Haha, the Mythbusters mostly told me how to make thermite. And then I looked up the "secret ingredient" they wouldn't reveal. So I now I completely know how to make thermite. Not as hard as I was expecting.
Well, as a novelist, knowing how to make bombs could be very important for a book. Or maybe you're just curious. Or maybe you're wondering how bombs work. Or you could have a school report. Or maybe you're interested in fireworks and rocket ships (which are, essentially, bombs) or controlled demolition. Maybe you think the apocalypse is coming and you want to be prepared to fight the zombies with bombs made out of stuff you found in the ransacked supermarket.
Does it matter? I know how to make bombs (go high school physics!) but it's not like I'm going to bomb city hall. I know how to snort coke (and so do you! Everyone knows how to snort coke) should I be arrested for future snorting of coke just because I know how?
Measuring performance is pretty much the job of managers (principals, in this case), and is difficult in every industry. That being said, some teachers are really, really obviously bad teachers that need to be fired (screaming at the class, throwing chairs at students, and teaching incorrect "facts" [like Mars being the smallest planet in the solar system]), but can't be fired because of union regulations.
"Importance of subject matter" isn't 100% opinion based (can't do most subjects without a good math, English, and science foundations), but this can also be rarity of teachers teaching a certain position. If there's a billion people teaching English, lower pay, if there's four people teaching music, higher pay.
That's actually not true. Unions in other industries inspire fierce, fierce loyalty. You ever talk to a longshoreman? Or a miner? They love the union. Pretty much any manufacturing union as well, or any job with low pay and high danger, specifically because they know that, without the union, they'd be dead or maimed inside a week. If Foxconn employers unionized (if, you know, they wouldn't get thrown in jail for 5 years for doing so), they'd love the union, too.
Teachers, even when the unions are negotiating a better contract for them, pretty much always hate the union. They might actually be unique in this; I have not heard of any unions more hated by their own members than the teachers' unions.
That's typically not the complaint against teachers' unions (teachers should definitely be getting paid more). But that's independent from whether the teachers' unions are good or bad for teachers.
The complaint against teachers' unions is that they make it impossible to fire bad teachers. Pay and raises are based on the unions' bargained amount and not on a teacher's performance or importance of subject matter. And they actively lobby to increase the amount of standardized testing, which is useless. Further, most teachers hate the union, so you have a union composed of members that hate the union. How does that even make sense?
Practically, that's not a big difference, especially if the union is forced to accept all members anyway. At the end of the day, if you want to work, you have to be a union member.
A matter compiler isn't about converting energy into matter (or vice-versa), but of rearranging already present matter into an appropriate configuration, which, while energy consumptive, is much more doable (and already being done by microbiology researchers on a small scale).
Legal definitions for injury aren't based off the relative strengths of the perpetrators, but on the injury caused. Also, when is it "okay" for a three year old to hit and kick an adult man as hard as possible?
That in mind, a three year old kicking an adult man as hard as possible typically does not result in an injury greater than a bruise, and it would probably be possible for the victim to sue the child's parent in small claims court if an actual injured was incurred. Similarly, if an adult man, say, slapped a three year old (comparatively similar non-injury), the child's parents could probably sue the adult man in small claims court.
I can only speak on my experience with teachers' unions in Washington state, but yes they can. A teacher in WA automatically becomes an "agency fee" member of the teachers' union, must pay dues to the union, must accept the union's collectively bargained salary and benefits packages, and must go on strike when the union says to go on strike. If they become a full member (for a higher due) they get some additional benefits (liability insurance, representation, voting in the union, etc.). But as far as salary and basic benefits bargaining, they get what the union gets. So even if you're "not a part of the union," you're a part of the union.
Aside: teachers' strikes are... weird. Because of how their pay is setup, they keep getting paid and, often, will end up working the same number of days just pushed into summer. Since the public schools aren't making something to sell, they don't have much of an incentive to get the teachers back to work (no lost profits). And the youth crime rate spikes because all the hooligans don't have school and get bored.
I've been reading more into this case, and it looks like there wasn't any actual salary fixing or hiring bans. Essentially, the companies agreed to not "cold call" each others' employees with job offers, and this may have affected the salaries of some number of employees who would have been able to negotiate better salaries. But, let's be honest now, cold calling another company's employees is kind of a dick move.
So, essentially, they're being hit with an antitrust case for agreeing to not be dicks to each other.
And we wonder why capitalism results in the biggest dicks coming out on top...
This isn't necessarily true. Some professions (teachers, for instance) have ONE union for a district, and you MUST be a member of that union to work in that district.
Edit: I have a confusing sentence in there. When I say, "Unions can force all new hires to become union members (which amounts to the same thing)," I mean it amounts to the same thing Trepidity was saying (closed shop), not the same as what the companies are doing right now.
That's not what these companies are doing (in fact, they're essentially doing the opposite of that). I meant that unions allow workers to "collectively bargain" with companies, and this is pretty much companies "collectively bargaining". Unions can force all new hires to become union members (which amounts to the same thing). Why people seem to be upset with the companies, however, is that they essentially agreed on certain salary rates, which is pretty much the primary function of most unions.
They're not talking about scanning random people on the street and taking their guns. They're talking about scanning arrestees instead of frisking them. If you're getting frisked, we're no longer talking about "law abiding citizens".
Granted, they certainly could use this device to scan random people. But that's an unconstitutional search which the Supreme Court would slap the Hell out of. Remember: fear the people, not the tool.
You apparently haven't looked at hotcake sales for the past decade. You can't move hotcakes. You say you've got some hotcakes for sale, and people are like, "I want ice cream cake!" And then you have to explain that you mean pancakes. But now they just want ice cream cake, or frosted cake, and all you have is syrup-drenched flapjacks.
It's a sad life being a hotcake salesman, let me tell you.
All joking aside, citing current PS2 sales is hardly relevant, since the PS3 doesn't have the same kind of record: Nintendo's current generation has beaten the pants of the current generations of Microsoft and Sony, and the Wii U's reception has been similar to that of the Wii months before its release.
Pretty much, it's impossible to say how well the Wii U is going to sell, and I definitely wouldn't short Nintendo's stock quite yet. They're scrappy, scrappy fighters with a rabid fanbase that has absorbed what was left of Sega's rabid fanbase. That's a lot of rabid.
Does anyone else have a nagging feeling that Nintendo is doomed in the next console cycle? The Wii U didn't grab the same attention that the original Wii did...
Haha. I remember just before the original Wii came out. The "attention" it garnered was "what's wrong with its name?" and everyone predicted it would bomb. I expect to be saying that same sentence a couple years after the Wii U comes out with very little modification.
Unless my high school history has failed me (again), the southern states seceded, and the northern states used military force to bring them back. That is, the southern states committed treason (War of Southern Treason) and the northern states aggressively brought them back into the Union (War of Northern Aggression). Of course, the "Northern Aggression" bit all depends on how you interpret the Fort Sumter situation.
I'm not talking about companies, I'm talking about countries. Countries make trade agreements and trade embargoes with/against each other all the time. For example, the US has had all kinds of trade disagreements with Japan concerning various products that often resulted in sanctions, including:
Motorcycles
Cars
Textiles
Color TVs
This is the most basic way in which countries interact with each other. I'll tax you this much if you tax me that much. I'll let you sell motorcycle engines, but only the small ones so you aren't competing with our domestic manufacturers. Take a harder stance on copyright infringement or we won't trade with you. Stop killing millions of your own people (seriously, we mean it this time)! This is not blackmail/extortion, this is the capitalist free market at work on the international level. The US government is free to disallow business with any country it wants, just like any country is free to disallow business with the US.
If you dislike the sanctions your politicians are imposing, change your politicians minds (or, change your politicians; the MPAA/RIAA certainly do). But don't use incorrect language to describe their legal actions.
Slashdot Mirror
The Chinese sweatshop Apple employs for the iEverythings is Foxconn. Other stuff Foxconn works on/componies Foxconn works for:
If you're not buying from a company that uses Foxconn, you're not buying tech.
Unions can force all new hires to become union members
No, they can't.
You're wrong, and I've already given examples throughout this thread. Find them.
Haha, the Mythbusters mostly told me how to make thermite. And then I looked up the "secret ingredient" they wouldn't reveal. So I now I completely know how to make thermite. Not as hard as I was expecting.
Well, as a novelist, knowing how to make bombs could be very important for a book. Or maybe you're just curious. Or maybe you're wondering how bombs work. Or you could have a school report. Or maybe you're interested in fireworks and rocket ships (which are, essentially, bombs) or controlled demolition. Maybe you think the apocalypse is coming and you want to be prepared to fight the zombies with bombs made out of stuff you found in the ransacked supermarket.
Does it matter? I know how to make bombs (go high school physics!) but it's not like I'm going to bomb city hall. I know how to snort coke (and so do you! Everyone knows how to snort coke) should I be arrested for future snorting of coke just because I know how?
Measuring performance is pretty much the job of managers (principals, in this case), and is difficult in every industry. That being said, some teachers are really, really obviously bad teachers that need to be fired (screaming at the class, throwing chairs at students, and teaching incorrect "facts" [like Mars being the smallest planet in the solar system]), but can't be fired because of union regulations.
"Importance of subject matter" isn't 100% opinion based (can't do most subjects without a good math, English, and science foundations), but this can also be rarity of teachers teaching a certain position. If there's a billion people teaching English, lower pay, if there's four people teaching music, higher pay.
That's actually not true. Unions in other industries inspire fierce, fierce loyalty. You ever talk to a longshoreman? Or a miner? They love the union. Pretty much any manufacturing union as well, or any job with low pay and high danger, specifically because they know that, without the union, they'd be dead or maimed inside a week. If Foxconn employers unionized (if, you know, they wouldn't get thrown in jail for 5 years for doing so), they'd love the union, too.
Teachers, even when the unions are negotiating a better contract for them, pretty much always hate the union. They might actually be unique in this; I have not heard of any unions more hated by their own members than the teachers' unions.
That's a good point. I've been sucked into the "corporations are single entities" rhetoric a bit too much, I think.
That's typically not the complaint against teachers' unions (teachers should definitely be getting paid more). But that's independent from whether the teachers' unions are good or bad for teachers.
The complaint against teachers' unions is that they make it impossible to fire bad teachers. Pay and raises are based on the unions' bargained amount and not on a teacher's performance or importance of subject matter. And they actively lobby to increase the amount of standardized testing, which is useless. Further, most teachers hate the union, so you have a union composed of members that hate the union. How does that even make sense?
Or if you find a way to harvest energy more efficiently, i.e. nuclear power powering my matter compiler.
Alright, have your ribosomes pump me out a sammich!
Practically, that's not a big difference, especially if the union is forced to accept all members anyway. At the end of the day, if you want to work, you have to be a union member.
A matter compiler isn't about converting energy into matter (or vice-versa), but of rearranging already present matter into an appropriate configuration, which, while energy consumptive, is much more doable (and already being done by microbiology researchers on a small scale).
Just wait until we have matter compilers. Then the software will pump out stuff we can eat, wear, and breathe.
Legal definitions for injury aren't based off the relative strengths of the perpetrators, but on the injury caused. Also, when is it "okay" for a three year old to hit and kick an adult man as hard as possible?
That in mind, a three year old kicking an adult man as hard as possible typically does not result in an injury greater than a bruise, and it would probably be possible for the victim to sue the child's parent in small claims court if an actual injured was incurred. Similarly, if an adult man, say, slapped a three year old (comparatively similar non-injury), the child's parents could probably sue the adult man in small claims court.
So, yes, they are the same.
I didn't say we should allow it. I just think it's an interesting, if necessary, hypocrisy.
I can only speak on my experience with teachers' unions in Washington state, but yes they can. A teacher in WA automatically becomes an "agency fee" member of the teachers' union, must pay dues to the union, must accept the union's collectively bargained salary and benefits packages, and must go on strike when the union says to go on strike. If they become a full member (for a higher due) they get some additional benefits (liability insurance, representation, voting in the union, etc.). But as far as salary and basic benefits bargaining, they get what the union gets. So even if you're "not a part of the union," you're a part of the union.
Aside: teachers' strikes are... weird. Because of how their pay is setup, they keep getting paid and, often, will end up working the same number of days just pushed into summer. Since the public schools aren't making something to sell, they don't have much of an incentive to get the teachers back to work (no lost profits). And the youth crime rate spikes because all the hooligans don't have school and get bored.
(Apparently I'm not the only one who hates teachers' unions.)
I've been reading more into this case, and it looks like there wasn't any actual salary fixing or hiring bans. Essentially, the companies agreed to not "cold call" each others' employees with job offers, and this may have affected the salaries of some number of employees who would have been able to negotiate better salaries. But, let's be honest now, cold calling another company's employees is kind of a dick move.
So, essentially, they're being hit with an antitrust case for agreeing to not be dicks to each other.
And we wonder why capitalism results in the biggest dicks coming out on top...
This isn't necessarily true. Some professions (teachers, for instance) have ONE union for a district, and you MUST be a member of that union to work in that district.
Edit: I have a confusing sentence in there. When I say, "Unions can force all new hires to become union members (which amounts to the same thing)," I mean it amounts to the same thing Trepidity was saying (closed shop), not the same as what the companies are doing right now.
That's not what these companies are doing (in fact, they're essentially doing the opposite of that). I meant that unions allow workers to "collectively bargain" with companies, and this is pretty much companies "collectively bargaining". Unions can force all new hires to become union members (which amounts to the same thing). Why people seem to be upset with the companies, however, is that they essentially agreed on certain salary rates, which is pretty much the primary function of most unions.
How is this any different from a union? And if it's okay for unions to do it, why isn't it okay for companies?
They're not talking about scanning random people on the street and taking their guns. They're talking about scanning arrestees instead of frisking them. If you're getting frisked, we're no longer talking about "law abiding citizens".
Granted, they certainly could use this device to scan random people. But that's an unconstitutional search which the Supreme Court would slap the Hell out of. Remember: fear the people, not the tool.
You apparently haven't looked at hotcake sales for the past decade. You can't move hotcakes. You say you've got some hotcakes for sale, and people are like, "I want ice cream cake!" And then you have to explain that you mean pancakes. But now they just want ice cream cake, or frosted cake, and all you have is syrup-drenched flapjacks.
It's a sad life being a hotcake salesman, let me tell you.
All joking aside, citing current PS2 sales is hardly relevant, since the PS3 doesn't have the same kind of record: Nintendo's current generation has beaten the pants of the current generations of Microsoft and Sony, and the Wii U's reception has been similar to that of the Wii months before its release.
Pretty much, it's impossible to say how well the Wii U is going to sell, and I definitely wouldn't short Nintendo's stock quite yet. They're scrappy, scrappy fighters with a rabid fanbase that has absorbed what was left of Sega's rabid fanbase. That's a lot of rabid.
Does anyone else have a nagging feeling that Nintendo is doomed in the next console cycle? The Wii U didn't grab the same attention that the original Wii did...
Haha. I remember just before the original Wii came out. The "attention" it garnered was "what's wrong with its name?" and everyone predicted it would bomb. I expect to be saying that same sentence a couple years after the Wii U comes out with very little modification.
Unless my high school history has failed me (again), the southern states seceded, and the northern states used military force to bring them back. That is, the southern states committed treason (War of Southern Treason) and the northern states aggressively brought them back into the Union (War of Northern Aggression). Of course, the "Northern Aggression" bit all depends on how you interpret the Fort Sumter situation.
I'm not talking about companies, I'm talking about countries. Countries make trade agreements and trade embargoes with/against each other all the time. For example, the US has had all kinds of trade disagreements with Japan concerning various products that often resulted in sanctions, including:
This is the most basic way in which countries interact with each other. I'll tax you this much if you tax me that much. I'll let you sell motorcycle engines, but only the small ones so you aren't competing with our domestic manufacturers. Take a harder stance on copyright infringement or we won't trade with you. Stop killing millions of your own people (seriously, we mean it this time)! This is not blackmail/extortion, this is the capitalist free market at work on the international level. The US government is free to disallow business with any country it wants, just like any country is free to disallow business with the US.
If you dislike the sanctions your politicians are imposing, change your politicians minds (or, change your politicians; the MPAA/RIAA certainly do). But don't use incorrect language to describe their legal actions.