So what you're saying is that, because you need a car one day a week, it's completely unreasonable for you (or anyone else) to use public transportation on the other six?
That's not the stupidest thing I've seen you write, but it's on up there...
Speaking of gas giants, it's relatively easy to imagine an ecosystem of blimp-like creatures floating around on one in a way similar to how plankton do in Earth's ocean.
Second, you missed his point: the thing that's hurt the scientific community the most is that it allowed the issue to be framed in terms of "belief" in the first place.
From the picture Bonch (who is on my foes list, by the way) posted, I think he actually has a point. The screen is reasonable form-follows-function, but there are plenty of ways to style a keyboard and mouse, and the one Visio chose really does rip off Apple.
I found the AC's comment neither vacuous or snide. In fact, I think his tone was pretty diplomatic, especially in retrospect after seeing how you're now treating me now. You're not only acting paranoid but now appear to have a huge chip on your shoulder too.
Anyway, alienate people with your attitude all you like; it's not as if I care. I just hope someday you'll come to understand why everyone appears to be conspiring against you even though they're really not, and why I'm going to add you to my foes list now.
Look, we all know how Slashdot works. However, randomly accusing the author of an on-topic reply in a completely unrelated thread of being a patent troll stalker is indeed paranoid.
Why do you have a physics class on your resume if you're not looking for a physics-related job? I weed out applicants that had cluttered up their CVs with every little thing they had ever touched.
I was under the impression that resumes and CVs are two different things: a resume is a single page (maybe two, for someone in the latter half of their career) that contains the most relevant skills and experience. A CV is a chronological list of everything you've done in your career, spanning (potentially) tens of pages.
I hate having to write out-of-context, complicated, error-free programs on them when I can't rely on muscle memory to do some of the syntax that my fingers would automatically handle for me if I was typing, and where my normal brain-to-output pathways are unavailable.
Since when did something written on a whiteboard have to be error-free and syntactically correct? Your whiteboard doesn't have a "compile" button on it, does it?!
Whiteboards are for writing pseudo-code, in order to explain a concept to other people. Precise mastery of the technical minutiae is not necessary.
Copper alone is prone to corrosion... though I suppose manufacturers might like a keyboard that rusts after a few years.
But with copper it isn't a problem like it is with iron. When iron rusts, the rusted part expands and flakes off, exposing the next layer so that it can then rust too. The process continues until the whole thing disintegrates. With copper, on the other hand, the corroded outer layer turns green but remains intact, so the item doesn't actually deteriorate.
You misunderstood: I said there's no obligation for the government not to make the data easily accessible in order to prop up Ancestry.com's business model. If improved data access screws over Ancestry.com, too bad for them.
Consider the possible categories of software writers, and the consequences of abolishing copyright on them:
Commercial software companies: bankrupt because their business model is no longer viable, they have no code to release the source for in the first place.
Companies in other industries with in-house software (or providers of software-as-a-service): no change, since they don't release even their binaries publicly anyway.
FOSS organizations: no change, since they're committed to releasing source already.
An interesting concept. It might not be bad initially. We may start to see more companies keeping their source code 'secret' though. Still, the shining ray of hope is that a huge amount of good will be done.
What companies? The ones who make software to sell commercially would be put out of business; the ones who make software for in-house use keep their code secret already.
Forcing someone to do something that they personally feel violates their own morality
If doing your job violates your sense of morality, you have the wrong job!
If a man finds it immoral to kill a man but is pressed into military service because of a draft do we make him take a gun and kill, because if he quits he is a deserter and will be hung, or do we let him be a consciences objector.
The proper analogy here would be if that man chose to enlist and then decided to go AWOL.
The way it ought to work is that if a government body adopts your standard, then you should lose your copyright on it. The copyright was only granted at the whim of the government in the first place, after all.
Ancestry.com can do what it wants, but there's no obligation for the government to preserve its business model by failing to make the data easily accessible itself.
Slashdot Mirror
So what you're saying is that, because you need a car one day a week, it's completely unreasonable for you (or anyone else) to use public transportation on the other six?
That's not the stupidest thing I've seen you write, but it's on up there...
Speaking of gas giants, it's relatively easy to imagine an ecosystem of blimp-like creatures floating around on one in a way similar to how plankton do in Earth's ocean.
Except they're not... not that the Powers That Be would care.
First, the GP didn't say those claims were true.
Second, you missed his point: the thing that's hurt the scientific community the most is that it allowed the issue to be framed in terms of "belief" in the first place.
I want to see them drop the iPad screen-side-down directly onto a pointy rock. Surviving that would be impressive!
My house has lots of wooden things with square corners.
From the picture Bonch (who is on my foes list, by the way) posted, I think he actually has a point. The screen is reasonable form-follows-function, but there are plenty of ways to style a keyboard and mouse, and the one Visio chose really does rip off Apple.
The foes list isn't for people I'm angry with; it's for worthless people with whom I shouldn't waste my time interacting.
I found the AC's comment neither vacuous or snide. In fact, I think his tone was pretty diplomatic, especially in retrospect after seeing how you're now treating me now. You're not only acting paranoid but now appear to have a huge chip on your shoulder too.
Anyway, alienate people with your attitude all you like; it's not as if I care. I just hope someday you'll come to understand why everyone appears to be conspiring against you even though they're really not, and why I'm going to add you to my foes list now.
Have a nice day, you poor sorry bastard.
Look, we all know how Slashdot works. However, randomly accusing the author of an on-topic reply in a completely unrelated thread of being a patent troll stalker is indeed paranoid.
I was under the impression that resumes and CVs are two different things: a resume is a single page (maybe two, for someone in the latter half of their career) that contains the most relevant skills and experience. A CV is a chronological list of everything you've done in your career, spanning (potentially) tens of pages.
How do you use it? It doesn't necessarily seem intended to be solved (especially since it doesn't have a unique solution).
If I were interviewing you and you gave that answer, I would hire you on the spot.
But then again, I'm unemployed too (and young enough never to have been asked to interview others yet)...
Do you really want to work for a company whose technical lead has become an expert at giving interviews?
As an interviewee, I'd be worried if the interviewer seemed too good at it; I don't want to work somewhere where they get that much practice!
Since when did something written on a whiteboard have to be error-free and syntactically correct? Your whiteboard doesn't have a "compile" button on it, does it?!
Whiteboards are for writing pseudo-code, in order to explain a concept to other people. Precise mastery of the technical minutiae is not necessary.
But with copper it isn't a problem like it is with iron. When iron rusts, the rusted part expands and flakes off, exposing the next layer so that it can then rust too. The process continues until the whole thing disintegrates. With copper, on the other hand, the corroded outer layer turns green but remains intact, so the item doesn't actually deteriorate.
Hey, I mispronounced it so bad I thought Velma was their spokesperson!
You misunderstood: I said there's no obligation for the government not to make the data easily accessible in order to prop up Ancestry.com's business model. If improved data access screws over Ancestry.com, too bad for them.
Consider the possible categories of software writers, and the consequences of abolishing copyright on them:
What companies? The ones who make software to sell commercially would be put out of business; the ones who make software for in-house use keep their code secret already.
Without copyright, there's no reason to keep the source hidden (except for things that aren't distributed anyway, making the issue irrelevant).
If doing your job violates your sense of morality, you have the wrong job!
The proper analogy here would be if that man chose to enlist and then decided to go AWOL.
The way it ought to work is that if a government body adopts your standard, then you should lose your copyright on it. The copyright was only granted at the whim of the government in the first place, after all.
Ancestry.com can do what it wants, but there's no obligation for the government to preserve its business model by failing to make the data easily accessible itself.