If all your trained to do is code, your old company can't prevent you from making a living.
Yes and no. They can't prevent you from coding, but they could prevent you from working for a direct competitor of theirs for a specified time. That's what's being claimed here. (Unlike most Slashdotters, I RTFM before posting.) NanoLimp is objecting to the coder working for Google as they're in direct competition in the search engine field. They want to make sure the confidentiality clauses of the contract are enforced, and to get any documents about how their engine works returned.
They were also pretty permissive about running IIS, Apache, you name it, on our workstations. However, it was pretty funny to watch everyone get Code Red.....
Why do I get the impression there's a cause/effect relationship here?
When someone is discovered to be running an unauthorized server or access point, especially if they didn't necessarily know it was running, the most that can really happen is for IT to remove it and warn the person not to do it again.
Now that's a good point. My post was made assuming that whoever had the unauthorized stuff on the LAN knew about it. Yes, if it's a matter of carelessness or a piece of misconfigured software, that shouldn't be a firing offense, and I doubt it would be. But knowingly setting something like that up, espcially if there's a policy forbidding it should have you out the door so fast your head spins.
it's pretty easy to run a secure network when you don't fucking allow people to actually *use* the network isn't it?
I don't know; I've never tried. There are a lot of ways to use a network without putting up an unauthorized server, or bringing your private laptop in and hooking it up. If you really need to do either of those, ask for permission. If there's a good reason, you should be able to get it, provided you take proper precautions. But nobody should be allowed to hook things up without telling anybody about it. That's just common sense.
Are there really companies out there that still don't have a policy about not hooking up private equipment to the LAN without permission? Are there even any that let you run your own server on their LAN without aking? I find that hard to believe. Even if bandwidth isn't an issue, the company owns the equiptment and has a right to say how it gets used, and what traffic is premitted. Anybody adding private equipment or running an unauthorized server has to know they're violating company policy, and can expect to be fired when it's discovered. The best way to keep it from happening a second time is to make sure everybody knows just why the fsckwit got canned.
But negligence does not require evidence of willful conduct. Negligence is merely a failure to act as a reasonably prudent person under the circumstances.
That's true, now. There was a time that a specific act had to be shown, and the person specified. Over a hundred years ago, a man was injured when a loose barrel came flying out of a brewery and hit him. He sued for negligence, and won, even though nobody could be shown to have caused it. This was because the incident was so outrageous that there was no possible explanation without assuming negligence, and it established a new legal priciple: res ipse loquitur, the act speaks for itself.
Why wouldn't closed-source developers want to do the same thing?
That's a good question. Some do, some don't. However, most of the people we hear about doing it are Open Source. Maybe that's because there are more people out there with the code helping to get the patches written.
WTF does the openness of the code have to do with when patches are released?
I never said there had to be a relationship. However, most open source developers tend to release important patches as soon as they're tested, to keep their project safe.
Microsoft releases security updates on a regular schedule, rather than as soon as they're created. For all we know, these new patches may have been sitting on the servers at Redmond for over a month before being announced. Not so with Open Source. When a patch is needed, it's developed, tested and released. No waiting for the next scheduled patch release like Microsoft does.
There's a very good reason IE loads faster than anything else. Part of its code is in memory all the time. It's the part used by Windows Explorer, your desktop shell. All that needs to load when you click on the Blue E is the part that isn't in use already. With Firefox, or any other browser, the entire program has to load, and that's going to take a little time.
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers!
on
Glass In Spaaaaace
·
· Score: 1
Back when the IBM PC first came out, you could buy a top-of-the-line PC for about $2000. You still can, even with inflation, and you get a lot more for it. My point is that even if the cost is still $7000/Kg, the price will be much less in purchasing power.
Re:Take THAT, space science nay-sayers!
on
Glass In Spaaaaace
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
Basic research tends to be expensive. Once we know how to make these glasses, it becomes an exercise in engeneering, and the price comes down. Yes, it can cost $7000 or so per kilo to bring it down from orbit, and it may still will in 50 years. But so what? How much will $7000 buy 50 years from today? Not as much as it does now, that's for sure. And if there's enough profit out there, the costs will come down as more and more ships are going up and back.
I've yet to have even read an SF novel in which a ship travels faster than light by accellerating a normal mass beyond the speed of light while keeping that mass within normal spacetime, and I've read hundreds of science fiction novels.
I take it, then, that you've never read Doc Smith's classic Skylark series, the first serious SF work to leave the Solar System. In it, he assumes that although you can convert mass into energy, the speed of light is no barrier. To be fair, it was written in the (I think) the early thirties, when Relativity had not been as well tested as it is now.
Would you be interested in a well written show with good acting? That's what Firefly was, and I've heard the movie is the same. I'm not a fan of the show because it's Sci-Fi, but because it's good, and I doubt I'm the only person who feels that way.
I'm not asking for an exact match. The problem is that any program that claims to predict what the climate is going to do can't come anywhere close to predicting the present starting 50 years ago. The temperature curve never even has the same general shape.
Right now, we have a lot of different computer programs that claim to show us the future. Not one of them can start with the known conditions of fifty years ago and end up with today. We don't understand why the climate is changing, and before we take drastic measures, we should learn what's really happening. As far as removing CO2 faster than we put it in, I'm talking about the US only. I heard it from somebody I trust to tell the truth, but I have no cites and if you don't want to believe it, I'll not argue the point.
I'm not disagreeing with you about the need to cut back pollution, but I'd like to point out that the climate was getting warmer long before humanity was putting out enough greenhouse gasses to cause it. During the Revolutionary War, Alexander Hamilton dragged cannon across the frozen Hudson River to help Washington. Fifty years later, that would have been impossible.
I've heard, recently, that there's so much forrest, agraculture and so-on in the USA that it's taking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere faster than it's putting it in, but I don't have a cite for it.
Before enacting legislation requiring expensive steps to reduce global warming, we should really be spending a little money finding out exactly what's going on.
Fatburger is OK, but not if I'm paying. To me, they're a little pricy for what you get. I'd say they'd be a much better value at about a 15% lower price. If you like them, knock your socks off, but I'll go to In-N-Out or Bob's Big Boy.
Space:1999, another timeless classic that has aged quite well...
Space 1999 was crap when it came out and it's still crap. If you want good SF from that era try either Blake's 7 or Saphire and Steel, although the latter comes closer to urban fantasy.
Libratarians like to say that the Marketplace will take care of it. This is a good place to let it do exactly that. Don't pay, don't comment, don't contribute. Go someplace else and watch the site wither on the vine.
You think that's bad? I once worked for a small company. When I was hired, I was given my company email address. I was told that they'd tried to set up their mail server not to require passwords but it wouldn't let them so they just set everybody's to password. They didn't give any instructions on how to change it, so you probably couldn't. I could have read the CEO's email if I'd cared, but it wouldn't have been worth the effort.
Short or long isn't the issue. Make them descriptive. If you're calculating the rent on an office, calling it "rent" should be enough. If you have to calculate three different rents and total them, "office_rent," "computer_rent," and "copier_rent" will help you keep track of which is which. Put in as much as you need to help the next programmer know what's going on, but making them long just because you can doesn't help.
Morons think "If I can get them involved, they will pay more attention to my ad" Instead most consumers get ANGRY at both the site that is abusing them and the moron company that thinks "bad pr is better than no pr"
I've got a good way to deal with this type of crap: if I find the advertising obnoxious, I stop buying that product. I figure advertising is intended to influence us, and if I dislike the ads, I let them influence me against the company in question. Because of this, I've not patronized some companies in over thirty years and don't miss them one bit.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes and no. They can't prevent you from coding, but they could prevent you from working for a direct competitor of theirs for a specified time. That's what's being claimed here. (Unlike most Slashdotters, I RTFM before posting.) NanoLimp is objecting to the coder working for Google as they're in direct competition in the search engine field. They want to make sure the confidentiality clauses of the contract are enforced, and to get any documents about how their engine works returned.
Why do I get the impression there's a cause/effect relationship here?
Now that's a good point. My post was made assuming that whoever had the unauthorized stuff on the LAN knew about it. Yes, if it's a matter of carelessness or a piece of misconfigured software, that shouldn't be a firing offense, and I doubt it would be. But knowingly setting something like that up, espcially if there's a policy forbidding it should have you out the door so fast your head spins.
I don't know; I've never tried. There are a lot of ways to use a network without putting up an unauthorized server, or bringing your private laptop in and hooking it up. If you really need to do either of those, ask for permission. If there's a good reason, you should be able to get it, provided you take proper precautions. But nobody should be allowed to hook things up without telling anybody about it. That's just common sense.
Are there really companies out there that still don't have a policy about not hooking up private equipment to the LAN without permission? Are there even any that let you run your own server on their LAN without aking? I find that hard to believe. Even if bandwidth isn't an issue, the company owns the equiptment and has a right to say how it gets used, and what traffic is premitted. Anybody adding private equipment or running an unauthorized server has to know they're violating company policy, and can expect to be fired when it's discovered. The best way to keep it from happening a second time is to make sure everybody knows just why the fsckwit got canned.
That's true, now. There was a time that a specific act had to be shown, and the person specified. Over a hundred years ago, a man was injured when a loose barrel came flying out of a brewery and hit him. He sued for negligence, and won, even though nobody could be shown to have caused it. This was because the incident was so outrageous that there was no possible explanation without assuming negligence, and it established a new legal priciple: res ipse loquitur, the act speaks for itself.
I'm the metamoderator given that mod to metamod, and I agree with you. Unfair!
That's a good question. Some do, some don't. However, most of the people we hear about doing it are Open Source. Maybe that's because there are more people out there with the code helping to get the patches written.
I never said there had to be a relationship. However, most open source developers tend to release important patches as soon as they're tested, to keep their project safe.
Microsoft releases security updates on a regular schedule, rather than as soon as they're created. For all we know, these new patches may have been sitting on the servers at Redmond for over a month before being announced. Not so with Open Source. When a patch is needed, it's developed, tested and released. No waiting for the next scheduled patch release like Microsoft does.
There's a very good reason IE loads faster than anything else. Part of its code is in memory all the time. It's the part used by Windows Explorer, your desktop shell. All that needs to load when you click on the Blue E is the part that isn't in use already. With Firefox, or any other browser, the entire program has to load, and that's going to take a little time.
Back when the IBM PC first came out, you could buy a top-of-the-line PC for about $2000. You still can, even with inflation, and you get a lot more for it. My point is that even if the cost is still $7000/Kg, the price will be much less in purchasing power.
Basic research tends to be expensive. Once we know how to make these glasses, it becomes an exercise in engeneering, and the price comes down. Yes, it can cost $7000 or so per kilo to bring it down from orbit, and it may still will in 50 years. But so what? How much will $7000 buy 50 years from today? Not as much as it does now, that's for sure. And if there's enough profit out there, the costs will come down as more and more ships are going up and back.
I take it, then, that you've never read Doc Smith's classic Skylark series, the first serious SF work to leave the Solar System. In it, he assumes that although you can convert mass into energy, the speed of light is no barrier. To be fair, it was written in the (I think) the early thirties, when Relativity had not been as well tested as it is now.
Would you be interested in a well written show with good acting? That's what Firefly was, and I've heard the movie is the same. I'm not a fan of the show because it's Sci-Fi, but because it's good, and I doubt I'm the only person who feels that way.
I'm not asking for an exact match. The problem is that any program that claims to predict what the climate is going to do can't come anywhere close to predicting the present starting 50 years ago. The temperature curve never even has the same general shape.
Right now, we have a lot of different computer programs that claim to show us the future. Not one of them can start with the known conditions of fifty years ago and end up with today. We don't understand why the climate is changing, and before we take drastic measures, we should learn what's really happening. As far as removing CO2 faster than we put it in, I'm talking about the US only. I heard it from somebody I trust to tell the truth, but I have no cites and if you don't want to believe it, I'll not argue the point.
I've heard, recently, that there's so much forrest, agraculture and so-on in the USA that it's taking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere faster than it's putting it in, but I don't have a cite for it.
Before enacting legislation requiring expensive steps to reduce global warming, we should really be spending a little money finding out exactly what's going on.
Fatburger is OK, but not if I'm paying. To me, they're a little pricy for what you get. I'd say they'd be a much better value at about a 15% lower price. If you like them, knock your socks off, but I'll go to In-N-Out or Bob's Big Boy.
Space 1999 was crap when it came out and it's still crap. If you want good SF from that era try either Blake's 7 or Saphire and Steel, although the latter comes closer to urban fantasy.
Libratarians like to say that the Marketplace will take care of it. This is a good place to let it do exactly that. Don't pay, don't comment, don't contribute. Go someplace else and watch the site wither on the vine.
You think that's bad? I once worked for a small company. When I was hired, I was given my company email address. I was told that they'd tried to set up their mail server not to require passwords but it wouldn't let them so they just set everybody's to password. They didn't give any instructions on how to change it, so you probably couldn't. I could have read the CEO's email if I'd cared, but it wouldn't have been worth the effort.
Short or long isn't the issue. Make them descriptive. If you're calculating the rent on an office, calling it "rent" should be enough. If you have to calculate three different rents and total them, "office_rent," "computer_rent," and "copier_rent" will help you keep track of which is which. Put in as much as you need to help the next programmer know what's going on, but making them long just because you can doesn't help.
su is your friend. Trust su.
I've got a good way to deal with this type of crap: if I find the advertising obnoxious, I stop buying that product. I figure advertising is intended to influence us, and if I dislike the ads, I let them influence me against the company in question. Because of this, I've not patronized some companies in over thirty years and don't miss them one bit.