My son's dairy allergy was present from the get go. He barfed all over the place his second exposure to dairy. Don't know about the peanut allergy, because my wife is allergic, so they weren't ever in the house to begin with. There are a lot of things that are very prevalent in the US of A that aren't as common in other places. But in my opinion it's just a matter of having outsmarted Darwin. 100 years ago, my father would have died in childhood due to his asthma. Instead, he passed that gene along to me. I too would have died in childhood. And now my son is poised to spread his own genetic misery on to the next generation.
I have found the fastest way to get the attention of somebody who can help you solve your problem is to email the CEO of the company. Just take a stab at what their email address is, based on the email addresses of other people in the company.
I had been getting the runaround from my energy company for about a week. This was a medium-sized industrial account, and we were trying to reconnect following some storm damage to the pole. Finally after somebody on the phones basically said there were no records of the other six calls I had made, I got fed up. Guessed on the CEO's address, got it right. Wrote a professional letter explaining the situation. The next day there were three trucks at my door, and two engineers on the phone.
We were introduced to this method by my electrician's wife. Any time she doesn't get love from Comcast, or Verizon, or Lennar, etc., she just emails the CEO. Works every time.
I too am shocked -- SHOCKED! -- that some people are treated differently in this country. This is the first time such inequality has ever been on display. EVER!!! Except when gays could be arrested for having sex in their own homes (2003), or when black people couldn't marry white people (1967), or when women couldn't vote (1920), or when you could own other humans (1863), or when you had to own land to vote (1792-1856).
This is actually a pretty good analogy. I work for a company with unreliable IT practices. Our email system is based on Office365 Outlook or whatever the hell, so I know that's not the problem. But for whatever reason email will be down from time to time. I could just cross my arms and say, "no work for me today" but I actually like my job, and like to get work done. My solution is to use my personal email address. My guess is she she got tired of the whinging from some IT underlings and just decided "screw this, I'll just get it done myself." She probably knew it was all illegal, but she didn't give a shit, because she's Hillary Fucking Clinton. I don't like her any more than the orange troll, but this has always been a witch hunt.
A buddy of mine is former military and a reluctant Trump supporter (was Cruz). Even he agreed, basically if the Secretary of State says it's sufficiently unclassified enough for her to put it on a personal server, there aren't a lot of people who can disagree with her.
That is as likely as a Sanders fanatic voting for Trump.
First of all, that's not completely out of the question. A lot of Bernie's little guy talk resonates strongly among Trump supporters, so I imagine the converse is true, that there might be some things Trump says that will attract some Bernie fans. Some people just liked Bernie because he was an outsider and not a Clinton. Trump fits that bill.
I don't see why a LGBT Libertarian is unlikely either. (besides the fact that it is unlikely for any American to be Libertarian). Gary Johnson has taken a fairly progressive stand on marriage equality, especially considering he's a reformed Republican. He's been fighting for gay rights at least as far back as 2011, when Hillary was still on the fence. Of course, she just votes for whatever the polls show will get her more votes (arguably that's a good thing).
I saved my company thousands of dollars by giving the air compressor manufacturer the finger. Ingersoll-Rand tried to tell us that the warranty was void if we didn't use their super-expensive lube and filters for the oil change service. We did it ourselves with no-name brand same weight oil for about $6k less than what they were going to charge. As soon as I mentioned the MMWA, they STFU. Basically as soon as you let somebody know they are full of shit, they will generally back down. Unless they really don't know the law, but most of these fuckers know that what they're doing is illegal.
This is an odd argument on Slashdot. It brings up a few interesting points, though.
Companies should be regulated for overstepping moral bounds. Let's split this into a couple of parts. 1) Companies have moral bounds, 2) They should be forced to remain inside their moral bounds by regulatory oversight.
I agree with the notion that there needs to be some moral bounds of a company that may not be solely identified by a legal framework. Most corporations believe they only have a duty to enrich their shareholders. That's not a very ethical viewpoint. Companies gain value from the community they are in, and in my opinion have a duty to return that enrichment when possible. Anadarko, Huntsman, Exxon, GE, just to name a few all have *massive* outreach programs. They send out engineers, MBAs, chemists, you name it to local schools to volunteer is various programs on the company's dime.
Whether a company should be regulated to comply with perceived moral bounds is a different question. Most slashdotters would probably argue that a better solution is for the free market to regulate it by means of a boycott. As you are well aware, this option is not always efficient or helpful. But from a practical standpoint, how would you regulate something as fuzzy as "moral bounds"? Especially now that companies can have a religion, thanks to Hobby Lobby, it would be very challenging to tell a corporate entity that it needs to participate in a specific altruistic behavior.
I agree that there are cases in which "boycott or STFU" is an unhelpful false dichotomy. On the other hand, it is very frustrating for people who have taken what they see as a moral stand against a company, when they see people winging about Apple while using their iPad (for example). It comes across as hypocritical. Sort of like immigrants supporting tighter immigration laws (which is strangely common).
There's also a point you didn't make, but could have. The GP says to STFU when you don't like the world you created. That's a terrible idea. If you helped cause a problem, you had better not STFU. Stand up, admit your mistake, come up with a solution, and work to fix it.
This is my problem with people who use "SJW" incorrectly. If you use it to disparage anybody you disagree with, it loses all meaning. What's the point of using letters as a slur if a) it refers to something that isn't actually offensive, and b) you use it for things that have nothing to do with women or gays or racial minorities? What does pointing out facts regarding a google search have to do with fighting for social justice?
It reminds me of the good old days when Rush coined the term feminazi. What does fighting for equal pay for women have to do with fascist dictatorships? So stupid to muddle things up like that. What's so disappointing is how easily monikers distract otherwise intelligent people (on both sides of any argument).
There are real problems with people who try to over-correct for perceived social injustices. Please focus on them, and people might take you a little more seriously. Hell, you might even get some people to change their point of view if you express your argument in a cogent fashion rather than relying on dog-whistles and obscure abbreviations.
Really? Because mine pops up with indictment right away. Don't be such a conspiracy theorist. I would like to point out that there are several disparaging things about Trump that don't show up either. If you type "does trump have tiny" it does NOT autocomplete "hands." Clearly this is a conspiracy against Marco Rubio. I mean really, anybody who says crap like that needs to realize how stupid and whiny they sound. If you type "trump frau" it does not add the "d" at the end. If you type "trump is hitle" it doesn't add "r." Perhaps Google is just more polite than Bing?
My Lenovo P50 for work came with a microphone, even though I specifically unchecked that in the equipment requisition form. I didn't even know it had one until I was dicking around with Jabber trying to figure out why the plug-in mic wasn't working. Ironically, if I try to use the built-in mic and speakers, WebEx gets a terrible feedback loop. I have to mute (deafen?) the mic when others are talking, and mute my speakers when talking. Luckily both can be controlled with physical buttons, so it's not too big of a PITA.
I agree with the conference camera thing. It's super easy to forget if it's on. I didn't even know my computer had a microphone until the Jabber settings popped up with it.
I don't even like sharing my screen. I was in a conference call getting trained on our ever-so-useful ERP system. I was taking hones notes in notepad about quirky things that needed to get fixed. I was in a bad mood, so the text file was peppered with colorful metaphors. Anyway, halfway through the training I got volunteered to walk through the process while everybody looked on. Luckily I remembered to only share the active window rather than my whole screen, but it could have easily become really embarrassing.
The plural of anecdote is not data. In the case of Sandy Hook or Pulse, these were unstable people for whom a "good guy with a gun" would have just been yet another target. Not a deterrent in the least. And for the record I am very pro second amendment, and think that people should be allowed to own and carry weapons. I also believe that they should be properly trained before trying to be a hero. Either way, if you're getting drunk at a night club, leave your fucking gun at home. Everybody knows that. All of my gun-nut buddies are *very* strict about the no booze and bullets rule.
I think there would be more resistance if people actually start getting killed.
But let's get real, here. It's not in the corporatocracy's business plan to have their security forces (AKA the US military) killing people and causing riots. It's much better for the "bad guys" to not be identifiable people like "the Baker family down the street," but rather "terrorists" and "pedophiles" and "drug dealers." Maybe my tin foil hat needs to be readjusted, but I really think anybody in power stands a much better chance of staying in power if they just roll with things and don't make too many changes too fast.
Besides, what's the benefit of taking our guns? The threat of taking guns? That's a different story. Lots of money to be made by threatening to take guns. Just look at the last 5 or 6 mass shootings. The gun-nuts and right-wing whackadoos fall for it every time. And the gun companies just devour the profits and whip the NRA into a frenzy for the next round.
Holy shit! how come none of my redneck gun-nut friends know about this law? I'm surprised they haven't tried to get it repealed. Forget Obamacare, this gem is a conspiracy theorist's wet dream!!
Let's remember that this is not a political blog. It's a technology news from yesterday (or dupe thereof) forum. So the only reason this is on-topic is because Internet. You have to admit, though, that it's a little ironic how Republicans hold up the second and fifth amendments (arms and due process) as sacrosanct, while using the fourth and first (search and assembly/religion/speech) to wipe their ass. Maybe they only like prime numbered amendments?
But isn't that what islamophobes always do when one crazy Muslim does something horrible? Blame the acts of one person on an entire religion. If it's good for the goose it's good for the gander.
600 years? More like 60. It was not that long ago that gays were castrated (either physically or chemically) in order to curb their "unnatural" ways. Ever heard of Alan Turing? It was only 15 years ago that being gay was legal in Texas. And that had to go all the way to the Supreme Court. Hell, you could even go to jail if you sodomized your wife.
Just like every other country in the world two hundred years ago. Their religion is just a few hundred years behind, since it started later. Eventually, they'll stop paying attention to the parts of their holy book they don't like, too. I love catfish and BJs. I don't gouge out my eye when I check out a girl's cleavage. I don't murder my children when they disobey me; hell, I don't even beat them. I don't tithe, and I certainly don't hand over all my belongings to the church. But I still consider myself a Christian.
Slashdot Mirror
My son's dairy allergy was present from the get go. He barfed all over the place his second exposure to dairy. Don't know about the peanut allergy, because my wife is allergic, so they weren't ever in the house to begin with. There are a lot of things that are very prevalent in the US of A that aren't as common in other places. But in my opinion it's just a matter of having outsmarted Darwin. 100 years ago, my father would have died in childhood due to his asthma. Instead, he passed that gene along to me. I too would have died in childhood. And now my son is poised to spread his own genetic misery on to the next generation.
Ummm... half the families in Texas? (yes they are that common)
My father-in-law just gives me his old car whenever he wants an upgrade. Problem solved!
I have found the fastest way to get the attention of somebody who can help you solve your problem is to email the CEO of the company. Just take a stab at what their email address is, based on the email addresses of other people in the company.
I had been getting the runaround from my energy company for about a week. This was a medium-sized industrial account, and we were trying to reconnect following some storm damage to the pole. Finally after somebody on the phones basically said there were no records of the other six calls I had made, I got fed up. Guessed on the CEO's address, got it right. Wrote a professional letter explaining the situation. The next day there were three trucks at my door, and two engineers on the phone.
We were introduced to this method by my electrician's wife. Any time she doesn't get love from Comcast, or Verizon, or Lennar, etc., she just emails the CEO. Works every time.
Yeah, cuz Trump always plays fair!!
I too am shocked -- SHOCKED! -- that some people are treated differently in this country. This is the first time such inequality has ever been on display. EVER!!! Except when gays could be arrested for having sex in their own homes (2003), or when black people couldn't marry white people (1967), or when women couldn't vote (1920), or when you could own other humans (1863), or when you had to own land to vote (1792-1856).
A buddy of mine is former military and a reluctant Trump supporter (was Cruz). Even he agreed, basically if the Secretary of State says it's sufficiently unclassified enough for her to put it on a personal server, there aren't a lot of people who can disagree with her.
That is as likely as a Sanders fanatic voting for Trump.
First of all, that's not completely out of the question. A lot of Bernie's little guy talk resonates strongly among Trump supporters, so I imagine the converse is true, that there might be some things Trump says that will attract some Bernie fans. Some people just liked Bernie because he was an outsider and not a Clinton. Trump fits that bill.
I don't see why a LGBT Libertarian is unlikely either. (besides the fact that it is unlikely for any American to be Libertarian). Gary Johnson has taken a fairly progressive stand on marriage equality, especially considering he's a reformed Republican. He's been fighting for gay rights at least as far back as 2011, when Hillary was still on the fence. Of course, she just votes for whatever the polls show will get her more votes (arguably that's a good thing).
I don't know. All of those could be clean-room remodels. I don't see anything 100% conclusive.
I saved my company thousands of dollars by giving the air compressor manufacturer the finger. Ingersoll-Rand tried to tell us that the warranty was void if we didn't use their super-expensive lube and filters for the oil change service. We did it ourselves with no-name brand same weight oil for about $6k less than what they were going to charge. As soon as I mentioned the MMWA, they STFU. Basically as soon as you let somebody know they are full of shit, they will generally back down. Unless they really don't know the law, but most of these fuckers know that what they're doing is illegal.
This is an odd argument on Slashdot. It brings up a few interesting points, though.
Companies should be regulated for overstepping moral bounds. Let's split this into a couple of parts. 1) Companies have moral bounds, 2) They should be forced to remain inside their moral bounds by regulatory oversight.
I agree with the notion that there needs to be some moral bounds of a company that may not be solely identified by a legal framework. Most corporations believe they only have a duty to enrich their shareholders. That's not a very ethical viewpoint. Companies gain value from the community they are in, and in my opinion have a duty to return that enrichment when possible. Anadarko, Huntsman, Exxon, GE, just to name a few all have *massive* outreach programs. They send out engineers, MBAs, chemists, you name it to local schools to volunteer is various programs on the company's dime.
Whether a company should be regulated to comply with perceived moral bounds is a different question. Most slashdotters would probably argue that a better solution is for the free market to regulate it by means of a boycott. As you are well aware, this option is not always efficient or helpful. But from a practical standpoint, how would you regulate something as fuzzy as "moral bounds"? Especially now that companies can have a religion, thanks to Hobby Lobby, it would be very challenging to tell a corporate entity that it needs to participate in a specific altruistic behavior.
I agree that there are cases in which "boycott or STFU" is an unhelpful false dichotomy. On the other hand, it is very frustrating for people who have taken what they see as a moral stand against a company, when they see people winging about Apple while using their iPad (for example). It comes across as hypocritical. Sort of like immigrants supporting tighter immigration laws (which is strangely common).
There's also a point you didn't make, but could have. The GP says to STFU when you don't like the world you created. That's a terrible idea. If you helped cause a problem, you had better not STFU. Stand up, admit your mistake, come up with a solution, and work to fix it.
This is my problem with people who use "SJW" incorrectly. If you use it to disparage anybody you disagree with, it loses all meaning. What's the point of using letters as a slur if a) it refers to something that isn't actually offensive, and b) you use it for things that have nothing to do with women or gays or racial minorities? What does pointing out facts regarding a google search have to do with fighting for social justice?
It reminds me of the good old days when Rush coined the term feminazi. What does fighting for equal pay for women have to do with fascist dictatorships? So stupid to muddle things up like that. What's so disappointing is how easily monikers distract otherwise intelligent people (on both sides of any argument).
There are real problems with people who try to over-correct for perceived social injustices. Please focus on them, and people might take you a little more seriously. Hell, you might even get some people to change their point of view if you express your argument in a cogent fashion rather than relying on dog-whistles and obscure abbreviations.
Really? Because mine pops up with indictment right away. Don't be such a conspiracy theorist. I would like to point out that there are several disparaging things about Trump that don't show up either. If you type "does trump have tiny" it does NOT autocomplete "hands." Clearly this is a conspiracy against Marco Rubio. I mean really, anybody who says crap like that needs to realize how stupid and whiny they sound. If you type "trump frau" it does not add the "d" at the end. If you type "trump is hitle" it doesn't add "r." Perhaps Google is just more polite than Bing?
Bing results for "trump is"
Google's results are:
Still think it's a conspiracy?
Except if you charged back, you did NOT pay money for the key.
My new laptop doesn't even have a physical switch for the WiFi antenna.
My Lenovo P50 for work came with a microphone, even though I specifically unchecked that in the equipment requisition form. I didn't even know it had one until I was dicking around with Jabber trying to figure out why the plug-in mic wasn't working. Ironically, if I try to use the built-in mic and speakers, WebEx gets a terrible feedback loop. I have to mute (deafen?) the mic when others are talking, and mute my speakers when talking. Luckily both can be controlled with physical buttons, so it's not too big of a PITA.
I agree with the conference camera thing. It's super easy to forget if it's on. I didn't even know my computer had a microphone until the Jabber settings popped up with it.
I don't even like sharing my screen. I was in a conference call getting trained on our ever-so-useful ERP system. I was taking hones notes in notepad about quirky things that needed to get fixed. I was in a bad mood, so the text file was peppered with colorful metaphors. Anyway, halfway through the training I got volunteered to walk through the process while everybody looked on. Luckily I remembered to only share the active window rather than my whole screen, but it could have easily become really embarrassing.
The plural of anecdote is not data. In the case of Sandy Hook or Pulse, these were unstable people for whom a "good guy with a gun" would have just been yet another target. Not a deterrent in the least. And for the record I am very pro second amendment, and think that people should be allowed to own and carry weapons. I also believe that they should be properly trained before trying to be a hero. Either way, if you're getting drunk at a night club, leave your fucking gun at home. Everybody knows that. All of my gun-nut buddies are *very* strict about the no booze and bullets rule.
I think there would be more resistance if people actually start getting killed.
But let's get real, here. It's not in the corporatocracy's business plan to have their security forces (AKA the US military) killing people and causing riots. It's much better for the "bad guys" to not be identifiable people like "the Baker family down the street," but rather "terrorists" and "pedophiles" and "drug dealers." Maybe my tin foil hat needs to be readjusted, but I really think anybody in power stands a much better chance of staying in power if they just roll with things and don't make too many changes too fast.
Besides, what's the benefit of taking our guns? The threat of taking guns? That's a different story. Lots of money to be made by threatening to take guns. Just look at the last 5 or 6 mass shootings. The gun-nuts and right-wing whackadoos fall for it every time. And the gun companies just devour the profits and whip the NRA into a frenzy for the next round.
*googles "Insurrection Act"*
Holy shit! how come none of my redneck gun-nut friends know about this law? I'm surprised they haven't tried to get it repealed. Forget Obamacare, this gem is a conspiracy theorist's wet dream!!
Let's remember that this is not a political blog. It's a technology news from yesterday (or dupe thereof) forum. So the only reason this is on-topic is because Internet. You have to admit, though, that it's a little ironic how Republicans hold up the second and fifth amendments (arms and due process) as sacrosanct, while using the fourth and first (search and assembly/religion/speech) to wipe their ass. Maybe they only like prime numbered amendments?
But isn't that what islamophobes always do when one crazy Muslim does something horrible? Blame the acts of one person on an entire religion. If it's good for the goose it's good for the gander.
600 years? More like 60. It was not that long ago that gays were castrated (either physically or chemically) in order to curb their "unnatural" ways. Ever heard of Alan Turing? It was only 15 years ago that being gay was legal in Texas. And that had to go all the way to the Supreme Court. Hell, you could even go to jail if you sodomized your wife.
I wish that were the only church rooting for murderers. But unfortunately, they're just the tip of the iceberg. Just google Steven Anderson.
Just like every other country in the world two hundred years ago. Their religion is just a few hundred years behind, since it started later. Eventually, they'll stop paying attention to the parts of their holy book they don't like, too. I love catfish and BJs. I don't gouge out my eye when I check out a girl's cleavage. I don't murder my children when they disobey me; hell, I don't even beat them. I don't tithe, and I certainly don't hand over all my belongings to the church. But I still consider myself a Christian.