a goal of getting 100 percent of our electricity from renewable resources and carbon-constrained fuels within 10 years
Read the part in bold again...
If he'd omitted that to say ONLY from renewable resources, it'd be a joke. As it is, I think it sounds reasonable.
By the way, I would define a "carbon-constrained fuel" as any fuel that puts out either a very low amount of carbon, or none at all. Nuclear plants fall in to this category in my eyes. (I don't know if Al Gore would agree with that, nor do I care actually...)
Japan is the only country that I can think of that has nuclear power, and doesn't have (or want) nuclear arms
This is also true for most of Europe (like here in Germany for example). There actually are nuclear weapons here, but they're under the NATO Nuclear Weapons Sharing programme, and are realistically entirely controlled by the United States, so more or less they're "US Nuclear Weapons" that happen to be in Germany rather than "German nuclear weapons".
(note that "most of Europe" does not include France of course - they love their nuclear weapons over there...)
Hmmm... excuse me, but not all "hippie greenies" hate Nuclear power. I quite happily consider myself to fall in to this group of people that are concerned enough about the environment to personally make steps towards improving things, and I'm strongly in favour of replacing bad systems with better ones. I don't think Nuke plants are the best solution long term, but they're millions of times better than coal, and, as the GP points out, significantly smaller (less burden on the local environment) than solar.
Here's 3 examples of places: I spent 6 years in Sydney, Australia - a city of 4 million people powered entirely from coal. Not only that, but Australia's coal is particular rich in radioactive materials due to the places it's mined, so it spews even more radioactive material in to our atmosphere than a nuke plant would generate in a neat little package over the same amount of time. My homeland, New Zealand, has a strict anti-nuclear policy... no nuclear weapons or power of any kind (you're not even allowed to sail a nuclear powered vessel in to NZ waters). For New Zealand, I strongly support this approach and agree with it, because New Zealand is already strongly ahead in alternative power sources (lots of hydro-electric for example) and doing pretty well. I am however realistic enough to know that this can't work everywhere for everyone due to the lay of the land, the amount of power needed and so on. Nuke makes a very good "second best" option. I currently live in Germany, where they're going to shut down all the nuclear plants. The plan is to replace them with better things, but so far, I haven't seen much in the way of good ideas on how to replace all the power needs with better things. I am quite concerned they may switch to coal. Hopefully if they're unable to meet the demands with alternatives (e.g. Wind (which there's already a fair amount of here), solar, tidal, hydro-electric and others), they will eventually decide to keep the nuclear plants running rather than turn on any coal burners, but at this stage, I'm not hopeful.
You and the GP are right - nukes make sense right now, and are in fact a good "green" alternative to the fossil fuel options.
Speaking to mods in general: All of that said, while I agree with parent, and think he deserves the "insightful" and "informative" mods, he ALSO deserves "flamebait", because the post really is worded in such a way as to incite people to flame him - the very definition of "flamebait". (he did NOT deserve the "troll" mod - but some people seem to be unable to tell the difference between "troll" and "flamebait" it seems)
Just to note, I'm not in the US either - Germany here...
I think you're right about some points, but wrong about others. Let's start here:
The thing about suggestions is that they are usually veiled orders, and if you refuse to do something important, they quickly show their true form;)
That really depends on the situation, and who is making the suggestion. I have actually tested it by telling my boss that I will not follow one of his suggestions, because it wasn't in the best interests of the project I was working on. The answer was something like, "Okay, but if it goes wrong because you didn't follow my suggestion, you're the one taking the responsibility for it". So, basically I do have the freedom to not follow the suggestion, but I have to be willing to accept the responsibility for it (which I am). This situation arises because I'm not just a "drone" worker... I'm employed to manage development projects (including doing the actual development) and that's what I'll do - manage them.
A team must work smoothly, and egos just get in the way. If you're too proud to conform to the corporate culture, you don't belong there
The sad reality of the world is that conformists succeed. Nobody likes a contrarian or a primadonna. Leaders create union, not dissent. If you want to move the world forward with your own ideology, an evolutionary approach is usually better than a revolutionary one.
I have to strongly disagree here - this leads to a corporate culture with NO innovation and NO growth. You need people who can think outside the standard plans and do things another way sometimes, because it's those people that will advance the company when they hit on something good. Their boss's responsibility should be to make sure that any negative side-effects of this freedom don't cause too much disruption, but they should NOT stifle the non-conformist!
but this newfangled "Generation Y" behavior where people don't take their work seriously and do not respond well to hierarchies and authority is, perhaps, one of america's problems rather than advantages:)
Who said anything about not taking work seriously? I take my work very seriously, and often put in long hours when I need to. What I DON'T accept is if someone tries to tell me what to do when I know far more about the subject than them. If I'm half way through a project in C++ and my boss comes to me and says, "re-write it in assembly, because it'll give a 2% performance gain!", I will quite happily refuse to do so, because the extra work (time, money, resources) involved would be ridiculous compared to the benefits. (as I have a good boss, there's no way he'd do that - instead he'd come to me and say, "I heard we could get a 2% performance gain by re-writing it in assembly, what do you think?" and then would accept my answer that it would make no sense to do so)
I run my own business, along with 2 other partners. We do expect employees to STFU and do their job.
I hope for YOUR sake that you don't expect creativity from these employees - you're effectively crushing it with that kind of attitude.
There's a task, there's a deadline, go do it and leave me alone. In return, you can work from home, or Starbucks, or whatever, you can work weird hours and since you're such a brilliant professional who does things right the first time around, I won't pick too many nits with what you've done.
That's a good start, but it's hardly managing them. You SHOULD say, "well, if you're capable of doing it on your own - go do it, but if you need any help from me, let me know!". 99% of the time, I can do everything I need to without my manager's assistance (I'm a technical person, he isn't so much, so asking him for programming help for example would be pointless). However, the other 1% of the time, I may
It very much depends where you are. In some places, it's implied that by working there, your output belongs to the company. In other places, anything you do is yours, unless you've specifically "signed over" your work to someone else (e.g. in your employment contract). To avoid ambiguity, I always ask for a phrase like this in employment contracts (I prefer it to say that what I create is mine, but I'll accept either way, as long as it's clearly spelled out so I know how I should behave (should I work on my own stuff in my lunch hour or not for example) and how much money I should ask for (if I don't own my output, I want to be paid more)).
In my current job, we settled for a comprimise where there is a dual copyright between myself and my employer. If I ever leave the company, they get a copy of the code and can do what they like with it (including removing my claim to further modifications they make), and I get my copy to do what I like with (including removing their claim to further modifications that I make) - they are, at that point, two separate products that just happen to share a common origin. (and there are no software patents where I live, so the whole mess over what happens if someone tries to patent it is avoided)
If you can get fired for refusing to wear a tie when it's not explicitly mentioned in your employment contract, then it's probably time to find a new job...
when did this idea that doing shit your told to do at work is optional?
When I signed my employment contract, which says I need to do what is best for the interests of the company... (there's no actual definition of that either, so I interpret it to mean what I think is best for the company). If my boss ever tried to tell me to do something that wasn't good for the company, I'd tell him to bugger off. (of course, my boss has never tried to "order" me to do anything, and I doubt he ever will). If the CEO tried to order me to do something, I'd probably do it, just because from my point of view, what he wants is what the company wants. I've never actually met the CEO though, so that's a pretty unlikely situation as well.
There's a place where you follow strict orders and shut the fuck up. It's called your job.
Give me a break... Some jobs may be like that, but for most people who "create" things (i.e. The kinds of people who would find themselves asking the question that the submitter is asking), it's far from the norm. My boss never "orders" me to do anything - he suggests things, gives input, and feeds information to me about the company's requirements. It's up to me what I do based on the information/input/suggestions. If he ever tried to "order" me to do something, I'd consider it as a suggestion, and if I didn't want to do it (e.g. If I believed it was bad for the company), I'd tell him where he could stick it (in the politest possible way of course, as we're pretty good friends as well) and he WOULD accept that.
Most people in creative positions are not under the slave-driver's whip, and there's no indication that the submitter is. My advice to the submitter would be to first check if the boss has the right to ask this (check employment contract for who owns the code etc), and then if the boss is within his rights to ask this, the submitter should raise his concerns with his boss and see what the reaction is. If the boss still wants to patent the invention, then it comes down to whether or not the submitter should refuse (and risk being fired, if that's allowed according to the many variables (which I note is the original question!)), or just swallow his pride and go ahead with it.
Agreed. I'm also not donating, because I'm not a US citizen (nor do I even live in the US). But, if I was ALLOWED to donate, I almost certainly would. Same applies for Barack Obama.
Now, some people reading this may ask, "why would this guy donate to a politician in a country he doesn't live in?" (or even, "a 'minor' politician in a state he's never even been to?"). The answer is actually pretty simple - the more politicians, ANYWHERE that support the same things I agree with, makes the world a better place in my eyes. Maybe one day I'll want to (or need to) visit Kansas. If I do, then in some way, the laws and policies of the place may have an effect on me. Or maybe I'll meet an American tourist over here, and become good friends - they might just happen to be from Kansas, and I'm always in favour of my friends having a better place to live! It's a small world, and almost everything, everywhere, affects almost everything else, everywhere else.
As some one who moved to Germany about a year ago, I have to say I'm loving the roads here. Of course, there's the basic idea of not using words unless absolutely necessary, so almost everything is pictographic. That makes it very quick once you get used to it, since a single symbol can mean something that would take several words to write in most languages (and, as my German is still a little sub-par, if it were written in German, it would take me longer!). But, beyond that, I really like the major road numbering system, the layout of the major highways (and not just the Autobahn roads, but the smaller "Bundesbahn" highways as well), and how well major cities and routes are signposted. I have never gotten totally lost here in Germany - which is something that happened to me regularly last time I was driving around France.
Interestingly, I have to disagree with you saying that you prefer "US 1 North" / "US 1 South" compared to "A1 Watford" / "A1 London". I find the UK method more reasonable as often I don't know whether I want to head North or South of where I am, I just know where I want to go! I generally know the names of any big/important cities/locations near where I want to go, and most of the ones along the route there, so I can follow a sign saying "London" to get to somewhere near London. If I don't know exactly where I am, "North" and "South" might be fairly meaningless (especially in more tightly packed areas, such as the greater London area!)
Ah, I was only trying to jest really... I've had some very good American microbrews that I really enjoyed... I'm well aware that their reputation for bad beer comes from the more "mass produced" beers, which for the most part really are terrible. The same is true for my homeland (New Zealand) - some really excellent beers if you know where to look, but the "normal" stuff is utterly horrid.
Although, I'm not sure a "British Real Ale drinker" is qualified to talk about beer anyway - British ale is something ENTIRELY different!;)
(for reference: my homeland is New Zealand, but I live in Germany - home of REALLY good beers of many different styles in plentiful abundance)
I actually really do feel OLD when people talk about XTs as if they're some kind of ancient history before anyone's reasonable memory... I remember the XT coming out, and already had a personal computer at the time - with MUCH less than 640KB of RAM and MUCH slower than 4MHz.
*sigh*
Personal experimental results
on
Digital Drugs
·
· Score: 3, Funny
I have, in the distant past (a good 10 or so years ago), tried similar things for "relaxation" and so on, and found that all they did was give me a headache (somewhat the opposite of relaxing me!), so I was naturally expecting these to be similar - headache from the noise with no real effects. While the audio does indeed sound like the exact same kind of thing (binaural beats), the "i-doser" package I downloaded as a torrent (as a collection of high-average-VBR mp3s, not the original ".drg" files with the custom player) definitely DID seem to have some kind of effect.
My first experiment was with "LSD.mp3", since that's a drug I know the effects of pretty well. I went through the MP3 twice (after the first time, I was "unsure" if I felt anything or not), and after the second time through (actually by about half-way through the second time through), had the familiar visual distortions (bright colours, slight extra movements to static things, etc), complex thought processes and a very introspective feeling - somewhat like a very mellow (but not "weak") LSD trip.
After it wore off (about 25 minutes - MUCH less than a real trip!), I of course wondered if this perhaps was a placebo effect. Since it's an effect I am familiar with, and knew that I was attempting to do the same to myself with this audio, perhaps my brain just conjured it up anyway (it's certainly capable of this - I get a similar thing if I'm EXTREMELY tired and have been driving a LONG time (a twelve hour road trip at 100km/h or faster the whole time generally gives me the same "trip" once I stop driving and sit down somewhere to rest)).
So, my next test was to take a collection of ones that I was reasonably sure to know what the effect should feel like, but then just play one random track and see if I could identify the feeling afterwards. I listened to the track, and then when it finished, stopped it before the next one came on. I felt really warm, mellow and "heavy limbed". I could focus on things, but felt like I didn't really "want to" - I just let my mind sort of wander in a happy haze for a bit, and about 10 minutes later, started feeling normal again. I looked at the track - "morphine.mp3". I've never tried morphine before, but I'm pretty certain that's at least an approximation of what it may feel like.
Just in case it was luck, I repeated the experiment. Completely different effect this time - a bit hyper, feeling talkative, wanting to just "get out and do something". Looked at the track name - "French Roast.mp3".
Further experimentation seems necessary just in case I "got lucky" on my two experiments and both were self induced feelings, but it does seem so far to be somewhat effective. Even if it turns out these don't really work and it is just a placebo effect, I'm not really complaining after the first LSD one - that's definitely something I enjoyed, regardless of where it came from!
Just to give an idea of my test environment - it was relatively late at night, quiet, dark, and I lay on my couch with my eyes closed. I played the sound from a generic Dell laptop (my work laptop) using ear-buds that I picked up at random somewhere (definitely not high quality headphones)
Couldn't agree more - as I posted higher up, Uplink is the only game I've ever bought, and I was very happy to support the developer with my purchase. Having a very good demo was one of the ways they made me feel this way.
I think the parent is wrong, but should not be modded "troll" - in fact, even though he's wrong, his post probably deserves "insightful" instead (it's an insight, even if it is wrong)
If I ever decide to start gaming again, this guy is EXACTLY the sort of developer I'll look at for game purchases, because he's actively trying to address the concerns of his customers. Not only the "non game" aspects such as DRM, but also the actual "fun" aspects of it, such as dramatically increasing game quality to make people more likely to buy it. Offer me a product I want, and I'll be happy to pay for it. Offer me a product I don't want, and I won't (note that I didn't want Doom 3, but I still pirated it - with the sole purpose of convincing my brother to switch to Linux (he said if he could play all the games he wants under WINE, he'd switch (although, he didn't)))
Auto security systems are more like a password to access the car each time you use it (your car key). Even very complex modern car security is ALL bypassed when you unlock your car and start it with the right key - the additional security is just there to make it harder for people who don't have the key.
Now, imagine if the "worst of game DRM" were applied to your car: 1) You have to drive your car to a mechanic once a week to get "re-activated" or it'll stop working 2) If you want a friend to drive your car, they have to buy a separate key, that costs the same as a new car 3) If you want to drive your car to a city you didn't buy it in, your insurance won't cover you anymore 4) At any time, a mechanic employed by the manufacturer may come and make alterations to your car without your permission (potentially to install new security features that require you to do more insane things) 5) If you lose your car key, you must buy a new one at the same price as a new car 6) If the car manufacturer goes out of business, you can't drive your car anymore 7) The car manufacturer has the right to come and take your car away for any reason whatsoever 8) You are not allowed to modify your car in ANY way - not even a bumper sticker
(note: As it relates to game DRM, this is pretty much the "worst of the worst", and I'm not saying all of these together apply to game DRM in general, however ANY of the above points, even without the others, should NOT be acceptable!)
"Closing up shop" isn't always a case of bankruptcy, and a company like Valve seems more likely to do the former than the latter.
I started a company about 12 years ago, and left it about 10 years ago. I sold the company to my employees at an equal share each and then just left. They chose one person to manage it, and he made such a complete mess of it, that eventually they had less money coming in to the company than they had assigned as their own salaries. Once the bank coffers ran dry, they just closed up shop - no creditors, so no "bankruptcy" (by definition), but definitely a dead company. At the point they did that, they released all of their knowledge ("intellectual property") in to the public domain (there was no software, but if there had been, that would've also been the same)
I'm not a big gamer... in fact, I really don't play much other than Nethack. However, I have pirated quite a few games - sometimes for other people, and sometimes "just to see what all the fuss is about" when lots of people are raving about it. I invariably delete it a week or so later out of lack of interest in it.
I have purchased a total of ONE game in my life. Uplink from Introversion Software. I played the demo at a friend's house, enjoyed it. Wondered if it was available for other platforms (my friend had the demo on Windows), and then discovered if I buy the CD, it comes with Windows, MacOS and Linux on the same CD. I immediately bought it.
I actually have all three of those Operating Systems (Win, Mac, Linux) at home, but simply having the choice went a long way towards my decision to buy it. That, combined with a very reasonable price, good playable demo to get me interested, and just the "geek chic" of the style of game itself were more than enough to make me want to buy it rather than pirate it. Like some other posters have mentioned, it's a matter of feeling as if you are rewarding the developer for their work - if you don't feel they SHOULD be rewarded for their work, you won't feel bad about pirating their stuff. Pirating Uplink would've made me feel really bad, because those guys definitely DID deserve to be rewarded.
I've (un?)fortunately never got to see one of these in the real world. You wouldn't know an easy way to force one would you?
Actually, I do wonder sometimes what the difference between my Macs and other peoples are... current uptime on the box I'm typing on is 105 days (yes, I ignore most updates that require a reboot unless/until I decide I need them) and I use this box pretty heavily for web browsing, watching movies, playing Nethack and coding (although admittedly, about 75% of my coding is done under Windows in VMWare Fusion, since it's work related stuff - and THAT crashes from time to time) I'm well aware my Mac CAN crash, and I've probably been very lucky so far, but after two years of owning it, I haven't seen that "grey multilingual screen of death" and I'd kind of like to.
Clearly I spend too much time in the digital printing world... the letter for black is "K" (in "CMYK") to distinguish it from "B" for blue (in "RGB"). I did a mental double-take when you said that "black" begins with "B". Really, if someone told me that "KSOD" means "Black screen of death", I wouldn't blink at it.
In many ways, it is the only reason to use Windows. Although, it may require some expansion of "forced to" to include such things as, "my boss says I have to", or "I have to/want to use app/game xyz which only exists on Windows". But really, is there any reason to use Windows if you DON'T have to?
Slashdot Mirror
Oops... yeh, I meant "Bundesstrasse"... just wasn't thinking!
You have a nuke plant in a place called "Diablo Canyon"? Isn't that just sort of ASKING for trouble?
a goal of getting 100 percent of our electricity from renewable resources and carbon-constrained fuels within 10 years
Read the part in bold again...
If he'd omitted that to say ONLY from renewable resources, it'd be a joke. As it is, I think it sounds reasonable.
By the way, I would define a "carbon-constrained fuel" as any fuel that puts out either a very low amount of carbon, or none at all. Nuclear plants fall in to this category in my eyes. (I don't know if Al Gore would agree with that, nor do I care actually...)
Japan is the only country that I can think of that has nuclear power, and doesn't have (or want) nuclear arms
This is also true for most of Europe (like here in Germany for example). There actually are nuclear weapons here, but they're under the NATO Nuclear Weapons Sharing programme, and are realistically entirely controlled by the United States, so more or less they're "US Nuclear Weapons" that happen to be in Germany rather than "German nuclear weapons".
(note that "most of Europe" does not include France of course - they love their nuclear weapons over there...)
Hmmm... excuse me, but not all "hippie greenies" hate Nuclear power. I quite happily consider myself to fall in to this group of people that are concerned enough about the environment to personally make steps towards improving things, and I'm strongly in favour of replacing bad systems with better ones. I don't think Nuke plants are the best solution long term, but they're millions of times better than coal, and, as the GP points out, significantly smaller (less burden on the local environment) than solar.
Here's 3 examples of places:
I spent 6 years in Sydney, Australia - a city of 4 million people powered entirely from coal. Not only that, but Australia's coal is particular rich in radioactive materials due to the places it's mined, so it spews even more radioactive material in to our atmosphere than a nuke plant would generate in a neat little package over the same amount of time.
My homeland, New Zealand, has a strict anti-nuclear policy... no nuclear weapons or power of any kind (you're not even allowed to sail a nuclear powered vessel in to NZ waters). For New Zealand, I strongly support this approach and agree with it, because New Zealand is already strongly ahead in alternative power sources (lots of hydro-electric for example) and doing pretty well. I am however realistic enough to know that this can't work everywhere for everyone due to the lay of the land, the amount of power needed and so on. Nuke makes a very good "second best" option.
I currently live in Germany, where they're going to shut down all the nuclear plants. The plan is to replace them with better things, but so far, I haven't seen much in the way of good ideas on how to replace all the power needs with better things. I am quite concerned they may switch to coal. Hopefully if they're unable to meet the demands with alternatives (e.g. Wind (which there's already a fair amount of here), solar, tidal, hydro-electric and others), they will eventually decide to keep the nuclear plants running rather than turn on any coal burners, but at this stage, I'm not hopeful.
You and the GP are right - nukes make sense right now, and are in fact a good "green" alternative to the fossil fuel options.
Speaking to mods in general: All of that said, while I agree with parent, and think he deserves the "insightful" and "informative" mods, he ALSO deserves "flamebait", because the post really is worded in such a way as to incite people to flame him - the very definition of "flamebait". (he did NOT deserve the "troll" mod - but some people seem to be unable to tell the difference between "troll" and "flamebait" it seems)
Just to note, I'm not in the US either - Germany here...
I think you're right about some points, but wrong about others. Let's start here:
The thing about suggestions is that they are usually veiled orders, and if you refuse to do something important, they quickly show their true form ;)
That really depends on the situation, and who is making the suggestion. I have actually tested it by telling my boss that I will not follow one of his suggestions, because it wasn't in the best interests of the project I was working on. The answer was something like, "Okay, but if it goes wrong because you didn't follow my suggestion, you're the one taking the responsibility for it". So, basically I do have the freedom to not follow the suggestion, but I have to be willing to accept the responsibility for it (which I am).
This situation arises because I'm not just a "drone" worker... I'm employed to manage development projects (including doing the actual development) and that's what I'll do - manage them.
A team must work smoothly, and egos just get in the way. If you're too proud to conform to the corporate culture, you don't belong there
The sad reality of the world is that conformists succeed. Nobody likes a contrarian or a primadonna. Leaders create union, not dissent. If you want to move the world forward with your own ideology, an evolutionary approach is usually better than a revolutionary one.
I have to strongly disagree here - this leads to a corporate culture with NO innovation and NO growth. You need people who can think outside the standard plans and do things another way sometimes, because it's those people that will advance the company when they hit on something good. Their boss's responsibility should be to make sure that any negative side-effects of this freedom don't cause too much disruption, but they should NOT stifle the non-conformist!
but this newfangled "Generation Y" behavior where people don't take their work seriously and do not respond well to hierarchies and authority is, perhaps, one of america's problems rather than advantages :)
Who said anything about not taking work seriously? I take my work very seriously, and often put in long hours when I need to. What I DON'T accept is if someone tries to tell me what to do when I know far more about the subject than them. If I'm half way through a project in C++ and my boss comes to me and says, "re-write it in assembly, because it'll give a 2% performance gain!", I will quite happily refuse to do so, because the extra work (time, money, resources) involved would be ridiculous compared to the benefits. (as I have a good boss, there's no way he'd do that - instead he'd come to me and say, "I heard we could get a 2% performance gain by re-writing it in assembly, what do you think?" and then would accept my answer that it would make no sense to do so)
I run my own business, along with 2 other partners. We do expect employees to STFU and do their job.
I hope for YOUR sake that you don't expect creativity from these employees - you're effectively crushing it with that kind of attitude.
There's a task, there's a deadline, go do it and leave me alone. In return, you can work from home, or Starbucks, or whatever, you can work weird hours and since you're such a brilliant professional who does things right the first time around, I won't pick too many nits with what you've done.
That's a good start, but it's hardly managing them. You SHOULD say, "well, if you're capable of doing it on your own - go do it, but if you need any help from me, let me know!". 99% of the time, I can do everything I need to without my manager's assistance (I'm a technical person, he isn't so much, so asking him for programming help for example would be pointless). However, the other 1% of the time, I may
It very much depends where you are. In some places, it's implied that by working there, your output belongs to the company. In other places, anything you do is yours, unless you've specifically "signed over" your work to someone else (e.g. in your employment contract). To avoid ambiguity, I always ask for a phrase like this in employment contracts (I prefer it to say that what I create is mine, but I'll accept either way, as long as it's clearly spelled out so I know how I should behave (should I work on my own stuff in my lunch hour or not for example) and how much money I should ask for (if I don't own my output, I want to be paid more)).
In my current job, we settled for a comprimise where there is a dual copyright between myself and my employer. If I ever leave the company, they get a copy of the code and can do what they like with it (including removing my claim to further modifications they make), and I get my copy to do what I like with (including removing their claim to further modifications that I make) - they are, at that point, two separate products that just happen to share a common origin. (and there are no software patents where I live, so the whole mess over what happens if someone tries to patent it is avoided)
If you can get fired for refusing to wear a tie when it's not explicitly mentioned in your employment contract, then it's probably time to find a new job...
when did this idea that doing shit your told to do at work is optional?
When I signed my employment contract, which says I need to do what is best for the interests of the company... (there's no actual definition of that either, so I interpret it to mean what I think is best for the company). If my boss ever tried to tell me to do something that wasn't good for the company, I'd tell him to bugger off. (of course, my boss has never tried to "order" me to do anything, and I doubt he ever will). If the CEO tried to order me to do something, I'd probably do it, just because from my point of view, what he wants is what the company wants. I've never actually met the CEO though, so that's a pretty unlikely situation as well.
There's a place where you follow strict orders and shut the fuck up. It's called your job.
Give me a break... Some jobs may be like that, but for most people who "create" things (i.e. The kinds of people who would find themselves asking the question that the submitter is asking), it's far from the norm. My boss never "orders" me to do anything - he suggests things, gives input, and feeds information to me about the company's requirements. It's up to me what I do based on the information/input/suggestions. If he ever tried to "order" me to do something, I'd consider it as a suggestion, and if I didn't want to do it (e.g. If I believed it was bad for the company), I'd tell him where he could stick it (in the politest possible way of course, as we're pretty good friends as well) and he WOULD accept that.
Most people in creative positions are not under the slave-driver's whip, and there's no indication that the submitter is. My advice to the submitter would be to first check if the boss has the right to ask this (check employment contract for who owns the code etc), and then if the boss is within his rights to ask this, the submitter should raise his concerns with his boss and see what the reaction is. If the boss still wants to patent the invention, then it comes down to whether or not the submitter should refuse (and risk being fired, if that's allowed according to the many variables (which I note is the original question!)), or just swallow his pride and go ahead with it.
That depends on where he lives, and what his contract says...
Agreed. I'm also not donating, because I'm not a US citizen (nor do I even live in the US). But, if I was ALLOWED to donate, I almost certainly would. Same applies for Barack Obama.
Now, some people reading this may ask, "why would this guy donate to a politician in a country he doesn't live in?" (or even, "a 'minor' politician in a state he's never even been to?"). The answer is actually pretty simple - the more politicians, ANYWHERE that support the same things I agree with, makes the world a better place in my eyes. Maybe one day I'll want to (or need to) visit Kansas. If I do, then in some way, the laws and policies of the place may have an effect on me. Or maybe I'll meet an American tourist over here, and become good friends - they might just happen to be from Kansas, and I'm always in favour of my friends having a better place to live!
It's a small world, and almost everything, everywhere, affects almost everything else, everywhere else.
As some one who moved to Germany about a year ago, I have to say I'm loving the roads here. Of course, there's the basic idea of not using words unless absolutely necessary, so almost everything is pictographic. That makes it very quick once you get used to it, since a single symbol can mean something that would take several words to write in most languages (and, as my German is still a little sub-par, if it were written in German, it would take me longer!). But, beyond that, I really like the major road numbering system, the layout of the major highways (and not just the Autobahn roads, but the smaller "Bundesbahn" highways as well), and how well major cities and routes are signposted. I have never gotten totally lost here in Germany - which is something that happened to me regularly last time I was driving around France.
Interestingly, I have to disagree with you saying that you prefer "US 1 North" / "US 1 South" compared to "A1 Watford" / "A1 London". I find the UK method more reasonable as often I don't know whether I want to head North or South of where I am, I just know where I want to go! I generally know the names of any big/important cities/locations near where I want to go, and most of the ones along the route there, so I can follow a sign saying "London" to get to somewhere near London. If I don't know exactly where I am, "North" and "South" might be fairly meaningless (especially in more tightly packed areas, such as the greater London area!)
Ah, I was only trying to jest really... I've had some very good American microbrews that I really enjoyed... I'm well aware that their reputation for bad beer comes from the more "mass produced" beers, which for the most part really are terrible. The same is true for my homeland (New Zealand) - some really excellent beers if you know where to look, but the "normal" stuff is utterly horrid.
Although, I'm not sure a "British Real Ale drinker" is qualified to talk about beer anyway - British ale is something ENTIRELY different! ;)
(for reference: my homeland is New Zealand, but I live in Germany - home of REALLY good beers of many different styles in plentiful abundance)
Hold on... there's just ONE thing that's confusing me about your post...
I am a H1-B dev from Europe.....I am here to take your jobs, women and beer
What European would want to drink American beer?
I actually really do feel OLD when people talk about XTs as if they're some kind of ancient history before anyone's reasonable memory... I remember the XT coming out, and already had a personal computer at the time - with MUCH less than 640KB of RAM and MUCH slower than 4MHz.
*sigh*
I have, in the distant past (a good 10 or so years ago), tried similar things for "relaxation" and so on, and found that all they did was give me a headache (somewhat the opposite of relaxing me!), so I was naturally expecting these to be similar - headache from the noise with no real effects. While the audio does indeed sound like the exact same kind of thing (binaural beats), the "i-doser" package I downloaded as a torrent (as a collection of high-average-VBR mp3s, not the original ".drg" files with the custom player) definitely DID seem to have some kind of effect.
My first experiment was with "LSD.mp3", since that's a drug I know the effects of pretty well. I went through the MP3 twice (after the first time, I was "unsure" if I felt anything or not), and after the second time through (actually by about half-way through the second time through), had the familiar visual distortions (bright colours, slight extra movements to static things, etc), complex thought processes and a very introspective feeling - somewhat like a very mellow (but not "weak") LSD trip.
After it wore off (about 25 minutes - MUCH less than a real trip!), I of course wondered if this perhaps was a placebo effect. Since it's an effect I am familiar with, and knew that I was attempting to do the same to myself with this audio, perhaps my brain just conjured it up anyway (it's certainly capable of this - I get a similar thing if I'm EXTREMELY tired and have been driving a LONG time (a twelve hour road trip at 100km/h or faster the whole time generally gives me the same "trip" once I stop driving and sit down somewhere to rest)).
So, my next test was to take a collection of ones that I was reasonably sure to know what the effect should feel like, but then just play one random track and see if I could identify the feeling afterwards. I listened to the track, and then when it finished, stopped it before the next one came on. I felt really warm, mellow and "heavy limbed". I could focus on things, but felt like I didn't really "want to" - I just let my mind sort of wander in a happy haze for a bit, and about 10 minutes later, started feeling normal again. I looked at the track - "morphine.mp3". I've never tried morphine before, but I'm pretty certain that's at least an approximation of what it may feel like.
Just in case it was luck, I repeated the experiment. Completely different effect this time - a bit hyper, feeling talkative, wanting to just "get out and do something". Looked at the track name - "French Roast.mp3".
Further experimentation seems necessary just in case I "got lucky" on my two experiments and both were self induced feelings, but it does seem so far to be somewhat effective. Even if it turns out these don't really work and it is just a placebo effect, I'm not really complaining after the first LSD one - that's definitely something I enjoyed, regardless of where it came from!
Just to give an idea of my test environment - it was relatively late at night, quiet, dark, and I lay on my couch with my eyes closed. I played the sound from a generic Dell laptop (my work laptop) using ear-buds that I picked up at random somewhere (definitely not high quality headphones)
Couldn't agree more - as I posted higher up, Uplink is the only game I've ever bought, and I was very happy to support the developer with my purchase. Having a very good demo was one of the ways they made me feel this way.
I think the parent is wrong, but should not be modded "troll" - in fact, even though he's wrong, his post probably deserves "insightful" instead (it's an insight, even if it is wrong)
If I ever decide to start gaming again, this guy is EXACTLY the sort of developer I'll look at for game purchases, because he's actively trying to address the concerns of his customers. Not only the "non game" aspects such as DRM, but also the actual "fun" aspects of it, such as dramatically increasing game quality to make people more likely to buy it. Offer me a product I want, and I'll be happy to pay for it. Offer me a product I don't want, and I won't (note that I didn't want Doom 3, but I still pirated it - with the sole purpose of convincing my brother to switch to Linux (he said if he could play all the games he wants under WINE, he'd switch (although, he didn't)))
Auto security systems are more like a password to access the car each time you use it (your car key). Even very complex modern car security is ALL bypassed when you unlock your car and start it with the right key - the additional security is just there to make it harder for people who don't have the key.
Now, imagine if the "worst of game DRM" were applied to your car:
1) You have to drive your car to a mechanic once a week to get "re-activated" or it'll stop working
2) If you want a friend to drive your car, they have to buy a separate key, that costs the same as a new car
3) If you want to drive your car to a city you didn't buy it in, your insurance won't cover you anymore
4) At any time, a mechanic employed by the manufacturer may come and make alterations to your car without your permission (potentially to install new security features that require you to do more insane things)
5) If you lose your car key, you must buy a new one at the same price as a new car
6) If the car manufacturer goes out of business, you can't drive your car anymore
7) The car manufacturer has the right to come and take your car away for any reason whatsoever
8) You are not allowed to modify your car in ANY way - not even a bumper sticker
(note: As it relates to game DRM, this is pretty much the "worst of the worst", and I'm not saying all of these together apply to game DRM in general, however ANY of the above points, even without the others, should NOT be acceptable!)
"Closing up shop" isn't always a case of bankruptcy, and a company like Valve seems more likely to do the former than the latter.
I started a company about 12 years ago, and left it about 10 years ago. I sold the company to my employees at an equal share each and then just left. They chose one person to manage it, and he made such a complete mess of it, that eventually they had less money coming in to the company than they had assigned as their own salaries. Once the bank coffers ran dry, they just closed up shop - no creditors, so no "bankruptcy" (by definition), but definitely a dead company. At the point they did that, they released all of their knowledge ("intellectual property") in to the public domain (there was no software, but if there had been, that would've also been the same)
I'm not a big gamer... in fact, I really don't play much other than Nethack. However, I have pirated quite a few games - sometimes for other people, and sometimes "just to see what all the fuss is about" when lots of people are raving about it. I invariably delete it a week or so later out of lack of interest in it.
I have purchased a total of ONE game in my life. Uplink from Introversion Software. I played the demo at a friend's house, enjoyed it. Wondered if it was available for other platforms (my friend had the demo on Windows), and then discovered if I buy the CD, it comes with Windows, MacOS and Linux on the same CD. I immediately bought it.
I actually have all three of those Operating Systems (Win, Mac, Linux) at home, but simply having the choice went a long way towards my decision to buy it. That, combined with a very reasonable price, good playable demo to get me interested, and just the "geek chic" of the style of game itself were more than enough to make me want to buy it rather than pirate it. Like some other posters have mentioned, it's a matter of feeling as if you are rewarding the developer for their work - if you don't feel they SHOULD be rewarded for their work, you won't feel bad about pirating their stuff. Pirating Uplink would've made me feel really bad, because those guys definitely DID deserve to be rewarded.
I've (un?)fortunately never got to see one of these in the real world. You wouldn't know an easy way to force one would you?
Actually, I do wonder sometimes what the difference between my Macs and other peoples are... current uptime on the box I'm typing on is 105 days (yes, I ignore most updates that require a reboot unless/until I decide I need them) and I use this box pretty heavily for web browsing, watching movies, playing Nethack and coding (although admittedly, about 75% of my coding is done under Windows in VMWare Fusion, since it's work related stuff - and THAT crashes from time to time)
I'm well aware my Mac CAN crash, and I've probably been very lucky so far, but after two years of owning it, I haven't seen that "grey multilingual screen of death" and I'd kind of like to.
Clearly I spend too much time in the digital printing world... the letter for black is "K" (in "CMYK") to distinguish it from "B" for blue (in "RGB"). I did a mental double-take when you said that "black" begins with "B". Really, if someone told me that "KSOD" means "Black screen of death", I wouldn't blink at it.
Maybe I just need some time off work...
In many ways, it is the only reason to use Windows. Although, it may require some expansion of "forced to" to include such things as, "my boss says I have to", or "I have to/want to use app/game xyz which only exists on Windows". But really, is there any reason to use Windows if you DON'T have to?