Car dealerships along the NM border will spring up the way lottery outlets and fireworks stands spring across the state line from where those are illegal. You're going to see a hell of a lot of cars being driven by NM residents, but owned (and registered) with their out-of-state sibling.
Also, does anybody remember back in the mid-1970s in the US, when all cars were required to have a continuously sounding buzzer if the seatbelt was unfastened, and some cars had seat belt interlocks? More to the point, does anybody remember that the very first trip taken in one of those cars was to a mechanic to get the interlock disabled?
Third, who's going to compensate the families of those who get killed when a driver is too distracted by fiddling with their rolling re-test device to pay attention to the goddamned road?
BTW, how long until there's a video recorder to make sure the driver isn't molesting a child in the back seat?
Perhaps your answer should have been "Yes. I am a strong proponent of jury nullification. My obligation is not merely to determine whether the defendant violated the law, but whether he or she committed a crime." You'll probably wind up on the jury pool's equivalent of a no-call list.
Here in Fulton County (Georgia, U.S.), the jurors waiting room has brochures everywhere from some legal foundation or another, describing jury nullification. It would be nice if somebody read the damned things.
We may be saying the same thing here, but here's my take:
In that 1985 copy of $ echo, AT&T said they would "assure licensees that AT&T will claim no ownership in the software that they developed -- only the portion of the software developed by AT&T." In a recent Computerworld article, Frank Hayes calls that a clarification of the license's derivative-works clause:
Of the million lines of Linux code that SCO claims IBM hijacked from Unix, SCO hasn't identified a single line that came from the original Unix source code. It was all created by IBM. According to AT&T in 1985, that means it's IBM's to keep -- or give away. And SCO's theory that it owns Linux code appears to be kaput.
Long story short, if SCO inherited from Novell the rights Novell inherited from AT&T, SCO has no claim over derivative works, only over the original AT&T code, and, of course, whatever they have written themselves.
Data is nouns; algorithms is verbs. This idea was actually a huge advance in programming language design.
Re:Interview questions.
on
Beyond Pay?
·
· Score: 1
Ah, the classic dodge of the social conservative. I suspected it would show up sooner or later. I take it you advocate "converting" homosexuals back to their natural heterosexuality?
Even if being gay is a choice, it's a choice that remains mine, not my employer's.
So if you'll forgive me, arguing with homophobes bores me after a while.
Re:Interview questions.
on
Beyond Pay?
·
· Score: 1
If you're a homosexual, people only know that about you when you let them.
So unless the job actually requires me to perform homosexual acts, what is the purpose of asking me if I am a homosexual?
If my employment hinges on my sexual orientation, the only difference between race and sexuality is that you are still allowed to discriminate against me because of my sexual orientation.
Riding a motorcycle is 90% mental, and requires a lot of judgment, and a lot of physical inputs quite different than "turn wheel mash pedals". And trucks don't fall over nearly so often after the vehicle's performance envelope (or, more precisely, the vehicle operator's performance envelope) has been exceeded.
Given a 45-degree rock face, a competent motorcyclist's biggest challenge is to slow down and not to catch too much air the top. Now, take a jacked-up SUV and traverse a 45-degree rock face.
As for the stream fording, well, if it's deper than three feet, for the price of one hulking SUV, I will just buy two bikes and leave one on either side of the damned river. For Hummer H2 money, I can purchase several dual-sport bikes and modify them into continent crossing, canyon strafing, stream fording, weather ignoring, hill-climbing, dune-bugging, mud-raping, jungle exploring, forest fighting monsters.
But the Hummer will definitely get me more 'tang. Like you said, "there are conditions suited for the various vehicles."
Re:Interview questions.
on
Beyond Pay?
·
· Score: 1
And in 1961 they could turn you away for being black, and in 1971 they could turn you away for being a woman. What's your point? What used to be acceptable, like your example from 14 years ago, is not acceptable today. Discrimination based on sexual orientation is still permitted in many states; Cracker Barrel's policy is "we will not discriminate against anyone we are not allowed to discriminate against" which means that they won't fire gays where it's illegal to fire gays. That's why I won't eat at Cracker Barrel. However, the tide is turning, and many federal labor laws, which apply to any corporation with over X employees, has to walk a fine line. My Jewish, lesbian sister-in-law still managed to get a job at Chick-Fil-A, was actually given a scholarship by them, and their corporate culture is so Christian-dominated that they won't open their restaurants on Sundays!
Re:Interview questions.
on
Beyond Pay?
·
· Score: 1
If their business would be directly harmed by it becoming general knowledge that their "Church Finance" software package was developed by homosexual coders, they have a legitimate reason to ask.
They do not.
However, they do have a legitimate reason to inform the candidate of the situation, perhaps by saying something like, "One of our products is a finance package for churches. As such, many of our clients are conservative Christians. They have certain...expectations of us, as a company, and as employees of the company, to uphold a certain...standard of conduct. How comfortable would you feel, working closely with such a client?"
Re:Interview questions.
on
Beyond Pay?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Can I not ask you if you were gay? If you had a girlfriend?
Sure you can. All you want. But NOT IN A JOB INTERVIEW! My having a spouse, or a funny accent, or a different god, is not a factor in my ability to perform a job. If, as an interviewer, you ask such a question, and it is answered, I can argue that you used the answer to discriminate against me during the hiring process. Likewise, if you hired me, everyone you didn't hire can argue that my answers to these questions denied them the job.
If you want to find out personal information about a candidate, a popular tactic is to end the interview, thank them for their time, then invite them out for lunch. You still have to be careful, though: perhaps the lunchgoers should be people who have no official say in the hiring process.
Nobody thinks they're the bad guy. Everybody thinks they are doing the right things for the right reasons. SCO is no exception.
And besides, what the hell did you think their press releases would say? Nobody writes "MWAAAHAHAHHA" when "In order to enhance shareholder value" will get the job done.
I am the author of the grandparent post, and yes, when it comes to fiscal matters, I am a conservative. But I don't see this as necessarily conflicting with a more progressive social agenda.
The problem with a debt is that eventually you have to pay it off. The FY 2004 budget is ~$2.23T, with a deficit of $0.44T. About $0.35T is going to net interest; by 2008 we will be paying close to half a trillion dollars a year on Treasury debt securities alone (Excel source). That's half a trillion dollars a year we can't use to shelter the homeless, feed the starving, cure the diseased, protect the abused, clean the environment, educate the ignorant.
Which of those are meritous is beyond the scope of my argument.
An excellent point about offering WiFi at hotels. But we're talking about an airport here.
The competitive advantage to an airport is that it can stimulate travel through and to Pittsburgh. One of the ugliest things about business travel is the waits. Time was, the best thing to do with a wait was get drunk at the airport bar. But with corporate forcing their minions to spend ever waking moment being productive, this is frowned upon.
It is getting harder and harder to work while disconnected. At the Pittsburgh airport, the minions will be connected. Nevermind most of them are non-tools and will be surfing CNN.com instead of working; but the tools and the non-tools are both happier.
So if a direct flight costs $750, but the flight with the three hour layover in Pittsburgh costs $500, and my minions will be connected during those three hours, they're damn sure getting the layover, and Pittsburgh collects about fifteen bucks in gate fees, ten bucks in Danishes and coffee, and if one in a hundred business through-travellers decides that maybe there's a point in actually doing business in Pittsburgh, I've done amazing things for the economy, just by providing WiFi at the airport. Even if all I've done is convinced a traveller to change planes in Pittsburgh rather than Philadelphia, that's fifteen bucks for Pittsburgh and fifteen less for Philly.
The same thing works for tourists, and anybody else. Being stuck at the airport sucks, particularly with the recorded anti-terrorism announcements disturbing me every five minutes. If I resent the airport, I'll resent the city, too.
P.S. whatever happened to buying a Robert Ludlum novel to throw away at the end of the trip?
I hate, hate, hate to say this, but with a national debt that's growing by a half trillion dollars over the next few years, shouldn't the United States focus more on something like getting out of debt.
Maybe something more modest, like a permanent moon base? Or more modest than that, wait a few years so we can fund this project with cash instead of Easy Credit Terms?
The Bush stats aren't the facts, they're the propaganda.
So were the Clinton stats. My ghod, how +5 Insightful can you get, noticing that when the people trying to get reelected control the generation of the stats, the stats are always glowing. What's your point?
Do you work for the RNC?
Troll.
get your head out of the sand and help do something about the lies and misleadership.
Since I'm not a millionaire, I have no chance of getting on a ballot as a Democrat, either. This company (which I mistyped instead of "country", but will leave there) is controlled by corporations. Corporatism is the same as fascism: it sees citizens as a resource to exploit and expend, not as individuals with rights. In the case of fascism, we are cannon fodder; in the case of corporatism, we are consumers.
I never thought I would see the day that the Democrats were the party espousing fiscal responsibility. Things were at there best here when a fiscally responsible party controlled Congress and a socially conscious party had veto power.
That would be a good faith effort to eliminate any infringement, real or claimed. From a court's POV, it is quite different from an admission of guilt.
It's kind of like if some raving street person came up to you and started screaming that you've been stealing their thoughts. The best thing to do is to apologize and promise you will never do it again. Third parties will usually understand that you are doing this to make the street person go away, and not actually admitting to stealing their thoughts.
And would you like to hire such a 'lawyer' to represent you?
Do you mean lawyers like Patrick Henry and Daniel Webster, or lawyers like John Marshal, Stephen Douglas, Strom Thurman and Abraham Lincoln? Maybe you meant famous trial lawyers like Clarence Darrow, or former ABA president Robert Storey?
Nice slur there, the "Big Tony" thing. Nothing like an ad hominem attack to prove how strong and rational your position is.
Scalia and Cheney have a prior existing friendship, and have taken this same hunting trip together many times. Since Scalia is appointed for life, Cheney can in no way improve or harm Scalia's career, and their mutual participation in this activity does not demonstrate bribery.
Scalia can still recuse himself, although I suspect that if he does, your strong and rational position will change to "That wiseguy knew he couldn't rule against a friend, but since he didn't hide in a hole for the rest of the session, he had undue influence as a member of the very court that tried him."
In other words you are off topic and not very insightful at all. The ABA is a trade union for lawyers, and heavily influenced by trial lawyers in particular. It is in their best professional interest to "let the courts decide" in every case. If the legislature creates a mechanism of direct oversight of Microsoft's compliance, then they as an industry are out hundreds of millions in legal fees.
You don't need to express your personal dislike a specific judge and a specific politician to see this.
As has been pointed out numerous times here, cameras only reduce crime in areas monitored by cameras. This study has shown that the crime rate has remained the same. Obviously, the crime has moved to side streets and other "unmonitored" areas.
In other words, instead of being a place where there is a rather low but more uniform chance of a crime taking place, a given public space now has areas where the odds are much lower, and areas where the odds are much higher. This has been true for a long time: there have always been good neighborhoods and rough neighborhoods, always been unwholesome back alleys, but one can readily identify and rank the risk.
Unfortunately, it is much more difficult to tell the difference between a monitored and an unmonitored area---unless, of course, you are actively looking for cameras. This means that it is more difficult for individuals to determine the risk when moving through a given space. A criminal, however, can stake out a good location well in advance, simply by finding all the cameras.
One has to wonder what effect this would have on a population, transitioning from a society where there is a persistent, low-grade risk of crime, to one where there is an intermittent, high-grade risk.
Slashdot Mirror
They didn't vanish; the drive's knowledge of them vanished: the dd operation overwrote the drive's bad sector table.
They were, until the RSPCA outlawed giving them breast implants.
As soon as they can get them to dress slutty like Britney and tongue kiss each other. It's not like the music would be any worse...
Also, does anybody remember back in the mid-1970s in the US, when all cars were required to have a continuously sounding buzzer if the seatbelt was unfastened, and some cars had seat belt interlocks? More to the point, does anybody remember that the very first trip taken in one of those cars was to a mechanic to get the interlock disabled?
Third, who's going to compensate the families of those who get killed when a driver is too distracted by fiddling with their rolling re-test device to pay attention to the goddamned road?
BTW, how long until there's a video recorder to make sure the driver isn't molesting a child in the back seat?
Here in Fulton County (Georgia, U.S.), the jurors waiting room has brochures everywhere from some legal foundation or another, describing jury nullification. It would be nice if somebody read the damned things.
In that 1985 copy of $ echo, AT&T said they would "assure licensees that AT&T will claim no ownership in the software that they developed -- only the portion of the software developed by AT&T." In a recent Computerworld article, Frank Hayes calls that a clarification of the license's derivative-works clause:
Long story short, if SCO inherited from Novell the rights Novell inherited from AT&T, SCO has no claim over derivative works, only over the original AT&T code, and, of course, whatever they have written themselves.
Perl has a split function built right in, along with other features, for you to effectively obfuscate whatever you want.
Data is nouns; algorithms is verbs. This idea was actually a huge advance in programming language design.
Even if being gay is a choice, it's a choice that remains mine, not my employer's.
So if you'll forgive me, arguing with homophobes bores me after a while.
So unless the job actually requires me to perform homosexual acts, what is the purpose of asking me if I am a homosexual?
If my employment hinges on my sexual orientation, the only difference between race and sexuality is that you are still allowed to discriminate against me because of my sexual orientation.
Riding a motorcycle is 90% mental, and requires a lot of judgment, and a lot of physical inputs quite different than "turn wheel mash pedals". And trucks don't fall over nearly so often after the vehicle's performance envelope (or, more precisely, the vehicle operator's performance envelope) has been exceeded.
As for the stream fording, well, if it's deper than three feet, for the price of one hulking SUV, I will just buy two bikes and leave one on either side of the damned river. For Hummer H2 money, I can purchase several dual-sport bikes and modify them into continent crossing, canyon strafing, stream fording, weather ignoring, hill-climbing, dune-bugging, mud-raping, jungle exploring, forest fighting monsters.
But the Hummer will definitely get me more 'tang. Like you said, "there are conditions suited for the various vehicles."
And in 1961 they could turn you away for being black, and in 1971 they could turn you away for being a woman. What's your point? What used to be acceptable, like your example from 14 years ago, is not acceptable today. Discrimination based on sexual orientation is still permitted in many states; Cracker Barrel's policy is "we will not discriminate against anyone we are not allowed to discriminate against" which means that they won't fire gays where it's illegal to fire gays. That's why I won't eat at Cracker Barrel. However, the tide is turning, and many federal labor laws, which apply to any corporation with over X employees, has to walk a fine line. My Jewish, lesbian sister-in-law still managed to get a job at Chick-Fil-A, was actually given a scholarship by them, and their corporate culture is so Christian-dominated that they won't open their restaurants on Sundays!
They do not.
However, they do have a legitimate reason to inform the candidate of the situation, perhaps by saying something like, "One of our products is a finance package for churches. As such, many of our clients are conservative Christians. They have certain...expectations of us, as a company, and as employees of the company, to uphold a certain...standard of conduct. How comfortable would you feel, working closely with such a client?"
Sure you can. All you want. But NOT IN A JOB INTERVIEW! My having a spouse, or a funny accent, or a different god, is not a factor in my ability to perform a job. If, as an interviewer, you ask such a question, and it is answered, I can argue that you used the answer to discriminate against me during the hiring process. Likewise, if you hired me, everyone you didn't hire can argue that my answers to these questions denied them the job.
If you want to find out personal information about a candidate, a popular tactic is to end the interview, thank them for their time, then invite them out for lunch. You still have to be careful, though: perhaps the lunchgoers should be people who have no official say in the hiring process.
And besides, what the hell did you think their press releases would say? Nobody writes "MWAAAHAHAHHA" when "In order to enhance shareholder value" will get the job done.
The problem with a debt is that eventually you have to pay it off. The FY 2004 budget is ~$2.23T, with a deficit of $0.44T. About $0.35T is going to net interest; by 2008 we will be paying close to half a trillion dollars a year on Treasury debt securities alone (Excel source). That's half a trillion dollars a year we can't use to shelter the homeless, feed the starving, cure the diseased, protect the abused, clean the environment, educate the ignorant.
Which of those are meritous is beyond the scope of my argument.
The competitive advantage to an airport is that it can stimulate travel through and to Pittsburgh. One of the ugliest things about business travel is the waits. Time was, the best thing to do with a wait was get drunk at the airport bar. But with corporate forcing their minions to spend ever waking moment being productive, this is frowned upon.
It is getting harder and harder to work while disconnected. At the Pittsburgh airport, the minions will be connected. Nevermind most of them are non-tools and will be surfing CNN.com instead of working; but the tools and the non-tools are both happier.
So if a direct flight costs $750, but the flight with the three hour layover in Pittsburgh costs $500, and my minions will be connected during those three hours, they're damn sure getting the layover, and Pittsburgh collects about fifteen bucks in gate fees, ten bucks in Danishes and coffee, and if one in a hundred business through-travellers decides that maybe there's a point in actually doing business in Pittsburgh, I've done amazing things for the economy, just by providing WiFi at the airport. Even if all I've done is convinced a traveller to change planes in Pittsburgh rather than Philadelphia, that's fifteen bucks for Pittsburgh and fifteen less for Philly.
The same thing works for tourists, and anybody else. Being stuck at the airport sucks, particularly with the recorded anti-terrorism announcements disturbing me every five minutes. If I resent the airport, I'll resent the city, too.
P.S. whatever happened to buying a Robert Ludlum novel to throw away at the end of the trip?
Maybe something more modest, like a permanent moon base? Or more modest than that, wait a few years so we can fund this project with cash instead of Easy Credit Terms?
We just have to get there before the Taliban does. I'll go ahead and call this an open schedule.
So were the Clinton stats. My ghod, how +5 Insightful can you get, noticing that when the people trying to get reelected control the generation of the stats, the stats are always glowing. What's your point?
Do you work for the RNC?
Troll.
get your head out of the sand and help do something about the lies and misleadership.
Since I'm not a millionaire, I have no chance of getting on a ballot as a Democrat, either. This company (which I mistyped instead of "country", but will leave there) is controlled by corporations. Corporatism is the same as fascism: it sees citizens as a resource to exploit and expend, not as individuals with rights. In the case of fascism, we are cannon fodder; in the case of corporatism, we are consumers.
I never thought I would see the day that the Democrats were the party espousing fiscal responsibility. Things were at there best here when a fiscally responsible party controlled Congress and a socially conscious party had veto power.
It's kind of like if some raving street person came up to you and started screaming that you've been stealing their thoughts. The best thing to do is to apologize and promise you will never do it again. Third parties will usually understand that you are doing this to make the street person go away, and not actually admitting to stealing their thoughts.
C'mon. Help me out here.
Scalia and Cheney have a prior existing friendship, and have taken this same hunting trip together many times. Since Scalia is appointed for life, Cheney can in no way improve or harm Scalia's career, and their mutual participation in this activity does not demonstrate bribery.
Scalia can still recuse himself, although I suspect that if he does, your strong and rational position will change to "That wiseguy knew he couldn't rule against a friend, but since he didn't hide in a hole for the rest of the session, he had undue influence as a member of the very court that tried him."
In other words you are off topic and not very insightful at all. The ABA is a trade union for lawyers, and heavily influenced by trial lawyers in particular. It is in their best professional interest to "let the courts decide" in every case. If the legislature creates a mechanism of direct oversight of Microsoft's compliance, then they as an industry are out hundreds of millions in legal fees.
You don't need to express your personal dislike a specific judge and a specific politician to see this.
In other words, instead of being a place where there is a rather low but more uniform chance of a crime taking place, a given public space now has areas where the odds are much lower, and areas where the odds are much higher. This has been true for a long time: there have always been good neighborhoods and rough neighborhoods, always been unwholesome back alleys, but one can readily identify and rank the risk.
Unfortunately, it is much more difficult to tell the difference between a monitored and an unmonitored area---unless, of course, you are actively looking for cameras. This means that it is more difficult for individuals to determine the risk when moving through a given space. A criminal, however, can stake out a good location well in advance, simply by finding all the cameras.
One has to wonder what effect this would have on a population, transitioning from a society where there is a persistent, low-grade risk of crime, to one where there is an intermittent, high-grade risk.