Also makes it unreadable. I used to go out with a teacher and I never figured out how she could read the scrawl that was handed to her.
No, cursive doesn't make it unreadable. Poor penmanship makes it unreadable. I assure you, if you look at cursive written by somebody that is currently 60+, their cursive is most likely very readable. If they happen to be 80+ it is probably beautiful.
but the content of the show clearly implies that everyone is guilty.
No, the content of the show is evidence that most, not all, are guilty of at least one crime...evading police or resisting arrest. When you're getting arrested and you fight with the police you're committing a crime regardless if you committed the one they were arresting you for.
I wasn't talking about an objective comparison based on common beliefs. I was simply saying that his statement is not provable for his systems unless they have been compromised. You have to be compromised before you can KNOW what is required to prevent it.
Knowing which is hardest to protect would require ALL of them to have been compromised at least once. Since NONE of them have been you have no basis for a comparison.
So even if you wanted a different browser, you still had this piece of shit IE sitting there, taking up space and using up your resources. That's what MS was convicted of.
So you think I should be able to sue a company based on a difference of opinion in how their product is put together? Having the browser integrated into the OS doesn't violate my rights as a consumer. This is one decision that the courts got wrong. That's why our justice system isn't still on them like the EU is. They decided they screwed up and wasted money.
Because MS had a monopoly on its OS, and used that monopoly to leverage acceptance of the browser.
That is complete bullshit. MS has NEVER had a monopoly in the OS arena. They NEVER forced you to use their browser. I had Netscape Navigator installed on my Windows 95 machine from the first day I had it. It's been the same ever since, although Netscape has become Firefox. If they don't SUPPLY a browser there is no way to GET another one.
UNLESS you pay full retail price, you do NOT own the device.
Even then.. you only own the hardware, not the OS, which is only LICENSED to you. Nor do you, at that point, still have any right to use whatever SIM card you want to in it. NOR do you have any warranty.
First, wrong. I DO own the device if I purchase it. If I am specifically LEASING it, I don't. If I stop paying my bill they can turn off my service and send me to collections for the service, NOT the device.
Second, I DO have the right to use any SIM card I want. Wireless providers are required to unlock your phone. They can charge for it, but that wasn't the statement.
No, you get a fully functional system off the CD, perhaps minus some oddball drivers. It is no less than Windows. Net access is not required for the install.
That is correct. I was talking about things that have nothing to do with, nor any impact on, their business. Obviously selling somebody's trade secrets is wrong, again, both morally and legally. I wasn't trying to be an absolutest, I despise those statements too. I guess I should have stated my qualifications the first time around.
Yes, they are. They have no right, moral or legal, to tell her what she can do outside of business hours. They still try. Following a company's guidelines stops where their business does. Their business does not include anyone's personal life.
ANY company that tries to tell its employees what they are allowed to do on their own time is in the wrong, both morally and legally. They have no more power to tell me what to do with my time than I do to tell you.
You wouldn't believe what is considered a conflict of interest in the modern newspaper. My wife writes for a large newspaper and some of the stuff they consider a conflict is on the verge of violating her rights as a person. The rules are VERY strict.
Is there a cellphone provider that doesn't require you to provide your SSN before signing up for a contract?
Do you mean legally require you to? Cell phone providers aren't one of the few people who are legally allowed to REQUIRE a SSN. You can give it to them if you want but they can't deny you service for not giving it to them. It isn't required for a credit check. It simply make sit easier to do one.
Most ISPs solution to this would be to immediately switch all plans to a per-byte type of plan (which works given the comparison with utilities. I don't get carte blanche from the electric company to use it all for free, complaining that "they provide 20A to the house so I should be able to use 20A around the clock for free!"),
That isn't the correct comparison. The electric company doesn't cut you down to 100 volts AND charge you per kilowatt. They provide you with full voltage (full speed) electricity and charge per kilowatt. The ISPs want to charge you both per speed AND per kilobyte. That is unacceptable.
Actually, doesn't the law covering this read "up to $XXXX per infringement" or something similar? If that's the case I would think that the judge has a LOT of discretion when handing out a penalty.
I'm not trying to qualify for your signature but you must have missed the part in the other guy's comment about being legally enforceable. If I, as a design engineer, think of a product on my own time and design said product on my own time, any company I work for, no matter what I've signed, cannot claim ownership by default unless they can somehow prove that I used their physical or intellectual property for my work. If I didn't use an idea they own, or equipment they own, they have no say in what I do outside of work.
they let us know that they took our code that we submitted and stored it in a program with a database.
Then you should have taken the tact of a friend of mine. Refuse to allow that. They don't own your code. Neither does the company that wrote this so-called checking program. That second group is now profiting from your work. This is why my friend fought, and won, to keep his papers out of such a system.
> Regardless, in this case it's his code and he has the right to do whatever he wants with it.
This is probably not the case. At my University they own the rights to all code that is written as part of the educational program, not the students.
Well, I'm not sure what country you're in, but that just simply isn't true. ANY creative work is the property of the author especially if there is no compensation for your work.
Why not write your own textbook, leaving out the low points and concentrating on the high points, and make some extra money. It's now like you'd be the first prof to do so. Of course, this would mean a little extra work each semester reorganizing the book so the students have to buy it each and every year. @#$!@%#$@%#$@#$
You've already given them your bio information and legally there's nothing stopping them from doing whatever they want with it.
Well, except that little thing called contract law. You violating their terms gets you kicked off their site. Them violating their terms, by selling or giving away your information when their own TOS say they won't, is illegal.
Slashdot Mirror
Also makes it unreadable. I used to go out with a teacher and I never figured out how she could read the scrawl that was handed to her.
No, cursive doesn't make it unreadable. Poor penmanship makes it unreadable. I assure you, if you look at cursive written by somebody that is currently 60+, their cursive is most likely very readable. If they happen to be 80+ it is probably beautiful.
but the content of the show clearly implies that everyone is guilty.
No, the content of the show is evidence that most, not all, are guilty of at least one crime...evading police or resisting arrest. When you're getting arrested and you fight with the police you're committing a crime regardless if you committed the one they were arresting you for.
Thanks for letting everybody know why I'll never live in Europe.
That's exactly what I was thinking. So his phone was somewhere, woohoo. Convict the phone.
Are you that stupid? Ford developed it's own hybrid drive system. Toyota BOUGHT the patent for the system in the Prius from GM.
I wasn't talking about an objective comparison based on common beliefs. I was simply saying that his statement is not provable for his systems unless they have been compromised. You have to be compromised before you can KNOW what is required to prevent it.
Knowing which is hardest to protect would require ALL of them to have been compromised at least once. Since NONE of them have been you have no basis for a comparison.
So even if you wanted a different browser, you still had this piece of shit IE sitting there, taking up space and using up your resources. That's what MS was convicted of.
So you think I should be able to sue a company based on a difference of opinion in how their product is put together? Having the browser integrated into the OS doesn't violate my rights as a consumer. This is one decision that the courts got wrong. That's why our justice system isn't still on them like the EU is. They decided they screwed up and wasted money.
OOOOOOHHHHHHH, I'm so sorry. I guess we should be suing Apple as well for forcing us to use Safari AT LEAST ONCE.
If MS didn't supply IE with Windows, the same people would be using them for lack of functionality.
Because MS had a monopoly on its OS, and used that monopoly to leverage acceptance of the browser.
That is complete bullshit. MS has NEVER had a monopoly in the OS arena. They NEVER forced you to use their browser. I had Netscape Navigator installed on my Windows 95 machine from the first day I had it. It's been the same ever since, although Netscape has become Firefox. If they don't SUPPLY a browser there is no way to GET another one.
UNLESS you pay full retail price, you do NOT own the device. Even then.. you only own the hardware, not the OS, which is only LICENSED to you. Nor do you, at that point, still have any right to use whatever SIM card you want to in it. NOR do you have any warranty.
First, wrong. I DO own the device if I purchase it. If I am specifically LEASING it, I don't. If I stop paying my bill they can turn off my service and send me to collections for the service, NOT the device.
Second, I DO have the right to use any SIM card I want. Wireless providers are required to unlock your phone. They can charge for it, but that wasn't the statement.
No, you get a fully functional system off the CD, perhaps minus some oddball drivers. It is no less than Windows. Net access is not required for the install.
That is correct. I was talking about things that have nothing to do with, nor any impact on, their business. Obviously selling somebody's trade secrets is wrong, again, both morally and legally. I wasn't trying to be an absolutest, I despise those statements too. I guess I should have stated my qualifications the first time around.
Yes, they are. They have no right, moral or legal, to tell her what she can do outside of business hours. They still try. Following a company's guidelines stops where their business does. Their business does not include anyone's personal life.
ANY company that tries to tell its employees what they are allowed to do on their own time is in the wrong, both morally and legally. They have no more power to tell me what to do with my time than I do to tell you.
You wouldn't believe what is considered a conflict of interest in the modern newspaper. My wife writes for a large newspaper and some of the stuff they consider a conflict is on the verge of violating her rights as a person. The rules are VERY strict.
Is there a cellphone provider that doesn't require you to provide your SSN before signing up for a contract?
Do you mean legally require you to? Cell phone providers aren't one of the few people who are legally allowed to REQUIRE a SSN. You can give it to them if you want but they can't deny you service for not giving it to them. It isn't required for a credit check. It simply make sit easier to do one.
Most ISPs solution to this would be to immediately switch all plans to a per-byte type of plan (which works given the comparison with utilities. I don't get carte blanche from the electric company to use it all for free, complaining that "they provide 20A to the house so I should be able to use 20A around the clock for free!"),
That isn't the correct comparison. The electric company doesn't cut you down to 100 volts AND charge you per kilowatt. They provide you with full voltage (full speed) electricity and charge per kilowatt. The ISPs want to charge you both per speed AND per kilobyte. That is unacceptable.
Actually, doesn't the law covering this read "up to $XXXX per infringement" or something similar? If that's the case I would think that the judge has a LOT of discretion when handing out a penalty.
I'm not trying to qualify for your signature but you must have missed the part in the other guy's comment about being legally enforceable. If I, as a design engineer, think of a product on my own time and design said product on my own time, any company I work for, no matter what I've signed, cannot claim ownership by default unless they can somehow prove that I used their physical or intellectual property for my work. If I didn't use an idea they own, or equipment they own, they have no say in what I do outside of work.
they let us know that they took our code that we submitted and stored it in a program with a database.
Then you should have taken the tact of a friend of mine. Refuse to allow that. They don't own your code. Neither does the company that wrote this so-called checking program. That second group is now profiting from your work. This is why my friend fought, and won, to keep his papers out of such a system.
> Regardless, in this case it's his code and he has the right to do whatever he wants with it.
This is probably not the case. At my University they own the rights to all code that is written as part of the educational program, not the students.
Well, I'm not sure what country you're in, but that just simply isn't true. ANY creative work is the property of the author especially if there is no compensation for your work.
Edit: I see I'm not alone in this feeling
V
V
V
Why not write your own textbook, leaving out the low points and concentrating on the high points, and make some extra money. It's now like you'd be the first prof to do so. Of course, this would mean a little extra work each semester reorganizing the book so the students have to buy it each and every year. @#$!@%#$@%#$@#$
You've already given them your bio information and legally there's nothing stopping them from doing whatever they want with it.
Well, except that little thing called contract law. You violating their terms gets you kicked off their site. Them violating their terms, by selling or giving away your information when their own TOS say they won't, is illegal.
Do we really trust a company that can't do a simple conversion?
100kW ~ 134-135 hp (depending on hp standard)
2 x 100kW ~ 270hp
270 =/= 400
You forgot the end of that sentence. It only damages fuel systems that aren't designed for it.