LOL OK, I will agree with that. Having worked with plenty of H-1Bs, I can assure you that there posses no special talent compared to other workers. On the whole there are quite a few mediocre software engineers.
Sort of OK? Fuck you Mark, you degenerate piece of shit!
So, you are arguing that only being exposed to one environment is fine? I didn't mention anything about real or good. I just said if your school is only exposing you to a single environment and language, then the school is doing you a disservice.
Many of the modern CS students spend all there time in a single environment and a single language (Java on Windows). If this is the case for your school they are doing you a disservice. I was exposed to the at least 5 operating systems and 7 or 8 programming languages and wrote assembly that ran on bare metal in school. If you experience a variety of environments and languages you will have a much better base to judge what is good and bad when developing solutions.
Really! Are you sure? If assault can not be consented to, then why can boxer consent and it is not a chargeable offense?
Number one on your list should be lying. Generally, it is OK for the government to lie to you, but a crime for you to lie to the government.
I see the GP didn't take up the challenge. Here is some info at wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_rights
Yes, it's nonsense, because the theoretical creation of a derivative work at run time due to dynamic linking (e.g. shared libraries and kernel modules link at run time) has never been tested in court. Furthermore, the derivative work is not being distributed (I generally programs are not distributed while they are running).
OK, I see it claimed often that linking into a GPL'ed code makes a derivative work. First, I will note that little claim has never been tested in court and I suspect it would not stand. Secondly, APIs and header files are generally not copyrightable. So, I think there is not legal route to call run time linking a derivative work in the legal frame work of US copyright law.
However, let's assume that is wrong, then if it is not a derivative work until it is linked, then the end user is doing the linking and is not distributing "derivative work". So, even in the unlikely case that linking creates a derivative work, the GPL is still not violated because that derivative work is not being distributed.
I suppose I should point out that the US does not implement a purely capitalist economy. There are regulation on many parts of the economy, including how and when labor can organize.
I was replying to the comments about China, not the US. I was responding to the claim that China was a shinning example of capitalism, which I think is a hard claim to support.
I wonder why in many examples of capitalism, all markets are free except labor. If a nation is truly based on capitalist ideas, why not have a market for labor. In this case workers could band together and sell their labor to the highest bidder. For some reason, this is never considered a part of capitalism, which I believe is just a convenient inconsistency by the rich.
Because China does not have a free labor market, it is not a shining example of capitalism. It is a shining example of the powerful taking advantage, which happens everywhere.
No doubt, you have "Clear history when Firefox closes" checked on the options Privacy tab.
Though, I agree with what you have said, I think it might be helpful to look at the definition of justice and just.
1 a : the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments
b : judge
c : the administration of law; especially : the establishment or determination of rights according to the rules of law or equity
2 a : the quality of being just, impartial, or fair
b (1) : the principle or ideal of just dealing or right action (2) : conformity to this principle or ideal : righteousness
c : the quality of conforming to law
3: conformity to truth, fact, or reason : correctness
and maybe the word just also.
1 a : having a basis in or conforming to fact or reason : reasonable
b archaic : faithful to an original
c : conforming to a standard of correctness : proper
2 a (1) : acting or being in conformity with what is morally upright or good : righteous (2) : being what is merited : deserved
b : legally correct : lawful
I believe the meaning usually assigned to "Social Justice" is related to definition 1a of Justice and 2a (1) of the Just (or possibly 1a). People are making a moral judgement (or stating what they think is reasonable), which may or may not be tied to any legal precept.
So, the gp may, in fact, be using "Social Justice" is a consistent way that happens to match his morals or reason.
Our government is happy to surveille their own citizens (even with drones and cameras everywhere). So, essentially we can do it, but nobody else should!