Tunneling isn't just inconvenient for the average user. What keeps me from doing IPv6 tunneling is an utter lack of clarity on the migration path from there. When my ISP finally does give me a 16-bit subnet in the v6 address space, I expect that I will have to go through all of that configuration again from the start and also end up spending days debugging the tiny bits of the tunneling configuration and software that didn't come out cleanly. It all sounds like a major hassle, and the only benefit is that I will be able to browse some small portion of the same websites at a slower speed (due to the tunnel) and probably have slower DNS lookups (because, presumably, my system would have to check through the tunnel for an IPv6 address and therefore take longer than using a more local DNS).
The cost-benefit just isn't there for tunneling. I lose time setting it up, lose future time un-setting it up, and get worse performance with absolutely no additional, noticeable service available in between.
"Contractor" status is also nice for other reasons, such as skirting worker's compensation insurance premiums, minimum wage laws, imputed liability for negligence, and so on. People think that they can just give a 1099 instead of a W-2 and it automatically makes the recipient a contractor rather than employee. It doesn't work that way. What you actually do when you issue a 1099 instead of a W-2 for someone who is legally an employee is break the law. Giving stock or options to an actual independent contractor is extremely uncommon if it happens at all, and would be a major factor in the IRS or a court of law deciding that the actual relationship is employer-employee.
On the other side of things, I think that someone who does IT for a startup is far enough removed from the actual startup's business (whatever that business is - even if you're doing the in-house IT for an IT shop, your job is not part of their core business in any irreplaceable way) that he should not expect to receive any equity in the company, unless he did something really special. (As others have pointed out, asking for equity after all the risk has been dissolved is not only greedy and stupid but also just plain rude and out of place. It's analogous to asking Buzz Aldrin if you, the janitor in Houston who kept the Mission Control floor clean, can take over his role after he gets back from the moon.) Being a truly independent contractor would just underscore this: You are replaceable, and your replacement will have less of a pent-up volatile ego problem waiting to do some damage.
There are two ways (short of hostile takeovers, forced bankruptcy, and the like) to become an equity holder in a business. The first is to pay for it by taking risks and making unique contributions - that is, showing your faith in the company before it is rational to do so and giving things to the company that couldn't be done by just any other Joe with your same basic qualifications. The second is to pay for it with cash.
My god man, who cares if he gets rid of the stuff if he's only got around 2 days to live!!!???
Serious-sounding-but-facetious answer to a facetious question: His executor. I'm picturing a 3,000-page inventory of the guy's estate, itemizing every floppy disk, memory module, hard drive, bizarre cable, manual, and blank warranty card he owned, followed by a "Total value: $3.17" that some lawyer charged the executor $150 per page to prepare and file with the probate court.
I was talking about the contents of the post I was responding to, which only distinguished between sites using hydraulic fracturing and sites without any wells, yet claimed to be authoritative. I never once claimed that the paper did or did not say something, only that the person I was responding to fell short of demonstrating his own point. Maybe the AC should also have read the paper before writing about it (which is what that person actually did).
I don't have time to read the paper this morning. Does it only discuss sites using hydraulic fracturing for natural gas production and non-extraction sites (which I take to mean sites where natural gas is not being drilled for or produced)? If so, then it misses the possibility (which the commenter you addressed as "Dude" pointed out) of natural gas wells in the same area that do not use hydraulic fracturing. In other words, the suggestion was that they failed to isolate the variable of hydraulic fracturing. But, as I said, I don't have time to read the paper at this time so it's possible that they did account for that. Your response, however, does not indicate they did.
I read one report that no country would really accept his remains for burial and therefore the only way to respect Islamic tradition and law was to bury him at sea promptly after his death. That does make sense, but of course it's impossible to know for certain whether ulterior motives were involved and even more impossible to silence conspiracy theorists.
That's a really interesting story. I had to do some searching to find more information, as I knew it couldn't be (jet-powered) B-52s handling the task during WWII. It sounds from this Wikipedia article that a variety of aircraft from C-3s to C-87s did the job, with the C-47 being the workhorse.
When I saw this article, though, about fuel stops in space, I was immediately struck with the thought that it would take a lot more fuel to decelerate enough to dock and re-accelerate than it would be worth. It probably makes sense to fuel up in low Earth orbit and possibly in the asteroid belt, before firing off into an escape orbit (of the Earth and the Sun, respectively), but once you're at escape velocity I can't imagine much benefit from stopping for fuel.
I prefer imperial measurements for cooking. Fluid ounces are part of a base-2 system, which makes it much easier to name a unit that fits the task rather than having to use arbitrary numbers of metric base-10 units.
You're missing one of the greatest benefits of the imperial system: It teaches you not to rely on easily-converted units. Anyone who can deal with both inches and feet can easily handle dealing with both inches and centimeters. Someone who only deals with centimeters and meters cannot as easily handle working with something that isn't exactly 10^n of them.
What's with the recent phenomenon of anonymous supposed newbies posting release announcements for software, claiming it's easy to use and posting all sorts of information about how well it runs on their systems? Why doesn't someone with some real knowledge post the release announcement? Should I personally be announcing the 2012 General Motors line-up?
Character evidence is not inadmissible per se. Character for untruthfulness and conviction of a felony can each be used to impeach a witness. I'm taking a guess here that grand larceny in whatever jurisdiction the Ceglias are charged in carries a felony-level penalty, and their scheme to defraud sounds like evidence of untruthful character.
No, seriously. Tell me the exact, specific components - hardware and software - that are necessary to purchase music, television, and cinema content quickly and easily from my computer or my couch, then stream it to my television and surround sound system via HDMI carrying both audio and video. It must be capable of configuration and use by someone without substantial technical skills or knowledge. So far it's all just claims that such things exist with not one specific example being named. Bonus points for not having any noisy fans in the TV-end set-top box and extra bonus points if it fits in the space of a paperback novel.
Don't ask. Tell. What protocol should we be using that allows us to use one relatively clean user interface on the computer to purchase, play, and stream audio and video content including movie rentals and television show subscriptions (iTunes) that quickly and easily, without nerd intervention, can also send content to our television through an inexpensive set-top box (Apple TV), to our stereo through a reasonably-priced wireless access point (Airport Express), or to our hands through a tablet (iPad)?
The wording there is that the jury are the "judges of the law and the facts." That doesn't necessarily mean that they determine the law, but possibly only that they apply the law to the facts. That is the normal way of doing it, although I do not know whether Georgia has addressed which of these (normal or abnormal) the state constitution actually means.
Another thing to consider is to re-read the statistics but replace "Facebook" with "e-mail account" or even "postal address" (modified to fit context and grammar, even though the story itself didn't bother with proper grammar ("three... is on Facebook"). Facebook is a tool for staying in contact with people on a less formal and broader basis than e-mail (and possibly for wasting time playing games like Farmville). It should not be surprising or worrying that it has many users or that its users sign in daily or more often, just as the surprise and worry of a decade or so ago when the bulk of the developed world's population started obtaining e-mail accounts and checking them daily was unfounded.
Nothing. I haven't read the decision, but it sounds like Mirror Worlds obtained a jury verdict against Apple for $625.5 million. A jury verdict is worth nothing until the judge orders that the clerk enter judgment according to it. In the American legal system, a jury can decide facts but the judge rules on the law. A jury's finding of fact is generally unassailable unless there was basically no evidence in support of that fact. It sometimes happens that a jury will reach a verdict and then the lawyers will argue whether the verdict was supported by competent evidence. If it was not, then the verdict will not stand. It does not take much evidence to allow a jury verdict to stand - even circumstantial evidence standing alone can be enough - but it takes some.
In other words, what happened here was that Mirror Worlds had lazy or stupid lawyers who failed to present evidence on all of the facts they had to prove to the jury, so even though the jury came back with a verdict in their favor the verdict is of no value. They can appeal the judge's ruling and ask the appellate court to reverse his decision and order judgment on the jury verdict, but they will have to point the appellate court to specific evidence in the trial transcript and exhibits that supports each and every element of their claims. If they couldn't point the trial judge to that evidence after he had sat through the whole trial, it is unlikely they will be able to show it to the appellate court - if they are even allowed to, since you generally cannot raise an issue on appeal that you never raised in the court you are appealing from.
There is likely no precedential value of this judge's decision beyond this one case, except that Mirror Worlds' lawyers will work harder in the future at their new jobs.
Leaving to the side the content of the story itself, this is just another blog that someone has succeeded in getting free advertising for thanks to Slashdot's willingness to post retarded crap. But the most annoying part is that the blogger is illiterate. There's a difference between whooping and whopping, for instance. He also sucks at math, as others have pointed out. If Slashdot is going to feed the world other people's blogs all day, can we at least get some that are well-written about topics of interest to nerds over the age of 5?
It appears that your definition of "marketing exercise" is idiosyncratic. Asking for money in a lawsuit is not the sine qua non of using a lawsuit as a marketing tool. Being reasonable in your demands does not defeat marketing value. The fact that you are so attached to the concept that Tesla is being reasonable and therefore is a good company not just out to gain some marketing exposure itself tends to show that, at least to the extent you represent their target market, the marketing exercise is working.
Good joke, and all, but a serious application of Occam's razor leads us to only conclusion. Just like last January, all employees and contractors with access to the area where the drug was found checked out. That only leaves one class of people who could have been in the area to leave cocaine behind: Visiting politicians.
You had to go to 7G, didn't you? I was skimming through the comments and making sure that nobody beat me to my joke, which involves 5G, and you ruined it by jumping the gun on numbers without even making the obligatory Onion reference. You know what? Fuck everything, I'm doing 190G. The 8th G lathers. You'll miss that one with your puny 7G.
It comes from saying "March 14, 2011" in formal writing and oral communication. 3/14/11 is an informal abbreviation of that, and is in that order because it comports with how the formal, unabbreviated version is written. In other words, the purpose for which dates were abbreviated results in the manner in which they were abbreviated. Computerized sorting by date was not a consideration when this date format came into standard use.
I don't know why we say "March 14, 2011" instead of "14 March, 2011", but as a native speaker of American English it does feel much more natural to say the former. There is probably a history behind that but it, too, had no reason to take into consideration computerized sorting.
I agree with your criticism, but not your response to the situation. I just skip the shitty movies and, if that means that I only go to one movie a year, then so be it. I also don't think that Blade Runner sequels or prequels can tarnish the original. They may dilute its good name, but they can't tarnish the original. Only actuallymessing with the original can hope to accomplish that, but even that does not tarnish the original, it only makes the untarnished original harder to get ahold of.
Slashdot Mirror
The point is that the tunnel itself isn't a major source of latency, which is good to know in response to my earlier comment.
Tunneling isn't just inconvenient for the average user. What keeps me from doing IPv6 tunneling is an utter lack of clarity on the migration path from there. When my ISP finally does give me a 16-bit subnet in the v6 address space, I expect that I will have to go through all of that configuration again from the start and also end up spending days debugging the tiny bits of the tunneling configuration and software that didn't come out cleanly. It all sounds like a major hassle, and the only benefit is that I will be able to browse some small portion of the same websites at a slower speed (due to the tunnel) and probably have slower DNS lookups (because, presumably, my system would have to check through the tunnel for an IPv6 address and therefore take longer than using a more local DNS).
The cost-benefit just isn't there for tunneling. I lose time setting it up, lose future time un-setting it up, and get worse performance with absolutely no additional, noticeable service available in between.
"Contractor" status is also nice for other reasons, such as skirting worker's compensation insurance premiums, minimum wage laws, imputed liability for negligence, and so on. People think that they can just give a 1099 instead of a W-2 and it automatically makes the recipient a contractor rather than employee. It doesn't work that way. What you actually do when you issue a 1099 instead of a W-2 for someone who is legally an employee is break the law. Giving stock or options to an actual independent contractor is extremely uncommon if it happens at all, and would be a major factor in the IRS or a court of law deciding that the actual relationship is employer-employee.
On the other side of things, I think that someone who does IT for a startup is far enough removed from the actual startup's business (whatever that business is - even if you're doing the in-house IT for an IT shop, your job is not part of their core business in any irreplaceable way) that he should not expect to receive any equity in the company, unless he did something really special. (As others have pointed out, asking for equity after all the risk has been dissolved is not only greedy and stupid but also just plain rude and out of place. It's analogous to asking Buzz Aldrin if you, the janitor in Houston who kept the Mission Control floor clean, can take over his role after he gets back from the moon.) Being a truly independent contractor would just underscore this: You are replaceable, and your replacement will have less of a pent-up volatile ego problem waiting to do some damage.
There are two ways (short of hostile takeovers, forced bankruptcy, and the like) to become an equity holder in a business. The first is to pay for it by taking risks and making unique contributions - that is, showing your faith in the company before it is rational to do so and giving things to the company that couldn't be done by just any other Joe with your same basic qualifications. The second is to pay for it with cash.
My god man, who cares if he gets rid of the stuff if he's only got around 2 days to live!!!???
Serious-sounding-but-facetious answer to a facetious question: His executor. I'm picturing a 3,000-page inventory of the guy's estate, itemizing every floppy disk, memory module, hard drive, bizarre cable, manual, and blank warranty card he owned, followed by a "Total value: $3.17" that some lawyer charged the executor $150 per page to prepare and file with the probate court.
I was talking about the contents of the post I was responding to, which only distinguished between sites using hydraulic fracturing and sites without any wells, yet claimed to be authoritative. I never once claimed that the paper did or did not say something, only that the person I was responding to fell short of demonstrating his own point. Maybe the AC should also have read the paper before writing about it (which is what that person actually did).
I don't have time to read the paper this morning. Does it only discuss sites using hydraulic fracturing for natural gas production and non-extraction sites (which I take to mean sites where natural gas is not being drilled for or produced)? If so, then it misses the possibility (which the commenter you addressed as "Dude" pointed out) of natural gas wells in the same area that do not use hydraulic fracturing. In other words, the suggestion was that they failed to isolate the variable of hydraulic fracturing. But, as I said, I don't have time to read the paper at this time so it's possible that they did account for that. Your response, however, does not indicate they did.
I read one report that no country would really accept his remains for burial and therefore the only way to respect Islamic tradition and law was to bury him at sea promptly after his death. That does make sense, but of course it's impossible to know for certain whether ulterior motives were involved and even more impossible to silence conspiracy theorists.
That's a really interesting story. I had to do some searching to find more information, as I knew it couldn't be (jet-powered) B-52s handling the task during WWII. It sounds from this Wikipedia article that a variety of aircraft from C-3s to C-87s did the job, with the C-47 being the workhorse.
When I saw this article, though, about fuel stops in space, I was immediately struck with the thought that it would take a lot more fuel to decelerate enough to dock and re-accelerate than it would be worth. It probably makes sense to fuel up in low Earth orbit and possibly in the asteroid belt, before firing off into an escape orbit (of the Earth and the Sun, respectively), but once you're at escape velocity I can't imagine much benefit from stopping for fuel.
I prefer imperial measurements for cooking. Fluid ounces are part of a base-2 system, which makes it much easier to name a unit that fits the task rather than having to use arbitrary numbers of metric base-10 units.
You're missing one of the greatest benefits of the imperial system: It teaches you not to rely on easily-converted units. Anyone who can deal with both inches and feet can easily handle dealing with both inches and centimeters. Someone who only deals with centimeters and meters cannot as easily handle working with something that isn't exactly 10^n of them.
What's with the recent phenomenon of anonymous supposed newbies posting release announcements for software, claiming it's easy to use and posting all sorts of information about how well it runs on their systems? Why doesn't someone with some real knowledge post the release announcement? Should I personally be announcing the 2012 General Motors line-up?
Character evidence is not inadmissible per se. Character for untruthfulness and conviction of a felony can each be used to impeach a witness. I'm taking a guess here that grand larceny in whatever jurisdiction the Ceglias are charged in carries a felony-level penalty, and their scheme to defraud sounds like evidence of untruthful character.
No, seriously. Tell me the exact, specific components - hardware and software - that are necessary to purchase music, television, and cinema content quickly and easily from my computer or my couch, then stream it to my television and surround sound system via HDMI carrying both audio and video. It must be capable of configuration and use by someone without substantial technical skills or knowledge. So far it's all just claims that such things exist with not one specific example being named. Bonus points for not having any noisy fans in the TV-end set-top box and extra bonus points if it fits in the space of a paperback novel.
Don't ask. Tell. What protocol should we be using that allows us to use one relatively clean user interface on the computer to purchase, play, and stream audio and video content including movie rentals and television show subscriptions (iTunes) that quickly and easily, without nerd intervention, can also send content to our television through an inexpensive set-top box (Apple TV), to our stereo through a reasonably-priced wireless access point (Airport Express), or to our hands through a tablet (iPad)?
The wording there is that the jury are the "judges of the law and the facts." That doesn't necessarily mean that they determine the law, but possibly only that they apply the law to the facts. That is the normal way of doing it, although I do not know whether Georgia has addressed which of these (normal or abnormal) the state constitution actually means.
Another thing to consider is to re-read the statistics but replace "Facebook" with "e-mail account" or even "postal address" (modified to fit context and grammar, even though the story itself didn't bother with proper grammar ("three ... is on Facebook"). Facebook is a tool for staying in contact with people on a less formal and broader basis than e-mail (and possibly for wasting time playing games like Farmville). It should not be surprising or worrying that it has many users or that its users sign in daily or more often, just as the surprise and worry of a decade or so ago when the bulk of the developed world's population started obtaining e-mail accounts and checking them daily was unfounded.
Nothing. I haven't read the decision, but it sounds like Mirror Worlds obtained a jury verdict against Apple for $625.5 million. A jury verdict is worth nothing until the judge orders that the clerk enter judgment according to it. In the American legal system, a jury can decide facts but the judge rules on the law. A jury's finding of fact is generally unassailable unless there was basically no evidence in support of that fact. It sometimes happens that a jury will reach a verdict and then the lawyers will argue whether the verdict was supported by competent evidence. If it was not, then the verdict will not stand. It does not take much evidence to allow a jury verdict to stand - even circumstantial evidence standing alone can be enough - but it takes some.
In other words, what happened here was that Mirror Worlds had lazy or stupid lawyers who failed to present evidence on all of the facts they had to prove to the jury, so even though the jury came back with a verdict in their favor the verdict is of no value. They can appeal the judge's ruling and ask the appellate court to reverse his decision and order judgment on the jury verdict, but they will have to point the appellate court to specific evidence in the trial transcript and exhibits that supports each and every element of their claims. If they couldn't point the trial judge to that evidence after he had sat through the whole trial, it is unlikely they will be able to show it to the appellate court - if they are even allowed to, since you generally cannot raise an issue on appeal that you never raised in the court you are appealing from.
There is likely no precedential value of this judge's decision beyond this one case, except that Mirror Worlds' lawyers will work harder in the future at their new jobs.
Leaving to the side the content of the story itself, this is just another blog that someone has succeeded in getting free advertising for thanks to Slashdot's willingness to post retarded crap. But the most annoying part is that the blogger is illiterate. There's a difference between whooping and whopping, for instance. He also sucks at math, as others have pointed out. If Slashdot is going to feed the world other people's blogs all day, can we at least get some that are well-written about topics of interest to nerds over the age of 5?
When did I say that this lawsuit is strictly for marketing purposes?
It appears that your definition of "marketing exercise" is idiosyncratic. Asking for money in a lawsuit is not the sine qua non of using a lawsuit as a marketing tool. Being reasonable in your demands does not defeat marketing value. The fact that you are so attached to the concept that Tesla is being reasonable and therefore is a good company not just out to gain some marketing exposure itself tends to show that, at least to the extent you represent their target market, the marketing exercise is working.
Good joke, and all, but a serious application of Occam's razor leads us to only conclusion. Just like last January, all employees and contractors with access to the area where the drug was found checked out. That only leaves one class of people who could have been in the area to leave cocaine behind: Visiting politicians.
You had to go to 7G, didn't you? I was skimming through the comments and making sure that nobody beat me to my joke, which involves 5G, and you ruined it by jumping the gun on numbers without even making the obligatory Onion reference. You know what? Fuck everything, I'm doing 190G. The 8th G lathers. You'll miss that one with your puny 7G.
It comes from saying "March 14, 2011" in formal writing and oral communication. 3/14/11 is an informal abbreviation of that, and is in that order because it comports with how the formal, unabbreviated version is written. In other words, the purpose for which dates were abbreviated results in the manner in which they were abbreviated. Computerized sorting by date was not a consideration when this date format came into standard use.
I don't know why we say "March 14, 2011" instead of "14 March, 2011", but as a native speaker of American English it does feel much more natural to say the former. There is probably a history behind that but it, too, had no reason to take into consideration computerized sorting.
I agree with your criticism, but not your response to the situation. I just skip the shitty movies and, if that means that I only go to one movie a year, then so be it. I also don't think that Blade Runner sequels or prequels can tarnish the original. They may dilute its good name, but they can't tarnish the original. Only actually messing with the original can hope to accomplish that, but even that does not tarnish the original, it only makes the untarnished original harder to get ahold of.
I don't recall being issued any uniform.