hso9791

I had obligatory wood shop from age 10 to age 15 (late 80's - early 90's). Endless hours of sandpaper, shavers, and various old school tools. It was fantastic!

Still today, if I really want something made right out of wood, I know I can do it.

Only wish there had been obligatory metal working, too.

So, people who are mean - by this person's judgement - are stupid?

For fear of being mean (and stupid) I shan't put words to what I think about this.

If you do drop out, make your plan B now.

Priority one should be to be self-sufficient. It might be hard to get sufficient wages at that wage, and as a dropout, but this needs to happen.

If you end up in an unstructured environment, chances are you'll lose track of what you wanted to do. So - even if it's totally unrelated to what you want to do for the future - work like your life depends on it. It will give you a feeling of worth, and give you habits that will eventually make you the right man for the job that you want.

By whom are they listed?

Ha! Universally, my ass.

If you read your own post, you'll see that you claim that every case involves: a) a contract b) a breach of mentioned contract

Yet you seem to reference a case in which there was no contract between Monsanto and the farmer, thus contradicting the aforementioned universal claim a.

Can you explain this seeming paradox? Or are you just abusing the language to paint a pretty picture?

Wow, that Wikipedia article's history is interesting.

What I can see from a cursory look at the court documents is that the court dismissed on grounds of irrelevance his claim that he neither used roundup nor any similar herbicide on the crop in question.

What kind of IT Policy was applied? Was this automatic, did they detect the event before he alerted them, or did they do this after he had disclosed the vulnerability?

The first application of the IT Policy is the interesting one here, as it lays the foundation for - or undermines Hamed's case as a white hat.

Maybe the right response would be to legally punish - by fine - both parties.

After all, there is private data insufficiently safeguarded. Some poor girl could end up getting stalked if the right kind of sleeze came across this.

Since when is it a private business owner's responsibility to play law enforcement?

If the police knows a place to be an epicenter of criminal activities, isn't that a great opportunity to do proper police work, and keep the place under surveillance?

There is something about this case that makes me feel an injustice has been done. Not by Aaron Swartz, but by the apparatus investigating and prosecuting this case.

Sadly, I wonder how frequent these witch hunts are in the USA. The Larsgard story is another, prime example of how misconstrued the narratives of prosecuting attorneys can get - without any risk to their own career.

(Edit:) This is just one out of a few, key reasons that I do not want to visit nor work in the USA. The risk that one may get to pay for some a..hole's political aspirations.

He broke the law?

Read this, and then think long and hard about it: http://tech.mit.edu/V132/N46/swartz/swartz-suppress2.pdf

Derision? Do you also deride people wearing shirts with a crocodile on them? People driving cars with a little lightning bolt in a circle? Businesses issuing paper invoices with the supplier's name printed on the invoice form? (Practices may vary by country.)

Leaving this one line unchanged says ~= zero about a person.

The proper term for pushing this law is "rent-seeking". You must include our content, and you must pay us for it.

This is a general problem with people and businesses perceiving themselves as working for society. They cannot see the wrongs they cause - because it's all for an even better cause.

German newspapers can use robots.txt and obey the social contract of the web like the rest of us.

As a Norwegian having lived in English-speaking countries for many years, I find the conclusion plausible, but the evidence lacking.

We do share a lot of the same rules for word order as English. There are, however, notable exceptions.

For instance, if the sentence starts with another word than the subject, then we swap subject and verb.

If we ask a question, then we start with the verb. Of course, this is done with 'to do' in English, and there's a nice, archaic sound to it if one simply place the verb first ("Went you to the store?").

In the sagas it is written that at some point earlier in history, the vikings and the inhabitants of Great Britain (the island) understood each other.

With all the wars, conquests and migrations done by people of a similar language, it is hardly strange that one cannot pinpoint exactly what English is. At the time, one may summarize the situation that the Norwegians and Danes were organized(1), as well as the Normans, whereas the inhabitants of Great Britain were less so. The language of power, the courts and records will disproportionately influence the common language.

1) Organized in the sense that they had picked up how to maintain power from the remnants of the Roman empire. Vikings used, among other things, to serve as the imperial guard of Constantinople.

edit: removed an asterisk that caused formatting changes

A cyclist's speed is hard to predict for a driver. I believe that mandatory bicycle headlights - day and night - would help alleviate this problem. The reason being that the cyclist then gets picked up by a driver's peripheral vision, which would help the brain process the change of position (a.k.a. velocity) continuously.

Maybe it would be better to spend some time on: -certifications -further education -market/company research -polishing applications -part time job at neighborhood kiosk

Instead of just going automatic shotgun all over every position you see?

It's quite simple: Wording. Somebody might have gotten sloppy writing requirements for the new position, or HR may have misunderstood the requirements.

This may be enough to give the rejected applicant ammunition for a law suit. I've been to several interviews where I've had to dig out that what they say they're looking for doesn't match the position they actually want to fill.

I'm a straight, white male in my thirties, so discrimination is far from my mind. Other people may form different ideas, though..

The thugs would be ratting the drug lords out all over the place to get plea bargains.

The biggest winner in the war on drugs are criminal enterprises, just because of the profit margins. These are agricultural products that anyone could produce given some soil and modest investments. How could this sustain the lavish lifestyles the top of the cartels have gotten used to?

As some already have pointed out, internationalization can be somewhat tricky on alternative keyboard layouts.

As it is, I find that languages with extra letters often move some extra symbols (like {[]}) into combinations with peripheral keys, thus making coding a chore as compared to on US keyboards.

What I would like to see is if anybody has a good way of getting rid of both the "key" and "board" part of keyboards. Electronics and manufacturing is so cheap today that this could be feasible to produce on a large scale.

For those who have a sense of rhythm, I'm thinking a combination of twisting/pushing/tapping/whatever moves that in combination would indicate a given symbol. This would take some focused effort to learn, but after that...

The form factor could be a ball, a pair of gloves, a combination with pedals, a guitar-like thing, whatever. Keyboards would make a cheap fallback in settings where such a contraption would be inappropriate.

Has anyone else thought of something similar?

What safety is not temporary? And what liberty isn't essential?

Writing style has changed over the centuries, to me this reads like he's also reminding us that liberty is essential, and safety is temporary - and that it always must be so.

Well, when reading the text, the reference to Dale Carnegie's work - as well as the author's reflections on that - constitute the pivotal point of the chapter "Why criticism is bad". Without that, what is left except feelings and such?

He even repeats a claim that 99% of people one criticizes "will not see themselves to blame anyway."

That is not how we reached our modern science and academia.

Furthermore, he advises: "It is amazing how often it is you end up in a chair across from someone at a table interviewing you for a job you really need who happens to have worked on an open source project you publically condemned. Whoops."

If one's criticism is well-argued, this may in fact be the tipping point that secures the job. If the criticism was a one-liner on twitter, it may spark a dialogue that generates mutual respect.

My issue with the post is that it throws the baby - ugly or not - out with the bath water.

We should embrace criticism. If it is valid, one learns. If not, one may clarify.

Saying somebody's baby is ugly is not criticism - it is simply useless. Attempting to compare proper criticism to it is even more useless.

This post to me is an antithesis to rationality.

Obviously, twitter is a medium more suitable for quick dismissals or approvals than a well-founded critique of a language. In such, I somewhat agree with the original poster. Nevertheless, to take an early 20th century sales coach's bastardization of good manners as our guideline for how to give criticism in the crafts seems a poor course to stake out for society.

in my case ++beer--