prosecution.
False statement. Such a server would be illegal now, since a law was passed the year after Kerry took over at State. That doesn't imply that there were no illegal things done.
Comey didn't say that Clinton broke no laws. He said she wouldn't be prosecuted. This is entirely in line with how previous people who did much the same thing as Clinton were treated. I've been asking for counterexamples for months, and trying to find one, and people still keep ignoring the fact that people who accidentally mishandle classified information are not criminally prosecuted. Period.
I was trying to keep optimistic about a Trump presidency, and then I saw his Cabinet picks. I now see no reason to change my original conclusion that we're screwed.
There's a lot of social pressure to make certain choices, and that starts real young. Of course, if you think that anyone who disagrees with you is pushing for heavy-handed government programs, you're going to miss the nuances.
And said nothing about whether women make less because they're pushed away from higher-paying jobs. "The same job" can cover up a lot of problems. This can happen whether or not anyone is intentionally discriminating against women.
Exactly how did your parents manage it? Hard work? Poor people in general seem to work a lot harder than I do. Unusual talent? Luck? There's a difference between a solution that works for some people and a solution that works for most people.
Slashdot Mirror
Not if the situation was his fault in the first place.
As long as everyone's reasonable, and things are defined sufficiently well, there's no need for lawyers (although you might do well to have one to look over written agreements). When people get unreasonable, or agreements are fuzzy, getting a lawyer can be a good move.
The ex-employee isn't responsible for possibly malicious incompetence by his ex-employer, but tying his personal email account to the school's gmail account was his own failure.
Look on the bright side. If you'd gone to Ottawa and pled your case in court, it would have been your word against the police officer's and you would have spend money, taken time, and undergone stress for the exact same result.
Yup. I've seen questions about what I want at my funeral. It seems to me that that is very definitely Not My Problem. I'll make suggestions about my birthday party or what I want for Christmas or things like that, that I'm likely to be present for.
He demanded $200K to let the school use its own stuff. Why don't you consider that blackmail?
The company probably didn't order the sysadmin to have their gmail administration linked with his personal email. That is sabotage. They have no right to ask the guy to do anything other than compensate for his malfeasance on the job.
I had a manager once who said that he had no objections to a lottery pool as long as he was included. If all of us called in rich one morning, he didn't want to have to go to work and cope.
That depends on the company. Some companies have the attitude that they'll take care of their employees, and their employees will take care of them, and get better work for it. However, you can never count on it continuing, particularly in a publicly held company.
The measure of a man is at least related to what the guy does when nobody's looking, not what the guy thinks. I like thinking up ways to scam the system, and I'd never carry them out.
Statistics are real facts, guy.
Showing that you have no imagination, no knowledge of history, and no knowledge of what's actually happening in the world. For most people, their pay depends more on how expensive it would be to replace them than what they deliver.
Seriously, we need children in society. Right now, fertility rates in most developed countries are below replacement level, which suggests to me that having and raising children is useful to society. Bearing and raising children is hard work.
You probably want to have a functioning economy when you retire. To keep the economy functioning over that time, people are going to have to continue to have children. If you intend to rely on other people making certain expensive choices, you've got a big entitlement complex there. You are being a defector in a large Prisoner's Dilemma game.
You're assuming that women make the STEM/not-STEM choice completely freely and without social pressures making one choice or another difficult. If there are pressures against a woman going into STEM, it isn't an entirely free choice.
Seriously, can't you tell the difference between making sure women have good choices available and forcing them into things?
And why do they do that? Are women feeling pushed into different choices? Would we all be happier if we encouraged different choices?
Seriously, women face different choices with different social pressures than they used to. This stuff is at least partly cultural, and there's no reason to assume that we've gotten the culture to some optimum point. It's almost certain that people a century from now will look back on US society of 2017 and saying how much it's improved since then.
The difference between Sweden now and then is that now he's of less interest to the US, and would have to face charges.
I'm not implying guilt. I don't know exactly what happened. I've read statements, but I don't trust them.
Extradition does not prove guilt. Extradition proves that a person is alleged to have committed a certain act that is a crime in both countries, and usually that the allegation has some evidence behind it. It's proof that there is a reasonable accusation of criminal acts.
So far, I see nothing to contradict the prima facie account that Assange moved to Sweden, thinking he was reasonably safe, had sexual intercourse with two women, was accused of rape (specifically, of acts the UK considers rape), left for the UK, and is simply trying to avoid facing Swedish courts. I don't trust his honesty, and his talk of the US is just talk on his part, not backed up by anything I've seen.
I am biologically male. I also dress and act more or less like men are expected to do in this culture. Those are two separate statements, and neither implies the other.
I've got the diagnoses. Therefore, I'm mentally ill, although it usually doesn't show. I also have some physical illnesses you won't notice by looking at me. I'm reasonably healthy for my age, and I know a lot of contemporaries who are worse off, but I'm not in perfect health.
I'm emphasizing this because I really hate "mentally ill" being used as an insult, and it often is. APK does not necessarily have a mental illness; APK might just be an asshole, which is not a category in DSM-V. There are mentally healthy people I wouldn't trust with a burned-out match.
In other words, you completely agree with me that nobody's been criminally prosecuted for doing what Clinton did. I'm aware of cases of losing a job and/or a security clearance, but not ones involving criminal prosecution. I'm not sure exactly who your last reference was, but if it's who I think it is he agreed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, but didn't have to (Clinton probably had something to do with that). That's not criminal prosecution.
False statement. Such a server would be illegal now, since a law was passed the year after Kerry took over at State. That doesn't imply that there were no illegal things done.
Comey didn't say that Clinton broke no laws. He said she wouldn't be prosecuted. This is entirely in line with how previous people who did much the same thing as Clinton were treated. I've been asking for counterexamples for months, and trying to find one, and people still keep ignoring the fact that people who accidentally mishandle classified information are not criminally prosecuted. Period.
I was trying to keep optimistic about a Trump presidency, and then I saw his Cabinet picks. I now see no reason to change my original conclusion that we're screwed.
In other words, tyranny is fine as long as you agree with it. Gotcha.
In other words, you've made up your mind, and so inquiry shows emotional issues. Got it.
There's a lot of social pressure to make certain choices, and that starts real young. Of course, if you think that anyone who disagrees with you is pushing for heavy-handed government programs, you're going to miss the nuances.
And said nothing about whether women make less because they're pushed away from higher-paying jobs. "The same job" can cover up a lot of problems. This can happen whether or not anyone is intentionally discriminating against women.
Exactly how did your parents manage it? Hard work? Poor people in general seem to work a lot harder than I do. Unusual talent? Luck? There's a difference between a solution that works for some people and a solution that works for most people.