Comment In summary... (Score 1) 288
Looking over all (heh) of the posts already here, then adding my own $0.02, the answer can be summarized as follows:
IT DEPENDS
Looking over all (heh) of the posts already here, then adding my own $0.02, the answer can be summarized as follows:
IT DEPENDS
We regularly give trivial problems (like FizzBuzz) to our applicants. Ever since we went from hiring only referrals from other developers, a large percentage of them can't even handle the trivial problems. How in heck are they supposed to be able to solve real problems with bugs in deployed production software?
Judging by the number of applicants we get for junior (and senior!) software development positions that can't code their way out of a wet paper bag, I'd have to say no, not everyone can become a programmer.
I should add that protection from investors is not absolute. If an investor thinks that you defrauded them, they can still sue you personally.
Anybody can always sue you personally. They won't necessarily win, but will generally cost you legal fees just to address it, even if it's spurious. (I don't disagree with you, in case it's unclear. Also, IANAL.)
I don't buy that. The contents of my speech do not make me liable for the actions of others in response to that speech.
[In a crowded theater.]
FIRE!!! FIRE!!!
You can say anything you want about Jesus and no Christian will kill you.
...anymore.
A basic precept of science is that you can't prove a negative.
Can we please stop circulating this little bit of folk "wisdom" now?
Proofs of non-existence by reductio ad absurdum are common. Euler's proof of the non-existance of a largest prime number is one notable example.
More discussion here.
For me, using a keyboard+mouse will always trump using a multistick+button controller. I'll put up with crappier graphics to have better, faster controls.
And before anyone argues otherwise, posting to Slashdot is totally like playing an immersve FPS.
The scheme was promising 7% return per week. Even among the gullible and greedy it takes a special breed of idiot to believe such guarentees can be anything but a scam.
That's really not a special breed. That's the garden-variety idiot, right there, and we have a lot of them.
Have you missed the last 3 years of Obama's pandering to the 1%? What do you think the bank bail-outs, Wall Street bail-outs, etc. were? And do you not understand that the Obamacare bill was written by the insurance companies that are supposedly being taken to task?
TARP was signed into law in the Bush Administration. A majority of the big bailouts occurred during the Bush Administration. Roughly 85% of the TARP disbursements have been paid back.
The Affordable Care Act was based on published Republican plans and was brought in because the Democrats figured (wrongly) that they could get compromise support for it. I'm sure insurance companies couldn't wait to be forced to cover pre-existing conditions.
You're remarkably ignorant.
You mean how like how in the US the government can take away your business and give the property to some mega-corp with deep government ties via eminent domain?
How often does this really happen, though?
One notable example from my neck of the woods are the businesses shunted out of the way so that Richfield could offer Best Buy a choice spot for their new corporate headquarters using eminent domain and tax-increment financing.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/mn-court-of-appeals/1073064.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/05/realestate/05domain.html
A smaller business and residences were basically kicked out to make space for a big fish, all in the name of larger tax revenue. This wasn't even "deep government ties", this was an external business the city was trying to court into moving in.
There have been several that were known to be terrorists who, under a sting operation, the TSA were waiting for.
I think you're thinking of the FBI.
There are cheaper and more effective methods of terrorizing the masses now.
I object! The Department of Homeland Security is definitely NOT cheap.
I think you misunderstand the thread. He "fixed" (the "FTFY") the quote from prnewswire.com so that it said: (note the bolded, incorrectly-spelled word)
More than 50 percent of Americans surveyed corectly attributed the quote, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" to President Barack Obama"
It's a partisan troll, one that should be ignored.
The hardest part of climbing the ladder of success is getting through the crowd at the bottom.
