YES, it can: the whole fucking point of Prop8 is to breach people's rights using the force of law.
That's a very subjective view.
Not least, it includes the assumption that marriage is a right. It precludes multiple definitions of 'marriage'. It is in its own way just as fucking bigoted as someone that doesn't like gay people.
You can believe whatever the hell you want, but when you try to have laws enacted to enforce your bigoted views, then people are going to have a real problem with that. If you don't understand that simple concept, then I don't know how to help you.
..and we're back to the Muslims that want you stoned to death for promoting homosexuality. Or are you also supporting Sharia law?
If I work for Whole Foods, I can probably expect nothing, and the Muslim colleague can expect a lecture about respecting diversity.
So all Muslims should be sacked because they all oppose gay marriage (as a side effect of believing homosexuality to be anti-Islamic)? No CEO can be Muslim?
As for that Muslim idiot in they hypothetical example, a person's views can't breach your rights to religious freedom.
Someone's support for Prop 8 can't breach your rights either, so just what's the fucking problem here?
I'm just seriously confused that people are celebrating someone losing their job because they happened to express a political opinion outside of the workplace.
as a low-level employee, I don't have any power to impose my viewpoint on anyone
Yes, you do. Merely articulating your views at work is a form of imposition. So I'll rephrase my query in a form that you can maybe answer: If you mention at work that you're "glad Eich is no longer CEO as his gay marriage views are bigoted" and a Muslim colleague complains to HR that your views on gay marriage breach his rights to religious freedom, should you be sacked?
Incidentally, I've heard of 'right to work' and luckily I live in a jurisdiction in which that does not apply. So ignore the legality and tell me whether you should or not?
It's not about retribution. It's about being able to do your job properly. It's that by supporting prop 8 you are showing yourself to be a bigot. There is no reason to doubt the software engineering abilities of a person if they are a bigot. There is a good reason to doubt the leadership abilities of a person if they are a bigot.
How does that show that he's a bigot. It's reasonable to assume that he's a highly logical thinker (due to his career history) so why do you assume that he doesn't have a very logical reason for supporting prop 8, and that instead he's coming from a position of ignorance?
Have you actually asked him why he supported it? Have you done anything more than react emotionally in an ignorant and prejudiced manner? Just who the fuck is the bigot here?
Depends. Does Ford give people equal employment rights and opportunities irrespective of their race, gender or religious beliefs?
Does the CEO lynch black people in the factory?
Out of curiousity, do you impose your homosexuality viewpoints on your colleagues? Would you consider it acceptable to be sacked for doing so? What if one of them were Muslim and found your viewpoints intolerable on religious grounds. Who gets sacked then? You the bigot for failing to respect his religious freedoms or him the bigot for failing to respect your sexual preference preferences?
So we have to put up with that NAMBLA dude in the next cubicle?
Yes. If the dude says and acts on his beliefs outside of the workplace and complies with the law and company policy at work then you have no grounds to do anything other than put up with him.
I mean, should we be able to get you sacked because you browse slashdot at home? Lots of people dislike that activity and why should they have to cope with you being in the same office as them?
Don't support thoughtcrime. Prevent actual crime. Being a twat is not illegal, or the prison industry would be even more profitable.
If Pepsi caused fuss about a can of coke on someone's desk then I'd agree that they were unreasonable.
When someone brings a can of coke into a meeting - and nobody's brought a can or bottle of coke or pepsi to any meeting I've been in for months - then I can understand that this is interpreted as either antagonism or a lack of business sense, and either are reasonable grounds to challenge the competence of the developer.
Picking up a can of coke knowing you're going into a meeting with Pepsi is provocation or naivety, and just unprofessional in that context either way.
If Pepsi came in to sell you their products then sure, do that to put pressure on them, exert competitive tensions, make a point. But not when they're the client.
The MyBook Live Duo using 9W and I can buy one pre-built with 4TB of storage for $432.
It's not as powerful as an i3 (any i3) but it's a fully functional linux box and perfectly adequate as file server.
When something is cheaper than home-brew, comes prebuilt, has the configuration/setup software pre-installed (including user, quota and access management via web UI) and just sits there working properly, I'm happy.
Or you could buy their (cheap, reliable, effective) NAS devices and use your own Dynamic DNS and SSH to provide cloud-based file storage without relying on the Western Digital cloud service.
WD make good hard disks, and their MyBook Duo is a perfectly capable home NAS device, and it's bloody cheap. That doesn't mean that they're good at cloud services, redirection to your home network or otherwise.
No, I attack personally when confronting someone that can't grasp basic arguments, continues to believe they're right when I've pointed out where they're not, and acts like a twat.
There's a big difference between "Prevent a source of fraudulent payments and/or high chargebacks from damaging the brand/customers" and being a cartel.
Learn the difference, and learn to use citations without resorting to unnecessary and puerile lmgtfy links. Especially when they're not relevant to the argument.
I'd link to lmgtfy for the word 'cunt' but you don't need to be told the meaning; just look in the mirror.
Visa do incur cost. They act as a broker between card acquirers (the people providing card payments services to retailers) and card issuers (the people that give cards to consumers). (Processors such as First Data provide services to card issuers).
Visa is not a cartel, anybody can use their services. They grew from an industry association, but that doesn't make it a cartel, and certainly doesn't describe its current operations.
If the fixed costs are not in the transaction fees, then how are you proposing that those are funded? Connectivity fees that penalise low volume stores?
The fee often isn't a percentage. It's sometimes a fixed fee, sometimes a fixed minimum with percentage beyond that. There may be upper limits in place.
It should cost more to process a $10,000 purchase than a $1.59 stick of gun.
Yes, it should. Higher loss in the event of fraud, and a $1.59 purchase usually isn't even going to get checked against card balances, to keep the network traffic down.
Interchange fees are however an interesting thing, and very easily misunderstood. I worked for a corporation that had a retail arm and a card issuing bank. They proposed using cards issued by the bank to pay all of their supplier invoices, so that they'd get the interchange fees back.
No thought about the cost to the bank of providing that service, the card payment fees owed to VISA/Mastercard, the suppliers tacking on card surcharges or the cost of money impacts of using a credit card (although they could have used non-credit payment cards, they also wanted the interest free period from using credit card).
The thing with Notch is that he did something for fun, made it a success, earned a fortune, and now he puts his money where his mouth is. He backs other independent developers - including Oculus, even though they were developing hardware not the games that need it.
So you have a very successful developer living the dream, a very successful businessman that's a self-made millionaire and a genuine philanphropist, all of which would draw attention and admiration, all wrapped up in one slightly unreliable but interesting person.
He may or may not be right, but he's done a fuck of a lot more than most people, and whether it's appropriate or not he sets trends. People listen.
Microsoft are bloody good at hardware computer peripherals - sure the Xbox variants have had issues, but generally speaking Microsoft do excellent hardware.
I'd actually respect them if they did that. It would be a remarkably decent thing to do.
However, I do agree - they either really believed in VR, and Facebook's money will help them deliver on their vision, and/or they were in this to make money, and job done. Either way you can't blame them for saying 'yes'.
Slashdot Mirror
YES, it can: the whole fucking point of Prop8 is to breach people's rights using the force of law.
That's a very subjective view.
Not least, it includes the assumption that marriage is a right. It precludes multiple definitions of 'marriage'. It is in its own way just as fucking bigoted as someone that doesn't like gay people.
You can believe whatever the hell you want, but when you try to have laws enacted to enforce your bigoted views, then people are going to have a real problem with that. If you don't understand that simple concept, then I don't know how to help you.
..and we're back to the Muslims that want you stoned to death for promoting homosexuality. Or are you also supporting Sharia law?
You see, they think you're the bigoted one.
If I work for Whole Foods, I can probably expect nothing, and the Muslim colleague can expect a lecture about respecting diversity.
So all Muslims should be sacked because they all oppose gay marriage (as a side effect of believing homosexuality to be anti-Islamic)? No CEO can be Muslim?
As for that Muslim idiot in they hypothetical example, a person's views can't breach your rights to religious freedom.
Someone's support for Prop 8 can't breach your rights either, so just what's the fucking problem here?
I'm just seriously confused that people are celebrating someone losing their job because they happened to express a political opinion outside of the workplace.
as a low-level employee, I don't have any power to impose my viewpoint on anyone
Yes, you do. Merely articulating your views at work is a form of imposition. So I'll rephrase my query in a form that you can maybe answer: If you mention at work that you're "glad Eich is no longer CEO as his gay marriage views are bigoted" and a Muslim colleague complains to HR that your views on gay marriage breach his rights to religious freedom, should you be sacked?
Incidentally, I've heard of 'right to work' and luckily I live in a jurisdiction in which that does not apply. So ignore the legality and tell me whether you should or not?
Let us know when you've written your book on your time as a tax lawyer. I want more of these stories :)
It's not about retribution. It's about being able to do your job properly. It's that by supporting prop 8 you are showing yourself to be a bigot. There is no reason to doubt the software engineering abilities of a person if they are a bigot. There is a good reason to doubt the leadership abilities of a person if they are a bigot.
How does that show that he's a bigot. It's reasonable to assume that he's a highly logical thinker (due to his career history) so why do you assume that he doesn't have a very logical reason for supporting prop 8, and that instead he's coming from a position of ignorance?
Have you actually asked him why he supported it? Have you done anything more than react emotionally in an ignorant and prejudiced manner? Just who the fuck is the bigot here?
Depends. Does Ford give people equal employment rights and opportunities irrespective of their race, gender or religious beliefs?
Does the CEO lynch black people in the factory?
Out of curiousity, do you impose your homosexuality viewpoints on your colleagues? Would you consider it acceptable to be sacked for doing so? What if one of them were Muslim and found your viewpoints intolerable on religious grounds. Who gets sacked then? You the bigot for failing to respect his religious freedoms or him the bigot for failing to respect your sexual preference preferences?
Sacking people for what they think is wrong.
Indeed. He assured that the vote was properly informed by providing the necessary funding to achieve that.
You should be THANKING him for his generosity.
Personally I'd fucking ban marriage. Live with someone if you want to. Don't if you don't.
So we have to put up with that NAMBLA dude in the next cubicle?
Yes. If the dude says and acts on his beliefs outside of the workplace and complies with the law and company policy at work then you have no grounds to do anything other than put up with him.
I mean, should we be able to get you sacked because you browse slashdot at home? Lots of people dislike that activity and why should they have to cope with you being in the same office as them?
Don't support thoughtcrime. Prevent actual crime. Being a twat is not illegal, or the prison industry would be even more profitable.
Please address his point about whether Mozilla should fire the employees that spoke out on Twitter. Is that a reasonable action?
Women have the same rights as men, including one vote per penis.
Lorraine Bobbit wanted a vote?
They're the client. They don't have to act professionally.
And this is Pepsi. Everybody knows they're complete cocks when it comes to their main rival, and vice-versa. Deal with it, or don't deal with them.
If Pepsi caused fuss about a can of coke on someone's desk then I'd agree that they were unreasonable.
When someone brings a can of coke into a meeting - and nobody's brought a can or bottle of coke or pepsi to any meeting I've been in for months - then I can understand that this is interpreted as either antagonism or a lack of business sense, and either are reasonable grounds to challenge the competence of the developer.
Picking up a can of coke knowing you're going into a meeting with Pepsi is provocation or naivety, and just unprofessional in that context either way.
If Pepsi came in to sell you their products then sure, do that to put pressure on them, exert competitive tensions, make a point. But not when they're the client.
While Pepsi may indeed be utter twats, it was fucking poor showing by the developer.
Show some fucking respect for your client.
The MyBook Live Duo using 9W and I can buy one pre-built with 4TB of storage for $432.
It's not as powerful as an i3 (any i3) but it's a fully functional linux box and perfectly adequate as file server.
When something is cheaper than home-brew, comes prebuilt, has the configuration/setup software pre-installed (including user, quota and access management via web UI) and just sits there working properly, I'm happy.
Or you could buy their (cheap, reliable, effective) NAS devices and use your own Dynamic DNS and SSH to provide cloud-based file storage without relying on the Western Digital cloud service.
WD make good hard disks, and their MyBook Duo is a perfectly capable home NAS device, and it's bloody cheap. That doesn't mean that they're good at cloud services, redirection to your home network or otherwise.
Bias or not, it would prove rather pointless to create a video about American business and innovation and not use Apple
What utter total fucking nonsense.
There are hundreds of innovative American businesses that aren't Apple. Indeed, Apple is significantly less innovative than many of them.
Shit, IBM innovate more than Apple, and have been for decades longer, let alone the likes of Lockheed Martin.
No, I attack personally when confronting someone that can't grasp basic arguments, continues to believe they're right when I've pointed out where they're not, and acts like a twat.
You.
You ignorant patronising piece of shit.
There's a big difference between "Prevent a source of fraudulent payments and/or high chargebacks from damaging the brand/customers" and being a cartel.
Learn the difference, and learn to use citations without resorting to unnecessary and puerile lmgtfy links. Especially when they're not relevant to the argument.
I'd link to lmgtfy for the word 'cunt' but you don't need to be told the meaning; just look in the mirror.
Visa do incur cost. They act as a broker between card acquirers (the people providing card payments services to retailers) and card issuers (the people that give cards to consumers). (Processors such as First Data provide services to card issuers).
Visa is not a cartel, anybody can use their services. They grew from an industry association, but that doesn't make it a cartel, and certainly doesn't describe its current operations.
If the fixed costs are not in the transaction fees, then how are you proposing that those are funded? Connectivity fees that penalise low volume stores?
The fee often isn't a percentage. It's sometimes a fixed fee, sometimes a fixed minimum with percentage beyond that. There may be upper limits in place.
It should cost more to process a $10,000 purchase than a $1.59 stick of gun.
Yes, it should. Higher loss in the event of fraud, and a $1.59 purchase usually isn't even going to get checked against card balances, to keep the network traffic down.
Interchange fees are however an interesting thing, and very easily misunderstood. I worked for a corporation that had a retail arm and a card issuing bank. They proposed using cards issued by the bank to pay all of their supplier invoices, so that they'd get the interchange fees back.
No thought about the cost to the bank of providing that service, the card payment fees owed to VISA/Mastercard, the suppliers tacking on card surcharges or the cost of money impacts of using a credit card (although they could have used non-credit payment cards, they also wanted the interest free period from using credit card).
The thing with Notch is that he did something for fun, made it a success, earned a fortune, and now he puts his money where his mouth is. He backs other independent developers - including Oculus, even though they were developing hardware not the games that need it.
So you have a very successful developer living the dream, a very successful businessman that's a self-made millionaire and a genuine philanphropist, all of which would draw attention and admiration, all wrapped up in one slightly unreliable but interesting person.
He may or may not be right, but he's done a fuck of a lot more than most people, and whether it's appropriate or not he sets trends. People listen.
It could've gone two ways.
Microsoft are bloody good at hardware computer peripherals - sure the Xbox variants have had issues, but generally speaking Microsoft do excellent hardware.
But they might have coupled it to the Xbox.
My new favourite Slashdot comment of the decade.
I'd actually respect them if they did that. It would be a remarkably decent thing to do.
However, I do agree - they either really believed in VR, and Facebook's money will help them deliver on their vision, and/or they were in this to make money, and job done. Either way you can't blame them for saying 'yes'.