I don't think that this is race related, I think that the punishment is so harsh because everyone is scared of improvised explosive devices after Boston. When I first heard the story it was reported as "An Acid Bomb was Set Off At a Local High School".
I made the switch years ago and have never looked back. I was really glad that Heroku adopted Postgres as their standard database and even began providing Postgres as a service (https://postgres.heroku.com), it makes my life easier.
Any weapon will be inherently dangerous, attempting to "protect" consumers from danger doesn't really apply to something that is meant to be dangerous.
The loaded chamber indicator on my SR9c is my least favorite feature; I treat guns as if they are always loaded so it doesn't make a difference in how I handle the gun, it only sticks up and gets snagged on my clothes or in my holster. I'd argue that the loaded chamber indicator actually makes my gun less safe, although it is by such a small margin it is mostly inconsequential.
It's not going to allow them to upgrade for free, just reduce their taxable income.
For a simplified example assume that someone has $100,000 of taxable income, in the US they'll be taxed roughly 25% paying $25,000.
If this person is able to write off $2,000 of old equipment when they purchase new equipment they will now have a taxable income of $98,000 still taxed at roughly 25% paying $24,500, a $500 savings.
If they are able to replace $2,000 worth of equipment for $500 then they would, in essence, get the upgrade for free; otherwise they are only able to save some money by donating their old equipment to someone in need.
This person couldn't "donate" their old equipment to a friend, it has to be to a registered non-profit.
So there is one person who is getting positive feedback from the rest of their team (presumably improving the work environment for almost everyone) and one person who doesn't feel as effective as they could be? Why doesn't the person who feels ineffective find another job?
No matter how many laws we create the underlying feelings that lead to sexually offensive (or otherwise insensitive) language or acts will not go away. By outlawing offensive statements and actions in the workplace you are sanctioning discrimination against people who enjoy making or hearing those type of things. If a the majority of people at a particular employer enjoy that type of humor why would we restrict it? No one is forced to work anywhere these days, they always have the choice to find employment at a firm that is more in line with their character.
If a non-offensive workplace is the ideal state most workplaces will move towards being non-offensive on their own.
I'm well aware of what externalization is, but I don't understand how it applies to the situation at hand. What benefit is being enjoyed, and by whom? What costs are created?
Why not just let the "market" handle it? If some place is really so bad for , then they can choose not to accept the position or leave after accepting the position... if a lack of diversity is really a negative in their industry, then the team will not be do top quality work and will eventually move towards obsolescence.
I really dislike that the US has laws making it illegal to offend others.
I tried out Lighthouse when looking for a new bug tracking system and was pretty underwhelmed... IMO, it was functional, but lacked polish. We also tried using Trajectory for a while, but settled on DoneDone.
Take a look at DoneDone (http://www.getdonedone.com/), they offer a free plan with 3 active users, unlimited projects, and 1GB of storage. I use it professionally and love it.
It's related to design, not functionality. It's not as if Apple was trying to prevent anyone from making a smartphone, just prevent someone from creating a smartphone that (to most consumers) looked identical to an iPhone. They never said that they objected to Samsung making a phone that leveraged location services, push notifications, an accelerometer, and a touch screen.
Apple suing Samsung was related to Samsung creating a phone that looked almost identical to the iPhone; it wasn't to prevent Samsung from using any particular technology. Samsung was the one that started trying to use their own patents to prevent Apple from using specific technology.
When has Apple attempted to stop someone from using something covered under one of their patents without the other party first bringing litigation against Apple? I'm not saying that there's no chance it happened, I just do not recall a case in which Apple has attacked another company unprovoked.
If Apple didn't hold this patent someone else would use it against them. I can't really fault a company for defending their right to use some technology. I haven't seen many cases where Apple was the first to enter into litigation.
I think that a lot of the complaints mentioned in the post apply more to large commercial games than to Indie efforts. I love some of the large commercial games like Red Dead Redemption, but felt that I expected more polish out of such a major effort, while I've played some indie games that felt nearly perfect (Braid, Limbo).
Perhaps the issue is that a lot of the larger commercial games are repeats of an old concept, while many of the indies feel fresh. When you've already experience a mechanic ten times over you become free to pay attention to some of the minutia.
I really got sucked into this one. I saw Mitnick on the Colbert Report, downloaded the sample to my iPad, quickly reached the end of the sample, purchased the full copy, then read until the book was finished.
I heard the other side of the story while I was really into computer security, this made getting Mitnick's personal account of events something that really interested me. Reading through this book brought back a lot of memories and proved to be much more enjoyable than I had initially anticipated.
The Russian security firm was able to brute force devices that were locked with a 4 digit PIN because there are not that many possible 4 digit PINs. They could not crack a phone with a text-based lock code.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder if Apple is going to wait until after the 5S is released before providing sales figures to the public?
How do you expect to foster creativity in the technology sector when certain ideas are forbidden?
I think that Titstare was a stupid app, but I also think that Barbie Nail Salon is a stupid app. Why is it ok for one to exist, but not the other?
I don't think that this is race related, I think that the punishment is so harsh because everyone is scared of improvised explosive devices after Boston. When I first heard the story it was reported as "An Acid Bomb was Set Off At a Local High School".
I made the switch years ago and have never looked back. I was really glad that Heroku adopted Postgres as their standard database and even began providing Postgres as a service (https://postgres.heroku.com), it makes my life easier.
Any weapon will be inherently dangerous, attempting to "protect" consumers from danger doesn't really apply to something that is meant to be dangerous. The loaded chamber indicator on my SR9c is my least favorite feature; I treat guns as if they are always loaded so it doesn't make a difference in how I handle the gun, it only sticks up and gets snagged on my clothes or in my holster. I'd argue that the loaded chamber indicator actually makes my gun less safe, although it is by such a small margin it is mostly inconsequential.
It's not going to allow them to upgrade for free, just reduce their taxable income.
For a simplified example assume that someone has $100,000 of taxable income, in the US they'll be taxed roughly 25% paying $25,000.
If this person is able to write off $2,000 of old equipment when they purchase new equipment they will now have a taxable income of $98,000 still taxed at roughly 25% paying $24,500, a $500 savings.
If they are able to replace $2,000 worth of equipment for $500 then they would, in essence, get the upgrade for free; otherwise they are only able to save some money by donating their old equipment to someone in need.
This person couldn't "donate" their old equipment to a friend, it has to be to a registered non-profit.
No, but they can reduce their tax burden while gaining some control over where their resources help the community.
I second this advice, although having a personal project that you spent time working on can stand in for the gap in employment.
So there is one person who is getting positive feedback from the rest of their team (presumably improving the work environment for almost everyone) and one person who doesn't feel as effective as they could be? Why doesn't the person who feels ineffective find another job?
No matter how many laws we create the underlying feelings that lead to sexually offensive (or otherwise insensitive) language or acts will not go away. By outlawing offensive statements and actions in the workplace you are sanctioning discrimination against people who enjoy making or hearing those type of things. If a the majority of people at a particular employer enjoy that type of humor why would we restrict it? No one is forced to work anywhere these days, they always have the choice to find employment at a firm that is more in line with their character.
If a non-offensive workplace is the ideal state most workplaces will move towards being non-offensive on their own.
I'm well aware of what externalization is, but I don't understand how it applies to the situation at hand. What benefit is being enjoyed, and by whom? What costs are created?
Could you elaborate?
Why not just let the "market" handle it? If some place is really so bad for , then they can choose not to accept the position or leave after accepting the position... if a lack of diversity is really a negative in their industry, then the team will not be do top quality work and will eventually move towards obsolescence. I really dislike that the US has laws making it illegal to offend others.
I tried out Lighthouse when looking for a new bug tracking system and was pretty underwhelmed... IMO, it was functional, but lacked polish. We also tried using Trajectory for a while, but settled on DoneDone.
Take a look at DoneDone (http://www.getdonedone.com/), they offer a free plan with 3 active users, unlimited projects, and 1GB of storage. I use it professionally and love it.
Yes. Unless he can be reasonably expected to find the descendants of the particular Jews that his grandfather stole from.
Stop being so reasonable!
She's a paraplegic motivational speaker (I'm sure that the tits didn't hurt though).
It's related to design, not functionality. It's not as if Apple was trying to prevent anyone from making a smartphone, just prevent someone from creating a smartphone that (to most consumers) looked identical to an iPhone. They never said that they objected to Samsung making a phone that leveraged location services, push notifications, an accelerometer, and a touch screen.
Apple suing Samsung was related to Samsung creating a phone that looked almost identical to the iPhone; it wasn't to prevent Samsung from using any particular technology. Samsung was the one that started trying to use their own patents to prevent Apple from using specific technology.
When has Apple attempted to stop someone from using something covered under one of their patents without the other party first bringing litigation against Apple? I'm not saying that there's no chance it happened, I just do not recall a case in which Apple has attacked another company unprovoked.
If Apple didn't hold this patent someone else would use it against them. I can't really fault a company for defending their right to use some technology. I haven't seen many cases where Apple was the first to enter into litigation.
Student loans will still exist, just not from the government.
I think that a lot of the complaints mentioned in the post apply more to large commercial games than to Indie efforts. I love some of the large commercial games like Red Dead Redemption, but felt that I expected more polish out of such a major effort, while I've played some indie games that felt nearly perfect (Braid, Limbo). Perhaps the issue is that a lot of the larger commercial games are repeats of an old concept, while many of the indies feel fresh. When you've already experience a mechanic ten times over you become free to pay attention to some of the minutia.
I really got sucked into this one. I saw Mitnick on the Colbert Report, downloaded the sample to my iPad, quickly reached the end of the sample, purchased the full copy, then read until the book was finished. I heard the other side of the story while I was really into computer security, this made getting Mitnick's personal account of events something that really interested me. Reading through this book brought back a lot of memories and proved to be much more enjoyable than I had initially anticipated.
The Russian security firm was able to brute force devices that were locked with a 4 digit PIN because there are not that many possible 4 digit PINs. They could not crack a phone with a text-based lock code.