The problem is that many of our laws have been made to protect the stupid people who should be dying (Darwin and all that.) [...] An example: Currently laws in many states mandate seatbelt use. If instead seatbelt use was not mandated but the law specifically allowed insurance carriers to not pay medical costs of anyone in the car who was not wearing a seatbelt, that would allow people to make the stupid choice if they want to and force them to live with the consequences if they get hurt in the process.
Of course, you're going to get a bunch of whiners talking about how we should coddle stupid people who would object to this. What do you expect from a generation brought up on Mr. Rogers and Barney? I'm sorry. It's a cruel world. It's supposed to be a cruel world. And overly crowded too; no room for stupid people.
Thr problem is that someone in an accident will recieve medical attention, regardless of weather they can afford it or not. From that perspective, seatbelt laws are an attempt to reduce the burden placed on the rest of us who can afford medical attention.
Some other things to keep in mind: What happens to children if their parents are killed? Again someone has to bear the cost of now raising them (e.g. an orphange). Additionally, the police and fire department would have to spend more time at the scene of an accident with serious injuries than at the scene of an accident with moderate injuries. They have better places to be too, right? Finally, what about the poor driver who is unlucky enough to run over the person that just got thrown out the car in front of them because that idiot did not have his seatbelt on? I think I'd prefer to not have to deal with that psychological trauma thank you very much.
It's sad, just as Thief was tossed aside like an old toy . . ..
When Looking Glass Studios went under I assumed I'd be boycotting any Thief 3 to come along. I mean, who would even have a prayer of creating a game that was even half as good as the first two Thief projects!?! But then Eidos threw a curve ball by handing Thief 3 to ION Storm Austin -- Warren Spector's team! Who promptly hired on several of the former Thief team members. Sorry, but I do not think Thief has just beed tossed aside like a Toy.
Perhaps the real question is which candidate do we think will be more likely to pick a good cabinet and then listen to them? In other words, who will be the better delegator. From that standpoint I think Bush fits the bill better.
Same goes for BeOS support - if we want it, Be, Inc. needs to write it on their own, because ATI ain't helping anyone with drivers.
My understanding is that Be is providing the manpower but ATI is providing technical assistance for said manpower. To me that would qualify as helping out.
Besides, as a Be user would you rather have a programmer intimatly familiar with the OS writing the driver or someone at ATI who knows a lot less about the OS writing it?
I find it amusing that many of the same people who try to justify Napster get all up in arms over the idea that the GPL might not get held up. It's OK to send Lars' music around the net, but even hint that Microsoft might be able to repackage the vast amount of GPLed code out there and profit from it without releasing changes to the community and everyone flips out. Not so funny when it's happening to you, is it?
What is wrong with using Napster to distribute an MP3 that has been released as "freeware"? Lars wants to sell their music to make money. Conversly people who GPL their code want it to be freely distributed. Your comparision is completely invalid!
Title says it all. The movie was so bad, I could almost see the robot shadows in the bottom right corner of the screen. Yes, it stinks so bad that it is actually humorous! Thinking about the movie still brings a smile to my face.
So why is it okay for a company to bundle an OS with no frills applications, but it is not okay to bundle an OS with decent apps?
I do not tihnk it benefits the industry in the long run to make this distinction. For example, I want my OS to come with a good disk repair tool, a good degragger, and a good backup tool.
If we make a distinction in quality, then we may find ourselves stck with something like scandisk.
How soon before bundling all those free apps with Linux comes into question (e.g. SuSE ships with Sybase)? If the quality of the bundled software is not caled into question, it becomes irrelevant. But if only mediocre apps are acceptable, then we all stand to lose.
Actually, for UNIX support you will need to also buy Citrix MetaFrame. The server versions of WIndows 2000 will have Terminal Services, in remote administraton and full blown models, though I suspect for the full use model extra licenses will be needed.
There will also be a Citrix MetaFrame 2000, so you can still get those cool extra features like UNIX clients, ICA, server farms, the ica browser, published apps, etc.
Look at Colombine. How many gun laws were violated (and afterwards we get to hear Democrats calling for more gun regulation). Look at movies. How hard is it for an underage kid to go see an R rated movie? Not very hard. Are we to believe that new laws will change that?
But best of all, take a look at the computer game industry. There has been a voluntary, self-regulated rating system in place now for years. Too bad most people, especially parents, do not pay attention to it.
More laws and regulations will not solve the problem. Our society, especialy the parents in our society, need to give a damn about protecting kids.
As others have said, almost every company has clauses that give them the right to monitor all network traffic, including your e-mail. As has also been said, abusing this will create a hostile work environment.
What I have not seen addressed is which department has the authority to order this. If the HR department has the authority to order this, then the HR department has authority over the network, something they are not qualified to manage.
Furthermore, the likelyhood of being dragged into corporate politics increases greatly, something most engineers want to avoid and something any good compony wants to help them out on. I mean, if you owned a company, would you want your SA's playing politics? After all, they have access to sensitive information and are usually the only ones authorized to use network monitoring software and hardware!
And there is of course the issue of the SA's time. Most places are understaffed when it comes to SAs, so the likelihood that they are working on something else that is more important is pretty high. And what about spending money to buy monitoring software (hey, if HR was shoving something down my throat I'd be much happier buying somthing to do it than to have to write something to do it)?
Unless necessary (e.g. financial institutions like Edward Jones and A.G. Edwards) monitoring e-mail should be done against individuals when suspicious activitiy is detected or complaints filed.
As others have pointed out, any hours I work over 40 are on MY time. If the company expects me to work more than 40 hours then they have to give me a certain degree of privacy, because I will have to do some personal things from work.
The bottom line is that the HR department should have to submit a request for the network monitoring and then justify it. If they think they can demand this without a reason then you should either start looking for another job or have a talk with the company lawyers.
-- Argel
P.S. I would give a company wide warning before performing the type of monitoring you have been asked to do. Make sure you point the finger at the HR department, or you will take the "bad vibes" bullet when they are the ones who deserve it.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that many of our laws have been made to protect the stupid people who should be dying (Darwin and all that.) [...] An example: Currently laws in many states mandate seatbelt use. If instead seatbelt use was not mandated but the law specifically allowed insurance carriers to not pay medical costs of anyone in the car who was not wearing a seatbelt, that would allow people to make the stupid choice if they want to and force them to live with the consequences if they get hurt in the process.
Of course, you're going to get a bunch of whiners talking about how we should coddle stupid people who would object to this. What do you expect from a generation brought up on Mr. Rogers and Barney? I'm sorry. It's a cruel world. It's supposed to be a cruel world. And overly crowded too; no room for stupid people.
Thr problem is that someone in an accident will recieve medical attention, regardless of weather they can afford it or not. From that perspective, seatbelt laws are an attempt to reduce the burden placed on the rest of us who can afford medical attention.
Some other things to keep in mind: What happens to children if their parents are killed? Again someone has to bear the cost of now raising them (e.g. an orphange). Additionally, the police and fire department would have to spend more time at the scene of an accident with serious injuries than at the scene of an accident with moderate injuries. They have better places to be too, right? Finally, what about the poor driver who is unlucky enough to run over the person that just got thrown out the car in front of them because that idiot did not have his seatbelt on? I think I'd prefer to not have to deal with that psychological trauma thank you very much.
Nothing in life is simaple.
It's sad, just as Thief was tossed aside like an old toy . . . .
When Looking Glass Studios went under I assumed I'd be boycotting any Thief 3 to come along. I mean, who would even have a prayer of creating a game that was even half as good as the first two Thief projects!?! But then Eidos threw a curve ball by handing Thief 3 to ION Storm Austin -- Warren Spector's team! Who promptly hired on several of the former Thief team members. Sorry, but I do not think Thief has just beed tossed aside like a Toy.
Perhaps the real question is which candidate do we think will be more likely to pick a good cabinet and then listen to them? In other words, who will be the better delegator. From that standpoint I think Bush fits the bill better.
Isn't BeOS written in gcc/g++ (and assembler)?
My understanding is that Be is providing the manpower but ATI is providing technical assistance for said manpower. To me that would qualify as helping out.
Besides, as a Be user would you rather have a programmer intimatly familiar with the OS writing the driver or someone at ATI who knows a lot less about the OS writing it?
-- Argel
What is wrong with using Napster to distribute an MP3 that has been released as "freeware"? Lars wants to sell their music to make money. Conversly people who GPL their code want it to be freely distributed. Your comparision is completely invalid!
Title says it all. The movie was so bad, I could almost see the robot shadows in the bottom right corner of the screen. Yes, it stinks so bad that it is actually humorous! Thinking about the movie still brings a smile to my face.
>Notepad is a simple, no-frills text editor.
So why is it okay for a company to bundle an OS with no frills applications, but it is not okay to bundle an OS with decent apps?
I do not tihnk it benefits the industry in the long run to make this distinction. For example, I want my OS to come with a good disk repair tool, a good degragger, and a good backup tool.
If we make a distinction in quality, then we may find ourselves stck with something like scandisk.
How soon before bundling all those free apps with Linux comes into question (e.g. SuSE ships with Sybase)? If the quality of the bundled software is not caled into question, it becomes irrelevant. But if only mediocre apps are acceptable, then we all stand to lose.
Actually, for UNIX support you will need to also buy Citrix MetaFrame. The server versions of WIndows 2000 will have Terminal Services, in remote administraton and full blown models, though I suspect for the full use model extra licenses will be needed.
There will also be a Citrix MetaFrame 2000, so you can still get those cool extra features like UNIX clients, ICA, server farms, the ica browser, published apps, etc.
Look at Colombine. How many gun laws were violated (and afterwards we get to hear Democrats calling for more gun regulation). Look at movies. How hard is it for an underage kid to go see an R rated movie? Not very hard. Are we to believe that new laws will change that?
But best of all, take a look at the computer game industry. There has been a voluntary, self-regulated rating system in place now for years. Too bad most people, especially parents, do not pay attention to it.
More laws and regulations will not solve the problem. Our society, especialy the parents in our society, need to give a damn about protecting kids.
-- Argel
As others have said, almost every company has clauses that give them the right to monitor all network traffic, including your e-mail. As has also been said, abusing this will create a hostile work environment.
What I have not seen addressed is which department has the authority to order this. If the HR department has the authority to order this, then the HR department has authority over the network, something they are not qualified to manage.
Furthermore, the likelyhood of being dragged into corporate politics increases greatly, something most engineers want to avoid and something any good compony wants to help them out on. I mean, if you owned a company, would you want your SA's playing politics? After all, they have access to sensitive information and are usually the only ones authorized to use network monitoring software and hardware!
And there is of course the issue of the SA's time. Most places are understaffed when it comes to SAs, so the likelihood that they are working on something else that is more important is pretty high. And what about spending money to buy monitoring software (hey, if HR was shoving something down my throat I'd be much happier buying somthing to do it than to have to write something to do it)?
Unless necessary (e.g. financial institutions like Edward Jones and A.G. Edwards) monitoring e-mail should be done against individuals when suspicious activitiy is detected or complaints filed.
As others have pointed out, any hours I work over 40 are on MY time. If the company expects me to work more than 40 hours then they have to give me a certain degree of privacy, because I will have to do some personal things from work.
The bottom line is that the HR department should have to submit a request for the network monitoring and then justify it. If they think they can demand this without a reason then you should either start looking for another job or have a talk with the company lawyers.
-- Argel
P.S. I would give a company wide warning before performing the type of monitoring you have been asked to do. Make sure you point the finger at the HR department, or you will take the "bad vibes" bullet when they are the ones who deserve it.