And the rule is:
Never say anything that you would not be proud to have on a sign on your front lawn.
"Say" in this context includes anything written.
You could burn a diary if you wrote something in that you later came to regret.
With anything transmitted electronically, there is no going back. Once you hit the send button, it is out of your control forever.
So before you click it, be certain that you mean it.
Drive in such a manner that you don't hit stuff.
Be sufficiently aware of the world around you that other stuff doesn't hit you
Hold the wheel whereever you please.
...employers will just ask potential employees to accept their HR staff's friend request, as the article yesterday stated. But one could easily get around that by making sure the HR staff is in a Facebook list that has no access to a user's wall/timeline and other info.
Your personal, private affairs do not belong in the workplace at all. Although I have friends at work, and we do socialize with them, none of them are facebook friends, nor ever will be -- and they all seem to be OK with that.
I'm not sure what I would do if a personal friend came to work for this company, but since it isn't likely I won't fret.
Time and time again I see people losing jobs -- and friends -- by failing to keep their employers/jobs/work out of their private lives and vice-versa.
My answer to such a request from HR would be, "I strive to keep my personal life out of the workplace, just as I don't discuss work-related issues with family and friends. For that reason, I don't make facebook friends with colleagues. You are welcome to connect with me on LinkedIn, though, since that is where I keep my professional connections." If that doesn't satisfy them, then I'm perfectly happy not working for them.
That is the question underlying the entire discussion.
I have a so-called "living will" that sets standards for when I should not be resuscitated.
I don't really care if a miracle cure comes along later.
When I'm done with my body, I'm happy that someone else can get some use out of whatever parts remain usable.
"Value of a human life" is more than just a "life or death" question. The quality of life is of concern in this issue as well.
It does not matter if you are later cleared, acquitted, exonerated or whatever your local legal system calls it.
If you are cleared, there will always be those who think that you are some sort of pervert who "got off".
Also, if you are convicted just because there was porn on your computer, there will be (hopefully) be some people who will recognize the miscarraige of justice..
Once accused -- guilty or not -- your live is forever changed. I will likely cost you your retirement savings to pay to a lawyer to mitigate the damage.
Therefore, do not be your own accuser.
If you find anything incriminating on your computer, delete it irretrievably -- if you don't know how, find out.
Then ever afterwards, stfu.
Never EVER again buy any CD, DVD, Blu-Ray or ANY OTHER crap that these industries try to sell you.
Go to movies if you must -- when you're done, remember them.
Attend music concerts -- the artists get more money from live performances, so you're helping support them. Buying media does the artist very little good -- pennies per item, or so I'm told.
If they come on TV record 'em on your PVR if you like.
Listen to music on the radio, and enjoy its fleeting beauty
Download whatever you please, after all, your advertising dollars, your theatre tickets and your concert tickets paid the FULL COST OF PRODUCTION.
All the rest of the drek merely goes to line the pockets of the rich greedy leeches that use the performers as pawns in their quest to mine your pockets.
When you exchange money for "something of value", you now have complete control of that thing.
You own it.
You control it.
You can do with it what ever you please.
This has been the case since barter was invented.
When that "something of value" is a so-called license to use some other thing, then it comes with some form of license agreement.
Read any of them and in there you will find a clause that grants one side of the bargain an exclusive right to change the agreement without notice.
If one side has that right, then the other does too. Even if the agreement says otherwise. Fair is fair, after all .
So...
Whenever you click the "Agree" button, say out loud, "I can do whatever I bloody well please." then agree to that.
There is no need to inform the other party.
They may haul you before the courts, but at least you can do whatever you bloody please with a clear conscience
You can alter all the notices etc on all of the physical media you buy too.
Very liberating!
And therein lies the source of the whole fubar mess.
If I purchase something -- In other words I exchange money for the possession of ANYTHING -- the original owner can no longer expect to control my actions in relation to that item.
The so-called "licenses" are not valid contracts whatever the courts of whatever country may decide, since there is no negotiation involved.
Furthermore, they are coercive by their very nature, and the only thing that supports them is the threat of force. That force may be held to be legal -- in some cases, the mere threat of lawsuit cause economic harm to those even suspected of breach of one of these so-called implied agreements. The law itself is sometimes the weapon wielded by the enforcers.
The only answer is for everyone to say, out loud, "No thank you" as they click the "I agree" box. If the one-sided "contract" can be held to be legally binding, they such a one-sided rejection of it is equally valid.
The Judge has received some re-election funds from the MPAA
Just because you don't like the ruling, doesn't necessarily mean it's contrary to the law.
That being said, the MPAA and RIAA have been instrumental in writing the laws, so...
It's the LAW I don't like
However your comment is a beautiful encapsulation of the entire problem.
First, the courts are for sale, since judges are elected.
Second, the people who write the laws are for sale.
American politicians are little more than puppets for the wealthy and powerful to play with.
I would, however, claim that for a number of organizations that cloud use IS due diligence. And I'd still maintain that a good number of folk's fourth amendment rights were just tossed into the crapper.
Bear in mind that no-one outside of the US has ANY fourth amendment rights -- or any other for that matter.
Of all countries in the so-called free world, the USA had the best shot at "government by the people, for the people".
The people of that country have allowed their system of government to be co-opted by the moneyed classes to such an extent that their laws now serve only to justify the robbery of "those that have some" by "those that want more".
The root of the clash lies in the difference between morality and law. A corporation has no moral standing to guide it -- only the law. If the law runs contrary to an individuals moral code, then that individual is likely to disobey the law. Some would argue that such an individual is bound by duty to the common good to disobey that law.
The problem with "piracy" is that most people carry the ancient common-law notion that having paid money and received something in return, we have complete control over what is done with that item. This has been replaced by the notion that the seller retains control over what the buyer does with the item. This notion is foreign to even law-abiding, free people, and it is this clash that Intellectual property laws need to address.
If actions such as the take-down of Megaupload continue, it may become economically necessary to avoid doing business with any company governed by the laws of the USA. In fact, it is already necessary in some countries to ensure that some classes of data -- medical records among them -- are not stored on servers subject to search by US authorities.
When I googled the quoted phrase "overly critical guy" and appended the word idiot, I came up with a page someone posted about you. Is this something google did? Is a court order in the offing?
When I googled "overly critical guy +idiot" the top result was your post.
They will always make statements that stand to gain them the most favor, whether the statements are true or not.
You're close. Corporations say and do that which will gain them the most money. They exist solely for the purpose of returning value to their shareholders.
If currying favour with the general public will gain them money, then they will do that. However, if pissing off the 90% will help them mine hordes of cash from the pockets of the other 10%, they will gladly do so.
Corporations are not moral entities -- they are devoid of conscience. Even the individuals who comprise the corporation must give secondary consideration to moral issues where they conflict with the primary purpose of making money.
Corporations must never consider an individual's circumstances -- not customers', not employees' nor even individual shareholders' -- all are subject to the overwhelming need to maximize return on investment.
One might argue that the extreme compensation paid to corporate executives violates this, but in those cases is it usually the extreme greed of the individuals involved, coupled with extreme manipulative behaviour that have convinced shareholders that such compensation will maximize their own return on investment.
In such a context, only greedy psychopaths remain eligible to inherit the American dream.
The only way to stop this forever is for everyone everywhere to just stop buying music.
Don't buy DVDs of movies. Ever. Go to them in theatres if you must. Then remember what they were like, then do something else with your time instead of watching them over and over. You don't need them. They don't improve your live or your health.
If you must have music that badly, learn to play and instrument. Or two....
Sing! You have have a voice, USE IT.
But for the love of God, stop crying 'cuz they make it tough to steal it.
Even as tough as they can possibly make it, it will always be sofa king easy to steal without risking detection even a 20-nothing slashdotter can figure it out. So figure it out, do it and stop whining.
The so-called "associations" that are harassing you exist for the sole purpose of robbing you blind. $20 for a CD???? What could possibly make it worth $20??? But you continue to pay it. Go into any mall, and the stores are full of people stuffing money into cash registers while their customers walk out with nothing but songs they can hear on the radio for free.
It is ALREADY being done in many spheres of commerce.
Aviation and Poker, for example.
Those who categorize the idea as "stupid" appear as luddites.
Or perhaps they have a hard time adding or subtracting numbers < 25 in their heads.
Who is calling who stupid?
We all got used to the metric system -- it took barely a year -- and the benefits will last forever.
Like all things human, time measurement and display will evolve, and there will always be luddites who will rant against whatever it evolves to.
All of the poker rooms I deal with use GMT -4 (Eastern Time, I think), so everyone ELSE is already using a world wide time standard
With aviation, they use UTC (symbol Z), which is roughly equal to GMT
In the hinterland of N BC I used to use a satellite package, since there was no cell coverage at all.
I know nothing about data caps, or transmission speeds, but it is totally independent of any cell network.
assuming they still exist, of course
Maybe even older
Doubt that the originators of the prior art will oppose the patent in person, but if I was this dude, I would not be messing about with the originators of the Godly Powers.
Attitude and effort.
If you have both, you can learn anything we need you to know.
If you want me to hire you, then you will be asked to do the following:
1. Demonstrate effort. Any relevant cert will do, a body of completed work will help -- even home projects etc.
2. Demonstrate attitude. Be on time for your interview, be interested and even excited about working for us. Fake this convincingly if you must, but if you do, you'll be expected to fake it continuously for the duration of your probationary period. (not as easy as it sounds).
3. End the recession so I have money to hire you.
This is the age-old problem with democracies:
What to do when the majority is wrong?
This can easily happen when even the "smartiest" are ill informed, or influenced by advertising, or don't care -- and now it seems that the more people share their thoughts and ideas, the less likely it is that those ideas are optimal.
It seems like we are trading critical thinking for a feeling of belonging.
It's the 1st amendment because it's the most important one -- they can't inhibit the spread of information if it wants to be free; To do so is unconstitutional.
Fortunately for the family in question, they live in the UK, not the US.
The "right" to say what one pleases unfettered by the responsibility to do no harm, is itself harmful
The point of the order is not to prevent people identifying the family.
This is a mistake common to law-abiding people -- thinking that a law or a court order prevents a behaviour.
Such a law/order can never do so, however, it gives the people harmed by a breach of the law/order a legal remedy.
"a lock only stops an honest man", however if a dishonest one breaks that lock, the crime is more severe than had he merely walked in through an unlocked door.
Without the order, bringing attention to this family is merely reprehensible socially inexcusable behaviour, now it is a crime, and the might of the law can be brought to bear on those who ignore the order.
Slashdot Mirror
And the rule is:
Never say anything that you would not be proud to have on a sign on your front lawn.
"Say" in this context includes anything written.
You could burn a diary if you wrote something in that you later came to regret.
With anything transmitted electronically, there is no going back. Once you hit the send button, it is out of your control forever.
So before you click it, be certain that you mean it.
Drive in such a manner that you don't hit stuff.
Be sufficiently aware of the world around you that other stuff doesn't hit you
Hold the wheel whereever you please.
...employers will just ask potential employees to accept their HR staff's friend request, as the article yesterday stated. But one could easily get around that by making sure the HR staff is in a Facebook list that has no access to a user's wall/timeline and other info.
Your personal, private affairs do not belong in the workplace at all. Although I have friends at work, and we do socialize with them, none of them are facebook friends, nor ever will be -- and they all seem to be OK with that.
I'm not sure what I would do if a personal friend came to work for this company, but since it isn't likely I won't fret.
Time and time again I see people losing jobs -- and friends -- by failing to keep their employers/jobs/work out of their private lives and vice-versa.
My answer to such a request from HR would be, "I strive to keep my personal life out of the workplace, just as I don't discuss work-related issues with family and friends. For that reason, I don't make facebook friends with colleagues. You are welcome to connect with me on LinkedIn, though, since that is where I keep my professional connections."
If that doesn't satisfy them, then I'm perfectly happy not working for them.
That is the question underlying the entire discussion.
I have a so-called "living will" that sets standards for when I should not be resuscitated.
I don't really care if a miracle cure comes along later.
When I'm done with my body, I'm happy that someone else can get some use out of whatever parts remain usable.
"Value of a human life" is more than just a "life or death" question. The quality of life is of concern in this issue as well.
It does not matter if you are later cleared, acquitted, exonerated or whatever your local legal system calls it.
If you are cleared, there will always be those who think that you are some sort of pervert who "got off".
Also, if you are convicted just because there was porn on your computer, there will be (hopefully) be some people who will recognize the miscarraige of justice..
Once accused -- guilty or not -- your live is forever changed. I will likely cost you your retirement savings to pay to a lawyer to mitigate the damage.
Therefore, do not be your own accuser.
If you find anything incriminating on your computer, delete it irretrievably -- if you don't know how, find out.
Then ever afterwards, stfu.
Never EVER again buy any CD, DVD, Blu-Ray or ANY OTHER crap that these industries try to sell you.
Go to movies if you must -- when you're done, remember them.
Attend music concerts -- the artists get more money from live performances, so you're helping support them. Buying media does the artist very little good -- pennies per item, or so I'm told.
If they come on TV record 'em on your PVR if you like.
Listen to music on the radio, and enjoy its fleeting beauty
Download whatever you please, after all, your advertising dollars, your theatre tickets and your concert tickets paid the FULL COST OF PRODUCTION.
All the rest of the drek merely goes to line the pockets of the rich greedy leeches that use the performers as pawns in their quest to mine your pockets.
So take it away from them. Don't buy the crap.
When you exchange money for "something of value", you now have complete control of that thing.
You own it.
You control it.
You can do with it what ever you please.
This has been the case since barter was invented.
When that "something of value" is a so-called license to use some other thing, then it comes with some form of license agreement.
Read any of them and in there you will find a clause that grants one side of the bargain an exclusive right to change the agreement without notice.
If one side has that right, then the other does too.
Even if the agreement says otherwise . Fair is fair, after all
. So...
Whenever you click the "Agree" button, say out loud, "I can do whatever I bloody well please." then agree to that.
There is no need to inform the other party.
They may haul you before the courts, but at least you can do whatever you bloody please with a clear conscience
You can alter all the notices etc on all of the physical media you buy too.
Very liberating!
Will the Blu-Ray improve the awful acting in the 1st half of season 1?
Are they coming out with a new series of dolls -- oh, sorry, "action figures" -- to further mine the pockets of the lame?
Half of all Fortune 500 Companies run Symantec Endpoint Protection as the AV "solution"
No, what you're buying on iTunes is a license
And therein lies the source of the whole fubar mess.
If I purchase something -- In other words I exchange money for the possession of ANYTHING -- the original owner can no longer expect to control my actions in relation to that item.
The so-called "licenses" are not valid contracts whatever the courts of whatever country may decide, since there is no negotiation involved.
Furthermore, they are coercive by their very nature, and the only thing that supports them is the threat of force. That force may be held to be legal -- in some cases, the mere threat of lawsuit cause economic harm to those even suspected of breach of one of these so-called implied agreements.
The law itself is sometimes the weapon wielded by the enforcers.
The only answer is for everyone to say, out loud, "No thank you" as they click the "I agree" box. If the one-sided "contract" can be held to be legally binding, they such a one-sided rejection of it is equally valid.
The Judge has received some re-election funds from the MPAA
Just because you don't like the ruling, doesn't necessarily mean it's contrary to the law.
That being said, the MPAA and RIAA have been instrumental in writing the laws, so...
It's the LAW I don't like
However your comment is a beautiful encapsulation of the entire problem.
First, the courts are for sale, since judges are elected.
Second, the people who write the laws are for sale.
American politicians are little more than puppets for the wealthy and powerful to play with.
I would, however, claim that for a number of organizations that cloud use IS due diligence. And I'd still maintain that a good number of folk's fourth amendment rights were just tossed into the crapper.
Bear in mind that no-one outside of the US has ANY fourth amendment rights -- or any other for that matter.
Of all countries in the so-called free world, the USA had the best shot at "government by the people, for the people".
The people of that country have allowed their system of government to be co-opted by the moneyed classes to such an extent that their laws now serve only to justify the robbery of "those that have some" by "those that want more".
The root of the clash lies in the difference between morality and law. A corporation has no moral standing to guide it -- only the law. If the law runs contrary to an individuals moral code, then that individual is likely to disobey the law. Some would argue that such an individual is bound by duty to the common good to disobey that law.
The problem with "piracy" is that most people carry the ancient common-law notion that having paid money and received something in return, we have complete control over what is done with that item. This has been replaced by the notion that the seller retains control over what the buyer does with the item. This notion is foreign to even law-abiding, free people, and it is this clash that Intellectual property laws need to address.
If actions such as the take-down of Megaupload continue, it may become economically necessary to avoid doing business with any company governed by the laws of the USA. In fact, it is already necessary in some countries to ensure that some classes of data -- medical records among them -- are not stored on servers subject to search by US authorities.
-- except in matter,
and if it is dangling participle, it will be smaller
When I googled the quoted phrase "overly critical guy" and appended the word idiot, I came up with a page someone posted about you. Is this something google did? Is a court order in the offing?
When I googled "overly critical guy +idiot" the top result was your post.
You may find it necessary to sue yourself.
They will always make statements that stand to gain them the most favor, whether the statements are true or not.
You're close. Corporations say and do that which will gain them the most money. They exist solely for the purpose of returning value to their shareholders.
If currying favour with the general public will gain them money, then they will do that. However, if pissing off the 90% will help them mine hordes of cash from the pockets of the other 10%, they will gladly do so.
Corporations are not moral entities -- they are devoid of conscience. Even the individuals who comprise the corporation must give secondary consideration to moral issues where they conflict with the primary purpose of making money.
Corporations must never consider an individual's circumstances -- not customers', not employees' nor even individual shareholders' -- all are subject to the overwhelming need to maximize return on investment.
One might argue that the extreme compensation paid to corporate executives violates this, but in those cases is it usually the extreme greed of the individuals involved, coupled with extreme manipulative behaviour that have convinced shareholders that such compensation will maximize their own return on investment.
In such a context, only greedy psychopaths remain eligible to inherit the American dream.
"Remember more than they think" implies that they think.
The only way to stop this forever is for everyone everywhere to just stop buying music.
Don't buy DVDs of movies. Ever. Go to them in theatres if you must. Then remember what they were like, then do something else with your time instead of watching them over and over. You don't need them. They don't improve your live or your health.
If you must have music that badly, learn to play and instrument. Or two....
Sing! You have have a voice, USE IT.
But for the love of God, stop crying 'cuz they make it tough to steal it. Even as tough as they can possibly make it, it will always be sofa king easy to steal without risking detection even a 20-nothing slashdotter can figure it out. So figure it out, do it and stop whining.
The so-called "associations" that are harassing you exist for the sole purpose of robbing you blind. $20 for a CD???? What could possibly make it worth $20???
But you continue to pay it.
Go into any mall, and the stores are full of people stuffing money into cash registers while their customers walk out with nothing but songs they can hear on the radio for free.
It is ALREADY being done in many spheres of commerce.
Aviation and Poker, for example.
Those who categorize the idea as "stupid" appear as luddites.
Or perhaps they have a hard time adding or subtracting numbers < 25 in their heads.
Who is calling who stupid?
We all got used to the metric system -- it took barely a year -- and the benefits will last forever.
Like all things human, time measurement and display will evolve, and there will always be luddites who will rant against whatever it evolves to.
All of the poker rooms I deal with use GMT -4 (Eastern Time, I think), so everyone ELSE is already using a world wide time standard
With aviation, they use UTC (symbol Z), which is roughly equal to GMT
In the hinterland of N BC I used to use a satellite package, since there was no cell coverage at all.
I know nothing about data caps, or transmission speeds, but it is totally independent of any cell network.
assuming they still exist, of course
Just in case -- I am now your nemesis
--but I WILL cash it
Maybe even older
Doubt that the originators of the prior art will oppose the patent in person, but if I was this dude, I would not be messing about with the originators of the Godly Powers.
Attitude and effort.
If you have both, you can learn anything we need you to know.
If you want me to hire you, then you will be asked to do the following:
1. Demonstrate effort. Any relevant cert will do, a body of completed work will help -- even home projects etc.
2. Demonstrate attitude. Be on time for your interview, be interested and even excited about working for us. Fake this convincingly if you must, but if you do, you'll be expected to fake it continuously for the duration of your probationary period. (not as easy as it sounds).
3. End the recession so I have money to hire you.
This is the age-old problem with democracies: What to do when the majority is wrong? This can easily happen when even the "smartiest" are ill informed, or influenced by advertising, or don't care -- and now it seems that the more people share their thoughts and ideas, the less likely it is that those ideas are optimal. It seems like we are trading critical thinking for a feeling of belonging.
It's the 1st amendment because it's the most important one -- they can't inhibit the spread of information if it wants to be free; To do so is unconstitutional.
Fortunately for the family in question, they live in the UK, not the US.
The "right" to say what one pleases unfettered by the responsibility to do no harm, is itself harmful
The point of the order is not to prevent people identifying the family. This is a mistake common to law-abiding people -- thinking that a law or a court order prevents a behaviour. Such a law/order can never do so, however, it gives the people harmed by a breach of the law/order a legal remedy. "a lock only stops an honest man", however if a dishonest one breaks that lock, the crime is more severe than had he merely walked in through an unlocked door. Without the order, bringing attention to this family is merely reprehensible socially inexcusable behaviour, now it is a crime, and the might of the law can be brought to bear on those who ignore the order.