Why would someone expect their employer to keep them around after they file a lawsuit against them?
Well, actually, I would expect that to happen if the lawsuit was justified. Let's say there is building work at my company and my car gets damaged, and I think it's the fault of my company. Sorting that out should have no effect on my career. It's different if you file a lawsuit and it turns out it is all based on lies.
Just what can you reasonably expect? Most programmers have been emotionally hurt repeatedly by women
WTF? Almost every programmer that I know is in a stable and good relationship with a woman. Except for one female programmer, who is in a stable and good relationship with a man.
So, was there a non-disclosure agreement? You don't have a statutory right to not have your ideas stolen.
An NDA wouldn't help if the idea was nothing special. You have a trade secret if you have a secret that gives you a competitive advantage because you know the secret and others don't. But if others have the same idea and therefore the same knowledge about the idea, then you don't have a trade secret.
Yes, but if they had an NDA they should be suing for breaking the NDA, not theft of trade secrets.
If I divulge something that I received under an NDA, then you can sue me in a civil court for a breach of the NDA. For example if you hired me to organize your kid's birthday party and want it kept secret. That would be a secret, but not a trade secret.
If what I divulge is a trade secret, then you can make criminal charges for breach of a trade secret. Because that's what it is.
How can you claim something is a trade secret if you show it to others? If you want to keep your design proprietary, patent it.
That's what an NDA is for. If I have a trade secret, you sign an NDA and I tell you the trade secret because of the NDA, then (1) it stays a trade secret, and (2) if you breach the NDA I can get you for breach of contract _and_ with criminal charges for violation of a trade secret.
Not that checking it after every add instruction is really that practical. It would be better to have trapping and non-trapping versions of integer arithmetic, and to have languages with semantics which expose that choice to the programmer.
Swift does exactly that. Every instruction is checked for overflow. Not sure how clever the compiler is in proving that certain instructions cannot overflow.
Self preservation should always triumph. Why? That is what people do anyway.
That is obviously wrong. Minimising total damage should always triumph. If you intentionally drive into a pedestrian, you should and will go to jail.
What about a stroke while still breathing, locking accidentally the door to "locked from inside", triggering accidentally the descent mechanism, accidentally not answering the door?
That is of course a possibility. But how often has it happened that someone had a stroke while still breathing, triggering the descent mechanism by accident and _not_ locking the door from the inside? It seems that it is hard to lock the door by accident, so not locking it is 100 times more likely than locking it. Do we have any reported case of that? Where the pilot went into the cockpit just in time to save the airplane? I don't think so.
If you can't see the obvious tragic death of a child (with their future robbed from them) having a heavier weight than an 80 y/o great grandmother who's had a wonderful life then I can't help you.
It may have more effect on relatives. The effect on the person dying is the same. And there have been times not so far away when a huge percentage of children didn't ever make it to adulthood.
The chances of that are about the same as those people who committed suicide by shooting themselves in the head - twice.
I read that it is possible to put two bullets in the gun - one the normal way, and one just pushed into the gun. So it is not possible to shoot yourself in the head twice, but it is possible to have two bullets in your head.
They are valued at 700billion in the stock market. "What do I consider a bloated balloon??"
Apple made $18bn profit in the last quarter. $72bn per year. That's 10 percent of the stock price. With the money they have in the bank, they can earn the current shareprice in profits in about 8 years.
Samsung spends far more on marketing than Apple.
They have done that in the past, at times massively. Right now Samsung mobile revenues are down, and if they spent the same money on advertising they spent in the past, the would actually lose money. Profits are down as it is.
The semiconductor part that has actually grown in revenue and profit doesn't really need that much marketing.
The Tao is like a glob pattern: used but never used up. It is like the extern void: filled with infinite possibilities.
