And when employers write illegal contracts, they can get away with it?
I'm sick of people saying that laws applied to all aren't applied fairly. If I am supposed to obey an illegal, and thus unfair, contract, what does the employer do for its part in fairness? Or does fair only apply to employees?
A non-compete clause is not signing yourself over to slavery. It's a pretty reasonable thing to do for an employer.
Employees outnumber employers, maybe you've noticed. If I had to choose between laws which favor the few over laws which favor the many, why would I choose the few?
I'd bet, since these things only happen when someone changes jobs, that for every employer who gains from a non-compete clause, some other employer loses by the same amount. You think?
Just as copyright and patent law is supposed to further society as a whole, seems to me that society as whole benefits more from an experienced employee working rather than being forced to sit idle while his experience ages into obsolesence. Where is the benefit to that, except to some employer who is afraid of competition?
Why should employers be able to get away with not matching the marketplace? You who scream about the benefits of a free market seem to do an about face when it comes to people having a free market. Yes, by all means, force someone to go without work for a year because they are too smart and someone wants to pay them more than their current employer.
I suppose you are right about it not being slavery. Slavery forces you to work for nothing. This forces you to not work for nothing.
Yes, bedrooms need a way to escape fires. You don't like that? You think it's good that poor people should have the option of living in a firetrap slum?
CA law says that anything over a year, the landlord has to expect normal wear and tear, so they can't charge for cleaning carpets, new paint, etc. If you park your Harley inside, or keep livestock inside, that's not normal wear and tear.
You know why these things become law? It's to prevent slumlords. Poor people often don't have a lot of leverage. You sound like one of those fortunate people who have never had to struggle. You probably make enough that you don't worry about it. If you don't like that firetrap apt, you rent elsewhere. Heck, you probably have never even had to think about those cheap places, they never even show up on your radar. But a lot of people don't have that option. They don't have a lot of choices when landlords stack rental contracts with bogus cleaning deposits and other atrocious fees.
One of the reasons for laws is to make standards. Life is a lot easier when you don't have to sweat details all the time, just like HTML or PPP or any other computer protocol. How would you like it if M$ actually got away with their Embrace Extend Extinguish policy most of the time? Sure would make life miserable for the small companies -- ie, poor companies -- who don't have much choice in those matters.
That's what political laws do. They impose standards so the poor people -- people without much leverage or choice -- don't get shafted by those with lots of power.
If you don't like it, then you have never been in that position, and I pity you your elite snobbery and lack of compassion. Life must really suck to be so cold and emotionless.
And that's exactly my point - the state of Califoria does not honor the right to illegal contracts. You want to sign yourself into slavery ? That's what non-compete clauses do.
You who tout this protection as less than desirable like to rant about not signing contracts you don't like. Well -- you have open to you that very option - move out of California. If you want to be able to sign yourself into slavery, move to some place that would allow that.
Sauce, goose, gander.
Go. Try Myanmar or Zimbabwe. Just don't complain when no one comes to your rescue.
There are a ton of illegal contracts out there, signed and unsigned. Almost all apartment rental contracts in California that I have seen, mine and others, have illegal clauses, such as requiring a cleaning deposit. Or the apartment itself is illegal, bedrooms without windows, no occupancy permit or even building permit, etc.
Illegal contracts, or at least the illegal clauses within them, can't be enforced.
Just because he signed a contract doesn't make it enforceable.
The simple fact is that politicians, Daryl, everybody and his dog lies when they can get away with it, because usually the truth requires more explanation. Much easier to say No than say something real.
Plus, people have no control over most of their lives. Buses on strike? Politicians starting wars? People simply have no control over that. Stock options, what a joke. Allegedly give people an incentive to work smarter and harder. Baldersash! The company's destiny is set by the CEO and COB and that's about it. Same with any company or government, only a very very few people have any real control.
Look at the US government. Suppose Rumsfeldt had actually tried to change anything -- he'd have been out on his ass so fast, just like Shimonoseki, who said he'd need several times as many troops for the occupation... they can affect lots of little things, but not the big picture, that is controlled by Rove mostly.
People happen to have tons of common sense when it comes to their daily lives. Why worry about Rumsfeld's lies when you can't change a damn thing about them anyway? If people worried about every lying thieving politician and corporate officer, the world would stop dead in its tracks because nothing would ever get done.
Thin clients keep all their info on the server. This is NOT a thin client. It might be called a remote client, but each blade has its own CPU, disk drives, etc. Each blade is a full PC, serving just one desktop. The only thing unusual is that the PC is located in the server room instead of on the desktop. Thin clients are really just a minor variation on the old timeshare model of big expensive computers. This could only be considered a thin client if you think of every user having their very own dedicated server.
Thin clients vs PCs are like taxis vs private cars. Blade PCs are like private cars kept in a communal garage, like an apartment block vs a private house.
You didn't even read your own link. This is a new low for slashdot, methinks.
I apologize for reading your post as a neocon rant. The Bushie crowd loves to spout about abstinence, and that is the first thing that comes to mind when someone mentions it.
As for morals, no, everyone has morals. My rant was about the holier than thou moralists who deny everyone else having morals that bugs me. It's bad enough that they are so smug as to assume they, and only they, know the One True Path, but when you peek behind the curtain, they all seems to have been practicing the opposite of what they preach. Then put them in charge of the Bushie's plan for fighting AIDs, and it only means that they will have no effect whatsoever on stopping AIDs.
Again, mea cupla on misreading your post as a rant from one of those holy hyprocrits.
And there's a cure for ebola, measles, smallpox... abstinence from society. Total abstinence. That'll knock 'em dead.
There's a cure for auto accidents, too, called the M1 Abrams tank. Mileage sucks, maintenance sucks, cost sucks, but by god, if we only let those people drive who could afford Abrams, why, we'd cut deaths from auto accidents down to almost zero.
Or maybe you'd prefer banning automobiles altogether. Yeh, that'd stop auto accidents. Yeh.
Get real. Expecting humans to abstain from sex except with their spouse is about as real as expecting people to stop speeding on the honor system. Especially when the number of people with AIDS in the US is around one million; one in 300. And with the incubation period being on the order of ten years, it sure isn't on people's minds all the time, especially when they get drunk or just plain feel good. Are you going to ban alcohol and feeling good too?
It's real nice to spout platitudes about morality and abstinence being the only known cure, but it isn't a known cure because it doesn't stop transfusions or needle sharing spreading AIDs, and there are far more practical methods like using condoms. Are you part of the crowd that turns your nose up at recommending condoms to stop AIDs because it encourages amoral sex outside marriage? Must be nice to not have shit that stinks.
Better to have a solution, condoms, which is widely used, even if it is only 95% effective, than some psuedo cure, alleged to be 100% effective, which is unusable in practice.
Perfect is the enemy of good enough. Moral twerps have their heads up their asses.
He didn't ask for the interview with them; they asked him to come to an interview. If somebody asks me to come for an interview, I'd damn well be pissed to have to explain to them why they asked me to come in.
If he purposely lied about the meaning of somebody's trademark, he could easily be sued for defamation, destruction of a trademark, slander, libel, whatever the legal jargon is. If you feel like quibbling about the exact buzzword, knock yourself out.
The term Free Software is as close to a registered trademark as you will find, and this clown deliberately misused it to confuse people, to distort the meaning, to bring it down a peg or two, for his own gain.
Go ahead. Quibble about what is legal and what he can get away with because Free Software is not a registered trademark. You will only show how shallow your ethics are.
You are dreaming if you think SUN bought StarOffice so they could open source it. They did it to compete with Microsoft. No corporation does things purely for bennies. They do things to make money, whether immediately or indirectly.
This applies to IBM, RedHat, Novell, everyone.
You are easily misled if you think SUN bought StarOffice altruistically. They deserve no more open source credit for this than for designing SPARC chips or using 68Ks back in the day. It was a pure business decision.
What they do deserve blame for is intentionally misusing the word free to mislead their audience. That is hijacking a term for their own profit. I don't steal SPARC chips or SUN workstations or servers. They damn well have no excuse for stealing that word.
People who know nothing about software and how it is made from source at least hear the extra word and pay a bit of attention, even if it's just a look in their eyes that tells me I need to explain.
People who know about source code understand what I mean.
If it were under the BSD license, Microsoft would have adopted it by now, under the hood, invisibly. Windows popularity would soar even more, and its reputation for stability and speed would have made Linux distributions obsolete, thus putting a stop to all independent peer-reviewed Linux development, leaving it to Microsoft, where it belongs. Then, with the lack of competition, Microsoft would stumble, dropping the ball, possibly scoring yet another own goal, and another Unix-lookalike would spring up, only this time the developers would be so mad about Microsoft's embrace extend extinguish of Linux that they would adopt a new license, called... the GPL!
And ESR would have another chance to get it right.
Hot Little Therm but see the warning about no longer selling them... great thermo probes, wish they were still selling them. I am glad I have a few extra.
These ought to do the trick just fine. A bit of configuring or shell scripting, send email to a cell phone or pager or whatever, you should be happy as a clam at high tide.
There are probably others as well. There may even be source code on sourceforge. Hot Little Therm has software. Weather Duck may also.
File a false unemployment claim and you can receive $400 per week for 26 weeks. Do it for 100 Social Security numbers and you've made a quick $1.04 million.
Quick? 26 weeks? Plus the start up overhead of several weeks?
Slashdot Mirror
And when employers write illegal contracts, they can get away with it?
I'm sick of people saying that laws applied to all aren't applied fairly. If I am supposed to obey an illegal, and thus unfair, contract, what does the employer do for its part in fairness? Or does fair only apply to employees?
There are laws against bank robbery, but we still have bank robbers.
.... ?
Your point is
A non-compete clause is not signing yourself over to slavery. It's a pretty reasonable thing to do for an employer.
Employees outnumber employers, maybe you've noticed. If I had to choose between laws which favor the few over laws which favor the many, why would I choose the few?
I'd bet, since these things only happen when someone changes jobs, that for every employer who gains from a non-compete clause, some other employer loses by the same amount. You think?
Just as copyright and patent law is supposed to further society as a whole, seems to me that society as whole benefits more from an experienced employee working rather than being forced to sit idle while his experience ages into obsolesence. Where is the benefit to that, except to some employer who is afraid of competition?
Why should employers be able to get away with not matching the marketplace? You who scream about the benefits of a free market seem to do an about face when it comes to people having a free market. Yes, by all means, force someone to go without work for a year because they are too smart and someone wants to pay them more than their current employer.
I suppose you are right about it not being slavery. Slavery forces you to work for nothing. This forces you to not work for nothing.
Yes, bedrooms need a way to escape fires. You don't like that? You think it's good that poor people should have the option of living in a firetrap slum?
CA law says that anything over a year, the landlord has to expect normal wear and tear, so they can't charge for cleaning carpets, new paint, etc. If you park your Harley inside, or keep livestock inside, that's not normal wear and tear.
You know why these things become law? It's to prevent slumlords. Poor people often don't have a lot of leverage. You sound like one of those fortunate people who have never had to struggle. You probably make enough that you don't worry about it. If you don't like that firetrap apt, you rent elsewhere. Heck, you probably have never even had to think about those cheap places, they never even show up on your radar. But a lot of people don't have that option. They don't have a lot of choices when landlords stack rental contracts with bogus cleaning deposits and other atrocious fees.
One of the reasons for laws is to make standards. Life is a lot easier when you don't have to sweat details all the time, just like HTML or PPP or any other computer protocol. How would you like it if M$ actually got away with their Embrace Extend Extinguish policy most of the time? Sure would make life miserable for the small companies -- ie, poor companies -- who don't have much choice in those matters.
That's what political laws do. They impose standards so the poor people -- people without much leverage or choice -- don't get shafted by those with lots of power.
If you don't like it, then you have never been in that position, and I pity you your elite snobbery and lack of compassion. Life must really suck to be so cold and emotionless.
And that's exactly my point - the state of Califoria does not honor the right to illegal contracts. You want to sign yourself into slavery ? That's what non-compete clauses do.
You who tout this protection as less than desirable like to rant about not signing contracts you don't like. Well -- you have open to you that very option - move out of California. If you want to be able to sign yourself into slavery, move to some place that would allow that.
Sauce, goose, gander.
Go. Try Myanmar or Zimbabwe. Just don't complain when no one comes to your rescue.
There are a ton of illegal contracts out there, signed and unsigned. Almost all apartment rental contracts in California that I have seen, mine and others, have illegal clauses, such as requiring a cleaning deposit. Or the apartment itself is illegal, bedrooms without windows, no occupancy permit or even building permit, etc.
Illegal contracts, or at least the illegal clauses within them, can't be enforced.
Just because he signed a contract doesn't make it enforceable.
You must be thinking of something else. Sort of assistant, that's all.
Dang you, I just finished the Half Blood Prince, I haven't gotten to volume 7 yet, are you trying to tell me that Lord Voldermort dies?!?
The simple fact is that politicians, Daryl, everybody and his dog lies when they can get away with it, because usually the truth requires more explanation. Much easier to say No than say something real.
... they can affect lots of little things, but not the big picture, that is controlled by Rove mostly.
Plus, people have no control over most of their lives. Buses on strike? Politicians starting wars? People simply have no control over that. Stock options, what a joke. Allegedly give people an incentive to work smarter and harder. Baldersash! The company's destiny is set by the CEO and COB and that's about it. Same with any company or government, only a very very few people have any real control.
Look at the US government. Suppose Rumsfeldt had actually tried to change anything -- he'd have been out on his ass so fast, just like Shimonoseki, who said he'd need several times as many troops for the occupation
People happen to have tons of common sense when it comes to their daily lives. Why worry about Rumsfeld's lies when you can't change a damn thing about them anyway? If people worried about every lying thieving politician and corporate officer, the world would stop dead in its tracks because nothing would ever get done.
Go back to math class. A number mod 666 can never equal 666
Except for sufficiently large values of 665.9999999.....
But not unpossible.
Thin clients keep all their info on the server. This is NOT a thin client. It might be called a remote client, but each blade has its own CPU, disk drives, etc. Each blade is a full PC, serving just one desktop. The only thing unusual is that the PC is located in the server room instead of on the desktop. Thin clients are really just a minor variation on the old timeshare model of big expensive computers. This could only be considered a thin client if you think of every user having their very own dedicated server.
Thin clients vs PCs are like taxis vs private cars. Blade PCs are like private cars kept in a communal garage, like an apartment block vs a private house.
You didn't even read your own link. This is a new low for slashdot, methinks.
I apologize for reading your post as a neocon rant. The Bushie crowd loves to spout about abstinence, and that is the first thing that comes to mind when someone mentions it.
As for morals, no, everyone has morals. My rant was about the holier than thou moralists who deny everyone else having morals that bugs me. It's bad enough that they are so smug as to assume they, and only they, know the One True Path, but when you peek behind the curtain, they all seems to have been practicing the opposite of what they preach. Then put them in charge of the Bushie's plan for fighting AIDs, and it only means that they will have no effect whatsoever on stopping AIDs.
Again, mea cupla on misreading your post as a rant from one of those holy hyprocrits.
And there's a cure for ebola, measles, smallpox ... abstinence from society. Total abstinence. That'll knock 'em dead.
There's a cure for auto accidents, too, called the M1 Abrams tank. Mileage sucks, maintenance sucks, cost sucks, but by god, if we only let those people drive who could afford Abrams, why, we'd cut deaths from auto accidents down to almost zero.
Or maybe you'd prefer banning automobiles altogether. Yeh, that'd stop auto accidents. Yeh.
Get real. Expecting humans to abstain from sex except with their spouse is about as real as expecting people to stop speeding on the honor system. Especially when the number of people with AIDS in the US is around one million; one in 300. And with the incubation period being on the order of ten years, it sure isn't on people's minds all the time, especially when they get drunk or just plain feel good. Are you going to ban alcohol and feeling good too?
It's real nice to spout platitudes about morality and abstinence being the only known cure, but it isn't a known cure because it doesn't stop transfusions or needle sharing spreading AIDs, and there are far more practical methods like using condoms. Are you part of the crowd that turns your nose up at recommending condoms to stop AIDs because it encourages amoral sex outside marriage? Must be nice to not have shit that stinks.
Better to have a solution, condoms, which is widely used, even if it is only 95% effective, than some psuedo cure, alleged to be 100% effective, which is unusable in practice.
Perfect is the enemy of good enough. Moral twerps have their heads up their asses.
My head is spinning. I will disregard all results of your man inquiry.
:-)
Pretty good
Lack of a sense of humor is distasteful here on slashdot. Please find the restroom, take a dump, and lighten up.
He didn't ask for the interview with them; they asked him to come to an interview. If somebody asks me to come for an interview, I'd damn well be pissed to have to explain to them why they asked me to come in.
If he purposely lied about the meaning of somebody's trademark, he could easily be sued for defamation, destruction of a trademark, slander, libel, whatever the legal jargon is. If you feel like quibbling about the exact buzzword, knock yourself out.
The term Free Software is as close to a registered trademark as you will find, and this clown deliberately misused it to confuse people, to distort the meaning, to bring it down a peg or two, for his own gain.
Go ahead. Quibble about what is legal and what he can get away with because Free Software is not a registered trademark. You will only show how shallow your ethics are.
You are dreaming if you think SUN bought StarOffice so they could open source it. They did it to compete with Microsoft. No corporation does things purely for bennies. They do things to make money, whether immediately or indirectly.
This applies to IBM, RedHat, Novell, everyone.
You are easily misled if you think SUN bought StarOffice altruistically. They deserve no more open source credit for this than for designing SPARC chips or using 68Ks back in the day. It was a pure business decision.
What they do deserve blame for is intentionally misusing the word free to mislead their audience. That is hijacking a term for their own profit. I don't steal SPARC chips or SUN workstations or servers. They damn well have no excuse for stealing that word.
People who know nothing about software and how it is made from source at least hear the extra word and pay a bit of attention, even if it's just a look in their eyes that tells me I need to explain.
People who know about source code understand what I mean.
Can't any of you responders recognize satire when you see it? Are you all so brain dead and numbed out that you have to take everything seriously?
Sheesh.
If it were under the BSD license, Microsoft would have adopted it by now, under the hood, invisibly. Windows popularity would soar even more, and its reputation for stability and speed would have made Linux distributions obsolete, thus putting a stop to all independent peer-reviewed Linux development, leaving it to Microsoft, where it belongs. Then, with the lack of competition, Microsoft would stumble, dropping the ball, possibly scoring yet another own goal, and another Unix-lookalike would spring up, only this time the developers would be so mad about Microsoft's embrace extend extinguish of Linux that they would adopt a new license, called ... the GPL!
And ESR would have another chance to get it right.
It is a damned poor mind indeed that can't think of at least two ways of spelling any word.
-- Andrew Jackson
Here
Hot Little Therm but see the warning about no longer selling them ... great thermo probes, wish they were still selling them. I am glad I have a few extra.
Weather Duck and Power Egg
These ought to do the trick just fine. A bit of configuring or shell scripting, send email to a cell phone or pager or whatever, you should be happy as a clam at high tide.
There are probably others as well. There may even be source code on sourceforge. Hot Little Therm has software. Weather Duck may also.
File a false unemployment claim and you can receive $400 per week for 26 weeks. Do it for 100 Social Security numbers and you've made a quick $1.04 million.
Quick? 26 weeks? Plus the start up overhead of several weeks?