with my future PhD than to teach people for free. This whole "academics/teachers are not in it for the money" crap needs to stop. We are in it for the money just as much as anyone else. We balance job satisfaction with pay. That "not for the money" meme only encourages people to pay educators less.
If you kept you rlong unrememberable key on say, a postit, and then when the cops come in burn it. Then you dont know the key and cannot recover it. I think that would get you off the hook. However, post-its are not so reliable. What you would need is a way to store the key on some form of removable memory which can be quickly, but not accidentally, totaly erased.
Or use some clever hidden partitions as a way to plausibly deny the data exists at all.
I agree with all that, totally. I wish I didn't have such a visceral reaction to the how cheap the sets and effects look. I mean, TNG was on lower tech but it still, even today, does not look cheap. Probably because they still had high budgets even though they used old tech. I think its something harder to pin down, not just the quality, but the design and implementation of things. Maybe ST was more sciency? I dunno, I always just found the environs in say, DS9 more believable for some reason. Possibly because I was already indoctrinated and understood a lot of the basics more, it all seems more natural to me.
DS9 copies BAB5 but it was a copy that was better than the original.
I am somewhat prideful about my scifi and I don't allow it to get away with low production values.
Yeah, powerpoint isn't that great, but its "killer" in that offices use it A LOT and it HAS TO work. When a client of partner comes in and wants to show a powerpoint, and it wont render correctly in star office, theres going to be some people unhappy.
It seems to be a textbook case of delusional disease. This meme of wifi illness got out there, and now certain people are prone to believing it, and propagating it.
What strikes me is the ponderance of what you think Apple would do if a company filed a similar patent and used as a figure, seemingly not very related to the patent itself, a verbatim diagram of an iPhone UI.
Do you think Apple would impart legal action? Would Steve Jobs send an email?
Are Apple's patent people so lazy they can't invent their own hypothetical applications? They have to invoke hypothetical applications which already exist? If its just a hypothetical usage scenario, why show such a complex UI?
And its not just similar, its EXACT. The positioning of the icons is the same. Its not like someone familiar with the app was drawing this and thought "well lets just make it look kinda like this" they went through the trouble of copying it as exactly as possible.
Each group fails to understand the other at their own peril. For scientists this means they get less funding, for non-scientists this means no saving the world.
Don't give me BS about OSS developers wanting to enrich anyone. They enrich themselves by pursuing a hobby. They only self-aggrandize by saying its about a cause. You act like these people are saints. An OSS developer is no more a saint than people who put their own apple-pie recipes online.
OSS as it was can never really dominate, its impossible for less-organized, unpaid people to outperform highly-paid professionals at the same game. The only cases where I see OSS possibly moving into a dominant system is with Chrome/ChromeOS/Android and thats because Google puts huge amounts of resources into them (because they make money for Google).
Good point, also, appeals to "performance" are short-sighted in computer land. Anything which runs too slow on a computer this year will be butter by next year. Apple is not against flash because its bad, but because once the performance problems go away with the next generation of hardware, Adobe has a platform which can do an end-run around Apple's app-store ecosystem. Its the same kind of logic behind why they don't allow java. If Flash and Java ran in the browser on an iPhone, then you could actually develop high-powered webapps, and run a web-based app store. Not to mention all the cross-platform development. This is especially true since Android is rapidly gaining marketshare, Apple is trying to lock up developers as fast as possible so they won't jump to Android quite as quickly when it inevitably overtakes them, and it is inevitable. There's no way Apple can compete with all the hardware-variety of Android phones. Plus, in a few years there will be Android phones doing something Apple can never do, which is being given away for free with contract. Not to mention Android apps are going to run on tablets and your TV (without any lame pixel doubling).
I see this as more of a property issue than anything, though I know that legal tack hasn't been taking with this case. The way I see it, the passwords or the more abstract concept of "access" is property of the organization. The network is property of the organization. By not returning the passwords or access under termination, he stole company property. Its like if you have a company car and get reassigned and don't turn in the keys. You've then stolen the keys, and prevented use of the car. Not doing something is just as active a thing as doing something when its done purposefully with the intent of blocking something. If he didn't do something because it was outside his responsibility and didn't see how it could cause much harm is one thing, but seeing a situation, and taking purposeful inaction with the purpose of preventing something else is in that case an action.
Its perfectly criminal in many cases to NOT do something.
Correct, failure to have a "meeting of the minds" does not by its own claim exempt you from contractual obligations. Saying "well I didn't read the contract" is not good enough. Saying "well I read it but I didn't understand it" is not, on itself, good enough.
I wonder how much the Native Americans were paid for their samples.
If I sign a paper before surgery that states the doctor has my permission to remove my appendix because it is infected, then I have given him informed consent. But, once in there, he can't just decide that my gall bladder, also an extraneous organ, looks like something his research students could use in their doctoral theses.
No, but if he saw that your gallbladder was also infected, and it presented an imminent threat to your life, he could remove it at his discretion unless you had specifically instructed him not to.
There are laws in several states which prevent the use of DNA evidence to deny coverage. Also, thanks to Obama, having a preexisting condition (such as possessing a "cancer gene") would not be grounds for refusal of coverage.
IRB's don't review studies like this. In fact, studies on "previously collected samples" are specifically exempted from IRB review. After all, this is not a study on human subjects, its a study on biological samples.
I wish I could find more information about this case. In most cases when you submit a biological sample you have very little recourse as to how its used. In that, it is no longer your property. There may have been a violation of trust, but if the researches said "We want to do genetic research which could give us insight on why you are prone to diabetes." Then there was no violation of trust, the tribe was most likely simply ignorant that "genetic research" entails a lot of things. Likely the researchers who did the original study did study diabetes or whatever, but the samples are usually then stored or submitted to a tissue bank where other researchers are using them (and scientists have an obligation to share samples with other scientists).
The problem is they settled out of court, so the details of the case are probably lost to us.
Well then the subordinate should either just do their job or quit. If the lost productivity due to the standard is substantial the company will suffer for his bad descision. (and any company which allows a suit to make such decisions deserves to suffer)
I could care less if Linux is better off. Linux will grow based on it's own merits as it always has.
No, broad appeal is why the Zune failed. The secret to competing is NOT TO COMPETE. Apple saw a lot of really poorly done MP3 players and made the best one. MS sees a lot of really poorly done featurephones and is going to make the best one. Its SILLY to try and "kill the iPhone."
I think actually the Kin is going to be a big help to Zune. (assuming it sells well, which is entirely dependent on these phones being very nearly free on contract and having a very affordable dataplan)
EVERY KIN IS A ZUNE. And once people understand how awesome zunepass is, they won't go back. Parents will like it too as they won't have to shell out money all the time for itunes music.
Slashdot Mirror
with my future PhD than to teach people for free. This whole "academics/teachers are not in it for the money" crap needs to stop. We are in it for the money just as much as anyone else. We balance job satisfaction with pay. That "not for the money" meme only encourages people to pay educators less.
If you kept you rlong unrememberable key on say, a postit, and then when the cops come in burn it. Then you dont know the key and cannot recover it. I think that would get you off the hook. However, post-its are not so reliable. What you would need is a way to store the key on some form of removable memory which can be quickly, but not accidentally, totaly erased. Or use some clever hidden partitions as a way to plausibly deny the data exists at all.
Maybe they will do it to just freak everyone out?
I agree with all that, totally. I wish I didn't have such a visceral reaction to the how cheap the sets and effects look. I mean, TNG was on lower tech but it still, even today, does not look cheap. Probably because they still had high budgets even though they used old tech. I think its something harder to pin down, not just the quality, but the design and implementation of things. Maybe ST was more sciency? I dunno, I always just found the environs in say, DS9 more believable for some reason. Possibly because I was already indoctrinated and understood a lot of the basics more, it all seems more natural to me.
Its pretty obvious not everything can be replicated.
DS9 copies BAB5 but it was a copy that was better than the original. I am somewhat prideful about my scifi and I don't allow it to get away with low production values.
in Siberia.
we will have converted its mass into computronium anyway.
Yeah, powerpoint isn't that great, but its "killer" in that offices use it A LOT and it HAS TO work. When a client of partner comes in and wants to show a powerpoint, and it wont render correctly in star office, theres going to be some people unhappy.
It seems to be a textbook case of delusional disease. This meme of wifi illness got out there, and now certain people are prone to believing it, and propagating it.
The ironic thing is that water IS a mineral.
True enough, maybe this will help people realize what that means.
What strikes me is the ponderance of what you think Apple would do if a company filed a similar patent and used as a figure, seemingly not very related to the patent itself, a verbatim diagram of an iPhone UI. Do you think Apple would impart legal action? Would Steve Jobs send an email? Are Apple's patent people so lazy they can't invent their own hypothetical applications? They have to invoke hypothetical applications which already exist? If its just a hypothetical usage scenario, why show such a complex UI? And its not just similar, its EXACT. The positioning of the icons is the same. Its not like someone familiar with the app was drawing this and thought "well lets just make it look kinda like this" they went through the trouble of copying it as exactly as possible.
Each group fails to understand the other at their own peril. For scientists this means they get less funding, for non-scientists this means no saving the world.
Don't give me BS about OSS developers wanting to enrich anyone. They enrich themselves by pursuing a hobby. They only self-aggrandize by saying its about a cause. You act like these people are saints. An OSS developer is no more a saint than people who put their own apple-pie recipes online. OSS as it was can never really dominate, its impossible for less-organized, unpaid people to outperform highly-paid professionals at the same game. The only cases where I see OSS possibly moving into a dominant system is with Chrome/ChromeOS/Android and thats because Google puts huge amounts of resources into them (because they make money for Google).
Good point, also, appeals to "performance" are short-sighted in computer land. Anything which runs too slow on a computer this year will be butter by next year. Apple is not against flash because its bad, but because once the performance problems go away with the next generation of hardware, Adobe has a platform which can do an end-run around Apple's app-store ecosystem. Its the same kind of logic behind why they don't allow java. If Flash and Java ran in the browser on an iPhone, then you could actually develop high-powered webapps, and run a web-based app store. Not to mention all the cross-platform development. This is especially true since Android is rapidly gaining marketshare, Apple is trying to lock up developers as fast as possible so they won't jump to Android quite as quickly when it inevitably overtakes them, and it is inevitable. There's no way Apple can compete with all the hardware-variety of Android phones. Plus, in a few years there will be Android phones doing something Apple can never do, which is being given away for free with contract. Not to mention Android apps are going to run on tablets and your TV (without any lame pixel doubling).
I see this as more of a property issue than anything, though I know that legal tack hasn't been taking with this case. The way I see it, the passwords or the more abstract concept of "access" is property of the organization. The network is property of the organization. By not returning the passwords or access under termination, he stole company property. Its like if you have a company car and get reassigned and don't turn in the keys. You've then stolen the keys, and prevented use of the car. Not doing something is just as active a thing as doing something when its done purposefully with the intent of blocking something. If he didn't do something because it was outside his responsibility and didn't see how it could cause much harm is one thing, but seeing a situation, and taking purposeful inaction with the purpose of preventing something else is in that case an action. Its perfectly criminal in many cases to NOT do something.
Except this is not a case of medical ethics. The people here are not patients, they are simply research subjects.
Correct, failure to have a "meeting of the minds" does not by its own claim exempt you from contractual obligations. Saying "well I didn't read the contract" is not good enough. Saying "well I read it but I didn't understand it" is not, on itself, good enough. I wonder how much the Native Americans were paid for their samples.
No, but if he saw that your gallbladder was also infected, and it presented an imminent threat to your life, he could remove it at his discretion unless you had specifically instructed him not to.
Also consider, that this tribe is probably broke, and the university looks like someone with money. I am sure a slick lawyer made off with a lot here.
There are laws in several states which prevent the use of DNA evidence to deny coverage. Also, thanks to Obama, having a preexisting condition (such as possessing a "cancer gene") would not be grounds for refusal of coverage.
IRB's don't review studies like this. In fact, studies on "previously collected samples" are specifically exempted from IRB review. After all, this is not a study on human subjects, its a study on biological samples. I wish I could find more information about this case. In most cases when you submit a biological sample you have very little recourse as to how its used. In that, it is no longer your property. There may have been a violation of trust, but if the researches said "We want to do genetic research which could give us insight on why you are prone to diabetes." Then there was no violation of trust, the tribe was most likely simply ignorant that "genetic research" entails a lot of things. Likely the researchers who did the original study did study diabetes or whatever, but the samples are usually then stored or submitted to a tissue bank where other researchers are using them (and scientists have an obligation to share samples with other scientists). The problem is they settled out of court, so the details of the case are probably lost to us.
Well then the subordinate should either just do their job or quit. If the lost productivity due to the standard is substantial the company will suffer for his bad descision. (and any company which allows a suit to make such decisions deserves to suffer) I could care less if Linux is better off. Linux will grow based on it's own merits as it always has.
No, broad appeal is why the Zune failed. The secret to competing is NOT TO COMPETE. Apple saw a lot of really poorly done MP3 players and made the best one. MS sees a lot of really poorly done featurephones and is going to make the best one. Its SILLY to try and "kill the iPhone." I think actually the Kin is going to be a big help to Zune. (assuming it sells well, which is entirely dependent on these phones being very nearly free on contract and having a very affordable dataplan) EVERY KIN IS A ZUNE. And once people understand how awesome zunepass is, they won't go back. Parents will like it too as they won't have to shell out money all the time for itunes music.