My company rig has VMWare Workstation 11 running on Fedora 21 XFCE.
Corporate Windoze 7 image runs as a VM. Separate Winders VMs (linked clones) for each client environment I support. Numerous demo images, mostly CENTOS, also run as VMs.
It's that if you don't answer the complaint, then the plaintiff files a motion for summary judgement. Hearing no objection from the defendant, judges typically grant such motions, legally affording plaintiffs all relief they were seeking in their complaint, which nearly always includes attorneys' fees.
Of course, then the plaintiff has to actually collect on the awarded judgement.
"...it is surprising to many that Congress would abdicate their role in determining the specifics of agreements that may have far reaching implications for their constituents."
No, it's only surprising to those who cling to a childishly naive belief that Congress actually serves a constituency of voters, rather than face the reality that it serves the interests of corporate oligarchs first and foremost.
This was my immediate reaction to skimming the front-page blurb.
Seriously, differentiation of "effect" and "affect" is neither a difficult nor novel concept. This just reflects editorial laziness, which does call into question in the mind of the audience the quality of information being conveyed.
For example, I'm in the IT security field, and a CISSP does carry a good bit of weight.
I've also worked in virtualization, and have a VCP5 certification...I can tell you it might or might not mean something to a prospective employer, but I can damned sure tell when I'm talking about the workings of a particular client's virtual infrastructure whether their people are VCPs.
The idiotic opiates are only going to keep the horde distracted for so long. We'll eventually reach some titration point and the simmering pot will boil over violently.
You're missing his point entirely, as well as displaying a fundamental lack of understanding as to what constitutes a right.
Rights are inherent to people, irrespective of what geographic location they may be born or reside in. They exist innately within the person. It's a simple concept, yet one that many statists have a difficult time comprehending.
Perhaps what you meant to say is that "those are not rights respected or protected by the government of Canada." Nevertheless, they are rights.
The time for Obama to have voiced this firm position was back during Genachowski's charimanship when Verizon sued the FCC for his attempt to implement NN rules, and the courts essentially said that absent Title II CC classification, NN would not be possible.
Today's weaksauce announcement is four years too late and a Congressional majority short to be anything other than political theatrics.
Anyone who buys into Obama's sudden lame-duck, no Congressional majority in either chamber announcement of a decisive position in favor of Net Neutrality as genuine is a blind fool.
...I can hardly believe how much has changed since then!
It's almost as though we're part of some political theater that's designed to give the impression of distinct choices while actually maintaining the status quo nearly entirely.
It's not karma to burn. You're just talking about a completely different aspect (and I agree there are plenty of good foreign engineering resources to be found).
I was taking issue with the surreal falsity of the quote...the guy specifically asserted that the "vast, vast majority of tech *engineers* supported..." blahblahblah.
To me, that's a bald-faced lie. The decision to hire offshore "talent" is driven by MBAs, not MSes or PhDs. Now if he'd said "tech execs" or "CTOs," I would have believed him implicitly.
Anyhow, I just wanted to be clear that my issue with the statement isn't a reflection of any belief that good talent doesn't exist offshore. It was with the preposterous characterization of his "belief" in the apparent superiority of foreign talent being shared by nearly all domestic tech engineers.
"The vast, vast majority of tech engineers that I talked to who are from the United States are very supportive of bringing in people from other countries because they want to work with the very best."
I've worked in tech (SE) for 15+ years now, and I don't know of a single colleague that would agree with the sentiment expressed in that quote.
Slashdot Mirror
My company rig has VMWare Workstation 11 running on Fedora 21 XFCE.
Corporate Windoze 7 image runs as a VM. Separate Winders VMs (linked clones) for each client environment I support. Numerous demo images, mostly CENTOS, also run as VMs.
Wouldn't do it any other way.
It's that if you don't answer the complaint, then the plaintiff files a motion for summary judgement. Hearing no objection from the defendant, judges typically grant such motions, legally affording plaintiffs all relief they were seeking in their complaint, which nearly always includes attorneys' fees.
Of course, then the plaintiff has to actually collect on the awarded judgement.
I understand several counties in the State of Imaginationland have such ordinances in effect.
For those of us who live in the actual USofA, there's no such worry.
"...it is surprising to many that Congress would abdicate their role in determining the specifics of agreements that may have far reaching implications for their constituents."
No, it's only surprising to those who cling to a childishly naive belief that Congress actually serves a constituency of voters, rather than face the reality that it serves the interests of corporate oligarchs first and foremost.
What a mendacious douchebag. Fucking statists.
n/m
This was my immediate reaction to skimming the front-page blurb.
Seriously, differentiation of "effect" and "affect" is neither a difficult nor novel concept. This just reflects editorial laziness, which does call into question in the mind of the audience the quality of information being conveyed.
Because iTards can't conceive of using non-Apple-provided "solutions" for anything, nor can they imagine others doing it.
For example, I'm in the IT security field, and a CISSP does carry a good bit of weight.
I've also worked in virtualization, and have a VCP5 certification...I can tell you it might or might not mean something to a prospective employer, but I can damned sure tell when I'm talking about the workings of a particular client's virtual infrastructure whether their people are VCPs.
OMFG, BWHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Sad, but true.
I'm just waiting.
The idiotic opiates are only going to keep the horde distracted for so long. We'll eventually reach some titration point and the simmering pot will boil over violently.
The "whoosh" remark was onomatopoeia.
It was the sound of the previous author's sarcasm, to which you had replied, sailing above your understanding.
Our government blatantly abusing and/or misconstruing legislative intent for vendettas or other malicious purposes? No way!!!
You're missing his point entirely, as well as displaying a fundamental lack of understanding as to what constitutes a right.
Rights are inherent to people, irrespective of what geographic location they may be born or reside in. They exist innately within the person. It's a simple concept, yet one that many statists have a difficult time comprehending.
Perhaps what you meant to say is that "those are not rights respected or protected by the government of Canada." Nevertheless, they are rights.
Who else is shocked? Anyone? Bueller?
You're dead-on, in principle.
The time for Obama to have voiced this firm position was back during Genachowski's charimanship when Verizon sued the FCC for his attempt to implement NN rules, and the courts essentially said that absent Title II CC classification, NN would not be possible.
Today's weaksauce announcement is four years too late and a Congressional majority short to be anything other than political theatrics.
Anyone who buys into Obama's sudden lame-duck, no Congressional majority in either chamber announcement of a decisive position in favor of Net Neutrality as genuine is a blind fool.
...I can hardly believe how much has changed since then!
It's almost as though we're part of some political theater that's designed to give the impression of distinct choices while actually maintaining the status quo nearly entirely.
Yes, I'm aware the pedantically technical answer is "no," so save it, nerds.
That wasn't the point being expressed in the quote.
Sure thing, AC...we'll get right on doing that needful for you.
HAH!
LMAO @ "Do The Needful"
The first time I saw that in an email, I was just like, "WTF am I reading?!?"
It's not karma to burn. You're just talking about a completely different aspect (and I agree there are plenty of good foreign engineering resources to be found).
I was taking issue with the surreal falsity of the quote...the guy specifically asserted that the "vast, vast majority of tech *engineers* supported..." blahblahblah.
To me, that's a bald-faced lie. The decision to hire offshore "talent" is driven by MBAs, not MSes or PhDs. Now if he'd said "tech execs" or "CTOs," I would have believed him implicitly.
Anyhow, I just wanted to be clear that my issue with the statement isn't a reflection of any belief that good talent doesn't exist offshore. It was with the preposterous characterization of his "belief" in the apparent superiority of foreign talent being shared by nearly all domestic tech engineers.
"The vast, vast majority of tech engineers that I talked to who are from the United States are very supportive of bringing in people from other countries because they want to work with the very best."
I've worked in tech (SE) for 15+ years now, and I don't know of a single colleague that would agree with the sentiment expressed in that quote.