The point of this (slightly old) article is that this is a guy who got screwed because of lax IP protections. I don't think your point works well with it. By the time the company that he was working for (and which owned the patent) had settled the lawsuit, he was no longer working for them.
And according to the current law, so is copyright infringement. You are free to disagree with the law all you want, but that is a question for elected law makers, not law enforcement civil servants.
"However, not all people in India live in slums, and those who are likely to get outsourced jobs probably don't (because they need a minimum of education). "
Actually we were talking about the outsourced jobs that don't require education (with many of them going to countries much poorer than India).
"But you can get apartments for much less than 10$ a day."
That was a typo, my bad. I meant to say $10 a month. The hotel room at $1.50 a night would end up costing $45 a month, which would be well out of range for someone making $2 a day.
"Protectionism doesn't mean keeping developing nations poor. "
No, that is never the intent, but is usually the result.
"You have to understand that the primary goal of outsourcing is not to raise the standard of living in impoverished nations - in fact, if salaries climb too much, the outsourcing companies will simply pack up and leave."
You are talking about an individual company outsourcing some of their positions. I am talking about having a free market economy where people in developing nations are allowed to compete with those who were lucky enough to be born in nations where people whine and moan if the unemployment rate gets above 5%.
"The probability of global warming - as another poster has already written - is 1. "
And as I pointed out to him, no its not.
"we can also observe some of them today"
Really? Like what? Cite specific examples.
Nothing in your posts points to the probability that anything will happen, nor gives insight in how the probabilities that consequences from a hypothesis will occur can be calculated.
"
Since global warming has already been observed, I'd say the chances are about 1 in 1."
Watching "The Day After Tomorrow" doesn't count as observing global warming. In reality, it has not been observed, and many of the predicitons early versions of the theory made have simply not panned out. It is an unproven theory at best. That doesn't mean it won't happen, but certainly doesn't mean that it is guarenteed to happen either.
"They may be better off on an absolute case (i.e. net income, assets), however to make a standard of living comparison you also have to factor in cost of living."
Have you seen the slums in India? Or other countries that are "stealing our jobs" (remember the origional post was on manufactoring jobs, not IT jobs that mostly go to India)? Its not just like America except you can rent an apartmentfor $10 a day and a new widescreen TV set costs $20. They really are areas of the world which are poor.
"Basically, until countries reach similar standards of living, free movement of labor between these countries will disrupt the richer economy. Protectionism is a necessary tool of economic planning, and forsaking it in the name of some free-market leap of faith is foolish."
So you are saying we need protectionism to make sure poor nations don't improve? I know many (myself included) who would disagree with that.
"I truly feel bad for all of the people made destitute by the manufacturing industries leaving the US. These are people that are mostly not college educated, and often not even high school educated. These are people living hand to mouth, as their families have been for generations. These people are the ones getting fucked. They can't just get online, buy a plane ticket, and move to Asia for a job."
And yet they are still better off than many of the people in third world countries who may get a chance to make a half-way decent living as a result of jobs coming by via 'outsourcing'.
Really? Global warming has a greater than 1 in 37 chance of occuring? Exactly what do you believe the chances are that global warming will happen anyways? Furthermore, I would like to know how you are estimating the chances that the effects of an unproven hypothesis will occur in the first place.
"
in that kind of situation, a possible solution might be to change the time at which it crosses the earth's orbital path by speeding it up or slowing it down (rather than trying to change its orbit or blowing it up)?"
Is that really something we want to do before we know exactly what its orbit is (and whether or not it will for certain hit us)? What if we were safe from the origional orbit, but the altered one would crash into us even sooner? This still seems to be something that we would need to wait on rather than act on with incomplete information as the origional poster suggested.
It won't hit for nearly a quarter of a century. I cannot get to the article (/.ed) but I would suspect that would mean it is pretty far away. Thus there wouldn't be much we can do for some time. But I'm sure the pentagon already has a number of contingency plans already written up and filed away somewhere next to the plans for what to do if Djibouti gets the bomb and threatens to nuke Luxembourg.
It works for some people, yes. They sell their personal information (along with that of their families and friends) and get a free toy. But along down the road it ceases to work because everyone gullible enough to sign up for one of these has already done it and in the end most who sign up end up just giving away their personal information for free. It ends up suffering from the same problems that any pyramid scam suffers from.
"This always seems to be the case for these types of events, while death estimates in Western countries always seem to start on the high side and trend down."
Early reports are never accurate, and shouldn't be expected to be. Actually, I've seen reports of disasters in non-Western countries where the first estimates were much higher. Remember the train collision in North Korea a while back?
"BTW is it just me, or does it seem in poor taste for News outlets like FOX and CNN to focus on possible American casualties when these kind of natural disasters happen?"
Well if I have family/friends in the affected area, I want to know if they are ok. Fox and CNN (or at least the versions you are probably watching if you are in the States, I know CNN and NewsCorp have international channels as well) are reporting primarily to American viewers who are more likely to have American family and friends in the area. Its really no more tasteless than you expressing concern over one possible fatality (Clarke) when thousands are probably dead.
Remember these are all early reports, these numbers often go down. In the initial confusion a lot of people end up reported dead who are merely out of contact, and there are often duplicates. Hopefully that happened here.
Don't mind him, he is just some troll with a severe case of karma-envy who has been following me around the past few months. At first it was a little funny, but it got so pathetic I had to stop reading his posts.
Re:More money than brains I guess
on
Re-Pet a Reality
·
· Score: 2, Informative
"... and they get a pet that looks like their deceased pet yet isn't. "
It actually may not even look like their pet. Often appearance is not identical even with clones, such as in calico cats.
I've seen lots of posts that say its neither unethical nor rude and I would have to agree. This guy probably took a lot of your code during the split, so he has no right to complain to you about you using his code. In fact, feel free to use that against him. Next time he doesn't want you to use his code, tell him you don't want him using your code. Legally you don't really have much recourse if it is GPLed, but then again neither does he. The things he is threatening to do will most likely only hurt his project and really do violate the spirit of the GPL if not the letter.
However, I do see a potential problem. It does sort of defeat the point of the split if both projects are virtually identical. Now if you were against the split from the start maybe you don't care and if these are minor changes it probably doesn't matter. But as a general principle, I think we are in many ways served by not having to rely on one developer (be it you or this other guy).
Does/. routinely cover tech companies that are going down the drain nowadays or is this just because the company in question initialized a lawsuit that by all accounts is frivolous and will never effect in the industry in any meaningful way?
"This is another strawman example. Not refusing consent is not equivalent to consenting. "
Yes, it is an example of a strawman. I never argued she was consenting. Thus your claim that I was is a strawman. Good job, but next time it would be appreciated if you were to just leave the strawmen out of your posts.
"Furthermore, violence in this context means to do physical harm upon another. Physical harm can be simply touching. So, all aspects of rape are present."
Playing with semantics in order to prove a point? Sorry, doesn't work. You know what I meant, don't pretend you don't.
"Fine, please don't call it tantamount to rape. The effects of rape are not equivalent to that of exploitation or voyeurism. The effects of rape are much more profound than any recording of a consensual act. It saddens me that you think any meaningful equivalency can be drawn on the effects of rape."
Both are actions in which one person is exploited against their will for the sexual gratification of another one. Thats all I meant by "tantamount", pretending I meant something else is a strawman as well.
"Without giving a context, your example is really bad in that sex might mean S&M."
I apologize, I assumed you were intelligent enough to deduce from my post that she had not given consent to S&M. The intent of that post was to give an example of where someone can give consent for one act and then have it taken to a level they are not comfortable with, not for you to try to find creative loopholes.
"Resistance would be a strong indicator that she wasn't giving consent. "
While participating in S&M activities? Are you sure you understand what S&M means?
Nitpick all you want, just think of an example where she has no way of stating that she doesn't want to do this (as in the India example the girl had no way of telling the kid she didn't want a video of her all over the net because she didn't know about it).
"There's no physical harm in [recording someone having sex]."
Really? So you wouldn't mind if I secretly put a videocamera in your bathroom?
"There's nothing sexual about videotaping someone."
There is if the act being taped is sexual.
"But at least where I live there's only a punishment for child exploitation"
The fact that the girl in this case was a child, and the fact that at least in most states non-consentual voyeurism is considered a crime aside...
Just because something is legal doesn't mean there is nothing wrong with it. If in your state you are permitted to put secret video cameras in someone's bedroom doesn't mean you are not violating that person's rights.
"The foundation of rape is about violence acted upon a person by another involving sex against their will."
In some cases, yes. However, not always. Drugging a girl such that she is unable to refuse consent and then sleeping with her is considered rape, even though no violence was used.
"But please don't call it rape. "
Ok, I have now defined the word "tantamount" so you can no longer claim ignorance. From now on any accusation that I called the act rape will be regarded at a rather pathetic attempt at a strawman argument and pointed out as such.
Slashdot Mirror
The point of this (slightly old) article is that this is a guy who got screwed because of lax IP protections. I don't think your point works well with it. By the time the company that he was working for (and which owned the patent) had settled the lawsuit, he was no longer working for them.
And according to the current law, so is copyright infringement. You are free to disagree with the law all you want, but that is a question for elected law makers, not law enforcement civil servants.
Second, I got that number from extrapolating from the $2 a day it was estimated that someone could get away with making in India.
Actually we were talking about the outsourced jobs that don't require education (with many of them going to countries much poorer than India).
"But you can get apartments for much less than 10$ a day."
That was a typo, my bad. I meant to say $10 a month. The hotel room at $1.50 a night would end up costing $45 a month, which would be well out of range for someone making $2 a day.
"Protectionism doesn't mean keeping developing nations poor. "
No, that is never the intent, but is usually the result.
"You have to understand that the primary goal of outsourcing is not to raise the standard of living in impoverished nations - in fact, if salaries climb too much, the outsourcing companies will simply pack up and leave."
You are talking about an individual company outsourcing some of their positions. I am talking about having a free market economy where people in developing nations are allowed to compete with those who were lucky enough to be born in nations where people whine and moan if the unemployment rate gets above 5%.
And as I pointed out to him, no its not.
"we can also observe some of them today"
Really? Like what? Cite specific examples.
Nothing in your posts points to the probability that anything will happen, nor gives insight in how the probabilities that consequences from a hypothesis will occur can be calculated.
Watching "The Day After Tomorrow" doesn't count as observing global warming. In reality, it has not been observed, and many of the predicitons early versions of the theory made have simply not panned out. It is an unproven theory at best. That doesn't mean it won't happen, but certainly doesn't mean that it is guarenteed to happen either.
Have you seen the slums in India? Or other countries that are "stealing our jobs" (remember the origional post was on manufactoring jobs, not IT jobs that mostly go to India)? Its not just like America except you can rent an apartmentfor $10 a day and a new widescreen TV set costs $20. They really are areas of the world which are poor.
"Basically, until countries reach similar standards of living, free movement of labor between these countries will disrupt the richer economy. Protectionism is a necessary tool of economic planning, and forsaking it in the name of some free-market leap of faith is foolish."
So you are saying we need protectionism to make sure poor nations don't improve? I know many (myself included) who would disagree with that.
And yet they are still better off than many of the people in third world countries who may get a chance to make a half-way decent living as a result of jobs coming by via 'outsourcing'.
Really? Global warming has a greater than 1 in 37 chance of occuring? Exactly what do you believe the chances are that global warming will happen anyways? Furthermore, I would like to know how you are estimating the chances that the effects of an unproven hypothesis will occur in the first place.
Is that really something we want to do before we know exactly what its orbit is (and whether or not it will for certain hit us)? What if we were safe from the origional orbit, but the altered one would crash into us even sooner? This still seems to be something that we would need to wait on rather than act on with incomplete information as the origional poster suggested.
It won't hit for nearly a quarter of a century. I cannot get to the article (/.ed) but I would suspect that would mean it is pretty far away. Thus there wouldn't be much we can do for some time. But I'm sure the pentagon already has a number of contingency plans already written up and filed away somewhere next to the plans for what to do if Djibouti gets the bomb and threatens to nuke Luxembourg.
It works for some people, yes. They sell their personal information (along with that of their families and friends) and get a free toy. But along down the road it ceases to work because everyone gullible enough to sign up for one of these has already done it and in the end most who sign up end up just giving away their personal information for free. It ends up suffering from the same problems that any pyramid scam suffers from.
Early reports are never accurate, and shouldn't be expected to be. Actually, I've seen reports of disasters in non-Western countries where the first estimates were much higher. Remember the train collision in North Korea a while back?
"BTW is it just me, or does it seem in poor taste for News outlets like FOX and CNN to focus on possible American casualties when these kind of natural disasters happen?"
Well if I have family/friends in the affected area, I want to know if they are ok. Fox and CNN (or at least the versions you are probably watching if you are in the States, I know CNN and NewsCorp have international channels as well) are reporting primarily to American viewers who are more likely to have American family and friends in the area. Its really no more tasteless than you expressing concern over one possible fatality (Clarke) when thousands are probably dead.
Remember these are all early reports, these numbers often go down. In the initial confusion a lot of people end up reported dead who are merely out of contact, and there are often duplicates. Hopefully that happened here.
Don't mind him, he is just some troll with a severe case of karma-envy who has been following me around the past few months. At first it was a little funny, but it got so pathetic I had to stop reading his posts.
It actually may not even look like their pet. Often appearance is not identical even with clones, such as in calico cats.
However, I do see a potential problem. It does sort of defeat the point of the split if both projects are virtually identical. Now if you were against the split from the start maybe you don't care and if these are minor changes it probably doesn't matter. But as a general principle, I think we are in many ways served by not having to rely on one developer (be it you or this other guy).
Its unsettling that MS is finally starting to improve their browser? I would consider the addition of a pop-up blocker a good thing.
Does /. routinely cover tech companies that are going down the drain nowadays or is this just because the company in question initialized a lawsuit that by all accounts is frivolous and will never effect in the industry in any meaningful way?
There is no point to arguing with you if you are going to be obtuse beyond belief. Goodbye.
Yes, it is an example of a strawman. I never argued she was consenting. Thus your claim that I was is a strawman. Good job, but next time it would be appreciated if you were to just leave the strawmen out of your posts.
"Furthermore, violence in this context means to do physical harm upon another. Physical harm can be simply touching. So, all aspects of rape are present."
Playing with semantics in order to prove a point? Sorry, doesn't work. You know what I meant, don't pretend you don't.
"Fine, please don't call it tantamount to rape. The effects of rape are not equivalent to that of exploitation or voyeurism. The effects of rape are much more profound than any recording of a consensual act. It saddens me that you think any meaningful equivalency can be drawn on the effects of rape."
Both are actions in which one person is exploited against their will for the sexual gratification of another one. Thats all I meant by "tantamount", pretending I meant something else is a strawman as well.
A monopoly in professional sports? Who ever heard of such a thing?
Besides, he said "for the lay-person", not "read by the lay-person". I can write a book for geeks, that doesn't mean any geek would have to read it.
Ok, so if you slip a girl a roofie and then have sex with her you are not forcing her to do anything?
I apologize, I assumed you were intelligent enough to deduce from my post that she had not given consent to S&M. The intent of that post was to give an example of where someone can give consent for one act and then have it taken to a level they are not comfortable with, not for you to try to find creative loopholes.
"Resistance would be a strong indicator that she wasn't giving consent. "
While participating in S&M activities? Are you sure you understand what S&M means?
Nitpick all you want, just think of an example where she has no way of stating that she doesn't want to do this (as in the India example the girl had no way of telling the kid she didn't want a video of her all over the net because she didn't know about it).
"There's no physical harm in [recording someone having sex]."
Really? So you wouldn't mind if I secretly put a videocamera in your bathroom?
"There's nothing sexual about videotaping someone."
There is if the act being taped is sexual.
"But at least where I live there's only a punishment for child exploitation"
The fact that the girl in this case was a child, and the fact that at least in most states non-consentual voyeurism is considered a crime aside...
Just because something is legal doesn't mean there is nothing wrong with it. If in your state you are permitted to put secret video cameras in someone's bedroom doesn't mean you are not violating that person's rights.
"The foundation of rape is about violence acted upon a person by another involving sex against their will."
In some cases, yes. However, not always. Drugging a girl such that she is unable to refuse consent and then sleeping with her is considered rape, even though no violence was used.
"But please don't call it rape. "
Ok, I have now defined the word "tantamount" so you can no longer claim ignorance. From now on any accusation that I called the act rape will be regarded at a rather pathetic attempt at a strawman argument and pointed out as such.