One could argue that extensions are specifically not permitted as there are no limits on how many extensions one could grant...
It was tried in the US Supreme Court and the argument failed. Don't shoot the messenger.
Re:Without remorse there is no rehabilitation.
on
Kevin Mitnick Answers
·
· Score: 2
he like many others see information as something that should be open
So naive. Check the answer to the question about his "hardware, OS, software you use to work". It's always other people's information that should be free.
It says: "The reason for the huge, $1-1.5 billion and three year differences is because NASA has had to lay off workers and stop work on many components due to a lack of funds. "
So taking the article at face value, that's at most $1.5 billion in cost overrun.
The article is deceitful when it says, "what was originally slated to be a $5.1 Billion project, to launch in 2013"
No, it was originally expected to cost $500 million and to launch in 2007. The numbers have been steadily ballooning upwards ever since.
A large part of the added cost could have been avoided if Congress had just given an additional 250 million for a launch date in 2015.
I find it hard to believe that a lack of $250 million ballooned into several billions of dollars. The article cites a supposedly independent review, but doesn't go into any detail about the math. It just sounds like activist propaganda. Sorry, I like science too, but let's be honest.
If anything, it sounds like he's making money out of his hobby.
If you believe his story, and if you consider spending time being hassled by cops and in court worth a grand, along with the risk of some cop getting pissed at you and framing you for something.
Cause I like javascript and I wanna hear why others don't?
I speak as somebody who came from a Java background when I first look at JavaScript. It just felt like a toy language, and I think the main things were no static typing and lack of support for things like namespaces.
Granted, there's a big divide between the dynamic typing and static typing folks, so some of it is a matter of preference.
I just don't think it was a big deal that somebody was fired over the phone. As evidence for some kind of coverup, it's something I wouldn't even raise an eyebrow over.
Obviously we're never going to agree on these particulars.
What's so great about Linux? I use it and like it, but the main selling point is that it is open source with a lot of open source software built around it.
I think Microsoft Office is a decent product, Windows 95 and XP were pretty good for the times, and I don't know about Windows 7 since I haven't used it, but by all accounts they refined Vista so that it wasn't crap. Corporate IT admins are also pretty happy with Exchange and related products, a space where Apple and Linux don't compete very well. Visual Studio is another area where Microsoft does well.
It just seems that people like to give Microsoft a lot of crap because they were the evil monopoly -- which I do, too, but I think they've done a decent job in some areas.
most of their products have always been second rate replicas of other people's products
You mean like Linus was when he developed a Unix kernel for the 386? People love to bash Gates, yet praise Linus, but for what? He was a good coder who got lucky with his timing and took advantage of it. He never set out to make a huge splash in the world.
Gates, meanwhile, along with Paul Allen, set out to create a business by building a software product that was needed. They did that by building a Basic for the Altair microcomputer before everybody else. It was a technical challenge under time pressure, and they succeeded. They ended up licensing their Basic to many other companies.
He did get lucky with the IBM/DOS deal, but he put himself in that position to get lucky with the original Basic. "Fortune favors the bold."
Here most people now that 'anonymous' are mostly kids from 4chan, doing what kids and teens in general do... get pissed about injustice and morally wrong things.
And also fucking with people for the "lulz", and carrying out their own brand of vigilante justice. Meanwhile, the article is talking about dealing with the likes of illicit credit card networks. These criminal gangs do exist.
If firing somebody is uncomfortable for someone, there's no reason that this someone should have been hiring in the first place. To compare it to breakups is a rather moot point - breakups are personal... hirings and firings are professional matters.
Managers are people, and you'd have to be a cold-hearted and sadistic bastard to enjoy firing somebody. Not that some people in management aren't, but to say that you can't be comfortable with firing somebody to be a hiring manager is ridiculous. Firing people is just a necessary, but ugly part of the job.
And besides all that, there was plenty of reason to fire her. She was hired to turn around the company and didn't.
But it *distinctly* creates an impression of dishonesty... more of a "lying by omission" sort of dishonesty, but dishonesty nonetheless.
Maybe for you, but I find it absurd and conspiracy-prone. People break up over the phone or online, or whatever, not because they are being dishonest, but because it's uncomfortable. Outside of some sense of courtesy or honesty, there really isn't any practical reason for a firing to happen in person.
Communism is alive and well, it just changed names.
Going by your own percentages, 5 of the demands are below 50%. Your reply was to "A communist regime in the model that Marx was pushing hasn't ever been implemented."
While bits and pieces have gained traction in the United States, it's hardly a communist country by any stretch. The fact that is that most industries in the United States are privately owned, most people live on private property, and there's a relatively free market for labor.
Honor, for example, mattered far more than wealth in some cultures. I think that time has passed, sadly.
Maybe people talked about it a lot, but in reality in every culture where honor was given high value there was still the usual greed and fighting for power under the surface. Japan, England, Rome, it's all the same human desires.
Alternatively, firing people is uncomfortable no matter what the reason, and given the company's performance there is all the reason in the world to fire her.
I'd say Occam's Razor applies here, and there's no need to go imagining conspiracy theories.
Simplicity wins, except when it loses. True story follows.
I have a rarely used bank account with a few measly dollars in it. It got put on a security alert, and when I called up customer service they demanded that I send a fax with positive ID (driver's license at least, maybe social, etc).
Well, guess what, I don't have a land-line, and while there are free options to send a fax via the Internet, how is this any more secure than email? It's even worse, because faxes often contain sensitive info, and I have to trust some 3rd party Internet company offering free faxes not to misuse my information.
Seriously, it's 2011. This problem was solved in the 90s! It's called uploading a file via the browser. The bank still let me login, it just wouldn't show me anything. All they had to do was provide a form on their web site.
So I just let my account sit there in limbo. It's not worth jumping through their stupid hoops to close it or re-activate it. They also keep wasting money mailing monthly statements for an account with a few bucks in it.
the fact that they weren't willing to do it in person can make it look like they were trying to hide something, and may even provide sufficient basis to warrant an investigation.
I don't follow your logic. How does over the phone imply they were trying to cover up something? What would have happened differently if it were in person?
However, the CEO was also under contract, according to a news article I read, with a year to go, so I'm sure she'll have a golden parachute clause as most big CEOs do.
Slashdot Mirror
That pretty much stopped politics in science
That's good for a laugh. Where there's people, there's politics.
One could argue that extensions are specifically not permitted as there are no limits on how many extensions one could grant...
It was tried in the US Supreme Court and the argument failed. Don't shoot the messenger.
he like many others see information as something that should be open
So naive. Check the answer to the question about his "hardware, OS, software you use to work". It's always other people's information that should be free.
Today the USA want the whole world to pity them.
No we don't. This is a day of national remembrance. We don't want your pity and didn't ask for it.
It says: "The reason for the huge, $1-1.5 billion and three year differences is because NASA has had to lay off workers and stop work on many components due to a lack of funds. "
So taking the article at face value, that's at most $1.5 billion in cost overrun.
The article is deceitful when it says, "what was originally slated to be a $5.1 Billion project, to launch in 2013"
No, it was originally expected to cost $500 million and to launch in 2007. The numbers have been steadily ballooning upwards ever since.
Particle Physics: Benefits to Society
A large part of the added cost could have been avoided if Congress had just given an additional 250 million for a launch date in 2015.
I find it hard to believe that a lack of $250 million ballooned into several billions of dollars. The article cites a supposedly independent review, but doesn't go into any detail about the math. It just sounds like activist propaganda. Sorry, I like science too, but let's be honest.
If anything, it sounds like he's making money out of his hobby.
If you believe his story, and if you consider spending time being hassled by cops and in court worth a grand, along with the risk of some cop getting pissed at you and framing you for something.
Cause I like javascript and I wanna hear why others don't?
I speak as somebody who came from a Java background when I first look at JavaScript. It just felt like a toy language, and I think the main things were no static typing and lack of support for things like namespaces.
Granted, there's a big divide between the dynamic typing and static typing folks, so some of it is a matter of preference.
If your story is true, which I doubt, you're wasting your time just as much as the cops.
So, what, you're going to hold public libraries and businesses like McDonald's liable for open Wi-Fi?
I just don't think it was a big deal that somebody was fired over the phone. As evidence for some kind of coverup, it's something I wouldn't even raise an eyebrow over.
Obviously we're never going to agree on these particulars.
What's so great about Linux? I use it and like it, but the main selling point is that it is open source with a lot of open source software built around it.
I think Microsoft Office is a decent product, Windows 95 and XP were pretty good for the times, and I don't know about Windows 7 since I haven't used it, but by all accounts they refined Vista so that it wasn't crap. Corporate IT admins are also pretty happy with Exchange and related products, a space where Apple and Linux don't compete very well. Visual Studio is another area where Microsoft does well.
It just seems that people like to give Microsoft a lot of crap because they were the evil monopoly -- which I do, too, but I think they've done a decent job in some areas.
most of their products have always been second rate replicas of other people's products
You mean like Linus was when he developed a Unix kernel for the 386? People love to bash Gates, yet praise Linus, but for what? He was a good coder who got lucky with his timing and took advantage of it. He never set out to make a huge splash in the world.
Gates, meanwhile, along with Paul Allen, set out to create a business by building a software product that was needed. They did that by building a Basic for the Altair microcomputer before everybody else. It was a technical challenge under time pressure, and they succeeded. They ended up licensing their Basic to many other companies.
He did get lucky with the IBM/DOS deal, but he put himself in that position to get lucky with the original Basic. "Fortune favors the bold."
Here most people now that 'anonymous' are mostly kids from 4chan, doing what kids and teens in general do... get pissed about injustice and morally wrong things.
And also fucking with people for the "lulz", and carrying out their own brand of vigilante justice. Meanwhile, the article is talking about dealing with the likes of illicit credit card networks. These criminal gangs do exist.
It was a joke, Anonymous Coward. Lighten up.
If firing somebody is uncomfortable for someone, there's no reason that this someone should have been hiring in the first place. To compare it to breakups is a rather moot point - breakups are personal... hirings and firings are professional matters.
Managers are people, and you'd have to be a cold-hearted and sadistic bastard to enjoy firing somebody. Not that some people in management aren't, but to say that you can't be comfortable with firing somebody to be a hiring manager is ridiculous. Firing people is just a necessary, but ugly part of the job.
And besides all that, there was plenty of reason to fire her. She was hired to turn around the company and didn't.
But it *distinctly* creates an impression of dishonesty... more of a "lying by omission" sort of dishonesty, but dishonesty nonetheless.
Maybe for you, but I find it absurd and conspiracy-prone. People break up over the phone or online, or whatever, not because they are being dishonest, but because it's uncomfortable. Outside of some sense of courtesy or honesty, there really isn't any practical reason for a firing to happen in person.
Communism is alive and well, it just changed names.
Going by your own percentages, 5 of the demands are below 50%. Your reply was to "A communist regime in the model that Marx was pushing hasn't ever been implemented."
While bits and pieces have gained traction in the United States, it's hardly a communist country by any stretch. The fact that is that most industries in the United States are privately owned, most people live on private property, and there's a relatively free market for labor.
Honor, for example, mattered far more than wealth in some cultures. I think that time has passed, sadly.
Maybe people talked about it a lot, but in reality in every culture where honor was given high value there was still the usual greed and fighting for power under the surface. Japan, England, Rome, it's all the same human desires.
It's lazy ignorant nonsense.
And also an advertisement for gold. There are a lot of people invested in it that want to drive the price up.
That's really weak.
Alternatively, firing people is uncomfortable no matter what the reason, and given the company's performance there is all the reason in the world to fire her.
I'd say Occam's Razor applies here, and there's no need to go imagining conspiracy theories.
Simplicity wins, except when it loses. True story follows.
I have a rarely used bank account with a few measly dollars in it. It got put on a security alert, and when I called up customer service they demanded that I send a fax with positive ID (driver's license at least, maybe social, etc).
Well, guess what, I don't have a land-line, and while there are free options to send a fax via the Internet, how is this any more secure than email? It's even worse, because faxes often contain sensitive info, and I have to trust some 3rd party Internet company offering free faxes not to misuse my information.
Seriously, it's 2011. This problem was solved in the 90s! It's called uploading a file via the browser. The bank still let me login, it just wouldn't show me anything. All they had to do was provide a form on their web site.
So I just let my account sit there in limbo. It's not worth jumping through their stupid hoops to close it or re-activate it. They also keep wasting money mailing monthly statements for an account with a few bucks in it.
the fact that they weren't willing to do it in person can make it look like they were trying to hide something, and may even provide sufficient basis to warrant an investigation.
I don't follow your logic. How does over the phone imply they were trying to cover up something? What would have happened differently if it were in person?
I do not know how CEOs are treated compared to us, but my guess is you still need to prove why they were fired.
Your guess, as a general rule, is wrong.
However, the CEO was also under contract, according to a news article I read, with a year to go, so I'm sure she'll have a golden parachute clause as most big CEOs do.