I've always said they should take the Al Capone approach: audit spammers and try to get them for tax fraud. Something tells me that most penis pill pushers aren't paying the full amount of taxes for every bottle of pills they sell. With all of the regulations in existance that govern business operations, any spammer has got to be violating at least a handful of them. Relentlessly investigate a bunch of them, and others will decide that spamming is not worth it. Not to mention the profitability of spammers will decrease enormously when they have to spend a bunch of time and money preparing for a tax audit and coming into compliance with a bunch of other regulations as well.
A prison term is the only way to truly deter someone from spamming. Financial penalties are pointless. When Joe Trailerpark decides to start spamming, he is faced with the choice of doing something that is financially lucrative or doing the next best alternative which would probably be something along the lines of working at Taco Bell. The way he sees it, even if he were sued for everything he had, he wouldn't be any worse off than he would have been by not spamming and taking the shitty fast food job. Prison on the other hand would make him really stop and think, and most likely he would decide that spamming just isn't worth it. Sure some people will do it anyway, just like some people sell drugs, but that is what the legal system is there for.
Here's a better idea: do your fucking job as a parent! Since when is it the responsibility of "society" to make your spoiled brat behave? Good luck with the private schools, they'll throw troublemakers out on their ass, unless the parents are willing to pay > $20,000 a year to keep them in. I'm sorry that you had no control over your actions at age 16, but the rest of the students in a public or private school classroom shouldn't have to suffer for it. Afterall, somebody's got to pump the gas.
Certifications serve as a de-facto licensing program for computer professionals. This is the only way to realistically license people. Could a government organization possibly keep up with technology to the extent that they would be able to keep licensing requirements current? I highly doubt it, in a field that changes so fast. Organizations who hire technical people simply must know how to hire good ones. It is common sense that hiring the cheapest person to get the job done will usually result in inferior quality. Another downside to licensing is that just because someone is licensed does not necessarily make them good at what they do. The "paper certs" who know how to get certified but don't know how to do anything in the real world will learn how to play the licensing game as well. Managers must be adept at weeding out people like this.
Generally such contracts are unenforceable, even with at-will employment, unless the activity being prohibited directly competes with or otherwise undermines the employer. If the side job does not use the employer's resources, clients, or compete with them in the marketplace, it is generally considered unreasonable restriction of someone's right to make a living if they try to take action against you for holding the side job. They could likely trump up some reason to fire you, but they would most likely not be able to prevent you from working for the other company.
This is in Australia; Kazaa was found to be legal in the United States. Australian judges do not consider these rulings when a suit is filed in their court. The makers of Kazaa are still being sued on a regular basis even in the U.S. whenever the recording industry lawyers come up with a new idea for a suit.
Just tell him you smoke weed. He'll never call again, guaranteed. Got to love how the US Army works. You can beat your wife or steal a bunch of stuff and get a second chance. But smoke some weed and you're gone immediately.
Exactly. They've scared congress with enough tales of financial ruin that there will be even more heavy handed legislation and most importantly for them, federal enforcement. The civil copyright infringement remedies, which have traditionally relied on the owner for enforcement, have now been transferred to the taxpayers. But somehow I doubt the government would be nearly as responsive if some smalltime software developer asked for federal help to stop illegal distribution of his applications.
Why is the BBC interested in keeping up with the times? Ah competition, that would be it. There are other stations which everyone would watch if BBC wasn't interesting enough (in a relative sense. I know, it's British TV we're talking about here.) Anyway, a publicly owned BT would be a monopoly, since it's hard enough to have a competing phone company even without a government owned monopoly. I highly doubt they would realistically allow for a competitor, so they would have every excuse to stagnate and become someone's political empire where they could hire their friends into cushy guaranteed government jobs.
How would a publicly run British Telecom be any better? They would have no incentive to update technology since there would be no competition. You would be stuck with a very reliable big black rotory dial phone.
Tell you what, if Sun ever gets up to $44 a share, kick away. That's about where I bought it, so I have indeed taken a financial beating on it. Luckily I don't have many shares so it doesn't bother me too much. Don't get your hopes up about the nutkick, though, I really don't think Sun will ever be what they were in the late 90s.
You're putting a lot of trust in the software company. At their sole discretion, they can declare you in violation of any of the numerous terms, and cut off your access without refund. If you dispute this, you're free to take them to court at a cost that would definitely be greater than the cost of the software. Gee, where do I sign up? Also, I do believe that most license agreements say something along the lines of subject to change at anytime with or without notice. So not only do you have to agree to numerous conditions, some of which may not be legal in the first place, but you also must agree to future conditions which you aren't even aware of. Are you beginning to see now that this is not such a black and white right and wrong issue?
I ended up going with cable in my new place for the same reason. It seems like DSL is a promising technology, but has never quite worked out so well due to phone company and provider incompetence. It was especially bad in college when I had DSL through a "competitive" DSL provider. I had to finally drop it after repetitively getting bounced around between them and Verizon whenever there was a problem. I didn't feel too sorry for them when they went under. And until recently, in my area, DSL was more expensive and slower than cable! Jeez, no wonder Covad went bankrupt.
I bought when their outlook was much better (ie in the bubble) and was a naive investor at the time, thinking I would hold on until they pulled out of their slide. Here I am, having ridden it all the way to the bottom. I should probably sell and take the tax deduction, but I would definitely make more by just waiting to sell when the price gets up above $12 a share. I think they're going to pull a SCO in a few years and cause a temporary spike in price, at which time I will bail.
You've got to remember folks, this is Sun we're talking about. The company that just doesn't get it, and hasn't gotten it for about the last 7 years. I seriously doubt they are going to corner the market on anything now. At most, this may stop current Solaris users from switching to Linux, but that's about it. And Sun won't make a significant amount of money on this plan either.
The point is that other companies don't abuse their customers this way. Therefore, I won't do business with a shady place like that. Why should I have to pay a car rental company whatever arbitrary fee they come up with just because I drove their car 56 MPH in a 55 zone? Is this really about "safety", or revenue enhancement?
You would have to have a very large concentration of pot smoke to get someone else high. Trust me, smelling someone smoking it is not going to do anything to you. I've been to enough concerts to know first hand that a second hand high is nearly impossible to get. Still yet, smoking pot in public places that are currently non smoking should of course be prohibited.
Yes, yes, the sky is falling! Just like it was in the 1970s when we had only 20 years of natural gas left. Environmental hysteria is old, we don't care anymore. Study after study of unsubstantiated claptrap has left people apathetic about the environment. If the so called environmentalists want to actually make people concerned about things, they could at least come up with some reality-based information rather than alarmist crap that is always proven false later. People who continually spout junk science actually undermine the cause of environmentalism. I know that hysteria is supposed to get peoples' attention, but after time it just annoys them and makes them tune out.
Ya OK, we'll deindustrialize the US, just because you say so, in order to make things "fair" for the so-called developing nations; are you happy now? That is what this treaty is about afterall; wealth redistribution, not cleaning up the environment. Why else would they have this pollution credit bullshit and exemptions for the most-polluting country (China)?
Slashdot Mirror
I've always said they should take the Al Capone approach: audit spammers and try to get them for tax fraud. Something tells me that most penis pill pushers aren't paying the full amount of taxes for every bottle of pills they sell. With all of the regulations in existance that govern business operations, any spammer has got to be violating at least a handful of them. Relentlessly investigate a bunch of them, and others will decide that spamming is not worth it. Not to mention the profitability of spammers will decrease enormously when they have to spend a bunch of time and money preparing for a tax audit and coming into compliance with a bunch of other regulations as well.
A prison term is the only way to truly deter someone from spamming. Financial penalties are pointless. When Joe Trailerpark decides to start spamming, he is faced with the choice of doing something that is financially lucrative or doing the next best alternative which would probably be something along the lines of working at Taco Bell. The way he sees it, even if he were sued for everything he had, he wouldn't be any worse off than he would have been by not spamming and taking the shitty fast food job. Prison on the other hand would make him really stop and think, and most likely he would decide that spamming just isn't worth it. Sure some people will do it anyway, just like some people sell drugs, but that is what the legal system is there for.
Here's a better idea: do your fucking job as a parent! Since when is it the responsibility of "society" to make your spoiled brat behave? Good luck with the private schools, they'll throw troublemakers out on their ass, unless the parents are willing to pay > $20,000 a year to keep them in. I'm sorry that you had no control over your actions at age 16, but the rest of the students in a public or private school classroom shouldn't have to suffer for it. Afterall, somebody's got to pump the gas.
I think he just forgot that xenophobia is only OK when it's against the United States.
Certifications serve as a de-facto licensing program for computer professionals. This is the only way to realistically license people. Could a government organization possibly keep up with technology to the extent that they would be able to keep licensing requirements current? I highly doubt it, in a field that changes so fast. Organizations who hire technical people simply must know how to hire good ones. It is common sense that hiring the cheapest person to get the job done will usually result in inferior quality. Another downside to licensing is that just because someone is licensed does not necessarily make them good at what they do. The "paper certs" who know how to get certified but don't know how to do anything in the real world will learn how to play the licensing game as well. Managers must be adept at weeding out people like this.
Single sign on was never alive (and never will be, despite Microsoft's non-efforts).
Generally such contracts are unenforceable, even with at-will employment, unless the activity being prohibited directly competes with or otherwise undermines the employer. If the side job does not use the employer's resources, clients, or compete with them in the marketplace, it is generally considered unreasonable restriction of someone's right to make a living if they try to take action against you for holding the side job. They could likely trump up some reason to fire you, but they would most likely not be able to prevent you from working for the other company.
This is in Australia; Kazaa was found to be legal in the United States. Australian judges do not consider these rulings when a suit is filed in their court. The makers of Kazaa are still being sued on a regular basis even in the U.S. whenever the recording industry lawyers come up with a new idea for a suit.
Just tell him you smoke weed. He'll never call again, guaranteed. Got to love how the US Army works. You can beat your wife or steal a bunch of stuff and get a second chance. But smoke some weed and you're gone immediately.
Exactly. They've scared congress with enough tales of financial ruin that there will be even more heavy handed legislation and most importantly for them, federal enforcement. The civil copyright infringement remedies, which have traditionally relied on the owner for enforcement, have now been transferred to the taxpayers. But somehow I doubt the government would be nearly as responsive if some smalltime software developer asked for federal help to stop illegal distribution of his applications.
Why is the BBC interested in keeping up with the times? Ah competition, that would be it. There are other stations which everyone would watch if BBC wasn't interesting enough (in a relative sense. I know, it's British TV we're talking about here.) Anyway, a publicly owned BT would be a monopoly, since it's hard enough to have a competing phone company even without a government owned monopoly. I highly doubt they would realistically allow for a competitor, so they would have every excuse to stagnate and become someone's political empire where they could hire their friends into cushy guaranteed government jobs.
Don't forget, BT could also sue them for all those hyperlinks that Google puts on their results pages!
How would a publicly run British Telecom be any better? They would have no incentive to update technology since there would be no competition. You would be stuck with a very reliable big black rotory dial phone.
Tell you what, if Sun ever gets up to $44 a share, kick away. That's about where I bought it, so I have indeed taken a financial beating on it. Luckily I don't have many shares so it doesn't bother me too much. Don't get your hopes up about the nutkick, though, I really don't think Sun will ever be what they were in the late 90s.
You're putting a lot of trust in the software company. At their sole discretion, they can declare you in violation of any of the numerous terms, and cut off your access without refund. If you dispute this, you're free to take them to court at a cost that would definitely be greater than the cost of the software. Gee, where do I sign up? Also, I do believe that most license agreements say something along the lines of subject to change at anytime with or without notice. So not only do you have to agree to numerous conditions, some of which may not be legal in the first place, but you also must agree to future conditions which you aren't even aware of. Are you beginning to see now that this is not such a black and white right and wrong issue?
I ended up going with cable in my new place for the same reason. It seems like DSL is a promising technology, but has never quite worked out so well due to phone company and provider incompetence. It was especially bad in college when I had DSL through a "competitive" DSL provider. I had to finally drop it after repetitively getting bounced around between them and Verizon whenever there was a problem. I didn't feel too sorry for them when they went under. And until recently, in my area, DSL was more expensive and slower than cable! Jeez, no wonder Covad went bankrupt.
I bought when their outlook was much better (ie in the bubble) and was a naive investor at the time, thinking I would hold on until they pulled out of their slide. Here I am, having ridden it all the way to the bottom. I should probably sell and take the tax deduction, but I would definitely make more by just waiting to sell when the price gets up above $12 a share. I think they're going to pull a SCO in a few years and cause a temporary spike in price, at which time I will bail.
You've got to remember folks, this is Sun we're talking about. The company that just doesn't get it, and hasn't gotten it for about the last 7 years. I seriously doubt they are going to corner the market on anything now. At most, this may stop current Solaris users from switching to Linux, but that's about it. And Sun won't make a significant amount of money on this plan either.
</Sun Shareholder rant>
The point is that other companies don't abuse their customers this way. Therefore, I won't do business with a shady place like that. Why should I have to pay a car rental company whatever arbitrary fee they come up with just because I drove their car 56 MPH in a 55 zone? Is this really about "safety", or revenue enhancement?
What do you expect from a bunch of crooked Texas businessmen?
You would have to have a very large concentration of pot smoke to get someone else high. Trust me, smelling someone smoking it is not going to do anything to you. I've been to enough concerts to know first hand that a second hand high is nearly impossible to get. Still yet, smoking pot in public places that are currently non smoking should of course be prohibited.
Yes, yes, the sky is falling! Just like it was in the 1970s when we had only 20 years of natural gas left. Environmental hysteria is old, we don't care anymore. Study after study of unsubstantiated claptrap has left people apathetic about the environment. If the so called environmentalists want to actually make people concerned about things, they could at least come up with some reality-based information rather than alarmist crap that is always proven false later. People who continually spout junk science actually undermine the cause of environmentalism. I know that hysteria is supposed to get peoples' attention, but after time it just annoys them and makes them tune out.
This comment is so truthful and insightful, I just knew it would get modded +4 Flamebait when some pissed off socialist with mod points read it.
Ya OK, we'll deindustrialize the US, just because you say so, in order to make things "fair" for the so-called developing nations; are you happy now? That is what this treaty is about afterall; wealth redistribution, not cleaning up the environment. Why else would they have this pollution credit bullshit and exemptions for the most-polluting country (China)?
No, that makes him your baby-daddy.