That is not exactly true. Hybrid vigour is something you mostly see in deeply inbred populations. When we breed different rabbit breeds together to create hybrid vigour we are breeding two inbred rabbits that are still very very genetically similar together to fix the issues of the inbreeding. You don't see the same vigour in healthy populations, and outbreeding can produce some very bad results when it is between two very different animals. Look around, there's a reason that mules, or sheep goat hybrids have not replaced their ancestors. This is something we see both in nature and in agriculture, purebreds predominate.
We see a similar thing in humans. Human hybrids are generally less healthy and this is only exacerbated by the medical community being unable to perform many life saving procedures on them due to even their parents not being a genetic matches for them in some circumstances.
The thing about competition is that Amazon is competing with every single brick and mortar store. I buy things from Amazon only after I verify that even with shipping it is cheaper or identically priced to stores in my area. Amazon very well might be able to buy out or otherwise ruin their competition on Amazon. But if their power cords cost more than Canadian Tire's or Home Depot's they are not going to get much business.
That is not anti-competitive. Finding ways to charge more for a product is the exact opposite of anti-competitive. Well, at least in how that word is typically used, because in a more generic use sure, it is anti-competitive in that the store is no longer competing with its competition and everyone has just gone to the store that sells the same things for less.
While it might be true that giving Hillary a 70% lead was altogether a rather conservative position compared to the 99.x% that the mainstream news was running with, it is still an obliteration. That is still being very very wrong.
he wouldn't have made the same decision but the appearance didn't violate Facebook policies
Zuckerberg had to go on record stating that it was not against company policy to be friends with someone, but was careful to first state that he disagreed with taking that stance.
No. All Americans are either making minimum wage at minimum or getting welfare which is even more money. This makes them fall into the lower bracket of the 1% super wealthy, or just barely miss it depending on the state.
Everyone lives paycheck to paycheck. What determines if you are middle class or not is the size of that paycheck.
I don't see it. There are a lot of teachers and the only ones I have seen are ones under employed struggling to get more hours. On all levels I see an overabundance of teachers competing for jobs. You might be surprised just how much many people value having half your life off work while getting paid a full time salary.
And I think you overvalue the hotshot wiz kids of silicon valley and their ability at teaching others. The last thing students need is someone who has never struggled with a programming concept in their life trying to teach them. And this is just the absolute opposite of my experience. I have gone to a university that attracted international talent to do research and shit. The only ones in the entire institution who had any idea how to teach anyone were TAs and this one teacher who was not a professor.
One of the dozens of commercials that the auto industry have put out. They all share some similar features: 1) A woman is driving 2) She is putting on makeup, talking with a friend, or doing something else that makes her not even glance at the road occasionally. 3) The car then suddenly stops, and the woman realised that it just saved her life or someone else's. 4) The narrator then start talking about how if you drive this car you will never get in an accident, and can spend your time "driving" doing more important things than watching the road.
This. Google has made it such that if a search Engine cannot guess what I want from a misspelled generic word, then it sucks. I don't want to put in the effort of actually typing in a unique identifier for the actually information I am searching for. I don't want to have to spell it correctly, and I don't want to have to know enough about what I am searching for to know what to type in.
And half the reason I use Google is for stuff beyond search engines. Like its calculator which does better than dedicated sites like wolfram now, and it's timer.
While US legislation has much to hold against it, how is EU any sort of alternative? At least speech is free in America and you cannot be charged for having illegal opinions in your search history or not forgetting things legislated to be forgotten. Their are probably one or two countries I would rank better than America for wanting your data in them, but the EU would top the list of the least desirable.
Technically that is not how copyright works. If you rescind your license, then you own the copyright, and under law the people currently using it must stop. If they don't then in this case (aka 90% of business done in the world uses linux at some point) lawyer firms start contacting you asking for a 10% stake in the 10 billion dollar suit they want to file on your behalf.
The way you are saying it is like saying, you have to hire a lawyer to prevent yourself from being murdered. No, it is the criminals responsibility to not break the law.
This is the most ridiculous comment. Half of the tech community is saying people can rescind code on GPLv2 because they read GPLv2 comparried it to GPLv3 and saw that there appears to be a reasonable case for such an interpretation.
What sort of story is this? Guy who informally represents Open Source as a whole says you cannot do the thing that is bad for open source, and but if you did it would be really bad.
I was once told by a chrome extension developer that he fixed this issue but that I really needed to buy an SSD (things were loading slowly enough that the software was throwing "cannot find resource X" errors on browser start)
Increased to compensate for the 2 hours is not even the bare minimum. The 2 extra hours off work significantly increases your "consuming time", making you spend significantly more money. If you have 2 hours off every day, this could increase the amount of money many people spend by 1/3. while only reducing their working time less than 20%. In reality, we are looking at wages possibly needed to be doubled to maintain someone's standard of living. Every expense goes through the roof when you are talking about possibly doubling the amount of awake time people have off work. From twice as many toilet flushes, twice as much food, to roads needing to be expanded, and the power infrastructure somehow needs to manage to provide the same amount of power to industry, but concentrated into fewer hours. We don't have giant batteries hooked up, so this is a serious problem.
I have always wondered what jobs these studies are talking about?
The majority of jobs are Truckers, teachers, nurses. Sure, a Trucker can deliver their loads faster, in exchange for increased risk. But my understanding of society is that this option is off the table. Can students really learn just as much in 4 hours of class time as 6? Or is it lunch that you want to cut, or teacher prep time?
For me, I have worked construction and IT. For IT, to really be the best asset we could be, we aimed to be available 24 hours a day as we were reactive problems that popped up as much as we were there for daily maintenance and upgrading. And honestly, you can only click through menus so fast, or walk down the hall so fast. I see the relationship of work accomplished to time spent as directly linear.
For construction. There is a general feeling that it would be pretty nice if we could skip lunch and breaks and go home 2 hours earlier. But that is doing the exact same amount of work over the same amount of time. You don't work faster in construction without increasing your skill level or getting yourself and others killed.
Slashdot Mirror
So you are saying that their is still time to apply for a patent for a single click litigation application?
That is not exactly true. Hybrid vigour is something you mostly see in deeply inbred populations. When we breed different rabbit breeds together to create hybrid vigour we are breeding two inbred rabbits that are still very very genetically similar together to fix the issues of the inbreeding. You don't see the same vigour in healthy populations, and outbreeding can produce some very bad results when it is between two very different animals. Look around, there's a reason that mules, or sheep goat hybrids have not replaced their ancestors. This is something we see both in nature and in agriculture, purebreds predominate.
We see a similar thing in humans. Human hybrids are generally less healthy and this is only exacerbated by the medical community being unable to perform many life saving procedures on them due to even their parents not being a genetic matches for them in some circumstances.
And humans having sex with monkeys gave us AIDs.
The thing about competition is that Amazon is competing with every single brick and mortar store. I buy things from Amazon only after I verify that even with shipping it is cheaper or identically priced to stores in my area. Amazon very well might be able to buy out or otherwise ruin their competition on Amazon. But if their power cords cost more than Canadian Tire's or Home Depot's they are not going to get much business.
That is not anti-competitive. Finding ways to charge more for a product is the exact opposite of anti-competitive. Well, at least in how that word is typically used, because in a more generic use sure, it is anti-competitive in that the store is no longer competing with its competition and everyone has just gone to the store that sells the same things for less.
While it might be true that giving Hillary a 70% lead was altogether a rather conservative position compared to the 99.x% that the mainstream news was running with, it is still an obliteration. That is still being very very wrong.
And yet their still exist people who have no idea why the GOP approval rating has been soaring since Kavanaugh hit the news cycle.
he wouldn't have made the same decision but the appearance didn't violate Facebook policies
Zuckerberg had to go on record stating that it was not against company policy to be friends with someone, but was careful to first state that he disagreed with taking that stance.
Crimes of passion are just people trying to get justice. That weed dealer is murdering and ruining peoples live simply for profit.
According to Google the average cost per year for a car is $8000-$9000 which brings a $15 and hour salary down to about $11.
And after factoring in the car needed to get them to the job site every morning and back at night, how much of that do you think is left?
No. All Americans are either making minimum wage at minimum or getting welfare which is even more money. This makes them fall into the lower bracket of the 1% super wealthy, or just barely miss it depending on the state.
Everyone lives paycheck to paycheck. What determines if you are middle class or not is the size of that paycheck.
I don't see it. There are a lot of teachers and the only ones I have seen are ones under employed struggling to get more hours. On all levels I see an overabundance of teachers competing for jobs. You might be surprised just how much many people value having half your life off work while getting paid a full time salary.
And I think you overvalue the hotshot wiz kids of silicon valley and their ability at teaching others. The last thing students need is someone who has never struggled with a programming concept in their life trying to teach them. And this is just the absolute opposite of my experience. I have gone to a university that attracted international talent to do research and shit. The only ones in the entire institution who had any idea how to teach anyone were TAs and this one teacher who was not a professor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
One of the dozens of commercials that the auto industry have put out.
They all share some similar features:
1) A woman is driving
2) She is putting on makeup, talking with a friend, or doing something else that makes her not even glance at the road occasionally.
3) The car then suddenly stops, and the woman realised that it just saved her life or someone else's.
4) The narrator then start talking about how if you drive this car you will never get in an accident, and can spend your time "driving" doing more important things than watching the road.
This. Google has made it such that if a search Engine cannot guess what I want from a misspelled generic word, then it sucks. I don't want to put in the effort of actually typing in a unique identifier for the actually information I am searching for. I don't want to have to spell it correctly, and I don't want to have to know enough about what I am searching for to know what to type in.
And half the reason I use Google is for stuff beyond search engines. Like its calculator which does better than dedicated sites like wolfram now, and it's timer.
While US legislation has much to hold against it, how is EU any sort of alternative? At least speech is free in America and you cannot be charged for having illegal opinions in your search history or not forgetting things legislated to be forgotten. Their are probably one or two countries I would rank better than America for wanting your data in them, but the EU would top the list of the least desirable.
Technically that is not how copyright works. If you rescind your license, then you own the copyright, and under law the people currently using it must stop. If they don't then in this case (aka 90% of business done in the world uses linux at some point) lawyer firms start contacting you asking for a 10% stake in the 10 billion dollar suit they want to file on your behalf.
The way you are saying it is like saying, you have to hire a lawyer to prevent yourself from being murdered. No, it is the criminals responsibility to not break the law.
This is the most ridiculous comment. Half of the tech community is saying people can rescind code on GPLv2 because they read GPLv2 comparried it to GPLv3 and saw that there appears to be a reasonable case for such an interpretation.
What sort of story is this? Guy who informally represents Open Source as a whole says you cannot do the thing that is bad for open source, and but if you did it would be really bad.
So the female dominated field of teaching, designed to accommodate teaching females gives better grades to females.
The only reason this is a story is because the guy is brown. The thousands of white people fixing iPhones are ignored and relegated to the shadows.
I was once told by a chrome extension developer that he fixed this issue but that I really needed to buy an SSD (things were loading slowly enough that the software was throwing "cannot find resource X" errors on browser start)
Most people would just get a second job, and work 12 hours every day.
Increased to compensate for the 2 hours is not even the bare minimum. The 2 extra hours off work significantly increases your "consuming time", making you spend significantly more money. If you have 2 hours off every day, this could increase the amount of money many people spend by 1/3. while only reducing their working time less than 20%. In reality, we are looking at wages possibly needed to be doubled to maintain someone's standard of living. Every expense goes through the roof when you are talking about possibly doubling the amount of awake time people have off work. From twice as many toilet flushes, twice as much food, to roads needing to be expanded, and the power infrastructure somehow needs to manage to provide the same amount of power to industry, but concentrated into fewer hours. We don't have giant batteries hooked up, so this is a serious problem.
I have always wondered what jobs these studies are talking about?
The majority of jobs are Truckers, teachers, nurses.
Sure, a Trucker can deliver their loads faster, in exchange for increased risk. But my understanding of society is that this option is off the table.
Can students really learn just as much in 4 hours of class time as 6? Or is it lunch that you want to cut, or teacher prep time?
For me, I have worked construction and IT.
For IT, to really be the best asset we could be, we aimed to be available 24 hours a day as we were reactive problems that popped up as much as we were there for daily maintenance and upgrading. And honestly, you can only click through menus so fast, or walk down the hall so fast. I see the relationship of work accomplished to time spent as directly linear.
For construction. There is a general feeling that it would be pretty nice if we could skip lunch and breaks and go home 2 hours earlier. But that is doing the exact same amount of work over the same amount of time. You don't work faster in construction without increasing your skill level or getting yourself and others killed.