[Privacy] is expected, and protected by the constitution of the United States - you know, that pesky little document you swore to uphold and defend, not mutilate and destroy.
Actually, the constitution doesn't touch on privacy rights, however, the Bill of Rights does reflect some of the spirit of the right to privacy in the sense of freedom of speech (1); privacy of the home (3); privacy from searches and seizure (4); abuse of government authority and due process (V) -- however there is no amendment that specifically states a right to privacy.
I'd agree though that the judicial branch's interpretation of the Bill of Rights is grossly out of whack. While they extend the privacy of the home (3) (specifically worded as 'No Soldier [can] be quartered in any house without consent') as extending to mean 'No agents of the State'; severely restricting law enforcement from entering the home in (nearly) any capacity. Meanwhile they interpret "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" as 'we can read your emails, personal conversations, and Netflix recommendations on demand, and if you're doing something we don't like, expect us to bust down the door.'
Moreover, the supreme court ruled in Olmstead v. United States (back in good ol' 1928) that a wiretap violated neither the 4th or 5th amendment; this set the precedent that has turned into the status quo for the government law enforcement branches... Bush then passed the Patriot Act to make us safe from the terrorists. Then the Library of Congress gets to decide that unlocking cell phones isn't allow[comment truncated due to anti-American propaganda]
The landscape may have changed, but the law has not. I was speaking to the law.
This cuts to the core of my original ('poor attitude') comment. International royalty / licensing fees increased from US$2.8 billion in 1970 to US$27 billion in 1990, and to approximately US$180 billion in 2009 – outpacing growth in global GDP. When you have a nut that skips an order of magnitude every decade, based upon intellectual property alone, we're left with crazy disparate ownership of IP on the side of businesses.
IIRC, around 1980, only about 60% of US companies were IP based. Now its over 95%. Basically, the entire US economy now runs on IP. Its not individuals who are benefiting from this increase in business owned IP. Enforcing your patent, on a big business, is like bringing a knife to a gunfight. They would likely settle out of court, or bury you depending on how much your asking for, perhaps both. Yes, the law is on your side if you are victim of legitimate patent infringement, and in the 1980s, you might have had a shot at enforcing your patent, up to and including jury trial. But now, the court system itself is where enforcement of ownership now comes to die, instead of an reasonably affordable and speedy trial.
Its turned into a poker game, where big business holds all the chips, and individuals barely have enough for the blinds to even play.
Washington warned against the two party system. It only took about a 20 years after his death that the two party system was instituted. It was never the direct intention of ANY of the founders that we have a two party system, yet nobody questions it now.
Hippopotamus Voting Rights bill was just filibustered; the youtube video of them flinging poop was too controversial, as the GOP currently holds the poop flinging record.
On the other hand, if you saw something you thought could be improved and worked on it in your own time, that is yours.
Until you realize that the court fees will bankrupt you because you're being sued by McDonald's. I think this thread has totally lost the spirit of the article.
If you patented an invention that was remotely related to McDonald's, while on the clock or off the clock, while being employed by them or not; you LOSE in court. Period.
The ribbon UI is so awesome, that Visual Studio doesn't have it (thank God) So the people who actually *write Microsoft software* don't like the ribbon.
So there's that.
When notepad gets a ribbon -- that's when I start to have deep concern for Microsoft's design choices.
The fact that the "magic button" to close full screen apps is an archaic key combo from windows 3.1 is a key indicator of how bad this interface is. I mean alt -f4 is a great shortcut key, but for that to be the great "answer " for closing full screen apps. Yes, I count that as a fail.
How is alt-f4 an 'archaic fail'...? From windows 3.1 all the way up to windows 8, you can control everything/anything, keyboard only; fairly impressive from a design standpoint. Few other GUI based OSes can claim this long standing keyboard only functionality. You forget that circa windows 3.1 there weren't standardized input/mouse drivers, it was often a requirement to know how to operate the OS entirely from a select set of standardized keyboard types. If you were lucky enough to learn windows 3.1 using a keyboard, you should be thankful that they haven't changed the shortcuts almost 20 years later.
YouTube hosts LOTS of cat videos, maybe enough even to influence the number of cat purchases by animal lovers.
Remember, this is the same site that shows ADS before the TRAILER -- I wouldn't exactly say they have their priorities in order for box office revenue (or for any of their advertisers for that matter).
Cool that they've added additional security; but doubling the balance of the 'average' account? Sounds completely unlikely.
I've had privilege to see large amounts of transaction data from where the law of large numbers reigns supreme. The 99%ers, keep a very low to no balance, generally breaking even each month. Its insanity to look at the actual trends.
So when a bank opens a product that magically doubles the deposits, clearly they're either marketing either to a different segment, or the additional security means it costs more to keep that account, therefor the natural response is to keep a higher balance, often to avoid paying fees.
While the security aspect is notable (FYI already in R&D at many banks with fingerprint scanners becoming ubiquitous); the whole 'double their deposit' notion sounds wholly unlikely.
Worthy response. I work inside the Microsoft ecosystem. But also know about many, many other languages. From Fortran and LUA to JAVA, Objective-C.
C# is an ISO standard. The parent clearly doesn't know the difference between standards and Microsoft products.
Bad programmers develop this way of thinking when you only know or care to know PHP/Java.
"Bentham felt the Panopticon could make humanity more virtuous, more hard-working and happier"
Where in the world did this guy get THAT idea from Bentham's works? The Panopticon was an invention for prisons and used today in that capacity. Almost all prisons and jails have been modeled off of it.
Hard working? Happier? I don't think so. Try subordinate and loss of all humanity.
Wait a minute... Isn't 'CamelCase', really "camelCase" as in the hump is in the middle (with the first word always lowercase)? I was taught that what the author is describing is 'Pascal Case' -- where each word begins with a cap.
The problem is not with 24-bit/192kHz music downloads. The problem is some idiot is touting them "as being of 'uncompromised studio quality'". Who said they're even close to lossless...?
Slashdot Mirror
[Privacy] is expected, and protected by the constitution of the United States - you know, that pesky little document you swore to uphold and defend, not mutilate and destroy.
Actually, the constitution doesn't touch on privacy rights, however, the Bill of Rights does reflect some of the spirit of the right to privacy in the sense of freedom of speech (1); privacy of the home (3); privacy from searches and seizure (4); abuse of government authority and due process (V) -- however there is no amendment that specifically states a right to privacy.
I'd agree though that the judicial branch's interpretation of the Bill of Rights is grossly out of whack. While they extend the privacy of the home (3) (specifically worded as 'No Soldier [can] be quartered in any house without consent') as extending to mean 'No agents of the State'; severely restricting law enforcement from entering the home in (nearly) any capacity. Meanwhile they interpret "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" as 'we can read your emails, personal conversations, and Netflix recommendations on demand, and if you're doing something we don't like, expect us to bust down the door.'
Moreover, the supreme court ruled in Olmstead v. United States (back in good ol' 1928) that a wiretap violated neither the 4th or 5th amendment; this set the precedent that has turned into the status quo for the government law enforcement branches... Bush then passed the Patriot Act to make us safe from the terrorists. Then the Library of Congress gets to decide that unlocking cell phones isn't allow[comment truncated due to anti-American propaganda]
True, but the FBI has recently issued translators for pig Latin -- rendering your face to face encryption technology useless!
we don't get that satisfying crash and clatter when hanging up on somebody to make a point.
We also don't have to get up early to shoe our horses anymore. Bummer.
The landscape may have changed, but the law has not. I was speaking to the law.
This cuts to the core of my original ('poor attitude') comment. International royalty / licensing fees increased from US$2.8 billion in 1970 to US$27 billion in 1990, and to approximately US$180 billion in 2009 – outpacing growth in global GDP. When you have a nut that skips an order of magnitude every decade, based upon intellectual property alone, we're left with crazy disparate ownership of IP on the side of businesses.
IIRC, around 1980, only about 60% of US companies were IP based. Now its over 95%. Basically, the entire US economy now runs on IP. Its not individuals who are benefiting from this increase in business owned IP. Enforcing your patent, on a big business, is like bringing a knife to a gunfight. They would likely settle out of court, or bury you depending on how much your asking for, perhaps both. Yes, the law is on your side if you are victim of legitimate patent infringement, and in the 1980s, you might have had a shot at enforcing your patent, up to and including jury trial. But now, the court system itself is where enforcement of ownership now comes to die, instead of an reasonably affordable and speedy trial.
Its turned into a poker game, where big business holds all the chips, and individuals barely have enough for the blinds to even play.
The landscape has complete changed since 1987 when the 'burp tank' was filed. Not exactly apples to apples.
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/4762244/description.html
Huzzah! A job creator! We should cut his taxes!
Washington warned against the two party system. It only took about a 20 years after his death that the two party system was instituted. It was never the direct intention of ANY of the founders that we have a two party system, yet nobody questions it now.
Yet Foxwoods is a English name. Its as if people naming these places don't give a damn.
Hippopotamus Voting Rights bill was just filibustered; the youtube video of them flinging poop was too controversial, as the GOP currently holds the poop flinging record.
On the other hand, if you saw something you thought could be improved and worked on it in your own time, that is yours.
Until you realize that the court fees will bankrupt you because you're being sued by McDonald's. I think this thread has totally lost the spirit of the article.
If you patented an invention that was remotely related to McDonald's, while on the clock or off the clock, while being employed by them or not; you LOSE in court. Period.
Not even going to start on how accurate the movie is to real software engineering (hint: it's not).
You're right, cause in real life all those Facebook programmers did cocaine.
164k a year... and she's complaining about not being paid enough?
I'm gonna go throw my panties at a band who deserves it!
Now, if we can only figure out how to clone Freddie Mercury...
He's like a real life Samuel L Jackson character.
"Yeah, Linus! As in, father of FOSS? Mt. Linux? Don't f*ck with me or I'll shove a penguin up your ass! LINUS!"
The ribbon UI is so awesome, that Visual Studio doesn't have it (thank God) So the people who actually *write Microsoft software* don't like the ribbon.
So there's that.
When notepad gets a ribbon -- that's when I start to have deep concern for Microsoft's design choices.
The fact that the "magic button" to close full screen apps is an archaic key combo from windows 3.1 is a key indicator of how bad this interface is. I mean alt -f4 is a great shortcut key, but for that to be the great "answer " for closing full screen apps. Yes, I count that as a fail.
How is alt-f4 an 'archaic fail'...? From windows 3.1 all the way up to windows 8, you can control everything/anything, keyboard only; fairly impressive from a design standpoint. Few other GUI based OSes can claim this long standing keyboard only functionality. You forget that circa windows 3.1 there weren't standardized input/mouse drivers, it was often a requirement to know how to operate the OS entirely from a select set of standardized keyboard types. If you were lucky enough to learn windows 3.1 using a keyboard, you should be thankful that they haven't changed the shortcuts almost 20 years later.
Economic situations have a far FAR greater affect on divorce rates than twit-face ever will. Tons of studies available. End of thread.
YouTube hosts LOTS of cat videos, maybe enough even to influence the number of cat purchases by animal lovers.
Remember, this is the same site that shows ADS before the TRAILER -- I wouldn't exactly say they have their priorities in order for box office revenue (or for any of their advertisers for that matter).
Cool that they've added additional security; but doubling the balance of the 'average' account? Sounds completely unlikely.
I've had privilege to see large amounts of transaction data from where the law of large numbers reigns supreme. The 99%ers, keep a very low to no balance, generally breaking even each month. Its insanity to look at the actual trends.
So when a bank opens a product that magically doubles the deposits, clearly they're either marketing either to a different segment, or the additional security means it costs more to keep that account, therefor the natural response is to keep a higher balance, often to avoid paying fees.
While the security aspect is notable (FYI already in R&D at many banks with fingerprint scanners becoming ubiquitous); the whole 'double their deposit' notion sounds wholly unlikely.
Worthy response. I work inside the Microsoft ecosystem. But also know about many, many other languages. From Fortran and LUA to JAVA, Objective-C.
C# is an ISO standard. The parent clearly doesn't know the difference between standards and Microsoft products.
Bad programmers develop this way of thinking when you only know or care to know PHP/Java.
What I want, is something that can scan any 3d object and make a file to print it.
What I want is "Tea. Earl Grey... Hot"
"Bentham felt the Panopticon could make humanity more virtuous, more hard-working and happier"
Where in the world did this guy get THAT idea from Bentham's works? The Panopticon was an invention for prisons and used today in that capacity. Almost all prisons and jails have been modeled off of it.
Hard working? Happier? I don't think so. Try subordinate and loss of all humanity.
"a system and method ... that aligns the interests of teaching professionals, [strike]students,[/strike] and publishers"
FTFY.
Wait a minute... Isn't 'CamelCase', really "camelCase" as in the hump is in the middle (with the first word always lowercase)? I was taught that what the author is describing is 'Pascal Case' -- where each word begins with a cap.
The problem is not with 24-bit/192kHz music downloads. The problem is some idiot is touting them "as being of 'uncompromised studio quality'". Who said they're even close to lossless...?