Could she have a little son called Timmy who needs very expensive medical treatment, and her only hope to be able to afford it is to succeed as a rock star? Tell me she could. I always fall for those things.
I don't think he's saying that rights don't exist. He's saying that they come from the end of a gun.
Rights don't come from the end of a gun. What can come from the end of a gun is protection of those rights. It's like saying justice comes from judges. Not really; both rights and justice are more abstract concepts than that.
He was implying that it means something if you can defend your claim, and if you can't defend your claim, anything you do to stake your claim means nothing.
Well, when I say that my house is mine, I don't mean I can personally defend it from a band of thugs. I rely on the government to defend my property. The guys at OrbDev presumably hope for the same. It's just they're a bit misguided about the probability of the government agreeing with them:-D.
but to believe that rights have any fundamental substance is simply a delusion.
I don't think anybody has claimed to have found atoms of Rightium or a rights vector field, so yes, you can say rights don't have a physical existence, just like the rest of human culture.
But that's a pretty limited definition of existence. With it, music doesn't exist either, only a certain pattern of vibration in nitrogen and oxygen molecules. There aren't jobs, only people who seem to do the same things day after day. You don't have a name. You don't speak a language. You don't have a nationality.
Even better, your own definition of existence doesn't exist according to itself. I wouldn't say it's a very good definition.
You'll never, ever see this position advertised. Not because it's not a good idea, but because every boss thinks that he's The Smart Guy. He wouldn't be "boss" otherwise. Right?
Of course that position won't ever be implemented in any company, but I disagree about the reason.
In my experience, people who've been at a company for a longish time (like most bosses) are mainly interested in keeping the power they have and grabbing a bit more when they see the chance. Doing a good work is just worthy of attention as another instrument to that goal.
A Smart Guy who invades every boss's area of decision is just going to mess too much with internal politics. Even if the bosses could agree with the reasoning behind hiring a Smart Guy, they aren't going to tolerate an uncontrollable influence like that in the decision space they've earned so hardly.
So even if someone in upper management with enough power went ahead and hired a Smart Guy, management unrest would shortly grow so high that the Smart Guy would be quickly disposed of.
I think the study is only recognizing that being locked into a irreplaceable propietary platform is a problem. It's not saying that it's the only or even the worst possible problem.
Common sense as this may seem, it needs to be said anyway. How many companies realized before adopting.DOC as a de-facto standard that this effectively prevented them from switching to non-Microsoft solutions, should the need arise?
People are more likely to buy a product if they think it's specifically designed for them. Those four categories serve that purpose.
Please observe how the description of the third category has been made as broad as it can be. Basically the author is saying that the book is not targeted at you if you are the worst programmer in the world, not a programmer, or Donald Knuth. Such an asymmetric categorization can only be for marketing purposes.
That's all very well and good, but I was only saying that the agreement argument goes nowhere. If the agreement says you won't do anything illegal, and you're preventively stopped from an activity merely because it could result in something illegal, you're not being held to that agreement. At most you're being held to a different agreement about not doing anything that looks illegal.
Now I KNOW that not all P2P users are copying music - but MOST are.
Further, you probably sign a usage agreemnt when you connect up to the school's network saying that you won't due anything illegal. All the university is doing is holding you to that agreement.
Don't you see a little contradiction between those two statements? If using P2P isn't illegal per se, preventing you from using P2P is not simply holding you to that agreement.
The division of work between engineers and managers is supposed to bring efficiency through specialization. Engineers are supposed to concentrate on technology while managers are the socially-oriented people who are more proficient at "people skills" such as communication.
A manager shouldn't need to understand the technology and an engineer shouldn't need to be a good communicator. But it appears, as has been pointed out, that managers only communicate well among themselves, so engineers are expected to learn to communicate with them.
What I want to know is, what's the use of managers then?
I'm a big advocate for as few (i.e. none) false positives as possible. I consider them way more dangerous than a false negative...
You put it like there's some doubt or debate as to whether that is true. There shouldn't. A false negative (provided that it manages to go through content-based bayesian filters and the like) only means the person who receives the mail wastes a few seconds identifying it as a spam and deleting it. The consequences of a false negative can range from some confusion (that will still take much more time to clear up) to, for example, loss of job opportunities. And the victim will be a person who hasn't usually made the decision of using a blacklist and probably isn't even aware of the possibility of losing legitimate mail.
What ATI card and drivers are you using? I have a Radeon 9700 and I get massive unstability with the latest (3.2.5) ATI drivers, even though
I can't get 3d accel with them. Older drivers (2.9.x) were unstable too, though less so.
On the other hand, I also own an older NVIDIA GeForce2 card and I haven't experienced any unstability at all in Linux since a long time.
NVIDIA's driver packaging is also better. ATI only provides RPMs that I have to extract with rpm2cpio (I use Debian), and NVIDIA has a proper Makefile for their kernel modules.
In my experience, NVIDIA wins the Linux driver competition by far.
why should i allow abusive traffic into my network? Its my network, my server, my rules.
What an immature attitude. It's not your network; as long as you have users it's their network too. They're using it because they're confident that you will administer it in a responsible way.
To all the admins who say "it's my network": do you think you have the right to read your users' private mails for fun? Do you think you have the right the to delete mails from users whose names you don't like? Would the "it's my network" explanation work for those kind of actions? I'm curious.
Slashdot Mirror
And don't forget to complain about that 70 by 10 "square" ;)
Except when immediately followed by "and balanced".
Gives a whole new meaning to "There's More Than One Way To Do It".
Have you considered Peru might not be for sale?
It's also at the beginning of "Monthy Python and The Holy Grail", which is where Weird Al took it from, I suppose.
Something indeed: misuse of controlled substances.
What about the choice of *not buying it*?
Could she have a little son called Timmy who needs very expensive medical treatment, and her only hope to be able to afford it is to succeed as a rock star? Tell me she could. I always fall for those things.
Unless you're exchanging spit, bodily fluids, or blood, you're safe.
How are spit and blood not "bodily fluids"?
Sarcasm, meet AC. AC, Sarcasm.
I don't think he's saying that rights don't exist. He's saying that they come from the end of a gun.
Rights don't come from the end of a gun. What can come from the end of a gun is protection of those rights. It's like saying justice comes from judges. Not really; both rights and justice are more abstract concepts than that.
He was implying that it means something if you can defend your claim, and if you can't defend your claim, anything you do to stake your claim means nothing.
Well, when I say that my house is mine, I don't mean I can personally defend it from a band of thugs. I rely on the government to defend my property. The guys at OrbDev presumably hope for the same. It's just they're a bit misguided about the probability of the government agreeing with them :-D.
but to believe that rights have any fundamental substance is simply a delusion.
I don't think anybody has claimed to have found atoms of Rightium or a rights vector field, so yes, you can say rights don't have a physical existence, just like the rest of human culture.
But that's a pretty limited definition of existence. With it, music doesn't exist either, only a certain pattern of vibration in nitrogen and oxygen molecules. There aren't jobs, only people who seem to do the same things day after day. You don't have a name. You don't speak a language. You don't have a nationality.
Even better, your own definition of existence doesn't exist according to itself. I wouldn't say it's a very good definition.
Since the DMCA didn't exist back when Sega v. Accolade took place.
You'll never, ever see this position advertised. Not because it's not a good idea, but because every boss thinks that he's The Smart Guy. He wouldn't be "boss" otherwise. Right?
Of course that position won't ever be implemented in any company, but I disagree about the reason.
In my experience, people who've been at a company for a longish time (like most bosses) are mainly interested in keeping the power they have and grabbing a bit more when they see the chance. Doing a good work is just worthy of attention as another instrument to that goal.
A Smart Guy who invades every boss's area of decision is just going to mess too much with internal politics. Even if the bosses could agree with the reasoning behind hiring a Smart Guy, they aren't going to tolerate an uncontrollable influence like that in the decision space they've earned so hardly.
So even if someone in upper management with enough power went ahead and hired a Smart Guy, management unrest would shortly grow so high that the Smart Guy would be quickly disposed of.
I think the study is only recognizing that being locked into a irreplaceable propietary platform is a problem. It's not saying that it's the only or even the worst possible problem.
Common sense as this may seem, it needs to be said anyway. How many companies realized before adopting .DOC as a de-facto standard that this effectively prevented them from switching to non-Microsoft solutions, should the need arise?
I was going to post a "stupid k-letter jokes under this thread please" comment, but you were too fast for me.
They transmitted only zeros.
Marketing.
People are more likely to buy a product if they think it's specifically designed for them. Those four categories serve that purpose.
Please observe how the description of the third category has been made as broad as it can be. Basically the author is saying that the book is not targeted at you if you are the worst programmer in the world, not a programmer, or Donald Knuth. Such an asymmetric categorization can only be for marketing purposes.
That's all very well and good, but I was only saying that the agreement argument goes nowhere. If the agreement says you won't do anything illegal, and you're preventively stopped from an activity merely because it could result in something illegal, you're not being held to that agreement. At most you're being held to a different agreement about not doing anything that looks illegal.
Now I KNOW that not all P2P users are copying music - but MOST are.
Further, you probably sign a usage agreemnt when you connect up to the school's network saying that you won't due anything illegal. All the university is doing is holding you to that agreement.
Don't you see a little contradiction between those two statements? If using P2P isn't illegal per se, preventing you from using P2P is not simply holding you to that agreement.
The division of work between engineers and managers is supposed to bring efficiency through specialization. Engineers are supposed to concentrate on technology while managers are the socially-oriented people who are more proficient at "people skills" such as communication.
A manager shouldn't need to understand the technology and an engineer shouldn't need to be a good communicator. But it appears, as has been pointed out, that managers only communicate well among themselves, so engineers are expected to learn to communicate with them.
What I want to know is, what's the use of managers then?
I'm a big advocate for as few (i.e. none) false positives as possible. I consider them way more dangerous than a false negative...
You put it like there's some doubt or debate as to whether that is true. There shouldn't. A false negative (provided that it manages to go through content-based bayesian filters and the like) only means the person who receives the mail wastes a few seconds identifying it as a spam and deleting it. The consequences of a false negative can range from some confusion (that will still take much more time to clear up) to, for example, loss of job opportunities. And the victim will be a person who hasn't usually made the decision of using a blacklist and probably isn't even aware of the possibility of losing legitimate mail.
they will glue an "Anti-American" label to your forehead.
What ATI card and drivers are you using? I have a Radeon 9700 and I get massive unstability with the latest (3.2.5) ATI drivers, even though I can't get 3d accel with them. Older drivers (2.9.x) were unstable too, though less so.
On the other hand, I also own an older NVIDIA GeForce2 card and I haven't experienced any unstability at all in Linux since a long time.
NVIDIA's driver packaging is also better. ATI only provides RPMs that I have to extract with rpm2cpio (I use Debian), and NVIDIA has a proper Makefile for their kernel modules.
In my experience, NVIDIA wins the Linux driver competition by far.
why should i allow abusive traffic into my network? Its my network, my server, my rules.
What an immature attitude. It's not your network; as long as you have users it's their network too. They're using it because they're confident that you will administer it in a responsible way.
To all the admins who say "it's my network": do you think you have the right to read your users' private mails for fun? Do you think you have the right the to delete mails from users whose names you don't like? Would the "it's my network" explanation work for those kind of actions? I'm curious.