im sorry. ppl dont run a criminal background check here. they only run a credit check. once your credit doesnt match up, they will ask you to pay a deposit. take $800 with you to a shop, and see how easily you can get a cellphone of your choice.
now im assuming that a credit check and a criminal background check are two different things, and they dont show up on one another. also realize that the terrorists who come here wouldnt have a criminal background.
whats next? dont let ppl buy t.v's easily cos it might make it easier for a terrorist to entertain himself, and we dont wanna do that?
seriously, i doubt its the criminals who have a hard time getting a cellfone. its really the common man who comes here on a visit, or a student like me, who have a tough time. and anyway, they dont run a criminal background check on ya, just a credit check. i coulda paid at&t $800 bucks as deposit, and i coulda gotten a cellfone when i wanted, the moment i got here. im sure $800 isnt much for criminals.
"The Hop-on cell phone brings cellular phone technology to virtually everyone, regardless of age, income or credit status."
well, the main thing there is the "income/credit status". its plain. while in other countries you can go into a store and get a cellphone to use with cash, or prepaid sim's, i wasnt able to do that here in the u.s.
i was ready to pay cash, and even had a sizeable amount in my bank a/c. i even had a credit card which i primarily got to get the fone. but no. they would make a call from the shops to the telecoms, who would run a credit check, and then say "sorry".
at&t wanted me to pay $800 for a crappy nokia. i mean`, the fuckin fone itself would only be worth $10 (maybe even less as they offer it free to anyone who has a good credit , and for some reason, wants that model).
i cant believe that something like a cellphone, which i consider a basic necessity by now, is treated as though its like im trying to buy a fuckin house.
as for the fones we want to choose, where are the fuckin nokia/ericsson/siemens stores out here? i didnt find any. everything offered is by the telecoms. ppl flip out over here over fones which are just lame compared to the other places.
so, i dont think this is a bad thing - this disposable fone. only cos they have a stupid system in place here for something considered basic for any person anywhere else. the whole countrys' running on credit. messy.
thing is, would you take it sitting down if someone started insulting you for the work you have been involved in for over a decade, and which you know is not wrong? if these guys don't speak out (and they aren't really speaking out, just responding once in a while - look at the number of letters coming from sco, and the number from these guys), then you might start thinking "oh, why are these guys quiet? maybe there is some truth...". and anyway, which human being ever says "ohh, look he's so calm in the face of all this idiocy - i respect him" - in these days of the riaa and sco?
the remaining 260 people who got letters from the riaa would visit their local newspapers... the young and the old...the reaction i am sure would be soo intense, it wont get over in a day, not if the riaa hired 260 different lawyers
i didnt know that the riaa won any case proving that online swapping is illegal. (someone correct me if i'm wrong) if they didn't, how can they just go out and sue whoever they like? this is akin to someone taking the law into their own hands cos they feel like it (which is against the law). so, if i am not wrong about my first statement, it would be alright for sco to go out and file suits and sue ppl too. and then "settle" with them? and make some money that way.
and if i am right, what law of the land gives them the right to "settle" cases with the people they have sued?
so now the big corporations have also become the law-makers?
cos who are the reall "artists" these guys represent? the riaa isnt going after the ppl who download good artists, or ones who arent famous. they go after the "aguilera", "spears", "nelly" kinda "artists"...
where is the riaa protecting the other artists? and how is it that universal slashed the costs of a cd now? u have to be joking if a cd by these so-called "artists" costs $22. wtf is that all bout huh?
so, who in their right minds is gonna believe the riaa when they talk bout "artists"?
i tell ya, this alll started with the concept of IP. its getting worse. i should probably go sue someone cos i "feel" tht they may be infringing on my IP. maybe i can sue someone for thinking because i was thinking before him/er. maybe i can sue someone for pissin after me, cos well, i did so b4 him/er. wtf?
and anyway, i dont consider the likes of the above "artists" to be "artists".
maybe its time to sue the riaa and the music industry and these "artists" for comin up with trash and makin us pay $22 for it? its falsification of prices and a very low quality of goods they offer!
the man talks bout a "business model". he wants to have a "business model" with open-source. hmm ok. i stopped reading that rant/whining after about 3 paragraphs. i sometimes get frustrated and feel like ranting and whining, but i normally stop short after 2 paragraphs, cos i tend to calm down and see sense by then. but i'm gonna write a bit now (cos i feel like)
where did they pick this guy up from?
intellectual propriety/property => overrated. i feel like im living int he 17th century and should have a master tell me things to do, and get a whippin if i don't. the same issue as taken up by the riaa. who do these two bodies represent? sco is supposed to represent a tech company, and as tech companies go, they are built by developers. and who are they going after? developers. and riaa would also make more sense when they start giving the artists a few more cents on a sale than to the various middle-men and companies.
there is a fundamental flaw not in the OS model, but in the model that prevails at this moment. it's the same model that messed us all up in 1998 when the dotcoms crashed. but it seems like people (read management) like to stay the ostrich, and not open their minds up.
being in the computer-science field, i do not know any developer/tech person who would actually subscribe to this model of IP. everyone i know does their job cos they enjoy doing it, and they actually do it for a purpose. if sco has a tech/developer team, i cannot see how they can bear to work under such people.
this is a flawed model that should be looked at - the running of one discipline by people from another. i don't see many programmers running the riaa, the movie industry, heck, most of the companies - let alone those in the tech industry.
this is just a way to lighten the load of the graders. after all, they need some time off over the weekends, and have other things to do too.
it's not like overloaded human graders workin day-in/out checking these papers are the best solution either.
unless there was another system of screening candidates, we will have to live with automated graders.
as it is, how many of us actually send in the essays that convey our true feelings, and how many write essays they think would be best for the school they want to get into?
but one thing is for sure with this - no matter how well the algorithm works, it is sub-consciously going to stop the students from experimenting. everyone is going to ask the ones who turned in their essays and got grades, how and what they had written, and try and emulate the same.
hmm, first - employees at sco had to go thro all the code to find something like what they did? secondly, is the difference a case of
for ( ; ; ) and,
while (1) ?
did they find some line that did a printf the way they did? what did they find that rocked the sco managements socks off?
also, if the employees who found these lines in the linux kernel were given a bit more time, maybe they will find them in some other OS too? then sue them?
so, it all started with 2.4? till then, everything was ok? so, their developers are being paid to look for things that are general enuff so they can go sue instead of doin some more productive/creative? or maybe "work"?
so, is this a case of a last-ditch effort?
this is precisely wht happened with the dot-coms - have management and lawyers run the show in a tech area, and mess it all up for everyone. i guess that goes in every field - but especially this.
Slashdot Mirror
im sorry.
ppl dont run a criminal background check here.
they only run a credit check.
once your credit doesnt match up, they will ask you to pay a deposit.
take $800 with you to a shop, and see how easily you can get a cellphone of your choice.
now im assuming that a credit check and a criminal background check are two different things, and they dont show up on one another.
also realize that the terrorists who come here wouldnt have a criminal background.
whats next? dont let ppl buy t.v's easily cos it might make it easier for a terrorist to entertain himself, and we dont wanna do that?
umm, that blue cardboard-like thingie must be it. :)
it does say "disposable cell phone" on it.
seriously, i doubt its the criminals who have a hard time getting a cellfone. its really the common man who comes here on a visit, or a student like me, who have a tough time.
and anyway, they dont run a criminal background check on ya, just a credit check. i coulda paid at&t $800 bucks as deposit, and i coulda gotten a cellfone when i wanted, the moment i got here.
im sure $800 isnt much for criminals.
and i dont like prepaid schemes. i prefer billing.
"The Hop-on cell phone brings cellular phone technology to virtually everyone, regardless of age, income or credit status."
well, the main thing there is the "income/credit status". its plain.
while in other countries you can go into a store and get a cellphone to use with cash, or prepaid sim's, i wasnt able to do that here in the u.s.
i was ready to pay cash, and even had a sizeable amount in my bank a/c. i even had a credit card which i primarily got to get the fone. but no. they would make a call from the shops to the telecoms, who would run a credit check, and then say "sorry".
at&t wanted me to pay $800 for a crappy nokia. i mean`, the fuckin fone itself would only be worth $10 (maybe even less as they offer it free to anyone who has a good credit , and for some reason, wants that model).
i cant believe that something like a cellphone, which i consider a basic necessity by now, is treated as though its like im trying to buy a fuckin house.
as for the fones we want to choose, where are the fuckin nokia/ericsson/siemens stores out here? i didnt find any. everything offered is by the telecoms. ppl flip out over here over fones which are just lame compared to the other places.
so, i dont think this is a bad thing - this disposable fone. only cos they have a stupid system in place here for something considered basic for any person anywhere else. the whole countrys' running on credit. messy.
for my dual-boot?
about the guy, but im sure his favorite position is 69.
"He says his work is necessary to explore what bioterrorists might do."
Well, now im sure the bioterrorists "know" what to do. At least he has a "noble" cause to get more funding.
To have gotten a doctorate without requisite social skills is harmful, i think.
that's "spelt" to you, mr.oxford! lol
thing is, would you take it sitting down if someone started insulting you for the work you have been involved in for over a decade, and which you know is not wrong? ...".
if these guys don't speak out (and they aren't really speaking out, just responding once in a while - look at the number of letters coming from sco, and the number from these guys), then you might start thinking "oh, why are these guys quiet? maybe there is some truth
and anyway, which human being ever says "ohh, look he's so calm in the face of all this idiocy - i respect him" - in these days of the riaa and sco?
:P
i also realized that the ones who use the words "tech-savvy" are the biggest idiots.
i hadnt read this earlier, but this just sums it up about the RIAA's mentality.
h tm
anywhere in the world, no one would be able to release this, for sure!
http://www.divisiontwo.com/articles/roseletter.
these people get millions to talk like uneducated crass. wonderful!!
enjoy...
the remaining 260 people who got letters from the riaa would visit their local newspapers ... the young and the old ...the reaction i am sure would be soo intense, it wont get over in a day, not if the riaa hired 260 different lawyers
i didnt know that the riaa won any case proving that online swapping is illegal. (someone correct me if i'm wrong)
if they didn't, how can they just go out and sue whoever they like?
this is akin to someone taking the law into their own hands cos they feel like it (which is against the law).
so, if i am not wrong about my first statement, it would be alright for sco to go out and file suits and sue ppl too. and then "settle" with them? and make some money that way.
and if i am right, what law of the land gives them the right to "settle" cases with the people they have sued?
so now the big corporations have also become the law-makers?
cos who are the reall "artists" these guys represent? ...
the riaa isnt going after the ppl who download good artists, or ones who arent famous. they go after the "aguilera", "spears", "nelly" kinda "artists"
where is the riaa protecting the other artists?
and how is it that universal slashed the costs of a cd now? u have to be joking if a cd by these so-called "artists" costs $22. wtf is that all bout huh?
so, who in their right minds is gonna believe the riaa when they talk bout "artists"?
i tell ya, this alll started with the concept of IP. its getting worse. i should probably go sue someone cos i "feel" tht they may be infringing on my IP. maybe i can sue someone for thinking because i was thinking before him/er. maybe i can sue someone for pissin after me, cos well, i did so b4 him/er. wtf?
and anyway, i dont consider the likes of the above "artists" to be "artists".
maybe its time to sue the riaa and the music industry and these "artists" for comin up with trash and makin us pay $22 for it? its falsification of prices and a very low quality of goods they offer!
the moment i saw the study was funded by MS.
the man talks bout a "business model".
he wants to have a "business model" with open-source. hmm ok.
i stopped reading that rant/whining after about 3 paragraphs. i sometimes get frustrated and feel like ranting and whining, but i normally stop short after 2 paragraphs, cos i tend to calm down and see sense by then. but i'm gonna write a bit now (cos i feel like)
where did they pick this guy up from?
intellectual propriety/property => overrated. i feel like im living int he 17th century and should have a master tell me things to do, and get a whippin if i don't. the same issue as taken up by the riaa. who do these two bodies represent? sco is supposed to represent a tech company, and as tech companies go, they are built by developers. and who are they going after? developers. and riaa would also make more sense when they start giving the artists a few more cents on a sale than to the various middle-men and companies.
there is a fundamental flaw not in the OS model, but in the model that prevails at this moment.
it's the same model that messed us all up in 1998 when the dotcoms crashed. but it seems like people (read management) like to stay the ostrich, and not open their minds up.
being in the computer-science field, i do not know any developer/tech person who would actually subscribe to this model of IP. everyone i know does their job cos they enjoy doing it, and they actually do it for a purpose.
if sco has a tech/developer team, i cannot see how they can bear to work under such people.
this is a flawed model that should be looked at - the running of one discipline by people from another. i don't see many programmers running the riaa, the movie industry, heck, most of the companies - let alone those in the tech industry.
you tell me - would u like to have a clown run u?
this is just a way to lighten the load of the graders. after all, they need some time off over the weekends, and have other things to do too.
/out checking these papers are the best solution either.
it's not like overloaded human graders workin day-in
unless there was another system of screening candidates, we will have to live with automated graders.
as it is, how many of us actually send in the essays that convey our true feelings, and how many write essays they think would be best for the school they want to get into?
but one thing is for sure with this - no matter how well the algorithm works, it is sub-consciously going to stop the students from experimenting. everyone is going to ask the ones who turned in their essays and got grades, how and what they had written, and try and emulate the same.
hmm, first - employees at sco had to go thro all the code to find something like what they did?
secondly, is the difference a case of
for ( ; ; ) and,
while (1) ?
did they find some line that did a printf the way they did?
what did they find that rocked the sco managements socks off?
also, if the employees who found these lines in the linux kernel were given a bit more time, maybe they will find them in some other OS too? then sue them?
so, it all started with 2.4? till then, everything was ok? so, their developers are being paid to look for things that are general enuff so they can go sue instead of doin some more productive/creative? or maybe "work"?
so, is this a case of a last-ditch effort?
this is precisely wht happened with the dot-coms - have management and lawyers run the show in a tech area, and mess it all up for everyone. i guess that goes in every field - but especially this.