Why on earth would a state give up its voting sovereignty?? Seriously, follow the leader??
Anyway, there would still have to be a constitutional amendment at some point to remove the electoral college.
If anything, states should seriously be considering withdrawing their ratification of the Constitution. It's worthless toilet paper now and they actually do have the power to withdraw ratification at any given time. We no longer operate as the Union as intended by the Constitution. By the end of Obama's 4 years, there will be no states - we'll be a giant messy blob ripe for squashing.
Many states no longer want to deal with their own funding and just want the fed to give them all the money they need. Those idiots in CA are the worst. I like Arnold, but his governing is a joke. He has no balls to stand up and take control of his state.
This is a truly scary time for these United States of America.
Child porn is defined by what it is, not who has it. There is no difference between someone who is 15 or 35 shoplifting. Why should be be different here?
This is another example children wanting to be treated like adults - except when it's inconvenient for them. Then, all of a sudden, they are "just children".
We live in world where 1st graders are performing oral sex on each other when a teacher walks out of the world. I guess we should just allow that to happen. After all, they are "just children".
How much gas do you buy? Depends on how far you drove.
When do you pay gas tax? When you buy gas.
Cars cannot drive without consuming fuel. Unless you are buying your own crude oil and refining your own fuel, you already pay tax based on how much you drive.
This idea has nothing to do with taxes. It's about control and invasion of privacy.
That being said, I think we need to go back to paper ballots. My mom STILL double clicks on hyperlinks. Also, people are still very distrustful of this new-fangled computer stuff.
This student has no understanding of what free speech is. This is a failure of the school system.
As far as I can tell, this MySpace page is clearly defamation unless the principal has been proven to be sex addict or pedophile. Outright lying about someone or something is not parody, nor is it protected speech.
I see a similar problem with the SNL skit suggesting that Todd Palin had sex with his daughters. The difference there is that the skit is clearly parodying the media, not Todd Palin himself. Obviously, NBC has an arsenal of lawyers to make sure that skits are within legal boundaries. The problem is that kids are too stupid to see the difference.
A case might be made that, as the principal of a public school, he is a representative of the government. However, the accusations were of a personal nature.
Here, we have just have an idiot kid. Frankly, this kid should be removed permanently from the school. If I were the principal, I'd being taking civil action against the family for libel.
After reading the website, it sounds to me like the plan is to nationalize the internet in the U.S. With Democrats in control of Congress and the Whitehouse, all dissenters will be sought out on the net, located, and imprisoned.
The Fairness Doctrine will be implemented in tandem and our transformation to the Socialist Republic of America will be complete.
Next, the eugenics program will move into full swing. First, we'll begin terminating all pregnancies that "fail" genetic testing. Next, well move on to roping up all the genetically defective persons running around and do away with them. Of course, I'll put a bullet in the head of anyone that comes after my daughter, who happens to have Down syndrome.
For those who are lucky enough to be left, you will get free healthcare. However, anyone who costs too much will be euthanized for the good of everyone. YIf you have a good consitution, you may be able to wait out the year-long waiting lists for certain procedures or tests.
Everyone will be reassigned to new jobs, as the government sees fit.
Ironically, no one on the left will say a word. The ACLU will be silent. The media will not cover it. For once, Bush will not be to blame.
So, if I own some property and the local government or developer want to buy it, I should just let them give me enough money to cover the mortgage?
I see many comments here advising the OP to do exactly this. Those comments are moronic and anti-freedom in every way. I'm shocked that anyone on Slashdot would give this advice.
The OP should decide how much money would be personally satisfying to let go of the domain. The owner should then do some research into the financials of the company. This person was approached for the possibility of completing a business transaction. It should be treated as such and due diligence should be performed before doing anything.
What about the possibility of leasing use of the domain name? Or maybe a stake in the business? The domain clearly has some value to the company, otherwise they wouldn't have come forward.
I think it's best to come up with your own figure before even looking at an offer. They have probably already established how much they are willing to pay.
It's called working. If you are a salaried worker, you are exempt from overtime. Being salaried has nothing to do with being classified as management. I am a non-management employee and receive a salary.
The up-side of being salaried is that I am not tied to a time clock. Some weeks I work less than 40 hours, some weeks I work more. I keep track of what I work and take time off as needed to compensate for extra hours.
No one is forcing these people to continue their employment at Apple. I'm not sure this story is really worth discussing.
Why must someone who does something you don't agree with be "retarded"? The fact that you can't come up with something more clever to say clearly brings into question your own level of intelligence.
Equating someone who makes a seemingly foolish decision (in your opinion) to someone who is cognitively impaired is moronic shows a lack of social understanding.
The government can't win for losing in this situation. Either they are impeding on perceived Constitutional protections or it fails in its Constitutional directive to protect its citizens. Which one takes precedence? I don't see any way for a compromise that can accomplish both.
As far as I know, there is no Constitutional right to privacy. The government, however, is specifically directed to protect its citizens. Courts are already spitting on the the second amendment. It says in black and white that citizens can bear arms. Period. It is not up for "interpretation". Where is the ACLU here?
If you read the Constitution, you can see that it was written in such a way that there is no need for interpretation. It was written in lay terms for the time so that everyone could understand it. Believe it or not, it actually means what it says. It's a very simple document that creates the government, sets out the responsibilities of the government and limits the power of the government it created.
I don't understand people who want to limit the ability of the government to protect us. Was the lack of communication between local police, the FBI, and CIA during the Clinton years, which led to 9/11, not a big enough eye opener?
The ACLU is a private enterprise with its own agenda and does not care about the safety of U.S citizens. It's no different than "big oil" or "big business" that it is so fond of going after. The only difference is that "big business" is after money and the ACLU and its ilk is after power and control. It, along with environmental groups, is a mouthpiece for socialist movement in the U.S. The ACLU was not elected by the people and does not represent the people. It has no respect for the Constitution, but relies on it when politically expedient.
If myspace pages didn't suck so bad, there wouldn't be a problem. I don't even consider Facebook and MySpace rivals. Facebook is so far beyond MySpace, it isn't even worth discussing.
Facebook's days are numbered, I'm sure. Something will come along to replace it in the next couple of years...unless it is able to evolve.
Why on earth does a private company have to justify its service? If you don't like traffic-shaping, you can go to another provider. This is how the free-market works.
ISPs cannot have a monopoly. A monopoly is one, "mono".
You do not have a right to ANY internet, so if you don't like any of the providers, that is a personal problem. They provide the service for their own benefit, not yours.
If they want to packet-shape, it's their service to do with as they please.
So, this type of manipulation is ok as long as it isn't big corp, big oil, Republicans, Ccientology, pro-life groups, creationists, etc?
Personally, I don't care either way. I'm just sick of hearing hypocrisy. Public financing was bad until Obama found himself the nominee. Amazing how different the world seems when you become successful. And I love all the excuses and backtracking his minions spouting now. If McCain had opted out of public financing the day before Obama did, the sky would be falling and there would be Congressional hearings. It's total BS.
I think everyone knows Obama has this election in the bag. No one can criticize Obama without being called a racist. Racism is the mantra for this election. If there can be no debate, there is no chance for McCain to win. This election will be won with pure propaganda, by good little Marxists who aren't even smart enough to realize they represent the losing side of the Cold War.
Let's see how everyone feels after 4 years of real tyranny. You won't even realize you have nothing left to live for.
Compensation is more than salary. People regularly forget about the various health insurance subsidies, disability, life insurance, stock options, 401k matching, and other things offered by many companies.
I have no knowledge of what Apple offers its employees, but my guess is that they offer many of these things. There are other perks like telecommuting that are more difficult to assign a dollar value to. Then there are personal things like commute time. I'd rather have a slighter lower salary if my commute time is significantly shorter. Time with my family is more important than than extra money.
Anyone who has ever worked in IT knows this is a terrible idea. Most (99.9) of users cannot manage their own PCs.
Several things have already been mentioned, but software piracy is number one.
Turning off anti-virus is another problem.
Installing crap that breaks apps needed for their job is another.
A PC issued to you by your employer is not yours. The less control IT has over the PC, the more work it is. Ultimately, IT will be held responsible, even if the user screws it up. We all know this.
Honestly, this is a a ridiculous article to even have on Slashdot.
We all know that most people don't care about the government "spying". The left uses it to drum up support just like the right uses terrorism. There is no right to privacy in the this world. Personally, I have no problem with it. I can spy on anyone I want or hire someone to do so, so why can't the government? Police spy on people in order to catch the bad guys. I would be more concerned if the federal government wasn't "spying" on the goings-on within our borders. I WANT the federal government protecting me and I have no problem with "spying". I'm not giving up anything, because I never had a right to privacy. When you choose to be part of a working society, there are things you inherently do not have. Privacy is one of them. If you want privacy, go buy a piece of land unclaimed by any government. Good luck finding any existing government that doesn't spy on its citizens.
You may not like it, but that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with it. Some things just "are".
Slashdot Mirror
Why on earth would a state give up its voting sovereignty?? Seriously, follow the leader??
Anyway, there would still have to be a constitutional amendment at some point to remove the electoral college.
If anything, states should seriously be considering withdrawing their ratification of the Constitution. It's worthless toilet paper now and they actually do have the power to withdraw ratification at any given time. We no longer operate as the Union as intended by the Constitution. By the end of Obama's 4 years, there will be no states - we'll be a giant messy blob ripe for squashing.
Many states no longer want to deal with their own funding and just want the fed to give them all the money they need. Those idiots in CA are the worst. I like Arnold, but his governing is a joke. He has no balls to stand up and take control of his state.
This is a truly scary time for these United States of America.
Child porn is defined by what it is, not who has it. There is no difference between someone who is 15 or 35 shoplifting. Why should be be different here?
This is another example children wanting to be treated like adults - except when it's inconvenient for them. Then, all of a sudden, they are "just children".
We live in world where 1st graders are performing oral sex on each other when a teacher walks out of the world. I guess we should just allow that to happen. After all, they are "just children".
When you do buy gas? When you have driven.
How much gas do you buy? Depends on how far you drove.
When do you pay gas tax? When you buy gas.
Cars cannot drive without consuming fuel. Unless you are buying your own crude oil and refining your own fuel, you already pay tax based on how much you drive.
This idea has nothing to do with taxes. It's about control and invasion of privacy.
Don't you know that a high-speed internet, cable tv and a cool phone are more important than food, gas, or healthcare?
user error
That being said, I think we need to go back to paper ballots. My mom STILL double clicks on hyperlinks. Also, people are still very distrustful of this new-fangled computer stuff.
What's your point?
Consumers have no understanding or care about "proprietary" or customization. They just want cool stuff that works.
As long as iPods work and are perceived as cool, they will reign supreme.
There will always be a market for niche consumers, which make up a large portion of Slashdot.
This student has no understanding of what free speech is. This is a failure of the school system.
As far as I can tell, this MySpace page is clearly defamation unless the principal has been proven to be sex addict or pedophile. Outright lying about someone or something is not parody, nor is it protected speech.
I see a similar problem with the SNL skit suggesting that Todd Palin had sex with his daughters. The difference there is that the skit is clearly parodying the media, not Todd Palin himself. Obviously, NBC has an arsenal of lawyers to make sure that skits are within legal boundaries. The problem is that kids are too stupid to see the difference.
A case might be made that, as the principal of a public school, he is a representative of the government. However, the accusations were of a personal nature.
Here, we have just have an idiot kid. Frankly, this kid should be removed permanently from the school. If I were the principal, I'd being taking civil action against the family for libel.
Brilliant.
After reading the website, it sounds to me like the plan is to nationalize the internet in the U.S. With Democrats in control of Congress and the Whitehouse, all dissenters will be sought out on the net, located, and imprisoned.
The Fairness Doctrine will be implemented in tandem and our transformation to the Socialist Republic of America will be complete.
Next, the eugenics program will move into full swing. First, we'll begin terminating all pregnancies that "fail" genetic testing. Next, well move on to roping up all the genetically defective persons running around and do away with them. Of course, I'll put a bullet in the head of anyone that comes after my daughter, who happens to have Down syndrome.
For those who are lucky enough to be left, you will get free healthcare. However, anyone who costs too much will be euthanized for the good of everyone. YIf you have a good consitution, you may be able to wait out the year-long waiting lists for certain procedures or tests.
Everyone will be reassigned to new jobs, as the government sees fit.
Ironically, no one on the left will say a word. The ACLU will be silent. The media will not cover it. For once, Bush will not be to blame.
Long Live the Revolution!
So, if I own some property and the local government or developer want to buy it, I should just let them give me enough money to cover the mortgage?
I see many comments here advising the OP to do exactly this. Those comments are moronic and anti-freedom in every way. I'm shocked that anyone on Slashdot would give this advice.
The OP should decide how much money would be personally satisfying to let go of the domain. The owner should then do some research into the financials of the company. This person was approached for the possibility of completing a business transaction. It should be treated as such and due diligence should be performed before doing anything.
What about the possibility of leasing use of the domain name? Or maybe a stake in the business? The domain clearly has some value to the company, otherwise they wouldn't have come forward.
I think it's best to come up with your own figure before even looking at an offer. They have probably already established how much they are willing to pay.
OMG!! A computer that locks up!!
anyone?
how dare a company make record profits!!
It's called working. If you are a salaried worker, you are exempt from overtime. Being salaried has nothing to do with being classified as management. I am a non-management employee and receive a salary.
The up-side of being salaried is that I am not tied to a time clock. Some weeks I work less than 40 hours, some weeks I work more. I keep track of what I work and take time off as needed to compensate for extra hours.
No one is forcing these people to continue their employment at Apple. I'm not sure this story is really worth discussing.
Why must someone who does something you don't agree with be "retarded"? The fact that you can't come up with something more clever to say clearly brings into question your own level of intelligence.
Equating someone who makes a seemingly foolish decision (in your opinion) to someone who is cognitively impaired is moronic shows a lack of social understanding.
I doubt you are smarter than a 5th grader.
The government can't win for losing in this situation. Either they are impeding on perceived Constitutional protections or it fails in its Constitutional directive to protect its citizens. Which one takes precedence? I don't see any way for a compromise that can accomplish both.
As far as I know, there is no Constitutional right to privacy. The government, however, is specifically directed to protect its citizens. Courts are already spitting on the the second amendment. It says in black and white that citizens can bear arms. Period. It is not up for "interpretation". Where is the ACLU here?
If you read the Constitution, you can see that it was written in such a way that there is no need for interpretation. It was written in lay terms for the time so that everyone could understand it. Believe it or not, it actually means what it says. It's a very simple document that creates the government, sets out the responsibilities of the government and limits the power of the government it created.
I don't understand people who want to limit the ability of the government to protect us. Was the lack of communication between local police, the FBI, and CIA during the Clinton years, which led to 9/11, not a big enough eye opener?
The ACLU is a private enterprise with its own agenda and does not care about the safety of U.S citizens. It's no different than "big oil" or "big business" that it is so fond of going after. The only difference is that "big business" is after money and the ACLU and its ilk is after power and control. It, along with environmental groups, is a mouthpiece for socialist movement in the U.S. The ACLU was not elected by the people and does not represent the people. It has no respect for the Constitution, but relies on it when politically expedient.
If myspace pages didn't suck so bad, there wouldn't be a problem. I don't even consider Facebook and MySpace rivals. Facebook is so far beyond MySpace, it isn't even worth discussing.
Facebook's days are numbered, I'm sure. Something will come along to replace it in the next couple of years...unless it is able to evolve.
Why on earth does a private company have to justify its service? If you don't like traffic-shaping, you can go to another provider. This is how the free-market works.
No one has a right to to un-shaped traffic.
ISPs cannot have a monopoly. A monopoly is one, "mono".
You do not have a right to ANY internet, so if you don't like any of the providers, that is a personal problem. They provide the service for their own benefit, not yours.
If they want to packet-shape, it's their service to do with as they please.
So, this type of manipulation is ok as long as it isn't big corp, big oil, Republicans, Ccientology, pro-life groups, creationists, etc?
Personally, I don't care either way. I'm just sick of hearing hypocrisy. Public financing was bad until Obama found himself the nominee. Amazing how different the world seems when you become successful. And I love all the excuses and backtracking his minions spouting now. If McCain had opted out of public financing the day before Obama did, the sky would be falling and there would be Congressional hearings. It's total BS.
I think everyone knows Obama has this election in the bag. No one can criticize Obama without being called a racist. Racism is the mantra for this election. If there can be no debate, there is no chance for McCain to win. This election will be won with pure propaganda, by good little Marxists who aren't even smart enough to realize they represent the losing side of the Cold War.
Let's see how everyone feels after 4 years of real tyranny. You won't even realize you have nothing left to live for.
Compensation is more than salary. People regularly forget about the various health insurance subsidies, disability, life insurance, stock options, 401k matching, and other things offered by many companies.
I have no knowledge of what Apple offers its employees, but my guess is that they offer many of these things. There are other perks like telecommuting that are more difficult to assign a dollar value to. Then there are personal things like commute time. I'd rather have a slighter lower salary if my commute time is significantly shorter. Time with my family is more important than than extra money.
Aye!
Anyone who has ever worked in IT knows this is a terrible idea. Most (99.9) of users cannot manage their own PCs.
Several things have already been mentioned, but software piracy is number one.
Turning off anti-virus is another problem.
Installing crap that breaks apps needed for their job is another.
A PC issued to you by your employer is not yours. The less control IT has over the PC, the more work it is. Ultimately, IT will be held responsible, even if the user screws it up. We all know this.
Honestly, this is a a ridiculous article to even have on Slashdot.
If I had my way, we'd have everyone on Macs.
We all know that most people don't care about the government "spying". The left uses it to drum up support just like the right uses terrorism. There is no right to privacy in the this world. Personally, I have no problem with it. I can spy on anyone I want or hire someone to do so, so why can't the government? Police spy on people in order to catch the bad guys. I would be more concerned if the federal government wasn't "spying" on the goings-on within our borders. I WANT the federal government protecting me and I have no problem with "spying". I'm not giving up anything, because I never had a right to privacy. When you choose to be part of a working society, there are things you inherently do not have. Privacy is one of them. If you want privacy, go buy a piece of land unclaimed by any government. Good luck finding any existing government that doesn't spy on its citizens.
You may not like it, but that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with it. Some things just "are".
There is no such thing as privacy. The sooner you understand that, the happier you will be.