You clearly have no idea what a sunk cost is, which greatly reduces the credibility of your opinions on the matter. And no business hires anybody without believing they will profit out of tgat hire. By your own definition thats an investment. No other investment is guaranteed to pay off either.
That depends how you define "success" - if you define it as "the CEO got a nice golden handshake after 3 years by making the ballance sheet look great and reducing the company's very capacity to make money in the future" then sure...
The problem with that theory is that if it was the plan it backfired horribly. The companoes profits skyrocketed 4-fold since this was done. Which does not surprize me. Its a paradoxical but true observation that paying the best salaries in your industry is a key factor of being the most profitable. Its paradoxical nature means its rarely applied but businesses tgat do apply it tend to succeed. Henry Ford was another well known example. The key is to realize that wages are not an expense. Not even slightly. Wages are the single most important investment you make in a business. To maximize your profits you must maximize that investment. Trying to cut that, treating it as a cost, is what I like to call the Fiorina-Fallacy though the vast majority of businesses make it. So much that when somebody doesnt people think they are crazy.
Well Ill be more concerned when its not the president who has used the fewest vetos and the least executive actions in 80 years. Obama has, if anything, been too restraimed with the powers his role constitionally require him to exercise.
> I'd also not want to be the person trying to prove something was truly random.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the decay rate of a radioactive particle random ? There's an average between extremes which leads to half-life being calculable for large amounts but the specific moment at which one will decay is not predictable as far as I know. Wasn't that sort of Schroedinger's point ?
So one may conceive of a cat-scanner with a lump of subcritical uranium inside it, using the scanner to monitor the individual particle states and each time one decays you record the time from "started looking until decade" and use it as entropy.
Uranium acquisition is left as an exercise for the reader.
Correction: Delphi is an IDE - the language Delphi compiled was called Object Pascal. That hackish horrible thing you refer to never had a name of it's own it was just "object oriented programming support added in Turbo Pascal 5"
I was a long time contributor and user of FPC and Lazarus but I moved on to other work a few years ago and haven't been near the Pascal scene since. What's the status of Lazarus ? Still under active development ?
And er... what exactly are they supposed to do *before* hand anyway ? This is the free world - we aren't allowed to lock people up who haven't committed a crime. Sure conspiracy is a crime, but it's not an easy one to prove.
The truth is there is very little that free countries *can* do to prevent terrorism, which is why it's been a part of their history for the last 200 years. There is nothing new or special about current events. There has been some group or another bombing civilians in Europe or the USA every single decade since well before the US revolution. This is just the latest in a long, long line and at no point in all that history has your risk of dying in such an attack *ever* been higher than about 1 millionth of your risk of dying because you slipped in the shower. Suicide is a much more likely way to die.
Actually in terms of ways to die... this is so far down the list that there is absolutely *no* sanity in being the least bit concerned about it. And everybody losing their minds over it is simply abundant proof that humans are absolutely terrible at risk assessment.
Just a side consideration. If I open a lossless jpeg I had previously exported, and I don't add any layers - what can possibly be lost when saving it ? Anything lossless jpeg couldn't store could not have been there when I opened it in first place.
I could still have understood a "Set a lossy save flag and warn the user if there are changes the format cannot store" approach - but those are relatively rare actually. Like almost every photographer I start with raw format. I then do initial edits in a raw editor (this is basic postprocessing) long before gimp even gets involved. In gimp I do the advanced stuff that I need to get the shot I really want, and then save this in several formats. Usually in XCF - that is the "working copy" I will use if I ever want to make additional edits. But I also typically save in a low quality 800-res lossy jpeg which is for web-use and a high quality 300dpi lossless jpeg pre-sized to page sizes (never trust printer scaling) if I want to do a large print version. If I am opening the large print version there is absolutely no way I'll be doing any edits that would use masks or layers - because for any such work you use the XCF. Changes to the print version will always be limited to minor tweaks (i.e. it wasn't sized quite the same aspect ratio as paper and I want to make a crop on the edge so I can get a perfect stretchless end-to-end fit on A3). These are not changes that introduce any data that could be lost when saving, indeed I definitely would NOT want those in the XCF - because I made a small crop for this print does not mean I want the image cropped for all time - I may well want the uncropped image for a different use in future).
However if you go and introduce a change which fundamentally opposes 30 years of UI experience for *everybody* you need serious justification. In basically every program ever written Save saves a file in the format it was opened in, save-as or export lets you change it. Gnome goes and makes "save" replace the format with their own, and save as ALSO does that but lets you rename... so now you have ot learn to go File/Export even if you opened the file in the proper format in the first place.
Which is an idiotic design because people often have very good reasons for having a particular image in a particular format. If I am making a print-ready photograph it *has* to be in lossless jpeg, because that's the only format the printshops accept, if I open it ot make a tweak, I should NOT need to re-export it to save that tweak.
Its not a scientific debate unless the critics argument is science, backed by evidence. There is no scientific debate about this because the theory has a megafuckton of supporting evidence from virtually every hard science practised by mankind and the deniers have not a shred of evidence whatsoever. Hell most of their arguments are not even coherent. When you confuse artic with antarctic all you prove is that you dont even know preschool level geography.
So... er... your example of a "controversial" issue is one about which no scientific controversy whatsoever exist ?
The only *controversy* is between science and fossil fuel companies and is about as legitimate as the one that used to exist between science and tobacco sellers and between science and lead sellers. In fact - we have physical proof now that the fossil fuel companies don't even doubt AGW themselves ! They say they do in public, but internally they trust it so absolutely that they based their schedules for arctic drilling on when ice melt would make it most profitable !
In the Dutch Roman system they operate in different courts handling entirely different types of cases. An attorney can become a magistrate. An advocate can become a judge. But not vice versa.
Partly its a smart division of labour. Attorney cases take weeks, maybe a month or two. Advocates can be handling the same case for years. So partly tge restriction is to free them up so they can focus only on that heavy workload. If nobody can seek clients nobody has to. Attorneys get the clients first and if its an advocate case refer them to whoever they consider most suitable.
That's not actually that far fetched. In most countries it's already illegal for advocates to advertise (I'm not sure if the US legal system differentiates between attorney's and advocates), and, in fact, advocates are not even allowed to take walk-in clients, they can only accept a client after that client is referred to them by an attorney. In most sensible countries there are also very strict rules about how attorney's are allowed to advertise, generally print adds and the yellow-pages and a website maybe.
Of course, people will always find loopholes, this morning I saw a personally injury lawyer ad for the very first time in my life... turns out some enterprising atorney had decided to advertise on youtube, presumably on the basis of claiming that youtube does not fall under our government's jurisdiction and putting an ad there cannot violate a local advertising law.
I wonder how well that will play if he is actually prosecuted...
You think there is something magical about mason jars that make them defy the laws of physics ? Or is it the earth that somehow magically follows different rules ?
We use those rules to predict the core temperatures of SUNS. They work for everything, in the same way, that's why we call them "laws" of physics.
They aren't the "suggestions" of physics. They are not the "guesses" of physics".
But trust a denier to somehow believe they are the wishful thinking of physics.
The laws of thermodynamics do not change depending on the size of the system.
Miniscule ? According to the american geohysical union the total co2 from volcanoes is 0.25% of what human fossil fuels contribute. If that is "miniscule" what the fuck would you define as large ? Everybody choking to death on smoke ?
Its really easy to falsify. Put some co2 in a jar. Put some ordinary air in another jar. Leave both in the sun for an hour. Measure their temperature. If the co2 jar is not hotter than the air jar as predicted then you falsified the theory. Good luck with that. Everything else is basic thermodynamics.. if the rate at which energy leaves the system is reduced it heats up. No matter how big or complex the system. Of course you could try to disprove thermodynamics instead...
The torrent in Battle.net was optional and there was an HTTP option the last time I played (early this year) - but my sojourn in Azeroth started when bittorrent was already an option, was the initial switch-over without the option to fall back on http ?
Well i wasnt citing stories. Theoligians have placed it everywhere from Cairo to lebanon. I was talking about a scientiffic non-creationist theory about events likely to be the inspiration behind the stories
Of course as science it is speculative at best but so is most archeology . Even recent times archeology. The discovery of the atari dump last year led to a radical rethink of the story that ET killed atari because there were only a few thousand ET cartridges no more than any other game. That's a mere 49 years ago and we aren't sure what it really means. 10 thousand years and anything is at best a "good guess".
During world war 2 thousands of British children were seperated from their parents, loaded on boats and sent off to other countries to live with stranger volunteers. The plan was to ensure that no matter what Hitler did to Britain there would be another generation with at least a chance to grow up.
If the danger was great enough here, you bet we would load kids on a ship.
There is a theory that places the garden of eden in what is now the Persian gulf. It is probably the most scientific theory around, since it has some actual physical evidence to back it up and crucially it is entirely non-creationist. It's core is that the genesis tale (and the stories it was based on - eden is not a hebrew word;) ) are actually a telling of the transition from hunter-gatherer to farming community. It also suggests that what was, for humanity, a great leap forward was for those who did it a tragedy. If the theory is correct then the settlers who became the mesopotamians were descendents of a hunter-gatherer community that lived in the lush forest where the gulf is now, which would have been an easy life. When the ice age ended and the gulf was flooded they were forced north into the desert and had to learn to farm to survive. And by the sweat of your brow shall you eat...
Slashdot Mirror
You clearly have no idea what a sunk cost is, which greatly reduces the credibility of your opinions on the matter.
And no business hires anybody without believing they will profit out of tgat hire. By your own definition thats an investment. No other investment is guaranteed to pay off either.
That depends how you define "success" - if you define it as "the CEO got a nice golden handshake after 3 years by making the ballance sheet look great and reducing the company's very capacity to make money in the future" then sure...
The problem with that theory is that if it was the plan it backfired horribly. The companoes profits skyrocketed 4-fold since this was done.
Which does not surprize me. Its a paradoxical but true observation that paying the best salaries in your industry is a key factor of being the most profitable.
Its paradoxical nature means its rarely applied but businesses tgat do apply it tend to succeed. Henry Ford was another well known example.
The key is to realize that wages are not an expense. Not even slightly. Wages are the single most important investment you make in a business. To maximize your profits you must maximize that investment.
Trying to cut that, treating it as a cost, is what I like to call the Fiorina-Fallacy though the vast majority of businesses make it. So much that when somebody doesnt people think they are crazy.
Well Ill be more concerned when its not the president who has used the fewest vetos and the least executive actions in 80 years. Obama has, if anything, been too restraimed with the powers his role constitionally require him to exercise.
> I'd also not want to be the person trying to prove something was truly random.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the decay rate of a radioactive particle random ? There's an average between extremes which leads to half-life being calculable for large amounts but the specific moment at which one will decay is not predictable as far as I know. Wasn't that sort of Schroedinger's point ?
So one may conceive of a cat-scanner with a lump of subcritical uranium inside it, using the scanner to monitor the individual particle states and each time one decays you record the time from "started looking until decade" and use it as entropy.
Uranium acquisition is left as an exercise for the reader.
Correction: Delphi is an IDE - the language Delphi compiled was called Object Pascal. That hackish horrible thing you refer to never had a name of it's own it was just "object oriented programming support added in Turbo Pascal 5"
Worth mentioning that FPC will also let him port his program to Linux with minimal effort as the units are almost entirely identical.
I was a long time contributor and user of FPC and Lazarus but I moved on to other work a few years ago and haven't been near the Pascal scene since. What's the status of Lazarus ? Still under active development ?
Community service ?
Well the republicans keep telling us government should be more like a business so I guess thats a good thing then ?
For the record: I reject their premise. The purpose of government is to do all the things that are better not done like a business would.
And er... what exactly are they supposed to do *before* hand anyway ?
This is the free world - we aren't allowed to lock people up who haven't committed a crime. Sure conspiracy is a crime, but it's not an easy one to prove.
The truth is there is very little that free countries *can* do to prevent terrorism, which is why it's been a part of their history for the last 200 years. There is nothing new or special about current events. There has been some group or another bombing civilians in Europe or the USA every single decade since well before the US revolution.
This is just the latest in a long, long line and at no point in all that history has your risk of dying in such an attack *ever* been higher than about 1 millionth of your risk of dying because you slipped in the shower. Suicide is a much more likely way to die.
Actually in terms of ways to die... this is so far down the list that there is absolutely *no* sanity in being the least bit concerned about it. And everybody losing their minds over it is simply abundant proof that humans are absolutely terrible at risk assessment.
Just a side consideration. If I open a lossless jpeg I had previously exported, and I don't add any layers - what can possibly be lost when saving it ? Anything lossless jpeg couldn't store could not have been there when I opened it in first place.
I could still have understood a "Set a lossy save flag and warn the user if there are changes the format cannot store" approach - but those are relatively rare actually. Like almost every photographer I start with raw format. I then do initial edits in a raw editor (this is basic postprocessing) long before gimp even gets involved. In gimp I do the advanced stuff that I need to get the shot I really want, and then save this in several formats. Usually in XCF - that is the "working copy" I will use if I ever want to make additional edits. But I also typically save in a low quality 800-res lossy jpeg which is for web-use and a high quality 300dpi lossless jpeg pre-sized to page sizes (never trust printer scaling) if I want to do a large print version.
If I am opening the large print version there is absolutely no way I'll be doing any edits that would use masks or layers - because for any such work you use the XCF. Changes to the print version will always be limited to minor tweaks (i.e. it wasn't sized quite the same aspect ratio as paper and I want to make a crop on the edge so I can get a perfect stretchless end-to-end fit on A3). These are not changes that introduce any data that could be lost when saving, indeed I definitely would NOT want those in the XCF - because I made a small crop for this print does not mean I want the image cropped for all time - I may well want the uncropped image for a different use in future).
The right answer is to trust what the user gives you.
However if you go and introduce a change which fundamentally opposes 30 years of UI experience for *everybody* you need serious justification.
In basically every program ever written Save saves a file in the format it was opened in, save-as or export lets you change it.
Gnome goes and makes "save" replace the format with their own, and save as ALSO does that but lets you rename... so now you have ot learn to go File/Export even if you opened the file in the proper format in the first place.
Which is an idiotic design because people often have very good reasons for having a particular image in a particular format. If I am making a print-ready photograph it *has* to be in lossless jpeg, because that's the only format the printshops accept, if I open it ot make a tweak, I should NOT need to re-export it to save that tweak.
Its not a scientific debate unless the critics argument is science, backed by evidence. There is no scientific debate about this because the theory has a megafuckton of supporting evidence from virtually every hard science practised by mankind and the deniers have not a shred of evidence whatsoever. Hell most of their arguments are not even coherent. When you confuse artic with antarctic all you prove is that you dont even know preschool level geography.
So ... er... your example of a "controversial" issue is one about which no scientific controversy whatsoever exist ?
The only *controversy* is between science and fossil fuel companies and is about as legitimate as the one that used to exist between science and tobacco sellers and between science and lead sellers. In fact - we have physical proof now that the fossil fuel companies don't even doubt AGW themselves ! They say they do in public, but internally they trust it so absolutely that they based their schedules for arctic drilling on when ice melt would make it most profitable !
In the Dutch Roman system they operate in different courts handling entirely different types of cases. An attorney can become a magistrate. An advocate can become a judge. But not vice versa.
Partly its a smart division of labour. Attorney cases take weeks, maybe a month or two. Advocates can be handling the same case for years. So partly tge restriction is to free them up so they can focus only on that heavy workload. If nobody can seek clients nobody has to. Attorneys get the clients first and if its an advocate case refer them to whoever they consider most suitable.
That's not actually that far fetched. In most countries it's already illegal for advocates to advertise (I'm not sure if the US legal system differentiates between attorney's and advocates), and, in fact, advocates are not even allowed to take walk-in clients, they can only accept a client after that client is referred to them by an attorney.
In most sensible countries there are also very strict rules about how attorney's are allowed to advertise, generally print adds and the yellow-pages and a website maybe.
Of course, people will always find loopholes, this morning I saw a personally injury lawyer ad for the very first time in my life... turns out some enterprising atorney had decided to advertise on youtube, presumably on the basis of claiming that youtube does not fall under our government's jurisdiction and putting an ad there cannot violate a local advertising law.
I wonder how well that will play if he is actually prosecuted...
You think there is something magical about mason jars that make them defy the laws of physics ? Or is it the earth that somehow magically follows different rules ?
We use those rules to predict the core temperatures of SUNS. They work for everything, in the same way, that's why we call them "laws" of physics.
They aren't the "suggestions" of physics. They are not the "guesses" of physics".
But trust a denier to somehow believe they are the wishful thinking of physics.
The laws of thermodynamics do not change depending on the size of the system.
Miniscule ? According to the american geohysical union the total co2 from volcanoes is 0.25% of what human fossil fuels contribute.
If that is "miniscule" what the fuck would you define as large ? Everybody choking to death on smoke ?
Its really easy to falsify. Put some co2 in a jar. Put some ordinary air in another jar. Leave both in the sun for an hour. Measure their temperature.
If the co2 jar is not hotter than the air jar as predicted then you falsified the theory. Good luck with that.
Everything else is basic thermodynamics.. if the rate at which energy leaves the system is reduced it heats up. No matter how big or complex the system. Of course you could try to disprove thermodynamics instead...
The torrent in Battle.net was optional and there was an HTTP option the last time I played (early this year) - but my sojourn in Azeroth started when bittorrent was already an option, was the initial switch-over without the option to fall back on http ?
Well i wasnt citing stories. Theoligians have placed it everywhere from Cairo to lebanon. I was talking about a scientiffic non-creationist theory about events likely to be the inspiration behind the stories
http://www.ldolphin.org/eden/
Of course as science it is speculative at best but so is most archeology . Even recent times archeology. The discovery of the atari dump last year led to a radical rethink of the story that ET killed atari because there were only a few thousand ET cartridges no more than any other game. That's a mere 49 years ago and we aren't sure what it really means. 10 thousand years and anything is at best a "good guess".
During world war 2 thousands of British children were seperated from their parents, loaded on boats and sent off to other countries to live with stranger volunteers. The plan was to ensure that no matter what Hitler did to Britain there would be another generation with at least a chance to grow up.
If the danger was great enough here, you bet we would load kids on a ship.
There is a theory that places the garden of eden in what is now the Persian gulf. It is probably the most scientific theory around, since it has some actual physical evidence to back it up and crucially it is entirely non-creationist. ;) ) are actually a telling of the transition from hunter-gatherer to farming community.
It's core is that the genesis tale (and the stories it was based on - eden is not a hebrew word
It also suggests that what was, for humanity, a great leap forward was for those who did it a tragedy. If the theory is correct then the settlers who became the mesopotamians were descendents of a hunter-gatherer community that lived in the lush forest where the gulf is now, which would have been an easy life. When the ice age ended and the gulf was flooded they were forced north into the desert and had to learn to farm to survive. And by the sweat of your brow shall you eat...