Look again, they were producing above consumption already, then renewable energy jumped to what looks like the point that they couldn't drop conventional generation any lower without shutting down base load (expensive and takes a good while to recover from).
They very likely hit a discontinuity in the pricing algorithm at that point, but it appears quite reasonable that they were in an overproduction situation and needed to dump supply.
If it's legal and they literally cannot pas a constitutional law to change that status, then no. If it was a matter of concern and they might be able to take action on it within the Constitution, that would be another matter.
We do not need hearings along the lines of "did you or did you not chew bubblegum in your living room on Apr 23rd?".
There's a good point to that. In spite of rosey press releases from MS, the fact is, even with nag screens and automatic downloads trying to cram it down people's throats, they're having a hard time giving it away. Meanwhile, the various devices today aren't THAT much more capable than 2 or 3 year old machines, so people are sticking with what they have or going with upgrade/repair instead of buying new.
If the vendors want to sell more or even tread water, among other things they need to push back on MS.
How about your action in your personal short term interest harms both your and everyone else's long term interests. For example, you might not want to train your dirt cheap replacements a year from now. Your best hope to head that off is the union.
Keep in mind, it isn't always the union alone that wants an all union shop. The ability to negotiate once and be done for the whole workforce can be good for management as well. Will it make you feel better if management signs an exclusive contract with a particular employment agency? (especially one of those with an unofficial Americans need not apply policy).
I'm sure it does, and as long as the employees are divided, they will fall for the tragedy of the commons and all defect.
If they're united, they'll recognize that they might prevent their termination if nobody trains their replacement At the least, their employer might sweeten the severance pay.
How so? It wouldn't be the employees launching the attack, just them not being so particularly fast or proactive in stopping it. If I don't log in at all, I certainly haven't exceeded my authorization, I haven't even used the access I am authorized for.
Ford is well known for enlightened self-interest. If the management in other companies had bee likewise enlightened, the unions might not have had to apply as much pressure as they did. But even in the case of Ford, the decision to try it wasn't made in a vacuum. Unions had been advocating first for 10 hours, then for 8.
How many drop a bunch of weight, get paraded around by the fat shamers as 'proof' that dieting can work, then gain back 110% within 5 years because it really isn't sustainable?
Don't forget, at one time unions forced massive reforms that were taken for granted decades later and to some extent still are. Things like the 8 hour day, workplace safety, better pay. I have no doubt some unions have become corrupt over time, but that doesn't mean a newly formed union can't be effective today.
For example, what do you suppose the management would do if nobody was willing to train their replacement or answer any questions? Two choices, cancel the layoff or go down in flames.
That's part of the problem. In truth, not every alarm is even worth following up on beyond a cursory glance. Each step of followup should have a path to de-escalation as well.
If we're going to declare red alert every time someone sneezes, eventually alarm fatigue will set in and we'll miss a genuine red flag. That and the terror response itself will do more harm than the terrorists. People involved in the chain of decision for such things should be required to read and write a report on the story of Chicken Little.
If we treat every utterance of the village idiot with gravity, we have for all intents and purposes put said idiot in charge. Do you really want to be lead by an idiot?
That might have worked at one time, but the very nature of communities has changed to the point that it's not really a viable way to choose a viable judge these days.
Agreed. I can understand why a plaintiff might be up against the wall enough to accept a secrecy clause in a settlement, but it is against the public interest to keep others in the dark about the past bad behavior of the defendant.
Not really. TFA was quite clear that the problem is rampant in CRIMINAL trials, which are guaranteed by the Constitution to be PUBLIC trails. The intent behind that is to make the courts open enough that a citizen can satisfy himself that the trials are fair. It also defies the constitutional right for the defendant to see the evidence against him (ALL of the evidence) and rebut it.
These aren't nit-picks, the secrecy undermines the legitimacy of the entire court system. I find it disturbing that anyone could manage to become a judge and either not understand that or not care.
The problem wasn't that the woman was an idiot, every village has one. The problem is everyone else dog piling on. All it would take is for one person to say "it's just math" and for that to be enough to shut the panic down. Instead, we too frequently hand the leader role to whoever is most terrified and anyone who isn't terrified clearly doesn't understand the gravity of the situation (never mind that there really isn't a situation).
This isn't a country of vigilante justice, but rule of law, and we should be proud of that.
Funny you should say that in connection with a story where the border patrol took a quarter million dollars from someone and skipped due process. Even when procedure is followed, they call it "asset forfeiture" but robbery might be a better term for it.
Slashdot Mirror
Look again, they were producing above consumption already, then renewable energy jumped to what looks like the point that they couldn't drop conventional generation any lower without shutting down base load (expensive and takes a good while to recover from).
They very likely hit a discontinuity in the pricing algorithm at that point, but it appears quite reasonable that they were in an overproduction situation and needed to dump supply.
If it's legal and they literally cannot pas a constitutional law to change that status, then no. If it was a matter of concern and they might be able to take action on it within the Constitution, that would be another matter.
We do not need hearings along the lines of "did you or did you not chew bubblegum in your living room on Apr 23rd?".
There's a good point to that. In spite of rosey press releases from MS, the fact is, even with nag screens and automatic downloads trying to cram it down people's throats, they're having a hard time giving it away. Meanwhile, the various devices today aren't THAT much more capable than 2 or 3 year old machines, so people are sticking with what they have or going with upgrade/repair instead of buying new.
If the vendors want to sell more or even tread water, among other things they need to push back on MS.
Ultimately, until they become self-driving, they will have to follow the driver's commands for better or worse. In this case, much worse.
How about your action in your personal short term interest harms both your and everyone else's long term interests. For example, you might not want to train your dirt cheap replacements a year from now. Your best hope to head that off is the union.
Keep in mind, it isn't always the union alone that wants an all union shop. The ability to negotiate once and be done for the whole workforce can be good for management as well. Will it make you feel better if management signs an exclusive contract with a particular employment agency? (especially one of those with an unofficial Americans need not apply policy).
Yes, clearly the real problem is those damned kangarelephants won't quit hopping on the islands. Yeah, that's it.
I'm sure it does, and as long as the employees are divided, they will fall for the tragedy of the commons and all defect.
If they're united, they'll recognize that they might prevent their termination if nobody trains their replacement At the least, their employer might sweeten the severance pay.
How so? It wouldn't be the employees launching the attack, just them not being so particularly fast or proactive in stopping it. If I don't log in at all, I certainly haven't exceeded my authorization, I haven't even used the access I am authorized for.
Ford is well known for enlightened self-interest. If the management in other companies had bee likewise enlightened, the unions might not have had to apply as much pressure as they did. But even in the case of Ford, the decision to try it wasn't made in a vacuum. Unions had been advocating first for 10 hours, then for 8.
I can fly, I'm sure of it. If I jump and then keep jumping, surely I can soar like the birds!
How many drop a bunch of weight, get paraded around by the fat shamers as 'proof' that dieting can work, then gain back 110% within 5 years because it really isn't sustainable?
Because, due to the union, they end up with more money even after paying the dues than they would have otherwise.
Are you sure?
I'm going to need a citation for that claim.
Take pictures and then sue them for littering. A man in Atlanta did that successfully IIRC.
Don't forget, at one time unions forced massive reforms that were taken for granted decades later and to some extent still are. Things like the 8 hour day, workplace safety, better pay. I have no doubt some unions have become corrupt over time, but that doesn't mean a newly formed union can't be effective today.
For example, what do you suppose the management would do if nobody was willing to train their replacement or answer any questions? Two choices, cancel the layoff or go down in flames.
That's part of the problem. In truth, not every alarm is even worth following up on beyond a cursory glance. Each step of followup should have a path to de-escalation as well.
If we're going to declare red alert every time someone sneezes, eventually alarm fatigue will set in and we'll miss a genuine red flag. That and the terror response itself will do more harm than the terrorists. People involved in the chain of decision for such things should be required to read and write a report on the story of Chicken Little.
If we treat every utterance of the village idiot with gravity, we have for all intents and purposes put said idiot in charge. Do you really want to be lead by an idiot?
That might have worked at one time, but the very nature of communities has changed to the point that it's not really a viable way to choose a viable judge these days.
Agreed. I can understand why a plaintiff might be up against the wall enough to accept a secrecy clause in a settlement, but it is against the public interest to keep others in the dark about the past bad behavior of the defendant.
That's a perfect example that the need and benefit is more than theoretical.
I'm saying it takes a weak mind and weak character that has a need to feel superior to others even if the reason is manufactured.
Sure, but the same low breeding that leads to racism now leads to fat shaming.
Not really. TFA was quite clear that the problem is rampant in CRIMINAL trials, which are guaranteed by the Constitution to be PUBLIC trails. The intent behind that is to make the courts open enough that a citizen can satisfy himself that the trials are fair. It also defies the constitutional right for the defendant to see the evidence against him (ALL of the evidence) and rebut it.
These aren't nit-picks, the secrecy undermines the legitimacy of the entire court system. I find it disturbing that anyone could manage to become a judge and either not understand that or not care.
The problem wasn't that the woman was an idiot, every village has one. The problem is everyone else dog piling on. All it would take is for one person to say "it's just math" and for that to be enough to shut the panic down. Instead, we too frequently hand the leader role to whoever is most terrified and anyone who isn't terrified clearly doesn't understand the gravity of the situation (never mind that there really isn't a situation).
This isn't a country of vigilante justice, but rule of law, and we should be proud of that.
Funny you should say that in connection with a story where the border patrol took a quarter million dollars from someone and skipped due process. Even when procedure is followed, they call it "asset forfeiture" but robbery might be a better term for it.
That is true to the extent that the investments remain in the U.S.