In rich expensive countries, unions might not work so well nowadays in the case of IT or other sectors where the jobs can be outsourced.
And even though coal mining might not be easily outsourced, they could shutdown the mines and buy coal from a cheaper country.
Yes, the USA could do something like a slashdotter suggested: put import taxes/tariffs on stuff that's made under "poor conditions". But the working conditions aren't always that bad (not everywhere is as bad as Foxconn). The living conditions might be worse (no big house, no SUV, no pool, no BBQ) but the working conditions don't have to be that bad for things to be cheaper.
So it's not really a bad thing for women in the USA if they're dropping out of IT, hope they get jobs that make more sense (and dollars) in the USA. I'm sure there are jobs in other sectors.
On the other hand, might make sense for women in Vietnam, Thailand, etc to get into IT...;).
The other problem is many jobs in the IT world can be outsourced to people like me who live in poorer countries and earn lower wages.
A coffee barrista in Sydney probably earns more than I do, but his/her job can't be outsourced to me:).
So the bunch in the "rich world" with easily outsourced jobs have to be better and more productive in order to compete with us. If it means working longer hours for them so be it.
If we're 4 times cheaper, we can be a third as productive and we'd still be a better option. No competition to the top talent in the rich world, but to the rest.
So that's why I'm not as stressed - my boss isn't going to easily find someone who can do the same job as me for a lower price.
BTW, not sure why the researchers in that article don't think that the optimal would be to use shoes and run "toe-first". To me it seems obvious - you get the benefit of both worlds, shoe protection and a lower impact running style.
Flying is easy if you're the only bird in the air.
Flocking is not easy. Thousands of flamingoes can fly together and land together without killing or maiming each other. I doubt that many humans can "flock" like that.
It's more like formation flying.
So, I'm fine with flying cars if they make the license requirements stringent enough:
Able to stick in formation and designated air-lanes even when: 1) The phone rings 2) Some kid puts his hands around your eyes. 3) Someone drops stuff in the car while you (and others in formation) are making a difficult maneuver 4) Suffering a sudden, significant but not totally incapacitating condition. 5) Sleepy or mentally operating at 80% of norm (and not fly if < 80%). Nobody is going to be at 100% all the time.
Many pilots have stayed with their plane risking (or even losing) their lives without ejecting because they know their plane would kill others if they ejected. That's the degree of professionalism and responsibility I'd want from someone whose allowed to fly a multi-ton vehicle above a densely populated city on a regular basis.
The average driver should not be allowed to fly anywhere close to a populated area.
Many of these nuggets, sausages and patties can have the disclaimer: "No animals were harmed in the making of this product, OK so the pig grunted a bit in protest but it survived mostly intact".
In some countries smokers put in MORE money into the system than take out. The "limited dollars" often come from them in the first place. For example in the UK, smoking related problems cost the national health care system 5 billion UK pounds a year, but the tobacco tax revenue is about 10 billion a year.
So just increase the tobacco tax in your country till it evens out or you get a net gain. Legit drug money...
I'm a nonsmoker and I'm fine if smokers want to make extra contributions to society, and die younger in countries where "aging population" is a concern. As long as there are nonsmoking places and smoking places (don't ban smoking in restaurants/pubs etc, just tax establishments that allow smoking more- then you allow choice and don't miss out on revenue).
People (especially children) should be educated on the dangers of smoking, but once they are adults smoking is not really a big problem to me. Second hand smoke might shorten my lifespan, big deal, bad drivers might shorten/ruin my life even more.
Look on the bright side, at least you got paid. In contrast lots of WoW players pay $$$ every month for the privilege of grinding:).
Seriously though, it's fine to _sometimes_ work long hours. But if it happens too often or too long, it means you're getting screwed.
It's not mainly about the money - because even if they pay you for those extra hours, those hours come from your rather finite life. Go work out how many weekends you probably have left in your life based on your estimated life expectancy.
Now if you really really enjoy your work then it's not so bad, but it's good to keep some balance in your life. What happens if you lose your job or unable to do it anymore?
Anyway here I am wasting some of my life on Slashdot;).
> Yes, but at our age, we had to go out of our way to take an interest in technology
Kids today still have to go out of their way... Using Facebook and Twitter doesn't count as taking an interest in technology in quite the same way as learning BASIC and ASM/machine code from the manuals and writing your own programs.
When there are 100 times more possible directions, going a particular way can be more out of the way than when there were fewer ways;).
Back then:
It's night, should I a) Watch TV with only X channels. b) Go to sleep c) Read a book d) Listen to music - Z choices/channels e) Play one of Y games on my computer f) Write programs on my computer/Learn programming
Now: a) Watch TV with 10X channels b) Go to sleep c) Read stuff online - wikipedia, wikia, gutenberg press, blogs, reviews, news etc. d) Write stuff online - tweet, FB, blog, discussions, etc e) Read a book f) Play one or more of 1000*Y possible games on my computer (yes some people play more than one game at once:) ). There are lots of free games ou there g) Play a game on my phone h) Play a game on my game console or handheld gaming device i) Watch TV or videos online from a choice millions of possible videos j) Listen to 1000*Z possible music choices and chill k) Write programs on my computer.
The options are just an example (I don't have a game console etc) but I hope they show how having more choices can actually make it harder for certain things to happen even if the "barrier to entry" has dropped;).
Before that my parents in their youth were more active in certain areas than I was: they did a lot more sports, cycling trips to nearby towns, hung out at church with friends, did more useful stuff in many ways...
That said I know a youth who despite dying young not too long ago, did way more than I'll ever will in my whole life (even his parents and friends didn't know he was involved in so many organizations, projects and events).
> It's their computers and their networks, so they can do whatever they want
Funny how that's not true when it comes to landlords and tenants. In some countries it's even not true when it comes to landlords and squatters. Even squatters have rights.
I suspect there was some history in getting those protections.
The landlords in the "IT world" want their stuff to be legally treated like property but not too much like property;).
> The best computer science has come up with so far are very poor imitations of what the human brain does, and at the core a computer must be absolutely correct,
Yeah maybe they'll come up with AI that's smarter than us in many ways, but actually in the long run more of a dead end than our intelligence.
But computers can do that. Especially computers programmed by humans.
What computers still aren't so good at is: automagically making models/simulations of the world, to the extent of including "others" and "self", and use those models to help decide what to do.
Even many animals can do that - they may not be as good as humans in some ways but they are far better than current AIs.
I believe much human perception is anticipation, your brain keeps the simulations running, and if the world keeps matching well enough, you can go on "autopilot", but when there is a significant/sudden divergence, that's when you get a surprise:).
Wow. He covers up the "live free" slogan, and they jailed him for that. Sounds like "the beatings will continue until morale improves";).
Later on he moves to Connecticut and covers up "The Constitution State" and gets a citation for that... Talk about irony.
Anyway, the e-ads are a ridiculous idea from so many points, are they really serious about it?
Just because the vehicle is stationary doesn't mean you wouldn't need to know the license plate number. Most people drive around with non-faked license plates because they think they'll never commit a serious enough crime. But the difference between a law abiding citizen and a criminal is often just a lapse in judgement, a bad mistake or two.
> Take an example: I want to copy and paste an entire text message
Actually the tricky bit is if you only want to copy and paste PART of that message. It is often very important that someone else does not get the full message.
It's going to be hard to do that without a "copy and paste" feature and instead provide some sort of cross application magic.
I'd be fine with it as long as the system also records of "who is watching what and when", and also makes those records available for easy public read-only access.
1) Show me evidence that Bush started started the optional wars because of his religion. He did have backing from many others at the top for the war, so what makes you think he started those wars because of his religion?
2) You really believe atheists are significantly less likely to start optional wars? You may be right but given what I see from Stalin and Mao, it's not great comfort if the Great Atheist Leader starts killing millions of his own citizens rather those of some other country.
3) As for Galileo, from what I see it sure looks like he wasn't forced into his faith by terror from being burned at the stake as you originally claimed (without evidence).
It sure seems to me that many atheists are also prone to making claims without evidence.
Slashdot Mirror
In rich expensive countries, unions might not work so well nowadays in the case of IT or other sectors where the jobs can be outsourced.
;).
And even though coal mining might not be easily outsourced, they could shutdown the mines and buy coal from a cheaper country.
Yes, the USA could do something like a slashdotter suggested: put import taxes/tariffs on stuff that's made under "poor conditions". But the working conditions aren't always that bad (not everywhere is as bad as Foxconn). The living conditions might be worse (no big house, no SUV, no pool, no BBQ) but the working conditions don't have to be that bad for things to be cheaper.
So it's not really a bad thing for women in the USA if they're dropping out of IT, hope they get jobs that make more sense (and dollars) in the USA. I'm sure there are jobs in other sectors.
On the other hand, might make sense for women in Vietnam, Thailand, etc to get into IT...
> hoever took over from me wiped it all out and put FreeBSD on everything.
:).
> And then couldn't figure out why it wouldn't keep up with their load.
Too many machines were busy doing "make world"
The other problem is many jobs in the IT world can be outsourced to people like me who live in poorer countries and earn lower wages.
:).
A coffee barrista in Sydney probably earns more than I do, but his/her job can't be outsourced to me
So the bunch in the "rich world" with easily outsourced jobs have to be better and more productive in order to compete with us. If it means working longer hours for them so be it.
If we're 4 times cheaper, we can be a third as productive and we'd still be a better option. No competition to the top talent in the rich world, but to the rest.
So that's why I'm not as stressed - my boss isn't going to easily find someone who can do the same job as me for a lower price.
The good ones care, but perhaps more like the good mechanics, programmers, hairdressers etc care about doing a good job.
Some of those may not care about you very personally, but it doesn't matter if they do a good job right?
For example, I personally wouldn't want a good doctor to suffer severe mental anguish just because he couldn't save me. Unless he screwed up badly...
IMO the latter doesn't work as well for the joke. And the joke is the point of the post.
The use of uncommon words in humour for their slight veiling of meaning is a bit like a magician's misdirection.
Secondly, "walking quickly" is too specific.
Yeah, if you're used to running on your toes, running on high-heels wouldn't be a big problem (assuming they aren't ridiculously high).
http://www.livescience.com/animals/running-shoes-barefoot-running-100127.html
BTW, not sure why the researchers in that article don't think that the optimal would be to use shoes and run "toe-first". To me it seems obvious - you get the benefit of both worlds, shoe protection and a lower impact running style.
Flying is easy if you're the only bird in the air.
Flocking is not easy. Thousands of flamingoes can fly together and land together without killing or maiming each other. I doubt that many humans can "flock" like that.
It's more like formation flying.
So, I'm fine with flying cars if they make the license requirements stringent enough:
Able to stick in formation and designated air-lanes even when:
1) The phone rings
2) Some kid puts his hands around your eyes.
3) Someone drops stuff in the car while you (and others in formation) are making a difficult maneuver
4) Suffering a sudden, significant but not totally incapacitating condition.
5) Sleepy or mentally operating at 80% of norm (and not fly if < 80%). Nobody is going to be at 100% all the time.
Many pilots have stayed with their plane risking (or even losing) their lives without ejecting because they know their plane would kill others if they ejected. That's the degree of professionalism and responsibility I'd want from someone whose allowed to fly a multi-ton vehicle above a densely populated city on a regular basis.
The average driver should not be allowed to fly anywhere close to a populated area.
What do nuggets have to do with birds?
Many of these nuggets, sausages and patties can have the disclaimer: "No animals were harmed in the making of this product, OK so the pig grunted a bit in protest but it survived mostly intact".
It's not pointless:
.xxx domains just for 2) and branding.
1) It makes ICANN and friends more money
2) It makes it easier to search for porn
So yes I also doubt they'll move, but many will register
So efficient that fumes from a overheated PTFE coated frying pan can kill many birds...
In some countries smokers put in MORE money into the system than take out. The "limited dollars" often come from them in the first place. For example in the UK, smoking related problems cost the national health care system 5 billion UK pounds a year, but the tobacco tax revenue is about 10 billion a year.
So just increase the tobacco tax in your country till it evens out or you get a net gain. Legit drug money...
I'm a nonsmoker and I'm fine if smokers want to make extra contributions to society, and die younger in countries where "aging population" is a concern. As long as there are nonsmoking places and smoking places (don't ban smoking in restaurants/pubs etc, just tax establishments that allow smoking more- then you allow choice and don't miss out on revenue).
People (especially children) should be educated on the dangers of smoking, but once they are adults smoking is not really a big problem to me. Second hand smoke might shorten my lifespan, big deal, bad drivers might shorten/ruin my life even more.
I've no problems with high frequency trading.
The problem is:
1) When some traders are allowed to see stuff before everyone else. I find it amazing that's even considered acceptable.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/24/business/24trading.html
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2009/07/24/business/0724-webBIZ-trading.ready.html
2) It seems that if some parties screw up big they roll back those transactions. They don't roll back transactions if some small guy screws up.
It doesn't make a market more efficient or better if a market ARTIFICIALLY gives some traders an advantage over the others.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/24/business/24trading.html
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2009/07/24/business/0724-webBIZ-trading.ready.html
That's what all those psychos claim- "Mom's doing the laundry in the basement, she's too busy to see you right now, yeah busy with the laundry...".
Ah but those android apps may soon expose your dark basement secrets...
Look on the bright side, at least you got paid. In contrast lots of WoW players pay $$$ every month for the privilege of grinding :).
;).
Seriously though, it's fine to _sometimes_ work long hours. But if it happens too often or too long, it means you're getting screwed.
It's not mainly about the money - because even if they pay you for those extra hours, those hours come from your rather finite life. Go work out how many weekends you probably have left in your life based on your estimated life expectancy.
Now if you really really enjoy your work then it's not so bad, but it's good to keep some balance in your life. What happens if you lose your job or unable to do it anymore?
Anyway here I am wasting some of my life on Slashdot
> Yes, but at our age, we had to go out of our way to take an interest in technology
;).
:) ). There are lots of free games ou there
;).
Kids today still have to go out of their way... Using Facebook and Twitter doesn't count as taking an interest in technology in quite the same way as learning BASIC and ASM/machine code from the manuals and writing your own programs.
When there are 100 times more possible directions, going a particular way can be more out of the way than when there were fewer ways
Back then:
It's night, should I
a) Watch TV with only X channels.
b) Go to sleep
c) Read a book
d) Listen to music - Z choices/channels
e) Play one of Y games on my computer
f) Write programs on my computer/Learn programming
Now:
a) Watch TV with 10X channels
b) Go to sleep
c) Read stuff online - wikipedia, wikia, gutenberg press, blogs, reviews, news etc.
d) Write stuff online - tweet, FB, blog, discussions, etc
e) Read a book
f) Play one or more of 1000*Y possible games on my computer (yes some people play more than one game at once
g) Play a game on my phone
h) Play a game on my game console or handheld gaming device
i) Watch TV or videos online from a choice millions of possible videos
j) Listen to 1000*Z possible music choices and chill
k) Write programs on my computer.
The options are just an example (I don't have a game console etc) but I hope they show how having more choices can actually make it harder for certain things to happen even if the "barrier to entry" has dropped
Before that my parents in their youth were more active in certain areas than I was: they did a lot more sports, cycling trips to nearby towns, hung out at church with friends, did more useful stuff in many ways...
That said I know a youth who despite dying young not too long ago, did way more than I'll ever will in my whole life (even his parents and friends didn't know he was involved in so many organizations, projects and events).
> your home being a constitutionally protected zone.
:).
Hey if the "intellectual property" stuff can really be considered property, then are virtual homes also constitutionally protected?
> It's their computers and their networks, so they can do whatever they want
;).
Funny how that's not true when it comes to landlords and tenants. In some countries it's even not true when it comes to landlords and squatters. Even squatters have rights.
I suspect there was some history in getting those protections.
The landlords in the "IT world" want their stuff to be legally treated like property but not too much like property
Maybe many of the ICP fans are familiar with the "Diet coke and Mentos" guys:
http://www.eepybird.com/about/
> The best computer science has come up with so far are very poor imitations of what the human brain does, and at the core a computer must be absolutely correct,
Yeah maybe they'll come up with AI that's smarter than us in many ways, but actually in the long run more of a dead end than our intelligence.
But computers can do that. Especially computers programmed by humans.
:).
What computers still aren't so good at is: automagically making models/simulations of the world, to the extent of including "others" and "self", and use those models to help decide what to do.
Even many animals can do that - they may not be as good as humans in some ways but they are far better than current AIs.
I believe much human perception is anticipation, your brain keeps the simulations running, and if the world keeps matching well enough, you can go on "autopilot", but when there is a significant/sudden divergence, that's when you get a surprise
Wow. He covers up the "live free" slogan, and they jailed him for that. Sounds like "the beatings will continue until morale improves" ;).
Later on he moves to Connecticut and covers up "The Constitution State" and gets a citation for that... Talk about irony.
Anyway, the e-ads are a ridiculous idea from so many points, are they really serious about it?
Just because the vehicle is stationary doesn't mean you wouldn't need to know the license plate number. Most people drive around with non-faked license plates because they think they'll never commit a serious enough crime. But the difference between a law abiding citizen and a criminal is often just a lapse in judgement, a bad mistake or two.
> Take an example: I want to copy and paste an entire text message
Actually the tricky bit is if you only want to copy and paste PART of that message. It is often very important that someone else does not get the full message.
It's going to be hard to do that without a "copy and paste" feature and instead provide some sort of cross application magic.
I'd be fine with it as long as the system also records of "who is watching what and when", and also makes those records available for easy public read-only access.
1) Show me evidence that Bush started started the optional wars because of his religion. He did have backing from many others at the top for the war, so what makes you think he started those wars because of his religion?
2) You really believe atheists are significantly less likely to start optional wars? You may be right but given what I see from Stalin and Mao, it's not great comfort if the Great Atheist Leader starts killing millions of his own citizens rather those of some other country.
3) As for Galileo, from what I see it sure looks like he wasn't forced into his faith by terror from being burned at the stake as you originally claimed (without evidence).
It sure seems to me that many atheists are also prone to making claims without evidence.