C++ Final. The bulk of the grade was actually the programming. The final was only worth 20% of the grade, but failing the final was an automatic failure of the class (threat, prof actually handed out incompletes). Anyway, we're allowed one page of notes for the test. I decide to type the code listing of the last program of the text since it used every aspect of C++ covered in the textbook.
The final exam is the exact program and several pages of questions about it. I finished in record time with a perfect score. I even corrected unintentional typos on the exam. Unfortunately, I think I've used my lifetime store of luck for that one test.
I'm surprised nobody has stated the obvious. Form a company in your home country, and set up US operations. You will be able to travel back and forth at will. You can use your SO's address as the US base of operations--legally in most cases. You also become a more attractive prospect if you are a company that can be cast adrift at will, or hired just as quickly.
I'm assuming you have the european advantage of being multi-lingual. Language, coding, and business skills are a rare combination. You should work to refine that angle.
If you are not so ambitious, then get in line at your local consulate/embassy and play the immigration lottery game.
public records are just that..public, not private.
sheesh.
The records belong to the public. It does not follow that anyone should be able to access and use the data for any purpose they wish.
Data is collected for a specific purpose. Most people recognize the value of collecting and retaining data for _specific_ purposes. When any person has the ability to correlate and mine data from multiple sources, most people start to get a little uneasy, if not downright paranoid.
Even if you are not worried about terrorists having your information, are you prepared to face the legal economic discrimination that such data mining can enable?
Guy breaks EULA, guy reverse engineers copyright protection code, guy publishes way to break company's proprietary document protection code, company gets understandably upset and pursues legal options. Ho-hum. Why should Adobe have acted any differently.
..or you could go with 'guy is employed by a company to write software which enables a specific legal right in their country'. An EULA, or any contract, cannot break the law.
Skylarov and his employer created a product that allowed end users to make an electronic backup of documents; a practice specifically allowed for under russian law.
Here is a simlar analogy. Would you think it permissable for one of the vacationing principal authors of slashcode to be detained and prosecuted on a trip to China? Slashcode by all accounts is completely legal here in the U.S. However, in China such seditious tools are outlawed by the state.
Nobody cares about Mr. Skylarov, but everybody should care about what he represents.
In spirit, sure. But the way they go about suing their customers is reprehensible.
Step 1. Identify an IP address and force the ISP to hand over records stating who was _believed_ to have that IP address during the time in question.
Step 2. Threaten owner/leaseholder of the net connection with legal action, up to and including jail time.
Step 3. Offer a 'settlement' consisting of an arbitrary sum of money.
Step 4. Laugh all the way to the bank as previous customers finance suing of more customers.
Step 5. Hide profits in a PR move to 'prove' injury by file sharing in the court of owned politicians--wait, I mean public opinion.
The lack of due process, even in the UK, is the problem with this whole endeavor. The threats work because even if the responsible party can be proven blameless, it is cheaper to make them go away than it is to stand up for your rights.
Copyright laws aimed (rightfully so) at mass market pirates provide the stick to back up the threats.
I would like to see an exemption for P2P infringers where there was/is no profit motive. Make these folks fork over the value of the CD's they have shared, plus costs to get said restitution. Additionally, required attendance at a class of some sort could be justified.
Anyway, a nuisance bill of a couple hundred dollars in 'stolen' CD's and a 3-500 dollar cost recovery fee is more than enough to teach a lesson and serve the purpose of curtailing inadvertant/immature/just-plain-stupid file sharing.
I would like to see more of this kind of common sense in life today.
The story states both occupants were ejected from the car in the accident. The prosecution is quoted as saying their key element of the case was that part of the passenger door was melted on the dead guy.
So which was it? Did the dead guy stay there and take the burn, or get ejected? Did the car sit for awhile burning, and take off again?
I will make the specific conclusion from the vast amount of data in the article that there was enough doubt to go around in this case.
/sarcasm off
To often attorneys for both sides put up a George Lucas light show in order to sell their version to a jury. Matters are not helped by the fact that jury selection all to often resembles a Jerry Springer casting call.
I've seen the software in question used in a trial (once). What I saw seemed to be a believable representation of an elastic collision between vehicles. At no time were there any renderings, or mention of what happened INSIDE the vehicles. But then again, you know what they say about prepared demos...
I believe you injected the idea of a 'blanket subpoena'.
You missed the point on judicial oversite. A clerk in a district court in another jurisdiction is NOT judicial oversite.
Slow down and read the following over simplification. According to the ruling, the RIAA has to stop getting subpoenas mass produced by a single court clerk. In order for RIAA to get the information they want, they need to file an individual lawsuit against an unknown person in a court near where they believe the person lives. Then, in the context of that lawsuit, seek to find the identity of the person through a subpoena.
The theory being that the rights of both parties are preserved through competent judicial oversite of the process.
All this ruling does is preserve due process in achieving RIAA's legal ends.
This is not a victory for the people. The people we are talking about really _ARE_ infringing on copyrights in most cases.
What this ruling does do is make pursuing the actual infringers more expensive and annoying for RIAA and the like. Instead of getting blanket subpoenas en masse from a court a jillion miles away, they have been told to hire local council, file a John Doe lawsuit, and then file a subpoena for the information. Judicial oversite of the process is preserved, and a bunch of local lawyers will make more than the average amount collected from the alleged infringer for each suit filed.
With a lawsuit filed, you can challenge the subpoena.
Ok, it's like this. Verizon gets a subpoena for your IP as part of RIAA V. John Doe 1e+38. Verizon then informs you that they have a request to turn over the records. You can then hire an attorney to fight the subpoena, while your John Doe-ness is protected.
The big benefit is judicial oversite into the activities of RIAA. If RIAA wants to run roughshod over you, they need to hire a local lawyer and file a lawsuit in the correct venue.
Local judges, who may have to face being elected, may be a bit less inclined to blindly turn over records that may name people they know.
During the beta cycle, updates can happen much faster if the static packages stay in a repository.
As a 4 + meg download, you can try beta steppings much faster, too.
I agree, of course, that for the casual looker, a 400 meg download can be a bit off-putting. However, a local repository only has to be filled en masse once.
Do you not see any value in a commercial organization centered around profit as an outgrowth of a non-profit organization organized around Cool Code?
UserLinux aims to bring the Debian distribution to the paying masses, yet not corrupt Debian development.
Slashdot Mirror
Morse, not mores. Sorry, had to set the record straight.
Lameness filter blocked my little joke as I tried to type out "straight" in morse code. DOH!
C++ Final. The bulk of the grade was actually the programming. The final was only worth 20% of the grade, but failing the final was an automatic failure of the class (threat, prof actually handed out incompletes). Anyway, we're allowed one page of notes for the test. I decide to type the code listing of the last program of the text since it used every aspect of C++ covered in the textbook.
The final exam is the exact program and several pages of questions about it. I finished in record time with a perfect score. I even corrected unintentional typos on the exam. Unfortunately, I think I've used my lifetime store of luck for that one test.
The point is that you can easily get a business visa to be in the US legally.
I'm surprised nobody has stated the obvious. Form a company in your home country, and set up US operations. You will be able to travel back and forth at will. You can use your SO's address as the US base of operations--legally in most cases. You also become a more attractive prospect if you are a company that can be cast adrift at will, or hired just as quickly.
I'm assuming you have the european advantage of being multi-lingual. Language, coding, and business skills are a rare combination. You should work to refine that angle.
If you are not so ambitious, then get in line at your local consulate/embassy and play the immigration lottery game.
My sophos subscription lapsed in 2004. Anyway, the license at that time INCLUDED employee's personal home machines.
How about instead of bussing kids all over the place you let them attend the schools that were built in the neighborhood for that very purpose?
Why apply technology where sneakers excel?
public records are just that..public, not private. sheesh.
The records belong to the public. It does not follow that anyone should be able to access and use the data for any purpose they wish.
Data is collected for a specific purpose. Most people recognize the value of collecting and retaining data for _specific_ purposes. When any person has the ability to correlate and mine data from multiple sources, most people start to get a little uneasy, if not downright paranoid.
Even if you are not worried about terrorists having your information, are you prepared to face the legal economic discrimination that such data mining can enable?
Hmmm, maybe Microsoft if violating Red Hat's EULA by posting benchmarks.
EB games link from page one of the article is selling the gunmouse for 14.99 + shipping. http://www.ebgames.com/ebx/product/255244.asp?site ID=neQRQBqOKtQ-BZN0obLWZNVeG7HQQK%2FUMg
Guy breaks EULA, guy reverse engineers copyright protection code, guy publishes way to break company's proprietary document protection code, company gets understandably upset and pursues legal options. Ho-hum. Why should Adobe have acted any differently.
..or you could go with 'guy is employed by a company to write software which enables a specific legal right in their country'. An EULA, or any contract, cannot break the law.
Skylarov and his employer created a product that allowed end users to make an electronic backup of documents; a practice specifically allowed for under russian law.
Here is a simlar analogy. Would you think it permissable for one of the vacationing principal authors of slashcode to be detained and prosecuted on a trip to China? Slashcode by all accounts is completely legal here in the U.S. However, in China such seditious tools are outlawed by the state.
Nobody cares about Mr. Skylarov, but everybody should care about what he represents.
Isn't this exactly what we asked for?
In spirit, sure. But the way they go about suing their customers is reprehensible.
Step 1. Identify an IP address and force the ISP to hand over records stating who was _believed_ to have that IP address during the time in question.
Step 2. Threaten owner/leaseholder of the net connection with legal action, up to and including jail time.
Step 3. Offer a 'settlement' consisting of an arbitrary sum of money.
Step 4. Laugh all the way to the bank as previous customers finance suing of more customers.
Step 5. Hide profits in a PR move to 'prove' injury by file sharing in the court of owned politicians--wait, I mean public opinion.
The lack of due process, even in the UK, is the problem with this whole endeavor. The threats work because even if the responsible party can be proven blameless, it is cheaper to make them go away than it is to stand up for your rights.
Copyright laws aimed (rightfully so) at mass market pirates provide the stick to back up the threats.
I would like to see an exemption for P2P infringers where there was/is no profit motive. Make these folks fork over the value of the CD's they have shared, plus costs to get said restitution. Additionally, required attendance at a class of some sort could be justified.
Anyway, a nuisance bill of a couple hundred dollars in 'stolen' CD's and a 3-500 dollar cost recovery fee is more than enough to teach a lesson and serve the purpose of curtailing inadvertant/immature/just-plain-stupid file sharing.
Search results: Sorry, "toolzall" returned no matches. We did find matches for "dolzall". :(
I know, I may have to turn in my /. account.
/sarcasm off
I would like to see more of this kind of common sense in life today.
The story states both occupants were ejected from the car in the accident. The prosecution is quoted as saying their key element of the case was that part of the passenger door was melted on the dead guy.
So which was it? Did the dead guy stay there and take the burn, or get ejected? Did the car sit for awhile burning, and take off again?
I will make the specific conclusion from the vast amount of data in the article that there was enough doubt to go around in this case.
To often attorneys for both sides put up a George Lucas light show in order to sell their version to a jury. Matters are not helped by the fact that jury selection all to often resembles a Jerry Springer casting call.
I've seen the software in question used in a trial (once). What I saw seemed to be a believable representation of an elastic collision between vehicles. At no time were there any renderings, or mention of what happened INSIDE the vehicles. But then again, you know what they say about prepared demos...
Did you read my post?
I believe you injected the idea of a 'blanket subpoena'.
You missed the point on judicial oversite. A clerk in a district court in another jurisdiction is NOT judicial oversite.
Slow down and read the following over simplification. According to the ruling, the RIAA has to stop getting subpoenas mass produced by a single court clerk. In order for RIAA to get the information they want, they need to file an individual lawsuit against an unknown person in a court near where they believe the person lives. Then, in the context of that lawsuit, seek to find the identity of the person through a subpoena.
The theory being that the rights of both parties are preserved through competent judicial oversite of the process.
All this ruling does is preserve due process in achieving RIAA's legal ends. This is not a victory for the people. The people we are talking about really _ARE_ infringing on copyrights in most cases.
What this ruling does do is make pursuing the actual infringers more expensive and annoying for RIAA and the like. Instead of getting blanket subpoenas en masse from a court a jillion miles away, they have been told to hire local council, file a John Doe lawsuit, and then file a subpoena for the information. Judicial oversite of the process is preserved, and a bunch of local lawyers will make more than the average amount collected from the alleged infringer for each suit filed.
With a lawsuit filed, you can challenge the subpoena.
Ok, it's like this. Verizon gets a subpoena for your IP as part of RIAA V. John Doe 1e+38. Verizon then informs you that they have a request to turn over the records. You can then hire an attorney to fight the subpoena, while your John Doe-ness is protected.
The big benefit is judicial oversite into the activities of RIAA. If RIAA wants to run roughshod over you, they need to hire a local lawyer and file a lawsuit in the correct venue.
Local judges, who may have to face being elected, may be a bit less inclined to blindly turn over records that may name people they know.
now maybe the banks will ask the client for their goverment papers that proves they registered the bussiness.
Every business bank account I've ever opened needed to see my state tax registration paper.
"except for a module of expansion RAM I threw in there for my dad that died after 3-4 years."
My condolences on the loss of your father. Do you think the RAM contributed to his demise?
This has not been my experience at all, and I've been installing since Alpha. Of course there are warts, but no gaping wounds that I have found.
During the beta cycle, updates can happen much faster if the static packages stay in a repository. As a 4 + meg download, you can try beta steppings much faster, too. I agree, of course, that for the casual looker, a 400 meg download can be a bit off-putting. However, a local repository only has to be filled en masse once.
Then why don't you use Windows, Exchange, Outlook and Office. You seem so enamored with their features...
Do you not see any value in a commercial organization centered around profit as an outgrowth of a non-profit organization organized around Cool Code? UserLinux aims to bring the Debian distribution to the paying masses, yet not corrupt Debian development.