WASP means old-money. I mean, literally it doesn't. But it's used to connote a very specific type of person. If you didn't grow up with a trust fund or around people who did, you're not a WASP, regardless of your religion, ethnicity or ancestry.
Anti-Vaxxers are among some of the most educated and best informed people.
About what topic? Because about the only thing know about them (their defining characteristic), is that they are dead wrong on understanding vaccines, autism, epidemiology, children's rights and all other disciplines that contribute to why you should vaccinate your damn kids (medical exceptions obviously apply).
They used to tend to be more affluent (which is associated with educated but not informed), but it seems to have gone mainstream with the essential oils pyramid scheme (oops, multilevel marketing). And the only famous anti-vaxxers I know of are Jenny McCarthy and Rob Schneider.
And the no-longer-doctor Wakefield. Not sure I'd hold them up as "educated and/or informed".
Got it, you think children(who cannot choose their parents) should die for the sins of the father (or mother). And, further, that herd immunity shouldn't exist for the non-negligible number of people for whom the vaccine doesn't take fully or cannot be vaccinated because of immune system disorders.
While I believe there are some people who think that Facebook is the internet (esp.in places where FB offers free "internet"), I don't think Pinterest is that big... yet. And, frankly, I doubt it ever will be that big.
People aren't going on Pintrest to search for vaccines to learn and make a reasoned argument. The problem is they find it organically and get sucked in.
If people wanted to search for information, they would use Google.
Every year or so, there's another news article about some mommy blogger who's children just found out every moment of their life was memorialized online - and they are very angry. It's usually followed by the mommy blogger expressing no remorse, and talking about how they are still going to post everything their kid does (including this whole argument), usually with a fig leaf or two about some privacy "protecting" nothing that shows they "compromise".
Tasha Yar wore gold because she was in the security division (if the head of it.) The chief engineer also wears gold. Just like the chief medical officer and chief science officer wear blue
Command division or ops or science is the department they are in, rank is independent. If Picard or Riker had a personal aide who was supposed to set out his uniform every day, that person would wear red but be very low ranked.
Since you asked about Tasha Yar, you probably would note that Geordi and Worf both wear red that season. Which may seem weird. However, neither is in their iconic role yet; Worf and Geordi were both backup connmen, outside the security and engineering department. This is because they were originally conceived of as recurring rather than main characters.
Yes, I replied to the wrong spot elsewhere on the thread, but my brain mangled it. And productivity seems to have gone up 25% (the amount required to cancel out a 20% decrease in hours), since the article says the total output remained flat (on a weekly basis).
That said, I maintain there is a difference between weekly and and hourly productivity, just as hourly velocity and weekly velocity makes sense as well. It has to do with duty cycle. If you're going on a long car ride, I imagine your average velocity would decrease dramatically (because you are not driving while sleeping, eating, refueling, etc.) However, your velocity, when driving, is probably higher because you're exclusively on highways. It makes sense to talk about these as different numbers.
because some future President and Congress will eventually do the sane thing ditch the Coast Guard or merge it back where they belong under the Navy.
The Navy isn't allowed to enforce US laws. The Coast Guard is. That's why the Coast Guard is under the DHS (and was affected by the shutdown) and the Navy is under the DoD (and wasn't).
Now, in time of war, the Coast Guard becomes a military operation. But until then, they are arresting drug dealers and saving lives on the high seas.
because some future President and Congress will eventually do the sane thing ditch the Coast Guard or merge it back where they belong under the Navy.
And my guess is that the "space force", should it ever exist, will be under the Air Force. After all, the Air Force can already operate at pretty high altitudes.
The reporter (or a non-technical person) said 20%. They wanted to say it came out to a wash, and they knew it was a 20% reduction, so they thought 20% improvement. (And the wash probably had some fairly large error bars)
Note, I messed up elsewhere in the comments and thought it was a 20% weekly improvement.
You should at least RTFA when responding to someone who makes a big deal about it in their username! And in response to your bolded statement, the people were salaried - their pay remained the same even though they only worked 80% as long.
I'd probably be happy to work 4x12.5 hour days as long as my compensation and PTO make up for it. Three day weekends are great, and I'd rather go full off/full on. So, that would be another 10 weeks PTO a year, so that would be 12+ weeks PTO (in the US). Three months a year and three days a week (4 days when there is a holiday) is better than a few extra hours in the evening. Especially since 12.5 hours have more space in their for breaks than 8 hours do, since so often I have to do nothing while the computer cranks.
back when I worked 4 ten hour days instead of 5 8 hour days
But this study wasn't about moving around the 40-hour-week (actually 37.5 hour week in NZ due to lunch). It was literally just dropping one day from the schedule, and moving to a 30-hour-week (4x7.5).
And weekly productivity went up 20%. Which, given the 20% reduction in hours, means hourly productivity went up ~50%.
Either freedom of speech is total, or it isn't freedom of speech at all.
I guess we don't have freedom of speech then. We don't have the right to yell fire in a crowded theater, slander someone, incite a riot, plan an illegal act, threaten someone's life, or a variety of other limitations.
What if your job was to go around to anti-vaxxer homes and force vaccinate kids while police restrain the parents? Would you feel good about yourself at the end of the day?
I assume you mean morally, not "would you rather program computers or help". And yes, of course. You're saving children's lives. Their parents are asshats.
I mean, it would be emotionally draining, but so would dealing with all kinds of horrific things that, for example, the police have to. I wouldn't want to be a judge who had to sentence people to jail either, but I'm glad they exist.
You're missing something. Getting information from the signs would be "inferred from conduct". The line there is tricky, but doable. Imagine an algorithm that raises prices by a penny/gallon. If all its competitors follow suit, it waits 5 minutes and then raises prices again. If not, it lowers its price by a penny (back to where it was) and sleeps for a day or until a competitor raises prices by a penny. That is colluding.
Except that when people do not communicate with each other, I don't believe that it can be said to be colluding, by definition.
P
The federal government, specifically the FTC, disagrees with you. Collusion just requires that two companies agree to set prices, no communication is required. This agreement can be inferred from behavior. There are lots of examples from other posters (such as the airlines in the 1970's).
It makes sense that algorithms would collude... it's well known that algorithms can establish subtle communication with each other as they evolve, and collusion is the most efficient way to set prices.
And none of those people talk about taxes. They talk about housing costs... which are a self-correcting problem.
Also, talk is cheap. I'm considering moving to Paris. I'm also considering doing a lot of things. Let me know when they actually do it, because right now people are moving to California.
Slashdot Mirror
WASP means old-money. I mean, literally it doesn't. But it's used to connote a very specific type of person. If you didn't grow up with a trust fund or around people who did, you're not a WASP, regardless of your religion, ethnicity or ancestry.
About what topic? Because about the only thing know about them (their defining characteristic), is that they are dead wrong on understanding vaccines, autism, epidemiology, children's rights and all other disciplines that contribute to why you should vaccinate your damn kids (medical exceptions obviously apply).
They used to tend to be more affluent (which is associated with educated but not informed), but it seems to have gone mainstream with the essential oils pyramid scheme (oops, multilevel marketing). And the only famous anti-vaxxers I know of are Jenny McCarthy and Rob Schneider. And the no-longer-doctor Wakefield. Not sure I'd hold them up as "educated and/or informed".
Links or your just full of shit.
I'm sorry, are you saying that the dangers of lead and smoking are overstated by some sinister conspiracy?
Got it, you think children(who cannot choose their parents) should die for the sins of the father (or mother). And, further, that herd immunity shouldn't exist for the non-negligible number of people for whom the vaccine doesn't take fully or cannot be vaccinated because of immune system disorders.
While I believe there are some people who think that Facebook is the internet (esp.in places where FB offers free "internet"), I don't think Pinterest is that big... yet. And, frankly, I doubt it ever will be that big.
People aren't going on Pintrest to search for vaccines to learn and make a reasoned argument. The problem is they find it organically and get sucked in.
If people wanted to search for information, they would use Google.
Every year or so, there's another news article about some mommy blogger who's children just found out every moment of their life was memorialized online - and they are very angry. It's usually followed by the mommy blogger expressing no remorse, and talking about how they are still going to post everything their kid does (including this whole argument), usually with a fig leaf or two about some privacy "protecting" nothing that shows they "compromise".
Tasha Yar wore gold because she was in the security division (if the head of it.) The chief engineer also wears gold. Just like the chief medical officer and chief science officer wear blue
Command division or ops or science is the department they are in, rank is independent. If Picard or Riker had a personal aide who was supposed to set out his uniform every day, that person would wear red but be very low ranked.
Since you asked about Tasha Yar, you probably would note that Geordi and Worf both wear red that season. Which may seem weird. However, neither is in their iconic role yet; Worf and Geordi were both backup connmen, outside the security and engineering department. This is because they were originally conceived of as recurring rather than main characters.
Yes, I replied to the wrong spot elsewhere on the thread, but my brain mangled it. And productivity seems to have gone up 25% (the amount required to cancel out a 20% decrease in hours), since the article says the total output remained flat (on a weekly basis).
That said, I maintain there is a difference between weekly and and hourly productivity, just as hourly velocity and weekly velocity makes sense as well. It has to do with duty cycle. If you're going on a long car ride, I imagine your average velocity would decrease dramatically (because you are not driving while sleeping, eating, refueling, etc.) However, your velocity, when driving, is probably higher because you're exclusively on highways. It makes sense to talk about these as different numbers.
The Navy isn't allowed to enforce US laws. The Coast Guard is. That's why the Coast Guard is under the DHS (and was affected by the shutdown) and the Navy is under the DoD (and wasn't).
Now, in time of war, the Coast Guard becomes a military operation. But until then, they are arresting drug dealers and saving lives on the high seas.
And my guess is that the "space force", should it ever exist, will be under the Air Force. After all, the Air Force can already operate at pretty high altitudes.
You're showing your age. Now red shirts are the sign of command and authority. Yellow shirts are the most dangerous since the 1980's.
30 hour weeks. They were only working 7.5 hour days (on both sides of the experiment).
The reporter (or a non-technical person) said 20%. They wanted to say it came out to a wash, and they knew it was a 20% reduction, so they thought 20% improvement. (And the wash probably had some fairly large error bars)
Note, I messed up elsewhere in the comments and thought it was a 20% weekly improvement.
You should at least RTFA when responding to someone who makes a big deal about it in their username! And in response to your bolded statement, the people were salaried - their pay remained the same even though they only worked 80% as long.
I'd probably be happy to work 4x12.5 hour days as long as my compensation and PTO make up for it. Three day weekends are great, and I'd rather go full off/full on. So, that would be another 10 weeks PTO a year, so that would be 12+ weeks PTO (in the US). Three months a year and three days a week (4 days when there is a holiday) is better than a few extra hours in the evening. Especially since 12.5 hours have more space in their for breaks than 8 hours do, since so often I have to do nothing while the computer cranks.
But this study wasn't about moving around the 40-hour-week (actually 37.5 hour week in NZ due to lunch). It was literally just dropping one day from the schedule, and moving to a 30-hour-week (4x7.5).
And weekly productivity went up 20%. Which, given the 20% reduction in hours, means hourly productivity went up ~50%.
I have a proof, but it's too long to fit int he margin of this post.
I guess we don't have freedom of speech then. We don't have the right to yell fire in a crowded theater, slander someone, incite a riot, plan an illegal act, threaten someone's life, or a variety of other limitations.
I assume you mean morally, not "would you rather program computers or help". And yes, of course. You're saving children's lives. Their parents are asshats.
I mean, it would be emotionally draining, but so would dealing with all kinds of horrific things that, for example, the police have to. I wouldn't want to be a judge who had to sentence people to jail either, but I'm glad they exist.
By "inferior Android" you mean "open source" and "forkable"?
Do you mean a Mac? Isn't OSX just a FreeBSD fork?
Ads don't load at the speed of light. Most people aren't on fiber, so it's only 0.1c
You're missing something. Getting information from the signs would be "inferred from conduct". The line there is tricky, but doable. Imagine an algorithm that raises prices by a penny/gallon. If all its competitors follow suit, it waits 5 minutes and then raises prices again. If not, it lowers its price by a penny (back to where it was) and sleeps for a day or until a competitor raises prices by a penny. That is colluding.
P
The federal government, specifically the FTC, disagrees with you. Collusion just requires that two companies agree to set prices, no communication is required. This agreement can be inferred from behavior. There are lots of examples from other posters (such as the airlines in the 1970's).
It makes sense that algorithms would collude... it's well known that algorithms can establish subtle communication with each other as they evolve, and collusion is the most efficient way to set prices.
And none of those people talk about taxes. They talk about housing costs... which are a self-correcting problem.
Also, talk is cheap. I'm considering moving to Paris. I'm also considering doing a lot of things. Let me know when they actually do it, because right now people are moving to California.