Not where I live, which is a "major" city. All the channels except PBS are broadcast from towers around 30 miles outside of town. And they broadcast with sufficiently low enough power that if a butterfly so much as sneezes between your antenna and them the signal completely fails. And that's with a large directional antenna up on a pole attached to the chimney and pointed in the right direction.
I guess I don't care that much though as I rarely actually sit down and watch a show. If anything I usually listen to it and catch glimpses while I play games on my PC. The wife is the primary TV watcher, and half the time she has it on for no discernable reason.
I've talked to a few cable salepeople who seemed genuinely flabergasted when I told them that while I could afford their service I didn't consider it to be worth the cost. I had one guy that seemed to think that $39.99 was practically free and an amazing value. I guess it's good that they believe in their product, but it's annoying to no end when they can't seem to take "No Thanks" as a final answer.
Make your booby trap out of those bank robbery dye packs that explode. Not much danger of actual injury but it should make them much easier for law enforcement to find.
We had a mutt that was half Norwegian Elk Hound growing up. She was ferociously territorial. She would spaz out when the neighbor across the street had the audacity to check their mail or pick up the paper. She had a run next to our front door and she would defend the front door against anyone that wasn't family, even family friends whom she knew couldn't get to that door without her raising the neighborhood. If I ever lived in the country again and decided to have a dog or two they'd likely be Norwegian Elk Hound, pretty dogs too.
It sounds like they failed to teach basic math skills more than anything else. I never memorized my multiplication tables deliberately, though I do remember being tested on it and not doing well because of the time constraint. But because I did practice the procedures I eventually memorized enough to fake it. I guess what I'm saying is that learning and drilling the procedures should be what basic math classes are about.
Think of it like a database. Your data should be normalized as much as possible. Derived data should be kept to an absolute minimum, the exception being where time critical and it is faster to store the derived data than calculate it each time. Deliberately memorizing multiplication tables is storing derived data, Depending on the student/hardware that may be the better choice but in my case it was a waste.
Incidentally for most of us the computing devices of today are almost alien to what we had growing up. My family had internet access very early compared to my peers and even then that was halfway through highschool. What my Daughter was access to is nothing like what was available when I was her age.
I've got to agree that this doesn't sound like a withdrawl problem. My daughter will get uppity if you try and take the ipod touch away from her while she is using it. But she rarely uses it for more than half an hour or so, and she's almost 3. She'd much rather go outside and play in the dirt, poke at bugs, and in general be more active.
Rather than starting a skirmish over whether or not your child can use the device at all, just set limits that you wouldn't find unreasonable as an adult and strictly enforce them. Which it kind of sounds like you already do, but possibly the time is too short.
Well part of it is wages, but it's also partly to do with our expected standard of living. Many people today expect to live the same kind of lifestyle or better than their parents were giving them. Which is illogical given that their parents had been working for 20 years and so had all that time to amass wealth and such.
My Father has extensive seperate wood and metal working shops. He has machinery in his basement that would take a quarter of my annual salary to replace. When one of my younger Brothers moved out he set about trying to imitate that and quickly found himself nearly bankrupt. It took marrying a woman with a keen sense of fiscal responsibility to set him right, and keep him on track since.
My Wife is a stay at home Mom, luckily I earn, and she is thrifty, enough for that to work. But I personally know a number of people in the area that make considerably more with both parents working who are struggling because they have some unrealistic expectations about what their standard of living should be.
I've seen this with my Daughter who is a toddler. She will often ask to play with my Wife's iPod Touch. She'll play games, watch pre-screened video, draw and create stuff and generally use it rather intuitively. All of that works because she just has to touch the graphical interface.
But she isn't obssesed with it luckily. She pretty much only asks for it when she's bored and going outside to play isn't an option. Playing outside is pretty much her all time favorite thing to do.
Your complaint is more a problem of how you recieve your purchased good than how the market system actually functions.
I just started playing Eve last weekend and so far I really like how the market there is set up. You can sort any which way you want. You can post buy and sell orders. When you buy something it's automatically placed in your storage, at whichever station it was posted from. The fact that the markets are all locality based allows for some real commerce though it isn't necessary in a game like Diablo 3. The only reason that method wouldn't work in many other games like WoW and Diablo 3 is because of the perverse storage limitations. Which, by the way, in a game driven by item collecting makes no sense other than as a way to incite a little more grinding.
Not all discrimination is an evil thing, unlawful discrimination often is. The job requires what the job requires, and those requirements should be known to all involved parties. In some cases the courts have taken the position that certain job requirements were too arbitrary and hence counted as discrimination.
I am not a lawyer so this can't count as legal advice.
I am pretty sure that non-citizens are able to initiate civil cases. The difficulty in such a case though would be proving that you were discriminated against. The questions themselves are not actually illegal to ask in an interview, discriminating based on your answers is. Asking those questions is usually avoided because it opens up the company to the possibility of a discrimination lawsuit.
I agree that your travel times and such can be important to an employer. But Firing someone because it's an issue is a bit absurd and possibly illegal. Making those people the first in line in case of a layoff makes sense, but firing someone because they could not get to work during an emergency is ridiculous. It sounds like more of a chronic understaffing problem, which I've heard is an issue in the medical professions.
I'll grant you that for some classes of work professionals are worth paying. Such as car repairs and often some home repairs. But paying for professional food preparation is very rarely worth the money unless you are making absurd amounts of money. Cooking can often be done in larger bulk than you need for the day without affecting the prep time very much. The wife and I cook two or three times a week and we're set. I do still like to eat out, but I recognize that it is more an entertainment than necessity.
Although I've found that a number of things just aren't worth the risk ordering at a restaurant like steak and ribs, I swear no matter how much I pay for them they always screw it up somehow.
I didn't check the link myself. But there is actually a practice that some women do where they consume the placenta. Usually it's dried out and then ground up into a powder and mixed into a beverage or something. The idea being that it's got a lot of nutrients such as vitamins in it and usually a mother who gave birth recently is in short supply of those vitamins.
Seriously, donate it to your own child at their birth. Read up on the benefits of delayed cord clamping. The only situation that I've heard of where it's not worth it is where an emergency arises during the birth that requires the child and mother be seperated ASAP to safe a life. The umbilical cord and placenta contain a significant amount of blood which is the childs. Clamping and severing the cord immediately can basically make the child anemic right off the bat. It only takes a few minutes for the cord to finish transfering that blood to the child, so give it some time. It may also be possible to still harvest the cord for storage or donation but I'm not sure.
Not a biblical scholar myself, so you'll want to check up on it yourself. But my understanding has always been that the Law of Moses was in addition to the Gospel. The Law of Moses came about because the people wanted specifics on exactly how far they could deviate from God's will and what the associated price of redemption was for each deviation. This excess body of laws was essentially wiped out with Christ, note that he always emphazied the spirit of the laws rather than the letter. His Atonement fulfilled the Law of Sacrifice, which had existed from Adam and Eve, significantly predating Moses.
When I said "should abstain from homosexual relations" I was speaking in the context of a Christian who believes that what is natural is not important because the natural man is an enemy to God. If you believe that than essentially everyone is an enemy to God and merely less evil than others depending on their level of self discipline.
It was a Peppers analoogy, pizza is just a delicous way to consume them! From conversations with my Mother in Law it would seem that my wife naturally do not like peppers. In that she at a very young age refused to eat them when everyone else around her liked them. I was simply using it as an example where a small subset of people naturally are disposed to dislike something that most everyone else likes.
I would say that reading comprehension can be clouded by ones beliefs. I've known a number of people who can't understand how someone else could interpret a verse of scpriture differently than they do. I am no doubt affected by this as well but I do seem to notice it a lot in others, even among my own familial religion, which makes me think I might be more empathetic when it comes to differing points of view. Someone doesn't have to believe the same things that I do in order to understand what I write unless I am being overly ambiguous.
The impossibility of God could be a very long subject so I'll try to be as short as possible for everyones sake. The relevant attributes of the Christian God being that he is just, never wrong and knows the future. The logical issues boil down to whether or not free will is possible. If we have free will then it is impossible for God to know the future but he can justly hold us responsible for our actions. If we don't have free will then God can know the future but he can not justly hold us responsible for breaking a law.
Personally I'm inclined to believe that there is no free will. But I understand that it is expedient as a society for us to believe that we do.
1. Leviticus is Law of Moses territory. Given that the old law, the Law of Moses, was done away in Christ how do you reconcile that verse for modern usage?
2. As we've studied the world around us it's been found that homosexual behavior is actually a natural phenomena. It has been observed in a number of animal species and such. Of course the arguement can be made that the natural man is an enemy to God, so one should abstain from homosexual relations. But that doesn't invalidate that homosexuality is a natural state, transitory or permanent, for some people and animals. Hell, I like bell peppers on my pizza and other foods, while my wife finds their flavor unbearable and won't eat foods that are "contaminated" by it. Which is the correct natural state there?
3. Reading comprehension is not linked to a persons faith in logical fallacies such as the Christian defined God.
First, while hijackings were not always friendly incidents the violent ones were the outliers. And the policy at the time that was drilled into travelers was to play the pacifist and let the authorities handle it.
Second, yes, a large plane is a deadly weapon. But the fact that the cockpit doors are now locked and reinforced negates much of that danger. Hell they could go a step further and in new large plane designs make access to the passenger compartment from the cockpit physically impossible. Although making the cockpit unassailable isn't strictly necessary though, all it needs to do is buy the pilots time to contact the ground controllers, after that a Jet Fighter can intercept it if necessary. No one is talking about completely relaxing all restrictions for what you can bring on to a plane, but the pre-9/11 stuff was probably sufficient.
Third, none of the terrorists that participated in 9/11 had entered the country illegally. So securing the borders doesn't have much to do with it. The problem was a breakdown in communications between the CIA and the FBI. The CIA knew who the badguys were and refused to pass along the information to the FBI once they entered the country because they wanted credit for whatever bust might happen. They basically gambled and lost without having to pay the debt themselves. So yes, securing airports is easier than the borders, but in practice it didn't matter because the people that could have done something didn't for personal glory.
My Father grew up in the 50's playing with real chemistry sets and such. He gave most of it up when one of his friends forgot to clean up properly one night. When he got around to cleaning up the beaker of NI3 exploded when he slid it accross the table surface. He ended up with a flipper for a hand because plastic surgery wasn't a viable option or even available or some such.
Those efforts sound like a very good setup. But it's still not as secure as you might think. I didn't see anything about rectal exams. They can make very small devices these days containing small enough amounts of metal that smuggling something in still sounds plausible, if uncomfortable. Although given the systematic way in which the hardware is locked down they would likely be limited to recording what a person could see or hear, which is a very good thing.
All in all it sounds like quite enough to stop casual leaks like Manning. But a concerted effort from a nation state would probably still find a way.
According to http://www.dhra.mil/perserec/csg/s1class/mailing.htm the only stuff you can't send through the mail or fedex is Top Secret stuff. It does talk about making sure the package is wrapped multiple times and sealed to detect tampering.
What you describe is the policy everywhere I've ever worked. Perhaps I overstated when I said "known". That bit came from my conversation with an inspection team once upon a time when I asked about the point of a security check regarding crossing the streams. I pointed out with the seperate networks for each classification levels it should never happen. And in the case of a spillage no one should be wasting time and effort marking up the finding instead of actually rectifying the situation, at which point it would cease to be a open problem. Their reply, and I guess it counts as hearsay, was that some 3 letter agencies felt above the law in that regard and the finding remained in the checklist to track that issue.
While I agree that I'd like to see the DoD move to more secure technical solutions, I don't think it'd solve the security problem. Like you pointed out the system is only as good as the people that are using it. And even with a very small percentage of people willing to spy it'd be almost trivial for a foreign government to buy their way into almost any system.
Prior to 2001 everything was more compartmentalized, which was good for Information Security's sake. But it proved to be bad for our national safety as the CIA wouldn't pass on information about a potential threat to the FBI for what amounts to dick measuring reasons. In the aftermath of 9/11 the policies swung the other way and we end up with Bradley Manning having access to way more information than he needed for his job.
A proper solution is a multi faceted problem. We need technical systems that are secure and yet still useable by a barely trained 18 to 50 year old volunteer. We need systems designed to be as secure as possible but still interface with each other and work in a timely manner. We need people that are as immune to corruption and insanity as possible. And the hardest part is probably sticking to fights and engagements that don't force those people to question the morality of the job they are tasked with doing.
Slashdot Mirror
Not where I live, which is a "major" city. All the channels except PBS are broadcast from towers around 30 miles outside of town. And they broadcast with sufficiently low enough power that if a butterfly so much as sneezes between your antenna and them the signal completely fails. And that's with a large directional antenna up on a pole attached to the chimney and pointed in the right direction.
I guess I don't care that much though as I rarely actually sit down and watch a show. If anything I usually listen to it and catch glimpses while I play games on my PC. The wife is the primary TV watcher, and half the time she has it on for no discernable reason.
I've talked to a few cable salepeople who seemed genuinely flabergasted when I told them that while I could afford their service I didn't consider it to be worth the cost. I had one guy that seemed to think that $39.99 was practically free and an amazing value. I guess it's good that they believe in their product, but it's annoying to no end when they can't seem to take "No Thanks" as a final answer.
Make your booby trap out of those bank robbery dye packs that explode. Not much danger of actual injury but it should make them much easier for law enforcement to find.
We had a mutt that was half Norwegian Elk Hound growing up. She was ferociously territorial. She would spaz out when the neighbor across the street had the audacity to check their mail or pick up the paper. She had a run next to our front door and she would defend the front door against anyone that wasn't family, even family friends whom she knew couldn't get to that door without her raising the neighborhood. If I ever lived in the country again and decided to have a dog or two they'd likely be Norwegian Elk Hound, pretty dogs too.
Even with that bit in though it further specifies that you have to use specific language and or make threats that would be illegal anways.
So all in all it's the combination of "annoy or offend" and "obscene language" that would violate the 1st Ammendment.
It sounds like they failed to teach basic math skills more than anything else. I never memorized my multiplication tables deliberately, though I do remember being tested on it and not doing well because of the time constraint. But because I did practice the procedures I eventually memorized enough to fake it. I guess what I'm saying is that learning and drilling the procedures should be what basic math classes are about.
Think of it like a database. Your data should be normalized as much as possible. Derived data should be kept to an absolute minimum, the exception being where time critical and it is faster to store the derived data than calculate it each time. Deliberately memorizing multiplication tables is storing derived data, Depending on the student/hardware that may be the better choice but in my case it was a waste.
Incidentally for most of us the computing devices of today are almost alien to what we had growing up. My family had internet access very early compared to my peers and even then that was halfway through highschool. What my Daughter was access to is nothing like what was available when I was her age.
I've got to agree that this doesn't sound like a withdrawl problem. My daughter will get uppity if you try and take the ipod touch away from her while she is using it. But she rarely uses it for more than half an hour or so, and she's almost 3. She'd much rather go outside and play in the dirt, poke at bugs, and in general be more active.
Rather than starting a skirmish over whether or not your child can use the device at all, just set limits that you wouldn't find unreasonable as an adult and strictly enforce them. Which it kind of sounds like you already do, but possibly the time is too short.
Well part of it is wages, but it's also partly to do with our expected standard of living. Many people today expect to live the same kind of lifestyle or better than their parents were giving them. Which is illogical given that their parents had been working for 20 years and so had all that time to amass wealth and such.
My Father has extensive seperate wood and metal working shops. He has machinery in his basement that would take a quarter of my annual salary to replace. When one of my younger Brothers moved out he set about trying to imitate that and quickly found himself nearly bankrupt. It took marrying a woman with a keen sense of fiscal responsibility to set him right, and keep him on track since.
My Wife is a stay at home Mom, luckily I earn, and she is thrifty, enough for that to work. But I personally know a number of people in the area that make considerably more with both parents working who are struggling because they have some unrealistic expectations about what their standard of living should be.
I've seen this with my Daughter who is a toddler. She will often ask to play with my Wife's iPod Touch. She'll play games, watch pre-screened video, draw and create stuff and generally use it rather intuitively. All of that works because she just has to touch the graphical interface. But she isn't obssesed with it luckily. She pretty much only asks for it when she's bored and going outside to play isn't an option. Playing outside is pretty much her all time favorite thing to do.
Your complaint is more a problem of how you recieve your purchased good than how the market system actually functions.
I just started playing Eve last weekend and so far I really like how the market there is set up. You can sort any which way you want. You can post buy and sell orders. When you buy something it's automatically placed in your storage, at whichever station it was posted from. The fact that the markets are all locality based allows for some real commerce though it isn't necessary in a game like Diablo 3. The only reason that method wouldn't work in many other games like WoW and Diablo 3 is because of the perverse storage limitations. Which, by the way, in a game driven by item collecting makes no sense other than as a way to incite a little more grinding.
Not all discrimination is an evil thing, unlawful discrimination often is. The job requires what the job requires, and those requirements should be known to all involved parties. In some cases the courts have taken the position that certain job requirements were too arbitrary and hence counted as discrimination.
I am not a lawyer so this can't count as legal advice.
I am pretty sure that non-citizens are able to initiate civil cases. The difficulty in such a case though would be proving that you were discriminated against. The questions themselves are not actually illegal to ask in an interview, discriminating based on your answers is. Asking those questions is usually avoided because it opens up the company to the possibility of a discrimination lawsuit.
I agree that your travel times and such can be important to an employer. But Firing someone because it's an issue is a bit absurd and possibly illegal. Making those people the first in line in case of a layoff makes sense, but firing someone because they could not get to work during an emergency is ridiculous. It sounds like more of a chronic understaffing problem, which I've heard is an issue in the medical professions.
I'll grant you that for some classes of work professionals are worth paying. Such as car repairs and often some home repairs. But paying for professional food preparation is very rarely worth the money unless you are making absurd amounts of money. Cooking can often be done in larger bulk than you need for the day without affecting the prep time very much. The wife and I cook two or three times a week and we're set. I do still like to eat out, but I recognize that it is more an entertainment than necessity.
Although I've found that a number of things just aren't worth the risk ordering at a restaurant like steak and ribs, I swear no matter how much I pay for them they always screw it up somehow.
" In other words, America is extremely well suited to the average American."
No doubt, if a puddle of water could talk it would tell you the same thing about it's residence, a pothole.
I didn't check the link myself. But there is actually a practice that some women do where they consume the placenta. Usually it's dried out and then ground up into a powder and mixed into a beverage or something. The idea being that it's got a lot of nutrients such as vitamins in it and usually a mother who gave birth recently is in short supply of those vitamins.
Seriously, donate it to your own child at their birth. Read up on the benefits of delayed cord clamping. The only situation that I've heard of where it's not worth it is where an emergency arises during the birth that requires the child and mother be seperated ASAP to safe a life. The umbilical cord and placenta contain a significant amount of blood which is the childs. Clamping and severing the cord immediately can basically make the child anemic right off the bat. It only takes a few minutes for the cord to finish transfering that blood to the child, so give it some time. It may also be possible to still harvest the cord for storage or donation but I'm not sure.
Anyways google "delayed umbilical cord clamping"
Not a biblical scholar myself, so you'll want to check up on it yourself. But my understanding has always been that the Law of Moses was in addition to the Gospel. The Law of Moses came about because the people wanted specifics on exactly how far they could deviate from God's will and what the associated price of redemption was for each deviation. This excess body of laws was essentially wiped out with Christ, note that he always emphazied the spirit of the laws rather than the letter. His Atonement fulfilled the Law of Sacrifice, which had existed from Adam and Eve, significantly predating Moses.
When I said "should abstain from homosexual relations" I was speaking in the context of a Christian who believes that what is natural is not important because the natural man is an enemy to God. If you believe that than essentially everyone is an enemy to God and merely less evil than others depending on their level of self discipline.
It was a Peppers analoogy, pizza is just a delicous way to consume them! From conversations with my Mother in Law it would seem that my wife naturally do not like peppers. In that she at a very young age refused to eat them when everyone else around her liked them. I was simply using it as an example where a small subset of people naturally are disposed to dislike something that most everyone else likes.
I would say that reading comprehension can be clouded by ones beliefs. I've known a number of people who can't understand how someone else could interpret a verse of scpriture differently than they do. I am no doubt affected by this as well but I do seem to notice it a lot in others, even among my own familial religion, which makes me think I might be more empathetic when it comes to differing points of view. Someone doesn't have to believe the same things that I do in order to understand what I write unless I am being overly ambiguous.
The impossibility of God could be a very long subject so I'll try to be as short as possible for everyones sake. The relevant attributes of the Christian God being that he is just, never wrong and knows the future. The logical issues boil down to whether or not free will is possible. If we have free will then it is impossible for God to know the future but he can justly hold us responsible for our actions. If we don't have free will then God can know the future but he can not justly hold us responsible for breaking a law.
Personally I'm inclined to believe that there is no free will. But I understand that it is expedient as a society for us to believe that we do.
1. Leviticus is Law of Moses territory. Given that the old law, the Law of Moses, was done away in Christ how do you reconcile that verse for modern usage?
2. As we've studied the world around us it's been found that homosexual behavior is actually a natural phenomena. It has been observed in a number of animal species and such. Of course the arguement can be made that the natural man is an enemy to God, so one should abstain from homosexual relations. But that doesn't invalidate that homosexuality is a natural state, transitory or permanent, for some people and animals. Hell, I like bell peppers on my pizza and other foods, while my wife finds their flavor unbearable and won't eat foods that are "contaminated" by it. Which is the correct natural state there?
3. Reading comprehension is not linked to a persons faith in logical fallacies such as the Christian defined God.
First, while hijackings were not always friendly incidents the violent ones were the outliers. And the policy at the time that was drilled into travelers was to play the pacifist and let the authorities handle it.
Second, yes, a large plane is a deadly weapon. But the fact that the cockpit doors are now locked and reinforced negates much of that danger. Hell they could go a step further and in new large plane designs make access to the passenger compartment from the cockpit physically impossible. Although making the cockpit unassailable isn't strictly necessary though, all it needs to do is buy the pilots time to contact the ground controllers, after that a Jet Fighter can intercept it if necessary. No one is talking about completely relaxing all restrictions for what you can bring on to a plane, but the pre-9/11 stuff was probably sufficient.
Third, none of the terrorists that participated in 9/11 had entered the country illegally. So securing the borders doesn't have much to do with it. The problem was a breakdown in communications between the CIA and the FBI. The CIA knew who the badguys were and refused to pass along the information to the FBI once they entered the country because they wanted credit for whatever bust might happen. They basically gambled and lost without having to pay the debt themselves. So yes, securing airports is easier than the borders, but in practice it didn't matter because the people that could have done something didn't for personal glory.
My Father grew up in the 50's playing with real chemistry sets and such. He gave most of it up when one of his friends forgot to clean up properly one night. When he got around to cleaning up the beaker of NI3 exploded when he slid it accross the table surface. He ended up with a flipper for a hand because plastic surgery wasn't a viable option or even available or some such.
Those efforts sound like a very good setup. But it's still not as secure as you might think. I didn't see anything about rectal exams. They can make very small devices these days containing small enough amounts of metal that smuggling something in still sounds plausible, if uncomfortable. Although given the systematic way in which the hardware is locked down they would likely be limited to recording what a person could see or hear, which is a very good thing.
All in all it sounds like quite enough to stop casual leaks like Manning. But a concerted effort from a nation state would probably still find a way.
According to http://www.dhra.mil/perserec/csg/s1class/mailing.htm the only stuff you can't send through the mail or fedex is Top Secret stuff. It does talk about making sure the package is wrapped multiple times and sealed to detect tampering.
What you describe is the policy everywhere I've ever worked. Perhaps I overstated when I said "known". That bit came from my conversation with an inspection team once upon a time when I asked about the point of a security check regarding crossing the streams. I pointed out with the seperate networks for each classification levels it should never happen. And in the case of a spillage no one should be wasting time and effort marking up the finding instead of actually rectifying the situation, at which point it would cease to be a open problem. Their reply, and I guess it counts as hearsay, was that some 3 letter agencies felt above the law in that regard and the finding remained in the checklist to track that issue.
While I agree that I'd like to see the DoD move to more secure technical solutions, I don't think it'd solve the security problem. Like you pointed out the system is only as good as the people that are using it. And even with a very small percentage of people willing to spy it'd be almost trivial for a foreign government to buy their way into almost any system.
Prior to 2001 everything was more compartmentalized, which was good for Information Security's sake. But it proved to be bad for our national safety as the CIA wouldn't pass on information about a potential threat to the FBI for what amounts to dick measuring reasons. In the aftermath of 9/11 the policies swung the other way and we end up with Bradley Manning having access to way more information than he needed for his job.
A proper solution is a multi faceted problem. We need technical systems that are secure and yet still useable by a barely trained 18 to 50 year old volunteer. We need systems designed to be as secure as possible but still interface with each other and work in a timely manner. We need people that are as immune to corruption and insanity as possible. And the hardest part is probably sticking to fights and engagements that don't force those people to question the morality of the job they are tasked with doing.