The amendment was alive for less than 24 hours, but many news sites seems to have shat their pants over it still
Yes, I believe the phrase uttered was "Holy Crap! Can you imagine the number of ad impressions we will get if we print this even though it is outdated?"
So if I think the company may be leaking my personal information or doing something improper do I get the password to the HR and Financial systems, so I (or my lawyer) can investigate my claim?
I don't have to THINK that. I KNOW for a fact that my company has, without my consent, given my personal information to the state. Some of it, the state requires them to do, and some of it they were under no obligation to do, but in the course of a background check through the state agency, the company has to agree that the state gets to keep certain information about me, like fingerprints and whatnot. That's right, I don't have to agree to let the state have that information, the COMPANY agrees to it.
The difference is most of these legislators are ancient and neither want, nor care, about this newfangled "internet" thing. They still use flip phones and eschew anything with more than about 15 buttons on it. As a result, they go along with whatever their sponsors tell them about it. "It's totally not like that!" "Er, okay... *stamp*". We won't be able to fix these kinds of brain-damaged decisions until these dinosaurs are dead.
Unfortunately, by then we'll have an entire generation that's grown used to their chains and shackles, and may not be capable of embracing digital freedom again, nor bridging this artificially-created rift between the digital world, and the real one. We could be looking at the start of a new era in human evolution, but just like the last major leap forward (The Renaissance), it may be preceeded by a long Dark Age because a small group of people didn't want to release their stranglehold on power when their time was up, or were simply too set in their ways to adapt and forced a catacalysmic social event because of it.
You make it sound like this is just a fortunate (to the politicians) eventuality and not a carefully calculated plan.
Instead of telling your employer to pound sand, you only have to tell them that Facebook's terms of service clearly prohibits you from sharing your password.
Agreed, anyone who would violate the ToS and hand over their password is not an employee you want to keep. The one that tells you to go pound sand, now there is someone you know you can trust.
Does the law force one to comply? I think a simple "pound sand" would suffice.
I don't see how the law could force you to comply. You have signed a binding contract with Facebook to not reveal your password to anyone else, and to do so would therefore be breach of contract, ie. illegal. The law is not allowed to force you to do something which is illegal.
That is correct. Because you weigh 50 pounds more than the woman, on an average 737, that extra 50 pounds represents a 5/100ths of a percent increase in total weight, and so therefore, you should pay an extra 15 cents on a typical $300 ticket.
Okay, so that is tongue in cheek, but according to wikipedia, an extra 700 pounds represents a 1/2 percent increase in fuel burn. So let's assume a 70 pounds overweight person to make it easy. That is 1/20th of a percent increase in fuel burn. A typical two hour flight will burn 10,000 pounds of fuel. A 1/20th of a percent increase is about 5 pounds. Let's round up to one gallon. In bulk Jet fuel prices, you are looking at $4 a gallon, so an extremely conservative estimate of what it costs the airlines to fly a 70 pound overweight person is about $4.
Pants at big and tall stores cost more too. You cost more to move than her, so you pay more.
When you pay more at the big and tall store for pants, you get pants that are portioned for your size. When you pay more for an airline seat, you get seating portioned for a junior high student. That's what is not fare.
My brother repaid a loan that I made him. I will either deposit this money or put it in my safe. If I put it in my safe am I suddenly some sort of drug lord?
Don't put it in a safe. Are you trying to make the poor safe manufacturer go to jail?
... are you claiming to get $120/month in bitcoins from a single GPU?
Yes, I have a Radeon 6990. I bought it because I was building a system for Flight Simulator. By happy accident it turned out to be a great miner just when mining was starting out. I've paid for the whole system 2 times over and I wasn't even mining during most of that time. How I regret now not mining when the price dropped to 2. If I had kept mining, I would have made probably $25,000 right now.
If this happens to you, then aim your plane toward where you first saw the light. You won't save your own life, but with luck, you can save future lives.
You are correct to question that they would just simply run the business on fewer employees. Minimum wage jobs are mostly in the service business. In the service business, unlike in IT for example, you can't simple fire 1/3 of your staff and make the other 2/3 work twice as hard. In an hourly job, most people are able to do X amount of work. If you fire some of the people, then the remaining people can't magically do X * 1.5 the amount of work. The amount of output remains more or less the same. If this amount of output is not enough to meet the output necessary to make the business profitable, then the business will simply shut down. So it won't just be minimum wage earners affected by an increase in minimum wage. Whole businesses would simply stop doing business because it is no longer profitable to supply the service they supply. Until a new technology or cheaper supplies appears or the customer base agrees to pay more, the service will simply cease to exist.
At least he does not accept the full price in Bitcoin. There seems to be some hope for him left.
Well there's some hope left for the sale of the house. I highly doubt you can buy and sell land and using some random exchange technology not being legal tender. How would the govt. calculate the stamp duty for a start?
I guess it depends where you live. Around here, when you sell a house, your legal document says something like "in exchange for one dollar and other considerations." Don't worry, the taxman still somehow figures out the real purchase price. I'm sure the same thing happens if you did it with bitcoin. They'd just translate it to dollars or CDN in this case.
Speaking of cahoots with Silk Road. I recently completed a job application for a large local utility and they apparently have outsourced their application information gathering to Silk Road. Somebody sent me a direct link to the job posting on silk road, and I did not click it. Instead, I went to the corporate web site and followed the job listings down to the application, which sent me to the same address on silk road.
At 6 kilometers per hour, it will only take 5 hours to get to work instead of the 20 minutes it takes right now. Also, if I get bored, I can get off and walk. Of course, I would need to stop once in awhile and wait for it to to catch up.
Yeah, if we're going to talk about vacations, we could go into how he has had more in the last 4 years than I have had in my entire life. A true man of the people.
Thats like saying every woman I took to dinner and slept with later is a prostitute. Sure, I didn't pay her DIRECTLY, but there was money involved going directly towards something for her.
Yup, it's all a line drawing game.
But no, taking a woman to dinner is not prostitution, it's gambling.
As I have mentioned many times in the past, I also want a diesel. A nice sporty 4 door coupe with manual transmission. There are a few, like the VW Jetta and maybe the Passat, but I'm more interested in the BMW and Audi diesels that are widely available in Europe. (Yes, yes, Audi and VW use the same engine. That's not my only criteria).
The reason automatics rule in the US is because no one has time to use a manual. We are all busy texting, talking on the phone, eating, watching movies and sleeping. Sometimes, a few of those things at the same time... We only have two hands a knee to drive with!
Okay, you get funny points, but in case anyone takes you seriously, automatic transmissions pretty much became the norm in the U.S. in the 1950s and from your list only eating and sleeping were available in the car.
. I am quite sure that they need to pay far more than $2.10 for a typical waiter. Probably more like $8-$10 an hour
You are quite wrong. Ive waited several places and have family who has done the same. None of them provide above minimum wage for tipped staff, which was (~2003-2005) 2.10 / hr, 5.00 / hr for overtime.
In the event that your tips did not meet normal minimum wage, you would be compensated to hit minimum. However, what youre suggesting does not exist as a standard practice in the US AFAIK; certainly the national chains I worked at do not seem to be unusual in how they pay their staff.
No, I am not wrong. They do need to pay $8-$10 for a waiter. It just so happens that they don't. That is the crux of my point.
Slashdot Mirror
The amendment was alive for less than 24 hours, but many news sites seems to have shat their pants over it still
Yes, I believe the phrase uttered was "Holy Crap! Can you imagine the number of ad impressions we will get if we print this even though it is outdated?"
So if I think the company may be leaking my personal information or doing something improper do I get the password to the HR and Financial systems, so I (or my lawyer) can investigate my claim?
I don't have to THINK that. I KNOW for a fact that my company has, without my consent, given my personal information to the state. Some of it, the state requires them to do, and some of it they were under no obligation to do, but in the course of a background check through the state agency, the company has to agree that the state gets to keep certain information about me, like fingerprints and whatnot. That's right, I don't have to agree to let the state have that information, the COMPANY agrees to it.
The difference is most of these legislators are ancient and neither want, nor care, about this newfangled "internet" thing. They still use flip phones and eschew anything with more than about 15 buttons on it. As a result, they go along with whatever their sponsors tell them about it. "It's totally not like that!" "Er, okay... *stamp*". We won't be able to fix these kinds of brain-damaged decisions until these dinosaurs are dead.
Unfortunately, by then we'll have an entire generation that's grown used to their chains and shackles, and may not be capable of embracing digital freedom again, nor bridging this artificially-created rift between the digital world, and the real one. We could be looking at the start of a new era in human evolution, but just like the last major leap forward (The Renaissance), it may be preceeded by a long Dark Age because a small group of people didn't want to release their stranglehold on power when their time was up, or were simply too set in their ways to adapt and forced a catacalysmic social event because of it.
You make it sound like this is just a fortunate (to the politicians) eventuality and not a carefully calculated plan.
Instead of telling your employer to pound sand, you only have to tell them that Facebook's terms of service clearly prohibits you from sharing your password.
Agreed, anyone who would violate the ToS and hand over their password is not an employee you want to keep. The one that tells you to go pound sand, now there is someone you know you can trust.
Does the law force one to comply? I think a simple "pound sand" would suffice.
I don't see how the law could force you to comply. You have signed a binding contract with Facebook to not reveal your password to anyone else, and to do so would therefore be breach of contract, ie. illegal. The law is not allowed to force you to do something which is illegal.
But it IS discriminatory when you pay someone less who is not able to due as efficient of a job due to genetics. Double standard.
It's easy: Because it costs more to ship you.
That is correct. Because you weigh 50 pounds more than the woman, on an average 737, that extra 50 pounds represents a 5/100ths of a percent increase in total weight, and so therefore, you should pay an extra 15 cents on a typical $300 ticket.
Okay, so that is tongue in cheek, but according to wikipedia, an extra 700 pounds represents a 1/2 percent increase in fuel burn. So let's assume a 70 pounds overweight person to make it easy. That is 1/20th of a percent increase in fuel burn. A typical two hour flight will burn 10,000 pounds of fuel. A 1/20th of a percent increase is about 5 pounds. Let's round up to one gallon. In bulk Jet fuel prices, you are looking at $4 a gallon, so an extremely conservative estimate of what it costs the airlines to fly a 70 pound overweight person is about $4.
Why is that her fault?
Pants at big and tall stores cost more too. You cost more to move than her, so you pay more.
When you pay more at the big and tall store for pants, you get pants that are portioned for your size. When you pay more for an airline seat, you get seating portioned for a junior high student. That's what is not fare.
My brother repaid a loan that I made him. I will either deposit this money or put it in my safe. If I put it in my safe am I suddenly some sort of drug lord?
Don't put it in a safe. Are you trying to make the poor safe manufacturer go to jail?
It's from Northwest Airlines flight 7325, more specifically, it's from your anus.
... are you claiming to get $120/month in bitcoins from a single GPU?
Yes, I have a Radeon 6990. I bought it because I was building a system for Flight Simulator. By happy accident it turned out to be a great miner just when mining was starting out. I've paid for the whole system 2 times over and I wasn't even mining during most of that time. How I regret now not mining when the price dropped to 2. If I had kept mining, I would have made probably $25,000 right now.
For all we know, seti@home is wasting energy too. But of course, you can't prove a negative.
My GPU is still cost effective. It makes me about $120 a month and doesn't cost anywhere near that to run.
If this happens to you, then aim your plane toward where you first saw the light. You won't save your own life, but with luck, you can save future lives.
You are correct to question that they would just simply run the business on fewer employees. Minimum wage jobs are mostly in the service business. In the service business, unlike in IT for example, you can't simple fire 1/3 of your staff and make the other 2/3 work twice as hard. In an hourly job, most people are able to do X amount of work. If you fire some of the people, then the remaining people can't magically do X * 1.5 the amount of work. The amount of output remains more or less the same. If this amount of output is not enough to meet the output necessary to make the business profitable, then the business will simply shut down. So it won't just be minimum wage earners affected by an increase in minimum wage. Whole businesses would simply stop doing business because it is no longer profitable to supply the service they supply. Until a new technology or cheaper supplies appears or the customer base agrees to pay more, the service will simply cease to exist.
At least he does not accept the full price in Bitcoin. There seems to be some hope for him left.
Well there's some hope left for the sale of the house. I highly doubt you can buy and sell land and using some random exchange technology not being legal tender. How would the govt. calculate the stamp duty for a start?
I guess it depends where you live. Around here, when you sell a house, your legal document says something like "in exchange for one dollar and other considerations." Don't worry, the taxman still somehow figures out the real purchase price. I'm sure the same thing happens if you did it with bitcoin. They'd just translate it to dollars or CDN in this case.
Speaking of cahoots with Silk Road. I recently completed a job application for a large local utility and they apparently have outsourced their application information gathering to Silk Road. Somebody sent me a direct link to the job posting on silk road, and I did not click it. Instead, I went to the corporate web site and followed the job listings down to the application, which sent me to the same address on silk road.
At 6 kilometers per hour, it will only take 5 hours to get to work instead of the 20 minutes it takes right now. Also, if I get bored, I can get off and walk. Of course, I would need to stop once in awhile and wait for it to to catch up.
Yeah, if we're going to talk about vacations, we could go into how he has had more in the last 4 years than I have had in my entire life. A true man of the people.
Thats like saying every woman I took to dinner and slept with later is a prostitute. Sure, I didn't pay her DIRECTLY, but there was money involved going directly towards something for her.
Yup, it's all a line drawing game.
But no, taking a woman to dinner is not prostitution, it's gambling.
Do you really want POTUS stranded on a highway?
Yes, please.
using a diesel is more environmentally sensitive
Like he cares about the environment. He flies himself and his family around in a 747, burning about one gallon per second of fuel.
As I have mentioned many times in the past, I also want a diesel. A nice sporty 4 door coupe with manual transmission. There are a few, like the VW Jetta and maybe the Passat, but I'm more interested in the BMW and Audi diesels that are widely available in Europe. (Yes, yes, Audi and VW use the same engine. That's not my only criteria).
The reason automatics rule in the US is because no one has time to use a manual. We are all busy texting, talking on the phone, eating, watching movies and sleeping. Sometimes, a few of those things at the same time... We only have two hands a knee to drive with!
Okay, you get funny points, but in case anyone takes you seriously, automatic transmissions pretty much became the norm in the U.S. in the 1950s and from your list only eating and sleeping were available in the car.
. I am quite sure that they need to pay far more than $2.10 for a typical waiter. Probably more like $8-$10 an hour
You are quite wrong. Ive waited several places and have family who has done the same. None of them provide above minimum wage for tipped staff, which was (~2003-2005) 2.10 / hr, 5.00 / hr for overtime.
In the event that your tips did not meet normal minimum wage, you would be compensated to hit minimum. However, what youre suggesting does not exist as a standard practice in the US AFAIK; certainly the national chains I worked at do not seem to be unusual in how they pay their staff.
No, I am not wrong. They do need to pay $8-$10 for a waiter. It just so happens that they don't. That is the crux of my point.