"Please cite sources, I can just as easily say that you're wrong."
Well, you could look up the charities. Of course, churches tend not to provide that data. Which likely means that their overhead is obscene. After all, their purpose is continuing the faith, not charity.
"You could have sued, and prevailed, for the prayer at the beginning of the management meetings. I'm not sure why you didn't..."
You mean aside from the time, cost and uncertainty? And the same outcome?
You can find a reason to fire anyone that will stand up in court....
Re:People interested in news aren't stupid
on
Are Newspapers Doomed?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
"The investigative reporters are now almost exclusively online. You no longer need a distribution network, and printing facilities. A good investigative reporter can setup a web site fairly easily, and if he/she is any good, the ad dollars will follow."
You are kidding, right? Online investigative reporting doesn't hold a candle to some of my local/regional papers. And I live in the northwest. If the local paper disappears then so does the very good reporting on state and local government.
Now the papers full of AP material, they serve very little purpose and will be no great loss.
Your example of "thetruthaboutcars.com" isn't very good. All you had to do was look at their falling marketshare and legacy costs and do very simple math. In other words, it was "obvious".
Problems with online. Lack of resources (for small outfits), lack of focus (for large outfits), and lack of credibility. Papers (in general) are more credible than online. Their static nature is important. They also serve as a source of record. Some of these things may be overcome. The best of all worlds will probably be a small paper of "unique" items coupled with an online presence.
"If the revenue flow ceases to exist, there isn't going to be much content worth reading."
For me, the ads aren't an issue. The real problem is lack of good content. Most content is just AP "filler", the same as I can get online.
The only really value added parts of the paper are the local news and investigative reports. I imagine this is also the expensive part-something online sources just won't do. That is why the loss of good papers are bad.
"GATTACA always bothered me since you don't see Vincent's success, only that he was lucky enough to trick the system."
So he was good enough to circumvent a system designed to prevent people like him from acheiving success and you say he wasn't successful? Just what exactly is your definition of success?!?
"I know the message the movie was giving,.... but I couldn't help think that his actions were all hubris and were a huge risk to the mission and its crew."
And what happened if one of those "qualified" people tripped and broke their neck, or made a bad decision that led to mission failure, or a faulty part on the craft killed them all, etc.
One of the points of the movie that genes are not the sum of the person.
"At this point, you are asserting that this living creature is not human. You believe it will be human, but that it isn't at this point, and that's the justification for killing it."
"Well hopefully the cameras they have in their car or that you have pointed at your door streaming live 24/7 can be used as evidence against the cop for conducting an illegal search."
They won't. Tapes, videos, etc. generally dont need to be preserved by the police after review. In other words, they can be transcribed, described and then erased (common for interrogation). The only things that tend to be kept are things that help the police. There are exceptions of course. Cops, like the rest of us, are lazy.
I had a college calculus teacher who gave a multiple choice test (for some reason many in the class wanted it). For most questions you could choose A through M or so.....
In other words, if you didn't know the answer, it didn't help....
"When you have close to 200 niche music channels but only the budget to run 100 of them, you're going to end up with a lot of people who lose their channel and are rightfully upset."
Exactly what costs do they have for the music? You don't need a DJ for each channel. I realize they have other costs but still....
Or is it a case of music popular we pay you, music rare we make you pay through the orifice?
"The whole "bailout" for car manufacturers is about retaining the skill among the workforce to create manufactured products."
The people who build the cars don't have many skills. It's the engineers and associated skilled trades that build and design the parts that are needed. And they won't go away.
The automakers have yet to adjust to the fact that they can build more vehicles than people will buy. They need to cut costs. This is a problem that can be solved by bankruptcy. Bankruptcy does not mean that the companies will disappear.
Of course the management and investors will take a bath, but they deserve it..... But many people will still have good paying jobs.
In a way. Their goal is not to lose money (risk averse). So you take a classic story that has a known quantity (author, fanbase, general knowledge, etc) and add things (violence, cgi, fx, etc) to attract an even wider audience. Most people tied to the movie don't give a damn about the original story, just whether they produce a "good" movie (makes money, fame, etc).
"After all, that's what I pay him to do, keep up-to-date on medical research to help me with a disease. Doctor/pharmacists are required to complete continuing education courses so that they have the latest information available."
Thanks, that's the best laugh I've had in a long time.
Doctors, in general, do not keep up with current research. Those who are current are a minority. Hell, if you are lucky they might read the abstracts in a medical journal or two. Considering that most abstracts suck.....
Think about it. If doctors stayed current on research, why would people care if drug reps/companies gave promotional crap to doctors? We care because the reps often know more about the meds than the doctor. Which is pathetic.
I mean, how many of your coworkers keep up to date in a meaningful way?
In any case, if you have something that isn't common, you probably can find more information about it than your doctor. You have an incentive, they don't. Most doctors exist because they are able to prescribe drugs or have been made the gatekeepers. After all, the practice of medicine is just like using a flowchart.
"However, subvocalized computer control is easy, since the vocabulary is so limited. An "oral mouse" could be done with perhaps a dozen words, and the words could be chosen so that each was distinct. "Up", "down", "right" and "left" are very distinctive."
And how do you tell the mouse how far to move?
Words that are distinctive still might be confused. I have that happen all the time at work on a voice system. If the systems sucks in my environment, it will suck everywhere. The only benefit of a voice system is hands free. And the value of that varies greatly. It probably doesn't improve my productivity but certainly helped the vendors and consultants that sold it.....
To summarize, voice recognition sucks. If you don't want people to take their hands off of the keyboard, there are these things called "shortcuts".
"We are trending towards one world culture, and the danger is that if this culture is fundamentally flawed (and it's not hard to arrive at that conclusion), the damage caused by its downfall will affect the entire planet rather than an isolated group."
You are kidding, right? The culture between an inner city and its suburbs is significant. Not to mention that between two states much less two regions (US). The chance of us having a single world culture in my lifetime is about nil.
"...since the Democrats control the committee chairmanships in both House and Senate, and they weren't going to pick a Republican no matter what the result of the Alaska Senatorial race."
No, but he would have been on the committee as the top ranking Republican. Which means he could have still done his job (bring pork home). Do you really think he was ineffective all the other times the party wasn't in control?
You ought to learn a little about how Congress works, or doesn't:)
"It makes a big difference whether you live in a state with strict employment laws and a political system to enforce them."
It depends. The easiest way is to log all of the unpaid time up to the limit of the statute of limitations and then sue in the appropriate court. This way the employer is on the hook for years with the appropriate penalties.
Even better if you can use small claims court. Sure, it might be harder to get paid, but submitting a debt to collection doesn't look good on the companies record....
Reporting them doesn't do a whole lot of good (for you). Unless the government will do all of your work for you.
"Funny thing is, they don't get to fire you for no reason."
In at will states they do. Now if you mean, I just don't like you, then yes, they fire you for a reason.
While it is illegal to fire you for a reason related to being in a protected class, they can certainly fire you for something unrelated to that. Everyone will know the real reason, but unless you can prove it, it doesn't matter.
"Auto-darkening welding lenses are cheap to produce."
And might not be effective. To protect against significant laser exposure you might have to wear something that would make you effectively blind in daylight. Or at least some have speculated. I have no clue if they are correct.
In any case, welding lenses would not be ideal on a battlefield. Especially if someone is trying to kill you....
"Bull. It's more like 10%, with the rest being split between skill/intelligence and perseverance/hard work..."
Depends upon definition of success. If success is defined as being lower middle class or better, yes you may be right. If success means being Bill Gates, then you are incorrect.
People greatly overestimate their input in success and greatly underestimate chance. Laborers work harder than CEO's but get paid much less. You rarely get to be a CEO based on talent alone.
"Unsafe public transportation is worse than expensive public transportation, and there is a compelling public policy reason for regulating public transportation for safety's sake- regulations that Pickup Pal did not abide by."
That's absurd. A group of private individuals getting together to share a ride and the costs should be allowed to do so. And it is potentially riskier than taking public or regulated transportation. But it is certainly a carpool.
Taxis and buses operating for profit/public good are regulated allegedly to keep people from getting ripped off and/or injured. And you pay a higher price for a "professional" service.
In reality, regulation of for profit taxis and buses are good for the companies. It creates a barrier to entry. And results in higher prices.
"And how do you even know that the driver has the appropriate license for the vehicle he's driving?"
Ask him? I mean, I don't need a special license to drive a 15 person van. A class A or B vehicles, yes.
Here's the problem with some of the regulations. They don't result in proper insurance, licenses and/or roadworthy vehicles if they aren't enforced. And they probably aren't to any significant degree.
Yes, taxis and buses are regulated. Doesn't mean they won't rip you off or get you killed. Mostly it is a way to reduce competition.
Because they don't give a damn about their students?
The same way most CEO's and boards don't care about their customers (or employees). It's actually surprising that the University isn't giving in. Probably has something to do with the cost of complying.
Slashdot Mirror
"Please cite sources, I can just as easily say that you're wrong."
Well, you could look up the charities. Of course, churches tend not to provide that data. Which likely means that their overhead is obscene. After all, their purpose is continuing the faith, not charity.
Of course, you can still be fired for those reasons :) And if the employer is smart you won't have any recourse....
"You could have sued, and prevailed, for the prayer at the beginning of the management meetings. I'm not sure why you didn't..."
You mean aside from the time, cost and uncertainty? And the same outcome?
You can find a reason to fire anyone that will stand up in court....
"The investigative reporters are now almost exclusively online. You no longer need a distribution network, and printing facilities. A good investigative reporter can setup a web site fairly easily, and if he/she is any good, the ad dollars will follow."
You are kidding, right? Online investigative reporting doesn't hold a candle to some of my local/regional papers. And I live in the northwest. If the local paper disappears then so does the very good reporting on state and local government.
Now the papers full of AP material, they serve very little purpose and will be no great loss.
Your example of "thetruthaboutcars.com" isn't very good. All you had to do was look at their falling marketshare and legacy costs and do very simple math. In other words, it was "obvious".
Problems with online. Lack of resources (for small outfits), lack of focus (for large outfits), and lack of credibility. Papers (in general) are more credible than online. Their static nature is important. They also serve as a source of record. Some of these things may be overcome. The best of all worlds will probably be a small paper of "unique" items coupled with an online presence.
"If the revenue flow ceases to exist, there isn't going to be much content worth reading."
For me, the ads aren't an issue. The real problem is lack of good content. Most content is just AP "filler", the same as I can get online.
The only really value added parts of the paper are the local news and investigative reports. I imagine this is also the expensive part-something online sources just won't do. That is why the loss of good papers are bad.
"GATTACA always bothered me since you don't see Vincent's success, only that he was lucky enough to trick the system."
So he was good enough to circumvent a system designed to prevent people like him from acheiving success and you say he wasn't successful? Just what exactly is your definition of success?!?
"I know the message the movie was giving, .... but I couldn't help think that his actions were all hubris and were a huge risk to the mission and its crew."
And what happened if one of those "qualified" people tripped and broke their neck, or made a bad decision that led to mission failure, or a faulty part on the craft killed them all, etc.
One of the points of the movie that genes are not the sum of the person.
"At this point, you are asserting that this living creature is not human. You believe it will be human, but that it isn't at this point, and that's the justification for killing it."
Nice strawman.
"If there's not a conspiracy - then why can't a birth certificate be produced?"
It has.
The previous poster was quite correct when he stated
"but these people will never accept that he was elected President no matter the proof."
Pot, meet kettle.
"Well hopefully the cameras they have in their car or that you have pointed at your door streaming live 24/7 can be used as evidence against the cop for conducting an illegal search."
They won't. Tapes, videos, etc. generally dont need to be preserved by the police after review. In other words, they can be transcribed, described and then erased (common for interrogation). The only things that tend to be kept are things that help the police. There are exceptions of course. Cops, like the rest of us, are lazy.
I had a college calculus teacher who gave a multiple choice test (for some reason many in the class wanted it). For most questions you could choose A through M or so.....
In other words, if you didn't know the answer, it didn't help....
Kind of neat to see.
"When you have close to 200 niche music channels but only the budget to run 100 of them, you're going to end up with a lot of people who lose their channel and are rightfully upset."
Exactly what costs do they have for the music? You don't need a DJ for each channel. I realize they have other costs but still....
Or is it a case of music popular we pay you, music rare we make you pay through the orifice?
"The whole "bailout" for car manufacturers is about retaining the skill among the workforce to create manufactured products."
The people who build the cars don't have many skills. It's the engineers and associated skilled trades that build and design the parts that are needed. And they won't go away.
The automakers have yet to adjust to the fact that they can build more vehicles than people will buy. They need to cut costs. This is a problem that can be solved by bankruptcy. Bankruptcy does not mean that the companies will disappear.
Of course the management and investors will take a bath, but they deserve it..... But many people will still have good paying jobs.
"It could also be economics."
In a way. Their goal is not to lose money (risk averse). So you take a classic story that has a known quantity (author, fanbase, general knowledge, etc) and add things (violence, cgi, fx, etc) to attract an even wider audience. Most people tied to the movie don't give a damn about the original story, just whether they produce a "good" movie (makes money, fame, etc).
"After all, that's what I pay him to do, keep up-to-date on medical research to help me with a disease. Doctor/pharmacists are required to complete continuing education courses so that they have the latest information available."
Thanks, that's the best laugh I've had in a long time.
Doctors, in general, do not keep up with current research. Those who are current are a minority. Hell, if you are lucky they might read the abstracts in a medical journal or two. Considering that most abstracts suck.....
Think about it. If doctors stayed current on research, why would people care if drug reps/companies gave promotional crap to doctors? We care because the reps often know more about the meds than the doctor. Which is pathetic.
I mean, how many of your coworkers keep up to date in a meaningful way?
In any case, if you have something that isn't common, you probably can find more information about it than your doctor. You have an incentive, they don't. Most doctors exist because they are able to prescribe drugs or have been made the gatekeepers. After all, the practice of medicine is just like using a flowchart.
"Another reason why governments don't want to push for electric vehicles is that you can not tax them."
Huh? What do you call registration fees, sales tax, tolls, general taxes (for infrastructure), etc.
"However, subvocalized computer control is easy, since the vocabulary is so limited. An "oral mouse" could be done with perhaps a dozen words, and the words could be chosen so that each was distinct. "Up", "down", "right" and "left" are very distinctive."
And how do you tell the mouse how far to move?
Words that are distinctive still might be confused. I have that happen all the time at work on a voice system. If the systems sucks in my environment, it will suck everywhere. The only benefit of a voice system is hands free. And the value of that varies greatly. It probably doesn't improve my productivity but certainly helped the vendors and consultants that sold it.....
To summarize, voice recognition sucks. If you don't want people to take their hands off of the keyboard, there are these things called "shortcuts".
Mouses exist because they are good enough.
"We are trending towards one world culture, and the danger is that if this culture is fundamentally flawed (and it's not hard to arrive at that conclusion), the damage caused by its downfall will affect the entire planet rather than an isolated group."
You are kidding, right? The culture between an inner city and its suburbs is significant. Not to mention that between two states much less two regions (US). The chance of us having a single world culture in my lifetime is about nil.
"...since the Democrats control the committee chairmanships in both House and Senate, and they weren't going to pick a Republican no matter what the result of the Alaska Senatorial race."
No, but he would have been on the committee as the top ranking Republican. Which means he could have still done his job (bring pork home). Do you really think he was ineffective all the other times the party wasn't in control?
You ought to learn a little about how Congress works, or doesn't :)
"It makes a big difference whether you live in a state with strict employment laws and a political system to enforce them."
It depends. The easiest way is to log all of the unpaid time up to the limit of the statute of limitations and then sue in the appropriate court. This way the employer is on the hook for years with the appropriate penalties.
Even better if you can use small claims court. Sure, it might be harder to get paid, but submitting a debt to collection doesn't look good on the companies record....
Reporting them doesn't do a whole lot of good (for you). Unless the government will do all of your work for you.
"Funny thing is, they don't get to fire you for no reason."
In at will states they do. Now if you mean, I just don't like you, then yes, they fire you for a reason.
While it is illegal to fire you for a reason related to being in a protected class, they can certainly fire you for something unrelated to that. Everyone will know the real reason, but unless you can prove it, it doesn't matter.
"Auto-darkening welding lenses are cheap to produce."
And might not be effective. To protect against significant laser exposure you might have to wear something that would make you effectively blind in daylight. Or at least some have speculated. I have no clue if they are correct.
In any case, welding lenses would not be ideal on a battlefield. Especially if someone is trying to kill you....
"Bull. It's more like 10%, with the rest being split between skill/intelligence and perseverance/hard work..."
Depends upon definition of success. If success is defined as being lower middle class or better, yes you may be right. If success means being Bill Gates, then you are incorrect.
People greatly overestimate their input in success and greatly underestimate chance. Laborers work harder than CEO's but get paid much less. You rarely get to be a CEO based on talent alone.
"Unsafe public transportation is worse than expensive public transportation, and there is a compelling public policy reason for regulating public transportation for safety's sake- regulations that Pickup Pal did not abide by."
That's absurd. A group of private individuals getting together to share a ride and the costs should be allowed to do so. And it is potentially riskier than taking public or regulated transportation. But it is certainly a carpool.
Taxis and buses operating for profit/public good are regulated allegedly to keep people from getting ripped off and/or injured. And you pay a higher price for a "professional" service.
In reality, regulation of for profit taxis and buses are good for the companies. It creates a barrier to entry. And results in higher prices.
"And how do you even know that the driver has the appropriate license for the vehicle he's driving?"
Ask him? I mean, I don't need a special license to drive a 15 person van. A class A or B vehicles, yes.
Here's the problem with some of the regulations. They don't result in proper insurance, licenses and/or roadworthy vehicles if they aren't enforced. And they probably aren't to any significant degree.
Yes, taxis and buses are regulated. Doesn't mean they won't rip you off or get you killed. Mostly it is a way to reduce competition.
Because they don't give a damn about their students?
The same way most CEO's and boards don't care about their customers (or employees). It's actually surprising that the University isn't giving in. Probably has something to do with the cost of complying.