the fancy part is that this "fuel" is used of ground based installation because it does NOT meet aviation emission standard... So calling it "jet-fuel" is a bit of a misnomer.
Where do you get that 9000BTU/h by human ? Based solely on the daily energy requirement of a human, 2000kcal (this is the SI unit, not the Americanized Calorie), it translates to 2326 Wh, or a steady 100W output, which itself translates to 340 BTU/h.
If more companies were able to experiment with nuclear power, maybe there would be some groundbreaking discovery which would solve much of our current energy problem. You can hardly blame TEPCO not to have forseen a once-in-a-century tsunamy.
Your analogy with the banking system is interesting. If more "big bank" had actually crashed because they took too much risk, or even if the whole system crashed because it took too much risk, it would have been giving a better signal than the one given by all government, which was something like "continue to take as much risk as you want, the taxpayer is here to back your recklessness.". The system which would have emerged afterward would have had to learn about the reason of the previous failure. FYI, the core of the subprime problem was, at first, poor american with a subprime credit rating buying overpriced houses.
How can you trust the government when the current situation is due to its own regulation passed over years ? This is the whole problem with Kant's philosophy (and the whole catholic philosophy): you are asking those who created a problem to fix it by creating even more troublesome problems.
It all depends who is the initiator of action. The tech companies are acting toward their best interest, the tech flock are merely reacting. The a few in tech companies have created wealth from nothing, the tech flock are merely feeding on those few ideas and concept. They despise responsibility but still want to get their share of the cake. Though, there is nothing inherent bad at trying to maximize their own resource by the least amount of work possible.
See, this is another difference between you and me. You see the world in black and white, the Righteous and the Wrongeous. From my point of view, there is no such things, just ends. Whatever means to get to it is justifiable.
The ego of tech engineer will be their downfall. And it will be deserved. Free market is not about little or big guy. Capitalism isn't about making a society happy and prosperous directly, it is about making an individual happy and prosperous, and assuming that the rest will be willing to make their condition better as a result. What we see now is a bunch of irresponsible crybaby unable to act on their own to fix a situation. What is implied by a class action lawsuit is an agreement that they are too weak to act against the tech giant. It is a demonstration of weakness. Weak don't have their place on top of the food chain. Don't act in the name of Free Market when you all call for is regulation and government intervention (ie. socialism).
It is a matter of will for the average person to make its condition better if he thinks his current one sucks. However, by doing so, he would quit being an "average person" to become one of the few who took risks to thrive. However, the average person does not want to thrive, it just want to live its life within the narrow streets it understands.
Jobs' life has not been particularly quiet, Zuckerberg took risks, as did Larry Page, etc. For one successful tech CEO, how many fell ? I'm not saying that they did what they all had to do to succeed, I believe that they came at the right time with the right idea when the right technology appeared. Nobody knew that pagespeed was to become what it became. Nobody knew that facebook would be used worldwide today, etc. No matter what, these CEO deserves what they have. If other are not happy with their condition, they can decide to make it better, or they can decide that they have too much to lose for any risk to be worthwhile. All in all, there is no good or bad, no right or wrong.
No, we do not have a free market because the underling do not have a master mentality an continue to follow Kant's philosophy, which is more and more plaguing western societies...
Free market is whatever is good for a company is deemed "good". There is no Righteous principle that must be followed. If cooperation/collusion works best than cutting each other throat, then cooperation is good. If the SV engineer agree to be treated as a flock, then why shouldn't they ? They accept their condition willingly, unless of course they do not deserve the title of "engineer" and are merely good at pissing code without thinking. Just the same way they think they should be paid 300k for really creating no wealth.
So... Highly skilled engineer are too much of pussies to get unionized and claim their so-called "Rights", and end up crying in mother government's pants for new regulations... What a progress...
How does symmetry or asymmetry matter ? The goal of a company is to first make money, and then make profit, then maximize profit. If collusion, or cooperation, helps in the process, then it is a good strategy. I strongly believe that a pure capitalist ideal would see both competition and cooperation, not just pure competition.
Who cares what the CEO earns ? Your answer is just based on your own greed and resentment not having the same path in life, your are doing nothing but complaining of living your life as it is instead of theirs.
The Motherboard experiment was just enough for me. http://motherboard.vice.com/en...
If the product wasn't ready, don't have a reporter test it for a month, report rats, below hygiene standard preparation, and mold all over some package...
Your presidential oath is finished by a beautiful "So help me God", as is the citizenship oath, and every coin and bank note feature a the famous "In god we trust". So I really don't know what you are talking about...
The next Nobel prize alumni meeting would be of particular interest, Obama, Assange, Snowden and Manning in the same room exchanging chit-chat over a drink !
It might be considered that the NSA, and the supporting government, are the actual traitors, acting against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and Snowden is the actual hero. History (and to some extend, truth) being written by the victorious belligerent, the future will tell who's on whose side.
I meant gun owner are wrong to use starbucks for political means, and starbucks is wrong to ostracize a minority group. It is not considered OK to discriminate on sex, skin color, religion, or sexual preference because there are all seen as "progressist" causes, but it is OK to discriminate on gun owner, because the "progressist" agenda wants unarmed law-abiding citizen. This is an unacceptable agenda-based double standard
Censoring political activism is, in itself, political activism: a sign of political disapprobation. By censoring this repository, GitHub, a technical provider, has taken a political stance... which I do not expect from a technical provider.
If you do not comply with their policy, your presence on their ground constitute trespassing. It is no different to forbidding you to carry a firearm in their store (which they can do). Though, they choose to take a pseudo non-escalating stance, which is basically saying, we want to let you know our stance, but we will not enforce it.
Now, for my opinion on that stance per-se... Both side are wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
For a green card, I would *eventually* take a job there. Btw, how long is the servitude expected to last ?
... but only in the People Republic of California. At least, the weather's nice there.
the fancy part is that this "fuel" is used of ground based installation because it does NOT meet aviation emission standard... So calling it "jet-fuel" is a bit of a misnomer.
Where do you get that 9000BTU/h by human ? Based solely on the daily energy requirement of a human, 2000kcal (this is the SI unit, not the Americanized Calorie), it translates to 2326 Wh, or a steady 100W output, which itself translates to 340 BTU/h.
If more companies were able to experiment with nuclear power, maybe there would be some groundbreaking discovery which would solve much of our current energy problem. You can hardly blame TEPCO not to have forseen a once-in-a-century tsunamy. Your analogy with the banking system is interesting. If more "big bank" had actually crashed because they took too much risk, or even if the whole system crashed because it took too much risk, it would have been giving a better signal than the one given by all government, which was something like "continue to take as much risk as you want, the taxpayer is here to back your recklessness.". The system which would have emerged afterward would have had to learn about the reason of the previous failure. FYI, the core of the subprime problem was, at first, poor american with a subprime credit rating buying overpriced houses. How can you trust the government when the current situation is due to its own regulation passed over years ? This is the whole problem with Kant's philosophy (and the whole catholic philosophy): you are asking those who created a problem to fix it by creating even more troublesome problems.
It all depends who is the initiator of action. The tech companies are acting toward their best interest, the tech flock are merely reacting. The a few in tech companies have created wealth from nothing, the tech flock are merely feeding on those few ideas and concept. They despise responsibility but still want to get their share of the cake. Though, there is nothing inherent bad at trying to maximize their own resource by the least amount of work possible.
See, this is another difference between you and me. You see the world in black and white, the Righteous and the Wrongeous. From my point of view, there is no such things, just ends. Whatever means to get to it is justifiable.
The ego of tech engineer will be their downfall. And it will be deserved. Free market is not about little or big guy. Capitalism isn't about making a society happy and prosperous directly, it is about making an individual happy and prosperous, and assuming that the rest will be willing to make their condition better as a result. What we see now is a bunch of irresponsible crybaby unable to act on their own to fix a situation. What is implied by a class action lawsuit is an agreement that they are too weak to act against the tech giant. It is a demonstration of weakness. Weak don't have their place on top of the food chain. Don't act in the name of Free Market when you all call for is regulation and government intervention (ie. socialism).
It is a matter of will for the average person to make its condition better if he thinks his current one sucks. However, by doing so, he would quit being an "average person" to become one of the few who took risks to thrive. However, the average person does not want to thrive, it just want to live its life within the narrow streets it understands.
Jobs' life has not been particularly quiet, Zuckerberg took risks, as did Larry Page, etc. For one successful tech CEO, how many fell ? I'm not saying that they did what they all had to do to succeed, I believe that they came at the right time with the right idea when the right technology appeared. Nobody knew that pagespeed was to become what it became. Nobody knew that facebook would be used worldwide today, etc. No matter what, these CEO deserves what they have. If other are not happy with their condition, they can decide to make it better, or they can decide that they have too much to lose for any risk to be worthwhile. All in all, there is no good or bad, no right or wrong.
No, we do not have a free market because the underling do not have a master mentality an continue to follow Kant's philosophy, which is more and more plaguing western societies...
Collusion, by definition, is not a free market.
Free market is whatever is good for a company is deemed "good". There is no Righteous principle that must be followed. If cooperation/collusion works best than cutting each other throat, then cooperation is good. If the SV engineer agree to be treated as a flock, then why shouldn't they ? They accept their condition willingly, unless of course they do not deserve the title of "engineer" and are merely good at pissing code without thinking. Just the same way they think they should be paid 300k for really creating no wealth.
So... Highly skilled engineer are too much of pussies to get unionized and claim their so-called "Rights", and end up crying in mother government's pants for new regulations... What a progress...
How does symmetry or asymmetry matter ? The goal of a company is to first make money, and then make profit, then maximize profit. If collusion, or cooperation, helps in the process, then it is a good strategy. I strongly believe that a pure capitalist ideal would see both competition and cooperation, not just pure competition.
Who cares what the CEO earns ? Your answer is just based on your own greed and resentment not having the same path in life, your are doing nothing but complaining of living your life as it is instead of theirs.
The Motherboard experiment was just enough for me. http://motherboard.vice.com/en... If the product wasn't ready, don't have a reporter test it for a month, report rats, below hygiene standard preparation, and mold all over some package...
What separation ?
Your presidential oath is finished by a beautiful "So help me God", as is the citizenship oath, and every coin and bank note feature a the famous "In god we trust". So I really don't know what you are talking about...
you don't need to cast 'void' pointers...
This is pretty much the good old: "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime".
This country is rich ? Then why is all that social crap bought by debt (ie. money you DO NOT have) ?
"All is fair in love and war"
The next Nobel prize alumni meeting would be of particular interest, Obama, Assange, Snowden and Manning in the same room exchanging chit-chat over a drink !
It might be considered that the NSA, and the supporting government, are the actual traitors, acting against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and Snowden is the actual hero. History (and to some extend, truth) being written by the victorious belligerent, the future will tell who's on whose side.
I meant gun owner are wrong to use starbucks for political means, and starbucks is wrong to ostracize a minority group. It is not considered OK to discriminate on sex, skin color, religion, or sexual preference because there are all seen as "progressist" causes, but it is OK to discriminate on gun owner, because the "progressist" agenda wants unarmed law-abiding citizen. This is an unacceptable agenda-based double standard
Censoring political activism is, in itself, political activism: a sign of political disapprobation. By censoring this repository, GitHub, a technical provider, has taken a political stance... which I do not expect from a technical provider.
I choose to have a true opinion AND a quality relationship. Yes, some women actually *do* like that.
If you do not comply with their policy, your presence on their ground constitute trespassing. It is no different to forbidding you to carry a firearm in their store (which they can do). Though, they choose to take a pseudo non-escalating stance, which is basically saying, we want to let you know our stance, but we will not enforce it.
Now, for my opinion on that stance per-se... Both side are wrong.