You can't give them the minimum penalty in that case as that would result in anyone who would be found more than 'minimally' guilty wiping their drives in order to downgrade their liability. The only way to prevent that is to give them the maximum penalty.
It's exactly the same at a parking garage. If you lose your ticket, they don't charge you the minimum, they charge the maximum.
We've been getting 'cool dates' and 'cool' dates and times for as long as I can remember. There's Always some Once In A Hundred Lifetimes event to coo over. Comets, fancy dates, super novas.
If a billion events happen every month, then you shouldn't be surprised that a One In A Billion event is always in the news.
Sorry for being a curmudgeon. It's not as if I don't have the streamers up to celebrate the 3 days of micro-processors. It's just that I like to piss on people's chips.
Re:disappointed -- try the java cert exam
on
Java Puzzlers
·
· Score: 1
I went to see the authors give a presentation on this subject (I guess we were a last minute focus/qa group) and found it fascinating. Unfortunately I don't recall any examples well enough to include here but they relate to all sorts of java topics and their idiosynchrycies.
One interesting point is that if you want to play with the examples in your ide, don't use Eclipse! Apparently the authors have close ties with the Eclipse folks and they got an advanced copy of the book and proceeded to code much of the potential issues as warnings in the IDE, so you won't be able to work them out for yourself.
I'm going to buy the book based on the talk I attended. There's no more honest recommendation than that. It's genuinely fun casual reading for people that know java well and enjoy puzzles. And it has real world examples of why some of the Best Coding Practices are the way they are.
... I like to imagine that the person claiming these patent rights is doing so to shake some sense into the whole system. They must Know that there's no chance they can win, but the attempt to do so will force some lines to be drawn that will help a million more ambiguous cases. Am I the only one to think that this patent claim is the best thing to ever happen to software patents.
Bring it on so we can get clearer rules on when software patents have crossed over the line into the Land of Silly
Couldn't agree more. This was petty but well within bounds. Just 2 people who don't like each other having a spat. Happens all the time. This one happened to use email that's all. Even the person that publicised it was doing so because it was funny and nothing more.
The firings were absolutely uncalled for on the evidence given.
Would Einstein have let these patents through?
Maybe the problem we have is that our patent officials are TOO smart and are busy discovering the next major breakthrough in quantum physics instead of batting back nonsense patents of wheels and such.
Bless 'em
A cursory reading offers 2 major fallacies immediately to one with only a perfunctory knowledge of the case.
1) The crazy idea that SCO can prevail simply by demonstrating that anyone associated with the AT&T effort was also associated with Linux development. This seems to be the basis of the first half of the article. It's ridiculous. It would imply that no-one can work in the same industry as the company they've left for fear of using a memory that was formed at the previous company. Nonsense. The reason this avenue wasn't pursued in the lawsuit, is that it's a cul-de-sac.
2) The fact that minix doesn't show up in Linux doesn't mean it wasn't once in Linux and got refactored out. Ergo, not finding UNIX code in Linux is a poor defense indeed. This argument is the second half of the article. Well, it's ridiculous also. Minix was 5000 lines long. A tiny fraction of UNIX. The idea that natural refactoring would result in ALL of the original code being lost will be looked upon with great suspicion by anyone who's ever supported legacy code. And should be responded to with 'then what evidence DO you have?'
In short the article says that the fact that SCO has no evidence should not lead people to believe their claims are baseless. It either reads as professional trolling ("You, Murphy, write me 2000 words on why SCO are justified. Let's boil some blood out there") or funded PR/journalism.
I worked in the recruiting business for a few years and can tell you (without quoting the statutes) that in California it's common knowledge that giving a negative reference has legal ramifications. I was always trying to eek references out of people whose HR department had given them strict instructions to do no more than confirm they worked there. Apparently there have been cases of people winning lawsuits for receiving bad reviews.
Sorry I can't be more concrete but I'm sure most managers and all recruiters in the Bay Area will corroborate.
Slashdot Mirror
You can't give them the minimum penalty in that case as that would result in anyone who would be found more than 'minimally' guilty wiping their drives in order to downgrade their liability. The only way to prevent that is to give them the maximum penalty. It's exactly the same at a parking garage. If you lose your ticket, they don't charge you the minimum, they charge the maximum.
We've been getting 'cool dates' and 'cool' dates and times for as long as I can remember. There's Always some Once In A Hundred Lifetimes event to coo over. Comets, fancy dates, super novas. If a billion events happen every month, then you shouldn't be surprised that a One In A Billion event is always in the news. Sorry for being a curmudgeon. It's not as if I don't have the streamers up to celebrate the 3 days of micro-processors. It's just that I like to piss on people's chips.
I went to see the authors give a presentation on this subject (I guess we were a last minute focus/qa group) and found it fascinating. Unfortunately I don't recall any examples well enough to include here but they relate to all sorts of java topics and their idiosynchrycies.
One interesting point is that if you want to play with the examples in your ide, don't use Eclipse! Apparently the authors have close ties with the Eclipse folks and they got an advanced copy of the book and proceeded to code much of the potential issues as warnings in the IDE, so you won't be able to work them out for yourself. I'm going to buy the book based on the talk I attended. There's no more honest recommendation than that. It's genuinely fun casual reading for people that know java well and enjoy puzzles. And it has real world examples of why some of the Best Coding Practices are the way they are.
... I like to imagine that the person claiming these patent rights is doing so to shake some sense into the whole system. They must Know that there's no chance they can win, but the attempt to do so will force some lines to be drawn that will help a million more ambiguous cases. Am I the only one to think that this patent claim is the best thing to ever happen to software patents.
Bring it on so we can get clearer rules on when software patents have crossed over the line into the Land of Silly
Couldn't agree more. This was petty but well within bounds. Just 2 people who don't like each other having a spat. Happens all the time. This one happened to use email that's all. Even the person that publicised it was doing so because it was funny and nothing more. The firings were absolutely uncalled for on the evidence given.
Would Einstein have let these patents through? Maybe the problem we have is that our patent officials are TOO smart and are busy discovering the next major breakthrough in quantum physics instead of batting back nonsense patents of wheels and such. Bless 'em
A cursory reading offers 2 major fallacies immediately to one with only a perfunctory knowledge of the case.
1) The crazy idea that SCO can prevail simply by demonstrating that anyone associated with the AT&T effort was also associated with Linux development. This seems to be the basis of the first half of the article. It's ridiculous. It would imply that no-one can work in the same industry as the company they've left for fear of using a memory that was formed at the previous company. Nonsense. The reason this avenue wasn't pursued in the lawsuit, is that it's a cul-de-sac.
2) The fact that minix doesn't show up in Linux doesn't mean it wasn't once in Linux and got refactored out. Ergo, not finding UNIX code in Linux is a poor defense indeed. This argument is the second half of the article. Well, it's ridiculous also. Minix was 5000 lines long. A tiny fraction of UNIX. The idea that natural refactoring would result in ALL of the original code being lost will be looked upon with great suspicion by anyone who's ever supported legacy code. And should be responded to with 'then what evidence DO you have?'
In short the article says that the fact that SCO has no evidence should not lead people to believe their claims are baseless. It either reads as professional trolling ("You, Murphy, write me 2000 words on why SCO are justified. Let's boil some blood out there") or funded PR/journalism.
I worked in the recruiting business for a few years and can tell you (without quoting the statutes) that in California it's common knowledge that giving a negative reference has legal ramifications. I was always trying to eek references out of people whose HR department had given them strict instructions to do no more than confirm they worked there. Apparently there have been cases of people winning lawsuits for receiving bad reviews. Sorry I can't be more concrete but I'm sure most managers and all recruiters in the Bay Area will corroborate.