Perhaps you need to read the original comment, where I said that there could be other reasons that Uber drivers should be employees. My assertion here is only that how they are paid is not one of them because there is absolutely NO difference between them and how an independent contractor is paid by somebody who said how much they were willing to pay, and simply happened to be unwilling to negotiate it. The contractor accepting a rate of pay, even if that rate is not sufficient for the contractor to make a profit, does not make that contractor an employee. At most, it only makes that contractor foolish. Uber drivers are entirely free to reject offers they don't want, and although if this happens often enough, it can result in Uber not offering them any more jobs, an independent contractor could just as easily find himself in the same situation with a client that they repeatedly reject jobs from as well.
As reasons go for Uber drivers to supposedly be considered employees, how they are paid is among the worst of them.
Uber drivers have zero ability to negotiate their rate.
That's only because Uber has said what the rate is.... if I hire an independent contractor, and I tell him what rate I want to pay him, that doesn't make him an employee if he accepts because he's not under any obligation to work for me in the first place. He may be free to make a counter offer, but I am free to reject it, and even the fact that this might be known in advance of trying to make a counter offer does not change anything. The contractor can either accept the rate of pay offered, or simply not work for that client at all. This is 100% identical to the driver's situation with Uber.
They can't see a customer saying "I will pay $10" and come back with an offer like "I will do it for $13". Their only option is to reject the job.
That's because the customers aren't the driver's customers or clients. They are Uber's, and the driver has no authority to negotiate with them.
An independent contract who is being told by the person who wants to hire him how much they will pay and is not willing to negotiate gives exactly as much room for the contractor to select their own rate of pay as Uber does. Further, you can't say that drivers are employees because if they refuse too many jobs they won't get called onto jobs any more because a person who wants to hire a contractor is not under any obligation to keep coming back to that contractor when they refuse to do certain jobs just because of how much money they will make.
As I said... there may be other entirely legitimate reasons to consider Uber drivers employees, but how they are paid is definitely not one of them.
"Unable to see does not imply it is dangerous" is not equivalent to "Unable to see it implies it is not dangerous". It means that no conclusion about the danger of something can be drawn solely from the inability to see it. It does not mean that something you might not see cannot be dangerous, and the only way that being unable to see it would impact this is that it may inhibit one's ability to evaluate the dangers objectively.
Every conductor is a superconducting material at cold enough temperatures. Heck, even *insulators* can be superconductors when you get close enough to absolute zero.
You are still under the impression that the passengers would be the driver's clients or customers. They are not. The passengers and Uber's customers, and the driver, particularly as an independent contractor and not as an actual representative of Uber, would have *NO* authority to negotiate a different price with them. Under an independent contractor system, Uber is the driver's client. A client who is not willing to negotiate with a contractor for a different rate of pay does not make a contractor who accepts that rate of pay, even if they do so repeatedly, an employee. The contractor is, of course, free to decline a rate that they consider unacceptable, and a would-be client is not under obligation to continue to even offer jobs to a contractor anyways, especially if the contractor already has a history of rejecting job offers.
My point remains... Uber drivers have exactly as much freedom over their rate of pay as any independent contractor who accepts a rate that was given by the person who hired them, even if that person was unwilling to negotiate the amount. One can argue that an independent contractor who accepts a rate of pay below what they need to make a fair profit is an idiot, but that doesn't mean that they aren't independent contractors.
If you aren't making a profit on the deal it makes you either an idiot or a slave.
I'm not arguing that... I'd suggest that the people who hadn't figured out that they couldn't make as much profit as they wanted driving for Uber would fit into the former category.
But that doesn't mean that some people weren't entirely satisfied with the amounts they were getting for the work for Uber, however... especially if they saw it as just extra income and not as a job that they expected to make $X doing.
Not that it matters now... if Uber drivers are employees, then Uber will be placing rather hard restrictions on the exact times and how many hours the drivers can work, which will in general will likely result in many of the drivers making even *less* money overall than they were before, probably leading to most of them quitting, increasing customer wait times.
Does a would-be client telling you how much they want to pay you before you accept a job, and being unwilling to negotiate the amount, automatically make you their employee if you accept it?
An independent contractor has no useful ability to quote their own price to a client who has already said how much they will pay for a job either. They can try, but they'll be summarily rejected. The contractor must either accept the rate offered or not work for that client at all. So how does Working for Uber differ in this regard, exactly?
Actaully, Uber drivers can't negotiate the price with passengers because the passengers aren't actually the driver's clients, Uber is, and the passengers are Uber's customers, not the drivers, so driver has absolutely no authority to negotiate a different rate of pay with them. The driver can either accept the rate that Uber said they will pay... or not. Accepting what a client said they would pay does not make the contractor who agreed to work for that amount an employee.
There may be other reasons to consider Uber drivers employee's, but how the drivers are paid is definitely not one of them. If that, as you say, is really the tipping point, then Uber drivers would definitely be independent contractors.
Not any more than any other independent contractor that gets told in advance how much he'll make for the job. Uber drivers couldn't negotiate with passengers even if the drivers were independent contractors because the passengers would not be the drivers clients, Uber would be. An independent contractor can negotiate their rate of pay with the people who hire him at whatever agreed rate of pay, not with his boss's customers after his pay has already been agreed to.
I'm saying that with respect to how much money they make, Uber drivers have no less say over how much they get paid than an independent contractor who might want more than what a prospective client said they will pay Simply saying how much you will pay for a job does not make the person who accepts that rate an employee
As the price of automation continues to drop, I seriously doubt that Trump, or anyone, would be able to prevent it without creating new and increasingly heavy tax burdens for companies that use automation so that it is less expensive for them to hire people instead. This will, in turn, make any products that are produced through automation (most consumer goods these days) substantially more expensive. Giving Trump the benefit of the doubt, one should think that this is an unintended consequence, because if it is not, it would speak volumes about how ignorant Trump might be to those who aren't in the top 20% or so of income earners, which wouldn't even give him a snowball's chance in hell of winning the election, so it's pretty clear he'd have to at least *pretend* to care about everybody else... and making the price of most things go up is not going to accomplish that.
If you increase people's wages to try and counter the effect of goods,, then all you do is make automation more attractive, so in the end, I don't think Trump can actually change it or stop it.
Considering how natuarally the Fibonacci series occurs, no...
It would not. A long sequence of adjacent primes may do the trick, however, as no known natural phenomenon only deals in prime numbers.
The conclusion that alien life exists does not depend on any presumption of an evolutionary bias towards intelligence. The logic by those that would suggest alien life is certain to exist seem to go as follows: We, as an example of intelligent life, exist, so that means that there must be some non-zero probability for intelligent life to come exist in the universe. Given the non-zero probability for the occurrence of intelligent life, it is utterly incongruous that given the sheer vastness of the universe the likelihood of such life occurring elsewhere in the cosmos should not approach mathematical certainty. Therefore, intelligent life must almost certainly exist elsewhere.
However, there is still an unproven assumption in the above logic. Finding it is left as an exercise for the reader.
I meant that as far as I am aware they don't require specific brands of automobiles. Their restrictions that the car not be marked or be an industrial vehicle are not unreasonable. Someone hiring an independent contractor may have some limits on the types of tools you'll be allowed to use working for them because of safety reasons or to prevent a conflict of interest, but that doesn't automatically make you an. employee
What was wrong with your car that they would not accept it?
The only flexibility a contractor has in specifying how much he gets paid is before he gets the job anyways. Would-be ride share drivers would technically be entirely free to set their own rates, but that doesn't mean that Uber is willing to pay that amount. An independent contractor is similarly constrained to only accept whatever rates that the people who hire them are willing to pay. In terms of salary control, I see no difference between what Uber is doing with drivers and what happens with independent contractors.
It's worth noting, however, that even an independent contractor can have some the same restrictions... if an independent contractor wants more money than what the person paying them wants to pay, well... then they don't get the job at all. So the person paying the money still has full control over the price of the work.
And as far as I know, Uber isn't specifying that you must drive only a certain type of car either, so they aren't really exercising employer-like control over the driver's tools either.
The advertiser couldn't select that exclusion if Facebook did not allow them to select it. Simply put, the race of the person being advertised to should not be a criteria that is even available for selection by the advertiser.
(Moral of the story.... don't try and post something attempting to sound coherent when I first wake up... I made a couple of grammatical errors and Freudian slips there. I'll attempt to enumerate them so that hopefully I don't sound as stupid as I think I made myself look).
I feel like I must have been only semi-conscious when I typed "quantum fluctuations"... Too much star trek or something.
While the variances in exactly what levels are taken as TTL high vs low (and indeed the function of all semiconductors) are indeed caused by quantum-level effects, "quantum fluctuations" is a specific term in physics that is not really directly connected to why those variations occur. The term that I meant to type was quantum-level effects, not quantum fluctuations.
Also, I meant that the parts for this are ubiquitously *CHEAP* and ubiquitous.
Hmmm.... I thought I saw one other thing there that made me grossly ashamed to have posted it (oh, for a delete post or edit post button), but I don't see it right now.
My point remains... while doing this with a microcontroller executing firmware instructions or even microcode is certainly possible, it would not generally be very practical. While I've described the circuitry involved in terms of simple TTL components, this could easily be printed onto silicon as part of an IC package that may do many other things (and could even be a part of a microntroller IC), but even then, it would still not be firmware managing the power off button.
and in addition to the capacitor you'd also need a voltage reference, a comparator, a discharge circuit
No, no, and no.
TTL logic is high or low. There is no in-between, so you do not need a voltage reference or comparator to know when the appropriate charging point is reached. Using known values of resistance and capacitance, you can manually calculate how long it will take for a given capacitor in series with a given resistance to charge enough to get to what would be recognized as a TTL high signal. Quantum fluctuations may result in changes to this value on the order of picoseconds to the actual timing, but this is an on-off switch we are talking about, so such tiny variances will not generally affect any real-world use case. Further, being a few picoseconds off is still better than the nanosecond or worse granularity that you'd typically achieve doing it in firmware.
Discharging the capacitor after power is cut can be accomplished via a pull-down resistor to ground... so unless you consider one resistor a "circuit", no discharge circuit is required.
Even without buying the parts in bulk, the parts for this are ridiculously and ubiquitous.
The microcontroller on the main board has plenty of other things to do, and tying it up dealing with some firmware logic for powering down would be wasteful in terms of power usage, at least. The most sane thing for it to do would be to send a signal to the power off circuitry built into the power supply.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps you need to read the original comment, where I said that there could be other reasons that Uber drivers should be employees. My assertion here is only that how they are paid is not one of them because there is absolutely NO difference between them and how an independent contractor is paid by somebody who said how much they were willing to pay, and simply happened to be unwilling to negotiate it. The contractor accepting a rate of pay, even if that rate is not sufficient for the contractor to make a profit, does not make that contractor an employee. At most, it only makes that contractor foolish. Uber drivers are entirely free to reject offers they don't want, and although if this happens often enough, it can result in Uber not offering them any more jobs, an independent contractor could just as easily find himself in the same situation with a client that they repeatedly reject jobs from as well.
As reasons go for Uber drivers to supposedly be considered employees, how they are paid is among the worst of them.
That's only because Uber has said what the rate is.... if I hire an independent contractor, and I tell him what rate I want to pay him, that doesn't make him an employee if he accepts because he's not under any obligation to work for me in the first place. He may be free to make a counter offer, but I am free to reject it, and even the fact that this might be known in advance of trying to make a counter offer does not change anything. The contractor can either accept the rate of pay offered, or simply not work for that client at all. This is 100% identical to the driver's situation with Uber.
That's because the customers aren't the driver's customers or clients. They are Uber's, and the driver has no authority to negotiate with them.
An independent contract who is being told by the person who wants to hire him how much they will pay and is not willing to negotiate gives exactly as much room for the contractor to select their own rate of pay as Uber does. Further, you can't say that drivers are employees because if they refuse too many jobs they won't get called onto jobs any more because a person who wants to hire a contractor is not under any obligation to keep coming back to that contractor when they refuse to do certain jobs just because of how much money they will make.
As I said... there may be other entirely legitimate reasons to consider Uber drivers employees, but how they are paid is definitely not one of them.
Logic fail
"Unable to see does not imply it is dangerous" is not equivalent to "Unable to see it implies it is not dangerous". It means that no conclusion about the danger of something can be drawn solely from the inability to see it. It does not mean that something you might not see cannot be dangerous, and the only way that being unable to see it would impact this is that it may inhibit one's ability to evaluate the dangers objectively.
Every conductor is a superconducting material at cold enough temperatures. Heck, even *insulators* can be superconductors when you get close enough to absolute zero.
My point remains... Uber drivers have exactly as much freedom over their rate of pay as any independent contractor who accepts a rate that was given by the person who hired them, even if that person was unwilling to negotiate the amount. One can argue that an independent contractor who accepts a rate of pay below what they need to make a fair profit is an idiot, but that doesn't mean that they aren't independent contractors.
I'm not arguing that... I'd suggest that the people who hadn't figured out that they couldn't make as much profit as they wanted driving for Uber would fit into the former category.
But that doesn't mean that some people weren't entirely satisfied with the amounts they were getting for the work for Uber, however... especially if they saw it as just extra income and not as a job that they expected to make $X doing.
Not that it matters now... if Uber drivers are employees, then Uber will be placing rather hard restrictions on the exact times and how many hours the drivers can work, which will in general will likely result in many of the drivers making even *less* money overall than they were before, probably leading to most of them quitting, increasing customer wait times.
It's not hard to see where this is heading.
Does a would-be client telling you how much they want to pay you before you accept a job, and being unwilling to negotiate the amount, automatically make you their employee if you accept it?
So if someone wants to hire you and tells you how much they will pay, does that automatically make you an employee if you accept that rate?
An independent contractor has no useful ability to quote their own price to a client who has already said how much they will pay for a job either. They can try, but they'll be summarily rejected. The contractor must either accept the rate offered or not work for that client at all. So how does Working for Uber differ in this regard, exactly?
Actaully, Uber drivers can't negotiate the price with passengers because the passengers aren't actually the driver's clients, Uber is, and the passengers are Uber's customers, not the drivers, so driver has absolutely no authority to negotiate a different rate of pay with them. The driver can either accept the rate that Uber said they will pay... or not. Accepting what a client said they would pay does not make the contractor who agreed to work for that amount an employee.
There may be other reasons to consider Uber drivers employee's, but how the drivers are paid is definitely not one of them. If that, as you say, is really the tipping point, then Uber drivers would definitely be independent contractors.
Not any more than any other independent contractor that gets told in advance how much he'll make for the job. Uber drivers couldn't negotiate with passengers even if the drivers were independent contractors because the passengers would not be the drivers clients, Uber would be. An independent contractor can negotiate their rate of pay with the people who hire him at whatever agreed rate of pay, not with his boss's customers after his pay has already been agreed to.
I'm saying that with respect to how much money they make, Uber drivers have no less say over how much they get paid than an independent contractor who might want more than what a prospective client said they will pay Simply saying how much you will pay for a job does not make the person who accepts that rate an employee
???? Am I misremembering?? I thought that the '286 still only supported the segmented memory architecture used by previous incarnations of the x86 isa
I forgot about that bit. Didn't the lack of flat memory model played a role too?
Sort of. It was more specifically the lack of a flat memory model, but that still has to more to do with instructions set than memory capability.
If you increase people's wages to try and counter the effect of goods,, then all you do is make automation more attractive, so in the end, I don't think Trump can actually change it or stop it.
Obviously... but Uber is actually the driver's client, not the passenger. The passenger is Uber's client.
Considering how natuarally the Fibonacci series occurs, no... It would not. A long sequence of adjacent primes may do the trick, however, as no known natural phenomenon only deals in prime numbers.
The conclusion that alien life exists does not depend on any presumption of an evolutionary bias towards intelligence. The logic by those that would suggest alien life is certain to exist seem to go as follows: We, as an example of intelligent life, exist, so that means that there must be some non-zero probability for intelligent life to come exist in the universe. Given the non-zero probability for the occurrence of intelligent life, it is utterly incongruous that given the sheer vastness of the universe the likelihood of such life occurring elsewhere in the cosmos should not approach mathematical certainty. Therefore, intelligent life must almost certainly exist elsewhere.
However, there is still an unproven assumption in the above logic. Finding it is left as an exercise for the reader.
I meant that as far as I am aware they don't require specific brands of automobiles. Their restrictions that the car not be marked or be an industrial vehicle are not unreasonable. Someone hiring an independent contractor may have some limits on the types of tools you'll be allowed to use working for them because of safety reasons or to prevent a conflict of interest, but that doesn't automatically make you an. employee
What was wrong with your car that they would not accept it?
The only flexibility a contractor has in specifying how much he gets paid is before he gets the job anyways. Would-be ride share drivers would technically be entirely free to set their own rates, but that doesn't mean that Uber is willing to pay that amount. An independent contractor is similarly constrained to only accept whatever rates that the people who hire them are willing to pay. In terms of salary control, I see no difference between what Uber is doing with drivers and what happens with independent contractors.
It's worth noting, however, that even an independent contractor can have some the same restrictions... if an independent contractor wants more money than what the person paying them wants to pay, well... then they don't get the job at all. So the person paying the money still has full control over the price of the work.
And as far as I know, Uber isn't specifying that you must drive only a certain type of car either, so they aren't really exercising employer-like control over the driver's tools either.
The advertiser couldn't select that exclusion if Facebook did not allow them to select it. Simply put, the race of the person being advertised to should not be a criteria that is even available for selection by the advertiser.
I feel like I must have been only semi-conscious when I typed "quantum fluctuations"... Too much star trek or something.
While the variances in exactly what levels are taken as TTL high vs low (and indeed the function of all semiconductors) are indeed caused by quantum-level effects, "quantum fluctuations" is a specific term in physics that is not really directly connected to why those variations occur. The term that I meant to type was quantum-level effects, not quantum fluctuations.
Also, I meant that the parts for this are ubiquitously *CHEAP* and ubiquitous.
Hmmm.... I thought I saw one other thing there that made me grossly ashamed to have posted it (oh, for a delete post or edit post button), but I don't see it right now.
My point remains... while doing this with a microcontroller executing firmware instructions or even microcode is certainly possible, it would not generally be very practical. While I've described the circuitry involved in terms of simple TTL components, this could easily be printed onto silicon as part of an IC package that may do many other things (and could even be a part of a microntroller IC), but even then, it would still not be firmware managing the power off button.
No, no, and no.
TTL logic is high or low. There is no in-between, so you do not need a voltage reference or comparator to know when the appropriate charging point is reached. Using known values of resistance and capacitance, you can manually calculate how long it will take for a given capacitor in series with a given resistance to charge enough to get to what would be recognized as a TTL high signal. Quantum fluctuations may result in changes to this value on the order of picoseconds to the actual timing, but this is an on-off switch we are talking about, so such tiny variances will not generally affect any real-world use case. Further, being a few picoseconds off is still better than the nanosecond or worse granularity that you'd typically achieve doing it in firmware.
Discharging the capacitor after power is cut can be accomplished via a pull-down resistor to ground... so unless you consider one resistor a "circuit", no discharge circuit is required.
Even without buying the parts in bulk, the parts for this are ridiculously and ubiquitous.
The microcontroller on the main board has plenty of other things to do, and tying it up dealing with some firmware logic for powering down would be wasteful in terms of power usage, at least. The most sane thing for it to do would be to send a signal to the power off circuitry built into the power supply.