I did the same thing on myself a while back. The first few are me, and I'm scattered though the subsequent pages because of the magazine, but the other two major contenders are another developer and a VP at Sun.
There's a difference between buy and use. Most of the really expensive software that you use is paid for by your employer unless you are your own employer.
In that case, you don't pay for it - your employer does because they see the cost to benefit ratio as being reasonable. You just use it.
Besides, some of us like having physical media, liner notes, etc. Personally, I like playing cds in my car and it's a lot easier to tell the "real" ones apart at a glance than it is with any of the mix cds that I burn.
As for rewarding the RIAA for behavior that I find distasteful, I don't reward them. How? I buy most of my cds used. The only actual new cds I have bought in the last 2-3 years have been from local and regional bands that I went to see live.
I look at music the same way I look at software - if the people who made it want it to be free, great. If they want to charge for it, that's fine too. If they charge what I consider to be a reasonable price and I have some use/desire for it, I'll buy it. If they charge too much for my tastes or I don't really want it that badly, then I won't but it.
The ones who "used to work in technology" can be even worse. Some of them actually know what they're doing, but most of the people I've heard that line from were the "I've made an access database" sort.
It was refreshing to find the ones who acually knew what they were talking about, but after a while, you just got rather cynical.
There are a few reasons in my case: 1) Paper is easier on my eyes. 2) Paper makes it easier to rapidly flip pages. 3) Most of the e-books I have are PC based. This means that I have to keep switching windows if I am reading a technical book while I am working.
E-Books are nice because I can carry them around without all of the bulk of paper, so I usually keep a few with me if I'm working on something away from my bookshelf, but otherwise, I tend to stick with paper.
I thought it was rather amusing, personally. I also have to agree with the losing interest comment. When we have a perfectly valid vehicle for debate about a serious issue and the people "participating" in it decide to spend the entire thread bickering over points in each other's logic and terminology, I tend to get rather fed up.
I've got news for you. You should care about your own poor first because nobody else will.
India doesn't care about the American, Chinese, etc poor except how it may benefit them. The same goes for China and virtually every other country in the world.
You. Take. Care. Of. Your. Own. FIRST.
Otherwise, you and your own people all go down together while the other guy laughs.
I recently went back to my alma mater to see some people who still live in the area. While I was there, I stopped by the new lecture hall (it was built about the time I was graduating) to take a look around it.
I was impressed - roomy bench tables with power and ethernet jacks for every seat, comfortable chairs, good acoustics, the whole nine yards.
The older buildings, however, were pretty much as I remembered them - no outlets, cramped desks, etc.
The only reason I packed my laptop with me was so that I could work while off campus sitting in my favorite coffee shop or if I happened to have to make a visit to the office of a client. During classes, it usually stayed in my backpack.
This also depends on the company charter. If part of their charter is to do good works (or in this case, no evil - which could also be implied as doing good works), then they're fine.
Disclaimer: I am not supporting the censorship policies of china.
That said, riddle me this - which is better: not having a presence in China and thereby doing nothing good or at least giving people better access to information than they had before even if they still can't get to all of the content censored by their government?
Besides, by at least being there, they can start to bring about positive change, bit by bit. Most things do not change overnight. They happen by degrees.
I love the "we contacted you but we're going to make you jump through hoops" interviews. Even better was the fact that in the one I had, the HR people were positively gushing about me and I had to prod them for an answer a week later.
The answer, amusingly enough, was no. Guess my distate at being poked and proded showed.
Last year a special "retention plan" was put in place in Siebel that mandates larger severance packages in the event of layoffs after a company takeover.
This explains why Oracle is talking about laying off primarily their own staff and not the staff from the acquired company...
Not having to futz with memory is one of the reasons that I like java as well. I hear all of the people that I went to college with who have never touched java say how horrible and slow it is and how c or c++ are the only ways to go.
The engineering profs at the university I went to were all relatively cool. The ones I experienced who had large egos tended to be in the history department lol
Actually, only about 18% of people who have gout have a family history of it.
So unless the other 82% of people who get it are all mutations (which is not likely), your statement doesn't hold up.
Besides, as I said, both are causes.
"An elevated blood level of uric acid (called hyperuricemia) occurs when the liver produces more uric acid than the body can excrete in the urine, or when a diet high in rich foods (e.g., red meat, cream sauces, red wine) produces more uric acid than the kidneys can filter from the blood."
The liver producing excess amounts of uric acid can be caused by genetics. The amount released from a diet high in rich foods is not genetic.
Your employer's reaction could have been a whole lot worse even back then. At least they let you gracefully resign instead of dragging your name through the mud for firing you for it.
Hate to break this to you, but you're wrong. Actually, several things cause gout.
One may be more likely to get it due to genetics, but many other things also increase the risk.
# Obesity # High alcohol intake # High intake of food containing purines (which includes red meats from sheep and cows such as steaks, chops, corned beef and roasts, animal organs, shellfish, and legumes)
So, yes, a diet too high in protein can lead to gout.
Slashdot Mirror
I did the same thing on myself a while back. The first few are me, and I'm scattered though the subsequent pages because of the magazine, but the other two major contenders are another developer and a VP at Sun.
There's a difference between buy and use. Most of the really expensive software that you use is paid for by your employer unless you are your own employer.
In that case, you don't pay for it - your employer does because they see the cost to benefit ratio as being reasonable. You just use it.
I tend to be a fairly pragmatic individual.
Frightening isn't it?
Who says it has to be free?
Besides, some of us like having physical media, liner notes, etc. Personally, I like playing cds in my car and it's a lot easier to tell the "real" ones apart at a glance than it is with any of the mix cds that I burn.
As for rewarding the RIAA for behavior that I find distasteful, I don't reward them. How? I buy most of my cds used. The only actual new cds I have bought in the last 2-3 years have been from local and regional bands that I went to see live.
I look at music the same way I look at software - if the people who made it want it to be free, great. If they want to charge for it, that's fine too. If they charge what I consider to be a reasonable price and I have some use/desire for it, I'll buy it. If they charge too much for my tastes or I don't really want it that badly, then I won't but it.
It's amazing how that works.
I think this is what he was talking about.
The ones who "used to work in technology" can be even worse. Some of them actually know what they're doing, but most of the people I've heard that line from were the "I've made an access database" sort.
It was refreshing to find the ones who acually knew what they were talking about, but after a while, you just got rather cynical.
*looks at your sig and tries to take the hamster*
I use my laptop for dev work. Haven't bought a new desktop since 98.
There are a few reasons in my case:
1) Paper is easier on my eyes.
2) Paper makes it easier to rapidly flip pages.
3) Most of the e-books I have are PC based. This means that I have to keep switching windows if I am reading a technical book while I am working.
E-Books are nice because I can carry them around without all of the bulk of paper, so I usually keep a few with me if I'm working on something away from my bookshelf, but otherwise, I tend to stick with paper.
I thought it was rather amusing, personally. I also have to agree with the losing interest comment. When we have a perfectly valid vehicle for debate about a serious issue and the people "participating" in it decide to spend the entire thread bickering over points in each other's logic and terminology, I tend to get rather fed up.
I believe that Coca-Cola does the same thing and they're still doing quite well.
Analysts just hate it when people don't play ball with them so they can't get rich(er) as easily.
I've got news for you. You should care about your own poor first because nobody else will.
India doesn't care about the American, Chinese, etc poor except how it may benefit them.
The same goes for China and virtually every other country in the world.
You. Take. Care. Of. Your. Own. FIRST.
Otherwise, you and your own people all go down together while the other guy laughs.
I recently went back to my alma mater to see some people who still live in the area. While I was there, I stopped by the new lecture hall (it was built about the time I was graduating) to take a look around it.
I was impressed - roomy bench tables with power and ethernet jacks for every seat, comfortable chairs, good acoustics, the whole nine yards.
The older buildings, however, were pretty much as I remembered them - no outlets, cramped desks, etc.
The only reason I packed my laptop with me was so that I could work while off campus sitting in my favorite coffee shop or if I happened to have to make a visit to the office of a client. During classes, it usually stayed in my backpack.
This also depends on the company charter. If part of their charter is to do good works (or in this case, no evil - which could also be implied as doing good works), then they're fine.
Disclaimer: I am not supporting the censorship policies of china.
That said, riddle me this - which is better: not having a presence in China and thereby doing nothing good or at least giving people better access to information than they had before even if they still can't get to all of the content censored by their government?
Besides, by at least being there, they can start to bring about positive change, bit by bit. Most things do not change overnight. They happen by degrees.
I love the "we contacted you but we're going to make you jump through hoops" interviews. Even better was the fact that in the one I had, the HR people were positively gushing about me and I had to prod them for an answer a week later.
The answer, amusingly enough, was no. Guess my distate at being poked and proded showed.
DS9. There were human freighter captains working for the government of Bejor.
I had that double-take moment too. It struck me as a very sony thing to do...
Last year a special "retention plan" was put in place in Siebel that mandates larger severance packages in the event of layoffs after a company takeover.
This explains why Oracle is talking about laying off primarily their own staff and not the staff from the acquired company...
Not having to futz with memory is one of the reasons that I like java as well. I hear all of the people that I went to college with who have never touched java say how horrible and slow it is and how c or c++ are the only ways to go.
I just shake my head...
The engineering profs at the university I went to were all relatively cool. The ones I experienced who had large egos tended to be in the history department lol
Actually, only about 18% of people who have gout have a family history of it.
So unless the other 82% of people who get it are all mutations (which is not likely), your statement doesn't hold up.
Besides, as I said, both are causes.
"An elevated blood level of uric acid (called hyperuricemia) occurs when the liver produces more uric acid than the body can excrete in the urine, or when a diet high in rich foods (e.g., red meat, cream sauces, red wine) produces more uric acid than the kidneys can filter from the blood."
The liver producing excess amounts of uric acid can be caused by genetics. The amount released from a diet high in rich foods is not genetic.
http://www.podiatrychannel.com/gout/
Cat-o-nine-tails please :P
Your employer's reaction could have been a whole lot worse even back then. At least they let you gracefully resign instead of dragging your name through the mud for firing you for it.
Hate to break this to you, but you're wrong. Actually, several things cause gout.
One may be more likely to get it due to genetics, but many other things also increase the risk.
# Obesity
# High alcohol intake
# High intake of food containing purines (which includes red meats from sheep and cows such as steaks, chops, corned beef and roasts, animal organs, shellfish, and legumes)
So, yes, a diet too high in protein can lead to gout.
http://www.rheumatology.org.nz/nz08003.htm
One of the big problems with diets like Atkins is that eating too much protein can come with a whole other set of problems.
One of them is Gout.
Ever consider the weight loss is because of the running and the time you spend in the gym?