And in any case, I don't think a thing like this is worth being a dick about to other people and ruining their day. You've lost perspective
I think you've got it backwards. You've never gained perspective, which is why you don't see the value. Extrapolate that action to a million similar actions, whether it's popcorn or soda or any consumer item. Where does that leave us?
As an employee of a movie theater, why should you complain about doing your job? How is it 'making their life hell' by bringing to their attention something that is part of their job? Is laziness and unwillingness to fulfill job requirements the reason that it makes their life hell?
Knowing better, I can honestly say that someone getting a free refill on popcorn is absolutely not going to increase popcorn prices for anyone else at all.
Obviously you've never worked in pricing, or taken a microeconomics class that discusses pricing in depth. If you're working for a chain store, those refills are accounted for, as are full-price sales -- and both sets of data are used in the pricing model. It's not about how much popcorn is thrown away (a full bag of popcorn costs about $.25, IIRC, so it's meaningless) it's about how much to charge to maximize revenue. When employees don't ring up the refills, they really skew the demand curve -- since people buying refills signifies that the full price is too high, and the chain could likely increase revenues by lowering the price. When the fraudulent refills are rung up, they also skew the demand curve -- though without seeing the numbers who knows how it would affect the curve, and thus the optimal pricing.
Personally, I suggest collecting the fines from the employees of the company that made the decision to use unlicensed software and fonts. Why should they get off scott free? They're the ones who actually broke the law, the company charter didn't fly its ass up out of the file cabinet and insert the CD in the drive.
If they were independent contractors, sure. But I think you're missing the definition of the employee-employer relationship. The company is responsible for the actions of its employees while they are engaging in activity related to their employment. It's one reason why job descriptions are so important -- if you're acting outside your job description, the company may face limited liability.
IANAL. I have, however, dealt with employer culpability many times.
And by the way, how irritating of you to be the kind of guy who goes out of his way to report people who are getting popcorn refills from past days... do you have no happiness in your life?
No, I resent thieves who drive up the price of goods for the rest of us. Who do you think ends up paying for loss in the end? Sure, the marginal cost of popcorn is low, but it pisses me off when amoral asses can't do without popcorn. As to not making anyone's day better? A million incidents like that add up to more affordable goods for those who opt to do the moral thing and PAY for the popcorn/soda/CDs they consume.
Thief? Give me a break.
No, it's theft. Period. It's wrong. Just because the employees and the managers are too lazy or too hassle-advertent or [$REASON], doesn't justify the action of stealing anything. Is there a sliding scale for theft? Is it not wrong if you're only stealing a little bit? The correct response in terms of the best benefit for EVERYONE, not just the asses stealing, would be for people who refuse to pay $4 for a small popcorn (myself included) simply not buying the popcorn... at any price. All those quasi-refill popcorns screw up the pricing model, and people who are honest enough to pay get the raw end of the deal.
In short, theft is immoral no matter the value of the item, and theft hurts honest consumers.
But feel free to rationalize your actions all you want -- either way I can be content with the fact that I know I've done what's right.
West Village, Hudson Street across from Jane. Depends on the violation. Anywhere in Manhattan below 96 St has the higher rates, but the difference is not that large.
Anyhoo, here's a schedule of fines for NYC parking violations.
You're right, he's not cheap... he's a thief. He's not 'getting even with the man,' he's 'causing other people to pay more.'
If I caught him doing that, I'd say something to the management of the business he was robbing. FFS, if he doesn't want to pay the price they are offering, he shouldn't take the product. THAT would be sticking it to the man, depriving them of business from an individual moral high ground.
Disclaimer: I do not support the Iraqi resistance/terrorists/freedom fighters/whatever nor do I support a violent or armed overthrow of the US government.
It's sad that you have to make that disclaimer. Free speech and all that... out the window.
Every 2-4 years we get our chance for a peaceful revolution, and this system has worked more or less ok for roughly 230 years.
More or less OK according to whom? Do you think that the government we have now would be even remotely acceptable to any of the signers of the Declaration of Independence? Sure, times and our culture have changed, but it's nearly impossible to get good perspective of 230 years of government based on the experiences of less than a single lifetime. Also, as to the opportunity for revolution, that's a farce. The two-party system prevents any meaningful revolution at the ballot-box.
I hate to say it, as I once believed as you do -- but we're being hoodwinked by those in power (and it's not the political parties alone -- it's the corporations as well).
Finally, even though you mention that the US is not Iraq, it's a bit disingenuous to compare the possibility of resistance there with the same in the US. Here in the US, there is a huge status quo to protect, and any revolutionaries will be destroyed by the majority for disturbing that status quo (this is something that has helped our economy greatly, but prevents any chance at revolution we could have). The only way revolution could occur here is if it came from the military -- and the military structure is designed to prevent a coup.
Sounds like a good idea on the surface, but how many transactions do you need to rack up for this system to pay for itself?
How many transactions do you think happen at a typical parking meter in a day?
If you set a 2-hr time limit, and your meters are on for 12 hours, you could easily run up $1.50 in revenue or more per day per meter. In some areas, you're talking about $2/day per meter -- overlap time gets billed to two people:) How about places with 1-hr time limits?
The system itself would be pretty cheap, and is very scalable -- adding new towns would be very simple. I'd also imagine that the municipality is bearing most of the cost of installing new meter equipment as necessary -- after all, they are saving money on enforcement. Who knows if they are also paying the company providing the service.
at a $110 a pop, with $20 increases every three weeks for late payments, im suprised meter maids aren't murdered in the street by rioting mobs!
Where are you getting $110 from? Last ticket I paid (mailed the check out today) was $65. Different parking violations have different fees -- parking in front of a hydrant or in a handicapped spot certainly deserves a higher fine.
And as for late payment charges -- you shouldn't even include those, moron who don't pay or file a dispute on time have no one to blame but themselves.
Not copyright law, trademark law. Very different, yet quite similar.
And yes, you can personally make a t-shirt with whatever trademarks on it you wish. You just can't sell that t-shirt, or represent it as being made by the owner of the trademark.
Re:So What Does It Mean?
on
PGP & GPG
·
· Score: 1
"No one knows, no one cares and very few have been affected by their ignorance."
So what's the problem? I always thought obscurity was a key to security...
"Ebay isn't a live auction, so why are you so eager to jam-fit one feature of a live auction into it?"
Shit, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that proposing a solution to a "problem" espoused in an article was so out-of-line.
But, since I'm replying to your post, why did you even bother? Didn't the previous responses address the reason?
And while I'm at it, why are you bothering with the 30-second window straw man? It has nothing to do with what I suggested at all.
My post was an attempt to propose a solution to what some other people consider a problem. Why are you so eager to jump all over it with an invalid and/or redundant argument?
The point of the time-extension is to create the potential for snipers to bid against eachother. Those who aren't sniping lose their chance, but this would allow sellers to do a little better.
Of course, if sniping lost its luster (as it surely would) then a lot of those buyers would lose interest... the impulse adrenaline rush of winning a snipe is gone... thanks for giving me more to think about.
A lot of items I look at have been viewed less than 25 times, and the amount of bids will also stay fairly low.
Schrodinger's Bid: You either won the auction at the moment you placed your bid, or you lost. Until you view the auction results, both are true. Oh yeah, also, you were bidding on a cat that was possibly gassed to death.
Fermi's Bid: As long as your result is within an order of magnitude of the highest bid, you win.
Another new measure: ChoicePoint this month created a security advisory committee comprised of DiBattiste, the company's CIO, head of internal audit, the chief business officer, chief marketing officer, chief administrative officer and general counsel. The group meets regularly "to ensure we're hitting every aspect of security and privacy," says DiBattiste.
Emphasis mine.
Maybe it's just me, but a roomful of CxOs, including the CMO (WTF? What's wrong with VP of Marketing?[1]), plus a lawyer can only equal one thing -- a PR push plus some moves to limit liability.
[1] Speaking of stupid CxO titles, what the hell is a "Chief Administrative Officer"? We call those "Office Managers" around here... or maybe even "Chief Operations Officer" if we're feeling perky. But who wants a title that screams "Long-tenure secretary"? Maybe it's just a problem with assigning titels to people who sit on the board of a company (e.g., are legal Officers) but fulfill more mundane roles in terms of operations.
Hopefully your contract will be over when the first review period ends...
VP of Marketing: "What do you mean the chargeback for that tech is more than I make per hour?"
CIO/CFO: "Their time is valuable to us than yours."
VP of Marketing: "What am I, a schmuck?!"
CIO/CFO: "Yes."
In my experience, that's the downside of chargebacks -- all of a sudden, everyone has an idea of what "that guy in the server room" makes... and is VERY unhappy about it.
I ALWAYS do this, and it makes me wonder what idiots bid on something early? What advantage is there to ever do that?
Let's see:
A friend of the seller's might bid early to drive the price up. Someone who sells similar items might bid early to get the price up (and thereby drive buyersto their own product). Someone who won't have internet access when the auction ends. Someone who prefers to get a bid in and set their maximum bid (the fire-and-forget method). Someone who wants to scare away other bidders (not that this works on EBay often, but I did pick up some Hubbard bookends for a low fraction of my resale by immediately bidding 'high'... the seller didn't specify the maker, and it was an extremely rare casting) -- the key to this is low exposure for the item, like any 'steal' on EBay.
I've been sniped many times on EBay auctions, and it doesn't really bother me at all -- there is automatic bidding that will increase your bid to your maximum if someone tries to snipe you. In the end, they valued the item more than I did.
But why doesn't EBay operate like flesh-and-blood auctions? Keep the bidding open for the normal duration of time, but then extend the auction time whenever a new bid is placed? You know, like "going, going, gone!" Fairly easy to add 3 or 5 minutes to the end of an auction -- and those who haven't set incremental bidding can still get in on the close if they want to.
Good call. Departmental chargebacks, along with bonuses partially tied to budget variance, lead to more cost-effective methods. I've noticed more companies charging IT costs to individual departments, instead of lumping it all under admin costs, and not just for companies in the IT sphere of business.
When expensive storage == no new Blackberries his year, sales departments take notice:)
"Actually, I-90 in NY was supposed to become free quite a few years ago after the tolls paid off the construction costs. Now those tolls cover some of the maintenance, but are also the primary source of funding for the recreational Erie Canal system, which can't sustain itself."
Same for the GSP and NJTP in New Jersey (well, except for the Erie Canal system). A little loophole allows revenuse from these toll roads to be used for other budgets -- as long as the state of NJ maintains a balance of $0.01 (in reality, much higher) on the original bonds used to finance the highways, and the new bonds issued to pay off the old bonds, they can keep charging tolls on the highways. If they ever were to pay off those bonds in full, without issuing new bonds, then the law allowing the tolls to be charged would disappear.
That said, I'm all in favor of toll roads. Why tax people who don't use them -- especially the GSP, since no freight is carried on it?
Cheetos go in the easy-to-reach cabinet next to the fridge.
Beer goes in the fornt on the top shelf of the fridge, milk (eventually cheese, typically) goes on the bottom shelf in the back.
This is automated, since I simply shove things onto the shelves when I get home from the supermarket. Anything I consume and replace ends up at the front. Anything I buy because I 'should' be eating it (like fiber biscuits, or whatever) ends up pushed to the back.
It's automated via metatag, too. Anything tagged 'ice cream' goes in the door of the freezer, anything tagged 'vegetable' gets relegated somewhere in the back, where it quickly develops an inch of ice crystals, to slowly dry out to a freezer-burnt state of suspended animation until I buy a new fridge unit.
This costs no more than regular kitchen storage space, but if you'd like a custom design for you and your loved ones, my consulting fee is $75/hr, or a bag of chips and a six-pack.
While intercity high-speed trains sound great, they don't really reduce the dependence on oil much. What we really need to replace with rail are the commuting highways. New York has quite a large mass transit system, but it is really limited by the number of trains and buses that can cross the Hudson and East Rivers.
I think that the market is doing surprisingly well at encouraging people to take mass transit -- I've noticed ridership on my current bus line, as well as my previous train line, increase as gas prices have gone up. Real estate in towns with train stations is more in demand than real estate in towns without mass transit.
The next step is for states (with grants from the federal government) to build more mass transit. If you build it, they will come & all that. There are two problems:
1) NIMBYs objecting to railroad tracks near their property.
2) People in government thinking that the government should not subsidize mass transit.
I believe that, in urban areas, mass transit should be funded at the same amount as the road system.
One other thing -- our roads are getting much more expensive to maintain -- tar is getting more expensive (it's a petroleum product, after all). Much cheaper in the long run to maintain rails than roadways.
In the end, though, what's repsonsible for dominance of the roadways over mass transit is the automobile industry. The federal highway system is a handout to the auto manufacturers, the fuel companies, and the workers in those industries -- not that I disagree with public works, I think they are necessary and good, but it's important to realize that the lack of support for mass transit initiatives among our legislators is due to the auto lobby and the auto workers' lobbies.
Slashdot Mirror
In that case, you need to get your job description changed :)
At least make the 'additional duties' clause specific to your realm of employment.
As an employee of a movie theater, why should you complain about doing your job? How is it 'making their life hell' by bringing to their attention something that is part of their job? Is laziness and unwillingness to fulfill job requirements the reason that it makes their life hell?
Obviously you've never worked in pricing, or taken a microeconomics class that discusses pricing in depth. If you're working for a chain store, those refills are accounted for, as are full-price sales -- and both sets of data are used in the pricing model. It's not about how much popcorn is thrown away (a full bag of popcorn costs about $.25, IIRC, so it's meaningless) it's about how much to charge to maximize revenue. When employees don't ring up the refills, they really skew the demand curve -- since people buying refills signifies that the full price is too high, and the chain could likely increase revenues by lowering the price. When the fraudulent refills are rung up, they also skew the demand curve -- though without seeing the numbers who knows how it would affect the curve, and thus the optimal pricing.
IANAL. I have, however, dealt with employer culpability many times.
No, it's theft. Period. It's wrong. Just because the employees and the managers are too lazy or too hassle-advertent or [$REASON], doesn't justify the action of stealing anything. Is there a sliding scale for theft? Is it not wrong if you're only stealing a little bit? The correct response in terms of the best benefit for EVERYONE, not just the asses stealing, would be for people who refuse to pay $4 for a small popcorn (myself included) simply not buying the popcorn... at any price. All those quasi-refill popcorns screw up the pricing model, and people who are honest enough to pay get the raw end of the deal.
In short, theft is immoral no matter the value of the item, and theft hurts honest consumers.
But feel free to rationalize your actions all you want -- either way I can be content with the fact that I know I've done what's right.
Here's the link, oops.
West Village, Hudson Street across from Jane. Depends on the violation. Anywhere in Manhattan below 96 St has the higher rates, but the difference is not that large.
Anyhoo, here's a schedule of fines for NYC parking violations.
Of note, the "meter-feeding" violation is $65.
You're right, he's not cheap... he's a thief. He's not 'getting even with the man,' he's 'causing other people to pay more.'
If I caught him doing that, I'd say something to the management of the business he was robbing. FFS, if he doesn't want to pay the price they are offering, he shouldn't take the product. THAT would be sticking it to the man, depriving them of business from an individual moral high ground.
More or less OK according to whom? Do you think that the government we have now would be even remotely acceptable to any of the signers of the Declaration of Independence? Sure, times and our culture have changed, but it's nearly impossible to get good perspective of 230 years of government based on the experiences of less than a single lifetime. Also, as to the opportunity for revolution, that's a farce. The two-party system prevents any meaningful revolution at the ballot-box.
I hate to say it, as I once believed as you do -- but we're being hoodwinked by those in power (and it's not the political parties alone -- it's the corporations as well).
Finally, even though you mention that the US is not Iraq, it's a bit disingenuous to compare the possibility of resistance there with the same in the US. Here in the US, there is a huge status quo to protect, and any revolutionaries will be destroyed by the majority for disturbing that status quo (this is something that has helped our economy greatly, but prevents any chance at revolution we could have). The only way revolution could occur here is if it came from the military -- and the military structure is designed to prevent a coup.
If you set a 2-hr time limit, and your meters are on for 12 hours, you could easily run up $1.50 in revenue or more per day per meter. In some areas, you're talking about $2/day per meter -- overlap time gets billed to two people
The system itself would be pretty cheap, and is very scalable -- adding new towns would be very simple. I'd also imagine that the municipality is bearing most of the cost of installing new meter equipment as necessary -- after all, they are saving money on enforcement. Who knows if they are also paying the company providing the service.
And as for late payment charges -- you shouldn't even include those, moron who don't pay or file a dispute on time have no one to blame but themselves.
Not copyright law, trademark law. Very different, yet quite similar.
And yes, you can personally make a t-shirt with whatever trademarks on it you wish. You just can't sell that t-shirt, or represent it as being made by the owner of the trademark.
"No one knows, no one cares and very few have been affected by their ignorance."
So what's the problem? I always thought obscurity was a key to security...
"Isn't the real lesson from that whole debacle that Choicepoint has no business handling my personal information?"
:)
But that is their business -- handling and selling your information
It would be more accurate to say that Choicepoint has no business if not handling your information (for better or worse).
"Ebay isn't a live auction, so why are you so eager to jam-fit one feature of a live auction into it?"
Shit, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that proposing a solution to a "problem" espoused in an article was so out-of-line.
But, since I'm replying to your post, why did you even bother? Didn't the previous responses address the reason?
And while I'm at it, why are you bothering with the 30-second window straw man? It has nothing to do with what I suggested at all.
My post was an attempt to propose a solution to what some other people consider a problem. Why are you so eager to jump all over it with an invalid and/or redundant argument?
Of course, if sniping lost its luster (as it surely would) then a lot of those buyers would lose interest... the impulse adrenaline rush of winning a snipe is gone... thanks for giving me more to think about.
Those are the only items I bid on
Schrodinger's Bid:
You either won the auction at the moment you placed your bid, or you lost. Until you view the auction results, both are true.
Oh yeah, also, you were bidding on a cat that was possibly gassed to death.
Fermi's Bid:
As long as your result is within an order of magnitude of the highest bid, you win.
Maybe it's just me, but a roomful of CxOs, including the CMO (WTF? What's wrong with VP of Marketing?[1]), plus a lawyer can only equal one thing -- a PR push plus some moves to limit liability.
[1] Speaking of stupid CxO titles, what the hell is a "Chief Administrative Officer"? We call those "Office Managers" around here... or maybe even "Chief Operations Officer" if we're feeling perky. But who wants a title that screams "Long-tenure secretary"? Maybe it's just a problem with assigning titels to people who sit on the board of a company (e.g., are legal Officers) but fulfill more mundane roles in terms of operations.
Hopefully your contract will be over when the first review period ends...
VP of Marketing: "What do you mean the chargeback for that tech is more than I make per hour?"
CIO/CFO: "Their time is valuable to us than yours."
VP of Marketing: "What am I, a schmuck?!"
CIO/CFO: "Yes."
In my experience, that's the downside of chargebacks -- all of a sudden, everyone has an idea of what "that guy in the server room" makes... and is VERY unhappy about it.
A friend of the seller's might bid early to drive the price up.
Someone who sells similar items might bid early to get the price up (and thereby drive buyersto their own product).
Someone who won't have internet access when the auction ends.
Someone who prefers to get a bid in and set their maximum bid (the fire-and-forget method).
Someone who wants to scare away other bidders (not that this works on EBay often, but I did pick up some Hubbard bookends for a low fraction of my resale by immediately bidding 'high'... the seller didn't specify the maker, and it was an extremely rare casting) -- the key to this is low exposure for the item, like any 'steal' on EBay.
I've been sniped many times on EBay auctions, and it doesn't really bother me at all -- there is automatic bidding that will increase your bid to your maximum if someone tries to snipe you. In the end, they valued the item more than I did.
But why doesn't EBay operate like flesh-and-blood auctions? Keep the bidding open for the normal duration of time, but then extend the auction time whenever a new bid is placed? You know, like "going, going, gone!" Fairly easy to add 3 or 5 minutes to the end of an auction -- and those who haven't set incremental bidding can still get in on the close if they want to.
Good call. Departmental chargebacks, along with bonuses partially tied to budget variance, lead to more cost-effective methods. I've noticed more companies charging IT costs to individual departments, instead of lumping it all under admin costs, and not just for companies in the IT sphere of business.
:)
When expensive storage == no new Blackberries his year, sales departments take notice
That said, I'm all in favor of toll roads. Why tax people who don't use them -- especially the GSP, since no freight is carried on it?
That's what metatagging is for. Tag files that are not to be moved to slow storage no matter how infrequently they are accessed. RTFA.
Cheetos go in the easy-to-reach cabinet next to the fridge.
Beer goes in the fornt on the top shelf of the fridge, milk (eventually cheese, typically) goes on the bottom shelf in the back.
This is automated, since I simply shove things onto the shelves when I get home from the supermarket. Anything I consume and replace ends up at the front. Anything I buy because I 'should' be eating it (like fiber biscuits, or whatever) ends up pushed to the back.
It's automated via metatag, too. Anything tagged 'ice cream' goes in the door of the freezer, anything tagged 'vegetable' gets relegated somewhere in the back, where it quickly develops an inch of ice crystals, to slowly dry out to a freezer-burnt state of suspended animation until I buy a new fridge unit.
This costs no more than regular kitchen storage space, but if you'd like a custom design for you and your loved ones, my consulting fee is $75/hr, or a bag of chips and a six-pack.
While intercity high-speed trains sound great, they don't really reduce the dependence on oil much. What we really need to replace with rail are the commuting highways. New York has quite a large mass transit system, but it is really limited by the number of trains and buses that can cross the Hudson and East Rivers.
.
I think that the market is doing surprisingly well at encouraging people to take mass transit -- I've noticed ridership on my current bus line, as well as my previous train line, increase as gas prices have gone up. Real estate in towns with train stations is more in demand than real estate in towns without mass transit.
The next step is for states (with grants from the federal government) to build more mass transit. If you build it, they will come & all that. There are two problems:
1) NIMBYs objecting to railroad tracks near their property
2) People in government thinking that the government should not subsidize mass transit.
I believe that, in urban areas, mass transit should be funded at the same amount as the road system.
One other thing -- our roads are getting much more expensive to maintain -- tar is getting more expensive (it's a petroleum product, after all). Much cheaper in the long run to maintain rails than roadways.
In the end, though, what's repsonsible for dominance of the roadways over mass transit is the automobile industry. The federal highway system is a handout to the auto manufacturers, the fuel companies, and the workers in those industries -- not that I disagree with public works, I think they are necessary and good, but it's important to realize that the lack of support for mass transit initiatives among our legislators is due to the auto lobby and the auto workers' lobbies.