I still don't understand what the big deal is about finding someone's address and phone number.
Back in Ye Olden Days, when people had telephones that were plugged into walls, all this information was printed in large books distributed free to every customer.
Oh, OK. Thanks. I misunderstood. When you mentioned "lost" cities, I thought you were talking about cities that were actually lost. As in, they weren't still around, or that we didn't know where they were, but then archaeologists later discovered them.
Now I see why you put the word in quotes.
And, of course, when you mention "historical accounts [that] have later been found to be based on actual events", you meant... um... not sure how you spin that one. Doesn't matter, though. I was really mostly joking when I suggested that *no* parts of the Bible were based on reality.
I know that there really was a Roman Empire, and that it really occupied Jerusalem, and that there really were several Caesars, and that there really is a country called Egypt, which has been there for a very long time.
So, I apologize to anyone I upset by suggesting otherwise.
Some of the historical accounts have later been found to be based on actual events, there is also mention of 'lost' cities which are now significant archaeological sites.
I've never actually done a comparison, but I'd bet that computers running Microsoft's Starry Night screen saver, or the My Pictures slide show use pretty much the same amount of electricity as Seti@home does.
I'm a contractor, so I've worked for many different companies, 3-6 months at a time. For the last several years I've made it clear, during the initial interview, that I'm not on call 24/7.
That said, the occasional night or weekend work is an expected part of our industry, and sometimes they need people to cover that time. I also make clear that I understand that and will work with it.
My current company has no official on-call policy for my position, but the way it works out, if they call me when I'm not in the office, I'll answer if I'm not doing anything else, or return their calls when it's convenient for me. (I'm a pretty typical nerd, so this works out to most of the time.) If they do answer, I charge them for the time I actually spend working, a minimum of one hour.
If they want me standing by at night or over a weekend, that means I can't go out of town, or even out of the house for long. I'm not visiting friends, and I'm not running a D&D game. Since I've given up plans I may have, they're paying me for that time, even if all I'm doing is sitting around at home playing video games, listening for the phone, and occasionally checking email.
These times need to be agreed to ahead of time, and it won't be every weekend. In such cases, I usually charge them normal rates for about half the hours I'm on call, or all of the hours if I'm actually working the majority of that time. (If I'm sleeping, I'll only charge anything if they actually do call.)
So far, as long as I've stated what I expect up front, I've not had any complaints.
Several years ago I was working on a contract where I was frequently on call, and carried a pager.
After a while, they upgraded my responsibilities, and decided that the calls I would be answering after hours were too important to allow delays and issued me a cell phone.
The main difference is that when you call someone on the cell phone, you know immediately if they've gotten the call - with a pager, there's no feedback until the person locates a phone and calls you back. So you don't know if the person got your page and will be calling you back soon, or if you should escalate to the next person on the list.
Communication with a cell phone is just about as reliable, and always faster.
Oh, yeah, and you can call from any phone. See, in addition to SMS, many cell phones also allow voice communication.
I would venture to say it's actually just the opposite.
Many problems are not necessarily people who stand up for their rights as consumers, but from those like you who unquestioningly believe everything corporate PR departments tell them.
This is not going to raise prices on your Xbox. If Microsoft thought they could sell enough to make a bigger profit at a higher price, they'd already be charging that price.
I'd say I have no idea how so many people have been convinced otherwise, but I used to work in PR, so it's actually my fault. Actually, thinking back over all the press releases I wrote way back when, I'm still amazed that anyone accepted anything in them as truth.
Not that I think they actually did, but I can think of a couple of things they could gain:
"Hello, we're with the federal government. We work with the Justice Department. You know, the one that decides whether and how hard to press anti-trust lawsuits..."
"We're going to be making recommendations on what Operating System the entire federal government should use in coming budget cycles. We'd like to discuss some enhancements to yours..."
Of course, I can also think of perfectly legitimate reasons for the NSA to be working closely with Microsoft - such as ensuring tighter security on future versions of the OS that most of the government runs on.
That "little bit of money of the GI Bill" is on *top* of full tuition being paid for, including books and living allowance.
It's actually a pretty decent deal. It's what my roommate is doing right now as well.
It also includes a good health plan for life (for himself and four children he pays half of what I pay for just myself, and doesn't lose it if he switches jobs).
There's also some pretty attractive terms for home purchase in there as well.
It could, and probably should, be better, but it's not a total "screw you" to those who've served anymore.
There is a significant difference in that MSNBC does not take the things its commentators, like Olbermann, say and then report them as news in its news segments.
If the government is tracking who I call, how many times I call them, when I call them, and for how long, it's still "spying" on me, even if they don't record the actual content of the phone calls.
So, yeah, "wholesale" spying is still the appropriate term here.
A novel has, say, 75,000 words. The system changes, oh, let's say, 100 of them, in various ways.
So what are the chances of you being able to change enough yourself to obscure the changes they made? How high can you raise the probability without obscuring the text into unreadability?
Yeah, if they can do this on the fly when distributing digital copies of books, they've got something. Adding your own changes before distributing might help you track it, but it won't obscure theirs.
Of course, you could always get 3 copies (minimum, depending on how the changes are made), compare them and undo their changes, restoring the original. But how many people would do that?
Following the links and reading the comments, so far I've seen reporting that there is outrage.
I've seen comments saying they can see how this might cause outrage.
I've seen speculation in articles and comments that "some" might be offended.
What I've yet to see anywhere is any actual expression of outrage.
Whoever from the company told the game news and reviews sites that there is outrage going on and that they should report on it deserves a really big raise.
The problem isn't even that he wants to be 'in the top 500', it's that he wants to be in the top 500 NOW.
D&D Online lets you earn points in game that you can spend in the store.
But, if all you're doing is grinding for points, it's going to get pretty boring.
But, if he just uses healing potions he finds/buys in-game instead of buying them from the store, and if he waits until he's accumulated enough points in-game to buy a warforged monk or whatever rather than buying them, he can play the game just fine without spending any money at all on it.
That's what I'm doing.
Though I'm still thinking of spending the $12.00 for enough points to get a warforged monk myself...
When I sued my landlord in San Joaquin County, California, the judge awarded travel expenses for my costs in coming from Portland, Oregon, for the trial. (At $.285/mile no less, which paid me about three times what I'd originally paid for the car I used)
In another, unrelated countersuit I was involved in (in Oakland, CA), paying an expert witness was an awardable expense as well.
Most of my court experience was in the late 80s/early 90s, so perhaps things have changed since then. But I strongly suspect it varies by district.
Slashdot Mirror
I still don't understand what the big deal is about finding someone's address and phone number.
Back in Ye Olden Days, when people had telephones that were plugged into walls, all this information was printed in large books distributed free to every customer.
Oh, OK.
Thanks. I misunderstood. When you mentioned "lost" cities, I thought you were talking about cities that were actually lost. As in, they weren't still around, or that we didn't know where they were, but then archaeologists later discovered them.
Now I see why you put the word in quotes.
And, of course, when you mention "historical accounts [that] have later been found to be based on actual events", you meant... um... not sure how you spin that one. Doesn't matter, though. I was really mostly joking when I suggested that *no* parts of the Bible were based on reality.
I know that there really was a Roman Empire, and that it really occupied Jerusalem, and that there really were several Caesars, and that there really is a country called Egypt, which has been there for a very long time.
So, I apologize to anyone I upset by suggesting otherwise.
Really?
Like what?
Using government electricity?
I've never actually done a comparison, but I'd bet that computers running Microsoft's Starry Night screen saver, or the My Pictures slide show use pretty much the same amount of electricity as Seti@home does.
There are parts of the bible that are based on reality?
I'm a contractor, so I've worked for many different companies, 3-6 months at a time. For the last several years I've made it clear, during the initial interview, that I'm not on call 24/7.
That said, the occasional night or weekend work is an expected part of our industry, and sometimes they need people to cover that time. I also make clear that I understand that and will work with it.
My current company has no official on-call policy for my position, but the way it works out, if they call me when I'm not in the office, I'll answer if I'm not doing anything else, or return their calls when it's convenient for me. (I'm a pretty typical nerd, so this works out to most of the time.) If they do answer, I charge them for the time I actually spend working, a minimum of one hour.
If they want me standing by at night or over a weekend, that means I can't go out of town, or even out of the house for long. I'm not visiting friends, and I'm not running a D&D game. Since I've given up plans I may have, they're paying me for that time, even if all I'm doing is sitting around at home playing video games, listening for the phone, and occasionally checking email.
These times need to be agreed to ahead of time, and it won't be every weekend. In such cases, I usually charge them normal rates for about half the hours I'm on call, or all of the hours if I'm actually working the majority of that time. (If I'm sleeping, I'll only charge anything if they actually do call.)
So far, as long as I've stated what I expect up front, I've not had any complaints.
That's just the opposite of my experience.
Several years ago I was working on a contract where I was frequently on call, and carried a pager.
After a while, they upgraded my responsibilities, and decided that the calls I would be answering after hours were too important to allow delays and issued me a cell phone.
The main difference is that when you call someone on the cell phone, you know immediately if they've gotten the call - with a pager, there's no feedback until the person locates a phone and calls you back. So you don't know if the person got your page and will be calling you back soon, or if you should escalate to the next person on the list.
Communication with a cell phone is just about as reliable, and always faster.
Oh, yeah, and you can call from any phone. See, in addition to SMS, many cell phones also allow voice communication.
I would venture to say it's actually just the opposite.
Many problems are not necessarily people who stand up for their rights as consumers, but from those like you who unquestioningly believe everything corporate PR departments tell them.
This is not going to raise prices on your Xbox. If Microsoft thought they could sell enough to make a bigger profit at a higher price, they'd already be charging that price.
I'd say I have no idea how so many people have been convinced otherwise, but I used to work in PR, so it's actually my fault. Actually, thinking back over all the press releases I wrote way back when, I'm still amazed that anyone accepted anything in them as truth.
Not that I think they actually did, but I can think of a couple of things they could gain:
"Hello, we're with the federal government. We work with the Justice Department. You know, the one that decides whether and how hard to press anti-trust lawsuits..."
"We're going to be making recommendations on what Operating System the entire federal government should use in coming budget cycles. We'd like to discuss some enhancements to yours..."
Of course, I can also think of perfectly legitimate reasons for the NSA to be working closely with Microsoft - such as ensuring tighter security on future versions of the OS that most of the government runs on.
I think I'd still prefer it to an ICBM hitting my house.
That "little bit of money of the GI Bill" is on *top* of full tuition being paid for, including books and living allowance.
It's actually a pretty decent deal. It's what my roommate is doing right now as well.
It also includes a good health plan for life (for himself and four children he pays half of what I pay for just myself, and doesn't lose it if he switches jobs).
There's also some pretty attractive terms for home purchase in there as well.
It could, and probably should, be better, but it's not a total "screw you" to those who've served anymore.
You mean, somebody's likely to start a religion around his company?
There is a significant difference in that MSNBC does not take the things its commentators, like Olbermann, say and then report them as news in its news segments.
If the government is tracking who I call, how many times I call them, when I call them, and for how long, it's still "spying" on me, even if they don't record the actual content of the phone calls.
So, yeah, "wholesale" spying is still the appropriate term here.
That's just nonsense, of course.
A lot of atheists used to be Christians. Real, actual, believing, devout followers of Christ.
It doesn't say much about the strength of your own convictions that your faith is threatened by the existence of people who used to believe as you do.
I also used to believe in Santa Claus, but you're expected to grow out of that one for some reason.
Yes.
That's kind of the entire point of that article.
It was a response to people using that same section of the bible to justify their modern day opposition to the rights of gays.
Other way around, I believe.
Building code requiring it came first.
Bank started requiring it later to make sure the building is up to code.
"So much for tracking..." ?
A novel has, say, 75,000 words. The system changes, oh, let's say, 100 of them, in various ways.
So what are the chances of you being able to change enough yourself to obscure the changes they made? How high can you raise the probability without obscuring the text into unreadability?
Yeah, if they can do this on the fly when distributing digital copies of books, they've got something. Adding your own changes before distributing might help you track it, but it won't obscure theirs.
Of course, you could always get 3 copies (minimum, depending on how the changes are made), compare them and undo their changes, restoring the original. But how many people would do that?
Following the links and reading the comments, so far I've seen reporting that there is outrage.
I've seen comments saying they can see how this might cause outrage.
I've seen speculation in articles and comments that "some" might be offended.
What I've yet to see anywhere is any actual expression of outrage.
Whoever from the company told the game news and reviews sites that there is outrage going on and that they should report on it deserves a really big raise.
Ah-HAH! You have unwittingly exposed their plan!
First, they freeze the internet in September.
Then, they narrow it down to Sunday.
This is just one more step in their ultimate goal to destroy the Net by squeezing it down to nothing at all!
The problem isn't even that he wants to be 'in the top 500', it's that he wants to be in the top 500 NOW.
D&D Online lets you earn points in game that you can spend in the store.
But, if all you're doing is grinding for points, it's going to get pretty boring.
But, if he just uses healing potions he finds/buys in-game instead of buying them from the store, and if he waits until he's accumulated enough points in-game to buy a warforged monk or whatever rather than buying them, he can play the game just fine without spending any money at all on it.
That's what I'm doing.
Though I'm still thinking of spending the $12.00 for enough points to get a warforged monk myself...
What state is that in?
When I sued my landlord in San Joaquin County, California, the judge awarded travel expenses for my costs in coming from Portland, Oregon, for the trial. (At $.285/mile no less, which paid me about three times what I'd originally paid for the car I used)
In another, unrelated countersuit I was involved in (in Oakland, CA), paying an expert witness was an awardable expense as well.
Most of my court experience was in the late 80s/early 90s, so perhaps things have changed since then. But I strongly suspect it varies by district.
No, no that would be a million universes.
Of which, the asteroid will strike Earth in four of them.
There is a 1 in 250,000 chance, however, that anyone reading this will be in one of the four.
Yeah, me, too.
19,856,160 records * $.08/record = $1,588,492.80
So, it should have been "an approximate value of 1.6 million."
Disturbing that nobody seems to know how to round anymore.
No they don't. We have far, far more eyes than they can ever hope for.
It just seems like they have more because they're more willing to use them.