crazydoggers

Where are you seeing the marines where deployed? I am reading they were put on alert status, which is not the same.

I would imagine this is being done as a signal to the state of California not to incite insurrection or the Insurrection Act could be invoked.

I’m not making a judgment about the morality or correctness of the current federalization of the national guard, but we need to make sure we are not spreading misinformation at such a time and sticking to facts.

Edit:

I did just find this, so it seems they are being integrated somehow. So then yes, not clear how this would be legal:

https://www.northcom.mil/Newsroom/Press-Releases/Article/421...

If I were on the board / an investor of the company, I’d let the managers go and hire back that engineer.

The goal of a company is to serve its customers and make a profit, not stroke managements egos.

And it sounds more like this guy pointed out what was wrong and maybe embarrassed people, but that doesn’t make him an asshole. It’s one thing to be mean or call people names, that’s an asshole. But this guy was an “asshole” because he was right and it embarrassed people? I’ve seen the type of management that is so insecure they can’t be pointed out what they are doing wrong, sounds more like what happened here.

A good company has management that has a thick skin and acknowledges its missteps and raises up talent. If you can’t admit an employee “lower” than you can point out your flaws and give you criticism, then you’re the problem.

Can’t wait until V’Ger comes back to visit us in the 23rd century to tell us about its travels.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_The_Motion_Pictur...

This article doesn’t include information on the Hack.

The 404 media article linked in this article is an earlier article.

The 404 media article with the hack was posted last night at 6pm. So that needs a seperate post, and should not be marked duped.

Without looking out the window how would you tell the difference between acceleration or deceleration? You can’t.

And if you say “well one way I fly to the back of the tram and the other the front” You’re arbitrarily associating “front” with decelerate and “back” with accelerate.

300gs is 300gs regardless of the direction vector of the component.

> So for sure a system's design must consider more than just the magnitude of acceleration.

What else would you need to consider? Acceleration up? Down? Left? 20%x,30%y,40%z? There’s an infinite number of directions.

Acceleration is a vector. So if you apply the “deceleration” long enough you’ll eventually be accelerating in the opposite direction. Without a frame of reference it’s all the same. Even with a frame of reference you’re still accelerating just that it’s in he opposite direction of the current velocity.

I wonder if it’s actually a form of touch sensation. Some parts of the body might be minutely susceptible to magnetic fields and the feeling is distributed across areas of the turtle. The human finger can sense things only a micron in size.

Something like miniscule tugging of the shell in certain directions being felt?

Here’s a video of the expedition:

https://youtu.be/Jd2CdraSqt0?si=7xcYlM_GH4-1uw_k

His channel has lots of other amazing videos documenting creatures, mostly cold blooded. The level of knowledge imparted is very high, not just another wildlife show. Definitely worth watching.

I hope you’re being sarcastic. Today’s “AI” is as close to being a general intelligence with sentience as a toaster is to a laptop.

You might as well be concerned about revenge for all the electronics you sent to the dump or the software lines you deleted.

Why anyone would think some future sentient AI would concern itself with what you did in the past with your software bots or chat bots??

People really need to get a grip.

> They complain generally that the studies don't have total answers, without understanding that this is how science gets us to the big picture.

I think this is one of the big disconnects caused by a lack of good scientific education. A scientist’s default state is “I don’t know.” The rest of our institutions, if you say “I don’t know”, they want to kick you out of office, fire you, or call you incompetent.

Truth is discovered step wise, little by little, with lots of groping around in the dark. But our society seems allergic to the concept of not having all the answers served up to us on a dinner plate.

Carl Sagan often was asked, “Do you believe there’s extraterrestrial life” He’d answer, he didn’t know and explain what the data was. The questioner would usually press him asking, “but what’s your gut feeling?”. Here’s his reply:

  But I try not to think with my gut. If I'm serious about understanding the world, thinking with anything besides my brain, as tempting as that might be, is likely to get me into trouble.

Studying a single subject does not make it “poorly done”. That’s not how science works. A well done research experiment isn’t going to test everything known to man. They’re focused on microplastics and they’ve shown what microplastics can do in the human body. And even if other substances cause the same issue, it doesn’t negate that microplastics cause the issue.

If others have a hypothesis that “microsilt” (is that even a thing?) causes thrombosis in brain tissues, than another experiment can test that hypothesis.

This is what is typically used in nice mechanical watch dials nowadays.

Great point about the queen bee. The queen also uses her stinger inside her own hive. If the hive believes she is nearing the end of her reproductive abilities, they’ll rear other queens. She has to defend her position and quickly goes to kill the new queens when they emerge or she’ll be replaced. Beekeepers generally replace their queens every 2 years or so, and have to remove the old queen to prevent this behavior as well.

> That's why you don't go near a hive without protection.

This is true and recommended for just about everyone.. however, I have known some beekeepers that can do it. If you smoke the bees well, they’ll get calm enough that they won’t sting. It’s thought to be likely because the smoke covers pheromones, and also because the smoke causes the bees to begin hoarding honey in case they need to quickly leave a burning hive.

I was never brave enough to attempt it, however during my time beekeeping I was amazed at how magical smoke was. Picking up handfuls of bees in their hive and not being swarmed feels like a super power.

Yes! To put a finer point on it, group selection theories don’t have a specific physical explanation for how they operate, instead veering into philosophical explanations.

Ultimately natural selection must operate on the gene. Genes are the only source of information that gets passed to offspring through germ line cells in sexual reproduction or mitosis in asexual reproduction (don’t get me started on the fad of epigenetics, which is just a fancy term for standard DNA controlled embryological differentiation.)

The replication of genes and the information they encode, are the physical cause of the effect of phenotypes.

Group selection theorists (of which there are few) have no physical cause that allows selection to occur on the level of the group, and there’s no sound hypothesis of such that I have heard of. You’d need some physical mechanism for information flow between individuals in a group for that to be the case, and outside of kin inheritance, there’s nothing like that that exists.

“Group selection” is not a thing. The article hand waves this always with

> some biologists still get really triggered about group selection and deny its evolutionary importance

Which is dishonest at best. The vast majority of biologist have realized group selection doesn’t work as proposed. [0]

What people thought was group selection was just kin selection working over time.

All evolution works at the level of the gene. Genes “want” to reproduce more of themselves. And if the same gene is in a kin, then it can favor enhancing the survival of kin that carry copies of itself. At a macro level this can be misreported as group selection, but to be sure, the selection is happening at the level of the gene, and reaches at most to kin sharing genes.

The article then goes on to say

> The nice story I told above about the evolution of altruism could just have easily been applied to humans. Yet we do not exist in eusocial colonies, so there must be something else going on

And he then talks about gene selection and the fact that bees are haplodiploidy, which is indeed the cause of the “altruism” we see.

His dismissal of haplodiploidy at the end of the article is a weak argument. Just because haplodiploidy in other species doesn’t lead to eusocial groups, or that eusocial groups can occur without haplodiploidy are not sufficient arguments that dismiss the effects of haplodiploidy and kin selection favoring altruism in eusocial bees.

I highly recommend people interested in these topics to read the seminal Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins. [1]

0. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_selection#Criticism

1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene

There’s no upper limit, so there’d have to be some set of rules like no sleep(n).

Also given the halting problem, you could write an algorithm that would be impossible to determine if it loops forever.

I think the key word is “comprehensive”. There are definitely federal regulations of heavy metals in food products.

See:

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-B...

https://www.compliancegate.com/heavy-metal-regulations-unite...

You my friend, most likely have mining malware on your systems. They’ll shutdown when they detect task manager is opened so you don’t notice them.

This is an extremely important point. A lot of managers don’t read the employment contracts. Often times the legal departments (or just lawyer depending on company size) has just drafted something that protects the company as much as is legally possible. That’s often the safest thing for the attorney to do.

It’s never a bad thing to redline a contract and have discussions over sections that you’re uncomfortable with. A good company will work on them with you.

As I said, there have been challenges to the rule and it’s currently under injunction.

However, if you talk to any corporate attorney they will tell the company to prepare and position itself for having to comply with the ban.

If you’re an employee with a current non-compete, assume it applies unless you consult with an attorney.

If you’re a prospective employee, and a job offer includes signing a contract with a restrictive non-compete.. personally I’d redline it, and if they pushed back I’d find another job.

First off I never said they were “blanket banned”. I said “they were totally banned by the FTC” which is true and correct. And I said other states “also limited them significantly” which is also true and correct.

A Texas federal court ruled the FTC overstepped its bounds and has currently issued an injunction. However a federal court in Pennsylvania has ruled the opposite. Our legal system isn’t so simplistic that you could possibly interpret that as “it’s perfectly legal” as in the comment I was replying to.

In addition , in many if not most states (especially states in my opinion where innovation and economic activity matters most), most courts have ruled consistently against non-compete overreach and have precedents that do not favor non-competes.

For example § 16600 of the California’s Business and Professions Code, for the most part bans all non-competes along with civil penalties of $2500 per violation. Other states also have severe restrictions on what can be prevented in non competes, especially things not specifically related to the job the employee is hired for or outside of proven trade secrets, as has been the focus of most of the discussion here.

As can be seen on the following map the vast majority of states have restrictions on non competes.

https://eig.org/state-noncompete-map/

So any attempt to intemperate the current law around non-competes in the US as perfectly legal is ill informed. I don’t know if the comments on here attempting to paint things as “non-competes are perfectly legal” is either just employees being ill informed, or employers on here trying to convince people of things they wish were true.

Short take, If a company is attempting to get you to sign a non-competes you should definitely consult an attorney. Personally I will not work for anyone attempting to get me to sign a non-compete.

No they were totally banned by the FTC. And the states that do the most innovation and economic activity had also limited them significantly.

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/04/...

And why do people even comment before they do like 30 seconds of googling?

Are you perhaps not from the United States? Your take that it’s unethical seems to contradict with nearly 200 years of American IP law, or even further back to the 1400s in English common law where non competes were considered unjustifiable restraints on trade.

In the United States IP rights go to the inventor and most must be explicitly transferred to an employer. The whole point of the patent office is to encourage inventors to invent and not allow corporations to own everything and prevent competition. Although some companies have attempted to rig the system to prevent competition, ultimately the law has come down to foster competition (see the recent defeats of patent trolls)

And as the other commenter here points out, there are so many cases where someone working at a company discovers a way to improve business in the industry they are employed in, that could compete with their current employer, and that employer is unable or unwilling to devote resources or compensate for it. Huge swaths of US innovation or driven by such things. Probably the most iconic example is Steve Wozniak inventing the Apple I while he was working at HP, which HP refused to acquire and support causing Steve to resign and start Apple.

I also write this as someone with a name on a patent I chose to transfer to a company I helped found for an invention I helped create while working there. But to be clear, that was my choice. Ultimately the law said it was my invention by default, and there was no legal, moral, ethical, or god given obligation preventing me from walking away with it.

Just adding some links for reference.. in both California and New York, employers explicitly can NOT enforce IP assignment of work done on an employees own time and with their own equipment. (As long as the work is not related to the employers buisness). In other words such clauses in employment agreements in those states would be unenforceable.

https://www.ebglaw.com/insights/publications/new-york-restri...

https://law.justia.com/codes/california/code-lab/division-3/...

There is no way that it is unethical. According to who’s ethics?

According to my ethics it’s unethical for a company to believe it has any say whatsoever about what I author unless I give them specific assignment of what I create for specific compensation. Outside of that, they can go float a boat.

They hired me for my talent; and will compensate me adequately or I will provide my services elsewhere; and it’s up to me to determine what that looks like when I signed a contract with them.

It sounds like the corporate lawyers have succeeded in making you think they’re doing you all the favor when you create the value for them.

There’s a reason the FTC ruled against non-competes. It’s “ethically un-American”.

First, definitely consult a lawyer and your contract. In the US contract law pretty much says if you signed it, you agreed to it, then it holds, unless the law overrides it. For example, you could sign a contract that says you are now an indentured servant, but that violates the law, so would be unenforceable (at least in the US since 1917). However if it says the equivalent of “any code you write on your personal time is our property” you basically agreed to that being the case and you’d have to consult a lawyer in your state before making a determination if that contract would hold up in court. The best assumption prior to that would be to assume it is valid.

In addition, the FTC recently banned non competes country wide, which went into effect in September 2024. There have been a number of challenges to the ruling that have yet to work through the legal system, so it’s best to consult your states laws for the time being.

But outside of that, if a company in the US is telling you that your software that you can prove you developed on your personal time on your personal property is somehow theirs, and you are certain you never signed such a non-compete or an assignment agreement that covers work on your personal time; then find a new company to work at. They are basically bullying you. If your employee contract is so ambiguous regarding copyright assignment of software written on your own personal time and assets as to not be certain, find a new company as well, as they are probably incompetent. (You’d probably be safe however, as Contra proferentem in the US is a rule that states an ambiguous contract term should be construed against the drafter of the contract)

In fact, in the US, the author always owns the copyright. So in fact the company has to put in place an agreement that outlines that your code copyright is transferred to them. If you pay someone to write software, without such an agreement, the author will still actually hold the copyright. The company can use “work for hire” but since that means they have to prove that they hired you specifically for what your wrote, that it was written in the “scope of employment”; most employers who know what they are doing will have you sign an assignment agreement. Without an assignment agreement; if you write something they didn’t hire you to write and you didn’t agree to assign the copyright to them, you own it.

In fact, if a company also wants to patent something that you’ve invented or been part of inventing, they need to get you to file a patent assignment with the USPTO. This may or may not be outlined in your employment contract, but the assignment still needs to be made. You could refuse, most likely at the cost of your employment, however the patent rights would still remain with you the inventor. Not even work for hire would transfer patent or trademark rights.

All that said, it should be obvious, however it’s probably best pointed out.. if you copy any code that is owned by the company (code written by another employee or that you transferred ownership of to the employer) then you’re committing copyright infringement and can be held liable. So you better be sure your code is 100% yours.

If you utilize any of the company’s assets or property in its creation then they can argue ownership. For example if you write it on their laptop that you take home on the weekend, or you spend your lunch break at the computer in your office writing it, etc. (this will almost certainly be outlined in your employee contract)

If you write it at home on your personal property during your personal time, then they have as much claim to it as the work you do on your house or the models you paint or the soap you make and sell to your friends… which is none.

However, if it’s work you’re doing in the same industry, then you have to deal with non-compete clauses in your employment agreement depending on what state you live in.

Edit: This is USA law as I understand it (IANAL)

Yes, I would love to know what my runner up was. I unintentionally ended up with the same font I currently use, Fira Code… at least I’m consistent.

This is called an evolutionary stable strategy. (my favorite type of Nash equilibrium)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionarily_stable_strate...

Those sound like “Star Jelly”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_jelly