No, he still loses. He's now out the computer, and the money, and additional time. The company loses even more, but they're both losers.
What you're saying is that by my withholding sex from my wife, I win. In some aspect surely I do, but in all aspects that matter (to me), I still lose.
If you want him to win, chip in a few components or dollars and set the guy up with another computer. Perhaps if you're a OS-advocate you can even gain good press for your flavor of OS with the cheap publicity. (This poor guy was being persecuted by the Wintelions, and the white knight [insert OS type] came to the rescue.)
OOooOOoooOOoooo... Finally a use for all of PS3 cycles that are going unused!! Or even better, make it a real game that lets people try to interactively assemble the pieces online with others, and then run in automated mode when the user gets tired.
Rather than just granting more time to do the same, the judge should have offered Intel another option. "I'll give you another 30 days, before I allow AMD to "put Humpty-Dumpty back together again".
You're exactly right that as long as people deem it valuable, it is. Consider how much a Furby/Elmo/BeanieBaby/OtherFad retailed for, then eBayed for, and then is worth now.
The problem that can easily occur is that the value is suddenly diminished (devaluation) and there is no way to convert out of it. This has happened when the tying of one currency's value to another is removed (google on Brazil 1999 and devaluation). It has also happened when faith in the issuer of the funds is lost (such as Confederate dollars when the South lost). In those cases, it involved government decisions.
In the case of a company-backed currency, then it only takes one bad decision by one person, be it the CEO having a bad day, or a developer futzing something up. Of course the opposite is true too. Value can be driven up very easily by the company and can lead to unethical decisions being made for the stakeholders' profit. With a company controlling so much, there simply isn't enough oversight to keep things in check.
This is a bit off-topic, but I need to share the lesson I've learned.
NEVER give a woman a holiday present that has an electrical cord. You'll realize this the first time that she tells her friends that you gave her a vacuum for her birthday. Awkward to say the least! Perceptions of earrings, however, varies with whoever hears the story. A rich friend imagines those massive diamond dangly things. If she says she wants a (corded) Dyson for Christmas, buy one for the house and then give her earrings.
Oh yeah, and yes, my wife, who stays home, actually likes when I give her those gifts that are hard to explain to friends. It's like giving her free time if I give her something that gets the job done faster.
My stay-at-home Wifey tried this with me months ago. I told her that I could hire a nanny, a housekeeper, and umm... escorts... for less than she cost. She sorta snarled at me when she looked at the spreadsheet I worked up.
I expect that any day now she might start talking to me again.
Interesting...
Here in the US we allow a 3 day cooling off period for purchases in the home. Originally this was due to get around high-pressure sales tactics (Ma'am, buy this vacuum NOW and we'll throw in the attachments for free. I have to go though, so there's no time to think or call the hubbie. My manager said I only the special running today!)
If you read through the exceptions http://www.consumeraction.gov/caw_shopping_cooling _off.shtml to the rule, there's no internet exception. I wonder how well you could apply this rule to an internet purchase if you claim that you followed a "high-pressure banner ad" and bought everything you could before prices went up.
You point out that 18 is an arbitrary age. The only reason that I can really say that age 18 has any real importance is that by that age both males and females have been exposed to and given some time to begin controlling their own hormones.
IMO the laws apply to teens only in that you do not want someone (40 year old man) taking advantage of teen (16 year old girl) hormones to get his way. To rephrase, the laws are designed to prevent a mature person from taking advantage of an immature person,
The problem we're all having with this instance of enforcement is that neither party is mature. It's just a couple of horny kids fumbling around. Taking my initial assertion, the laws shouldn't apply here because neither party is mature and taking advantage of the other.
As a personal aside: I should register as a sex offender myself. Statuatory rape (with my now wife of umm... a long time). As you pointed out, I knew it was against the law and should face the consequences. I really doubt that my wife (nor kids) would agree with you though.
You're missing out on the potential for NASA funding. Set up cameras on-board like a reality tv-show, let human nature run rampant for 3 years, and sell it all pay-per-view. Even if the people all kill each other or have rampant orgies, the PPV-funding will keep NASA aloft for decades without needing additional government funding.
You might even throw a few extras into the capsule for kicks: a known psycopath, a porn-star, etc.
Think of the options for PPV: selling different camera views (shower-cam only $19.99 a month more!), time-slots (how many hours a day would you like?), and viewing types (we offer direct, unedited streaming, or the edited-for-primetime options).
Nah, this isn't the perfect way. You just have to declare that your iPod was off. "I always flip it off when I cross the street. Have evidence to the contrary or can you prove me guilty?"
If I'm vacationing in NY and run a red-light, and I kill a pedestrian wearing earphones, he's at fault? Obviously he must be since his behaviors are illegal.
Okay, so in reality we know that the fault is going to be split because both parties are responsible. So how is fault being split? It used to be 100% my fault (back when pedestrians had the right of way). How far have we swung the other way? Could I sue him (or his estate) for the damages to my car (and not to mention my emotional state!)? "Yes, I ran through the light, BUT he wasn't listening for my engine!" All I need is a 51:49 split.
This law is pointless and even harmful to pedestrians. Even I realize that writing tickets for iPods is unenforceable. You just have to declare that "I turn it off when I cross streets." The only thing that the law can really cause, it pedestrians being blamed for accidents and bad drivers not being so.
How about another loophole? Don't award him a prize, or even a discounted prize (which is a taxable gift). Instead, how about hiring him to work on the crew? Heck, you could even hire him as a waiter and pay him less than minimum wage and let him work for tips!
can someone explain to me how bills like these are grouped together
Typically the add-ons are caused by politicking. Let's say the bill is to increase military spending (with the intent to create a new military base for a new aircraft). Everyone agrees that it's a good thing to create this base; but, only in their own state. Each representative wants the base in their state so they can get the federal spending to flow to their own state.
Since the bill is going to pass, but only one base is being created, the politicking begins. Wisconsin wants the new base so the Wisconsin rep meanders over to the TX, LA, and FL reps and says, "hey.. how about we allow additional Gulf oil drilling? Let's add that to this bill, and some wording that the base will go into Wisconsin. Then we can all vote yes on it."
Everyone throws something into the bill so that everyone gets something for their own interests.
Or use the same idea of trading favors, but expect that reps save the favors up. "I'll abstain from voting on gun control next month, but you're going to vote in favor of my state getting the base." [now look back on voting records and you may find that what's not being voted on is as telling as what is being voted on]
What the hell happened to the times where you looked around, researched the company you wanted to work for, and you pursued employment there?
While I agree with you that researching a company is valuable, there are limits. Things change so quickly now that people need to look to the shorter and shorter term - companies do.
Companies no longer expect employees to remain through thick and thin. In good times, they pay a premium. In bad times, they have layoffs. As evidence, consider the weight that companies and employees place on a pension. Now it's all about the portable 401k.
Another reason that people don't invest large amounts of time researching a company is the speed of mergers and aquisitions in today's markets -- you may be researching and applying to a company that's already in the process of being sold. More than likely, the buying company will not coincide with your expectations.
If the company really wants to play pedantic games, accept the job, and let the company have to follow their own process to fire you. This should work marvelously in a large company!
Accept the job.
Fill out initial paperwork (aka: get payments started).
Stop showing up to work.
Be put onto a 6-month performance plan.
Fail the 5-months of performance plan.
Claim some medical disability.
Claim discrimination.
Get your "manager" to grant an inter-departmental transfer since it's easier to transfer someone than fire them.
Of course rights are cyclical. The cycle tends to be 1) establish a level of rights, 2) erosion of rights, 3) civil unrest in an effort to re-establish a level of rights.
What needs to be noted is that step 3, the civil unrest, varies on format. It could range from something as casual as public questioning of policy, to protests, to political changes, to coup, to war/revolution.
Slashdot Mirror
No, he still loses. He's now out the computer, and the money, and additional time. The company loses even more, but they're both losers.
What you're saying is that by my withholding sex from my wife, I win. In some aspect surely I do, but in all aspects that matter (to me), I still lose.
If you want him to win, chip in a few components or dollars and set the guy up with another computer. Perhaps if you're a OS-advocate you can even gain good press for your flavor of OS with the cheap publicity. (This poor guy was being persecuted by the Wintelions, and the white knight [insert OS type] came to the rescue.)
OOooOOoooOOoooo... Finally a use for all of PS3 cycles that are going unused!! Or even better, make it a real game that lets people try to interactively assemble the pieces online with others, and then run in automated mode when the user gets tired.
Rather than just granting more time to do the same, the judge should have offered Intel another option. "I'll give you another 30 days, before I allow AMD to "put Humpty-Dumpty back together again".
You're exactly right that as long as people deem it valuable, it is. Consider how much a Furby/Elmo/BeanieBaby/OtherFad retailed for, then eBayed for, and then is worth now.
The problem that can easily occur is that the value is suddenly diminished (devaluation) and there is no way to convert out of it. This has happened when the tying of one currency's value to another is removed (google on Brazil 1999 and devaluation). It has also happened when faith in the issuer of the funds is lost (such as Confederate dollars when the South lost). In those cases, it involved government decisions.
In the case of a company-backed currency, then it only takes one bad decision by one person, be it the CEO having a bad day, or a developer futzing something up. Of course the opposite is true too. Value can be driven up very easily by the company and can lead to unethical decisions being made for the stakeholders' profit. With a company controlling so much, there simply isn't enough oversight to keep things in check.
Heheh, true, but it still would fall into that "hard to explain to the friends" category. So, that, and earrings!
This is a bit off-topic, but I need to share the lesson I've learned.
NEVER give a woman a holiday present that has an electrical cord. You'll realize this the first time that she tells her friends that you gave her a vacuum for her birthday. Awkward to say the least! Perceptions of earrings, however, varies with whoever hears the story. A rich friend imagines those massive diamond dangly things.
If she says she wants a (corded) Dyson for Christmas, buy one for the house and then give her earrings.
Oh yeah, and yes, my wife, who stays home, actually likes when I give her those gifts that are hard to explain to friends. It's like giving her free time if I give her something that gets the job done faster.
So, what's six inches long, has a head on it, and drives women crazy? A hundred-dollar bill, of course! (Yeah, it's old, but I chortled.)
My stay-at-home Wifey tried this with me months ago. I told her that I could hire a nanny, a housekeeper, and umm... escorts... for less than she cost. She sorta snarled at me when she looked at the spreadsheet I worked up. I expect that any day now she might start talking to me again.
Interesting... Here in the US we allow a 3 day cooling off period for purchases in the home. Originally this was due to get around high-pressure sales tactics (Ma'am, buy this vacuum NOW and we'll throw in the attachments for free. I have to go though, so there's no time to think or call the hubbie. My manager said I only the special running today!)
g _off.shtml to the rule, there's no internet exception. I wonder how well you could apply this rule to an internet purchase if you claim that you followed a "high-pressure banner ad" and bought everything you could before prices went up.
If you read through the exceptions http://www.consumeraction.gov/caw_shopping_coolin
You point out that 18 is an arbitrary age. The only reason that I can really say that age 18 has any real importance is that by that age both males and females have been exposed to and given some time to begin controlling their own hormones.
IMO the laws apply to teens only in that you do not want someone (40 year old man) taking advantage of teen (16 year old girl) hormones to get his way. To rephrase, the laws are designed to prevent a mature person from taking advantage of an immature person,
The problem we're all having with this instance of enforcement is that neither party is mature. It's just a couple of horny kids fumbling around. Taking my initial assertion, the laws shouldn't apply here because neither party is mature and taking advantage of the other.
As a personal aside: I should register as a sex offender myself. Statuatory rape (with my now wife of umm... a long time). As you pointed out, I knew it was against the law and should face the consequences. I really doubt that my wife (nor kids) would agree with you though.
You're missing out on the potential for NASA funding. Set up cameras on-board like a reality tv-show, let human nature run rampant for 3 years, and sell it all pay-per-view. Even if the people all kill each other or have rampant orgies, the PPV-funding will keep NASA aloft for decades without needing additional government funding.
You might even throw a few extras into the capsule for kicks: a known psycopath, a porn-star, etc.
Think of the options for PPV: selling different camera views (shower-cam only $19.99 a month more!), time-slots (how many hours a day would you like?), and viewing types (we offer direct, unedited streaming, or the edited-for-primetime options).
Nah, this isn't the perfect way. You just have to declare that your iPod was off. "I always flip it off when I cross the street. Have evidence to the contrary or can you prove me guilty?"
Let me get this right...
If I'm vacationing in NY and run a red-light, and I kill a pedestrian wearing earphones, he's at fault? Obviously he must be since his behaviors are illegal.
Okay, so in reality we know that the fault is going to be split because both parties are responsible. So how is fault being split? It used to be 100% my fault (back when pedestrians had the right of way). How far have we swung the other way? Could I sue him (or his estate) for the damages to my car (and not to mention my emotional state!)? "Yes, I ran through the light, BUT he wasn't listening for my engine!" All I need is a 51:49 split.
This law is pointless and even harmful to pedestrians. Even I realize that writing tickets for iPods is unenforceable. You just have to declare that "I turn it off when I cross streets." The only thing that the law can really cause, it pedestrians being blamed for accidents and bad drivers not being so.
How about another loophole? Don't award him a prize, or even a discounted prize (which is a taxable gift). Instead, how about hiring him to work on the crew? Heck, you could even hire him as a waiter and pay him less than minimum wage and let him work for tips!
Typically the add-ons are caused by politicking. Let's say the bill is to increase military spending (with the intent to create a new military base for a new aircraft). Everyone agrees that it's a good thing to create this base; but, only in their own state. Each representative wants the base in their state so they can get the federal spending to flow to their own state.
Since the bill is going to pass, but only one base is being created, the politicking begins. Wisconsin wants the new base so the Wisconsin rep meanders over to the TX, LA, and FL reps and says, "hey.. how about we allow additional Gulf oil drilling? Let's add that to this bill, and some wording that the base will go into Wisconsin. Then we can all vote yes on it."
Everyone throws something into the bill so that everyone gets something for their own interests.
Or use the same idea of trading favors, but expect that reps save the favors up. "I'll abstain from voting on gun control next month, but you're going to vote in favor of my state getting the base." [now look back on voting records and you may find that what's not being voted on is as telling as what is being voted on]
While I agree with you that researching a company is valuable, there are limits. Things change so quickly now that people need to look to the shorter and shorter term - companies do.
Companies no longer expect employees to remain through thick and thin. In good times, they pay a premium. In bad times, they have layoffs. As evidence, consider the weight that companies and employees place on a pension. Now it's all about the portable 401k.
Another reason that people don't invest large amounts of time researching a company is the speed of mergers and aquisitions in today's markets -- you may be researching and applying to a company that's already in the process of being sold. More than likely, the buying company will not coincide with your expectations.
Accept the job.
Fill out initial paperwork (aka: get payments started).
Stop showing up to work.
Be put onto a 6-month performance plan.
Fail the 5-months of performance plan.
Claim some medical disability.
Claim discrimination.
Get your "manager" to grant an inter-departmental transfer since it's easier to transfer someone than fire them.
Repeat
Of course rights are cyclical. The cycle tends to be 1) establish a level of rights, 2) erosion of rights, 3) civil unrest in an effort to re-establish a level of rights.
What needs to be noted is that step 3, the civil unrest, varies on format. It could range from something as casual as public questioning of policy, to protests, to political changes, to coup, to war/revolution.