Someone taking CS at UVA lose a little pride so they had to rate me down? Poor guys. Ah well, at least I know I can out program you idiots who were in a few cases taught that C++ has garbage collection built into it.
That's about the worst analogy I have seen for Linux versus Windows.
Modifying Linux RARELY has to do with modifying the source code. The EXACT same holds true with Windows. In other words, tuning performance and removing/adding belts and other extra stuff can be done through external programs or simply REMOVING clutter on both OSes.
I happen to be a computer programmer, and my last two companies have been in the same field as one another. Neither company has had a non-compete part to their contract, and I know quite a bit about some very profitable software.
If a contract prevents you from doing your profession (e.g., a generalization such as NO other programming job for a year), then you really might want to consider other options or get them to strongly rephrase the terminology to specifically say your field (and you would obviously want whatever wording is best for you... field is still too general).
The point is, the guy in question has a deep knowledge of things that went on in MS that would greatly benefit Google (any edge MS may have would be immediately lost). His contract was there for a reason and he was already being paid quite a large amount of money so that he could live comfortablely for the YEAR (which is a VERY short time) that he could spend his time doing anything he wanted, except for working for direct competitors, which is a VERY short list considering what he did for MS.
Yes, it sucks, but what he is doing is nothing short of corporate espionage.
I believe that if this person is unallowed to take the job at Google, it should be Microsoft's responsibility to pay him for the 40 hours a week that they are taking away from him, at the same rate - otherwise they should not be allowed to dictate jack shit in a person's life for time they are not paying.
Considering his position at MS, his severance package most certainly did cover his living conditions for the next year, which is why an executive is supposed to sign these contracts.
Do you honestly think this guy was programming stuff? Executives don't. This is more of a reply to people you are talking too since you get he is not screwed.
It's his fault for signing the contract and it's his fault for breaking the contract. The man deserves no pity, he just did not think he would be called on it. It's not like he is not a millionaire. If this was a janitor at MS going to become a janitor at Google, then yes, I would feel pity for him and be up-in-arms too, but the fact is this guy knew he had timely information and wanted to start as soon as possible to give Google an extra, undeserved edge.
Guess it's a good thing that contract was signed in Washington state and being sued by Microsoft in Seattle, Washington. Also, the MS contract did not list specific employers and simply listed the obvious clause to prevent leaked trade secrets, which as the judge pointed out, is at the very least enforceable up until the trial and that is a great sign for MS.
I agree with the premise that it's less efficient, but I am just going with what I saw. There is no way these people actually had the number of epic items legitamitly.
There MUST be ids of the items in the database, simply by the idea of design. The unusual thing about WoW gold, compared to any other game that I have played, is that gold is not an item like other "items." It's just a quantity, so I doubt there is an id associated.
What I assume is going on now, is that people with LARGE amounts of gold, or a history of a large amount of gold are being checked and the transactions they did during the bug could (should) be checked. I don't know if it is being done, but it could probably be automated.
The farmers were actually duping the most, at least on the servers I saw. I saw a bunch of "epic" quality items (generally the best sellable, for those that don't play the game) duped and on the AH. It was not just gold being duped in other words.
That was my point about Google being able to walk away without so much as a slap on the wrist. They're the ones that brought down the lawsuit, especially if they knew about the contract.
I am actually confusing myself (probably because I have been working from my last post until this post, and I live in EST), but my point, and hopefully this comes out right, is that Google receives all of the benefits for breaking the contract and knowingly did. I'm tempted to even say that Google is obligated NOT to hire any person under such a contract where such an obvious conflict appears (now, hiring a.NET programmer to program their search technology is a different story).
Company A hires me to be their CEO and has a similar one year no-competition contract. The agreement states that I get a severance during that one year, to enable me to live comfortablely so that I am not giving away Company A's trade secrets.
Company B, a big competitor of Company A, notices I am willing to leave my company or already have. Now, they know I have signed the contract, but they need to know the information I was working with ASAP and are probably willing to pay for anything that happens to be as a result of breaking the contract. In other words, I lose nothing and they lose a little bit of cash, but gain all CURRENT information on Company A that they want/need.
That's the best I could come up with on short notice, and it actually sounds a bit like corporate espionage, but that is just me. Hopefully it made sense.
In response to my OTHER responders... I was using the robbery as a metaphor.
There might have been some sort of signing bonus that he received when he signed the contract that he had to give up for breaking out of the contract. He probably also got paid for leaving (severance). Maybe Google paid that back for him. This is completely a guess.
For the same reason you're guilty if you assist a criminal to escape the police. Sure, you didn't walk into the bank and take the money, but the guy you knowingly drove away did.
You have no obligation under the contract, but you cannot knowingly break someone out of a contract in order to benefit from it. It's the only catch. Otherwise what would be the point of a contract if someone can just break it for you and walk away (especially if you did not know they were doing it)?
Except 2/3 of the software industry IS NOT in direct competition with Microsoft. Yes, Microsoft does quite a bit of different things, but realisticly they're not going to sue a Bungie game programmer who leaves to go to EA. It's the position that makes this interesting because that guy was an executive, and thus he knows a lot about MS' operations and the year is to give them the time to have changed things before he can inform competitors on how it all works.
Nope. I am a fiscal conservative/social liberal who is strong on national defense. But yes, I do consider the Founding Fathers to be morons.
Okay, you admit to being a social liberal and then try to argue what I said was wrong. I simply CATEGORIZED the comment and you laid yourself into it.
I did catch the long paragraph calling me a moron for suggesting he leave the US (my eyes scan quick as I was scrolling down to this). Honestly, the whole point for me saying it was because he has such contempt for the country and its basis in existance. He obviously holds some sort of grudge. Personally, I could not stand to feel that way about the place I lived and would WANT to leave. Hopefully, I made the difference and pushed him over the edge to do what is RIGHT for himself/herself. You very well may love our country and BOTH of you are welcome to stay, but he CLEARLY hates it.
The hunting comment was a slap in John Kerry's face. I own a gun and I have never hunted before, and I never will.
As for the rest of your post about how we'd be so hunky-doory (doorey? oh well) had we stayed in the British Empire, did you even think twice about how they were holding the core industrial pieces of the puzzle so they held all the cards? I love how YOU liberals feel that you are the only "educated" people on ANY subject you feel like talking about. I'll gladly start nitpicking if you want me too.
i won't NEED arms to start guerilla warfare/resist tyranny etc. because the government won't be doing stuff like that since i WILL participate in it.
I like that idea and I do believe that my government should do what the people want, but the whole right to bear arms is not JUST for protection against my government (because to be honest, I do not see myself holed up in my house fighting a tank with a pistol, or even a squad of U.S. Marines). I mostly like the right because I have it as protection against anyone that feels THEY have the right to break into my house in hopes to hurt myself or my family.
I trust plenty of people, just most of them are not liberals. There are a few though.
While you may be right on your changing of the person theory, I had to catch this:
Not only will you suddenly have a very hard time pinpointing your hometown, let alone your country.
Considering the countries that have sent men and women into space, how can you honestly believe they have trouble pinpointing their country? Last I checked on pictures of the Earth, the US, Russia, Japan, and China are all pretty easy to spot. I also cannot see this as true:
Or when you watch the earth shrink to the size of a ping-pong ball when making the minutest of celestial excursions, for example to our moon.
I understand the point, and all, but the moon looks a lot bigger than a ping pong ball and it's not even half as large as the Earth and we view it from the ground level of our planet, but when you are on the moon, you are on the outermost part of it (where our atmosphere is), which puts us closer by comparison to an already larger object.
Pretty much what I am getting at is that I am a nitpicking bastard. In truth, I do not think man will be any less hostile in space than on Earth. After all, EVERYONE that goes into space is in the military. I do not see the space contests changing that in anything other than short-lived trips to space anytime soon (e.g., no colonization for them; just for governments).
If you think the IRS undermines the federal authority (by forwarding taxes to them, which can then be funneled back to the states), then yes.
The difference between the described and your post is that the described used a seemingly FOREIGN tax with FOREIGN collectors. The suggested fix was to simply make the local governments impose a tax (anything really) and simply forward that money to Britain, without the colonists even knowing for the most part.
It's liberal because it can be taken as anti-institution and it literally calls our Founding Fathers morons.
Generally, conservatives are not going to come out and say that. Honestly, the "Liberal poster" should probably not be living in the US because he quite obviously detests the country and even more so, its founding.
Modern liberal. Not to mention conservatives believe in bearing arms et al, while liberals do not (even if they go hunting every now and then...).
Some other misnomers taught to us through our *great* K-12 educational system about the American Revolution.
Who on earth would call our K-12 system great?
I could go on and on. The point is, the American Revolution is not something to draw a parallel with in terms of speculative future history regarding the colonization of space.
I don't see why not? Whether you are right or wrong on EVERY single point just goes to show you how inevitable conflict is during colonization. One side is going to feel screwed, and if there are other people colonizing, then they are going to probably going to eventually want part of another colony. You think China is going to get that from the US in, oh, 20 years? Heck no, there will be a fight.
Slashdot Mirror
Then again, I am not exactly running an old HP or Dell, or something similar.
Someone taking CS at UVA lose a little pride so they had to rate me down? Poor guys. Ah well, at least I know I can out program you idiots who were in a few cases taught that C++ has garbage collection built into it.
Is this a serious question or a sarcastic point?
-I go to UVA.
Modifying Linux RARELY has to do with modifying the source code. The EXACT same holds true with Windows. In other words, tuning performance and removing/adding belts and other extra stuff can be done through external programs or simply REMOVING clutter on both OSes.
Grading though, but otherwise an intriguing idea.
If a contract prevents you from doing your profession (e.g., a generalization such as NO other programming job for a year), then you really might want to consider other options or get them to strongly rephrase the terminology to specifically say your field (and you would obviously want whatever wording is best for you... field is still too general).
The point is, the guy in question has a deep knowledge of things that went on in MS that would greatly benefit Google (any edge MS may have would be immediately lost). His contract was there for a reason and he was already being paid quite a large amount of money so that he could live comfortablely for the YEAR (which is a VERY short time) that he could spend his time doing anything he wanted, except for working for direct competitors, which is a VERY short list considering what he did for MS.
Yes, it sucks, but what he is doing is nothing short of corporate espionage.
It's his fault for signing the contract and it's his fault for breaking the contract. The man deserves no pity, he just did not think he would be called on it. It's not like he is not a millionaire. If this was a janitor at MS going to become a janitor at Google, then yes, I would feel pity for him and be up-in-arms too, but the fact is this guy knew he had timely information and wanted to start as soon as possible to give Google an extra, undeserved edge.
Guess it's a good thing that contract was signed in Washington state and being sued by Microsoft in Seattle, Washington. Also, the MS contract did not list specific employers and simply listed the obvious clause to prevent leaked trade secrets, which as the judge pointed out, is at the very least enforceable up until the trial and that is a great sign for MS.
I agree with the premise that it's less efficient, but I am just going with what I saw. There is no way these people actually had the number of epic items legitamitly.
There MUST be ids of the items in the database, simply by the idea of design. The unusual thing about WoW gold, compared to any other game that I have played, is that gold is not an item like other "items." It's just a quantity, so I doubt there is an id associated.
What I assume is going on now, is that people with LARGE amounts of gold, or a history of a large amount of gold are being checked and the transactions they did during the bug could (should) be checked. I don't know if it is being done, but it could probably be automated.
The farmers were actually duping the most, at least on the servers I saw. I saw a bunch of "epic" quality items (generally the best sellable, for those that don't play the game) duped and on the AH. It was not just gold being duped in other words.
I am actually confusing myself (probably because I have been working from my last post until this post, and I live in EST), but my point, and hopefully this comes out right, is that Google receives all of the benefits for breaking the contract and knowingly did. I'm tempted to even say that Google is obligated NOT to hire any person under such a contract where such an obvious conflict appears (now, hiring a .NET programmer to program their search technology is a different story).
Company A hires me to be their CEO and has a similar one year no-competition contract. The agreement states that I get a severance during that one year, to enable me to live comfortablely so that I am not giving away Company A's trade secrets.
Company B, a big competitor of Company A, notices I am willing to leave my company or already have. Now, they know I have signed the contract, but they need to know the information I was working with ASAP and are probably willing to pay for anything that happens to be as a result of breaking the contract. In other words, I lose nothing and they lose a little bit of cash, but gain all CURRENT information on Company A that they want/need.
That's the best I could come up with on short notice, and it actually sounds a bit like corporate espionage, but that is just me. Hopefully it made sense.
In response to my OTHER responders... I was using the robbery as a metaphor.
There might have been some sort of signing bonus that he received when he signed the contract that he had to give up for breaking out of the contract. He probably also got paid for leaving (severance). Maybe Google paid that back for him. This is completely a guess.
You have no obligation under the contract, but you cannot knowingly break someone out of a contract in order to benefit from it. It's the only catch. Otherwise what would be the point of a contract if someone can just break it for you and walk away (especially if you did not know they were doing it)?
Except 2/3 of the software industry IS NOT in direct competition with Microsoft. Yes, Microsoft does quite a bit of different things, but realisticly they're not going to sue a Bungie game programmer who leaves to go to EA. It's the position that makes this interesting because that guy was an executive, and thus he knows a lot about MS' operations and the year is to give them the time to have changed things before he can inform competitors on how it all works.
I guess humor was left out of the schooling too? Too bad.
It's how the people considered the taxes and their collectors, not so much the cold hard literal matter.
"You take our money from continent A and send it to continent B for THEIR COMPLETE consumption."
I did catch the long paragraph calling me a moron for suggesting he leave the US (my eyes scan quick as I was scrolling down to this). Honestly, the whole point for me saying it was because he has such contempt for the country and its basis in existance. He obviously holds some sort of grudge. Personally, I could not stand to feel that way about the place I lived and would WANT to leave. Hopefully, I made the difference and pushed him over the edge to do what is RIGHT for himself/herself. You very well may love our country and BOTH of you are welcome to stay, but he CLEARLY hates it.
The hunting comment was a slap in John Kerry's face. I own a gun and I have never hunted before, and I never will.
As for the rest of your post about how we'd be so hunky-doory (doorey? oh well) had we stayed in the British Empire, did you even think twice about how they were holding the core industrial pieces of the puzzle so they held all the cards? I love how YOU liberals feel that you are the only "educated" people on ANY subject you feel like talking about. I'll gladly start nitpicking if you want me too.
I trust plenty of people, just most of them are not liberals. There are a few though.
Pretty much what I am getting at is that I am a nitpicking bastard. In truth, I do not think man will be any less hostile in space than on Earth. After all, EVERYONE that goes into space is in the military. I do not see the space contests changing that in anything other than short-lived trips to space anytime soon (e.g., no colonization for them; just for governments).
The difference between the described and your post is that the described used a seemingly FOREIGN tax with FOREIGN collectors. The suggested fix was to simply make the local governments impose a tax (anything really) and simply forward that money to Britain, without the colonists even knowing for the most part.
Generally, conservatives are not going to come out and say that. Honestly, the "Liberal poster" should probably not be living in the US because he quite obviously detests the country and even more so, its founding.
Modern liberal. Not to mention conservatives believe in bearing arms et al, while liberals do not (even if they go hunting every now and then...).