But I have played games on them before, and I don't remember seeing the warning screen. Was it always there, or was it added after the first round of suits?
Isn't the problem that these things slipped out of peoples' hands while they were using it as they were supposed to?
Maybe it's just because I finished up a torts class, but it's not a huge stretch of the imagination to anticipate wiimotes flying all over the place and breaking things.
And as stupid as tort law seems when someone say, throws a wiimote into a television screen and blames Nintendo, there's an easy precaution. Nintendo could have put some clear warnings along with the wiimotes, something like "be careful not to let these fly out of your hands and break the tv, window, mirrors, or your commemorative plate collection."
The two stupid assumptions cancel each other out in tort law. It's assumed that people pay attention to these ridiculously inclusive warnings, and it's assumed that a manufacturer is responsible when people slap themselves in the face with a product (if there weren't instructions not to.)
THAT is why you find things like labels on cans of peanuts that read: "warning: contains peanuts."
I find your perspective of "doing more with their computer" curious.
Personally, I feel that I am able to do more with a Linux distro or a BSD --customize look, layout, response, input, remap keys, automate tasks, etc-- to get it to do perform exactly as I wish. Or at least much closer to exactly as I wish than otherwise.
With Windows, even OSX for that matter, I'm only able to get so far and no further -- and then often only via guesswork like registry hacks.
I had a similar experience. One detail that you mentioned grabbed my attention: it woke you up.
I had a dream in which my grandmother (by then confined to a wheelchair) came for a visit, was walking with braces and my aunts on either side, then stepped away from the braces, their arms, and walked into our house.
My dream woke me up; wide awake, clear, not at all groggy, and much earlier than usual. I knew she had passed. It was a peaceful sensation, somehow allowing me to skip the initial, painful stages of grief and go right into acceptance.
I had just finished telling my sister that our grandmother had died when the phone rang to let us know that our grandmother had in fact died that morning.
Now I know that it's nothing I would ever be able to prove or convince to someone with a reasonably skeptic mind. There certainly are other explanations, and I'd be the first to admit the whole thing sounds like mystic, wishful thinking or even if the details were true, could be pure coincidence. You see that in the response to your post.
It's a curious position to be in: a sane person absolutely convinced that he or she has been spoken to from beyond the grave who can at the same time understand why people would not believe your story.
Here it sounds like you are the employee, and the University is your employer. (You are not a faculty member; they have different rights to their work product.)
You said you 'weren't hired directly'... I doubt this means what you hope. I'd guess that the NESRC paid the University, who in turn paid you. Look at your checks: if they are issued by the University, you're their employee.
It sounds as if you've been working on University grounds, using University equipment and resources, and getting paid by the University to write software, and you've finished the task. Writing the software was your main duty as an employee.
From what you've said, I believe you will NOT be able to properly claim IP rights to this software.
And you're VERY quick to insult. Do you have anything to support your belief?
My opinion comes from working with DA's, and later checking their output at the appellate level. I've been in the justice system for several years, on both coasts and in three states.
What professional contact have you had with DA's, besides reading about them in the news?
Jury convictions at trial courts do NOT set any sort of legal precedent. Future juries aren't bound by them in ANY WAY.
If another asshole manipulates a vulnerable kid to the point where he/she harms him/herself, another jury might or might not convict that asshole.
But there is NO jury that will convict you just for registering under a false name, whatever the law says. There's no DA that would bring a such a charge.
Once you try a few of these, it's easy to incorporate them in your daily life.
For example, next time you find yourself in a long, rambling conversation that jumps from topic to topic, try to trace the conversation backwards to the beginning topic with your conversation partner.
Another helpful practice is, when you're faced with something you want to remember, try to remember as many contextual details about it as you can: where you are, who you're with, what the weather is like, what you're wearing, what it smells like, what background noises there are, etc. If you notice these things, you have a better chance at building the kinds of associations that help build strong memories.
She's a smart cookie. She should not plan the rest of her life based on this.
The ACT is a standardized test, with five sections. Trying to branch out to a career based on these five paths is a false start.
A very good way to identify a career is to identify what you DON'T like. She may not like math and science (or she may not actually have a realistic idea of what those fields are).
She needs to explore. Let her. Let's be honest: her undergrad major really doesn't matter all that much, in comparison to doing well in her studies --and THAT only matters if you'll be going for higher education.
Even if he was going to distribute it, the fact that it was in English with those annoying Canadian subtitles would have considerably restricted its appeal.
It's a gamble, no degree is a guarantee; they just open certain opportunities. You can just start working as soon as possible and can just focus on developing the skill of making money. From what I've seen the people who manage to do this generally go into business for themselves.
It's a gamble. You probably will be disappointed in you're just looking at your education as a way to make more money. There is a quality of life value to education that will never translate into dollars.
Salary caps are telling; what's the highest wage you can find available for your level of education right now? The degree (or certification) doesn't guarantee the position, but opens these opportunity. In ten years I've looked for the highest opening salaries along the way, it's broken down approximately like this:
-no degree, no direct experience: from (federal) minimum wage to 50% above minimum wage
-Bachelor's: 150% -- 200% of minimum wage (with direct experience)
The 10" size is that of Asus's fourth generation, the 1000 series. I think the reality is that the drawbacks of the smaller form factors needed the minor compromises the previous generations have shaken out.
I picked up a 1000 a few months ago. I still think that the 40GB SSD in the 1000 is a better bargain than the 80 GB regular HD that comes w/ the XP version.
Xandros isn't horrible; it's just designed for someone who has never used Linux before. The only dealbreaker for me was Xandros' incompatibility with 802.1x. (Wpasupplicant is a messy kludge of a solution.)
I think that if not for the wireless problem, I might have tried customizing Xandros further. Simply replacing its default desktop environment would probably have addressed all of my other criticisms w/ Xandros.
There are problems w/ the Eee-specific Ubuntu distros (Eeebuntu, Ubuntu-eee), too. They can't yet access all the media keys. (Some of them don't even register an event in xev, at least last time I tried.) In my experience, Ubuntu-eee is also noticeably slower on the Eee than Xandros.
You should dig up information on the consultant. You cannot afford to lack critical analysis skills. Simply put, that means don't take what you're told (or what you read) at face value. Look up the source of the information and evaluate their reliability, and the authority of their sources.
Anyone can just make crap up. If they think they're right, they'll probably sound fairly convincing.
In particular, when we get to the 17-yo case, it's as simple as this: did you think, in good faith, that she was of age? If yes, you should be home free. We're talking reasonable doubt here. It's reasonable to think a 17-yo is 18 or 19.
All US states that I know of explicitly disallow the "but I thought she was legal" defense, even if the minor showed you a fake ID.
You overgeneralize Orwell's concept of ThoughtCrime to the point of error.
Orwell's concept was that certain thoughts themselves were crimes -- thoughts that would lead to the reasonable conclusion that the leadership was corrupt/abusive/needed to be replaced/etc.
In the US, hate crime legislation doesn't make mere thoughts a crime. You can still be as racist or otherwise bigoted as you want to be. You can even write books, tell people all about it, even march in a parade in Nazi regalia through a Jewish neighborhood (in the US, anyway. Not in Europe.)
Hate crimes still require a violent act --a beating, a rape, a murder. And if the perp's main reason for that crime was because they hated the group to which that person belonged (ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation), then it's considered among the most heinous of reasons (along with doing it for a profit.) Most murders, even in the 1st degree, do not automatically get one a life sentence.
Almost all other crimes ALSO require a thought element, a state of mind, a mens rea. You can accidentally harm somebody without it being a crime. It may be a tort and you may owe them money, but you won't get a prison sentence.
The only crime that I (think I) know of that doesn't require a state of mind is the possession of counterfeit currency. (I haven't looked it up, but I have heard that mere possession of it is the crime, even if you had no idea.)
Not only will the injunction outlawing the logo will fail spectacularly on 1st amendment grounds, but the very concept of outlawing a gang's insignia will just give the Mongols additional street cred, as they are now more-badass-than-thou.
"Our gang is so bad, our insignia is illegal. The very mention of our name will get you arrested. Think about us and you're committing a crime, brother!" Etc.
It just gives the gang additional appeal to the probable suckers who'd join a criminal biker gang in the first place.
I think the idea behind this type of advertising is to simply make the name familiar to you.
They're not trying to get you to run out and look them up when you need 'solutions', whatever that means.
So if & when you see their company's name on a list with other vendors (when your company is getting bids for a contract), you'll feel more comfortable with them simply because their name is more familiar than the others.
but in the end they will get the job and I will be on the street because they paid.
If you judge success by how much you get paid and job prestige then it does seem unfair and it's easy to feel cynical. Not that your point of view is way off, but it does "equivocate professional" success to just "success".
OTOH there are different ideas such as knowledge for its own sake, or that developing your own mind (and rest of your person) is what makes for success.
I think that the latter are the perspectives here, because if you think that is the sort of thing that comprises success, then free (or at least convenient) access to quality information makes it easier for anyone to succeed.
Slashdot Mirror
You're right, I don't own a Wii.
But I have played games on them before, and I don't remember seeing the warning screen. Was it always there, or was it added after the first round of suits?
Isn't the problem that these things slipped out of peoples' hands while they were using it as they were supposed to?
Maybe it's just because I finished up a torts class, but it's not a huge stretch of the imagination to anticipate wiimotes flying all over the place and breaking things.
And as stupid as tort law seems when someone say, throws a wiimote into a television screen and blames Nintendo, there's an easy precaution. Nintendo could have put some clear warnings along with the wiimotes, something like "be careful not to let these fly out of your hands and break the tv, window, mirrors, or your commemorative plate collection."
The two stupid assumptions cancel each other out in tort law. It's assumed that people pay attention to these ridiculously inclusive warnings, and it's assumed that a manufacturer is responsible when people slap themselves in the face with a product (if there weren't instructions not to.)
THAT is why you find things like labels on cans of peanuts that read: "warning: contains peanuts."
I find your perspective of "doing more with their computer" curious.
Personally, I feel that I am able to do more with a Linux distro or a BSD --customize look, layout, response, input, remap keys, automate tasks, etc-- to get it to do perform exactly as I wish. Or at least much closer to exactly as I wish than otherwise.
With Windows, even OSX for that matter, I'm only able to get so far and no further -- and then often only via guesswork like registry hacks.
With a little tweaking, it might just work!
Try this:
"The idea is that students would be free to file share. Music labels can sue and lose."
Works for me.
I had a similar experience. One detail that you mentioned grabbed my attention: it woke you up.
I had a dream in which my grandmother (by then confined to a wheelchair) came for a visit, was walking with braces and my aunts on either side, then stepped away from the braces, their arms, and walked into our house.
My dream woke me up; wide awake, clear, not at all groggy, and much earlier than usual. I knew she had passed. It was a peaceful sensation, somehow allowing me to skip the initial, painful stages of grief and go right into acceptance.
I had just finished telling my sister that our grandmother had died when the phone rang to let us know that our grandmother had in fact died that morning.
Now I know that it's nothing I would ever be able to prove or convince to someone with a reasonably skeptic mind. There certainly are other explanations, and I'd be the first to admit the whole thing sounds like mystic, wishful thinking or even if the details were true, could be pure coincidence. You see that in the response to your post.
It's a curious position to be in: a sane person absolutely convinced that he or she has been spoken to from beyond the grave who can at the same time understand why people would not believe your story.
IANAL, but IAALS
Here it sounds like you are the employee, and the University is your employer. (You are not a faculty member; they have different rights to their work product.)
You said you 'weren't hired directly'... I doubt this means what you hope. I'd guess that the NESRC paid the University, who in turn paid you. Look at your checks: if they are issued by the University, you're their employee.
It sounds as if you've been working on University grounds, using University equipment and resources, and getting paid by the University to write software, and you've finished the task. Writing the software was your main duty as an employee.
From what you've said, I believe you will NOT be able to properly claim IP rights to this software.
"There's no DA that would bring a such a charge."
You are VERY naive.
And you're VERY quick to insult. Do you have anything to support your belief?
My opinion comes from working with DA's, and later checking their output at the appellate level. I've been in the justice system for several years, on both coasts and in three states.
What professional contact have you had with DA's, besides reading about them in the news?
Jury convictions at trial courts do NOT set any sort of legal precedent. Future juries aren't bound by them in ANY WAY.
If another asshole manipulates a vulnerable kid to the point where he/she harms him/herself, another jury might or might not convict that asshole.
But there is NO jury that will convict you just for registering under a false name, whatever the law says. There's no DA that would bring a such a charge.
Jury verdicts do not set any legal precedent.
Though if your false name ends up in someone dead, you might find it used as an issue, if they have nothing else to go w/.
I think Brandtsegg's build of Csound is an excellent approach to musical permutations, but tfa's calling it "new" is a stretch.
If the dates are correct, the most recent composition on his site appears to be from 2002, and the oldest is from 1994.
Working on your power of concentration can help your memory and recall.
There are some helpful exercises described in the book Concentration by Ernest Wood (originally published in 1949). http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1443076&referer=brief_results
Once you try a few of these, it's easy to incorporate them in your daily life.
For example, next time you find yourself in a long, rambling conversation that jumps from topic to topic, try to trace the conversation backwards to the beginning topic with your conversation partner.
Another helpful practice is, when you're faced with something you want to remember, try to remember as many contextual details about it as you can: where you are, who you're with, what the weather is like, what you're wearing, what it smells like, what background noises there are, etc. If you notice these things, you have a better chance at building the kinds of associations that help build strong memories.
It's a test score.
She's a smart cookie. She should not plan the rest of her life based on this.
The ACT is a standardized test, with five sections. Trying to branch out to a career based on these five paths is a false start.
A very good way to identify a career is to identify what you DON'T like. She may not like math and science (or she may not actually have a realistic idea of what those fields are).
She needs to explore. Let her. Let's be honest: her undergrad major really doesn't matter all that much, in comparison to doing well in her studies --and THAT only matters if you'll be going for higher education.
Even if he was going to distribute it, the fact that it was in English with those annoying Canadian subtitles would have considerably restricted its appeal.
OCLC can try, but really now: it's best not to fuck with librarians.
We come from an unbroken lineage that doesn't simply date back to recorded history: we're the ones that RECORDED recorded history in the first place.
Cross us, OCLC, and you'll soon be as significant as the dust surrounding the jars that housed the Dead Sea scrolls. Bitches.
It's a gamble, no degree is a guarantee; they just open certain opportunities. You can just start working as soon as possible and can just focus on developing the skill of making money. From what I've seen the people who manage to do this generally go into business for themselves.
It's a gamble. You probably will be disappointed in you're just looking at your education as a way to make more money. There is a quality of life value to education that will never translate into dollars.
Salary caps are telling; what's the highest wage you can find available for your level of education right now? The degree (or certification) doesn't guarantee the position, but opens these opportunity. In ten years I've looked for the highest opening salaries along the way, it's broken down approximately like this:
-no degree, no direct experience: from (federal) minimum wage to 50% above minimum wage
-Bachelor's: 150% -- 200% of minimum wage (with direct experience)
-Masters: 500% -- 1000% of minimum wage
-JD: 1000% -- 1300% of minimum wage
Don't want to serve the community? Then don't take community funds to further the interests of your children.
That's my money paying for your kids' schools. It's about time that they try to actually earn it.
The 10" size is that of Asus's fourth generation, the 1000 series. I think the reality is that the drawbacks of the smaller form factors needed the minor compromises the previous generations have shaken out.
I picked up a 1000 a few months ago. I still think that the 40GB SSD in the 1000 is a better bargain than the 80 GB regular HD that comes w/ the XP version.
Xandros isn't horrible; it's just designed for someone who has never used Linux before. The only dealbreaker for me was Xandros' incompatibility with 802.1x. (Wpasupplicant is a messy kludge of a solution.)
I think that if not for the wireless problem, I might have tried customizing Xandros further. Simply replacing its default desktop environment would probably have addressed all of my other criticisms w/ Xandros.
There are problems w/ the Eee-specific Ubuntu distros (Eeebuntu, Ubuntu-eee), too. They can't yet access all the media keys. (Some of them don't even register an event in xev, at least last time I tried.) In my experience, Ubuntu-eee is also noticeably slower on the Eee than Xandros.
You should dig up information on the consultant. You cannot afford to lack critical analysis skills.
Simply put, that means don't take what you're told (or what you read) at face value. Look up the source of the information and evaluate their reliability, and the authority of their sources.
Anyone can just make crap up. If they think they're right, they'll probably sound fairly convincing.
In particular, when we get to the 17-yo case, it's as simple as this: did you think, in good faith, that she was of age? If yes, you should be home free. We're talking reasonable doubt here. It's reasonable to think a 17-yo is 18 or 19.
All US states that I know of explicitly disallow the "but I thought she was legal" defense, even if the minor showed you a fake ID.
You overgeneralize Orwell's concept of ThoughtCrime to the point of error.
Orwell's concept was that certain thoughts themselves were crimes -- thoughts that would lead to the reasonable conclusion that the leadership was corrupt/abusive/needed to be replaced/etc.
In the US, hate crime legislation doesn't make mere thoughts a crime. You can still be as racist or otherwise bigoted as you want to be. You can even write books, tell people all about it, even march in a parade in Nazi regalia through a Jewish neighborhood (in the US, anyway. Not in Europe.)
Hate crimes still require a violent act --a beating, a rape, a murder. And if the perp's main reason for that crime was because they hated the group to which that person belonged (ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation), then it's considered among the most heinous of reasons (along with doing it for a profit.) Most murders, even in the 1st degree, do not automatically get one a life sentence.
Almost all other crimes ALSO require a thought element, a state of mind, a mens rea. You can accidentally harm somebody without it being a crime. It may be a tort and you may owe them money, but you won't get a prison sentence.
The only crime that I (think I) know of that doesn't require a state of mind is the possession of counterfeit currency. (I haven't looked it up, but I have heard that mere possession of it is the crime, even if you had no idea.)
Not only will the injunction outlawing the logo will fail spectacularly on 1st amendment grounds, but the very concept of outlawing a gang's insignia will just give the Mongols additional street cred, as they are now more-badass-than-thou.
"Our gang is so bad, our insignia is illegal. The very mention of our name will get you arrested. Think about us and you're committing a crime, brother!" Etc.
It just gives the gang additional appeal to the probable suckers who'd join a criminal biker gang in the first place.
*CA, for example, doesn't. Neither does Scotland, hence English.
That is not accurate: California is a common law state. Its recent same sex marriage decision is one example of its use of judge-made, aka common law.
Did you mean LA? I believe they are the only American civil law state.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_law
I think the idea behind this type of advertising is to simply make the name familiar to you.
They're not trying to get you to run out and look them up when you need 'solutions', whatever that means.
So if & when you see their company's name on a list with other vendors (when your company is getting bids for a contract), you'll feel more comfortable with them simply because their name is more familiar than the others.
I enjoyed them to; I found them entertaining.
What is the point of trying to "get" an ad? Ads are an attempt to sell you something. That's it.
The approach here seemed to be to try to simply entertain, not try to convince you that their product is great.
but in the end they will get the job and I will be on the street because they paid.
If you judge success by how much you get paid and job prestige then it does seem unfair and it's easy to feel cynical. Not that your point of view is way off, but it does "equivocate professional" success to just "success".
OTOH there are different ideas such as knowledge for its own sake, or that developing your own mind (and rest of your person) is what makes for success.
I think that the latter are the perspectives here, because if you think that is the sort of thing that comprises success, then free (or at least convenient) access to quality information makes it easier for anyone to succeed.