You're confusing the maximum with the average. The maximum has not changed much. The average age used to be far lower. Improvements in sanitation, antibiotics, medical care and other things have raised the average live span immensely. That is what matters in terms of calculations about funds for retirement which is how social security and retirement funds were setup. Since the vast majority of people didn't have many years of retirement it was easier to fund the system. Funding is at issue in this discussion. How do you save up enough to live a life of leisure for 50 years?
Ah, okay, I'll take that definition. Then I have always been retired. I do interesting things and am my own boss and have been for over 40 years. This difference may be the key as to why some people want to retire (they hate what they're doing or are simply bored) and others have no desire (we're doing fascinating things).
How odd that you think I have nothing in my life other than work. I guess you also are making an assumption that my work is not fulfilling and fascinating. I suspect that this reflects far more on you and your work and life since neither is true about me and my work and life. Look in the mirror.
How odd that you think I have nothing in my life other than work. I guess you also are making an assumption that my work is not fulfilling and fascinating. I suspect that this reflects far more on you and your work and life since neither is true about me and my work and life. Look in the mirror.
Retirement is a mid-1900's concept, a fleeting fad. It was based on age 65 because most people didn't live that long, the median age was late-40's to mid-50's or something like that. From the employer's perspective there was a burgeoning younger work force and retirement was a way of dumping out the more expensive, more fossilized older workers in favor of cheaper, eager, more trainable younger workers.
Why retire? You are at your peak, so far, earning power. What are you going to do with your next 50 years? Perhaps your next 200 years of life as lifespans extend?
If you simply want to do something else, do that, but don't retire. Retire sounds way too much like died tired.
The other aspect of this is Apple should build in legacy support so that all old software, all the way back to the Apple I, works on modern Macs, iPads, iPhones, iPodTouch, etc. Heck, they already have, sort of, Windows support and they could bring that in native too. With just a bit more work add CPM, full Linux, DOS, PDP, Cray, Howell, etc support too. Then all those legacy hardware systems could be upgraded to new Apple hardware. That would open an enormous market for them.
1. People eat out more because perhaps it will get cheaper to eat out since labor is the largest cost in the restaurant business; or
2. Competition will drive out of business the (usually smaller) less competitive restaurants resulting in job losses as competition increases for the static level of consumers.
Both of these could happen together or to varying degrees.
"We throw away enough food to feed entire countries, there are millions of properties that sit vacant,"
This is one of those fun quotes some people like to throw around but the problem is that most of the food that goes into that calculation is not food that you or any other citizen wants to eat. Much of it is food that has gone bad, food that is beyond harvestable, food that is not very nutritious for humans but makes good animal feed, food that has 'spots' on it that consumers don't want to eat because they're paying for it and food that the government simply will not allow to be used as human food.
I would estimate that the real food waste is more like 1% to 10% of the claimed food waste. I'm in the food industry so I have a background in this.
"each bitcoin transaction requires the same amount of energy used to power nine homes in the U.S. for one day."
That is the most mind blowing part of the entire article.
Sadly, people who've made an investment into cryptocurrencies aren't going to let something like saving the world stand in their way of making more money. That just isn't natural.
Not really. Apple buys enormous numbers of some components and the suppliers are unable to supply all that is needed or Apple simply doesn't want to be dependent on a single supplier so they multi-source. Manufacturing is complex.
My customers employ me to solve problems for them. I produce products and solutions. If you're bothered by having to produce your degree then change your tact.
I'm sorry you missed my point. This is not about evolution of the various species but rather that the species are gaining new environments that were previously not hospitable.
As the northern waters warm a little the motile forms of the young corals drop into those newly hospitable areas and colonize.
This is not about evolution. Evolution's great but this is about how existing species can take on new areas because those areas become hospitable. The environment is changing rather than the species.
Shame on you for reducing to name calling - ref: your last paragraph.
What seems to be missed in all this negativity is the very positive thing that vast new parts of the oceans are now the right conditions for corals and the corals are moving into them. Part of the biology of corals is they squirt out their gametes into the currents which then for a mobile stage of the coral that floats and eventually settles somewhere in the world. If it settles in a viable spot then the coral flourishes causing the corals to spread.
This is a very good strategy, it works and people are ignoring it.
Probably people ignore this because most people don't know much about corals and it makes better headlines if you say gloom and doom.
Over the years I've read of others that were over 2,000 lbs.
Most don't get that big because they're overfed on a grain diet and kept in confinement which makes them fat which becomes too much for their heart.
I raise my pigs on pasture where about 80% of their diet is the pasture as measured by Percent Dry Matter Intake (%DMI) which is a standard way of measuring feed. They also get about 7%DMI dairy, 2%DMI spent barley (high protein, low in energy, high in fiber), apples, pears, pumpkins, eggs, 1%DMI bread, 1%DMI eggs... The result is mine tend to be muscular and lean as well as being in very good shape from walking around our mountain pastures. It may well be that if I were to feed my pigs a high grain diet they would end up far larger, but die of a heart attack like the very large grain fed pigs. Pigs are prone to heart attacks as they have relatively small hearts given their huge size.
Not really. This is a free market. This is capitalism. We are not required to place stores in some socialistic left wing egalitarian patter that you like. In fact, in the USA, and many countries, there are rules that require the companies to maximize income for their shareholders. Frankly, Apple does a lot of nice social things. The article cited above is just mud-slinging.
Slashdot Mirror
Depends on your goals...
If your goal is to create centralized, industrialized, Big Ag food then plant based pseudo meat works great.
If your goal is decentralized, small farm, local economies then pasture based grazing animal based real meat works great.
Frankly, there is no need to call plant based foods meat - that is deception. Call them what they are: Highly processed plant based foods.
I'll take the real thing any day.
You're confusing the maximum with the average. The maximum has not changed much. The average age used to be far lower. Improvements in sanitation, antibiotics, medical care and other things have raised the average live span immensely. That is what matters in terms of calculations about funds for retirement which is how social security and retirement funds were setup. Since the vast majority of people didn't have many years of retirement it was easier to fund the system. Funding is at issue in this discussion. How do you save up enough to live a life of leisure for 50 years?
Perhaps this says something about the obesity epidemic...
Ah, okay, I'll take that definition. Then I have always been retired. I do interesting things and am my own boss and have been for over 40 years. This difference may be the key as to why some people want to retire (they hate what they're doing or are simply bored) and others have no desire (we're doing fascinating things).
Do fascinating work...
How odd that you think I have nothing in my life other than work. I guess you also are making an assumption that my work is not fulfilling and fascinating. I suspect that this reflects far more on you and your work and life since neither is true about me and my work and life. Look in the mirror.
How odd that you think I have nothing in my life other than work. I guess you also are making an assumption that my work is not fulfilling and fascinating. I suspect that this reflects far more on you and your work and life since neither is true about me and my work and life. Look in the mirror.
Retirement is a mid-1900's concept, a fleeting fad. It was based on age 65 because most people didn't live that long, the median age was late-40's to mid-50's or something like that. From the employer's perspective there was a burgeoning younger work force and retirement was a way of dumping out the more expensive, more fossilized older workers in favor of cheaper, eager, more trainable younger workers.
Why retire? You are at your peak, so far, earning power. What are you going to do with your next 50 years? Perhaps your next 200 years of life as lifespans extend?
If you simply want to do something else, do that, but don't retire. Retire sounds way too much like died tired.
The other aspect of this is Apple should build in legacy support so that all old software, all the way back to the Apple I, works on modern Macs, iPads, iPhones, iPodTouch, etc. Heck, they already have, sort of, Windows support and they could bring that in native too. With just a bit more work add CPM, full Linux, DOS, PDP, Cray, Howell, etc support too. Then all those legacy hardware systems could be upgraded to new Apple hardware. That would open an enormous market for them.
This is a good feature and makes a lot sense speaking as both a user and an engineer.
So to balance the equation two things may happen:
1. People eat out more because perhaps it will get cheaper to eat out since labor is the largest cost in the restaurant business; or
2. Competition will drive out of business the (usually smaller) less competitive restaurants resulting in job losses as competition increases for the static level of consumers.
Both of these could happen together or to varying degrees.
"Fucking hypocrites."
The solution would be to stop doing that. Then there might be fewer.
You're ability to be snarky doesn't change the fact that you missed the point. Too bad.
â'AÂ=>â'B
Translation: Your logic abilities are weak.
Not only do batteries need charging but they also wear out. Li are no exception.
"We throw away enough food to feed entire countries, there are millions of properties that sit vacant,"
This is one of those fun quotes some people like to throw around but the problem is that most of the food that goes into that calculation is not food that you or any other citizen wants to eat. Much of it is food that has gone bad, food that is beyond harvestable, food that is not very nutritious for humans but makes good animal feed, food that has 'spots' on it that consumers don't want to eat because they're paying for it and food that the government simply will not allow to be used as human food.
I would estimate that the real food waste is more like 1% to 10% of the claimed food waste. I'm in the food industry so I have a background in this.
"each bitcoin transaction requires the same amount of energy used to power nine homes in the U.S. for one day."
That is the most mind blowing part of the entire article.
Sadly, people who've made an investment into cryptocurrencies aren't going to let something like saving the world stand in their way of making more money. That just isn't natural.
Not really. Apple buys enormous numbers of some components and the suppliers are unable to supply all that is needed or Apple simply doesn't want to be dependent on a single supplier so they multi-source. Manufacturing is complex.
Not too surprising, or not surprising at all, since Apple multi-sources components and they're not exactly the same. *shrug*
My customers employ me to solve problems for them. I produce products and solutions. If you're bothered by having to produce your degree then change your tact.
I have never been asked for my degree, what university or my majors. All my customers care about is that I deliver quality and solve their problems.
I'm sorry you missed my point. This is not about evolution of the various species but rather that the species are gaining new environments that were previously not hospitable.
As the northern waters warm a little the motile forms of the young corals drop into those newly hospitable areas and colonize.
This is not about evolution. Evolution's great but this is about how existing species can take on new areas because those areas become hospitable. The environment is changing rather than the species.
Shame on you for reducing to name calling - ref: your last paragraph.
What seems to be missed in all this negativity is the very positive thing that vast new parts of the oceans are now the right conditions for corals and the corals are moving into them. Part of the biology of corals is they squirt out their gametes into the currents which then for a mobile stage of the coral that floats and eventually settles somewhere in the world. If it settles in a viable spot then the coral flourishes causing the corals to spread.
This is a very good strategy, it works and people are ignoring it.
Probably people ignore this because most people don't know much about corals and it makes better headlines if you say gloom and doom.
Hormones are allowed in some species but not in others. I raise pigs - hormones are not allowed and I wouldn't use them anyways.
I've never heard of medications for water retention. Can you cite sources? Again this isn't something I use.
Salt licks don't cause animals to put on water weight. There you are simply flat out wrong.
My name's not "John" either. But I am a real farmer.
Over the years I've read of others that were over 2,000 lbs.
Most don't get that big because they're overfed on a grain diet and kept in confinement which makes them fat which becomes too much for their heart.
I raise my pigs on pasture where about 80% of their diet is the pasture as measured by Percent Dry Matter Intake (%DMI) which is a standard way of measuring feed. They also get about 7%DMI dairy, 2%DMI spent barley (high protein, low in energy, high in fiber), apples, pears, pumpkins, eggs, 1%DMI bread, 1%DMI eggs... The result is mine tend to be muscular and lean as well as being in very good shape from walking around our mountain pastures. It may well be that if I were to feed my pigs a high grain diet they would end up far larger, but die of a heart attack like the very large grain fed pigs. Pigs are prone to heart attacks as they have relatively small hearts given their huge size.
Not really. This is a free market. This is capitalism. We are not required to place stores in some socialistic left wing egalitarian patter that you like. In fact, in the USA, and many countries, there are rules that require the companies to maximize income for their shareholders. Frankly, Apple does a lot of nice social things. The article cited above is just mud-slinging.