'the first one to mention a number, loses' - that's interesting, as any quality negotiating course will tell you the power of first offer. What you want to avoid is making an offer which is higher/lower than they ultimately would have gone through tough negotiation, which many weak negotiators will do (trying to find immediate agreement).
When you make the first offer with a number, it's called an anchor and is the best thing you can do.
I call BS on this and all the other "I remember when I was a kid.." anecdotes that come up in these climate threads. Human perception, especially over long periods of time, is incredibly poor and should be given zero weight. If there's a noticeable decrease, such as snow to "no snow" this should show up clearly in some data. NONE I can find shows anything remotely similar to this for Ohio, in fact there's a ton of variability from year to year, and just recently have seen some of the largest snowfall amounts in many years.
None of the climate articles on Ohio's past mention anything about such a drastic reduction in the amount of snow either. If the ski resorts are shutting down, sounds like it's economic reasons. The data otherwise doesn't support your memory.
Where I live (Canada) there is already a long running need for a plug in at every parking spot, for a similarly critical need: making sure your vehicle starts when you come back to it (block heater). In this case it's a fight against cold weather, there's very few electric vehicles here. A block heater is standard on pretty much every new car purchased in Canada, and each has an electric plug in coming out of the front. People here are used to plugging in their vehicles when they get home for a good portion of the year.
So I'd say I already live in a society that has aimed for maximum plug-in parking penetration for a long time. Some observations:
- You're straight up wrong if you think most public garages will supply them. Comes down to cost. Very few parking garages here have plug ins, as important as it may be.
- Only until it reaches a certain point will you find free charging anywhere. That will disappear very quick. How do we handle short term electric billing?
- Putting in a new charger or outlet might be reasonable for a private homeowner, but fat chance in hell apartment building owners will install that many outlets (which have to be wired back to each unit's power to bill correctly). Many, many people live in rented apartments. I do, and we have plug ins, but if it weren't a requirement when built it would never be done. Also, guest spots do not get plug ins.
I have nothing against electric vehicles. I hope I do buy one, because that would mean they are cheaper and better than ICE vehicles. Ford didn't replace the horse and buggy because he offered a crappier solution for transportation, it was better and cheaper. Let's face facts, the real reason is the ridiculous amount of time it takes to recharge an electric vs. refueling a gas engine. And the range in that short time is far superior.. for it's intended task, at our current point in time, it is a far better product.
Why isn't the simple piece of data on how much of overall sales this is included? A quick search tells me about 1.5M cars per month, or in other words, 99% of buyers are still choosing ICE vehicles. I guess this is why we're hearing talk of banning ICE.. if left to the freedom of the people, it's clear what the choice is.
This looks like a list of your personal preferences over those ten years versus what society will be doing. I especially doubt #8 - time and time again, across every city, politicians and other central-planners talk about how people want smaller places, centralized, walking distance to everything type condos for living. When it comes to actually voting with their dollars, no family ever chooses that over a SFH in the suburbs.
Nonsense. Tesla's current stock price assumes they are as big as General Motors, meaning they have perfect growth to a multi-national corporation built in to current price. They currently sell two whole orders or magnitude less vehicles per year. The only reason the stock price is where it is at is hype and over-exuberance by environmentalists who don't understand finance very well.
You know, one thing this election cycle has been just amazing for is exposing which news outlets are just clickbait generators now. It was probably visible before to the keen and distrustful eye, but I think became obvious to a much larger population (and hence Trump was elected).
Some very big names in media too I will admit I was guilty of thinking they were more credible than they really are. CNN, Washington Post.. never before had I seen either outright false articles reported (Russian hacking) or such one-sided, extremist, disaster porn style reporting. I guess I wasn't too emotionally involved in the outcome (don't live in US), but agree of disagree with Trumps ideas I found little to get so worked up over. Here in Canada, I stopped reading a major publication (G&M) as I found all of their stories were some form of "OMG you won't believe what Trump did now!!11". It also highlighted the smart, objective newsmedia too let's not forget, I hope you found some. And not talking Brietbart of whatever here I'm talking intelligent, objective editors.
Identity politics. I was a child of the early 80s, and I grew up with the impression that all people were equal, and that's the society we strived for. I'd like to think my generation largely achieved that.. it's ridiculous to think any significant percentage of my age range (30-40) supports white supremacist views anymore.
But alas, the newer generation supports divisive politics so much, by mandating that all sorts of people are in special 'victim' classes. Using obscene names like racist to denounce valid forms of opinion. The same thing happened with hippies - the older generation hated them but at least hippies were for peace and freedom, ideas the older generation wasn't naturally opposed to. The newer generation seems to have forgotten the point of our sacred freedoms like free speech, and how they are more important that their cause de jour.
Oh, and fools like the other poster calling Trump a Nazi supporter. Most of us are can see how ridiculous that is, and refuse to stand with such people. Hence I'm a Trump supporter, because to me, he is far less divisive.
there are no jobs and haven't been for at least 10 years
And what planet do you live on?! I hope some youngster doesn't read your comment and get discouraged, we've been actively trying to push more kids into CS.
The large company I work for, which has offices in many major centers across US and Canada, usually always has opportunities for skilled IT staff. Sure there are local cyclical downturns in job markets, but fact remains a CS degree is a ticket to a very upper middle class lifestyle anywhere in NA if you have a bit of smarts. Especially if you get into a specialized field, say automation, SCADA, security, analytics, the list goes on.. A CS degree is a ticket to an extremely well paying and satisfying job, and we tell that to as many youngsters as we can.
Perhaps the issue is that I'm not in the tech industry (eg. Google, Facebook). The beauty of IT is that every single company need an IT dept. Another point to be very aware of, especially if you've seen how they work, is that no sourcing company will ever replace be able to replace you if you're smart.
I live in Canada, and you are just plain wrong. Very wrong. Right now, late 2017, you could not see a single electric vehicle on the road if you tried. I would find a claim that even 8% of new sales are electric/hybrid to be ludicrous, let alone 80%.
Go spread your lies elsewhere, or start reading the facts.
And yet, in the same 5 minutes, it's beyond easy to come up with multiple sources that straight up refute his point (example). In this article, the provincial government is looking for a target of 14,000 electric sales per year by 2020... out of an overall sales number of over 750,000.
Sales of electrics here in Canada are so pitiful, even with so many options, The OP's claim is total BS.
I hear this all the time and it's so disingenuous. I drive a large truck and it takes *maybe* 3 minutes to fully gas it up, actual fuel transfer time. There is no way any charger is giving any vehicle significant range in 6 minutes (yet). Second, proponents always seem to have a reason to extol the virtues of the much longer stops it will require to refuel your vehicle.
Just admit that it's massively inconvenient and time consuming compared to ICE vehicle refuelling. It needs to be addressed prior to mass adoption. Over promising the capabilities will just make people unhappy with their switch, if they ever do.
No, if you read his comments they were actually one of the few I've heard from him that were smart and I agree with. His comments were effectively, if he found anyone in the company trading Bitcoin, he'd fire them since they are stupid.
He accurately made a distinction between blockchain tech (which has high potential), and bitcoin, which is truly useless for any kind of large scale economic activity. It's a playground of the financial retards right now; the vast majority buying bitcoin right now have zero technical knowledge of it, they're just trying to get rick quick. Not a lasting formula.
I live at roughly the same latitude as Finland, and I call BS on your anedotal evidence of climate change over 20 years. Methinks this is a strong case of confirmation bias with all the global warming stories.
For anyone who actually lives in the north, you'll know winter is driven almost exclusively by sunlight, or the lack thereof as you approach winter months. The amount of light hitting our area of earth has not changed at all during this period, and actual temperature changes are so slight there no physical way you notice them change over twenty years. Nothing, absolutely nothing is going to change the fact that in December we only get ~6 hours of sunlight (at a very sharp angle), and it will be extremely cold. More lies and sensationalism, which the climate debate can do without.
I think what's far worse about it will be the battery impact from operating the camera the entire time the phone is on, or even with some logic, a good percentage of the time.
What a ridiculous list, who exactly are you trying to group together and identify as the 'enemy' here? I don't think people who object to Obamacare are in any way on the same plane of critical thinking as someone who denies evolution. I don't think Obamacare was all that bad but I would give an opponent in a debate on it more respect than assuming they denied evolution as well. Non sequitur.
Bringing up the "overwhelming scientific consensus" on climate change, within the context of this article, is also extremely disingenuous. It's already been noted that this storm season isn't anything special in terms of frequency and magnitude of storms, and there hasn't been a major hurricane make landfall in the US in 12 years (yes, way back in 2005).
Your second list if just stupid. I never heard of the first one, only idiots believed in the second, and I could make a much better argument than you any day that Trump doesn't give a shit about Goldman Sach's views if they contradict his. Check your critical thinking skills.
There seems to be a lot of groupthink here that doesn't align with current facts and trends. For starters, you underestimate just how fundamental fossil fuels are to many industries. Tell me how you're going to make steel or lay asphalt with solar energy. Worldwide usage of oil has not slowed down and continues to increase. Further, the trend in vehicle sales is clearly NOT towards electrics. Sales of large vehicles/trucks are increasing steadily, and simply put the data clearly shows as gas prices go down, people just buy larger vehicles.
Lastly, the other poster here vastly underestimates the inconvenience factor of a refueling process almost two orders of magnitude less efficient (time and distance wise) than an ICE vehicle. I'm middle class, and gas for a road trip over 7000km this summer was easily affordable. So which is it? Gas skyrockets in price, making large vehicles unattractive, but now oil industry is awash in cash (and not going 'belly up')? Or perhaps is crashes in price, in which we see people take advantage and buy larger vehicles and use more fuel? The industry is here to stay and grow, your personal politics aside.
"refusing to invest it" - citation needed. Actually, I'll settle for one example of how someone wealthy would not be "investing" their money. Put it in a bank - the bank invests it on their behalf by lending. Put it in stocks, it has been invested in equities. Bonds? Directly lent to a company.
Please, just one example of how the rich don't invest their money. Are you saying the average billionaire keeps a Scrooge McDuck type vault of money removed from the economy somewhere?
Interesting fact: Test have shown a clear correlation between calorie restricted diets and achieving maximum lifespan in an organism. The effect is pronounced, and it is one of the only known factors.
"Maximum life span" here means the mean life span of the most long-lived 10% of a given cohort. Caloric restriction has not yet been shown to break mammalian world records for longevity. Rats, mice, and hamsters experience maximum life-span extension from a diet that contains all of the nutrients but only 40–60% of the calories that the animals consume when they can eat as much as they want. Mean life span is increased 65% and maximum life span is increased 50%, when caloric restriction is begun just before puberty. For fruit flies the life extending benefits of calorie restriction are gained immediately at any age upon beginning calorie restriction and ended immediately at any age upon resuming full feeding
I actually hold the US in higher regard now, but for the fact they allow a neo-Nazi rally to take place. Court affirmed. Despite how abhorrent neo-Nazis are.
Though it's never been a racist comment (I'm a white dude), I've been called some pretty nasty things in my lifetime. I would still agree the proper response is to have the thicker skin and not let it get to you. Hint: that's why they say those things to you, to get a rise, get you angry/upset. If not a racist comment, they'll think of whatever insult is most likely to hurt your feelings. Certainly no one's words should change your views so much. You've given them complete control.
I have to agree that video on the Norwegian gender paradox was one of the most informative I've ever seen on the subject. It directly contradicts many of the posters here, "modern" gender studies paradigms, and more so clearly supports Damore's views.
So how do you explain then the near-even split of genders in non-tech roles at Google? The higher percentage of Asians in tech roles vs. the general population? Are you claiming discrimination is somehow limited to gender, and only within a certain part of the company?
Slashdot Mirror
'the first one to mention a number, loses' - that's interesting, as any quality negotiating course will tell you the power of first offer. What you want to avoid is making an offer which is higher/lower than they ultimately would have gone through tough negotiation, which many weak negotiators will do (trying to find immediate agreement).
When you make the first offer with a number, it's called an anchor and is the best thing you can do.
I call BS on this and all the other "I remember when I was a kid.." anecdotes that come up in these climate threads. Human perception, especially over long periods of time, is incredibly poor and should be given zero weight. If there's a noticeable decrease, such as snow to "no snow" this should show up clearly in some data. NONE I can find shows anything remotely similar to this for Ohio, in fact there's a ton of variability from year to year, and just recently have seen some of the largest snowfall amounts in many years.
None of the climate articles on Ohio's past mention anything about such a drastic reduction in the amount of snow either. If the ski resorts are shutting down, sounds like it's economic reasons. The data otherwise doesn't support your memory.
Where I live (Canada) there is already a long running need for a plug in at every parking spot, for a similarly critical need: making sure your vehicle starts when you come back to it (block heater). In this case it's a fight against cold weather, there's very few electric vehicles here. A block heater is standard on pretty much every new car purchased in Canada, and each has an electric plug in coming out of the front. People here are used to plugging in their vehicles when they get home for a good portion of the year.
So I'd say I already live in a society that has aimed for maximum plug-in parking penetration for a long time. Some observations:
- You're straight up wrong if you think most public garages will supply them. Comes down to cost. Very few parking garages here have plug ins, as important as it may be.
- Only until it reaches a certain point will you find free charging anywhere. That will disappear very quick. How do we handle short term electric billing?
- Putting in a new charger or outlet might be reasonable for a private homeowner, but fat chance in hell apartment building owners will install that many outlets (which have to be wired back to each unit's power to bill correctly). Many, many people live in rented apartments. I do, and we have plug ins, but if it weren't a requirement when built it would never be done. Also, guest spots do not get plug ins.
I have nothing against electric vehicles. I hope I do buy one, because that would mean they are cheaper and better than ICE vehicles. Ford didn't replace the horse and buggy because he offered a crappier solution for transportation, it was better and cheaper. Let's face facts, the real reason is the ridiculous amount of time it takes to recharge an electric vs. refueling a gas engine. And the range in that short time is far superior.. for it's intended task, at our current point in time, it is a far better product.
Why isn't the simple piece of data on how much of overall sales this is included? A quick search tells me about 1.5M cars per month, or in other words, 99% of buyers are still choosing ICE vehicles. I guess this is why we're hearing talk of banning ICE.. if left to the freedom of the people, it's clear what the choice is.
This looks like a list of your personal preferences over those ten years versus what society will be doing. I especially doubt #8 - time and time again, across every city, politicians and other central-planners talk about how people want smaller places, centralized, walking distance to everything type condos for living. When it comes to actually voting with their dollars, no family ever chooses that over a SFH in the suburbs.
Nonsense. Tesla's current stock price assumes they are as big as General Motors, meaning they have perfect growth to a multi-national corporation built in to current price. They currently sell two whole orders or magnitude less vehicles per year. The only reason the stock price is where it is at is hype and over-exuberance by environmentalists who don't understand finance very well.
You know, one thing this election cycle has been just amazing for is exposing which news outlets are just clickbait generators now. It was probably visible before to the keen and distrustful eye, but I think became obvious to a much larger population (and hence Trump was elected).
Some very big names in media too I will admit I was guilty of thinking they were more credible than they really are. CNN, Washington Post.. never before had I seen either outright false articles reported (Russian hacking) or such one-sided, extremist, disaster porn style reporting. I guess I wasn't too emotionally involved in the outcome (don't live in US), but agree of disagree with Trumps ideas I found little to get so worked up over. Here in Canada, I stopped reading a major publication (G&M) as I found all of their stories were some form of "OMG you won't believe what Trump did now!!11". It also highlighted the smart, objective newsmedia too let's not forget, I hope you found some. And not talking Brietbart of whatever here I'm talking intelligent, objective editors.
Identity politics. I was a child of the early 80s, and I grew up with the impression that all people were equal, and that's the society we strived for. I'd like to think my generation largely achieved that.. it's ridiculous to think any significant percentage of my age range (30-40) supports white supremacist views anymore.
But alas, the newer generation supports divisive politics so much, by mandating that all sorts of people are in special 'victim' classes. Using obscene names like racist to denounce valid forms of opinion. The same thing happened with hippies - the older generation hated them but at least hippies were for peace and freedom, ideas the older generation wasn't naturally opposed to. The newer generation seems to have forgotten the point of our sacred freedoms like free speech, and how they are more important that their cause de jour.
Oh, and fools like the other poster calling Trump a Nazi supporter. Most of us are can see how ridiculous that is, and refuse to stand with such people. Hence I'm a Trump supporter, because to me, he is far less divisive.
there are no jobs and haven't been for at least 10 years
And what planet do you live on?! I hope some youngster doesn't read your comment and get discouraged, we've been actively trying to push more kids into CS.
The large company I work for, which has offices in many major centers across US and Canada, usually always has opportunities for skilled IT staff. Sure there are local cyclical downturns in job markets, but fact remains a CS degree is a ticket to a very upper middle class lifestyle anywhere in NA if you have a bit of smarts. Especially if you get into a specialized field, say automation, SCADA, security, analytics, the list goes on.. A CS degree is a ticket to an extremely well paying and satisfying job, and we tell that to as many youngsters as we can.
Perhaps the issue is that I'm not in the tech industry (eg. Google, Facebook). The beauty of IT is that every single company need an IT dept. Another point to be very aware of, especially if you've seen how they work, is that no sourcing company will ever replace be able to replace you if you're smart.
I live in Canada, and you are just plain wrong. Very wrong. Right now, late 2017, you could not see a single electric vehicle on the road if you tried. I would find a claim that even 8% of new sales are electric/hybrid to be ludicrous, let alone 80%.
Go spread your lies elsewhere, or start reading the facts.
And yet, in the same 5 minutes, it's beyond easy to come up with multiple sources that straight up refute his point (example). In this article, the provincial government is looking for a target of 14,000 electric sales per year by 2020... out of an overall sales number of over 750,000.
Sales of electrics here in Canada are so pitiful, even with so many options, The OP's claim is total BS.
I hear this all the time and it's so disingenuous. I drive a large truck and it takes *maybe* 3 minutes to fully gas it up, actual fuel transfer time. There is no way any charger is giving any vehicle significant range in 6 minutes (yet). Second, proponents always seem to have a reason to extol the virtues of the much longer stops it will require to refuel your vehicle.
Just admit that it's massively inconvenient and time consuming compared to ICE vehicle refuelling. It needs to be addressed prior to mass adoption. Over promising the capabilities will just make people unhappy with their switch, if they ever do.
No, if you read his comments they were actually one of the few I've heard from him that were smart and I agree with. His comments were effectively, if he found anyone in the company trading Bitcoin, he'd fire them since they are stupid.
He accurately made a distinction between blockchain tech (which has high potential), and bitcoin, which is truly useless for any kind of large scale economic activity. It's a playground of the financial retards right now; the vast majority buying bitcoin right now have zero technical knowledge of it, they're just trying to get rick quick. Not a lasting formula.
I live at roughly the same latitude as Finland, and I call BS on your anedotal evidence of climate change over 20 years. Methinks this is a strong case of confirmation bias with all the global warming stories.
For anyone who actually lives in the north, you'll know winter is driven almost exclusively by sunlight, or the lack thereof as you approach winter months. The amount of light hitting our area of earth has not changed at all during this period, and actual temperature changes are so slight there no physical way you notice them change over twenty years. Nothing, absolutely nothing is going to change the fact that in December we only get ~6 hours of sunlight (at a very sharp angle), and it will be extremely cold. More lies and sensationalism, which the climate debate can do without.
I think what's far worse about it will be the battery impact from operating the camera the entire time the phone is on, or even with some logic, a good percentage of the time.
What a ridiculous list, who exactly are you trying to group together and identify as the 'enemy' here? I don't think people who object to Obamacare are in any way on the same plane of critical thinking as someone who denies evolution. I don't think Obamacare was all that bad but I would give an opponent in a debate on it more respect than assuming they denied evolution as well. Non sequitur.
Bringing up the "overwhelming scientific consensus" on climate change, within the context of this article, is also extremely disingenuous. It's already been noted that this storm season isn't anything special in terms of frequency and magnitude of storms, and there hasn't been a major hurricane make landfall in the US in 12 years (yes, way back in 2005).
Your second list if just stupid. I never heard of the first one, only idiots believed in the second, and I could make a much better argument than you any day that Trump doesn't give a shit about Goldman Sach's views if they contradict his. Check your critical thinking skills.
There seems to be a lot of groupthink here that doesn't align with current facts and trends. For starters, you underestimate just how fundamental fossil fuels are to many industries. Tell me how you're going to make steel or lay asphalt with solar energy. Worldwide usage of oil has not slowed down and continues to increase. Further, the trend in vehicle sales is clearly NOT towards electrics. Sales of large vehicles/trucks are increasing steadily, and simply put the data clearly shows as gas prices go down, people just buy larger vehicles.
Lastly, the other poster here vastly underestimates the inconvenience factor of a refueling process almost two orders of magnitude less efficient (time and distance wise) than an ICE vehicle. I'm middle class, and gas for a road trip over 7000km this summer was easily affordable. So which is it? Gas skyrockets in price, making large vehicles unattractive, but now oil industry is awash in cash (and not going 'belly up')? Or perhaps is crashes in price, in which we see people take advantage and buy larger vehicles and use more fuel? The industry is here to stay and grow, your personal politics aside.
"refusing to invest it" - citation needed. Actually, I'll settle for one example of how someone wealthy would not be "investing" their money. Put it in a bank - the bank invests it on their behalf by lending. Put it in stocks, it has been invested in equities. Bonds? Directly lent to a company.
Please, just one example of how the rich don't invest their money. Are you saying the average billionaire keeps a Scrooge McDuck type vault of money removed from the economy somewhere?
"Maximum life span" here means the mean life span of the most long-lived 10% of a given cohort. Caloric restriction has not yet been shown to break mammalian world records for longevity. Rats, mice, and hamsters experience maximum life-span extension from a diet that contains all of the nutrients but only 40–60% of the calories that the animals consume when they can eat as much as they want. Mean life span is increased 65% and maximum life span is increased 50%, when caloric restriction is begun just before puberty. For fruit flies the life extending benefits of calorie restriction are gained immediately at any age upon beginning calorie restriction and ended immediately at any age upon resuming full feeding
Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I actually hold the US in higher regard now, but for the fact they allow a neo-Nazi rally to take place. Court affirmed. Despite how abhorrent neo-Nazis are.
But stories like this are still important as a reminder this actually DOES happen.
Though it's never been a racist comment (I'm a white dude), I've been called some pretty nasty things in my lifetime. I would still agree the proper response is to have the thicker skin and not let it get to you. Hint: that's why they say those things to you, to get a rise, get you angry/upset. If not a racist comment, they'll think of whatever insult is most likely to hurt your feelings. Certainly no one's words should change your views so much. You've given them complete control.
I have to agree that video on the Norwegian gender paradox was one of the most informative I've ever seen on the subject. It directly contradicts many of the posters here, "modern" gender studies paradigms, and more so clearly supports Damore's views.
So how do you explain then the near-even split of genders in non-tech roles at Google? The higher percentage of Asians in tech roles vs. the general population? Are you claiming discrimination is somehow limited to gender, and only within a certain part of the company?