lennivelkant

One of my colleagues will even occasionally ask me "Heading for a smoke, wanna come along?" I just love chatting with him, I'll try to stand upwind so I don't catch as much second-hand smoke, he gets some company too, everyone's happy.

It does, in fact, turn humans invisible too. Isildur being the obvious example, but even the nine rings given to humans had that effect, shifting them to the spiritual / unseen world. That's a whole different ramble, but for now, let's sum it up that there is an unseen world not everyone can sense and influence, but the Maiar (including Sauron) are inherently spiritual beings that took physical shape in the seen world in order to interact with it.

For Sauron, so much of his power was poured into the One Ring that the continued existence of the ring meant that he could survive destruction of his physical form and eventually take shape again¹, though its loss in the War of the Last Alliance obviously robbed him of much of his strength and he had to hide for a long time to slowly regain his strength and renew his efforts.²

Through the Ring, Sauron had also dominated the nine human Ring bearers and bound them to him, moving them into the spiritual world. As his form was destroyed, so did they lose theirs. As he returned, so did they.

The reason they could still "see" Frodo is that they were attuned to the unseen and could sense him there, with their power over it manifesting in them stabbing his physical form even though it was invisible to mortal eyes.

There is still the question of the Dwarven rings. They were forged first, and it's possible they weren't as refined yet, though the dwarves are also described as more resilient at resisting the dominating effect. My guess is that the fact they were created by Aulë, Smith of the Valar, rendered them less susceptible to the craft of a lesser spirit (Sauron), but I have no evidence.

1: This paragraph and the following one originally read that Sauron could no longer take shape without the ring. I stand corrected on that, see the responses.

2: After his first destruction during the Fall of Numenor, his spirit managed to escape with the ring. 110 years later, he had enough strength to launch a strike against the nascent Gondor and start another war that lasted 13 years. He was destroyed again, this time losing his ring, and it took him a thousand years to become active again.Per the correction, he will probably have regained his form, though he was still too weak to fully reveal himself and start another open war for two thousand more years.

You'd need something to hook into the memory or storage of the app I guess?

There is a difference between wanting to live comfortably, which is rational, and actively seeking ways to exploit others for your own gain beyond what you need to live. Greed isn't "I want to have enough", it's "I can never have enough".

Society has always thrived on a measure of generosity. So many cultures have customs around giving gifts, because that's how you build a support network of people that will help you out when you need it. Greed is shortsighted and destructive.

Or would you want to voluntarily waive parts of your salary?

Depends on the reason. If the waived amount goes to paying for healthcare, support someone suddenly unemployed or maintain infrastructure that I or other people need? Sure.

Are we talking about the same guy that opted to scrap all sensors for his self-driving cars because he figures humans can drive with eyes only, they don't need more than a camera?

"I didn't give you permission to get caught!"

In that respect, I'm rather glad my employer is on the slow and steady side. Yeah, sure, they're very much behind on some topics and just recently started catching up on others, but their cautious scepticism towards new tech has spared us some headaches. I'd rather take the frustration of not getting all the tools I'd like to have than the stress of "ooh, look, this new shiny thing is gonna replace that other system you just got used to!"

I love this

I hate it too but I love it.

Corporate management often seems to think of changes as isolated, independent events, where the measurable impact of each change can be attributed to that change. I think it's a symptom of the pathological need for KPIs and Data-based decision-making. Making big decisions is scary, and data can help with informing them, but I get the impression some managers grow so dependent on using numbers as a crutch to spare them from having to justify their decision with their own best judgement.

They didn't fully hand it to Linux yet. We still have to earn that. Ideological appeal / privacy concern alone isn't enough for many people if the jump seems too scary, particularly if it feels like a one-directional leap of faith. What if they don't like it on the other side? Better the devil you know...

We need to build bridges, in both directions: help and encourage people to switch to Linux, but also promise them help to get back, basically an "out" if they don't like it. I see plenty of guides for migrating to Linux, but how about getting back to Windows?

It's okay not to like Linux, it's okay to be scared or apprehensive, and it's okay to get cold feet and return to the familiar. Maybe some time in the future they'll try again.

That's the usual case with arms races: Unless you are yourself a major power, odds are you'll never be able to fully stand up to one (at least not on your own, but let's not stretch the metaphor too far). Often, the best you can do is to deterr other, minor powers and hope major ones never have a serious intent to bring you down.

In this specific case, the number of potential minor "attackers" and the hurdle for "attack" mKe it attractive to try to overwhelm the amateurs at least. You'll never get the pros, you just hope they don't bother you too much.

Still illegal. Not immoral, but a lot of our laws aren't built on morality.