It is common usage to refer to a benefit that is obtained at the involuntary loss of another party as "theft". That a dictionary doesn't offer such a definition, or that courts may not charge the offense in such terms, is of little consequence.
Theft is the primary connotation of intentional copyright infrigment, because infringement involuntarily deprives the copyright owner of the benefit of the copyright. You're smart and you knew that, but you're also a sophist who likes posting semantic quibbling to sooth the guilt of infringers in denial. "Yeah, I didn't steal, I *infringed*. It's like tresspassing. I didn't steal anything. It's no big deal."
Let's consider your bond with your partner your "copyright". How about if I, without your agreement, get your partner pregnant and you end up raising the resulting children. I haven't taken possesion of your partner. But I have deprived you of the benefit (of passing along your genes). I strongly doubt you would not use the word "theft" to describe what I had done to your reproductive opporunity in that relationship.
But thanks to your insightful posts I know I'm not a thief, and I know you'll be careful to refer to it not as theft but as copyright infringment.
"The UNIX(R) system environment is an extremely strong solution for any telecommunications application and SCO's market leadership on the Intel(R) platform provides Nuance's customers with the ultimate, secure solution package."
Actually Greedy Corp is interested in responding on a priority basis to customers. If Greedy Corp has a large customer base it will groom calls, sending the most lucrative customers to live rep queues and less profitable/unprofitable customers to automated queues of various lengths.
You wouldn't rent a horse to a customer that mercilessly whipped it when it was unresponsive. I'd argue that a system designed to harvest and drop such customers on live support agents right when the whipping mood starts probably isn't a good idea either.
Abusive customers that walk away are not missed by anyone.
Monitoring the trends in emotional rage/distress of customers while in queue could be a useful metric in assessing customer service effectiveness if it gave more information than average time in queue.
Customer feedback does affect how companies shape their phone service, but being economically competitive shapes it even more. Human operators are are at least 10X more expensive than automated. Businesses just observe what customers do and react accordingly. For most companies phone support is an expense. Charging more for your product/service than your competitor (to cover live support) would simply drive customers away. So it would catch me off guard too!
OTOH where support is the primary product, live support is a separately priced product category sold to customers. But that is a unique business category.
Yes, this technology shouldn't be used to torture service reps with customers at the peak of their rage. Instead, use it to send 'em to voicemail with a special message indicating that they'll get a priority call back. That'll give them some time to cool off, and give the rep a chance to calmly gauge the priority based on customer type.
...as a meeting. If you want entertaining cynical hummor about how to suffer meetinghood, read the "Meetings" chapter in The Dilbert Principle. This article is a crude imitator's windy first draft by comparison.
And yes, 90% of the time is wasted if you take a narrow "information transfer" point of view. It isn't. Steven Pinker said it best in The Language Instinct:
"
Human communication is not just a transfer of information like two fax machines connected with a wire, it is a series of alternating displays of behavior by sensitive, scheming, second-guessing, social animals."
(We might add superstitious, egocentric, paranoid, deluded, projecting, as the case may be.)
So do I, but your preference about the openness of information is totally irrelevant here. Both links are accessible without registration.
> to return urea to normal levels additional fluid is needed
Wrong! The level of urea is restored by elimination (urea is organic waste). Elimination reduces the level of water.
The mere presence of a diuretic substance in a fluid does not remove all of its effect on restoring fluid balance. There is perhaps some concentration of diuretic substance in otherwise pure water that would yield a drink whose consumption would be a losing battle in restoring this equilibrium, but coffee is definitely not one of them. Otherwise a lot of people I know would be dead right now.
> From "ndmnutrition.com" link "Valtin thinks the notion may have started... er... so he doesn't have any justification other than quoting one line of a report which didn't advocate what he suggested it did.
So you quote 1/2 line! That's a laugh. Let's see what he really said:
"Valtin thinks the notion may have started when the Food and Nutrition Board of the National Research Council recommended approximately "1 milliliter of water for each calorie of food," which would amount to roughly two to two-and-a-half quarts per day (64 to 80 ounces).
Although in its next sentence, the Board stated "most of this quantity is contained in prepared foods," that last sentence may have been missed, so that the recommendation was erroneously interpreted as how much water one should drink each day. " (my emphasis)
Valtin wasn't out to prove this. He offered it as a possible source for the idea of 8x8 because there appeared to be no other plausible source in the scientific literature. And he's not critiquing what the board advocated or intended to advocate but how it would be misinterpreted by people like you and me.
> do you know ehat diseases youe are susceptable to?... Better safe than sorry
If it makes you feel healthy go on and drink 'til your groin hurts. Whatever. Just don't do it because it's proven to be healthy like the earth is proven to go around the sun.
> Those that are seriously dehydrated lose their thirst.
Now what was it they thinking about just before they lost their thirst?
> this is the belief of one lone doctor, vs the entire medical world
Eh? Of which planet? Certainly not this one. Against the world of popular opinion, sure.
Wrong. RTFA. Consumer gets to make final "accept/reject" on purchase after card is scanned. Also, card includes challenge/response authentication (AMEX at least, MC we aren't told). As the article clearly states, knowing the RFID card number does not give a thief any practical means to use it.
I think the only real impediment is a lack of motivation. Having a sober expectation that your contribution will be of significance -- that it will be used and appreciated by many others -- is all it takes. Unfortunately that's a lot harder to come by than a computer.
They amuse me too, and they definitely don't amuse the HR folks. As I said, intentionally lying won't get you anywhere (unless the company is stupid about interviewing you, in which case you're SOL after being hired anyway). You can't just make stuff up -- you have to start with something!
But every "something" has an angle from which it is viewed, giving the viewer a different interpretation of its significance. The terms you use to describe it and the context in which you place it transforms any so-called "objective" fact into something that either sells you or shoots you down. So you've got to supply such terms and context as work in your favor, because the interviewer will do the same, only not necessarily in your favor -- and you don't get a second chance. Show the interviewer the part of your reality that makes you the best candidate. You have no obligation to do otherwise.
As for getting experience, most of us do that by working in the right place at the right time, so it can be a chicken-and-egg problem when a job change depends on it. The easiest way to get experience is by migrating within your own organization, assuming it's big and diverse enough. Or take a similar job elsewhere that is. But if you're just starting out, experience is not the determining factor in hiring you, unless you happen to have had some particularly good internships. Appearing bright, proud of your existing accompishments but eager to learn more, having a balanced personality, and expressing a genuine desire for the job will get you in the door.
Ever written an effective resume? Welcome to the club!
Not that outright lying is what we're talking about here, just shading the truth to your advantage by disclosing information that tunes in a desired perception in the reader. Call it "good marketing" if you're trying to make a living or "disingenuous sophistry" if you still harbor romantic notions about the human race.
But in SCO's case the shading it so at odds with reality we'll just call it lying.
It's safe to say that all of the responders who chafe at hitting back or recommend turning the other cheek haven't experienced the daily adrenaline-soaked panic of multiple other kids physically threatening them. We're not talking about a few "incidents" here that are easily forgotten, we're talking about a posse of bullies making you feel in their gunsights at any moment, for their own entertainment. Compulsory school attendance becomes like chemotherapy: something that is supposed to make you better off eventually but at the moment is killing your insides.
People who haven't been there can't begin to have an informed opinion about what the victims *should* be doing. Being this emotionally whacked on a daily basis for an extended period leaves an indelible mark, making you unlike the rest of the people around you. Can you say paranoia and withdrawal? And it isn't something that goes away just because you "grow up" or have years of therapy. You can get a handle on it but it's wired into you for life.
Those "responsible adults" were sooo good at creating an environment where children have opportunities to learn how to solve problems on their own. I learned very quickly not to expect those adults to be of any assistance until after I was trashed. Try to tell them about your bullying problems and you'll find it denied or delegated back into your face. Then once the blood starts running you're presumed as guilty as the other party. Sure kids' sense of justice is too black and white (throw a desk), but the injustice of official ignorance to the bullying is where it starts.
When violence comes your way unasked for, you're left with two choices. You can feel good about having stood up for yourself, or you can feel like shit for being made to feel like shit and not doing anything about it. While I can't be certain I'd be a happier person today if I'd made Poag's choice more often, I do know what not making that choice often enough did to me, and I definitely don't recommend it. Fight back when you have to, learn how to if you can't.
UTAH - SCO (SCOX) announced today it is revoking its GNU license. "We gave the FSF guys plenty of time to respond to our claims and work with us," CEO Darl McBride told reporters, "but they've left us no choice." A few moments later a visibly angered McBride approached reporters again and disputed the "arbitrary" pulling of SCO's license. "We believe we have a fully paid-up, irrevocable license!"
For as DeBeers well knows, the converse is, "Any marketing process that creates scarcity steals benefits from any persons who are ignorant of abundance."
Slashdot Mirror
It is common usage to refer to a benefit that is obtained at the involuntary loss of another party as "theft". That a dictionary doesn't offer such a definition, or that courts may not charge the offense in such terms, is of little consequence.
Theft is the primary connotation of intentional copyright infrigment, because infringement involuntarily deprives the copyright owner of the benefit of the copyright. You're smart and you knew that, but you're also a sophist who likes posting semantic quibbling to sooth the guilt of infringers in denial. "Yeah, I didn't steal, I *infringed*. It's like tresspassing. I didn't steal anything. It's no big deal."
Let's consider your bond with your partner your "copyright". How about if I, without your agreement, get your partner pregnant and you end up raising the resulting children. I haven't taken possesion of your partner. But I have deprived you of the benefit (of passing along your genes). I strongly doubt you would not use the word "theft" to describe what I had done to your reproductive opporunity in that relationship.
But thanks to your insightful posts I know I'm not a thief, and I know you'll be careful to refer to it not as theft but as copyright infringment.
This made me laugh out loud...
The referenced article is 5 years old. To the best of my knowledge, Nuance does not currently support SCO UNIX in any of its products.
Actually Greedy Corp is interested in responding on a priority basis to customers. If Greedy Corp has a large customer base it will groom calls, sending the most lucrative customers to live rep queues and less profitable/unprofitable customers to automated queues of various lengths.
You wouldn't rent a horse to a customer that mercilessly whipped it when it was unresponsive. I'd argue that a system designed to harvest and drop such customers on live support agents right when the whipping mood starts probably isn't a good idea either.
Abusive customers that walk away are not missed by anyone.
Monitoring the trends in emotional rage/distress of customers while in queue could be a useful metric in assessing customer service effectiveness if it gave more information than average time in queue.
Customer feedback does affect how companies shape their phone service, but being economically competitive shapes it even more. Human operators are are at least 10X more expensive than automated. Businesses just observe what customers do and react accordingly. For most companies phone support is an expense. Charging more for your product/service than your competitor (to cover live support) would simply drive customers away. So it would catch me off guard too!
OTOH where support is the primary product, live support is a separately priced product category sold to customers. But that is a unique business category.
Yes, this technology shouldn't be used to torture service reps with customers at the peak of their rage. Instead, use it to send 'em to voicemail with a special message indicating that they'll get a priority call back. That'll give them some time to cool off, and give the rep a chance to calmly gauge the priority based on customer type.
...as a meeting. If you want entertaining cynical hummor about how to suffer meetinghood, read the "Meetings" chapter in The Dilbert Principle. This article is a crude imitator's windy first draft by comparison.
And yes, 90% of the time is wasted if you take a narrow "information transfer" point of view. It isn't. Steven Pinker said it best in The Language Instinct:
(We might add superstitious, egocentric, paranoid, deluded, projecting, as the case may be.)
For a moment I thought he had named the release in Darl's honor. But that would be "feisty dimwit"...
Their "Born Not to Run II" sample tracks are still .rams's.
Yes, thank goodness that will stop this silly patent from being issued.
Wait...
How about...
A patent on a method to develop litigation-based revenue streams utilizing go-for-broke PR FUD.
If they had referred to it as Stallm^H^H^H^HGnu/Linux, a Karl Marx comparison might have been unavoidable.
> both reference the same article
But dupes are a Slashdot tradition!
> I prefer info to be openSo do I, but your preference about the openness of information is totally irrelevant here. Both links are accessible without registration.
> to return urea to normal levels additional fluid is needed
Wrong! The level of urea is restored by elimination (urea is organic waste). Elimination reduces the level of water.
The mere presence of a diuretic substance in a fluid does not remove all of its effect on restoring fluid balance. There is perhaps some concentration of diuretic substance in otherwise pure water that would yield a drink whose consumption would be a losing battle in restoring this equilibrium, but coffee is definitely not one of them. Otherwise a lot of people I know would be dead right now.
> From "ndmnutrition.com" link "Valtin thinks the notion may have started... er... so he doesn't have any justification other than quoting one line of a report which didn't advocate what he suggested it did.
So you quote 1/2 line! That's a laugh. Let's see what he really said:
Valtin wasn't out to prove this. He offered it as a possible source for the idea of 8x8 because there appeared to be no other plausible source in the scientific literature. And he's not critiquing what the board advocated or intended to advocate but how it would be misinterpreted by people like you and me.
> do you know ehat diseases youe are susceptable to?... Better safe than sorry
If it makes you feel healthy go on and drink 'til your groin hurts. Whatever. Just don't do it because it's proven to be healthy like the earth is proven to go around the sun.
> Those that are seriously dehydrated lose their thirst.
Now what was it they thinking about just before they lost their thirst?
> this is the belief of one lone doctor, vs the entire medical world
Eh? Of which planet? Certainly not this one. Against the world of popular opinion, sure.
GO NOVELL! GO IBM! :-) It may seem strange, but I really am feeling some sort of loyalty to these two companies.
It's called Afghan Loyalty.
The northbound side is already gone. Take a look.
Yeah, electronic bill payment service really sucks.
Wait...
Wrong. RTFA. Consumer gets to make final "accept/reject" on purchase after card is scanned. Also, card includes challenge/response authentication (AMEX at least, MC we aren't told). As the article clearly states, knowing the RFID card number does not give a thief any practical means to use it.
Excellent point. Someone mod that up.
I think the only real impediment is a lack of motivation. Having a sober expectation that your contribution will be of significance -- that it will be used and appreciated by many others -- is all it takes. Unfortunately that's a lot harder to come by than a computer.
[1] Object or binary code is the code computers use and appears as a series of is and Os.
Seems they can't even find a one. Or a zero.
They amuse me too, and they definitely don't amuse the HR folks. As I said, intentionally lying won't get you anywhere (unless the company is stupid about interviewing you, in which case you're SOL after being hired anyway). You can't just make stuff up -- you have to start with something!
But every "something" has an angle from which it is viewed, giving the viewer a different interpretation of its significance. The terms you use to describe it and the context in which you place it transforms any so-called "objective" fact into something that either sells you or shoots you down. So you've got to supply such terms and context as work in your favor, because the interviewer will do the same, only not necessarily in your favor -- and you don't get a second chance. Show the interviewer the part of your reality that makes you the best candidate. You have no obligation to do otherwise.
As for getting experience, most of us do that by working in the right place at the right time, so it can be a chicken-and-egg problem when a job change depends on it. The easiest way to get experience is by migrating within your own organization, assuming it's big and diverse enough. Or take a similar job elsewhere that is. But if you're just starting out, experience is not the determining factor in hiring you, unless you happen to have had some particularly good internships. Appearing bright, proud of your existing accompishments but eager to learn more, having a balanced personality, and expressing a genuine desire for the job will get you in the door.
Ever written an effective resume? Welcome to the club!
Not that outright lying is what we're talking about here, just shading the truth to your advantage by disclosing information that tunes in a desired perception in the reader. Call it "good marketing" if you're trying to make a living or "disingenuous sophistry" if you still harbor romantic notions about the human race.
But in SCO's case the shading it so at odds with reality we'll just call it lying.
...Warjacking?
It's safe to say that all of the responders who chafe at hitting back or recommend turning the other cheek haven't experienced the daily adrenaline-soaked panic of multiple other kids physically threatening them. We're not talking about a few "incidents" here that are easily forgotten, we're talking about a posse of bullies making you feel in their gunsights at any moment, for their own entertainment. Compulsory school attendance becomes like chemotherapy: something that is supposed to make you better off eventually but at the moment is killing your insides.
People who haven't been there can't begin to have an informed opinion about what the victims *should* be doing. Being this emotionally whacked on a daily basis for an extended period leaves an indelible mark, making you unlike the rest of the people around you. Can you say paranoia and withdrawal? And it isn't something that goes away just because you "grow up" or have years of therapy. You can get a handle on it but it's wired into you for life.
Those "responsible adults" were sooo good at creating an environment where children have opportunities to learn how to solve problems on their own. I learned very quickly not to expect those adults to be of any assistance until after I was trashed. Try to tell them about your bullying problems and you'll find it denied or delegated back into your face. Then once the blood starts running you're presumed as guilty as the other party. Sure kids' sense of justice is too black and white (throw a desk), but the injustice of official ignorance to the bullying is where it starts.
When violence comes your way unasked for, you're left with two choices. You can feel good about having stood up for yourself, or you can feel like shit for being made to feel like shit and not doing anything about it. While I can't be certain I'd be a happier person today if I'd made Poag's choice more often, I do know what not making that choice often enough did to me, and I definitely don't recommend it. Fight back when you have to, learn how to if you can't.
...besides first posts.
UTAH - SCO (SCOX) announced today it is revoking its GNU license. "We gave the FSF guys plenty of time to respond to our claims and work with us," CEO Darl McBride told reporters, "but they've left us no choice." A few moments later a visibly angered McBride approached reporters again and disputed the "arbitrary" pulling of SCO's license. "We believe we have a fully paid-up, irrevocable license!"
Yeah, like these guys.
For as DeBeers well knows, the converse is, "Any marketing process that creates scarcity steals benefits from any persons who are ignorant of abundance."