Posts by Ian Michael Gumby

@Sweep Re: Needs a name

Bukkake?

Only if they explode.

@Dave Re: How many times?

So, I get 6 down votes for saying the tech is neat and its a good start, but questioning how many times could it be reused ???

;-)

To your point, yes sitting on top of a rocket is still a risky endeavor. I get that and while I'd do it, my wife would kill me for even thinking about it.

However my point was that even if they could constantly land it... we have a strengths and materials problem where components will eventually fail after so many uses.

How could they test this? I mean, depending on the payload, even insured, there's going to be a cost for Space X and that has to be balanced out against the manufacturing costs and the savings from reuse.

That's not rocket science but strictly bean counting and risk assessment. One would have to have a bunch of these being reused, and even after examining them for stress fractures and failures... extrapolate their life and then divide by 2 for a safety factor. (e.g. if its safe to use up to 10 times, limit its reuse to 5 and then melt it for scrap...)

You bring up another issue.

While I don't know you... but you do realize that you could get the shot in the arm or anywhere. Most likely the flight attendant will be male so if you want to pull your shorts off and get a long needle in the buttox... who am I to judge? ;-)

Personally, I'd skip breakfast and travel on an empty stomach.

@Torben Re: Plasma?

First show me a working fusion reactor that produces more energy than it consumes...

The current generation under construction do use magnetic force to help contain the plasma, but they also use the plasma field itself too.

You could think of the plasma as a jet of gas where its shaped and contained in the handle and the length of the blade is based on the amount of plasma being ejected.

Re: Once

So... Assange meets with the Swedes in the Embassy thanks to this new MoU / treaty.

Assange gets charged and the Swedes take him back to Sweden to face the music....

Many think that he's going to be free to walk around... he's not. He won't get bail and will be incarcerated for the duration of the trial and depending on the results, he will either be jailed or escorted on a plane, in custody back to the UK to face the music for his jumping bail. Note that while the bail is forfeit, he's still guilty of the charges and can face jail time.

Even then he will be kept in jail (custody) with no chance of bail.

So then when the UK is done with him... because of his actions... you can bet that the UK will then take him in custody to the airport and place him on a flight back to Australia. (Where he can see his dear ol' mum...) Whether or not he is in custody during his flight ... who knows. My guess is that he will be.

Post that... its a crap shoot. Does the US really want him? Probably not. Unless Hillary gets elected. But you never know. However, even then... Assange could now be denied entry in to many countries based on his current bad behavior.

@AC re "Set up" Re: One Swedish Charge left

Ah yes, the "its all a CIA plot and a set up".

Really?

Sorry, but no. The CIA running a Honey Pot on Assange... remember Occam's Razor.

@AC Re: @Yank One Swedish Charge left

"Jeez ... which extraditable crime has Julian committed in the USA that might magically be conjured up to legally allow this?"

Ah that's the rub isn't it.

If you believe Assange is paranoid that the US is out to get him, then either he did something, or its all in his head.

If its all in his head, then he has nothing to worry about because the US doesn't want to waste the time, effort and money of getting him extradited from Australia to the US.

If its not, then he did something.... which is why he hired a lawyer to shadow the Manning Article 32 hearing and the trial. Its also a reason why he didn't go to Sweden.

So what could Assange have done that would have made him so paranoid and scared of the US?

Could it be that he helped Manning during the theft of the documents and was more than just an innocent participant? This was raised during the Article 32 hearing but not during the trial.

So we'll just have to wait.

@Diogenes Re: One Swedish Charge left

Actually no.

With the outstanding EAW, the UK would have had to turn him over to the Swedes first unless the Swedes agreed and the US would have had to make their case... The US doesn't need to get him now and they have a lot more time since the charges he potentially faces in the US have a long statute of limitations.

So from the US perspective... they would love to have him back in AUSTRALIA, which is where he will go upon departing England. The UK Government has the power of how and where to toss him from their shores along with which countries will accept him on their soil. Since he's proven to be such a prat and jumped bail causing millions of pounds to be wasted on securing the embassy, he's not going to be given the benefit of the doubt and the UK government will put him on the plane to Australia since he's an Aussie traveling on an Aussie passport.

@ Mark... Re: @Joe Drunk

In the states... yes. Its a courtesy as an employee.

I'll defer to your UK rules, however, how often is it followed up upon when someone walks off the job.

The point of my post was to show that for contractors/consultants and senior employees you will have a work contract that may spell out gardening periods and non-competes which may or may not be enforceable, based on the wording in the clause.

So we are in violent agreement. ;-)

Re: That subpeona is a double edged sword.

I stand corrected... to a point.

There are limitations see civil Rule 45.

(Especially if you're telecommuting.)

Also if you're going to face a large cost to testify. (Like losing a day's wage or a couple of days wages.)

Then there's the question of what testimony you could provide... there's more, and if you want push it... you can make it difficult enough so that you're never going to be called.

@John Re: I used to work for a company that did the opposite.

This is a perfect example of what lawyers will do...

First, its legal for them to include terms in the contract that are unenforceable even if everyone knows that its unenforceable. IBM does this all the time. Its a blanket term in their base employee agreements.

However... it becomes enforceable when they specify a small list of companies which are direct competitors.

Or if they have given you compensation for the 'gardening period' which they are enforcing.

So if you worked for IBM, signed a contract that stipulated you couldn't go to Oracle, Microsoft, Google, etc ... but was only limited to a couple of these types of companies. And had a limited gardening period.. you would be bound by the contract.

By making a blanket statement... they are using it as a scare tactic. By doing it right... its a sign that they will enforce it. And there have been cases where they fought and won the right to block someone.

The largest irony... by the time it gets through the courts... its a moot point. The best anyone could do is to get a TRO blocking you from doing some work which if you didn't disclose this agreement upfront in your job interview... it could get you fired.

Re: Earth to world:

Oh there's more to it than that...

It depends on the contract as well as the type of work being done.

As Sir Alien says... some clauses are enforceable, some are not.

If you don't know how to write/read understand the terms of a contract... don't have a copy of Black's Law (US only) then get a lawyer. They money you spend will save you more in the long run.

Warranty and implied Warranty are a bit murky.

And that cat move at the end of a contract... never a good idea.

It doesn't hurt you to listen and then say '... sorry no ...'

@Joe Drunk

Giving notice is a courtesy unless you're an officer/executive of the company, or you are a contractor.

As a contractor, your notice period is contractually set. This works both ways. Unless the contract is terminated for cause... (meaning you screwed up big...), the company can show you the door right away, however, you have the right to bill them for the notice period and they are obligated to pay it, or they make stuff up to show cause.

If you're an officer of the company or a senior executive, you may be required to give notice, work for a transition period, then go on a gardening period. (This is usually negotiated.)

And yes, to your point, if you're not being compensated, you can tell them to f off. Or you can do them a favor. Your call and your risk.

@AC ...Re: If you read the reddit thread

You clearly don't know lawyers. ;-)

Unless its under oath... most is fair game. They will push it to the limit and beyond... You would be surprised as to what they can get away with before anything is sanction-able.

To your point, yes, clearly the person making the threats wasn't a lawyer and that his willful misinterpretation was more of desperation than a real legal threat. This is why the guy had nothing really to worry about. However, if the language in the clause is vague enough... then the willful misinterpretation could be excused. Yes, that sounds weird... but if the interpretation or misinterpretation is 'reasonable' then they could get away with the claim.

In civil cases, you can refuse to testify or be part of the case unless they decide to make you a party of the case.

Criminal cases... that's a different story.

No one can compel you to testify in a civil case.

Re: Dear former boss of SetSquared....

Sorry,

But the world is a very big place.

Anyone who's done a lot of independent consulting will tell you that this guy (bad client) will always find a n00b consultant who will fall for his carp. You would be surprised at a lot of things some clients will try to pull.

The guy should have called his bluff. Ok, so his current client has an in house counsel who took care of the issue. Not too difficult. All it would have taken is a single phone call and a follow up letter to tell the guy that he is full of it. Assuming that the clause he refers to is valid, then its only enforceable if the guy is in litigation and then his work is to be done in support of defending against said litigation. Until then... bugger off.

End of story.

@MrDamage... Re: One Invoice is all it takes

Dude! Lets get back to reality.

First, doing what you suggested would trigger a lot of potential legal headaches.

The guy is off the hook.

He could easily have not been the nice guy and had not offered to provide any additional... unbilled support. He is within his right to tell the company to stop bothering him.

More to the point, he's no longer under any contract therefore had he accessed the systems, provided any information which may have yielded any downtime due to a person following his advice, he would have opened himself up to criminal prosecution as well as civil liabilities.

Without seeing the contract, the clause that the previous employer relied upon to harass the guy would either be invalid / unenforceable, or enforceable under limited circumstances. (This is going to be true depending on the jurisdiction.... laws differ by state, country ... YMMV)

If this were in the UK, he could easily tell the company that he's not going to do anymore free support in that he is now working for another company. They could sue him, however, loser pays and in this instance, the company would lose with the case getting dismissed w prejudice.

In the US, the contract was terminated, there is no implied warranty and since they have since hired multiple staffers, any implied warranty would have been voided months earlier.

A competent lawyer would have a field day.

To your point, he could have easily told the former employer that he was out of a contract and that they could renegotiate a new contract as soon as he completes the work for his existing customer... and then set a high rate, along with other reasonable terms which the company may find distasteful. (e.g. like an upfront retainer.. plus payment at the time service is rendered. ) The moment they refuse ... then they are no longer a problem.