Yes, they are right here in good old LIbertyville, IL (about 35 minutes north of downtown chicago on the highway). However, yes, they have a very heavy presence in China, I believe with factories. it's been that way for at least 7 years, probably longer.
I'll show you learning. How about that I just learned Win7 over the past year, and now that I'm settling in to it alright MS is changing things *again*.
Learning should be on their part, that constantly changing things makes life difficult for people. Unless this is a VERY intriguing usability upgrade then I find this development disturbing.
If you think that chicken little is "still holding enough nuclear weapons to wipe mankind from the face of the earth", as well as "ecological damage that is measurably real and causing health problems to people", then I hate to know what your definition of serious is.
A lot of the science now is showing that eat less/exercise more doesn't produce much in terms of results over the long term. There have been studies done on eating less/deprivation, and the repeatedly conclude that it's bad. In extreme cases, of course (like eating a pound of bacon at each meal) there is room to cut back, but in general the whole idea of introducing fewer calories may not be the cure-all many think it is.
Obesity is actually a sign that we're not giving our body the nutrients it needs, so it stores fat. So eating better (read: more nutritious food) is likely to fix things more easily. Of course, exercise isn't bad or anything, it's just not a cure-all.
Oh they have a plan alright. The idea is to gut all regulation and bankrupt the government, pushing the wealth into their own hands in the process so they can reshape the government how they want and privatize most of it in the end. Seriously, read up on Tex Colson and all the think tanks from Nixon on. Plain as the nose on your face.
To follow up on that: No, people shouldn't get too many handouts. They get used to those really easily and it often ruins productivity (see the 3rd world and our "aid" to them) However, selectively figuring out how to help people in the most invisible ways possible that don't allow for abuse of the system ought to be what government does.
People will do what is most obviously (by their perception) of the most benefit. If people see they can get a handout and it's better to them to get that than work hard, if they've been taught or learned to think this way, they'll take the handout every time. However, show them that there is better opportunity and a better way to live through some work and they're much more likely to take that, I assert.
Great, that's fine, and I agree. However, when the opportunities don't exist for one to take care of oneself then there's a problem, or when the things we eat, drink, and do are very hazardous, unbeknownst to us, then that's not self-reliance. That's called Dumb Luck If You Live, and twisting this idea into "haul oneself up by one's bootstraps" is insane and vicious. It's what the Rs are doing now! "Let's remove all these regulations, and when it shakes out we'll just say the losers weren't self-reliant enough. Heh."
People. Need. Help. Those of you who "did it all on your own" are delusional. You got LOTS of help from other sources, but maybe you're too insecure to admit it.
Also, the older generation doesn't SEE the problem. They think that we should just work harder while they get to reap the benefits of our hard work as they stay in positions until the age of 70+ because they didn't save enough for retirement.
The BBC report on it is so sensational that it's reminiscent of Monty Python's "How not to be seen": "This is what could have happened if the underwear bomber had succeeded.... BOOM!" Priceless.
The guy didn't have a target, had no target or plane ticket. It was,"Even more sophisticated than the last one!" Ah yes, more sophisticated because it used a shiny silver button instead of a switch? Yes let's all get worried.
Does it adjust for number of theaters as well? (total number of seats that can hold butts, basically)
if 100% of the theaters sold out, that's a saturated market and the best a movie can do at that time. As far as I can tell that's the only worthwhile indicator for movie popularity on opening night.
This is going the same way that investments did. Started off where you basically needed a professional to get you a lot of things, and over time it's become easier for the individual layperson to participate.
Basically, if you want solid advice you find a good financial professional (same for a doctor of course). However, you can TRY to do it yourself. A few succeed, but many do a sub-optimal job. Personally, I think this will increase business for doctors in the long run as people come to them having screwed up their body, or not treated things that should have been.
OTOH... my doctor is a lazy ass, which is why I'm getting a new one. Too many professionals seem to feel entitled to their clients/patients, don't keep up with the times, and quite frankly don't do a very good job providing what they ought to. In that regard I can see how people would want to stop having to go to their doc once a month or every three months just to get a stupid medication. On top of that, it seems like every time I go to the doc he doesn't know shit about anything when it comes to medications anyway. He just says,"Well, it's your choice. Which one would you like to try?" This is the reason I suspect they're putting this legislation out there: It's just the crap shoot we've known all along. Taking medications is just a game of roulette, and it's been a way for doctors to rake in the bucks for a very long time by getting people to think that they should go to the doctor every time they get a headache or get sick. They just don't need to, but that's only if they actually know how to treat it themselves.
I *assume* the legislation will say that a doc needs to diagnose you with a condition once, then you can get medications for that indefinitely. Otherwise I suspect we could see a boom in the snake oil industry again. Caveat emptor.
Personally? It also sounds like a way for big pharma to cash in some more AND jettison responsibility for drugs they create. They'll put the decision square on the shoulders of the consumer instead of on doctors/theAMA. Shades of gray, pros/cons, etc etc etc
1) Let the USER download their information to hold onto it? Ok, I suppose it depends what kind of data that is, but I suspect that users have systems much more insecure than facebook's (this is assuming this "open standard" will retain anything super sensitive)
2) What he seems to be saying is,"Let's make it formal that we're a fascist state by electing representatives to corporations." Now, some days I think the U.S. is much farther gone than on other days, but whatever mood strikes me this just seems to cement the idea in place that corps are government entities. Those elected entities are SUPPOSED to be the board of directors, elected by stockholders.
How's this: Since the dinosaurs never existed, because God put the bones in the ground for us to find and remind us we will one day die and go to heaven, it's easier than ever to say that climate change doesn't, and never did, exist.
Representatives are voted in, but if they get voted out the same term then ALL VOTES they cast on laws and changes are rescinded back to popular vote in that representative's district. That way, if they don't represent us their laws and changes are undone. Basically, they have to follow through on their promises. It could also slow the growth of government.
Once the internet has all our data, where is all this profit coming from, precisely? We have an economy that can't seem to grow in the last decade or more. We have infrastructure falling apart. Where, precisely, are these dollars coming from that are going to benefit companies that support this?
They're thinking about the next 4 quarters of profit and not about the fact that they value our future at about $0.
The article says it will take years to switch over to this new Hulu model (if I read it right). I guess content companies are just going to keep hammering this internet bill crap down our throats until it passes., and when it's finally implemented they can turn on this Hulu verification crap.
As a financial planner, analytics are THE WORST CLIENTS TO HAVE. They are always challenging my advice, and while a healthy amount of that is good, trying to teach them specifically why things are the way they are, and their STILL not believing it, or thinking they're right anyway "just because I'm that smart", is practically akin to a religion.
Basically, they're SO skeptical of anything they haven't analyzed to death for years that at some point they become permanently skeptical no matter how much evidence is put before them. It's incredible, and it defies the very foundation of what being an analytic is supposed to be about.
Precisely! This is how movies and shows look to me on HDTVs. I don't watch much TV, so the few impressions I've had are terrible, and now I see no reason to ever get an HDTV. It all reminds me of a soap opera.
Most of them have no idea this is going on. there are too many issues and not enough education. Most people are just trying to get by from day to day, keeping the boss happy so they don't get fired.
The system is rigged to create scared, helpless people. It needs to prop people up and embolden them before anything will happen.
Basically, don't blame this on people. People are going to be people. There's a reason for that, and finding out what that reason is would go a lot farther than pointing fingers.
"Tube" (a movie) is doing it. Why can't studios? Re-use the art assets from game to game, or release them for free so others can use them/upgrade them. If the cost is because of incredibly high art expenditures for detailed worlds, then the cost has to go down somehow.
I;m sure someone from the game industry can give a few more insights than my layman's notions, though.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, they are right here in good old LIbertyville, IL (about 35 minutes north of downtown chicago on the highway). However, yes, they have a very heavy presence in China, I believe with factories. it's been that way for at least 7 years, probably longer.
I'll show you learning. How about that I just learned Win7 over the past year, and now that I'm settling in to it alright MS is changing things *again*.
Learning should be on their part, that constantly changing things makes life difficult for people. Unless this is a VERY intriguing usability upgrade then I find this development disturbing.
If you think that chicken little is "still holding enough nuclear weapons to wipe mankind from the face of the earth", as well as "ecological damage that is measurably real and causing health problems to people", then I hate to know what your definition of serious is.
Actually, that's not entirely true.
A lot of the science now is showing that eat less/exercise more doesn't produce much in terms of results over the long term.
There have been studies done on eating less/deprivation, and the repeatedly conclude that it's bad. In extreme cases, of course (like eating a pound of bacon at each meal) there is room to cut back, but in general the whole idea of introducing fewer calories may not be the cure-all many think it is.
Obesity is actually a sign that we're not giving our body the nutrients it needs, so it stores fat. So eating better (read: more nutritious food) is likely to fix things more easily. Of course, exercise isn't bad or anything, it's just not a cure-all.
Sorry, Washington D.C. is in the other direction.
Oh they have a plan alright. The idea is to gut all regulation and bankrupt the government, pushing the wealth into their own hands in the process so they can reshape the government how they want and privatize most of it in the end. Seriously, read up on Tex Colson and all the think tanks from Nixon on. Plain as the nose on your face.
Hell, it isn't even free. They charge an awful lot in "protection money" for that service.
To follow up on that: No, people shouldn't get too many handouts. They get used to those really easily and it often ruins productivity (see the 3rd world and our "aid" to them)
However, selectively figuring out how to help people in the most invisible ways possible that don't allow for abuse of the system ought to be what government does.
People will do what is most obviously (by their perception) of the most benefit. If people see they can get a handout and it's better to them to get that than work hard, if they've been taught or learned to think this way, they'll take the handout every time. However, show them that there is better opportunity and a better way to live through some work and they're much more likely to take that, I assert.
Great, that's fine, and I agree. However, when the opportunities don't exist for one to take care of oneself then there's a problem, or when the things we eat, drink, and do are very hazardous, unbeknownst to us, then that's not self-reliance. That's called Dumb Luck If You Live, and twisting this idea into "haul oneself up by one's bootstraps" is insane and vicious. It's what the Rs are doing now! "Let's remove all these regulations, and when it shakes out we'll just say the losers weren't self-reliant enough. Heh."
People. Need. Help. Those of you who "did it all on your own" are delusional. You got LOTS of help from other sources, but maybe you're too insecure to admit it.
dingdingding
Also, the older generation doesn't SEE the problem. They think that we should just work harder while they get to reap the benefits of our hard work as they stay in positions until the age of 70+ because they didn't save enough for retirement.
I *knew* it! Hipsters.
Umm... how did you get to be a grad student? Didn't you go to a university that was probably at some point funded by the government?
Yes, that is how government works. Stop being selfish and realize that we all benefit from helping each other out.
The BBC report on it is so sensational that it's reminiscent of Monty Python's "How not to be seen": "This is what could have happened if the underwear bomber had succeeded.... BOOM!" Priceless.
The guy didn't have a target, had no target or plane ticket. It was,"Even more sophisticated than the last one!" Ah yes, more sophisticated because it used a shiny silver button instead of a switch? Yes let's all get worried.
Does it adjust for number of theaters as well? (total number of seats that can hold butts, basically)
if 100% of the theaters sold out, that's a saturated market and the best a movie can do at that time. As far as I can tell that's the only worthwhile indicator for movie popularity on opening night.
This is going the same way that investments did. Started off where you basically needed a professional to get you a lot of things, and over time it's become easier for the individual layperson to participate.
Basically, if you want solid advice you find a good financial professional (same for a doctor of course). However, you can TRY to do it yourself. A few succeed, but many do a sub-optimal job. Personally, I think this will increase business for doctors in the long run as people come to them having screwed up their body, or not treated things that should have been.
OTOH... my doctor is a lazy ass, which is why I'm getting a new one. Too many professionals seem to feel entitled to their clients/patients, don't keep up with the times, and quite frankly don't do a very good job providing what they ought to. In that regard I can see how people would want to stop having to go to their doc once a month or every three months just to get a stupid medication. On top of that, it seems like every time I go to the doc he doesn't know shit about anything when it comes to medications anyway. He just says,"Well, it's your choice. Which one would you like to try?" This is the reason I suspect they're putting this legislation out there: It's just the crap shoot we've known all along. Taking medications is just a game of roulette, and it's been a way for doctors to rake in the bucks for a very long time by getting people to think that they should go to the doctor every time they get a headache or get sick. They just don't need to, but that's only if they actually know how to treat it themselves.
I *assume* the legislation will say that a doc needs to diagnose you with a condition once, then you can get medications for that indefinitely. Otherwise I suspect we could see a boom in the snake oil industry again. Caveat emptor.
Personally? It also sounds like a way for big pharma to cash in some more AND jettison responsibility for drugs they create. They'll put the decision square on the shoulders of the consumer instead of on doctors/theAMA.
Shades of gray, pros/cons, etc etc etc
1) Let the USER download their information to hold onto it? Ok, I suppose it depends what kind of data that is, but I suspect that users have systems much more insecure than facebook's (this is assuming this "open standard" will retain anything super sensitive)
2) What he seems to be saying is,"Let's make it formal that we're a fascist state by electing representatives to corporations." Now, some days I think the U.S. is much farther gone than on other days, but whatever mood strikes me this just seems to cement the idea in place that corps are government entities. Those elected entities are SUPPOSED to be the board of directors, elected by stockholders.
How's this:
Since the dinosaurs never existed, because God put the bones in the ground for us to find and remind us we will one day die and go to heaven, it's easier than ever to say that climate change doesn't, and never did, exist.
Am I doing it right?
Perhaps we should consider a hybrid:
Representatives are voted in, but if they get voted out the same term then ALL VOTES they cast on laws and changes are rescinded back to popular vote in that representative's district. That way, if they don't represent us their laws and changes are undone. Basically, they have to follow through on their promises. It could also slow the growth of government.
Once the internet has all our data, where is all this profit coming from, precisely? We have an economy that can't seem to grow in the last decade or more. We have infrastructure falling apart. Where, precisely, are these dollars coming from that are going to benefit companies that support this?
They're thinking about the next 4 quarters of profit and not about the fact that they value our future at about $0.
The article says it will take years to switch over to this new Hulu model (if I read it right).
I guess content companies are just going to keep hammering this internet bill crap down our throats until it passes., and when it's finally implemented they can turn on this Hulu verification crap.
So they let her off the plane and onto the streets to spread more bedbugs.
This city astounds me sometimes.
I can attest to this!
As a financial planner, analytics are THE WORST CLIENTS TO HAVE. They are always challenging my advice, and while a healthy amount of that is good, trying to teach them specifically why things are the way they are, and their STILL not believing it, or thinking they're right anyway "just because I'm that smart", is practically akin to a religion.
Basically, they're SO skeptical of anything they haven't analyzed to death for years that at some point they become permanently skeptical no matter how much evidence is put before them. It's incredible, and it defies the very foundation of what being an analytic is supposed to be about.
Precisely! This is how movies and shows look to me on HDTVs. I don't watch much TV, so the few impressions I've had are terrible, and now I see no reason to ever get an HDTV. It all reminds me of a soap opera.
Most of them have no idea this is going on. there are too many issues and not enough education.
Most people are just trying to get by from day to day, keeping the boss happy so they don't get fired.
The system is rigged to create scared, helpless people. It needs to prop people up and embolden them before anything will happen.
Basically, don't blame this on people. People are going to be people. There's a reason for that, and finding out what that reason is would go a lot farther than pointing fingers.
"Tube" (a movie) is doing it. Why can't studios? Re-use the art assets from game to game, or release them for free so others can use them/upgrade them.
If the cost is because of incredibly high art expenditures for detailed worlds, then the cost has to go down somehow.
I;m sure someone from the game industry can give a few more insights than my layman's notions, though.