Some point to Mr. McRaes death as the turning point, but instead I point towards Codemasters' purchase by an equity group just a few months earlier as the beginning of the end.
Oh please, nobody on Slashdot can be that gullible.
You were indeed not hired because of your love of cake. That's 100% the exact reason for them choosing not to hire you. What they will tell you, if anything (which in itself is doubtful) is that they simply found a better applicant, that your education didn't fit the position they were hiring for, or whatever other BS reason they come up with on their chart of "legal reasons to not hire someone".
The Fair Credit Reporting Act allows you to see what creditors see (your credit report in full) if they deny you credit. It doesn't matter what the reason is. If you're denied employment and the employer had pulled a Social Report, you will be allowed to see it in full and it doesn't matter if they tell you what the reason for not hiring was or wasn't.
I honestly don't see reputable businesses using it because if the report even contains one mention that you support gay rights (for example), they open themselves to accusations of sexual-orientation prejudice. Why generate the paper trail and compliance headache when research on social networks can remain an in-house operation?
A much better move from the FTC would be to require social media sites keep logs of who saw you (which they probably already do, at least IP addresses, much more likely "current logged in user") and make those logs available to you. That way you can pull documentation that a potential employer scoped out your political leanings.
From TFA (yeah, I guess I'm a square because I checked it out):
...as long as it complies with the Fair Credit Reporting Act to ensure that its clients let job applicants know when something that turned up in a background check had an adverse effect on their getting employed, or rather not getting employed.
So if they reported to your potential employer that you love cake and that caused your employer to think you'd grab more than one slice during employee functions that contain cake and therefore could not possibly be hired, they will be required to tell you that your cave love is what did you in.
Then I suppose it's up to you and your local Equal Opportunity Office to determine if the employer broke the law, whether those who love cave are a protected group, and what the punishment is.
Personally, I'd like to know who Social Intelligence Corporation's clients are so I can know which employers seek to be the employee's parents and I can save myself the trouble of including them in my job searches.
Right, and Google is poor and lacks lawyers. Gunboat diplomacy is less effective when the enemy actually has a few aircraft carriers. I think Oracle sees this more as a risk vs. reward thing. File the suit. If you win you get a whole lot of money. If you lose, you got a couple invalid patents that probably weren't worth much to begin with (or you would have won), and you paid some lawyers you were probably paying anyway. Small risk, big potential reward.
I just checked Google's revenue numbers, and it looks like the 2010 numbers has them exceeding Oracle, so, I'm wrong. Wasn't the first time, won't be the last.:)
I thought the google code was based on harmony, a clean room implementation. If so, I don't see where Oracle has a leg to stand on. Of course, I could be wrong.
It doesn't even matter. Suits cost money and Oracle's got a lot of it to spend. It's the corporate world's analogue to gunboat diplomacy.
Enjoying the results of forced warranties, difficult and expensive environmental regulations (RoHS, I'm looking at you) and takebacks on electronics, are we?
In the US, when it breaks, you get to keep both pieces. Although they do give you 12 months, it's encumbered by all sorts of conditions, and you get to pay for shipping (well, that's the usual MO here, don't know if Nintendo is breaking that mold or not).
When I bought a GBA SP, one of the first ones, it had an annoying bit of lint floating in the center of the screen. I put in a claim online and got a label. Slapped it on a spare box, shipped it in, had it back in about a week and a half. Nothing out of pocket.
Not too shabby, definitely beyond the letter of the law according to the warranty. Of course, this was back when their console division was a joke and they couldn't afford to be arrogant as an overall company.
What does a previous version have to do with *this* version mentioned in the article?
Maybe nothing, maybe something. With a closed-source OS, all you have is their word. My personal opinion? I would wager Apple cares more about closing up the "jailbreak" part of it than the "modify files via remote exploit".
Well, fine then. Each app has a developer. Write to them and find out what they want to do with your phone.
They don't write back? Don't install the app. They write back marketing fluff? Don't install the app. They write back something you suspect is a lie? Don't install the app. They write back something you suspect is true but you don't want them to have the permissions? Don't install the app.
My app selection criteria revolves around what's important to me. Sounds like I just itemized your criteria. No no, my pleasure.
Ultimately, it comes down to trust. It's not limited to computing, the real world has examples, too. Do you trust the cleaning person? Do you trust the developer of a given app? Do you trust the cleaner to have a copy of your keys? Do you trust the developer to run code on your system? Do you trust the cleaner not to steal anything? Do you trust the developer to respect your data? Do you verify the cleaner isn't stealing anything with surveillance? Do you verify the developer isn't phoning home with data it doesn't need with a firewall or "wire" inspection?
If you trust no one, then the answers seem clear. Don't hire the cleaning person and don't download apps.
Businesses are not people, they don't have any rights against warrantless search.
This is one of the few times on this type of issue where the government isn't overreaching and violating the constitution.
We also already have inspections of other industrys for illegal practices (food industrys, chemical industrys, etc.) So why should replication businesses have any special status.
Because illegal practices in those other industries can lead to mass death and loss of life. Tainted food could kill consumers, unsafe chemical plants can explode and leave a city sized crater.
Who dies if the copyright cops have to wait to get a warrant as opposed to not getting one?
That accounting department might really have needed it.
I *don't* code, I build spreadsheets for a government finance office. Usually I'm translating a spreadsheet that's been helpfully locked into.pdf form by another government agency back into a usable spreadsheet, and being able to glance back and forth without sacrificing the full screen view is sanity preserving.
I'd wager anyone that uses a computer for work would benefit from a second monitor.
The real issue, as I see it, is that Accounting needed a monitor so instead of ordering one they took it from an employee that already had one. To the submitter of the story, as a project manager, why aren't you removing the developer's obstacles? Using a term like "wailing" makes it pretty clear what you think of the lowly developer on a personal level, but why are you asking us if they really need it instead of enabling him/her to do their job as they see fit?
I'd like to know what kind of damages they've incurred as a result of being tracked by Google that justifies a $50 million payday...
That's called "punitive damages". Not based on damage done, but a sufficiently high number to coerce a settlement -- er, I mean -- punish the company for wrong doing.
Exactly. They didn't add it on request of any government: they added it first and then shopped it around for favors. I wonder if Jobs presented it as "one more thing..." when asking for patent favors from the US or extra security around the factories from the Chinese.
Perhaps is music wasn't overly compressed (talking about dynamic range, here) they wouldn't need so many more bits of resolution for the -3 dB they're mastering audio at these days.
"Gee, you sure are popular now that you're a Stonecutter." "It's wonderful, Marge! These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
if the hack didn't involve sticking an arduino in it. When you add that part, it's not really a hack anymore, it's just a replacement cover for new internals.
Complete agreement here. It's not so much converting a toy into an Enigma machine, it's using a toy as an interface to an Enigma emulator.
If programmers new what they were doing I wouldn't be stuck running old-assed unsecurable OS's that we only keep around because stupid programmers can't be arsed to update their bloated crappy application software to run on current systems.
Hey programmer, try running your app without a machine to run it on.
A lot of times it's the push from management, not the lack of motivation. App XYZ was written 9000 years ago (in computer time, so, translated into maybe 15 earth years?) and the developers were tricked into using some snazzy system calls or library components that promised they'd change the way they work "forever", but, really, support was dropped 3 years later leaving an app that, best case, needs an entire tier rewritten (worst case: the whole dang thing). It takes time and money, but the business won't spend any money because XYZ, as far as their concerned, still works just fine. Believe me: there's nothing I want more than to rewrite these little timebombs into something more supportable.
Part of this is why I just roll my eyes when the architecture team starts pushing this brand new framework of product or library that will somehow magically solve all our problems. It's just a whole lot of "play now, pay later."
Seems like there's a continuum of "dumb" for dumbphones. I'm not paying the smartphone tax, but my phone can: A) Browse web fairly successfully B) Run apps (J2ME, mind you, but they look pretty good and can connect to the web. Touchscreens are for babies) C) Text/Email/RSS feed consumption D) Calendar, contacts, notes that all sync with a few Bluetooth activation keypresses
Sounds like as smart as I need my phone to be. Is it somehow smarter to pay more? I've heard that just sticking your SIM into a smartphone gets a signal set at the carrier that it's their chance to gouge you EVEN MORE.
The nice part is, unlike Y2K, is that there's no hard drop-dead date by which all work has to be done and all of a sudden there's a bunch of folks laid off. IPv4 can be a looming threat for years to come! Huzzah!
Slashdot Mirror
Some point to Mr. McRaes death as the turning point, but instead I point towards Codemasters' purchase by an equity group just a few months earlier as the beginning of the end.
Oh please, nobody on Slashdot can be that gullible.
You were indeed not hired because of your love of cake. That's 100% the exact reason for them choosing not to hire you.
What they will tell you, if anything (which in itself is doubtful) is that they simply found a better applicant, that your education didn't fit the position they were hiring for, or whatever other BS reason they come up with on their chart of "legal reasons to not hire someone".
The Fair Credit Reporting Act allows you to see what creditors see (your credit report in full) if they deny you credit. It doesn't matter what the reason is. If you're denied employment and the employer had pulled a Social Report, you will be allowed to see it in full and it doesn't matter if they tell you what the reason for not hiring was or wasn't.
I honestly don't see reputable businesses using it because if the report even contains one mention that you support gay rights (for example), they open themselves to accusations of sexual-orientation prejudice. Why generate the paper trail and compliance headache when research on social networks can remain an in-house operation?
A much better move from the FTC would be to require social media sites keep logs of who saw you (which they probably already do, at least IP addresses, much more likely "current logged in user") and make those logs available to you. That way you can pull documentation that a potential employer scoped out your political leanings.
From TFA (yeah, I guess I'm a square because I checked it out):
...as long as it complies with the Fair Credit Reporting Act to ensure that its clients let job applicants know when something that turned up in a background check had an adverse effect on their getting employed, or rather not getting employed.
So if they reported to your potential employer that you love cake and that caused your employer to think you'd grab more than one slice during employee functions that contain cake and therefore could not possibly be hired, they will be required to tell you that your cave love is what did you in.
Then I suppose it's up to you and your local Equal Opportunity Office to determine if the employer broke the law, whether those who love cave are a protected group, and what the punishment is.
Personally, I'd like to know who Social Intelligence Corporation's clients are so I can know which employers seek to be the employee's parents and I can save myself the trouble of including them in my job searches.
Right, and Google is poor and lacks lawyers. Gunboat diplomacy is less effective when the enemy actually has a few aircraft carriers. I think Oracle sees this more as a risk vs. reward thing. File the suit. If you win you get a whole lot of money. If you lose, you got a couple invalid patents that probably weren't worth much to begin with (or you would have won), and you paid some lawyers you were probably paying anyway. Small risk, big potential reward.
I just checked Google's revenue numbers, and it looks like the 2010 numbers has them exceeding Oracle, so, I'm wrong. Wasn't the first time, won't be the last. :)
I thought the google code was based on harmony, a clean room implementation. If so, I don't see where Oracle has a leg to stand on. Of course, I could be wrong.
It doesn't even matter. Suits cost money and Oracle's got a lot of it to spend. It's the corporate world's analogue to gunboat diplomacy.
Enjoying the results of forced warranties, difficult and expensive environmental regulations (RoHS, I'm looking at you) and takebacks on electronics, are we?
In the US, when it breaks, you get to keep both pieces. Although they do give you 12 months, it's encumbered by all sorts of conditions, and you get to pay for shipping (well, that's the usual MO here, don't know if Nintendo is breaking that mold or not).
When I bought a GBA SP, one of the first ones, it had an annoying bit of lint floating in the center of the screen. I put in a claim online and got a label. Slapped it on a spare box, shipped it in, had it back in about a week and a half. Nothing out of pocket.
Not too shabby, definitely beyond the letter of the law according to the warranty. Of course, this was back when their console division was a joke and they couldn't afford to be arrogant as an overall company.
What does a previous version have to do with *this* version mentioned in the article?
Maybe nothing, maybe something. With a closed-source OS, all you have is their word. My personal opinion? I would wager Apple cares more about closing up the "jailbreak" part of it than the "modify files via remote exploit".
Clearly Microsoft used a variation on their trans-warp technology to go back into the past and cause those outages in order to lower the asking price.
Wake up, sheeple.
Well, fine then. Each app has a developer. Write to them and find out what they want to do with your phone.
They don't write back? Don't install the app.
They write back marketing fluff? Don't install the app.
They write back something you suspect is a lie? Don't install the app.
They write back something you suspect is true but you don't want them to have the permissions? Don't install the app.
My app selection criteria revolves around what's important to me. Sounds like I just itemized your criteria. No no, my pleasure.
Ultimately, it comes down to trust. It's not limited to computing, the real world has examples, too. Do you trust the cleaning person? Do you trust the developer of a given app? Do you trust the cleaner to have a copy of your keys? Do you trust the developer to run code on your system? Do you trust the cleaner not to steal anything? Do you trust the developer to respect your data? Do you verify the cleaner isn't stealing anything with surveillance? Do you verify the developer isn't phoning home with data it doesn't need with a firewall or "wire" inspection?
If you trust no one, then the answers seem clear. Don't hire the cleaning person and don't download apps.
If you drink Brawndo, you will WIN AT YELLING.
Businesses are not people, they don't have any rights against warrantless search.
This is one of the few times on this type of issue where the government isn't overreaching and violating the constitution.
We also already have inspections of other industrys for illegal practices (food industrys, chemical industrys, etc.) So why should replication businesses have any special status.
Because illegal practices in those other industries can lead to mass death and loss of life. Tainted food could kill consumers, unsafe chemical plants can explode and leave a city sized crater.
Who dies if the copyright cops have to wait to get a warrant as opposed to not getting one?
That accounting department might really have needed it.
I *don't* code, I build spreadsheets for a government finance office. Usually I'm translating a spreadsheet that's been helpfully locked into .pdf form by another government agency back into a usable spreadsheet, and being able to glance back and forth without sacrificing the full screen view is sanity preserving.
I'd wager anyone that uses a computer for work would benefit from a second monitor.
The real issue, as I see it, is that Accounting needed a monitor so instead of ordering one they took it from an employee that already had one. To the submitter of the story, as a project manager, why aren't you removing the developer's obstacles? Using a term like "wailing" makes it pretty clear what you think of the lowly developer on a personal level, but why are you asking us if they really need it instead of enabling him/her to do their job as they see fit?
So anytime you are curious about anything, you must always satisfy that curiosity in the most stupid, unsafe manner possible then?
I prefer to satisfy my curiosity by watching a YouTube video of someone satisfying their curiosity in the most stupid, unsafe manner possible.
I'd like to know what kind of damages they've incurred as a result of being tracked by Google that justifies a $50 million payday...
That's called "punitive damages". Not based on damage done, but a sufficiently high number to coerce a settlement -- er, I mean -- punish the company for wrong doing.
Exactly. They didn't add it on request of any government: they added it first and then shopped it around for favors. I wonder if Jobs presented it as "one more thing..." when asking for patent favors from the US or extra security around the factories from the Chinese.
There's really no cause for alarm, if it works in pre-3.0 it'll work, it just won't be as polished as it should be.
But who could resist spreading FUD instead?
OMG only 20 apps! Android really sucks after all... better go get an iPad instead!
Perhaps is music wasn't overly compressed (talking about dynamic range, here) they wouldn't need so many more bits of resolution for the -3 dB they're mastering audio at these days.
"Gee, you sure are popular now that you're a Stonecutter."
"It's wonderful, Marge! These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
dslreports says it cost $293 million; $200 million is how much it will cost every 5 years.
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Meet-The-United-States-First-Ever-Broadband-Map-112787
All that money and they couldn't make each connectivity technology uniquely color coded? That's a pretty rookie display.
if the hack didn't involve sticking an arduino in it. When you add that part, it's not really a hack anymore, it's just a replacement cover for new internals.
Complete agreement here. It's not so much converting a toy into an Enigma machine, it's using a toy as an interface to an Enigma emulator.
If programmers new what they were doing I wouldn't be stuck running old-assed unsecurable OS's that we only keep around because stupid programmers can't be arsed to update their bloated crappy application software to run on current systems.
Hey programmer, try running your app without a machine to run it on.
A lot of times it's the push from management, not the lack of motivation. App XYZ was written 9000 years ago (in computer time, so, translated into maybe 15 earth years?) and the developers were tricked into using some snazzy system calls or library components that promised they'd change the way they work "forever", but, really, support was dropped 3 years later leaving an app that, best case, needs an entire tier rewritten (worst case: the whole dang thing). It takes time and money, but the business won't spend any money because XYZ, as far as their concerned, still works just fine. Believe me: there's nothing I want more than to rewrite these little timebombs into something more supportable.
Part of this is why I just roll my eyes when the architecture team starts pushing this brand new framework of product or library that will somehow magically solve all our problems. It's just a whole lot of "play now, pay later."
Seems like there's a continuum of "dumb" for dumbphones. I'm not paying the smartphone tax, but my phone can:
A) Browse web fairly successfully
B) Run apps (J2ME, mind you, but they look pretty good and can connect to the web. Touchscreens are for babies)
C) Text/Email/RSS feed consumption
D) Calendar, contacts, notes that all sync with a few Bluetooth activation keypresses
Sounds like as smart as I need my phone to be. Is it somehow smarter to pay more? I've heard that just sticking your SIM into a smartphone gets a signal set at the carrier that it's their chance to gouge you EVEN MORE.
The nice part is, unlike Y2K, is that there's no hard drop-dead date by which all work has to be done and all of a sudden there's a bunch of folks laid off. IPv4 can be a looming threat for years to come! Huzzah!
Government sponsored skydiving? Free hookers and cocaine? Euthanasia bounties paid to your family?
Just don't use words with more than three syllables or else you'll be investigated for being too smart.