Also, the reason Solyndra went belly-up is because China started their own initiative and dumped $4 billion into solar panel development, which they then dumped on the market for dirt cheap. And by dirt cheap, they went from $400/kg to $40/kg in three years time.
In short, we're not just competing with companies in other countries; we're competing with the countries themselves. How many markets are you will to surrender to China?
Don't forget that IE also has a selectable document mode. So, I'd like to see a full matrix of browser modes and document modes that are effected (if it applies).
I completely agree with this. I have a high school diploma and make well over $100k as a developer. The degree is only needed to get you in the door if you don't have experience but experience completely trumps the piece of paper once you have it. Everyone in this industry knows that college does not prepare you for real world software development so the degree is pretty meaningless. That said, there are a couple of exceptions. If you want to do scientific programming that requires a great deal of math skills (in which case you should get a Math degree rather than a CS degree) or you want to work on low level stuff like operating systems and core algorithms (like sorts and data structures). You can study that stuff on your own as well (like I did with data structures) but for normal business software, it's pretty much worthless.
If you want to stay desirable, make sure you always keep your skills up to date. You should know what's in demand at all times and what the trends are and learn that technology. I also strongly recommend not getting too emotionally attached to technology. Stuff changes over time and your great love my go down the drain at any time. Instead, use that emotion to motivate yourself to learn new things that will help a company be more competitive. Do that and you'll have no problem staying employed. I've been doing it for over 23 years.
Honestly, I think the OP getting the degree at this point actually hurts him because he'd be much better off spending the time learning stuff that people are actually using to write awesome software today (which is something you won't learn in school).
You're right, they should come up with a budget and Reed shouldn't get a free ride. However, it's also true that whatever they came up with would never get past the Republican controlled House and would only be used as political fodder.
Fine, I read your links. The newsbatch site states that the cap was only in place until the utility recovered its stranded costs. After that, they could charge whatever they wanted to. They give SDG&E as an example of a power company that had done this and then jacked up their retail prices.
But forget that for a minute. Lets say there were no restrictions at all and they could charge whatever they want whenever they wanted. It's not a free market situation where that would be appropriate but c'est la vie. Now Enron manipulates the market by shutting down power plants and causes a price spike. That cost is then passed straight to the consumer. The consumer cannot afford the inflated price any more than the power company can. So, the people of California are still fucked and the state has to step in.
At the end of the day, all monopolies has to be regulated. It's not a free market and even Milton Friedman agrees with that (yeah, I actually read his books). It should also be noted that it's hardly unusual for utilities to have to request price increases from the state they operate in.
In short, any company that can fraudulently manipulate the energy markets will fuck you over no matter what.
Bullshit. Enron asked plants to shut down to tighten supply and jack up the price. It's all well documented and, IIRC, they have recordings of it in the documentary "Enron: The Smartes Guys in the Room". It was flat out market manipulation. I also recall that Enron's contribution alone to California's debt was close $40 billion. Also, this whole notion that the power companies couldn't raise prices on electricity was also bullshit because Californians were paying about 4x the cost for electricity as most states.
Personally, I use Open Office and I don't see the point in spending money on Microsoft Office. The vast majority of the population uses maybe 20% of its functionality.
Also, if you did need to learn Excel or Word for your job and you consider that a big deal in the slightest...I weep for you (or the idiot in HR).
First, I apologize for the obscenities. It was uncalled for. My only excuse is that this topic really grinds my gears.
On with the discussion...
I'm sorry but there's no way the auto companies could possibly have restructured in time to be saved with a loan. And credit was, in fact, nearly non-existant. Find me a single credible source that would indicate that they could have gotten credit for the nearly $20 billion they needed to stay alive during the worst credit crunch in modern history and we'll talk. It just wasn't going to happen. Who would have given them the money? The investment banks that were shitting their pants at the time? Or the commercial banks that were busy learning how royally fucked they were due to all their garbage real-estate CDOs? For the record, I'm not for the government getting in the car business (or any other business) as a rule of thumb but given the situation is was the best option of a bunch of bad ones.
(I should state that when I refer to GLBA going forward, I'm referring to a series of legislative attacks that have been passed to de-fang Glass-Stegal over decades. GLBA was just the last straw.)
Yeah, CDSs existed before the passing of GLBA but it took a long time before they really took off. Now they account for 10s of trillions of dollars in basically fake bullshit. It allowed these companies to say they were covered for their losses even though the company(s) covering the amount didn't have to have even a single dollar in reserve. This helped promote the high risk attitude that inundated Wall Street. This whole notion that economists think that GLBA was a good thing and just accelerated the inevitable is ridiculous. GLBA (et. al.) made it possible. Prior to GLBA there were no real estate CDOs. Why? Because it wasn't legal (commercial banking and investment banking were required to be separate). Glass-Steagall was passed to prevent exactly this kind of problem. The government passed it after learning a harsh lesson during the depression. Repealing it was one of the stupidest things the government ever did.
So, I just don't get how anyone can say this would have happened without GLBA. I'm not saying there could not have been some other kind of crisis (like a minor recession) but GLBA enabled a failure of world shaking, galactic proportions that simply would have not been possible without it because there would never have been real-estate CDOs.
Real estate CDOs and CDSs are the root causes of the financial crisis. You need to really research those instruments if you want to have understanding about what ultimately destroyed the world economy.
Ultimately, the banks were given too much freedom, greed took over (as it always has and always will), and the inevitable ensued.
True but there's another way to fix it without letting the economy self-destruct...
Reinstate Glass-Stegall (which would kill CDOs) and outlaw CDSs (fake insurance). We had stable banking for decades until some extremely poor choices were made in the deregulation frenzy of the late 90's.
These regulations provide stability and eliminate the boom and bust cycles associated with unrestricted markets.
No, they are not public information. The government has strict rules about how that information is treated and who it can be given to. Try and get a list of SSNs from the government and let me know how that works for you.
Companies and individuals, on the other hand, have no legal requirement to protect that information.
A) The Vietnamese were no joke. They knew how to fight and they knew even better the art of propaganda. Don't paint them as clueless because they weren't.
B) We could win the war very easily against Vietnam or Afghanistan if we were willing to "take the gloves off".
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe, but it's true.
People like to make a big deal of of Soklyndra but the failure rate of these government supported green companies is actually quite small: http://money.cnn.com/2012/10/22/news/economy/obama-energy-bankruptcies/index.html
Also, the reason Solyndra went belly-up is because China started their own initiative and dumped $4 billion into solar panel development, which they then dumped on the market for dirt cheap. And by dirt cheap, they went from $400/kg to $40/kg in three years time.
In short, we're not just competing with companies in other countries; we're competing with the countries themselves. How many markets are you will to surrender to China?
Don't forget that IE also has a selectable document mode. So, I'd like to see a full matrix of browser modes and document modes that are effected (if it applies).
noobs
What if I'm running IE10 in IE8 mode?
No way, dude! It's paradigm shifting! You just don't get it. What, are you like a 80??
I don't see what that has to do with weather.
I completely agree with this. I have a high school diploma and make well over $100k as a developer. The degree is only needed to get you in the door if you don't have experience but experience completely trumps the piece of paper once you have it. Everyone in this industry knows that college does not prepare you for real world software development so the degree is pretty meaningless. That said, there are a couple of exceptions. If you want to do scientific programming that requires a great deal of math skills (in which case you should get a Math degree rather than a CS degree) or you want to work on low level stuff like operating systems and core algorithms (like sorts and data structures). You can study that stuff on your own as well (like I did with data structures) but for normal business software, it's pretty much worthless.
If you want to stay desirable, make sure you always keep your skills up to date. You should know what's in demand at all times and what the trends are and learn that technology. I also strongly recommend not getting too emotionally attached to technology. Stuff changes over time and your great love my go down the drain at any time. Instead, use that emotion to motivate yourself to learn new things that will help a company be more competitive. Do that and you'll have no problem staying employed. I've been doing it for over 23 years.
Honestly, I think the OP getting the degree at this point actually hurts him because he'd be much better off spending the time learning stuff that people are actually using to write awesome software today (which is something you won't learn in school).
You might have an argument if was decided by a US organization rather than the World Meteorological Organization. Note the word "World".
It's kinda pointless to switch just temperature measurement to celsius unless you're going to switch to the metric system entirely.
So you're one of those government money wasters?
And I'm sure that the satellites from the 70's are just as good as the satellites of today!
Actually, I have zero problem with you dying. So it sounds good to me.
You're right, they should come up with a budget and Reed shouldn't get a free ride. However, it's also true that whatever they came up with would never get past the Republican controlled House and would only be used as political fodder.
Eddie Izzard does a good bit about that in his Dressed to Kill show.
Fortunately, there's always enough money for pretty horses and regalia for royal weddings.
That's ok, internet freedom can join the long list of other things that are going away, like privacy.
Fine, I read your links. The newsbatch site states that the cap was only in place until the utility recovered its stranded costs. After that, they could charge whatever they wanted to. They give SDG&E as an example of a power company that had done this and then jacked up their retail prices.
But forget that for a minute. Lets say there were no restrictions at all and they could charge whatever they want whenever they wanted. It's not a free market situation where that would be appropriate but c'est la vie. Now Enron manipulates the market by shutting down power plants and causes a price spike. That cost is then passed straight to the consumer. The consumer cannot afford the inflated price any more than the power company can. So, the people of California are still fucked and the state has to step in.
At the end of the day, all monopolies has to be regulated. It's not a free market and even Milton Friedman agrees with that (yeah, I actually read his books). It should also be noted that it's hardly unusual for utilities to have to request price increases from the state they operate in.
In short, any company that can fraudulently manipulate the energy markets will fuck you over no matter what.
Bullshit. Enron asked plants to shut down to tighten supply and jack up the price. It's all well documented and, IIRC, they have recordings of it in the documentary "Enron: The Smartes Guys in the Room". It was flat out market manipulation. I also recall that Enron's contribution alone to California's debt was close $40 billion. Also, this whole notion that the power companies couldn't raise prices on electricity was also bullshit because Californians were paying about 4x the cost for electricity as most states.
So, because he ended up losing his mind, that invalidates all his accomplishments?
So I should spend several hundred dollars per year per person on something I don't really need. Gotcha!
Personally, I use Open Office and I don't see the point in spending money on Microsoft Office. The vast majority of the population uses maybe 20% of its functionality.
Also, if you did need to learn Excel or Word for your job and you consider that a big deal in the slightest...I weep for you (or the idiot in HR).
First, I apologize for the obscenities. It was uncalled for. My only excuse is that this topic really grinds my gears.
On with the discussion...
I'm sorry but there's no way the auto companies could possibly have restructured in time to be saved with a loan. And credit was, in fact, nearly non-existant. Find me a single credible source that would indicate that they could have gotten credit for the nearly $20 billion they needed to stay alive during the worst credit crunch in modern history and we'll talk. It just wasn't going to happen. Who would have given them the money? The investment banks that were shitting their pants at the time? Or the commercial banks that were busy learning how royally fucked they were due to all their garbage real-estate CDOs? For the record, I'm not for the government getting in the car business (or any other business) as a rule of thumb but given the situation is was the best option of a bunch of bad ones.
(I should state that when I refer to GLBA going forward, I'm referring to a series of legislative attacks that have been passed to de-fang Glass-Stegal over decades. GLBA was just the last straw.)
Yeah, CDSs existed before the passing of GLBA but it took a long time before they really took off. Now they account for 10s of trillions of dollars in basically fake bullshit. It allowed these companies to say they were covered for their losses even though the company(s) covering the amount didn't have to have even a single dollar in reserve. This helped promote the high risk attitude that inundated Wall Street. This whole notion that economists think that GLBA was a good thing and just accelerated the inevitable is ridiculous. GLBA (et. al.) made it possible. Prior to GLBA there were no real estate CDOs. Why? Because it wasn't legal (commercial banking and investment banking were required to be separate). Glass-Steagall was passed to prevent exactly this kind of problem. The government passed it after learning a harsh lesson during the depression. Repealing it was one of the stupidest things the government ever did.
So, I just don't get how anyone can say this would have happened without GLBA. I'm not saying there could not have been some other kind of crisis (like a minor recession) but GLBA enabled a failure of world shaking, galactic proportions that simply would have not been possible without it because there would never have been real-estate CDOs.
Real estate CDOs and CDSs are the root causes of the financial crisis. You need to really research those instruments if you want to have understanding about what ultimately destroyed the world economy.
Ultimately, the banks were given too much freedom, greed took over (as it always has and always will), and the inevitable ensued.
True but there's another way to fix it without letting the economy self-destruct...
Reinstate Glass-Stegall (which would kill CDOs) and outlaw CDSs (fake insurance). We had stable banking for decades until some extremely poor choices were made in the deregulation frenzy of the late 90's.
These regulations provide stability and eliminate the boom and bust cycles associated with unrestricted markets.
No, they are not public information. The government has strict rules about how that information is treated and who it can be given to. Try and get a list of SSNs from the government and let me know how that works for you.
Companies and individuals, on the other hand, have no legal requirement to protect that information.
A) The Vietnamese were no joke. They knew how to fight and they knew even better the art of propaganda. Don't paint them as clueless because they weren't.
B) We could win the war very easily against Vietnam or Afghanistan if we were willing to "take the gloves off".