Ships call for help using a 406 MHz EPIRB. The signal is picked up by the COSPAS-SARSAT satellite network and relayed to a local SAR station. The 406 MHZ beacons are a big improvement over the old 121.5 and 243 MHz beacons, as they support identification and GPS data. The old beacons basically just scream "Help!".
The only point I see in running shoes is an certain amount of cushoning
I run in a park with some dogs, a lot of geese, and the occasional spot of broken glass. I also run along roads. My running shoes protect me from puncture wounds, infection, and general grossness.
Rote memorization is no substitute for rational, critical thought, but it's a pretty cheap vaccine against bad ideas. I would very much like for a majority of the population to be able to explain why it's not a good idea to [insert bad idea], but I'll settle for them just knowing that it's not a good idea to [insert bad idea].
There's a flaw in my reasoning, though. Without examination, the rote memorization could just as well be bad facts. Which suggests that a question such as "% water coverage" is really just asking "What % of the population has been indoctrinated to dogma X?"
Zymurgist ahoy! Of course you'd find a brewer - beer and "discussion" go hand in hand.;)
I aim high on my Hefeweizens as well, but then try to force them to spend a little bit of time at the low end of the range. I like to have both the banana and clove flavors, leaning toward banana.
how many can say off the top of their head the optimal fermenting temperature for a lager?
About 47 degrees, coincidentally enough. (Low 60's for most ales, mid to high 60's for Hefeweizens, higher still for Saisons).
Seriously, though: I think the point is that you need to know enough about things outside your area of expertise so that you can give things a quick sanity check. If you're totally blindly ignorant, any "expert" can take you for a ride. If the voting public is in that position, then that's bad news. Rather than trying to get someone to sit still for a comprehensive evaluation of their general scientific knowledge, you wind up using questions like this water percentage one.
Really. In the joke sense, "Serenity" has some positive connotations, and they're space-related. It's certainly no worse than "Enterprise". In the plain vanilla sense, "Serenity" is a reasonably nice word that will probably get spelled correctly more often than "Endeavour".
I would be all for naming the module "FUCK" if it would make the public more interested in our space program...
Our space program should elevate the public's interests, not degrade itself to grab their attention. I, for one, would be much happier working to build the "Serenity" than the "Colbert".
This decision establishes that The Consulting Association's actions were illegal. In the US, The Consulting Association would now be the target of lawsuits from workers affected by those illegal actions. I'm not quite sure if it's the same deal in the UK.
If that's true, then a lot of people are complete idiots.
Yep. It's regrettable, but true. It's also true that the financial behaviors of idiots (none of us, of course) have consequences for the rest of us, and we have to deal with that. There's a reason we have railings, rounded corners, and safety guards to prevent easily avoidable physical catastrophes.
We seem to have different definitions for GSE. If a piece of hardware matches form, fit, and function, but uses different materials, I'd tend to call it a brassboard. For me, GSE usually refers to interface mockups, support electronics, etc. for testing a subsystem.
I get most of what you're saying, and I'm pretty clear on how it works for the nominal case. But I'm specifically wondering about:
And, then, at the one month time frame you gave, you fire them.
Let's say you don't fire them right then and there. Let's say that right as the one month probationary period is coming to a close, some unfortunate event in their lives makes it cruel/heartless/distasteful to fire them "on schedule". So you hold off for some period of time, and then follow through on firing them. Does that also get documented? Does that open you up to challenges the next time you try to fire someone using that procedure?
...if negative reviews were really being pulled at the request of advertiser...
That would be really bad, I agree.
...if a salesmen implied that all negative reviews would be removed...
This is also really bad. Was Yelp management really unaware of this behavior? Were they turning a blind eye to it?
The Yelp CEO seems to acknowledge that manipulating review order for money would be bad and wrong. What bothers me is that he doesn't also state that it would be bad and wrong for his sales force to imply that they could do that.
...it seems like some sales droid was being overly pushy and overstating the facts, which is SOP for a salesmen...
Ah, the good old "overzealous staffer" defense. That supposed salesman is acting on behalf of the company. The company is responsible for making sure that nobody gets "overzealous", and is culpable when somebody does.
Or, it was that drive-up place where you can get a side of bronto ribs delivered right to your car. People tend to just toss the bones aside afterward.
You would think that an article like that would cite some sort of FAA or JAA report on the incident. It's a great example of an article put up by someone with an axe to grind, but I don't think it's an example of recursion.
Right, but some things have much higher potential for misuse than others. Some things have such a high potential for misuse that we (as a society) require you to pass some sort of check before you can use them. It's not a good idea to put these things in the hands of just anybody. I don't know if I'd go that far for tracking technologies, but they definitely have a higher potential for misuse than your average box of cheerios.
I think I may just be fishing for nefarious uses of a box of cheerios.
I'd just like to add that money used to 'rescue' AIG ($85B) is enough to fund NASA for five years at its current budget ($17B). They found that $85B in one weekend.
I really got tired of reading about the blunders of management in NASA during my engineering ethics class back in the day.
You get to read about NASA's blunders because NASA will:
1. document them,
2. admit to them,
3. not sue you for publishing analysis about them.
Contrast that with the occasions where a corporation has been dragged before a judicial or legislative body to explain themselves. There are plenty of other "blunders" being perpetrated on a daily basis. At least in the case of NASA, you can rule out the profit motive.
You might want to look into some of the game theory behind all this. Basically, nice guys (cooperators) hang together and get a lot more done because they can trust each other. This behavior is vulnerable to exploitation by manipulative assholes (defectors). Nice guys can defend themselves against this by being picky about who they cooperate with, and seeking out others with a reputation as nice guys.
In essence, nice guys win if they ostracize assholes and learn to hold a grudge. If you're an asshole, you better be really good at it, because you're going to run out of suckers really quick. It's nice to know that ethical behavior is actually a sound strategy.
Slashdot Mirror
Ships call for help using a 406 MHz EPIRB. The signal is picked up by the COSPAS-SARSAT satellite network and relayed to a local SAR station. The 406 MHZ beacons are a big improvement over the old 121.5 and 243 MHz beacons, as they support identification and GPS data. The old beacons basically just scream "Help!".
The only point I see in running shoes is an certain amount of cushoning
I run in a park with some dogs, a lot of geese, and the occasional spot of broken glass. I also run along roads. My running shoes protect me from puncture wounds, infection, and general grossness.
Interesting. You were hidden in plain sight. A congregation of police cars at the Tim Horton's draws a lot of snarky comments, but not suspicion.
How are you going to judge what is overwhelming and what isn't?
Easy. We dunked her and she floats - proof positive of witchery.
I'm sorry, Dave, but I can't let you use that stall.
Rote memorization is no substitute for rational, critical thought, but it's a pretty cheap vaccine against bad ideas. I would very much like for a majority of the population to be able to explain why it's not a good idea to [insert bad idea], but I'll settle for them just knowing that it's not a good idea to [insert bad idea].
There's a flaw in my reasoning, though. Without examination, the rote memorization could just as well be bad facts. Which suggests that a question such as "% water coverage" is really just asking "What % of the population has been indoctrinated to dogma X?"
Zymurgist ahoy! Of course you'd find a brewer - beer and "discussion" go hand in hand. ;)
I aim high on my Hefeweizens as well, but then try to force them to spend a little bit of time at the low end of the range. I like to have both the banana and clove flavors, leaning toward banana.
how many can say off the top of their head the optimal fermenting temperature for a lager?
About 47 degrees, coincidentally enough. (Low 60's for most ales, mid to high 60's for Hefeweizens, higher still for Saisons).
Seriously, though: I think the point is that you need to know enough about things outside your area of expertise so that you can give things a quick sanity check. If you're totally blindly ignorant, any "expert" can take you for a ride. If the voting public is in that position, then that's bad news. Rather than trying to get someone to sit still for a comprehensive evaluation of their general scientific knowledge, you wind up using questions like this water percentage one.
Really. In the joke sense, "Serenity" has some positive connotations, and they're space-related. It's certainly no worse than "Enterprise". In the plain vanilla sense, "Serenity" is a reasonably nice word that will probably get spelled correctly more often than "Endeavour".
I would be all for naming the module "FUCK" if it would make the public more interested in our space program...
Our space program should elevate the public's interests, not degrade itself to grab their attention. I, for one, would be much happier working to build the "Serenity" than the "Colbert".
This decision establishes that The Consulting Association's actions were illegal. In the US, The Consulting Association would now be the target of lawsuits from workers affected by those illegal actions. I'm not quite sure if it's the same deal in the UK.
If that's true, then a lot of people are complete idiots.
Yep. It's regrettable, but true. It's also true that the financial behaviors of idiots (none of us, of course) have consequences for the rest of us, and we have to deal with that. There's a reason we have railings, rounded corners, and safety guards to prevent easily avoidable physical catastrophes.
It really doesn't seem logical that...
Ah, there's where you went wrong.
We seem to have different definitions for GSE. If a piece of hardware matches form, fit, and function, but uses different materials, I'd tend to call it a brassboard. For me, GSE usually refers to interface mockups, support electronics, etc. for testing a subsystem.
And, then, at the one month time frame you gave, you fire them.
Let's say you don't fire them right then and there. Let's say that right as the one month probationary period is coming to a close, some unfortunate event in their lives makes it cruel/heartless/distasteful to fire them "on schedule". So you hold off for some period of time, and then follow through on firing them. Does that also get documented? Does that open you up to challenges the next time you try to fire someone using that procedure?
firing for cause without good documentation is a good way to lose a lawsuit
What happens if they held off for a month or so out of pity and then fired her? Does that get documented as well?
...if negative reviews were really being pulled at the request of advertiser...
That would be really bad, I agree.
...if a salesmen implied that all negative reviews would be removed...
This is also really bad. Was Yelp management really unaware of this behavior? Were they turning a blind eye to it?
The Yelp CEO seems to acknowledge that manipulating review order for money would be bad and wrong. What bothers me is that he doesn't also state that it would be bad and wrong for his sales force to imply that they could do that.
...it seems like some sales droid was being overly pushy and overstating the facts, which is SOP for a salesmen...
Ah, the good old "overzealous staffer" defense. That supposed salesman is acting on behalf of the company. The company is responsible for making sure that nobody gets "overzealous", and is culpable when somebody does.
Surely it must be possible to
famous last words.
Or, it was that drive-up place where you can get a side of bronto ribs delivered right to your car. People tend to just toss the bones aside afterward.
We'll be happy to, but only if we get to pick which ones.
You would think that an article like that would cite some sort of FAA or JAA report on the incident. It's a great example of an article put up by someone with an axe to grind, but I don't think it's an example of recursion.
Almost anything can be misused.
Right, but some things have much higher potential for misuse than others. Some things have such a high potential for misuse that we (as a society) require you to pass some sort of check before you can use them. It's not a good idea to put these things in the hands of just anybody. I don't know if I'd go that far for tracking technologies, but they definitely have a higher potential for misuse than your average box of cheerios.
I think I may just be fishing for nefarious uses of a box of cheerios.
I'd just like to add that money used to 'rescue' AIG ($85B) is enough to fund NASA for five years at its current budget ($17B). They found that $85B in one weekend.
I really got tired of reading about the blunders of management in NASA during my engineering ethics class back in the day.
You get to read about NASA's blunders because NASA will:
1. document them,
2. admit to them,
3. not sue you for publishing analysis about them.
Contrast that with the occasions where a corporation has been dragged before a judicial or legislative body to explain themselves. There are plenty of other "blunders" being perpetrated on a daily basis. At least in the case of NASA, you can rule out the profit motive.
You might want to look into some of the game theory behind all this. Basically, nice guys (cooperators) hang together and get a lot more done because they can trust each other. This behavior is vulnerable to exploitation by manipulative assholes (defectors). Nice guys can defend themselves against this by being picky about who they cooperate with, and seeking out others with a reputation as nice guys.
In essence, nice guys win if they ostracize assholes and learn to hold a grudge. If you're an asshole, you better be really good at it, because you're going to run out of suckers really quick. It's nice to know that ethical behavior is actually a sound strategy.