I'm not against it though, maybe it will let one handed people play more games, or some paraplegic will be able to play doom by blinking at the screen and it betters his life...
Having this technology at the consumer level would be huge for affordable adaptive technology. Games/shmames (though why not, people without limbs should be able to enjoy entertainment too).
Most adaptive equipment is horrifically expensive. The more accessible consumer-level stuff I can get to help my son, the better.
If only we could explain what causes this upheaval of the status quo that lead to social and cultural issues. Surely it's the not automation taking jobs while still supplying a net gain in resources! That would never explain why the masses have shit jobs, yet the nation can still support the dole.
Yeah, it couldn't be the political stupidity of turning on massive spending, turning a recession into a depression.
It must be those robot armies that explain the 1930s. And the massive leaps in robotics that happened precisely in 2008/9
Keep in mind Asimov was an avowed atheist, and his description of "spiritual malaise" referred more to human nature, and less to going to church.
Yet he lived in a society that was most definitely recently post-Christian.
He and many other thinkers of the time liked that inheritance, even if they didn't believe it's source. Plenty of thinkers were wondering "how do we keep that, without the beliefs?"
Most divergent of all, he believed that increasing automatization of labor would spawn not inequality or joblessness, but spiritual malaise.
Yeah, those robot armies of the 1930s were sure awful.
There has been pretty much no correlation of automation and bad economy. There were no special giant leaps in automation in the 1930s, 1970s, or 2008.
Deep down, you know who you have to thank for this economy... but it's hard to admit you were wrong when you go so emotionally all in for a person and a political party.
I haven't figured out why they won't just sell you an HBO Go subscription as a separate entity. They have a digital content distribution system in place. It has support on many different devices. Yet they still require that you buy their channel through a cable/satellite provider and THEN get access to it.
Why not just have an HBO Go subscription for $10/month? They can cut out the middle man (cable companies) and get a lot more customers that only do internet based TV.
These things are always more complicated than they seem... all the players are experts at maximizing rent. Logic, from the consumer's standpoint, has little to do with it.
Rare is the meting or conversation that requires more than one page of notes, and very rarely more than two or three. I write the date and a reasonable "title" of whatever is going on at the top of the page.
Works surprisingly well - thoughts and sketches go on there freeform, any way I want them to, in ways that rarely work well on any screen. I can reorganize my notations in a flash too, if the meeting or my thoughts take a different tack.
It's easy enough to find stuff later if I want to (though it's surprising how often I don't end up wanting or needing to... ).
Between this low tech stuff and my highly searchable email, most of my office needs are covered well.
There's acid in your stomach. Saying something is safe unless you eat it, at which point it becomes deadly, doesn't really fill the definition of the word 'non-toxic'
Toxicity isn't binary, silly.
Potassium Ferrocyanide, compared to Potassium Cyanide, is much less dangerous.
And if we banned everything that is toxic if you eat it, well... good luck with that.
No contest. It's got everything: hubris, cronyism, bureaucratic bungling, political idiocy, numerous huge IT errors, hundreds of millions of dollars. Once all the details come out, this massive fail will be studied in universities. Books will be written. The political consequences will last for years. Coming soon: the doctor shortages. And does everyone know that in 2014, the health plan tax kicks in? I don't mean the "Cadillac plan" tax, or the tax if you don't have insurance. I mean the 2% tax on every health plan. Yes, in order to make health insurance more "affordable," they are taxing health insurance! Words fail.
Yep.
The idea that there is even some question about what the biggest tech mishap of 2013 is says a lot about Slashdot/techie politics. When you go all in for someone, it's very hard to admit later that you were wrong.
Not just hobby chemists either. I'm a geologist with a minor in analytic chemistry. I used to have an assay lab where I could run samples for qualitative analysis. That's in the crapper now. You have to jump through hoops to get things like con nitric acid, and just forget anything like potassium cyanide. And if you do manage to get supplies, they make you a target for a raid any time the local cops get a bug up their ass. So no more lab.:(
I remember having Potassium Ferrocyanide in my chemistry set, as a ten year old. (Yes, that one's essentially non-toxic, but releases the highly toxic gas if you mix with an acid.)
And I'm hardly ancient. It wasn't really that long ago.
But, anyway, what I really wanted to say was that the "culture of envy" is a myth. We have the same myth here too. The envy is mostly inside the head of people earning a lot of money. The people earning less generally do not care.
All I can say to that is, wow. Not sure how you don't see it. For one thing, you obviously read Slashdot...
Transparency worked pretty well back in the 50's when most jobs were unionized. Everyone knew what everyone else was paid and everyone worked their fair share because the company wasn't focused solely on posting record profits.
People need leadership, not management. That's a distinction this generation has no concept of as it fell out of fashion back in the 80's. You manage boxes and machines, but you lead people.
The 1950s were prosperous in spite of unions, not because of them.
The rest of the world's industrial capacity had been destroyed by war. No competition - nice work, if you can get it. Unions smelled blood, and it was cheaper for awhile just to pay them off, with unsustainable benefits and salary.
As soon as the rest of the world rebuilt, well, we had the 1970s...
Is it respect for employee privacy or respect for being able to pay drastically different wages for the same job? A lot of times, company rules (official or unofficial) against discussing salaries protect the employer much more than the employees.
The key question being, of course, whether it is really the "same" job, even if it has the same title...
Or in other words, every Detroit school teacher is a state-certified, union-label professional, worth the same salary as any other teacher with the same seniority. Right?
I don't care what others get paid, it is up to me to negociate a salary with my employer.
So you're perfectly happy to go into negotiations at a disadvantage, knowing that the employer has relevant information that you don't have?
You sound like a shitty negotiator.
Oh, come off it. I've got plenty of information that they don't have, too.
They don't know what other companies are offering, who I've already interviewed with, whether I have any backup offers (or brothers-in-law in high places, or whatever), and any of 500 other potentially relevant factors.
Disclaimer: I am a state employee whose salary is publicly posted...
That out of the way, most if not all those salaries posted are very, very misleading. It is gross salary+travel+incentives+any other state money that employee has received including payments made for health coverage and retirement. It doesn't include any deductions such as taxes, co-payments for health and retirement, garnishments, etc...
Huh? Neither does anybody else's salary.
Private employer salary figures don't account for all that stuff either.
As interfaces get more and more simplistic to suit 4 inch screens people jab at with their thumbs, losers are everybody.
There's been a constant dumbing down of computing devices for at least 20 odd years now, until they actually not general purpose computing devices any more, but mere locked down tools to spy on our every move.
Exactly, and this continues to baffle me.
Phone-style controls make some sense on, you know, a phone. They make no sense on a large screen general purpose computing device, with real inputs like mice and keyboards.
... put up a Yahoo Store (or something similar), in the meantime.
Get a subset of your products out there, at least. Use a CMS and eBay to check out. Whatever it takes! Get something out there.
Make it clear that this is a stop gap measure, pardon our dust, whatever. But c'mon. People who sell scrapbooking supplies out of their basement are selling them online. You can at least get the functionality out there while you fix or build something for your real offering.
Slashdot Mirror
... I wonder if there is someone in charge of "the Pentagon". Who would that have been, I wonder, in 2012 and 2013?
So when we're all sitting around collecting checks, where do the goods and services come from?
More importantly, it hides the fact that GMOs are not at all used to feed the aforementioned starving peoples.
Right. And if I buy a wino food, I'm not supporting his wine habit, because it doesn't free up what money he does have for wine.
Because nothing is fungible.
I'm not against it though, maybe it will let one handed people play more games, or some paraplegic will be able to play doom by blinking at the screen and it betters his life...
Having this technology at the consumer level would be huge for affordable adaptive technology. Games/shmames (though why not, people without limbs should be able to enjoy entertainment too).
Most adaptive equipment is horrifically expensive. The more accessible consumer-level stuff I can get to help my son, the better.
If only we could explain what causes this upheaval of the status quo that lead to social and cultural issues. Surely it's the not automation taking jobs while still supplying a net gain in resources! That would never explain why the masses have shit jobs, yet the nation can still support the dole.
Yeah, it couldn't be the political stupidity of turning on massive spending, turning a recession into a depression.
It must be those robot armies that explain the 1930s. And the massive leaps in robotics that happened precisely in 2008/9
Keep in mind Asimov was an avowed atheist, and his description of "spiritual malaise" referred more to human nature, and less to going to church.
Yet he lived in a society that was most definitely recently post-Christian.
He and many other thinkers of the time liked that inheritance, even if they didn't believe it's source. Plenty of thinkers were wondering "how do we keep that, without the beliefs?"
Most divergent of all, he believed that increasing automatization of labor would spawn not inequality or joblessness, but spiritual malaise.
Yeah, those robot armies of the 1930s were sure awful.
There has been pretty much no correlation of automation and bad economy. There were no special giant leaps in automation in the 1930s, 1970s, or 2008.
Deep down, you know who you have to thank for this economy ... but it's hard to admit you were wrong when you go so emotionally all in for a person and a political party.
...and recognize this for what it is. Fascism.
So, who's in charge of this fascism? Is there someone in charge of the executive branch?
Did anyone, you know, warn Slashdotters about him? Any chance we could hold him accountable?
I haven't figured out why they won't just sell you an HBO Go subscription as a separate entity. They have a digital content distribution system in place. It has support on many different devices. Yet they still require that you buy their channel through a cable/satellite provider and THEN get access to it.
Why not just have an HBO Go subscription for $10/month? They can cut out the middle man (cable companies) and get a lot more customers that only do internet based TV.
These things are always more complicated than they seem ... all the players are experts at maximizing rent. Logic, from the consumer's standpoint, has little to do with it.
Think Windows and PCs, for example.
I use legal pads.
Rare is the meting or conversation that requires more than one page of notes, and very rarely more than two or three. I write the date and a reasonable "title" of whatever is going on at the top of the page.
Works surprisingly well - thoughts and sketches go on there freeform, any way I want them to, in ways that rarely work well on any screen. I can reorganize my notations in a flash too, if the meeting or my thoughts take a different tack.
It's easy enough to find stuff later if I want to (though it's surprising how often I don't end up wanting or needing to ... ).
Between this low tech stuff and my highly searchable email, most of my office needs are covered well.
... is fully state certified.
Your honor, the prosecution rests.
There's acid in your stomach. Saying something is safe unless you eat it, at which point it becomes deadly, doesn't really fill the definition of the word 'non-toxic'
Toxicity isn't binary, silly.
Potassium Ferrocyanide, compared to Potassium Cyanide, is much less dangerous.
And if we banned everything that is toxic if you eat it, well ... good luck with that.
No contest. It's got everything: hubris, cronyism, bureaucratic bungling, political idiocy, numerous huge IT errors, hundreds of millions of dollars. Once all the details come out, this massive fail will be studied in universities. Books will be written. The political consequences will last for years. Coming soon: the doctor shortages. And does everyone know that in 2014, the health plan tax kicks in? I don't mean the "Cadillac plan" tax, or the tax if you don't have insurance. I mean the 2% tax on every health plan. Yes, in order to make health insurance more "affordable," they are taxing health insurance! Words fail.
Yep.
The idea that there is even some question about what the biggest tech mishap of 2013 is says a lot about Slashdot/techie politics. When you go all in for someone, it's very hard to admit later that you were wrong.
... is so scientific ...
Perhaps you could provide us with a helpful list of things that we must believe or be shunned.
You could call it a "catechism" ...
If the wages were transparent, this would never have happened and this problem would have never occurred.
Huh? How does that follow?
Maybe it would have just been a problem right away, instead of waiting until someone somehow found out about it.
Not just hobby chemists either. I'm a geologist with a minor in analytic chemistry. I used to have an assay lab where I could run samples for qualitative analysis. That's in the crapper now. You have to jump through hoops to get things like con nitric acid, and just forget anything like potassium cyanide. And if you do manage to get supplies, they make you a target for a raid any time the local cops get a bug up their ass. So no more lab. :(
I remember having Potassium Ferrocyanide in my chemistry set, as a ten year old. (Yes, that one's essentially non-toxic, but releases the highly toxic gas if you mix with an acid.)
And I'm hardly ancient. It wasn't really that long ago.
But, anyway, what I really wanted to say was that the "culture of envy" is a myth. We have the same myth here too. The envy is mostly inside the head of people earning a lot of money. The people earning less generally do not care.
All I can say to that is, wow. Not sure how you don't see it. For one thing, you obviously read Slashdot ...
Transparency worked pretty well back in the 50's when most jobs were unionized. Everyone knew what everyone else was paid and everyone worked their fair share because the company wasn't focused solely on posting record profits.
People need leadership, not management. That's a distinction this generation has no concept of as it fell out of fashion back in the 80's. You manage boxes and machines, but you lead people.
The 1950s were prosperous in spite of unions, not because of them.
The rest of the world's industrial capacity had been destroyed by war. No competition - nice work, if you can get it. Unions smelled blood, and it was cheaper for awhile just to pay them off, with unsustainable benefits and salary.
As soon as the rest of the world rebuilt, well, we had the 1970s ...
Is it respect for employee privacy or respect for being able to pay drastically different wages for the same job? A lot of times, company rules (official or unofficial) against discussing salaries protect the employer much more than the employees.
The key question being, of course, whether it is really the "same" job, even if it has the same title ...
Or in other words, every Detroit school teacher is a state-certified, union-label professional, worth the same salary as any other teacher with the same seniority. Right?
So you're perfectly happy to go into negotiations at a disadvantage, knowing that the employer has relevant information that you don't have? You sound like a shitty negotiator.
Oh, come off it. I've got plenty of information that they don't have, too.
They don't know what other companies are offering, who I've already interviewed with, whether I have any backup offers (or brothers-in-law in high places, or whatever), and any of 500 other potentially relevant factors.
Most US states make available public employee salaries, and have been for quite some time. For example: http://seethroughny.net/
And that's supposed to be an argument ... in favor of this practice?!?
Disclaimer: I am a state employee whose salary is publicly posted...
That out of the way, most if not all those salaries posted are very, very misleading. It is gross salary+travel+incentives+any other state money that employee has received including payments made for health coverage and retirement. It doesn't include any deductions such as taxes, co-payments for health and retirement, garnishments, etc...
Huh? Neither does anybody else's salary.
Private employer salary figures don't account for all that stuff either.
Is there any other way?
Simple answer, yes.
Good place to start might be Fred Morrison, for example.
As interfaces get more and more simplistic to suit 4 inch screens people jab at with their thumbs, losers are everybody.
There's been a constant dumbing down of computing devices for at least 20 odd years now, until they actually not general purpose computing devices any more, but mere locked down tools to spy on our every move.
Exactly, and this continues to baffle me.
Phone-style controls make some sense on, you know, a phone. They make no sense on a large screen general purpose computing device, with real inputs like mice and keyboards.
... put up a Yahoo Store (or something similar), in the meantime.
Get a subset of your products out there, at least. Use a CMS and eBay to check out. Whatever it takes! Get something out there.
Make it clear that this is a stop gap measure, pardon our dust, whatever. But c'mon. People who sell scrapbooking supplies out of their basement are selling them online. You can at least get the functionality out there while you fix or build something for your real offering.