And I'm saying it's possible for him to be overpaid AND for it to be a good investment. I can't see how those two things could possibly be mutually exclusive, the CEO salary is likely a tiny portion of the expenses of the company it being a bit larger than I think it optimal is unlikely to shift the company as a whole from being a good investment to a bad investment.
What is your logical proof that an overpaid CEO implies a bad investment?
How does being banned from driving translate to being supported in prison for $200k/year for life in your mind?
I don't have driving license, can I get that $200k government money thing without the prison part? Should I be on the look out for the cops coming to throw me in jail for the henious crime of not being allowed to drive?
And that's what we be found out. It's a really simple system.
First you notice the timestamps and that they may indicate the person was posting to facebook while driving and that may have contributed to the accident.
Second you file a lawsuit (you may have done that first of course and have noticed that first part in addition to your initial motivation).
Third you convince the judge at ht epre-trial phase with the data you do have to let you do some discovery and subpoena facebook for more fine grained data and the details of the timestamping and get the logs/image/whatever of the "electronic communication device" and possibly subpoena the cellular provider for logs/etc too.
You don't have to have a 100% solid case at the very beginning, that's what pre-trial is for. This is civil remember, you aren't expected to have the resources of law enforcement before you start.
Legally you don't have to be at work. You can just not turn up and you haven't broken any laws (well assuming you aren't in the Army or some other job with such special circumstances).
Legally a student under the age of 16 has to be at school. If they just don't turn up they have broken the law and can be sent to juvie and their parents fined.
Hence the two situations are completely unrelated.
schools lose about $35 per day for each absent student
Where the GPS technology has been implemented, average attendance among the chronically truant jumped from 77 percent up to 95 percent during the six-week program.
That state grant part makes it all worthwhile, otherwise you'd be spending $240 (or $336 depending on whether the cost per student per day of the system is school day or calendar day) to save $189 - and no they don't give a shit about the kids themselves...
Did you read the article? This is for people who have FOUR unexcused absences. That's hardly at the level of not wanting to learn or go to school - that's having something better to do every few months.
And obviously anything the "editor" adds is by definition trolling - it's added to generate comments which ups the page views which brings in the advertising dollars.
And I likely agree with you about the other half of the discussion, your post wasn't a troll and it wasn't a baseless blanket claim - the first part of it gave the reasoning after all.
You manged to reply to the reply of a post that came after yours? Or is 12:25PM is now after 1:04PM?
Are you seriously trying to claim that your statement: "So why is the blanket claim that a movie is *good* not a troll?", was referring to some other claim and not the one being discussed in the post you replied to?
Which was my exactly my point. Did you read the thread?
If the way for me "have a say" in the the CEO's salary is by not owning the shares then I can't do that because there are other reasons to own them that outweigh the pay of the CEO. Hence claiming that gives me a say is just plain false.
You didn't mention censorship in the initial you only mentioned "regulatory bodies", and the MPAA certainly isn't one of those since it isn't part of the government.
So because a business is doing well overall that means that there is no single part of it that could be improved? Doyou ride unicorns to the fields to frollick with the fairies in your world by any chance?
What if you think he is overpaid, but still think that even with that extra unneccesary cost the stock is still the best investment choice for some portion of your money?
I'm pretty sure every stock I own is for an entity that does at least one thing I disagree with.
What does the term "not limited to" mean to your legal expert opinion?
How is the GPLv2 not covered by:
“Excluded License” means any license requiring, as a condition of use, modification and/or distribution of the software subject to the license, that the software or other software combined and/or distributed with it be (i) disclosed or distributed in source code form; (ii) licensed for the purpose of making derivative works; or (iii) redistributable at no charge.
Auditor-General Sheila Fraser, for one, first raised the alarm in 2002 when she warned "there are weaknesses in the system.
"There are access controls that need to be fixed; there are a whole series of minimum security issues that are not being dealt with. There are vulnerabilities. Government needs to fix them."
Three years later, Fraser checked again and found not much had changed.
And you go to your professor or tutor without even looking at the basics first?
I'm glad you were never my one of my students. Well I hope you were never one of my students, there were a couple like that.
You can be a selfish jerk who thinks that other people should give them a personalized tutorial on everything instead of looking at the existing stuff first, that's fine. You'll find you learn stuff slower and burn all the people who might have helped you later when you get to the more difficult stuff though.
You seemed to get an answer you sort of liked so I guess it is working out for you. Mind you it took an hour after you posted as opposed to 5 seconds for the google search, and its example is incorrect as opposed to the numerous correct ones on the first result of the google search.
Obviously, unless you expect someone to spend as much time and effort as has been spent already on writing a wikipedia page and numerous step by step example explanations when writing a slashdot comment. In which case I suspect you are going to be disappointed.
Sure, but the idea is that you do apply the patch that was released yesterday at some point in the very near future, so you are only vulnerable for a short time period. So most of the time you there aren't any known vilnerabilities that make you vulnerable and the direct attacker likely isn't going to find one right now.
Slashdot Mirror
And I'm saying it's possible for him to be overpaid AND for it to be a good investment. I can't see how those two things could possibly be mutually exclusive, the CEO salary is likely a tiny portion of the expenses of the company it being a bit larger than I think it optimal is unlikely to shift the company as a whole from being a good investment to a bad investment.
What is your logical proof that an overpaid CEO implies a bad investment?
How does being banned from driving translate to being supported in prison for $200k/year for life in your mind?
I don't have driving license, can I get that $200k government money thing without the prison part? Should I be on the look out for the cops coming to throw me in jail for the henious crime of not being allowed to drive?
And that's what we be found out. It's a really simple system.
First you notice the timestamps and that they may indicate the person was posting to facebook while driving and that may have contributed to the accident.
Second you file a lawsuit (you may have done that first of course and have noticed that first part in addition to your initial motivation).
Third you convince the judge at ht epre-trial phase with the data you do have to let you do some discovery and subpoena facebook for more fine grained data and the details of the timestamping and get the logs/image/whatever of the "electronic communication device" and possibly subpoena the cellular provider for logs/etc too.
You don't have to have a 100% solid case at the very beginning, that's what pre-trial is for. This is civil remember, you aren't expected to have the resources of law enforcement before you start.
Legally you don't have to be at work. You can just not turn up and you haven't broken any laws (well assuming you aren't in the Army or some other job with such special circumstances).
Legally a student under the age of 16 has to be at school. If they just don't turn up they have broken the law and can be sent to juvie and their parents fined.
Hence the two situations are completely unrelated.
Because the stats so far say it does. Or does your honest thoughts trump the measured results?
The reasons are in the article:
That state grant part makes it all worthwhile, otherwise you'd be spending $240 (or $336 depending on whether the cost per student per day of the system is school day or calendar day) to save $189 - and no they don't give a shit about the kids themselves...
Did you read the article? This is for people who have FOUR unexcused absences. That's hardly at the level of not wanting to learn or go to school - that's having something better to do every few months.
Yes. And fine the parents a couple grand.
Though very rarely, and this is far broader and hence not a case of "do this or we'll prosecute".
OK, strange context to do so but fine.
And obviously anything the "editor" adds is by definition trolling - it's added to generate comments which ups the page views which brings in the advertising dollars.
And I likely agree with you about the other half of the discussion, your post wasn't a troll and it wasn't a baseless blanket claim - the first part of it gave the reasoning after all.
You manged to reply to the reply of a post that came after yours? Or is 12:25PM is now after 1:04PM?
Are you seriously trying to claim that your statement: "So why is the blanket claim that a movie is *good* not a troll?", was referring to some other claim and not the one being discussed in the post you replied to?
Which was my exactly my point. Did you read the thread?
If the way for me "have a say" in the the CEO's salary is by not owning the shares then I can't do that because there are other reasons to own them that outweigh the pay of the CEO. Hence claiming that gives me a say is just plain false.
You didn't mention censorship in the initial you only mentioned "regulatory bodies", and the MPAA certainly isn't one of those since it isn't part of the government.
"for my part" makes it not a blanket statement, so that one does have an "in my opinion" prefix.
Why?
It's a fixed length non-reappointable term, making "for lfe" not an option.
And all bar two (three if you count the one acting holder) of the people who have had that title had it for longer than she has so far.
So because a business is doing well overall that means that there is no single part of it that could be improved? Doyou ride unicorns to the fields to frollick with the fairies in your world by any chance?
Employing people to work on that would reduce their profit per employee, and possibly their profit full stop.
Welcome to the English language, you will notice that it is not actually a branch of Mathematics.
What if you think he is overpaid, but still think that even with that extra unneccesary cost the stock is still the best investment choice for some portion of your money?
I'm pretty sure every stock I own is for an entity that does at least one thing I disagree with.
What does the term "not limited to" mean to your legal expert opinion?
How is the GPLv2 not covered by:
again in your expert legal opinion?
And other people will find RPGs to be soul-crushing madness.
And hat does soul-crushing madness have to do with them not being winnable losable (something they share with games like WoW)?
And you go to your professor or tutor without even looking at the basics first?
I'm glad you were never my one of my students. Well I hope you were never one of my students, there were a couple like that.
You can be a selfish jerk who thinks that other people should give them a personalized tutorial on everything instead of looking at the existing stuff first, that's fine. You'll find you learn stuff slower and burn all the people who might have helped you later when you get to the more difficult stuff though.
You seemed to get an answer you sort of liked so I guess it is working out for you. Mind you it took an hour after you posted as opposed to 5 seconds for the google search, and its example is incorrect as opposed to the numerous correct ones on the first result of the google search.
Obviously, unless you expect someone to spend as much time and effort as has been spent already on writing a wikipedia page and numerous step by step example explanations when writing a slashdot comment. In which case I suspect you are going to be disappointed.
Which can be removed without removing low commission changing.
Sure, but the idea is that you do apply the patch that was released yesterday at some point in the very near future, so you are only vulnerable for a short time period. So most of the time you there aren't any known vilnerabilities that make you vulnerable and the direct attacker likely isn't going to find one right now.