I must respecfully disagree here. If the maladjusted person was sitting at home talking to the microwave then there would be no opportunity to as you say 'make light' of their version of reality.
When they choose to share those versions of reality with others then they exercise that wonderful right of free speech and the responsibility to deal with what comes after.
It's the same situation as what you do behind closed doors and what you do in a public park. If it's out of the public eye then it's no one's business but your own. As soon as you start doing it when others can see then you're going to start taking flack.
That being said, I don't find these all that amusing personally. They make me a bit sad that these people have so fastened onto an idea or a vision that they're out of touch with the rest of society. And the farther they go the more difficult it is to get back.
Fanbois kind of fall into that category too but it's more of a voluntary thing in their case.
Yahoo tried for quite a while to compete with eBay. But the momentum was against them. So they shut it down.
Sounds like the time is right to dust off that code and open them back up. eBay is losing a LOT of the people who made it happen so if there's another 'named' auction site the transition will be rather swift.
The other sites mentioned are either 'fixed price' sites (not actual auctions) or are niche markets where you're not going to get the eyeballs that will make it worth your while.
I tried using one of the niche sites to find some books I wanted. The seller NEVER bothered to respond to my e-mail. Tells you how committed he was to that site. And yes, I know that happens on eBay too. But if you're going through the effort to post on a niche site you might occasionally check on your auctions.
Yes, 'free speech' is a right guaranteed by the Constitution here in the USA.
The lesser spoken follow-up to that is taking responsibility for what you say.
That's where libel, disorderly conduct and other things come into play. Yes, you can shout 'Fire!' in a crowded theater. That's your right to do so. However, you're responsible for whatever happens as a result of your saying that if it isn't true.
The fine line with libel is how things are stated. "In my opinion" in front of almost any statement will prevent it from being presented as a fact. Without that you're stating something that you expect others to believe as fact. Again, it's your right to say it but you also have to take on the responsibility of saying it.
Student rights are not even something I want to address except to say that unless they're emancipated adults they have no rights beyond what is expressly given to minors. Constitutional rights apply to emancipated adults. Period.
That's the entire reason for an e-mail campaign. To show that it isn't just a few pissy people. Look at the response after the Amazon campaign. This one is just more directed.
And no, I don't expect an answer. Or if I do get one it will be a canned 'thank you for your comments' kind of crap.
At least I've taken a proactive step. And yours is?
Are they looking for a new distribution medium so movies don't cost as much to produce for retail sale? If that's the case then maybe this isn't such a terrible idea. Any type of DRM is already obsolete so we can remove that from the equation.
The sheep will use the dongle and be happy. Everyone else will crack and rip the movie to a different storage medium. Heck, I can even see moving it back to a thumb drive if the speed is there to watch it smoothly.
Now I'm no hardware person. I'll be the first to admit that. But doesn't reading from USB take less power and generate less heat than reading from an optical drive? And fewer moving parts means fewer chances for something to break.
The price is laughable if they're trying for proof of concept. This kind of thing smacks of the "Release something people really don't want for an outrageous price then scrap the idea because no one is buying it" type of thinking that has permeated the media industry for far too long. I can't even hope for anything different any more.
Re:Install accountability, and this will get fixed
on
Zero Day Threat
·
· Score: 1
Technically any officer of a financial institution can be held personally liable for actions undertaken by that institution. It's part of being 'an officer of the company'.
So if you can prove negligence you technically can sue the officers of that division for willful negligence or some other charge.
Not something they want generally known, I guess. Nor do I know how to go about doing it. But there you go. Have at.
Any obvious physical means to obscure the license plate would be self-defeating.
Just get some polarizing film and put it over your license plate. Unless the cameras are head-on (which generally they're not) they're going to get a black rectangle where the license plate should be.
A 'clear' film would be much less likely to attract law enforcement attention than some kind of physical change.
I believe this kind of thing is illegal but then again if you're going to be using a cloned transmitter I don't see that breaking another law would cause you to lose any sleep.
I can't prevent my job from being outsourced
on
My Job Went To India
·
· Score: 1
Gee, I didn't realize I had the ability to decide if my job gets outsourced or not. Somehow I always thought the beancounters in corner offices made that decision. How silly of me.
This advice is of some use in keeping yourself marketable in case you become unemployed but there's nothing the individual employee can do if the decision is made. Trying to give that impression is just, well, wrong.
And why is outsourcing any different from downsizing, rightsourcing, consolidation, 'tightening our belts' or any other justification they use to reduce the labor force at a company? Yes, I realize they're still paying for the product but in terms of the employees affected it's the same result. You're shown the door.
Yet another author trying to sell books with those trigger words. "Oh noes! My job may be outsourced! How convenient that this book is available to tell me how to prevent that!"
Dredging the memory archives for college experiences seem to bring up that a number of professors wrote their own handouts for particular subjects/topics/etc. How does this differ from putting them online for potential reuse?
It's actually a good variant on the 'publish or perish' dilemma that is forced on them. Publishing a small monograph on your speciality and putting it out there for the world to use as a teaching reference would really pump up the ol' CV.
The thing I remember most about how the textbook publishers would screw people on the so-called revisions was by changing the problem sets. You can't use an old version of the book if the problem sets are different. Or if the chapters are in a slightly different order. I had a friend who got bit by that one in an online course. Mind you, she didn't take proper steps to make sure she was using the version of the text the class needed but her 'professor' also didn't get around to grading the problem sets until almost half of them were submitted. Which is an entirely different conversation.
Back to the topic at hand. Most decent professors are doing this already in an informal manner. Formalize it, put some kind of templates out there for consistency, and have at.
The real trick is going to be getting this type of course material into the mainstream. Textbook publishers are quite aggressive about protecting that segment of their market, as we all know. Heck, selling books back is more 'by the pound' than by potential usefulness. How many landfills are full of old versions of textbooks, one must wonder?
My husband was taking pictures of some industrial building (as reference for use in his model train layout in the future) when a security guard came puffing over the hill and demanded that he hand over the camera. Wisely, my husband said no.
The security guard was shocked and then demanded that my husband hand over the film. This was a digital camera. So he said no.
Once the guard realized it was digital he demanded that my husband delete ALL the pictures in the camera.
At this point my husband just walked away, leaving the guard standing there looking very upset that he couldn't do anything.
I will elaborate that my husband was on a public road, not on the private property, so trespassing would not apply. He was taking a picture of a building clearly visible to the public.
Even if the security guard had been a law officer (which they're not, no matter how much they want to be treated as such) there is nothing that will prevent you from taking pictures in public. There is no guarantee of privacy when you're in a public place. If he had planned on publishing the photos then there might be issues with people in the pictures but a picture of a building isn't protected.*
* I know there were some lawsuits in Chicago about people taking pictures of the sculptures displayed in Millenium Park and the artists were getting up in arms about their 'copyrighted works' being misued. I believe that went nowhere but this being Slashdot someone will come along with more information. If there is more information,
If a company is going to say I can't work in a related field for a certain amount of time after leaving I have no problem with that. IF they continue to pay me the going market rate for that position for the entire duration of the 'non-competition' period.
The way I see it, if they're going to prevent me from working someone is going to pay for it and that someone isn't me.
I wonder what the HR drone in charge of the hiring paperwork would do if someone marked up the employment agreement (properly) and asked them if they have the authority to approve modifications to the agreement. I'm guessing it would a 'deer in the headlights' moment.
Employment is a two way street. You pay me and I perform work. If the company that wanted to hire me expected me to sign a unilateral 'agreement' giving them a say over my future employment then they darn well better compensate me for that time.
It's an interesting point but I don't see it happening.
If I'm told by my company to learn COBOL and it's on their dime, I'll learn it. Why should I care one way or the other? It's just another language to know.
Zealots aside, if it's needed then learn it. It might not be as 'sexy' as the newer stuff out there but if it keeps me employed and puts me into a hard-to-do-without niche I'm perfectly happy.
Then again I may be the exception in that I'll learn anything my company needs me to learn. There's a few languages I've learned on my own, for my own reasons, but overall I'll take any training they're willing to dole out. Kind of like the reward pellets. I'll keep whatever I learn no matter where I go so I don't see a downside.
Actually there are salaried positions eligible for overtime pay. That's what the lawsuit is about - they're in those positions but being denied the overtime pay required by the state when overtime is worked.
So they do have a legimate position for a lawsuit - Apple is not following the employment laws.
Most technical positions aren't in the 'salaried non-exempt' category so you're not aware they exist.
I only know this because of the work I do on my company's timesheet system. I found it interesting at the time.
A number of cities that use the traffic cameras actually don't go over the 'tapes' themselves. They contract out with a company that gets a percentage of the fines.
So let's think about this. A non-law enforcement company with a stake in finding violations gets to write citations.
If they're allowed to take valuable and necessary equipment for no particular reason can we invoice the US Government for a daily fee to cover the cost of rental replacement of the equipment in question?
"Oh, you want to take that notebook? Well it's going to cost you $150 per day. Sign this invoice and I'll turn it over."
Yeah, that's going to happen.
And how much of this stuff is going to get 'lost' while in government custody? Will there be weekly reports on the status and exact location so that the true owner can track and potentially retrieve their investment once the government is done ham-fistedly pounding the keys?
Send letters to your Congresscritters!
And speaking of Congresscritters, does this apply to them as well? Will they have the prospect of having their personal equipment confiscated and searched? If not, then neither should we.
Is it just me that remembers that the idea of "childhood" is at most a century old? Prior to that they were adults-in-training.
So this entire "Think of the children" crap is more about protecting an idea that these small humans should be shielded from the realities of life instead of educated so they actually do become adults.
I think the new definition of childhood actually extends into the mid-20s because of more societal pressure. They're in college, they really aren't responsible yet, etc.
Screw that. It's the parents job to get those little monsters properly trained to be responsible adults. Heck, overseas 'kids' are in professional training schools by they time they're sixteen. Here they're still considered helpless babes who can't do anything without mommy and daddy there to make sure they don't get 'damaged'.
Don't even get me started on that whole self-esteem vs actual value stuff that the schools are promoting.
I realize I'm starting to sound like an old fogey but I guess that's what I am. I'm tired of seeing these poor young adults with absolutely no idea of what is expected of them or how to achieve it. And all because of some misguided idea that they should be protected while they're young instead of taught.
I freely admit I didn't see "Batman Begins" so some of the references didn't make sense to me. (No Stately Wayne Manor? No Batcave? Alfred having been some kind of commando?) But overall they weren't important enough to detract.
CB as Batman was.. meh. There just wasn't anything there to engage me. He was, both as Batman and Bruce Wayne, more background than anything. And since technically the movie is about him that's rather sad.
Heath Ledger was good, as he has been in pretty much anything he's done. I like him as an actor. But honestly the Joker wasn't that hard of a character to 'get into'. He was impulse-driven and had no real long-term plan.
I've read reviews how Joker said he didn't have a plan but then everything he wanted to do worked out just fine. Well, what about things he set up that didn't work out and were still waiting? Hopefully that was something they were going to explore in what is now the sequel that can never be.
Adding in Harvey Dent's transformation into Two Face was rushed and didn't do the actor or the character justice. They could have done better by setting him up as "The White Knight" and taking the character into his own movie in the next one. But obviously the sequel was going to be more Joker.
The editing gave me a headache. I can't stand movies where they just cut back and forth for no real reason. Heck, at least use Steadicam for Spaghetti's sake! Some of us do have an attention span, you know.
I'll conclude with saying that had Heath Ledger not died this movie still would have done well but not nearly as well as it did. The press so pumped up his performance that there was no way this movie wasn't going to the top of the box office. Let's see if it has legs, tho.
One thing that doesn't get mainstream media coverage is the piracy rate of BSA members.
From what I hear that's a pretty substantial number of unauthorized copies (per BSA requirements) but it would be bad publicity to acknowledge that even their own members are pirating* software from each other.
If their own member companies can't prove ownership using the BSA 'chain of licensing' then you know it's a crock.
* That's 'pirating' for a specific definition of pirating. Kind of like a certain ex-US president asking what the definition of 'is' is.
I know I'm feeding the trolls but sometimes ya gotta.
Define a 'real review'. Is it something you wrote? Something a professional movie critic (whatever the heck that is) wrote? Do I read a variety of reviews from a variety of sources?
Silly me, I went into this movie expecting something like the previous one. You know, the movie before the sequel. I enjoyed the previous movie very much. I was hoping to enjoy the sequel as well.
I'm not quite sure about your comment about 'pre-judging a file based on another is extremely short-sighted.' If I don't like the work of a certain actor/director/whatever then why should I continue to see movies with them, hoping that one of them will appeal to me? Why should I continue to read books by a certain author if I find that I don't like their writing?
And you're using another review site to tell me that people liked a movie. Fine and dandy. Good for them. All I said was that I was happy I hadn't seen it because I'm not pleased with the director's work. So explain to me how not liking a director's work could mean I then would like that director's work?
On second thought, no. Please don't. Whatever convoluted explanation you try to foist upon me (and the rest of the site) would only make my teeth itch.
Response to this movie is turning into two camps - love it or hate it.
I fall mildly into the 'hate it' camp. Too much of the director's vision, not enough freakin' story.
Underdeveloped characters, waaaaaaaaaaaay too much CGI, overly cluttered scenes, eco-terrorist plot. All adding up to me literally yawning my way through the movie.
The original movie appeals to me because of a strong story with supporting visual effects. This movie seems to be all about overwhelming visual effects with some story thrown in to try to pull them together.
If this is what Pan's Labyrinth is like then I'm glad I didn't waste my time in seeing it. I don't see the director as 'visionary' any more than I see M. Night Wasshisname as a visionary.
Harsh, I know. But I'm rather picky about how I spend my precious free time and wasting it on this movie just annoys me.
When even the editor says not to read the article I take heed.
We had one employee who forgot his notebook several times. Good coder, complete flake otherwise. Let's say his name is "Ben". Forgetting one's laptop became "Pulling a Ben". He's no longer with us.
I've forgotten mine once or twice but normally just far enough away that going home to get it then driving into work made far less sense than driving home and working through the VPN. We're allowed to do that on occasion. But obviously we can't be trusted to work from home and actually work. ~sigh~
I was able to get myself a docking station for home as well as for work so that I don't need to worry about forgetting accessories. They're in the bag for working at a remote location but otherwise all I need is the laptop itself.
As to where it resides when at home, it sits with my purse and my 'bag of things' that I use to carry my lunch and such. I bring it home because I'm a system admin and may need to dial in to fix a problem during off-hours. Unless that happens it just sits where I leave it. I feel no need to fire it up and work during my non-work time because the work will be there tomorrow. Same reason I don't have a Blackberry or a pager. If they really need me they can call.
Back to the topic on hand, if it really can be considered a topic. If I blank enough to forget my notebook I really shouldn't be working that day anyway. I used to have nice mindless paperwork I could do on those days but that's been given to someone else so I have to find other work I can do that won't harm anything. Documentation is generally the way I do on those days since we all know no one reads the darn stuff.
Because I don't like the 'typing on oatmeal' response of tactile keyboards?
When I spend hours a day typing on the thing I'm going to use the tool that works best for me. For Spaghetti's sake switch to decaf and leave me alone to do my work on the tool I prefer.
And get off my intarwebz.
Re:There is only one true keyboard...
on
Review of Das Keyboard
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I'm not about to give up my extra ten words per minute I get on my clicky keyboard just because you don't like the sound.
I don't like it when you listen to voice mail on speakerphone, argue with your spouse over who has to cook dinner that night, suck your teeth to get out the last shreds of the lunch you just ate at your desk, or any of the other annoying audible habits you have.
That's why they make sound cancelling headphones.
Note - I had a co-worker complain about my keyboard. This is the same co-worker who would make the most obnoxious choking sounds that you could hear across the room. Yeah, my keyboard is the most annoying thing going.
Slashdot Mirror
I must respecfully disagree here. If the maladjusted person was sitting at home talking to the microwave then there would be no opportunity to as you say 'make light' of their version of reality.
When they choose to share those versions of reality with others then they exercise that wonderful right of free speech and the responsibility to deal with what comes after.
It's the same situation as what you do behind closed doors and what you do in a public park. If it's out of the public eye then it's no one's business but your own. As soon as you start doing it when others can see then you're going to start taking flack.
That being said, I don't find these all that amusing personally. They make me a bit sad that these people have so fastened onto an idea or a vision that they're out of touch with the rest of society. And the farther they go the more difficult it is to get back.
Fanbois kind of fall into that category too but it's more of a voluntary thing in their case.
Yahoo tried for quite a while to compete with eBay. But the momentum was against them. So they shut it down.
Sounds like the time is right to dust off that code and open them back up. eBay is losing a LOT of the people who made it happen so if there's another 'named' auction site the transition will be rather swift.
The other sites mentioned are either 'fixed price' sites (not actual auctions) or are niche markets where you're not going to get the eyeballs that will make it worth your while.
I tried using one of the niche sites to find some books I wanted. The seller NEVER bothered to respond to my e-mail. Tells you how committed he was to that site. And yes, I know that happens on eBay too. But if you're going through the effort to post on a niche site you might occasionally check on your auctions.
Yes, 'free speech' is a right guaranteed by the Constitution here in the USA.
The lesser spoken follow-up to that is taking responsibility for what you say.
That's where libel, disorderly conduct and other things come into play. Yes, you can shout 'Fire!' in a crowded theater. That's your right to do so. However, you're responsible for whatever happens as a result of your saying that if it isn't true.
The fine line with libel is how things are stated. "In my opinion" in front of almost any statement will prevent it from being presented as a fact. Without that you're stating something that you expect others to believe as fact. Again, it's your right to say it but you also have to take on the responsibility of saying it.
Student rights are not even something I want to address except to say that unless they're emancipated adults they have no rights beyond what is expressly given to minors. Constitutional rights apply to emancipated adults. Period.
One message, yes. Several thousand, possibly not.
That's the entire reason for an e-mail campaign. To show that it isn't just a few pissy people. Look at the response after the Amazon campaign. This one is just more directed.
And no, I don't expect an answer. Or if I do get one it will be a canned 'thank you for your comments' kind of crap.
At least I've taken a proactive step. And yours is?
I just sent off an e-mail to the president of EA telling him I'll never purchase one of his products that includes DRM.
The address didn't bounce immediately so it might actually be good.
John.Riccitiello@ea.com
Your turn. Flood the fscker with messages telling him we don't want DRM.
Are they looking for a new distribution medium so movies don't cost as much to produce for retail sale? If that's the case then maybe this isn't such a terrible idea. Any type of DRM is already obsolete so we can remove that from the equation.
The sheep will use the dongle and be happy. Everyone else will crack and rip the movie to a different storage medium. Heck, I can even see moving it back to a thumb drive if the speed is there to watch it smoothly.
Now I'm no hardware person. I'll be the first to admit that. But doesn't reading from USB take less power and generate less heat than reading from an optical drive? And fewer moving parts means fewer chances for something to break.
The price is laughable if they're trying for proof of concept. This kind of thing smacks of the "Release something people really don't want for an outrageous price then scrap the idea because no one is buying it" type of thinking that has permeated the media industry for far too long. I can't even hope for anything different any more.
Technically any officer of a financial institution can be held personally liable for actions undertaken by that institution. It's part of being 'an officer of the company'.
So if you can prove negligence you technically can sue the officers of that division for willful negligence or some other charge.
Not something they want generally known, I guess. Nor do I know how to go about doing it. But there you go. Have at.
Any obvious physical means to obscure the license plate would be self-defeating.
Just get some polarizing film and put it over your license plate. Unless the cameras are head-on (which generally they're not) they're going to get a black rectangle where the license plate should be.
A 'clear' film would be much less likely to attract law enforcement attention than some kind of physical change.
I believe this kind of thing is illegal but then again if you're going to be using a cloned transmitter I don't see that breaking another law would cause you to lose any sleep.
Gee, I didn't realize I had the ability to decide if my job gets outsourced or not. Somehow I always thought the beancounters in corner offices made that decision. How silly of me.
This advice is of some use in keeping yourself marketable in case you become unemployed but there's nothing the individual employee can do if the decision is made. Trying to give that impression is just, well, wrong.
And why is outsourcing any different from downsizing, rightsourcing, consolidation, 'tightening our belts' or any other justification they use to reduce the labor force at a company? Yes, I realize they're still paying for the product but in terms of the employees affected it's the same result. You're shown the door.
Yet another author trying to sell books with those trigger words. "Oh noes! My job may be outsourced! How convenient that this book is available to tell me how to prevent that!"
Yawn. Pass.
Dredging the memory archives for college experiences seem to bring up that a number of professors wrote their own handouts for particular subjects/topics/etc. How does this differ from putting them online for potential reuse?
It's actually a good variant on the 'publish or perish' dilemma that is forced on them. Publishing a small monograph on your speciality and putting it out there for the world to use as a teaching reference would really pump up the ol' CV.
The thing I remember most about how the textbook publishers would screw people on the so-called revisions was by changing the problem sets. You can't use an old version of the book if the problem sets are different. Or if the chapters are in a slightly different order. I had a friend who got bit by that one in an online course. Mind you, she didn't take proper steps to make sure she was using the version of the text the class needed but her 'professor' also didn't get around to grading the problem sets until almost half of them were submitted. Which is an entirely different conversation.
Back to the topic at hand. Most decent professors are doing this already in an informal manner. Formalize it, put some kind of templates out there for consistency, and have at.
The real trick is going to be getting this type of course material into the mainstream. Textbook publishers are quite aggressive about protecting that segment of their market, as we all know. Heck, selling books back is more 'by the pound' than by potential usefulness. How many landfills are full of old versions of textbooks, one must wonder?
WikiTextbook anyone?
My husband was taking pictures of some industrial building (as reference for use in his model train layout in the future) when a security guard came puffing over the hill and demanded that he hand over the camera. Wisely, my husband said no.
The security guard was shocked and then demanded that my husband hand over the film. This was a digital camera. So he said no.
Once the guard realized it was digital he demanded that my husband delete ALL the pictures in the camera.
At this point my husband just walked away, leaving the guard standing there looking very upset that he couldn't do anything.
I will elaborate that my husband was on a public road, not on the private property, so trespassing would not apply. He was taking a picture of a building clearly visible to the public.
Even if the security guard had been a law officer (which they're not, no matter how much they want to be treated as such) there is nothing that will prevent you from taking pictures in public. There is no guarantee of privacy when you're in a public place. If he had planned on publishing the photos then there might be issues with people in the pictures but a picture of a building isn't protected.*
* I know there were some lawsuits in Chicago about people taking pictures of the sculptures displayed in Millenium Park and the artists were getting up in arms about their 'copyrighted works' being misued. I believe that went nowhere but this being Slashdot someone will come along with more information. If there is more information,
If a company is going to say I can't work in a related field for a certain amount of time after leaving I have no problem with that. IF they continue to pay me the going market rate for that position for the entire duration of the 'non-competition' period.
The way I see it, if they're going to prevent me from working someone is going to pay for it and that someone isn't me.
I wonder what the HR drone in charge of the hiring paperwork would do if someone marked up the employment agreement (properly) and asked them if they have the authority to approve modifications to the agreement. I'm guessing it would a 'deer in the headlights' moment.
Employment is a two way street. You pay me and I perform work. If the company that wanted to hire me expected me to sign a unilateral 'agreement' giving them a say over my future employment then they darn well better compensate me for that time.
It's an interesting point but I don't see it happening.
If I'm told by my company to learn COBOL and it's on their dime, I'll learn it. Why should I care one way or the other? It's just another language to know.
Zealots aside, if it's needed then learn it. It might not be as 'sexy' as the newer stuff out there but if it keeps me employed and puts me into a hard-to-do-without niche I'm perfectly happy.
Then again I may be the exception in that I'll learn anything my company needs me to learn. There's a few languages I've learned on my own, for my own reasons, but overall I'll take any training they're willing to dole out. Kind of like the reward pellets. I'll keep whatever I learn no matter where I go so I don't see a downside.
Actually there are salaried positions eligible for overtime pay. That's what the lawsuit is about - they're in those positions but being denied the overtime pay required by the state when overtime is worked.
So they do have a legimate position for a lawsuit - Apple is not following the employment laws.
Most technical positions aren't in the 'salaried non-exempt' category so you're not aware they exist.
I only know this because of the work I do on my company's timesheet system. I found it interesting at the time.
A number of cities that use the traffic cameras actually don't go over the 'tapes' themselves. They contract out with a company that gets a percentage of the fines.
So let's think about this. A non-law enforcement company with a stake in finding violations gets to write citations.
[sarcasm]I don't see how this could go wrong.[/sarcasm]
If they're allowed to take valuable and necessary equipment for no particular reason can we invoice the US Government for a daily fee to cover the cost of rental replacement of the equipment in question?
"Oh, you want to take that notebook? Well it's going to cost you $150 per day. Sign this invoice and I'll turn it over."
Yeah, that's going to happen.
And how much of this stuff is going to get 'lost' while in government custody? Will there be weekly reports on the status and exact location so that the true owner can track and potentially retrieve their investment once the government is done ham-fistedly pounding the keys?
Send letters to your Congresscritters!
And speaking of Congresscritters, does this apply to them as well? Will they have the prospect of having their personal equipment confiscated and searched? If not, then neither should we.
Is it just me that remembers that the idea of "childhood" is at most a century old? Prior to that they were adults-in-training.
So this entire "Think of the children" crap is more about protecting an idea that these small humans should be shielded from the realities of life instead of educated so they actually do become adults.
I think the new definition of childhood actually extends into the mid-20s because of more societal pressure. They're in college, they really aren't responsible yet, etc.
Screw that. It's the parents job to get those little monsters properly trained to be responsible adults. Heck, overseas 'kids' are in professional training schools by they time they're sixteen. Here they're still considered helpless babes who can't do anything without mommy and daddy there to make sure they don't get 'damaged'.
Don't even get me started on that whole self-esteem vs actual value stuff that the schools are promoting.
I realize I'm starting to sound like an old fogey but I guess that's what I am. I'm tired of seeing these poor young adults with absolutely no idea of what is expected of them or how to achieve it. And all because of some misguided idea that they should be protected while they're young instead of taught.
I despair.
I freely admit I didn't see "Batman Begins" so some of the references didn't make sense to me. (No Stately Wayne Manor? No Batcave? Alfred having been some kind of commando?) But overall they weren't important enough to detract.
CB as Batman was .. meh. There just wasn't anything there to engage me. He was, both as Batman and Bruce Wayne, more background than anything. And since technically the movie is about him that's rather sad.
Heath Ledger was good, as he has been in pretty much anything he's done. I like him as an actor. But honestly the Joker wasn't that hard of a character to 'get into'. He was impulse-driven and had no real long-term plan.
I've read reviews how Joker said he didn't have a plan but then everything he wanted to do worked out just fine. Well, what about things he set up that didn't work out and were still waiting? Hopefully that was something they were going to explore in what is now the sequel that can never be.
Adding in Harvey Dent's transformation into Two Face was rushed and didn't do the actor or the character justice. They could have done better by setting him up as "The White Knight" and taking the character into his own movie in the next one. But obviously the sequel was going to be more Joker.
The editing gave me a headache. I can't stand movies where they just cut back and forth for no real reason. Heck, at least use Steadicam for Spaghetti's sake! Some of us do have an attention span, you know.
I'll conclude with saying that had Heath Ledger not died this movie still would have done well but not nearly as well as it did. The press so pumped up his performance that there was no way this movie wasn't going to the top of the box office. Let's see if it has legs, tho.
One thing that doesn't get mainstream media coverage is the piracy rate of BSA members.
From what I hear that's a pretty substantial number of unauthorized copies (per BSA requirements) but it would be bad publicity to acknowledge that even their own members are pirating* software from each other.
If their own member companies can't prove ownership using the BSA 'chain of licensing' then you know it's a crock.
* That's 'pirating' for a specific definition of pirating. Kind of like a certain ex-US president asking what the definition of 'is' is.
I know I'm feeding the trolls but sometimes ya gotta.
Define a 'real review'. Is it something you wrote? Something a professional movie critic (whatever the heck that is) wrote? Do I read a variety of reviews from a variety of sources?
Silly me, I went into this movie expecting something like the previous one. You know, the movie before the sequel. I enjoyed the previous movie very much. I was hoping to enjoy the sequel as well.
I'm not quite sure about your comment about 'pre-judging a file based on another is extremely short-sighted.' If I don't like the work of a certain actor/director/whatever then why should I continue to see movies with them, hoping that one of them will appeal to me? Why should I continue to read books by a certain author if I find that I don't like their writing?
And you're using another review site to tell me that people liked a movie. Fine and dandy. Good for them. All I said was that I was happy I hadn't seen it because I'm not pleased with the director's work. So explain to me how not liking a director's work could mean I then would like that director's work?
On second thought, no. Please don't. Whatever convoluted explanation you try to foist upon me (and the rest of the site) would only make my teeth itch.
Response to this movie is turning into two camps - love it or hate it.
I fall mildly into the 'hate it' camp. Too much of the director's vision, not enough freakin' story.
Underdeveloped characters, waaaaaaaaaaaay too much CGI, overly cluttered scenes, eco-terrorist plot. All adding up to me literally yawning my way through the movie.
The original movie appeals to me because of a strong story with supporting visual effects. This movie seems to be all about overwhelming visual effects with some story thrown in to try to pull them together.
If this is what Pan's Labyrinth is like then I'm glad I didn't waste my time in seeing it. I don't see the director as 'visionary' any more than I see M. Night Wasshisname as a visionary.
Harsh, I know. But I'm rather picky about how I spend my precious free time and wasting it on this movie just annoys me.
When even the editor says not to read the article I take heed.
We had one employee who forgot his notebook several times. Good coder, complete flake otherwise. Let's say his name is "Ben". Forgetting one's laptop became "Pulling a Ben". He's no longer with us.
I've forgotten mine once or twice but normally just far enough away that going home to get it then driving into work made far less sense than driving home and working through the VPN. We're allowed to do that on occasion. But obviously we can't be trusted to work from home and actually work. ~sigh~
I was able to get myself a docking station for home as well as for work so that I don't need to worry about forgetting accessories. They're in the bag for working at a remote location but otherwise all I need is the laptop itself.
As to where it resides when at home, it sits with my purse and my 'bag of things' that I use to carry my lunch and such. I bring it home because I'm a system admin and may need to dial in to fix a problem during off-hours. Unless that happens it just sits where I leave it. I feel no need to fire it up and work during my non-work time because the work will be there tomorrow. Same reason I don't have a Blackberry or a pager. If they really need me they can call.
Back to the topic on hand, if it really can be considered a topic. If I blank enough to forget my notebook I really shouldn't be working that day anyway. I used to have nice mindless paperwork I could do on those days but that's been given to someone else so I have to find other work I can do that won't harm anything. Documentation is generally the way I do on those days since we all know no one reads the darn stuff.
Because I don't like the 'typing on oatmeal' response of tactile keyboards?
When I spend hours a day typing on the thing I'm going to use the tool that works best for me. For Spaghetti's sake switch to decaf and leave me alone to do my work on the tool I prefer.
And get off my intarwebz.
I'm not about to give up my extra ten words per minute I get on my clicky keyboard just because you don't like the sound.
I don't like it when you listen to voice mail on speakerphone, argue with your spouse over who has to cook dinner that night, suck your teeth to get out the last shreds of the lunch you just ate at your desk, or any of the other annoying audible habits you have.
That's why they make sound cancelling headphones.
Note - I had a co-worker complain about my keyboard. This is the same co-worker who would make the most obnoxious choking sounds that you could hear across the room. Yeah, my keyboard is the most annoying thing going.
I don't have to call. Russ is my Senator.
Go Wisconsin!