The thing is (and don't get me wrong for that C- thing), I've had the exact same problem - one thing that I might pass on (I'm no longer in college) is the observation that sometimes, the biggest issue is the length. The essay limitation of 3-4 pages is too small to argue for something and make it good quality at the same time. Overall, in your essay, I think you did well in evaluating a number of different things that could be done in your opinion to solve the problem. This is crucial in getting a good grade - making sure you are analytical. In this case, your writing proved you were analytical.
One thing I noticed once I entered the business world is that there are pretty much three rules:
1) be as clear as you can (bullet, split, instruct like your audience was a robot,...),
2) do not hurt the audience (feelings, values, or anything put in a way that is likely to offend someone),
3) ensure you are making sense (even when you think you might not have a sound argument, but you need to use it nevertheless to get something done)
I mainly deal with business correspondence now, but looking back, I have a feeling that all three apply to essays as well - except for 2), which is flexible; an essay might try to argue something offensive, but that's where 3) kicks in.
For any other non-day-to-day correspondence (tech specs, longer formal documents), I found that the best approach that works is to be analytical and consider all options (similar to the "contrast and compare" approach for essays). When you unveil an issue to your reader in such a way, you will be demonstrating brilliance - most ingenious things are obvious, but it takes someone to point them out first!
That's my $.02 worth.
Good luck to you and all the best!! We might meet again on Slashdot, the best place for "Internet Special Olympics, where who is right or wrong doesn't matter, because in the end, everyone is still just a retard".:-)) [I'm quoting my friend who says that all the time.]
As discussed, please accept this letter as confirmation of my wish to terminate my contract with Vodafone, with one month's notice prior to the anniversary of my contract.
After this, the next sentence starts:
In the eleven months I have been with Vodafone, [...]
By this time, I stopped reading because I know that the rest of the letter is just ranting with a story that doesn't matter. And I don't even work for a cell phone company. You know what I think they did with the letter? They read up to about the same point that I read through, cancelled your service and then threw the rest of it out.
3) You're either a liar or an idiot for saying so.
This is very immature. I think you have run out argument other than restating yourself.
People and businesses AER the same thing. The reason why they are taxed differently is because the government feels that the power that arises from people combining their forces together (through venturing to take stake in a enterprise by combining capital together) is too big. By the tradition of the representative governing of a country in a republic, or a union of republics, a very important principle is attempted to be conserved: rights of minorities. A business is thus seen as a potential threat to an individual. And since entrepreneural activity is so commonplace, governments have established laws that allow that don't push "the small guy" - the same way as governments establish laws to not to tremble on rights of single individuals or minorities.
A business is indeed the same thing as people, except in case of a busines, it is a group of people. Take a mind experiment and think up a scenario for example like this: you and your friends agree to establish one checking account, where everyone will put up $10,000. The account is owned by person #1. Then, person #2 goes and buys a used truck using that money and purchases insurance on it in his name. Then, person #3 cleans up one of the rooms on the 1st floor of his house and uses some money to buy a desk, phone and agrees to sit there all day. Notice that all these three people have agreed to do what they did and trust each other (maybe there were best buddies from school). And now, they agree that they will advertise and run "moving services" (transporting furniture of people who are relocating from their old home to their new home). Person #1 will be the designated driver, person #1 & #2 will do the manual labor and person #3 will be sitting at his desk. They also agree that person #3 will be in charge of advertising and setting up appointments. They call themselves (informally) "The Three Movers" and they agree that each moving contract that they are able to close will be in fact a contract between the moving party and one of them - person #1, #2, or #3, rotating round robin so that income from the job gets split approximately evenly. Whenever they need to repair a truck, buy a new desk, or pay someone to get something done, they will do it by each putting down their after-tax personal dollars to cover cost and then move on.
Hopefully, if they play it right, they each have decent income and they just operated the same way as a business!!! Alone by themselves, they would not have been able to do it.
Notice that no business was ever registered and is ever needed!!! (Of course running the venture like this is less tax-efficient by current laws, but that's not the point.)
Now should someone prevent them from hiring a customer support specialist to pick up phones in India? Do you want to infringe on the personal right of person #3 to purchase a service from someone abroad???
DO YOU FINALLY UNDERSTAND WHY PEOPLE AND BUSINESSES ARE THE SAME THING???????
Comments: The essay has poor sentence structure and inappropriate choice of words (example: excessive use of "things"). C- would be awarded also largely due to lack of seeing the so-called "bigger picture" - discussing a global issue while not applying the same lemmas of economic reason to countries other than the U.S. In addition to that, there is a visible lack of sources in support of the "why it would work" aspect of arguments. The only arguments properly researched and supported by sources are factual data such as programmer salaries.
The electromagnetic spectrum is densely utilized, but FCC also instills regulations on the emitted power.
If there was no regulation of transmit power, then all three little piggies would be fucked, because a brick house would not protect them from having their brains fried or dying of cancer or leukemia when the big bad wolfs around the house decide to play "who has a stronger transmitter" across the neighborhood...
You're right, it's probably very unlikely that he has a solid case. Screw him, he should pay for his irresponsibility.
Even if he has the case the same way how I described it, it can be dismissed on the grounds of a simple argument: Not knowing the rules is no excuse for failure - during orientation and initial enrollment, he was most likely handed out the student handbook that describes all on-campus rules. It's his responsibility to read it and comply without the school having to walk him through everything reiterating every rule.
The fact that he got away with it for so long is symptomatic of cheating at many universities here in the US.
I'm sorry, but to me, it seems like your teaching a summer course at a prestigeous university only once has something to do with not knowing the difference between "symptomatic" and "systematic".
Sig: Mod me down, bitches, and watch how "+5 Interesting" is actually starting to become "+5 An Imbecile" over here on Slashdot.
If you RTFA, you would understand that the student's case is based on the following:
The school allows a student to be enrolled. Educational services are performed for money. Student violates academic requirements of the course completion by plagiarising at point T1=[early in the studies]. The school neglects to notify/kick-out/otherwise penalize the student at time T1. At point T2=[just before graduation], the school comes out with their objections to his course completion. His case is that the school has done this purposely, charging him money all this time and intentionally keeping the student in deception that he was in compliance with fulfillment of the academic requirements on each course he has taken and for instruction of which he was charged.
Simply put, he is trying for a case equivalent to a grocery store selling you clear water with no minerals in them while they knew that the reason you keep coming back is to get the mineral water.
If no one had confidence in theories, if no one thought it is worthwhile to risk resources to find out something new, we would be living in a pretty fscked up world, don't you think? Isn't that what the essence of 'investment' in research is about?
Instead of a "funny story" or an "urban legend", your story is more like that commercial for Geico where a lawyer taps a prisoner on the shoulder saying "I've got good news." When the prisoner turns to the lawyer with a question full of hopefeul expectation (because the lawyer is the only one who he has at least moderate trust in to get him out of there), he gets an idiotic American smile #6 from him with "I just saved myself a bunch of money by switching to Geico."
That sentence WAS correct. You're the one whose comprehension of English is limited to the point when you can't distinguish between a gramatically correct and incorrect sentence. Go flaimbait to show off your imbecility somewhere else.
3. Feel free to view the JavaScript source code and you will see that a valid "roll number" is at least 7 digits long (and also seems like max. 10 digits long) AND contains characters ['0'..'9'] AND starts with "12" or "22" or "32" or "62" or "42".
4. Enter a valid roll number, e.g. 1235321.
5. ???
6. Profit! (See people's names, grades, mothers' names, fathers' names,...)
This is outright infuriating!!!! (And thank goodness I'm not from India so I don't have to deal with this very unfortunate problem.)
I could theoretically write an automated script to brute-force the entire database and submit any possible combination of a "roll number" and collect so much data that the heads of their government officials would be spinning if it gets publicized......
As far as I know, it is illegal to destroy currency, whether paper or coin (in the U.S. that is) and I believe similar laws are standard in most developed countries.
-----
Title 18 United States Code, Section 331
Whoever fraudulently alters, defaces, mutilates, impairs, diminishes,
falsifies, scales, or lightens any of the coins coined at the mints of
the United States, or any foreign coins which are by law made current
or are in actual use or circulation as money within the United States;
or
Whoever fraudulently possesses, passes, utters, publishes, or sells,
or attempts to pass, utter, publish, or sell, or brings into the
United States, any such coin, knowing the same to be altered, defaced,
mutilated, impaired, diminished, falsified, scaled, or lightened -
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five
years, or both
----
Dear "expert on the subject" who could "honestly write a book",
This is a message from a capitalist to let you know you have been a good community citizen. On the back of your needs within the EQ community, the capitalist will build endless arbitrage opportunities that will create supply and satisfy demand. And the capitalist will take advantage of those to the fullest, maximizing the profit and benefit to himself.
Fare well, citizen, the capitalist will meet you somewhere where you will least expect it and you will be thankful to him that he is the enabler of your community experience.
And the calculations by a peasant today will not matter in the future, because that peasant tried, but only with time, everyone will see how the capitalist is a beneficiary of the system.
If the application is not available, there no business is done. If no business is done, no money is made (="no value is created", whichever way you prefer). If no money is made, I die of starvation or switch to caveman-style living, picking berries in the woods.
It's a good step, at least you don't get 'owned', but the hype is created and the propaganda that is being spread around deceitfully suggests that NX is a magic bullet...
OK, so now you will have that every buffer overflow problem that a virus could exploit to insert custom machien code will be stopped before it can happen.
Instead, whenever a buffer overflow exploit is attempted, the regular process/thread/control flow will be interrupted to "protect" the data area from running the code. In essence, the OS in collaboration with hardware will deny the process an opportunity to execute further, thus transforming every "code insertion through buffer overflow" into a "denial of service" attack.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, it's good to see that someone cared.
Congrats on achieving an improvement.
At least the hope that customer feedback gets heard is not dead.
The thing is (and don't get me wrong for that C- thing), I've had the exact same problem - one thing that I might pass on (I'm no longer in college) is the observation that sometimes, the biggest issue is the length. The essay limitation of 3-4 pages is too small to argue for something and make it good quality at the same time. Overall, in your essay, I think you did well in evaluating a number of different things that could be done in your opinion to solve the problem. This is crucial in getting a good grade - making sure you are analytical. In this case, your writing proved you were analytical.
...),
:-)) [I'm quoting my friend who says that all the time.]
One thing I noticed once I entered the business world is that there are pretty much three rules:
1) be as clear as you can (bullet, split, instruct like your audience was a robot,
2) do not hurt the audience (feelings, values, or anything put in a way that is likely to offend someone),
3) ensure you are making sense (even when you think you might not have a sound argument, but you need to use it nevertheless to get something done)
I mainly deal with business correspondence now, but looking back, I have a feeling that all three apply to essays as well - except for 2), which is flexible; an essay might try to argue something offensive, but that's where 3) kicks in.
For any other non-day-to-day correspondence (tech specs, longer formal documents), I found that the best approach that works is to be analytical and consider all options (similar to the "contrast and compare" approach for essays). When you unveil an issue to your reader in such a way, you will be demonstrating brilliance - most ingenious things are obvious, but it takes someone to point them out first!
That's my $.02 worth.
Good luck to you and all the best!! We might meet again on Slashdot, the best place for "Internet Special Olympics, where who is right or wrong doesn't matter, because in the end, everyone is still just a retard".
As discussed, please accept this letter as confirmation of my wish to terminate my contract with Vodafone, with one month's notice prior to the anniversary of my contract.
After this, the next sentence starts:
In the eleven months I have been with Vodafone, [...]
By this time, I stopped reading because I know that the rest of the letter is just ranting with a story that doesn't matter. And I don't even work for a cell phone company. You know what I think they did with the letter? They read up to about the same point that I read through, cancelled your service and then threw the rest of it out.
Sorry.
3) You're either a liar or an idiot for saying so.
This is very immature. I think you have run out argument other than restating yourself.
People and businesses AER the same thing. The reason why they are taxed differently is because the government feels that the power that arises from people combining their forces together (through venturing to take stake in a enterprise by combining capital together) is too big. By the tradition of the representative governing of a country in a republic, or a union of republics, a very important principle is attempted to be conserved: rights of minorities. A business is thus seen as a potential threat to an individual. And since entrepreneural activity is so commonplace, governments have established laws that allow that don't push "the small guy" - the same way as governments establish laws to not to tremble on rights of single individuals or minorities.
A business is indeed the same thing as people, except in case of a busines, it is a group of people. Take a mind experiment and think up a scenario for example like this: you and your friends agree to establish one checking account, where everyone will put up $10,000. The account is owned by person #1. Then, person #2 goes and buys a used truck using that money and purchases insurance on it in his name. Then, person #3 cleans up one of the rooms on the 1st floor of his house and uses some money to buy a desk, phone and agrees to sit there all day. Notice that all these three people have agreed to do what they did and trust each other (maybe there were best buddies from school). And now, they agree that they will advertise and run "moving services" (transporting furniture of people who are relocating from their old home to their new home). Person #1 will be the designated driver, person #1 & #2 will do the manual labor and person #3 will be sitting at his desk. They also agree that person #3 will be in charge of advertising and setting up appointments. They call themselves (informally) "The Three Movers" and they agree that each moving contract that they are able to close will be in fact a contract between the moving party and one of them - person #1, #2, or #3, rotating round robin so that income from the job gets split approximately evenly. Whenever they need to repair a truck, buy a new desk, or pay someone to get something done, they will do it by each putting down their after-tax personal dollars to cover cost and then move on.
Hopefully, if they play it right, they each have decent income and they just operated the same way as a business!!! Alone by themselves, they would not have been able to do it.
Notice that no business was ever registered and is ever needed!!! (Of course running the venture like this is less tax-efficient by current laws, but that's not the point.)
Now should someone prevent them from hiring a customer support specialist to pick up phones in India? Do you want to infringe on the personal right of person #3 to purchase a service from someone abroad???
DO YOU FINALLY UNDERSTAND WHY PEOPLE AND BUSINESSES ARE THE SAME THING???????
Just to let you know, I did not submit this evaluation because I want to troll - if I wanted to troll, I'd do it anonymously.
Hope my comments helped.
Grade: C-
Comments: The essay has poor sentence structure and inappropriate choice of words (example: excessive use of "things"). C- would be awarded also largely due to lack of seeing the so-called "bigger picture" - discussing a global issue while not applying the same lemmas of economic reason to countries other than the U.S. In addition to that, there is a visible lack of sources in support of the "why it would work" aspect of arguments. The only arguments properly researched and supported by sources are factual data such as programmer salaries.
The electromagnetic spectrum is densely utilized, but FCC also instills regulations on the emitted power.
If there was no regulation of transmit power, then all three little piggies would be fucked, because a brick house would not protect them from having their brains fried or dying of cancer or leukemia when the big bad wolfs around the house decide to play "who has a stronger transmitter" across the neighborhood...
Don't mislead here! Yahoo did NOT report on this story. Their news site only picked it up while aggregating news. eWEEK reported the story.
Fuhgetaboutit, my bad. I misread you. I'll read twice before posting next time. Apologies. Kudos.
You're right, it's probably very unlikely that he has a solid case. Screw him, he should pay for his irresponsibility.
Even if he has the case the same way how I described it, it can be dismissed on the grounds of a simple argument: Not knowing the rules is no excuse for failure - during orientation and initial enrollment, he was most likely handed out the student handbook that describes all on-campus rules. It's his responsibility to read it and comply without the school having to walk him through everything reiterating every rule.
I'm sorry, but to me, it seems like your teaching a summer course at a prestigeous university only once has something to do with not knowing the difference between "symptomatic" and "systematic".
Sig: Mod me down, bitches, and watch how "+5 Interesting" is actually starting to become "+5 An Imbecile" over here on Slashdot.
If you RTFA, you would understand that the student's case is based on the following:
The school allows a student to be enrolled. Educational services are performed for money. Student violates academic requirements of the course completion by plagiarising at point T1=[early in the studies]. The school neglects to notify/kick-out/otherwise penalize the student at time T1. At point T2=[just before graduation], the school comes out with their objections to his course completion. His case is that the school has done this purposely, charging him money all this time and intentionally keeping the student in deception that he was in compliance with fulfillment of the academic requirements on each course he has taken and for instruction of which he was charged.
Simply put, he is trying for a case equivalent to a grocery store selling you clear water with no minerals in them while they knew that the reason you keep coming back is to get the mineral water.
You're good.
How is this funny!!?
If no one had confidence in theories, if no one thought it is worthwhile to risk resources to find out something new, we would be living in a pretty fscked up world, don't you think? Isn't that what the essence of 'investment' in research is about?
Instead of a "funny story" or an "urban legend", your story is more like that commercial for Geico where a lawyer taps a prisoner on the shoulder saying "I've got good news." When the prisoner turns to the lawyer with a question full of hopefeul expectation (because the lawyer is the only one who he has at least moderate trust in to get him out of there), he gets an idiotic American smile #6 from him with "I just saved myself a bunch of money by switching to Geico."
That sentence WAS correct. You're the one whose comprehension of English is limited to the point when you can't distinguish between a gramatically correct and incorrect sentence. Go flaimbait to show off your imbecility somewhere else.
Very interesting, thank you for your insight.
I appreciate you getting back to me.
This is outright infuriating!!!! (And thank goodness I'm not from India so I don't have to deal with this very unfortunate problem.)
I could theoretically write an automated script to brute-force the entire database and submit any possible combination of a "roll number" and collect so much data that the heads of their government officials would be spinning if it gets publicized......
Mod parent up. This is hilarious!!!!
One could convert one foreign currency to another. Literally.
As far as I know, it is illegal to destroy currency, whether paper or coin (in the U.S. that is) and I believe similar laws are standard in most developed countries.
----- Title 18 United States Code, Section 331 Whoever fraudulently alters, defaces, mutilates, impairs, diminishes, falsifies, scales, or lightens any of the coins coined at the mints of the United States, or any foreign coins which are by law made current or are in actual use or circulation as money within the United States; or Whoever fraudulently possesses, passes, utters, publishes, or sells, or attempts to pass, utter, publish, or sell, or brings into the United States, any such coin, knowing the same to be altered, defaced, mutilated, impaired, diminished, falsified, scaled, or lightened - Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both ----
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/331.html
http://www.usmint.gov/consumer/18USC331.cfm
Original research on this topic: here
Why do you call the Voice Peering Fabric a "clearinghouse"? By functionality, it is clearly a "peering center" and not a clearing house.
Maybe less fancy and more clarity would improve the eloquence of the posts...
1. In a non-PVP-server setting, can you be killed by another player?
2. Who are the different ways that your character can die? CAn it be killed? By whom? By bots, other players, or how about "by aging"?
Sorry for the annoying noob questions, but I was just curious.
Dear "expert on the subject" who could "honestly write a book",
This is a message from a capitalist to let you know you have been a good community citizen. On the back of your needs within the EQ community, the capitalist will build endless arbitrage opportunities that will create supply and satisfy demand. And the capitalist will take advantage of those to the fullest, maximizing the profit and benefit to himself.
Fare well, citizen, the capitalist will meet you somewhere where you will least expect it and you will be thankful to him that he is the enabler of your community experience.
And the calculations by a peasant today will not matter in the future, because that peasant tried, but only with time, everyone will see how the capitalist is a beneficiary of the system.
If the application is not available, there no business is done. If no business is done, no money is made (="no value is created", whichever way you prefer). If no money is made, I die of starvation or switch to caveman-style living, picking berries in the woods.
It's a good step, at least you don't get 'owned', but the hype is created and the propaganda that is being spread around deceitfully suggests that NX is a magic bullet...
OK, so now you will have that every buffer overflow problem that a virus could exploit to insert custom machien code will be stopped before it can happen.
Instead, whenever a buffer overflow exploit is attempted, the regular process/thread/control flow will be interrupted to "protect" the data area from running the code. In essence, the OS in collaboration with hardware will deny the process an opportunity to execute further, thus transforming every "code insertion through buffer overflow" into a "denial of service" attack.