Err, you seem to be forgetting Livemotion (the direct competitor to flash).
That said, I hope Adobe does kill Freehand. It sucks hardcore. I hate it with a passion, and with good reason--it's UI hasn't been updated in a hideously long time, it is unusable, and probably the WORST of the MM products out there.
Fireworks is a different story--I think that it is one of the BEST products out there in terms of vector graphics and is a very usable, stable program. It is what made.png a much more common format, and is probably why so many web developers hate the lack of PNG support in IE6. Having never used ImageReady, I don't know how it compares.
The Dreamweaver vs. GoLive issue is difficult. I hate to say it, but in some ways it depends on whether you come from a graphic design & print background, or a coding/programming background. For those who come from a graphic design background, GoLive seems to be the product of choice, while Dreamweaver is more designed for those in coding. That said, I think most of my use for Dreamweaver is for site management and creating lots of very similar pages. Any more, though, I don't even do that--I use CSS, PHP & javascript to set up a single template and write the page based on current needs. This system is flexible, but I am getting OT. The real question is what will this mean for standards compliance in whatever product is resulting?
I hope that whatever happen isn't as bad as it could be, since the two powerhouses in web/graphic design just merged. Corel (as you say) is in trouble, but they haven't been a serious competitor in any respect.
Macromedia's stuff is good. I haven't had any trouble with dreamweaver (especially mx 2004, which has decent css support), in terms of stability. Design, by which I can only assume you mean usability, is arguable, but that is ALSO true for photoshop. Hard to learn? Flash, YES; fireworks, no; Dreamweaver, maybe; Freehand, does anyone use it?
I do hope, however, that this is a good thing. I have serious doubts, however, and suspect that it will end up being a BAD thing.
has several boards, but none of them are single proc systems. If you need a stock Mobo, and want that much memory, you may need to go for a tyan board. I don't know if you can purchase the quad cpu board, use one cpu and all sixteen slots or not, but I think it will work. Obviously if you are going to shell out for that much memory, buying that mobo shouldn't be a big deal, even if you don't use all four cpu slots.
Nah, I am in psychology fairly far, and I know as well as anyone that most of the psychologists simply can't write. It is no surprise to many of us, because of the simple fact that most of what they read (other research) is also poorly written. So they write to match the style, hoping to increase chances of publication.
As someone currently in a PhD program, I only hope to avoid the same type of BS. It's fairly hard to avoid though, since you are constantly inundated by it.
You, sir, obviously know nothing about psychometrics. I will concede that you likely know much more about programming, or some other skill, than I do, but I assure you that a properly designed selection system will NOT make the egregious errors that you refer to.
Unfortunately, many of the systems in place are poorly designed. Like programming or tinkering, designing a selection system is a skill that takes much time and effort to develop. Are there weaknesses in any particular selection system (even the best)? Absolutely. Will they miss that one person only has a certain amount of book smarts, but can't program competently? Not bloody likely if it is well designed.
I find it sad that most of the folks here, who I would guess know next to nothing about selection design, job analysis, or similar topics, are more than willing to give the designers of such systems such great advice, but would be all tore up if the roles were reversed.
Here's the drill, then. You talk about what you know, I'll talk about what I know, and maybe we can work together to make both our lives easier.
Actually, I am not so sure about that. Most folks in psychometrics (which is what this is all about) would want to see a few peices of information, such as a construct/content validity study (which is a comparison of real-world performance with test performance), reliability coefficients, and demographic validation information.
The idea is that it might be a decent test, but we need the numbers to prove it. If you were a manager looking to use this test, check with a qualified I/O psychologist or psychometrician. Not your average HR flooz (no offense to anyone), but someone who has had adequate training in evaluating test quality. Any test used for selection needs to be looked at in the context of the current job, so even if ETS has done all the work they should (which, BTW, they typically do), then you still need to compare on a local sample for your workplace.
So, to your emphatic YES, I respectfully disagree. Is it useful for your sample--the only way to tell is to look at the published information, check to see if it has been validated independently, and then check it out locally.
Every licensed health-care facility in the US is required to conform to this security act that keeps patient information confidential. It seems to have been written by paranoid schizophrenics for paranoid schizophrenics and is pretty stringent in its requirements--and pretty tough to follow every detail.
The paranoia in this act is good, though. It is the kind of privacy that I think that we should be allowed to have. It actually makes the gov'ts job harder when they want to find information about someone's healthcare history. I like it overall, but for most folks, it is also a PITA.
I love that movie, but most have never heard of it or seen it. The other one that people haven't seen is "Animals are Beautiful People", by the same folks.
I wasn't aware that malice was a requirement for slander, but IANAL.
That said, I feel (strongly) that it is the company's responsibility to ensure that their clerks are equipped mentally for a particular job--and accepting legal tender is part of their job. Being able to discriminate between fake money and real money is IMPORTANT!
Second, I don't know if Best Buy's role was criminal or not, but I do think that the police officer could have handled this much more smoothly. With the bills being marked with a pen (which would change color if the bills were fake), she should have trusted the pen, or the cop should have said, "do you mind coming with me until I get this straightened out?" Not clap him in irons and haul him off. An officer should be able to make these calls, and should CERTAINLY be able to tell the difference between counterfeit and real.
Yes, I would sue. And I'm sure that I would find a lawyer willing to take this one on. I think it is worth it.
Seven standard deviations--wow! As far as I know, there are not any tests that could measure that high.
Here's the problem with IQ tests in general--without going into factor analysis and the reification arguments--someone has to write them. Or a group of someones.
That someone has an IQ. That IQ is NOT the upper limit of the test, but it does factor in, because eventually they are unable to devise a question that someone differentially smarter enough couldn't answer in a much shorter period of time. This is why IQ tests are generally timed (makes it MUCH easier--instead of really hard questions, just make LOTS of them, and see how many they answer, but this too has limitations).
Another serious problem is this: a standard deviation is based on a distribution. After a certain point though (with IQ), it becomes impossible to get a large enough sample to validate the test for individuals with a very high IQ. Validation studies typically require hundreds (or thousands) of individuals. With a population of about 6 billion on the planet, there MIGHT be one or two (based on probability) with an IQ over 205, but this is unlikely. There are six members of the "giga" club, last I checked and entry for that is 190. Probability of a 190 is about 1 in 1 billion. So six is about the right number. Probability of a 205? Pretty small.
What that means, however, is that to validate the tests that supposedly measure IQ at that level (assuming that IQ is a real thing, of course), you only have a sample of six (or so), with a small distribution of folks that are lower.
The other problem is that there isn't a known good metric against which to compare the new test (for that population). How then do you test IQ for that population?
Simply put--you don't. IQ is an elusive construct at best (read Gould's Mismeasure of Man for a good description of the problem), and a blantant method of racial and cultural discrimination at worst. Personally, I think IQ is useful, but I wouldn't bank too much on a single score.
I was talking to a professor about having children, and his comment was that it reduced the number of degrees of freedom one had. I agreed, saying that if you started with only 10, it would take away 12 degrees of freedom.
I can agree with that assessment. After all, as I understand it, the concept of free speech was not to justify any type of pornographic filth that someone wanted to publish, but to make sure that Citizens had the RIGHT to criticize the gov't and talk about what happened to them with regard to the gov't without interference or fear of reprisal. The idea is that for a country to stay strong and to be free requires that citizens be able to criticize, in an open and public manner, not only the leaders of the gov't, but the gov't itself.
To me, that is what freedom of speech is all about. It has nothing to do with a right to publish porn, just a right to tell Sen. Clinton that you think she's a lying... you get the point. (Or if you prefer, tell President Bush that you think he's a moronic $var). It also would protect the right to say that you think that the gov't has gone to hell in a handbasket (or maybe a rocket-propelled car), and needs to be replaced. THESE are the things that I can see a need for privacy when saying--but only if the gov't is no longer protecting free speech.
All that said, I don't think that there should be a NEED for anonymity when saying things of this nature. Maybe there is a need, but there shouldn't be.
Okay, maybe you are correct (and maybe that's why it got modded (incorrectly, I might add) as flamebait) about not looking like a gov't site.
That said, I don't think its a big deal. Let me put it to you this way. If you own a website, there are only a few reasons. One is to distribute some type of information (software counts). This is the one that could get you in trouble. Another possibility is to sell or advertise something. There are more, but these seem to cover the majority.
In the second case, allowing people to contact you is important--it is hard to sell something otherwise.
In the first case, the expectation of privacy is only good as far as you don't put anything up that is of a personal nature. That means that bloggers don't have a real (or rather, reasonable) expectation of privacy (and I'm fairly certain the courts would agree).
Why would someone need privacy in this case? There may be some very good reasons, but I don't see the need--most of what you do on the net will eventually be traceable back to your name if you start publishing anything personal.
Now, if you are publishing torrents to questionable downloads (movies, etc), then I can see the desire for privacy. But why the.us TLD? Why not put it out there as a.name or a.info? These are available, and frankly, I would not see a problem with an.anon TLD designed just for that.
So, I will ask again. What is the big deal with disclosing contact info?
Disclaimer:: THIS IS NOT FLAMEBAIT. IT IS AN HONEST QUESTION!
As I can tell, the goal is to make sure that anyone who has a tld that looks like they might be affiliated with the US gov't needs to give full disclosure. What's the problem with that. And how many folks have a.us tld anyway?
Additionally, and on topic, I think that there should be one set of rules concerning those who immigrate as adults under their own volition, and those who came as minors with their families and are trying to be productive.
As far as I'm concerned, these kids deserve a chance--as do any others. I think they should be allowed to become citizens with a minimum of hassle--as long as they aren't in trouble for breaking other laws. Here's what I would suggest be the criteria:
1. Be employed or in school with a 2.5+ GPA. 2. No criminal record (other than illegal immigration) in the past three years. 3. English Fluency (spoken and written). 4. Immigrated as a minor with family (eg--not just to run away or something). 5. No affiliations with terrorist/anti-US groups (sorry I can't see letting future mad-bombers into the country).
If a kid can meet those criteria, then they should be allowed "conditional citizenship" for a period of time. If they can stay employed or in school with a good GPA, pay taxes, and stay out of trouble for a grace period (say 5 years), then they are granted full citizenship. During the conditional perioud, they would be eligible for federal student aid and similar help, thus giving them the benefit of going to school.
If, at any time, they break those conditions (excepting, of course, breif gaps in employment or minor violations, such as a speeding ticket), the time starts over and they get one or more points against them. If they ever accumulate more than, say, 50 points, then they are deported and told to apply for citizenship the hard way.
The upshot of this is that those who want to make it all work would be able to, and the US would gain. The only downside? Mexico (or whatever other country) would lose a lot of bright young folks.
Oh, and BTW, the parents would need to given resident alien status, with the agreement that they leave if their kid screws up. They then have to keep INS informed of their whereabouts every quarter, without fail.
I can't condone ripping the families away, but nor should they be allowed to stay without penalty. The parents, should they desire to stay past the point where the kid leaves home, would have to pay back taxes (prohibitive for most), and demonstrate a good work history. Otherwise, for better or worse, they have to leave, but are allowed to return if they want to apply for citizenship the normal way.
The goal is to give kids a chance without making it a burden on the US or kids whose parents are legal citizens. In no case should a student be edged out because someone needs to "make room" for an illegal alien. Merit alone, boys and girls, merit alone.
Frankly, I find the connection as annoying as can be. First, there are a LOT of folks who equate communism with Soviet Russia and the nutjobs who run many communist dictatorships. Seeing this connection causes them to equate communism with evil. Of course, you probably know this. Whether or not you like it or agree is immaterial to this conversation, so forget about that for a minute.
The sad truth is, however, that many people hate communism for some very poor reasons. Personally, I think that communism has some good points, but that too is immaterial.
Now, with your description of OSS, I must assume you mean F/OSS, which is different. Free OSS is exactly what you say it is, but OSS may cost money. There is NOTHING in the license that requires it to be free of cost, just that the source is available (and I think at no extra cost). To me this is important, because it allows a company to sell the software and make a profit. Yes the customer may take the software, make changes and resell it, but it generally doesn't make sense to do that.
The advantage of open source for the customer is NOT the ability to modify & sell, but in the ability to modify & use. I am not a serious developer, and so I will probably never modify an office suite or linux distro source to fit my needs, but I like to know that I can.
First off, he didn't say that the French hated Americans or that they were impolite. Just that BOTH cultures (in some fashion) feel that they are superior to other cultures, and therefore they tend to clash on occasion.
As far as he is concerned, I am afraid that you don't understand--he is VERY pro-French (whatever that is), and loves the people and culture. He spent about 15 years there as a businessman and married a French woman. He was also VERY careful to say that the French do NOT hate Americans.
As a side note, can we get any Frenchmen/women to pipe in on this? We are so far off topic that it's crazy.
Slashdot Mirror
Err, you seem to be forgetting Livemotion (the direct competitor to flash).
.png a much more common format, and is probably why so many web developers hate the lack of PNG support in IE6. Having never used ImageReady, I don't know how it compares.
That said, I hope Adobe does kill Freehand. It sucks hardcore. I hate it with a passion, and with good reason--it's UI hasn't been updated in a hideously long time, it is unusable, and probably the WORST of the MM products out there.
Fireworks is a different story--I think that it is one of the BEST products out there in terms of vector graphics and is a very usable, stable program. It is what made
The Dreamweaver vs. GoLive issue is difficult. I hate to say it, but in some ways it depends on whether you come from a graphic design & print background, or a coding/programming background. For those who come from a graphic design background, GoLive seems to be the product of choice, while Dreamweaver is more designed for those in coding. That said, I think most of my use for Dreamweaver is for site management and creating lots of very similar pages. Any more, though, I don't even do that--I use CSS, PHP & javascript to set up a single template and write the page based on current needs. This system is flexible, but I am getting OT. The real question is what will this mean for standards compliance in whatever product is resulting?
I hope that whatever happen isn't as bad as it could be, since the two powerhouses in web/graphic design just merged. Corel (as you say) is in trouble, but they haven't been a serious competitor in any respect.
Are you nuts?
Macromedia's stuff is good. I haven't had any trouble with dreamweaver (especially mx 2004, which has decent css support), in terms of stability. Design, by which I can only assume you mean usability, is arguable, but that is ALSO true for photoshop. Hard to learn? Flash, YES; fireworks, no; Dreamweaver, maybe; Freehand, does anyone use it?
I do hope, however, that this is a good thing. I have serious doubts, however, and suspect that it will end up being a BAD thing.
Neat thing is, though that if the poster (of the story) wants that much memory, they are probably willing to spring for the board and the memory.
Also, methinks that tyan has a newer version available.
I am not a weapon of mass distruction...
Honest.
Now that Sarin IV guy, he might be.
(for the humor impaired--look at his sig, look at my name, look up Sarin IV)
has several boards, but none of them are single proc systems. If you need a stock Mobo, and want that much memory, you may need to go for a tyan board. I don't know if you can purchase the quad cpu board, use one cpu and all sixteen slots or not, but I think it will work. Obviously if you are going to shell out for that much memory, buying that mobo shouldn't be a big deal, even if you don't use all four cpu slots.
FWIW, that's the only thing I know of.
Just to nitpick, but a case study is an anecdote. Case Study = n of 1 = anecdote. Neither is generalizable to the population.
Looking at a group of individuals (stats, research, oh yeah) is what gives us the ability to generalize to the population.
Nah, I am in psychology fairly far, and I know as well as anyone that most of the psychologists simply can't write. It is no surprise to many of us, because of the simple fact that most of what they read (other research) is also poorly written. So they write to match the style, hoping to increase chances of publication.
As someone currently in a PhD program, I only hope to avoid the same type of BS. It's fairly hard to avoid though, since you are constantly inundated by it.
who here has actually used an xgi card, and what was your experience?
I am extremely curious--they are cheap, but I want to know about performance.
You, sir, obviously know nothing about psychometrics. I will concede that you likely know much more about programming, or some other skill, than I do, but I assure you that a properly designed selection system will NOT make the egregious errors that you refer to.
Unfortunately, many of the systems in place are poorly designed. Like programming or tinkering, designing a selection system is a skill that takes much time and effort to develop. Are there weaknesses in any particular selection system (even the best)? Absolutely. Will they miss that one person only has a certain amount of book smarts, but can't program competently? Not bloody likely if it is well designed.
I find it sad that most of the folks here, who I would guess know next to nothing about selection design, job analysis, or similar topics, are more than willing to give the designers of such systems such great advice, but would be all tore up if the roles were reversed.
Here's the drill, then. You talk about what you know, I'll talk about what I know, and maybe we can work together to make both our lives easier.
Actually, I am not so sure about that. Most folks in psychometrics (which is what this is all about) would want to see a few peices of information, such as a construct/content validity study (which is a comparison of real-world performance with test performance), reliability coefficients, and demographic validation information.
The idea is that it might be a decent test, but we need the numbers to prove it. If you were a manager looking to use this test, check with a qualified I/O psychologist or psychometrician. Not your average HR flooz (no offense to anyone), but someone who has had adequate training in evaluating test quality. Any test used for selection needs to be looked at in the context of the current job, so even if ETS has done all the work they should (which, BTW, they typically do), then you still need to compare on a local sample for your workplace.
So, to your emphatic YES, I respectfully disagree. Is it useful for your sample--the only way to tell is to look at the published information, check to see if it has been validated independently, and then check it out locally.
Just a few peices of information about HIPAA:
Every licensed health-care facility in the US is required to conform to this security act that keeps patient information confidential. It seems to have been written by paranoid schizophrenics for paranoid schizophrenics and is pretty stringent in its requirements--and pretty tough to follow every detail.
The paranoia in this act is good, though. It is the kind of privacy that I think that we should be allowed to have. It actually makes the gov'ts job harder when they want to find information about someone's healthcare history. I like it overall, but for most folks, it is also a PITA.
Yeah, bury the hatchet in each other skulls!
Actually, I know practically nothing about either culture, although I find both fascinating.
Notice something:: the VAST majority of folks wouldn't wind up anywhere except in the water. Oops.
your sig:
it's from "The Gods must be Crazy", no?
I love that movie, but most have never heard of it or seen it. The other one that people haven't seen is "Animals are Beautiful People", by the same folks.
Great flicks.
I wasn't aware that malice was a requirement for slander, but IANAL.
That said, I feel (strongly) that it is the company's responsibility to ensure that their clerks are equipped mentally for a particular job--and accepting legal tender is part of their job. Being able to discriminate between fake money and real money is IMPORTANT!
Second, I don't know if Best Buy's role was criminal or not, but I do think that the police officer could have handled this much more smoothly. With the bills being marked with a pen (which would change color if the bills were fake), she should have trusted the pen, or the cop should have said, "do you mind coming with me until I get this straightened out?" Not clap him in irons and haul him off. An officer should be able to make these calls, and should CERTAINLY be able to tell the difference between counterfeit and real.
Yes, I would sue. And I'm sure that I would find a lawyer willing to take this one on. I think it is worth it.
Seven standard deviations--wow! As far as I know, there are not any tests that could measure that high.
Here's the problem with IQ tests in general--without going into factor analysis and the reification arguments--someone has to write them. Or a group of someones.
That someone has an IQ. That IQ is NOT the upper limit of the test, but it does factor in, because eventually they are unable to devise a question that someone differentially smarter enough couldn't answer in a much shorter period of time. This is why IQ tests are generally timed (makes it MUCH easier--instead of really hard questions, just make LOTS of them, and see how many they answer, but this too has limitations).
Another serious problem is this: a standard deviation is based on a distribution. After a certain point though (with IQ), it becomes impossible to get a large enough sample to validate the test for individuals with a very high IQ. Validation studies typically require hundreds (or thousands) of individuals. With a population of about 6 billion on the planet, there MIGHT be one or two (based on probability) with an IQ over 205, but this is unlikely. There are six members of the "giga" club, last I checked and entry for that is 190. Probability of a 190 is about 1 in 1 billion. So six is about the right number. Probability of a 205? Pretty small.
What that means, however, is that to validate the tests that supposedly measure IQ at that level (assuming that IQ is a real thing, of course), you only have a sample of six (or so), with a small distribution of folks that are lower.
The other problem is that there isn't a known good metric against which to compare the new test (for that population). How then do you test IQ for that population?
Simply put--you don't. IQ is an elusive construct at best (read Gould's Mismeasure of Man for a good description of the problem), and a blantant method of racial and cultural discrimination at worst. Personally, I think IQ is useful, but I wouldn't bank too much on a single score.
I was talking to a professor about having children, and his comment was that it reduced the number of degrees of freedom one had. I agreed, saying that if you started with only 10, it would take away 12 degrees of freedom.
Man, talk about geek talk.
I can agree with that assessment. After all, as I understand it, the concept of free speech was not to justify any type of pornographic filth that someone wanted to publish, but to make sure that Citizens had the RIGHT to criticize the gov't and talk about what happened to them with regard to the gov't without interference or fear of reprisal. The idea is that for a country to stay strong and to be free requires that citizens be able to criticize, in an open and public manner, not only the leaders of the gov't, but the gov't itself.
... you get the point. (Or if you prefer, tell President Bush that you think he's a moronic $var). It also would protect the right to say that you think that the gov't has gone to hell in a handbasket (or maybe a rocket-propelled car), and needs to be replaced. THESE are the things that I can see a need for privacy when saying--but only if the gov't is no longer protecting free speech.
To me, that is what freedom of speech is all about. It has nothing to do with a right to publish porn, just a right to tell Sen. Clinton that you think she's a lying
All that said, I don't think that there should be a NEED for anonymity when saying things of this nature. Maybe there is a need, but there shouldn't be.
Okay, maybe you are correct (and maybe that's why it got modded (incorrectly, I might add) as flamebait) about not looking like a gov't site.
.us TLD? Why not put it out there as a .name or a .info? These are available, and frankly, I would not see a problem with an .anon TLD designed just for that.
That said, I don't think its a big deal. Let me put it to you this way. If you own a website, there are only a few reasons. One is to distribute some type of information (software counts). This is the one that could get you in trouble. Another possibility is to sell or advertise something. There are more, but these seem to cover the majority.
In the second case, allowing people to contact you is important--it is hard to sell something otherwise.
In the first case, the expectation of privacy is only good as far as you don't put anything up that is of a personal nature. That means that bloggers don't have a real (or rather, reasonable) expectation of privacy (and I'm fairly certain the courts would agree).
Why would someone need privacy in this case? There may be some very good reasons, but I don't see the need--most of what you do on the net will eventually be traceable back to your name if you start publishing anything personal.
Now, if you are publishing torrents to questionable downloads (movies, etc), then I can see the desire for privacy. But why the
So, I will ask again. What is the big deal with disclosing contact info?
Disclaimer:: THIS IS NOT FLAMEBAIT. IT IS AN HONEST QUESTION!
As I can tell, the goal is to make sure that anyone who has a tld that looks like they might be affiliated with the US gov't needs to give full disclosure. What's the problem with that. And how many folks have a .us tld anyway?
I just don't see the problem here.
The part where you called those who are 30 - 35 "old coots".
Being not quite 30, I have to say you sounded pretty young to me. Can you even imagine how it sounds to be called "old" at 35? I doubt it somehow.
So, the next time you have the urge to speak, remember you don't know everything (and neither do I).
This is very true.
Additionally, and on topic, I think that there should be one set of rules concerning those who immigrate as adults under their own volition, and those who came as minors with their families and are trying to be productive.
As far as I'm concerned, these kids deserve a chance--as do any others. I think they should be allowed to become citizens with a minimum of hassle--as long as they aren't in trouble for breaking other laws. Here's what I would suggest be the criteria:
1. Be employed or in school with a 2.5+ GPA.
2. No criminal record (other than illegal immigration) in the past three years.
3. English Fluency (spoken and written).
4. Immigrated as a minor with family (eg--not just to run away or something).
5. No affiliations with terrorist/anti-US groups (sorry I can't see letting future mad-bombers into the country).
If a kid can meet those criteria, then they should be allowed "conditional citizenship" for a period of time. If they can stay employed or in school with a good GPA, pay taxes, and stay out of trouble for a grace period (say 5 years), then they are granted full citizenship. During the conditional perioud, they would be eligible for federal student aid and similar help, thus giving them the benefit of going to school.
If, at any time, they break those conditions (excepting, of course, breif gaps in employment or minor violations, such as a speeding ticket), the time starts over and they get one or more points against them. If they ever accumulate more than, say, 50 points, then they are deported and told to apply for citizenship the hard way.
The upshot of this is that those who want to make it all work would be able to, and the US would gain. The only downside? Mexico (or whatever other country) would lose a lot of bright young folks.
Oh, and BTW, the parents would need to given resident alien status, with the agreement that they leave if their kid screws up. They then have to keep INS informed of their whereabouts every quarter, without fail.
I can't condone ripping the families away, but nor should they be allowed to stay without penalty. The parents, should they desire to stay past the point where the kid leaves home, would have to pay back taxes (prohibitive for most), and demonstrate a good work history. Otherwise, for better or worse, they have to leave, but are allowed to return if they want to apply for citizenship the normal way.
The goal is to give kids a chance without making it a burden on the US or kids whose parents are legal citizens. In no case should a student be edged out because someone needs to "make room" for an illegal alien. Merit alone, boys and girls, merit alone.
pure genius man, pure genius. Keep it up.
Frankly, I find the connection as annoying as can be. First, there are a LOT of folks who equate communism with Soviet Russia and the nutjobs who run many communist dictatorships. Seeing this connection causes them to equate communism with evil. Of course, you probably know this. Whether or not you like it or agree is immaterial to this conversation, so forget about that for a minute.
The sad truth is, however, that many people hate communism for some very poor reasons. Personally, I think that communism has some good points, but that too is immaterial.
Now, with your description of OSS, I must assume you mean F/OSS, which is different. Free OSS is exactly what you say it is, but OSS may cost money. There is NOTHING in the license that requires it to be free of cost, just that the source is available (and I think at no extra cost). To me this is important, because it allows a company to sell the software and make a profit. Yes the customer may take the software, make changes and resell it, but it generally doesn't make sense to do that.
The advantage of open source for the customer is NOT the ability to modify & sell, but in the ability to modify & use. I am not a serious developer, and so I will probably never modify an office suite or linux distro source to fit my needs, but I like to know that I can.
First off, he didn't say that the French hated Americans or that they were impolite. Just that BOTH cultures (in some fashion) feel that they are superior to other cultures, and therefore they tend to clash on occasion.
As far as he is concerned, I am afraid that you don't understand--he is VERY pro-French (whatever that is), and loves the people and culture. He spent about 15 years there as a businessman and married a French woman. He was also VERY careful to say that the French do NOT hate Americans.
As a side note, can we get any Frenchmen/women to pipe in on this? We are so far off topic that it's crazy.