"Labor can be analyzed like other markets" - my first economics professor. Guess that sentiment swings both ways, eh?
I too doubt if the small-scale large-volume greed of some unions is really a socially effective answer to the large-scale low-volume greed of some business owners.
In economics, highly-paid superstars come about when being slightly better is enough to make a big difference for whatever reason. You seem to have a interesting explanation as to why something like that applies in a particular field. Economies of scale because there are more people to spread that higher cost over.
You'd rather have a few valuable deals than a large amount of low-value deals.
Sensible economics, it seems.
I do that myself - my business' sales volume is lower than it could be, but I don't want to overwork myself chasing a bunch of low-margin/higher-overhead deals
Tech-specific, this seems to be the business model for Apple Macs as opposed to the various Windows PC builders
LOL. Anyway, we often did straightforward trips that included the food transported in a trailer or pickup truck. Nevertheless, consistently buying more food than necessary has been one of our logistical issues.
One of the rules *was* that we needed to be able to move the personal gear ourselves (both quantity of gear and how it was packed.)
Okay, I wouldn't doubt it has legitimate use as a teaching tool, but the idea of doing the very opposite of what you're usually supposed to do is still rather entertaining. Reminds me of when one of my scout leaders gave a "How not to pack for a camping trip" demo.:P
You're definitely right about fusion, but hell, even fission seems more efficient than mass burning of coal and oil. misguided priorities? cost/benefit analysis skewed by misperception of risk?
My "and the like" addition was intended to refer to other high-bandwidth activities like the things you mentioned.
Hmm, a bandwith stat panel will be needed. If that's missing...
I do not like rabble-rousers calling me out for failing to buy into their alarmism.
I do admit that there are some details we are (in all likelihood) going to see in practice that will make this not work out well, but I just don't see what's wrong with the core concept.
While the exact limits and overage charges can be argued over, the core concept seems to make sense, and it's a relatively sensible way to address massive BitTorrenting and the like.
I can't blame them for doing what they have to once they get in. However, shouldn't they be aware, at least roughly speaking, that such things will happen when they are making that enlistment decision? That decision, not what they do afterwards, is what I'm questioning.
People misinformed about war pre-enlistment, or people who 'have to' enlist (for economic reasons?) amounts to an interesting and important discussion, but it isn't my core concept.
And I admit this is one of those things that outside people, including myself, just can't fully understand.
It's not something I'd ever do, for a myriad of reasons, so I admit that makes it hard to understand why someone else *would*; that could be broadened to a general concept.
Also, support or not support (the troops + their mission) is not entirely correlated with supporting or not supporting the country that's sending them out.
I have admittedly thought that was weaselese in the past (though thanks for the cool word), and it creates a sort of philosophical/logical paradox: especially considering that they're all volunteers, how can you support them without supporting what their job entails?
"Support the troops" seems to be one of the big cases of political correctness in current US society.
Support-both or don't-support-both both resolve the paradox, and which one of those is an argument I don't want to get into, at least not now.
http://twitter.com/shitmydadsays eh? Nice one. Some apparent crudity, but had some darn useful things to say if you can see through that. [FWIW, I'd say something similar about South Park]
http://twitter.com/RevRunWisdom (yeah, that's the Run from Run-DMC:P) Even if you aren't much for religious messages, a lot of his stuff just plain makes sense.
(I'm KingAlanI on twitter as well; I'm not going for serious inspiration, LOL)
It's great to hear that, like any communication channel, that Twitter can have quite serious purposes. I've noticed a bit myself in a much less grave context - for example, Twitter noise on the matter has sometimes been the first to point out various news stories to me.
And even if your main use for it is another way to goof around, then what's wrong with that?:)
There's just something about straightforward addictive arcade games. (Playing the arcade-game over-and-over is somewhat different from some other game that takes a long time to play through one round, or games with an indeterminate end)
Slashdot Mirror
"Labor can be analyzed like other markets" - my first economics professor.
Guess that sentiment swings both ways, eh?
I too doubt if the small-scale large-volume greed of some unions is really a socially effective answer to the large-scale low-volume greed of some business owners.
In economics, highly-paid superstars come about when being slightly better is enough to make a big difference for whatever reason.
You seem to have a interesting explanation as to why something like that applies in a particular field.
Economies of scale because there are more people to spread that higher cost over.
You'd rather have a few valuable deals than a large amount of low-value deals.
Sensible economics, it seems.
I do that myself - my business' sales volume is lower than it could be, but I don't want to overwork myself chasing a bunch of low-margin/higher-overhead deals
Tech-specific, this seems to be the business model for Apple Macs as opposed to the various Windows PC builders
the "^h" syntax is very fitting here. :P
Yeah, the terms in large part need to make the IP-related rules clear and fair.
In short, the articles advice to watch your ass legally, and provides some overview on doing so
Basic but functional, I suppose
LOL.
Anyway, we often did straightforward trips that included the food transported in a trailer or pickup truck. Nevertheless, consistently buying more food than necessary has been one of our logistical issues.
One of the rules *was* that we needed to be able to move the personal gear ourselves (both quantity of gear and how it was packed.)
Okay, I wouldn't doubt it has legitimate use as a teaching tool, but the idea of doing the very opposite of what you're usually supposed to do is still rather entertaining. :P
Reminds me of when one of my scout leaders gave a "How not to pack for a camping trip" demo.
That link - ick.
Such pessimism, for starters.
Taking a concept top the extreme and then complaining of the extreme - classic strawman?
You're definitely right about fusion, but hell, even fission seems more efficient than mass burning of coal and oil.
misguided priorities? cost/benefit analysis skewed by misperception of risk?
So, you are positing the "what some of them _really_ hate is the technological lifestyle" argument?
My "and the like" addition was intended to refer to other high-bandwidth activities like the things you mentioned.
Hmm, a bandwith stat panel will be needed. If that's missing...
I do not like rabble-rousers calling me out for failing to buy into their alarmism.
I do admit that there are some details we are (in all likelihood) going to see in practice that will make this not work out well, but I just don't see what's wrong with the core concept.
...Then it probably isn't the delay-product-to-help-current-generation shtick.
While the exact limits and overage charges can be argued over, the core concept seems to make sense, and it's a relatively sensible way to address massive BitTorrenting and the like.
I can't blame them for doing what they have to once they get in. However, shouldn't they be aware, at least roughly speaking, that such things will happen when they are making that enlistment decision? That decision, not what they do afterwards, is what I'm questioning.
People misinformed about war pre-enlistment, or people who 'have to' enlist (for economic reasons?) amounts to an interesting and important discussion, but it isn't my core concept.
And I admit this is one of those things that outside people, including myself, just can't fully understand.
It's not something I'd ever do, for a myriad of reasons, so I admit that makes it hard to understand why someone else *would*; that could be broadened to a general concept.
Also, support or not support (the troops + their mission) is not entirely correlated with supporting or not supporting the country that's sending them out.
Slashdot ate my sarcastic tags.
I have admittedly thought that was weaselese in the past (though thanks for the cool word), and it creates a sort of philosophical/logical paradox: especially considering that they're all volunteers, how can you support them without supporting what their job entails?
"Support the troops" seems to be one of the big cases of political correctness in current US society.
Support-both or don't-support-both both resolve the paradox, and which one of those is an argument I don't want to get into, at least not now.
"It is no longer necessary to write new stories about Facebook privacy issues; just change the dates."
http://twitter.com/FakeAPStylebook/status/13363923255
Aha!
If I pay a lot for it, that will make it fast and good
http://twitter.com/shitmydadsays eh? Nice one. Some apparent crudity, but had some darn useful things to say if you can see through that. [FWIW, I'd say something similar about South Park]
http://twitter.com/RevRunWisdom (yeah, that's the Run from Run-DMC :P)
Even if you aren't much for religious messages, a lot of his stuff just plain makes sense.
(I'm KingAlanI on twitter as well; I'm not going for serious inspiration, LOL)
It's great to hear that, like any communication channel, that Twitter can have quite serious purposes. I've noticed a bit myself in a much less grave context - for example, Twitter noise on the matter has sometimes been the first to point out various news stories to me.
And even if your main use for it is another way to goof around, then what's wrong with that? :)
http://www.twitter.com/KingAlanI
always antecedents. always second-guessing.
Nothing is (completely) new under the sun.
Hindsight is 20/20
There's just something about straightforward addictive arcade games.
(Playing the arcade-game over-and-over is somewhat different from some other game that takes a long time to play through one round, or games with an indeterminate end)
and yet, they probably shall maintain the authority to 'regulate' 'Foul Language'. :(
As someone who recognizes the reality of evolution, while also not being a homophobe, "why homosexuality exists" is a very interesting question.