If that was written at work I would have fired the guy for wasting company time. The thing is 13 pages long. How much time would it take to author a such well thought out document? (I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the crap in there, and I haven't read the thing in its entirety either. I'm just saying the structure and supporting arguments are well thought out and well executed.)
From the document:
but would never have the courage to say or defend because of our shaming culture and the possibility of being fired.
Well, he's insightful enough to have called it. Show of hands, who didn't see that coming?
Funny that, you don't have to be the biological father to pay child support.
While I don't disagree it sucks for the dude involved, being forced to pay for a child that is not his, I want to point out a couple of things about this case: Based on the court doc, they were married in 96, under two years later the kid was born, they weren't divorced until 2001. That would lead me to believe that for 3 years he raised the child as his own. The 2001 divorce filings "incorporated a revised marital settlement agreement acknowledging Richard as the father of the couple’s minor child and requiring him to pay child support." It wasn't until 2003, while his ex was suing him for non-payment of child support, that he contested paternity and subsequently attempted to claim fraud against her.
The judgement you referenced only stated that the statute of limitations for fraud had run out, and therefore he could not seek reparations. This other doc is an interesting read, paraphrasing a portion of it says: Because he signed the 2001 divorce decree acknowledging he was the father, he is the father for all intents and purposes of the law. Essentially legally adopting the child. If he would have presented the paternity tests at that time, or within a year, he would have gotten out of the support payments. Because he waited 2 years he's SoL.
Again, shitty for the dude involved and it sucks that he's stuck paying a shit load of money for a kid that's not his, but the facts and the laws are what they are.
Such bullshit, wtf to people think fonts will be used for when they pay for them?
Do you honestly think somebody is going to pay $100 for a font license to change the default font on their computer's operating system? Gtfo.
Your argument is irrelevant. The only relevant thing here is the licensing agreement, the cost doesn't affect the agreement. If I convince you to pay me $1M for a desktop background picture and the license says "not for commercial use" and you use it on your companies promotional material, you better bet your ass you're going to get sued.
Maybe a better argument would be computer software. There are countless tools out there that are "free for non-commercial use" but require you to purchase a license to use in a business setting. What do you expect to happen if the BSA comes in (assuming you are in the US) and finds those programs on your work computer?
Not sure if trolling, but... Surge pricing comes into effect when there is a shortage of cars. In order to reduce demand and attempt to increase supply, the price is increased. Taxi companies do not have the option to raise prices, and since they are heavily regulated there is a finite number of cabs you can have on the road. Therefore they do not have any mechanism to attempt to limit demand.
I was at a large concert last weekend, when it let out an Uber ride shot to $100+ where earlier it had cost $15 to get there. That same cab ride would have cost somewhere around $20-$25 in both directions, on the way to the concert it would have been OK, but it would have likely taken me 2 hours to get in one on the way home. If I was willing to pay the surge price on Uber I could have been in a car and on the way in 10 minutes.
So my choices were: 1) Be cheap, but not get home for 2 or 3 hours. 2) Pay the exorberant prices and be home in under an hour. or 3) The one I took, jump on the light rail until I was far enough outside of the surge area to grab an Uber home. $5 for the light rail, $25 for the uber. Took a little over an hour to get home.
making the products they sell actually useful out of the box
Have you ever actually worked with the public before? People are idiots. I've worked in a retail environment for a number of years, and a consumer electronics repair shop for a couple years. The level of stupidity achieved by the general population would make your head spin. When I sold and serviced remote car starters it would be at least a weekly experience explaining to a customer that there was a battery in the remote that needed to be replaced. Not to mention the call where we had to instruct the customer on how to unlock their door with a key because their remote died.
I'm not in the market of selling shit to the public (thank god) but if I was forced to accept returns without the opportunity to communicate with my customer I would be strongly considering a different platform.
On the other hand, you do have a valid point. I've bought some stuff off Amazon where the instructions looked like they were translated by a drunken ape... So I do see your point there.
they want a $19 can-opener that they'll replace in 5 years with a fancier model for some unfathomable reason (this one cuts from the side to produce no sharps on the lid--just on the can!).
I bought this "special" can opener that was labeled something like "opens first time, guaranteed". I have to say, the thing is amazing. It literally does what it says, and doesn't take three attempts to open a god damn can...
Although the data breach happened in 2015, Swedish Secret Service discovered it in 2016 and started investigating the incident, which led to the fire of STA director-general Maria Ågren in January 2017.
Holy shit. I have a hard time wrapping my head around how massive of a fuckup this is.
Ågren was also fined half a month's pay (70,000 Swedish krona which equals to $8,500)
In August of 2015, Snopes entered a revenue-share/content and ad management agreement with a company called Proper Media, formed earlier that very year. In early 2016, Proper arranged to buy Barbara’s [Estranged wife of the owner] share of Bardav [the company they two started, owner of Snopes], replacing her as co-owner of the company.
I stated "The project completion date is the default one (end of quarter 60 days away)" and chuckled a little.
Was then told that's right.
Project actually went 18 months, ( 90% done at the 12 month mark)
"You don't work on my project, do you?" -Anybody who has worked on an IT project.
No righteous high horse, no pedestal. I'm just as guilty as you are of everything you mentioned. Merely looking it it from the other point of view.
I've been on both sides of shitty situations. I busted up the back of another car because it was wet and I was following too close, and I've totaled a car because a guy completely disregarded a traffic signal. My point is that in both instances, data logging likely would have changed the outcome. The guy I rear ended unreasonably dynamited the brakes because the left turn light turned yellow, dude was literally stopped in the middle of the intersection when I hit him. When I t-boned the guy I was exceeding the speed limit, not by a lot but enough that 5-10 MPH would have made a huge difference. The first instance I was 100% at fault, when in reality he should have shared some of the blame. In the second, he was found 100% at fault where I should have shared in it.
And the argumentative side of me want's to say no, you weren't clear at all in your example. All you said was you were driving on a green and it turned yellow, no mention of how far away from the intersection you were or if you could safely stop. The only detail you provided was you that know the light stays yellow for a long time
You've been driving this road for decades, so you know it's a long yellow light.
So you're saying, "I could have safely stopped for the yellow light, but since I know it's a long yellow I decided I could beat it." Along with all of the other "bad stuff" you mention, not driving defensively, poor hand placement, loud music, distracted driving, are all choices you make.
You may have done nothing wrong and couldn't have prevented the accident
Not doing any one of the 5 things you mentioned in your comment may or may not prevent the accident, but which one is going to look better on paper in front of a judge? Your argument is basically, if I get in an accident I don't want my car to tell the judge if I fucked up.
We use Citrix deployment for our ERP software. When using an external monitor on a laptop or Surface Pro it literally won't work if the external monitor is on the right side of the laptop. It cuts off half of the window, and the mouse doesn't click where it's actually pointing (you have to click a half inch to the right of a button to get it to click). Move the monitor (physically and logically) to the left of the laptop, it works perfectly.
The term was coined by Columbia University media law professor Tim Wu
Which is all detailed out in the last link I provided. When I was referring to "as we know it", was referring to the courts affirming the right of the FCC to govern Broadband and the push for the classification of broadband as a Title II service. And it looks like I was wrong on the year, that was 2014, not 2013
I am 100% in favor of net neutrality, and smacking down the bullshit that internet providers get away with. I am also 100% against shitty click-bait journalism.
3 ISPs Have Spent $572 Million to Kill Net Neutrality Since 2008
Well shit, that sounds scary. But "net neutrality" as we know it know wasn't around til 2013. How could they have been spending money lobbying to kill net neutrality since 2008?
Three of the largest internet service providers and the cable television industry’s primary trade association have spent more than a half-billion dollars lobbying the federal government during the past decade on issues that include net neutrality, according to a MapLight analysis. (emphasis is mine)
Ah. There it is. Had to go to the tertiary source to find it. This includes the lobbying money spent on everything that the cable companies want to bend a congress-critter's ear about, not just net neutrality. Nice work on bending MapLight's reasonably less click-bait-y headline.
I get a couple of calls a week from the IRS and Credit Card scammers. (The ones that actually speak English well, not the Indians) I wonder how many of those people think they are actually doing legitimate work?
Don't forget Social Security. I have no illusions that the bag will be empty in 30 years when I'm due to start drawing the money that I've been paying in since I was 16.
I mean, I don't recall ever seeing a discrepancy on what the digital guide on my cable box displayed vs what was actually on that channel. (With the exception of a sporting event running long) That would imply that the information is available accurately in digital form. If any of the three parties wanted this "problem" fixed, it would be fixed, there are surely technical hurdles but they don't seem insurmountable. The fact that it hasn't been fixed would seem to imply that someone doesn't want it fixed.
Jealousy is not a good look. More to the point, isn't convincing people to "give" you $10B part of the genius? I mean, he didn't just find that money laying on the side of the road, or steal it from anybody. (No, I will not accept the argument that gov't grants, etc., are theft. The politicians authorized the grants/subsidies/etc. You elected the politicians to represent you.) That would lead to the conclusion that every dime spent on creating SpaceX, Tesla, etc was given to him willingly. If you, Anonymous Coward, managed to obtain $10B willingly given to you and do cool shit with it we would call you a genius too.
Slashdot Mirror
U.S. intelligence officials have concluded in a confidential assessment.
You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.
If that was written at work I would have fired the guy for wasting company time. The thing is 13 pages long. How much time would it take to author a such well thought out document? (I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the crap in there, and I haven't read the thing in its entirety either. I'm just saying the structure and supporting arguments are well thought out and well executed.)
From the document:
but would never have the courage to say or defend because of our shaming culture and the possibility of being fired.
Well, he's insightful enough to have called it. Show of hands, who didn't see that coming?
Funny that, you don't have to be the biological father to pay child support.
While I don't disagree it sucks for the dude involved, being forced to pay for a child that is not his, I want to point out a couple of things about this case: Based on the court doc, they were married in 96, under two years later the kid was born, they weren't divorced until 2001. That would lead me to believe that for 3 years he raised the child as his own. The 2001 divorce filings "incorporated a revised marital settlement agreement acknowledging Richard as the father of the couple’s minor child and requiring him to pay child support." It wasn't until 2003, while his ex was suing him for non-payment of child support, that he contested paternity and subsequently attempted to claim fraud against her.
The judgement you referenced only stated that the statute of limitations for fraud had run out, and therefore he could not seek reparations. This other doc is an interesting read, paraphrasing a portion of it says: Because he signed the 2001 divorce decree acknowledging he was the father, he is the father for all intents and purposes of the law. Essentially legally adopting the child. If he would have presented the paternity tests at that time, or within a year, he would have gotten out of the support payments. Because he waited 2 years he's SoL.
Again, shitty for the dude involved and it sucks that he's stuck paying a shit load of money for a kid that's not his, but the facts and the laws are what they are.
Solve the liberal problem by preventing weak men from reproducing!
They should put it in the water in all the low education red states....
Well arent you fucked up. "I dont like these peoples political opinions and who they vote for. So lets prevent them from having kids".
Wait, which one is messed up? The one that matches your world view, or the one that is opposite of yours?
Such bullshit, wtf to people think fonts will be used for when they pay for them?
Do you honestly think somebody is going to pay $100 for a font license to change the default font on their computer's operating system? Gtfo.
Your argument is irrelevant. The only relevant thing here is the licensing agreement, the cost doesn't affect the agreement. If I convince you to pay me $1M for a desktop background picture and the license says "not for commercial use" and you use it on your companies promotional material, you better bet your ass you're going to get sued.
Maybe a better argument would be computer software. There are countless tools out there that are "free for non-commercial use" but require you to purchase a license to use in a business setting. What do you expect to happen if the BSA comes in (assuming you are in the US) and finds those programs on your work computer?
Not sure if trolling, but... Surge pricing comes into effect when there is a shortage of cars. In order to reduce demand and attempt to increase supply, the price is increased. Taxi companies do not have the option to raise prices, and since they are heavily regulated there is a finite number of cabs you can have on the road. Therefore they do not have any mechanism to attempt to limit demand.
I was at a large concert last weekend, when it let out an Uber ride shot to $100+ where earlier it had cost $15 to get there. That same cab ride would have cost somewhere around $20-$25 in both directions, on the way to the concert it would have been OK, but it would have likely taken me 2 hours to get in one on the way home. If I was willing to pay the surge price on Uber I could have been in a car and on the way in 10 minutes.
So my choices were: 1) Be cheap, but not get home for 2 or 3 hours. 2) Pay the exorberant prices and be home in under an hour. or 3) The one I took, jump on the light rail until I was far enough outside of the surge area to grab an Uber home. $5 for the light rail, $25 for the uber. Took a little over an hour to get home.
making the products they sell actually useful out of the box
Have you ever actually worked with the public before? People are idiots. I've worked in a retail environment for a number of years, and a consumer electronics repair shop for a couple years. The level of stupidity achieved by the general population would make your head spin. When I sold and serviced remote car starters it would be at least a weekly experience explaining to a customer that there was a battery in the remote that needed to be replaced. Not to mention the call where we had to instruct the customer on how to unlock their door with a key because their remote died.
I'm not in the market of selling shit to the public (thank god) but if I was forced to accept returns without the opportunity to communicate with my customer I would be strongly considering a different platform.
On the other hand, you do have a valid point. I've bought some stuff off Amazon where the instructions looked like they were translated by a drunken ape... So I do see your point there.
they want a $19 can-opener that they'll replace in 5 years with a fancier model for some unfathomable reason (this one cuts from the side to produce no sharps on the lid--just on the can!).
I bought this "special" can opener that was labeled something like "opens first time, guaranteed". I have to say, the thing is amazing. It literally does what it says, and doesn't take three attempts to open a god damn can...
Not sure why you were modded down. Perhaps a bit brash, but the comment appears accurate.
Although the data breach happened in 2015, Swedish Secret Service discovered it in 2016 and started investigating the incident, which led to the fire of STA director-general Maria Ågren in January 2017.
Holy shit. I have a hard time wrapping my head around how massive of a fuckup this is.
Ågren was also fined half a month's pay (70,000 Swedish krona which equals to $8,500)
Oh. Well hell, that ought to teach her.
In August of 2015, Snopes entered a revenue-share/content and ad management agreement with a company called Proper Media, formed earlier that very year. In early 2016, Proper arranged to buy Barbara’s [Estranged wife of the owner] share of Bardav [the company they two started, owner of Snopes], replacing her as co-owner of the company.
I stated "The project completion date is the default one (end of quarter 60 days away)" and chuckled a little. Was then told that's right. Project actually went 18 months, ( 90% done at the 12 month mark)
"You don't work on my project, do you?" -Anybody who has worked on an IT project.
No righteous high horse, no pedestal. I'm just as guilty as you are of everything you mentioned. Merely looking it it from the other point of view.
I've been on both sides of shitty situations. I busted up the back of another car because it was wet and I was following too close, and I've totaled a car because a guy completely disregarded a traffic signal. My point is that in both instances, data logging likely would have changed the outcome. The guy I rear ended unreasonably dynamited the brakes because the left turn light turned yellow, dude was literally stopped in the middle of the intersection when I hit him. When I t-boned the guy I was exceeding the speed limit, not by a lot but enough that 5-10 MPH would have made a huge difference. The first instance I was 100% at fault, when in reality he should have shared some of the blame. In the second, he was found 100% at fault where I should have shared in it.
And the argumentative side of me want's to say no, you weren't clear at all in your example. All you said was you were driving on a green and it turned yellow, no mention of how far away from the intersection you were or if you could safely stop. The only detail you provided was you that know the light stays yellow for a long time
You've been driving this road for decades, so you know it's a long yellow light.
So you're saying, "I could have safely stopped for the yellow light, but since I know it's a long yellow I decided I could beat it." Along with all of the other "bad stuff" you mention, not driving defensively, poor hand placement, loud music, distracted driving, are all choices you make.
You may have done nothing wrong and couldn't have prevented the accident
Not doing any one of the 5 things you mentioned in your comment may or may not prevent the accident, but which one is going to look better on paper in front of a judge? Your argument is basically, if I get in an accident I don't want my car to tell the judge if I fucked up.
We use Citrix deployment for our ERP software. When using an external monitor on a laptop or Surface Pro it literally won't work if the external monitor is on the right side of the laptop. It cuts off half of the window, and the mouse doesn't click where it's actually pointing (you have to click a half inch to the right of a button to get it to click). Move the monitor (physically and logically) to the left of the laptop, it works perfectly.
The term was coined by Columbia University media law professor Tim Wu
Which is all detailed out in the last link I provided. When I was referring to "as we know it", was referring to the courts affirming the right of the FCC to govern Broadband and the push for the classification of broadband as a Title II service. And it looks like I was wrong on the year, that was 2014, not 2013
I am 100% in favor of net neutrality, and smacking down the bullshit that internet providers get away with. I am also 100% against shitty click-bait journalism.
3 ISPs Have Spent $572 Million to Kill Net Neutrality Since 2008
Well shit, that sounds scary. But "net neutrality" as we know it know wasn't around til 2013. How could they have been spending money lobbying to kill net neutrality since 2008?
Three of the largest internet service providers and the cable television industry’s primary trade association have spent more than a half-billion dollars lobbying the federal government during the past decade on issues that include net neutrality, according to a MapLight analysis. (emphasis is mine)
Ah. There it is. Had to go to the tertiary source to find it. This includes the lobbying money spent on everything that the cable companies want to bend a congress-critter's ear about, not just net neutrality. Nice work on bending MapLight's reasonably less click-bait-y headline.
If your interested, my google-fu on net neutrality history came up with this article from c-net: https://www.cnet.com/news/net-...
"Right to work" may bring back manufacturing jobs, but they will all be at 7.50/hour with no benefits.
I get a couple of calls a week from the IRS and Credit Card scammers. (The ones that actually speak English well, not the Indians) I wonder how many of those people think they are actually doing legitimate work?
No excuse for that.
I mean, there's an excuse for it, you and I just don't like what the excuse is.
Don't forget Social Security. I have no illusions that the bag will be empty in 30 years when I'm due to start drawing the money that I've been paying in since I was 16.
Dammit where are my mod points? That's funny as hell. well done.
I mean, I don't recall ever seeing a discrepancy on what the digital guide on my cable box displayed vs what was actually on that channel. (With the exception of a sporting event running long) That would imply that the information is available accurately in digital form. If any of the three parties wanted this "problem" fixed, it would be fixed, there are surely technical hurdles but they don't seem insurmountable. The fact that it hasn't been fixed would seem to imply that someone doesn't want it fixed.
Jealousy is not a good look. More to the point, isn't convincing people to "give" you $10B part of the genius? I mean, he didn't just find that money laying on the side of the road, or steal it from anybody. (No, I will not accept the argument that gov't grants, etc., are theft. The politicians authorized the grants/subsidies/etc. You elected the politicians to represent you.) That would lead to the conclusion that every dime spent on creating SpaceX, Tesla, etc was given to him willingly. If you, Anonymous Coward, managed to obtain $10B willingly given to you and do cool shit with it we would call you a genius too.
Aaah, thank you. Good insight.