No the argument is this 1. The supposed reason we need Copyright law is to protect creators at the deficit of society to encourage them to create 2. Creators aren't actually being protected anyway 3. Society isn't benefiting since these works are being locked up by people that didn't create them 4. Solution either fix copyright law so creators actually are protected and do benefit or get rid of it so society doesn't get screwed over by having creative works locked up in perpetuity. So pretty much if the law isn't doing what it's supposed to do either fix it or get rid of it.(I mean unless you're ok with all the crazy shit like the stuff I mentioned above or hey why don't I bring up that "Happy Birthday to You" copyright apparently doesn't expire until 2030. It's in the courts right now apparently.)

Which given the excuses for this stuff is really telling.(Since the whole "You're stealing from the creators" is one of the arguments you hear about this shit.) So these days you have shit like Hollywood accounting and things like the author of Forrest Gump literally not getting paid royalties for the movie.(Because it supposedly didn't make a profit.) Of course there's the whole thing screwing of musicians by record labels. Basically if you record an album don't expect to get any profits at all. If you make any money it will be off touring. Here's one, just to show how much of a bunch of scum bags they really are. https://www.techdirt.com/artic...

Yes, my same rant and yes I realize school is largely day care for older kids. Good, got that out of the way. So I look at this the same way I look at hours at a job. You can't get more than 40 hours a week of physical labor and you probably get far less than that with knowledge based labor.(Yes, that means overtime is actually pointless.) I wonder how many hours of school they should shoot for to maximize learning, my guess is it's probably less than 6 hours and most likely more time won't result in more learning. (I suppose they could be ridiculous like the president of a local university who expect 10 hours a day out of students. This was of course based off of nothing and was probably counter productive.)

You know besides all the weird stuff you experience browsing with IE. I did a bunch of upgrades this past week (new AMD drivers, these MS patches) on my Win7 PC and I saw that the settings in IE kept getting reset. Security was cranked up so I couldn't download anything and it blew away my history by setting it to 0 days. I'd reset that stuff, reboot my PC and come back and see everything had been set back. I could only get rid of the problem by restoring my PC to last week. I thought I picked up a virus or that it was that Raptr junk in the AMD drivers but now I'm thinking it's this patch. (I know, I should use Chrome more. It's installed here and I do use it but I use IE as well.)

Exactly right. I like to bring it up because in order to get in the Olympics you need to be really good and have every little edge you can get.(To get the most out of their training they've realized they need to consider rest as part of that.) Even in this extreme scenario overtime is counter productive for exactly the reasons you mention. (Which leads me to think in less extreme scenarios, such as IT professionals just doing their job, overtime probably doesn't work either. From what I know everybody who's studied the end result of overtime on workers finds that you don't actually get more work but you do get pissed off employees.)

Exactly, rest is part of their training. (And if you're a knowledge worker not getting your rest makes you significantly less intelligent.)

Olympic athletes. The usually train anywhere from 15-30 hours a week.(Really, google it.) They may train really hard but even they know that doing your best and doing overtime do not go together.

That it's pointless to make your workers work over 40 hours a week because over the long term (IE more than 2 or 3 weeks) you literally can't get more than 40 hours a week worth of work out of anyone? I think I've mentioned this before. (Actually I agree with other Slashdot posters that you should expect 20-30 hours of week of real work.

Just to expand on this there's the insistence that unless it's an exact match they don't want to consider it. For example if you've got over a decade of C++ experience that doesn't count with a lot of companies that are looking for C#. (Even though it's both OOP, C# has similar syntax, and was explicitly developed to let C++ developers jump into it quickly.) I can't wait when these kids come out with experience in say Visual Studio 2014 and then every company says, "No, we want VS2016 and we'll dump your app in the trash."

Here's an analogy I use for the "IT shortage" and no it doesn't involve cars. Imagine if you will your friend comes over your house. He starts tell you how he was out in the sun all day and has never been so thirsty in his life. He tells you he feels light headed and thinks he's having heart palpitations from dehydration. Feeling concern for your friend you go to your fridge and get a nice cold glass of filtered tap water with ice and bring it to him.

Your friend looks at this and then looks at you as though you had totally lost your mind. You ask "What's wrong?" He tells you, "Look when I said I was thirsty what I meant is I wanted a non-alcoholic raspberry lime rickey. Of course made with 7-up, not that cheap store brand stuff and of course freshly squeezed limes and definitely Zyrex syrup. What's wrong with you man?"

Two things come to your mind. The first is your friend is kind of an asshole. The second is he isn't that thirsty and should shut the fuck up about how he thinks he's going to die from dehydration.

Yes but why would Ford care how quickly they pick up their hookers?

Since it sounds like it breaks multiple amendment in the bill of rights, to be specific the 4th, 5th, and 8th. Let's see, the 4th prohibits unreasonable seizures which this is. You'd think it breaks the 5th since that literally says "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law". (How is taking property with no ability to get it back not expressly prohibited by that?) Finally it breaks the 8th in my mind because "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." to me means the only appropriate punishment if there has been no crime proven is no punishment at all.

The way I figure it is like this, I've done nothing for peace. Oddly enough that's way more than quite a few people that have won it. (Like Arafat and Kissinger) Therefore logically I must have won it as well. (Since I did more for peace) Of course when people ask where my prize is I say they probably lost it in the mail. Either that or they're still trying to get through the list of people that also did more for peace by doing nothing and are ahead of me alphabetically.

Was that 99.99% test done on a fire arm that has been used much? I kind of remember one of the big problems with these kinds of devices is that if you practiced regularly with the gun the shock from all those firings tended to break this kind of hardware. (And yes, you're supposed to practice with the actual gun you're going to use to protect yourself with. Picking up a random gun and getting off a perfect only happens in the movies.)

Since you know, righties hate stem cell research and lefties hate genetic engineering. (Which this apparently uses when they insert a couple of genes. Yeah, I'm cynical so go ahead and mod me down.)