You mean the railways that were granted rights-of-way by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT? And better get maps as to which streets were redone with FEDERAL GRANT MONEY, because you can't use those either. I suppose you can't consume any food that was checked for safety by the FEDERAL FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION. Better get off Slashdot, as the internet was largely sponsored and created by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
On a second note, I honestly don't get this retarded disconnect between federal and state governments. For some reason, people like you seem to forget that state government is still government, and can take away your rights just as easily as any federal government.
Yes, the roads are, but believe it or not, stuff got shipped and delivered before the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways got built. And many of the roads in this country are still built and maintained with city, county and State funds.
And believe it or not, it was far slower and far more expensive to ship things around. Once government stepped in, it became far more efficient and cheaper to ship things around the country by road.
No, I don't think so. The fact that I may consume goods that are provided by a corporation does NOT preclude my ability to complain that they have been given too much power already, or that these measures would give them far much more.
Which ones? Most states are in even worse financial shape than the Federal Government. I don't know about you, but I really don't want to live in a country where education funding waxes and wanes with the phases of recession.
I made a conscious decision to leave North Carolina
Good for you. What about those who can't afford to do so? Should they and their children just "suck it up"?
That's the problem with any of these "State's Rights" issues: You always claim that someone can just move away, but always forget that moving takes quite a bit of money, which a lot of people don't have right now.
You're misinterpreting this a bit. You don't have an obligation to return an item that you find; you can always leave it where you found it. You are obligated to return the lost item only if you take it.
Considering the thief did take it, I don't think I misinterpreted it at all. Yes, if you leave it where you find it, there is nothing that applies to you.
It's purely theft. He took something which was not his, and sold it.
And as far as "making shit up" (you can swear on the internet, it's ok), California State Law declares that if you find something that is considered to be misplaced, you must make an effort to reunite the item with it's owner. Either that, or turn it into the police, or the person in charge of the establishment. This thief did neither.
They're only defending the thief because they hate Apple. That's it. Had it been Samsung's phone that was stolen, they'd be up in arms against the guy.
Maybe not in common law, but California State Law is pretty clear on the matter. If you find lost property, which the iPhone prototype was, you are duty bound to turn it in so it can be reunited with it's owner.
Come up with whatever smartass reply you want. The fact of the matter is, you can't take something you find in a bar. You are supposed to turn it in, so it can be reunited with the proper owner. You definitely can't sell that item either.
It makes me wonder how many people think that a company should just hand everything to you.
If they're not doing this right, imagine how many other things they're not doing right. And damn straight they should be "handing" this shit to us. It's shit that makes our jobs a fuckload easier, so we can be more productive.
If you see a problem in the company, where you know you can add the value of good software engineering practices, fix it. You looking for career advancement? What looks better on a resume? A person who switches jobs because they don't have what he wants implemented? Or a person who sees a problem, presents a solution, implements it and learns how to deal with it? Which choice screams of career advancement?
That only works if the company is willing to take your advice. If they keep shooting you down, their shitty practices will rub off on you, and make you much harder to hire.
Or you can take the coward's way out and flee before you try to teach anything or learn anything.
Leaving is not the "coward's way out." Quite frankly, it's the only way a lot of these places will change: If they can't recruit and retain new talent.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean the railways that were granted rights-of-way by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT? And better get maps as to which streets were redone with FEDERAL GRANT MONEY, because you can't use those either. I suppose you can't consume any food that was checked for safety by the FEDERAL FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION. Better get off Slashdot, as the internet was largely sponsored and created by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
On a second note, I honestly don't get this retarded disconnect between federal and state governments. For some reason, people like you seem to forget that state government is still government, and can take away your rights just as easily as any federal government.
Yes, the roads are, but believe it or not, stuff got shipped and delivered before the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways got built. And many of the roads in this country are still built and maintained with city, county and State funds.
And believe it or not, it was far slower and far more expensive to ship things around. Once government stepped in, it became far more efficient and cheaper to ship things around the country by road.
No, I don't think so. The fact that I may consume goods that are provided by a corporation does NOT preclude my ability to complain that they have been given too much power already, or that these measures would give them far much more.
Which ones? Most states are in even worse financial shape than the Federal Government. I don't know about you, but I really don't want to live in a country where education funding waxes and wanes with the phases of recession.
I made a conscious decision to leave North Carolina
Good for you. What about those who can't afford to do so? Should they and their children just "suck it up"?
That's the problem with any of these "State's Rights" issues: You always claim that someone can just move away, but always forget that moving takes quite a bit of money, which a lot of people don't have right now.
So yes get rid of it and let the states and better yet localities assume more control over the local schools
Because Creationism is a valid theory that should be given preference in the classroom over any other "theory".
Funny you should mention that, as Ron Paul not only is a member of one of the "two entrenched parties", but he is perpetuating their entrenchment.
You're misinterpreting this a bit. You don't have an obligation to return an item that you find; you can always leave it where you found it. You are obligated to return the lost item only if you take it.
Considering the thief did take it, I don't think I misinterpreted it at all. Yes, if you leave it where you find it, there is nothing that applies to you.
You wrote something stupid. You got called on it. Seems like you just don't want to face the consequences of what you wrote.
Lam did extort Jobs. They had the name of the person who lost it. If they honestly wanted to return the phone, they would have contacted that person.
Or actually contacting the person who lost it, as he had the guy's actual name and FB page.
They bought the phone. They gave the guy money, and in exchange got the phone.
WRONG. It wouldn't be considered abandoned property. Not to mention, the thief had the guy's facebook page. He easily could have returned it.
It's purely theft. He took something which was not his, and sold it.
And as far as "making shit up" (you can swear on the internet, it's ok), California State Law declares that if you find something that is considered to be misplaced, you must make an effort to reunite the item with it's owner. Either that, or turn it into the police, or the person in charge of the establishment. This thief did neither.
They're only defending the thief because they hate Apple. That's it. Had it been Samsung's phone that was stolen, they'd be up in arms against the guy.
Wow, you are full of shit. The guy did NOT try to "do right," he sold a prototype phone that he stole from a bar.
Irrelevant. He was supposed to turn it in. The fact that he also had the name/facebook page of the guy who lost it damns him even more.
Well, a good start would be the amount he sold it to Gizmodo for. Following that, the amount of ad revenue Gizmodo brought in from the story.
Maybe not in common law, but California State Law is pretty clear on the matter. If you find lost property, which the iPhone prototype was, you are duty bound to turn it in so it can be reunited with it's owner.
Don't want to be called stupid? Don't say stupid things.
Come up with whatever smartass reply you want. The fact of the matter is, you can't take something you find in a bar. You are supposed to turn it in, so it can be reunited with the proper owner. You definitely can't sell that item either.
I honestly don't give a shit how fast you can deploy something. What really matters is how fast you can recover from a problem.
and need things to be challenging rather than repetitive
Working without version control might make things "more challenging", but not in any good sense of the word.
It makes me wonder how many people think that a company should just hand everything to you.
If they're not doing this right, imagine how many other things they're not doing right. And damn straight they should be "handing" this shit to us. It's shit that makes our jobs a fuckload easier, so we can be more productive.
If you see a problem in the company, where you know you can add the value of good software engineering practices, fix it. You looking for career advancement? What looks better on a resume? A person who switches jobs because they don't have what he wants implemented? Or a person who sees a problem, presents a solution, implements it and learns how to deal with it? Which choice screams of career advancement?
That only works if the company is willing to take your advice. If they keep shooting you down, their shitty practices will rub off on you, and make you much harder to hire.
Or you can take the coward's way out and flee before you try to teach anything or learn anything.
Leaving is not the "coward's way out." Quite frankly, it's the only way a lot of these places will change: If they can't recruit and retain new talent.