Indeed... on seeing the phrase "holy ark" my brain immediately jumped to the the item of focus in the first Indiana Jones film. If that relic were to ever actually be found, it would be of huge significance to many people with a religious affiliation worldwide... with the significance of any texts within being of only secondary importance.
It is what they find convenient or desirable, which is to use the service to the capacity that is being offered without concern about the details of the frequency or amount one is using it, and not getting surprised later on with higher overage charges than one was expecting.
I have unlimited nationwide roaming and long distance on my cell phone plan, and it's kinda nice to be able to freely use my phone wherever I am without worrying about any long distance charges that would otherwise apply.
With so-called unlimited data, it's the same thing... or at least it should be.
If there are so many people using unlimited data services to such an extent as to affect a significant number of other customers that are not using as much data, I would think that the better thing to do would be to raise the price of the unlimited plan to reduce demand for it. While this might seem to bite for the consumer who wants a bargain plan, their provider does have a legitimate right to charge what they find appropriate for their service. If one can find a better deal with another provider, they should obviously go there.
Of course, that brings us full circle.... back to how so-called unlimited plans started in the first place... as a means by which the providers could be competitive, try and offer superior services to the alternatves, and try to win subscribers from their competitors through better pricing or plans that are more convient for the user.
In the end, though... the ball is not in the consumer's court on this. It's always been in providers. If offering real unlimited plans isn't viable, then they fucking need to just stop it, or raise the prices and stop trying to pretend that they can one-up a competitor when they clearly can't (or else they wouldn't be complaining about the volume of use by people who want unlimited plans in the first place).
... In a country wher it is legal to build your own gun (as long as you do not sell it) is it ever questionable that you should not be allowed to 3D print one?
First of all, bear in mind I was not suggesting comparing the people that use trackers to people that do *not* lose any weight, I was suggesting comparing them to the *average* amount of weight lost by an obese person that did not use a tracker... some of these people may very lose a lot of weight (and according to this study, apparently more weight than people that use weight loss trackers), but many more of them will not.
Secondly, you miss my point, which is that people who are using weight loss trackers are still likely to be vastly more effective at weight loss than this aforementioned average obese person. The point of comparing them is to not show that the numbers might be similar, but to show that the results are just as skewed to one side as the comparison of people who use weight loss trackers to other people that are effectively losing weight without trackers.
It seems self-evident that the most effective weight loss will be from people who have found the will to do so within themselves, but the point of a tracker is to *give* some additional incentive to someone who would otherwise not have done the work at all, or may have stopped substantially sooner, lacking an unambiguous, objective, and quantitative measurement of how much work they have actually done.
For truly fair comparison, one should evaluate how much weight people with a weight-loss tracker lose compared to the average person who may not even exercise at all.
No worries... I realized as soon as I as your lmgtfy link what the misunderstanding was.
The report by the PNAS that said that fmri reports are invalidwas actually retracted shortly thereafter as they realized that the flaw was within a software bug that would not affect all of the results in the same way:
However, there is one number I regret [announcing publicy]: 40,000. In trying to refer to the importance of the fMRI discipline, we used an estimate of the entire fMRI literature as number of studies impinged by our findings. In our defense, we found problems with cluster size inference in general (severe for P=0.01 CDT, biased for P=0.001), the dominant inference method, suggesting the majority of the literature was affected. The number in the impact statement, however, has been picked up by popular press and fed a small twitterstorm. Hence, I feel it's my duty to make at least a rough estimate of "How many articles does our work affect?". I'm not a bibliometrician, and this really a rough-and-ready exercise, but it hopefully gives a sense of the order of magnitude of the problem.
The analysis code (in Matlab) is laid out below, but here is the skinny: Based on some reasonable probabilistic computations, but perhaps fragile samples of the literature, I estimate about 15,000 papers use cluster size inference with correction for multiple testing; of these, around 3,500 use a CDT of P=0.01. 3,500 is about 9% of the entire literature, or perhaps more usefully, 11% of papers containing original data. (Of course some of these 15,000 or 3,500 might use nonparametric inference, but it's unfortunately rare for fMRI -- in contrast, it's the default inference tool for structural VBM/DTI analyses in FSL).
I frankly thought this number would be higher, but didn't realise the large proportion of studies that never used any sort of multiple testing correction. (Can't have inflated corrected significances if you don't correct!). These calculations suggest 13,000 papers used no multiple testing correction. Of course some of these may be using regions of interest or sub-volume analyses, but it's a scant few (i.e. clinical trial style outcome) that have absolutely no multiplicity at all. Our paper isn't directly about this group, but for publications that used the folk multiple testing correction, P10, our paper shows this approach has familywise error rates well in excess of 50%.
So, are we saying 3,500 papers are "wrong"? It depends. Our results suggest CDT P=0.01 results have inflated P-values, but each study must be examined... if the effects are really strong, it likely doesn't matter if the P-values are biased, and the scientific inference will remain unchanged. But if the effects are really weak, then the results might indeed be consistent with noise. And, what about those 13,000 papers with no correction, especially common in the earlier literature? No, they shouldn't be discarded out of hand either, but a particularly jaded eye is needed for those works, especially when comparing them to new references with improved methodological standards.
So in fact, all that the study that found the software bug proved is that we need to double-check findings when they are made by a computer.... it doesn't mean that the findings are wrong, only that we should be rightly skeptical. Further, it means that fmri studies done *since* this discovery are actually more likely to have correct conclusions than ever before.
I don't think any such study has been performed... perhaps you should get on that yourself, since it seems to interest you so much as to bring political stance into a matter where it had not previously been brought up.
Of course, if you'd rather just make shit up because doing actual research to support your opinions is too hard, at least everyone should know what to think of what you just said.
For example if ones storage problems are that they have difficulty affording to buy all of the storage they need, the I think it is unlikely that this card would solve that problem.
No, it has not. It was shown fairly recently that a certain fairly common statistical error in the software could mislocate whet activity is occurring and perhaps as much as 10% of the some 40,000 or so research papers in existence that use results from fmri as the basis for a conclusion may in fact be faulty. However, the premise behind fmri is still entirely valid, and software bugs notwithstanding is continually getting better.
According to the IRS, there are three governing factors that determine if an individual is an employee or an independent contractor:
Behavioral: Does the company control or have the right to control what the worker does and how the worker does his or her job?
Uber has no control over what work the drivers do beyond the right to refuse to hire them for any further work in the future if they do not do things as Uber desires them. This is no different than any other independent contractor that is expected to adhere to standards specified by the agency that is paying them
Financial: Are the business aspects of the worker's job controlled by the payer? (these include things like how worker is paid, whether expenses are reimbursed, who provides tools/supplies, etc.)
Uber drivers expenses are not reimbursed... the tools that they must use to perform the job that Uber demands must be supplied by the driver with no compensation from Uber, and the costs of working for Uber must come entirely out of what monies that the Uber driver receives from doing jobs for them.
Type of Relationship: Are there written contracts or employee type benefits (i.e. pension plan, insurance, vacation pay, etc.)?
Uber offers no employee benefits to an Uber driver, does not pay any insurance, and there is no particular employment contract. The contract that does exist between the driver and Uber isnot any different than a contract that would be picked up by any independent contractor who chooses to work for a particular client with specific demands.
The app wouldn't change the color of the battery icon... that would be done by the update, if it were to get installed. The app could just provide confirmation that the update was installed and everything is performing as expected as a positive affirmation if that is required. Meanwhile, people who have vulnerable phones that have installed the update have a visible cue that they need to get theirs replaced.
Adequate insurance is the driver's responsibility... which as an independent contractor, he should be willing to front. His insurance would be a business expense and I'd imagine that a portion of it would also be tax-deductable. If he can't make enough money as a self-employed contractor to cover those costs after deductions, then it's just not viable in the first place.
They are not trying to "exploit" you.... surge pricing is simply an algorithmic response to an increase in demand when there is not a corresponding increase in supply, and not a result of anyone actually "trying" to exploit anyone. If there were always exactly enough Uber drivers on the road to meet any fluctuation in demand, then surge pricing would not ever happen. There is positively zero reason to take such a thing personally.
So what is stopping people who think that Uber's fluctuating price policy is unfair from taking a taxi, exactly?
Only thing about Uber, Airbnb that I'm not sure I like - people being encouraged to use their own personal property for making money.
It's called contract work, and it's entirely legal.
I was a Lyft driver for a while, but was never easy about piling on miles on my own car, thereby accelarating the depreciation.
Since you were self-employed, I would expect that some of the expense of driving your car around, especially during fares, would be tax-deductable. This is not dissimilar to how people who work from home can deduct a portion of their rent as a business expense as well.
Take a CAB if you think Uber's pricing structure is unfair.
Isn't that the whole point of Uber? To give people a broader *choice* in what service they use to get from A to B?
Uber has a notion of surge pricing that comes into effect anytime that a demand for its services exceeds some threshold, and that is just part of how Uber operates. Because of the nature of how demand for such services works, it is characteristically more likely that such surge pricing will occur at times when it might appear exploitative due to the pressing need for travel services that is inherently part of why demand is exceeding supply in the first.
I could understand being upset about this if some evil mastermind in the company were sitting behind a desk waiting for these kinds of crises to come up and then going and adding insult to injury by raising prices at these inconvenient times, but that is not how surge pricing works, as far as I understand it. It is, to the best of my knowledge, just determined by an algorithm that only takes into consideration the demand rates for its services.
But hey.... I'm sure that people would rather think that somehow the raised prices is about them personally.
Honestly, it just makes a whole lot more sense to take a taxi if you think Uber's fluctuating pricing structure is unfair.
It's my understanding that Mr. Munroe worked for NASA on a contract basis only. The only reason that stopped was because NASA eventually ran out of money to rehire him for another contract, not because he couldn't "cut it", or because they were dissatisfied with his work.
... while I am less than thrilled about having to spend about twice as much on toner cartridges from HP as I would from so-called compatible brands, previous experience with the laser printer I had before this one (of the same model, actually) has shown me that it is simply just not worth the grief.
Fortunately again, I use toner and not ink, so my cartridges don't dry out, and I can actually use everything that I paid for, even if it did cost more.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed... on seeing the phrase "holy ark" my brain immediately jumped to the the item of focus in the first Indiana Jones film. If that relic were to ever actually be found, it would be of huge significance to many people with a religious affiliation worldwide... with the significance of any texts within being of only secondary importance.
It is what they find convenient or desirable, which is to use the service to the capacity that is being offered without concern about the details of the frequency or amount one is using it, and not getting surprised later on with higher overage charges than one was expecting.
I have unlimited nationwide roaming and long distance on my cell phone plan, and it's kinda nice to be able to freely use my phone wherever I am without worrying about any long distance charges that would otherwise apply.
With so-called unlimited data, it's the same thing... or at least it should be.
If there are so many people using unlimited data services to such an extent as to affect a significant number of other customers that are not using as much data, I would think that the better thing to do would be to raise the price of the unlimited plan to reduce demand for it. While this might seem to bite for the consumer who wants a bargain plan, their provider does have a legitimate right to charge what they find appropriate for their service. If one can find a better deal with another provider, they should obviously go there.
Of course, that brings us full circle.... back to how so-called unlimited plans started in the first place... as a means by which the providers could be competitive, try and offer superior services to the alternatves, and try to win subscribers from their competitors through better pricing or plans that are more convient for the user.
In the end, though... the ball is not in the consumer's court on this. It's always been in providers. If offering real unlimited plans isn't viable, then they fucking need to just stop it, or raise the prices and stop trying to pretend that they can one-up a competitor when they clearly can't (or else they wouldn't be complaining about the volume of use by people who want unlimited plans in the first place).
... In a country wher it is legal to build your own gun (as long as you do not sell it) is it ever questionable that you should not be allowed to 3D print one?
First of all, bear in mind I was not suggesting comparing the people that use trackers to people that do *not* lose any weight, I was suggesting comparing them to the *average* amount of weight lost by an obese person that did not use a tracker... some of these people may very lose a lot of weight (and according to this study, apparently more weight than people that use weight loss trackers), but many more of them will not.
Secondly, you miss my point, which is that people who are using weight loss trackers are still likely to be vastly more effective at weight loss than this aforementioned average obese person. The point of comparing them is to not show that the numbers might be similar, but to show that the results are just as skewed to one side as the comparison of people who use weight loss trackers to other people that are effectively losing weight without trackers.
Actually, yes... this is exactly right.
It seems self-evident that the most effective weight loss will be from people who have found the will to do so within themselves, but the point of a tracker is to *give* some additional incentive to someone who would otherwise not have done the work at all, or may have stopped substantially sooner, lacking an unambiguous, objective, and quantitative measurement of how much work they have actually done.
For truly fair comparison, one should evaluate how much weight people with a weight-loss tracker lose compared to the average person who may not even exercise at all.
Generally set apart from a sentence by an exclamation point, or by comma when the feeling's not as strong.
I imagine that this might be theoretically possible, but I don't expect that our sun will still be burning if or when it is achieved.
No worries... I realized as soon as I as your lmgtfy link what the misunderstanding was.
The report by the PNAS that said that fmri reports are invalidwas actually retracted shortly thereafter as they realized that the flaw was within a software bug that would not affect all of the results in the same way:
So in fact, all that the study that found the software bug proved is that we need to double-check findings when they are made by a computer.... it doesn't mean that the findings are wrong, only that we should be rightly skeptical. Further, it means that fmri studies done *since* this discovery are actually more likely to have correct conclusions than ever before.
I don't think any such study has been performed... perhaps you should get on that yourself, since it seems to interest you so much as to bring political stance into a matter where it had not previously been brought up.
Of course, if you'd rather just make shit up because doing actual research to support your opinions is too hard, at least everyone should know what to think of what you just said.
For example if ones storage problems are that they have difficulty affording to buy all of the storage they need, the I think it is unlikely that this card would solve that problem.
No, it has not. It was shown fairly recently that a certain fairly common statistical error in the software could mislocate whet activity is occurring and perhaps as much as 10% of the some 40,000 or so research papers in existence that use results from fmri as the basis for a conclusion may in fact be faulty. However, the premise behind fmri is still entirely valid, and software bugs notwithstanding is continually getting better.
It's not a particularly new thing.... as I said, independent contractors do it all the time, and have been doing for quite a long time too.
According to the IRS, there are three governing factors that determine if an individual is an employee or an independent contractor:
Uber has no control over what work the drivers do beyond the right to refuse to hire them for any further work in the future if they do not do things as Uber desires them. This is no different than any other independent contractor that is expected to adhere to standards specified by the agency that is paying them
Uber drivers expenses are not reimbursed... the tools that they must use to perform the job that Uber demands must be supplied by the driver with no compensation from Uber, and the costs of working for Uber must come entirely out of what monies that the Uber driver receives from doing jobs for them.
Uber offers no employee benefits to an Uber driver, does not pay any insurance, and there is no particular employment contract. The contract that does exist between the driver and Uber isnot any different than a contract that would be picked up by any independent contractor who chooses to work for a particular client with specific demands.
The app wouldn't change the color of the battery icon... that would be done by the update, if it were to get installed. The app could just provide confirmation that the update was installed and everything is performing as expected as a positive affirmation if that is required. Meanwhile, people who have vulnerable phones that have installed the update have a visible cue that they need to get theirs replaced.
There's no way to get an update on all the phones that won't explode either. An app could be used to provide positive confirmation if that is needed.
... if it is does not pass. Then the fact that they changed its color is indicative of a real problem, and thus not breaking the standard.
Adequate insurance is the driver's responsibility... which as an independent contractor, he should be willing to front. His insurance would be a business expense and I'd imagine that a portion of it would also be tax-deductable. If he can't make enough money as a self-employed contractor to cover those costs after deductions, then it's just not viable in the first place.
They are not trying to "exploit" you.... surge pricing is simply an algorithmic response to an increase in demand when there is not a corresponding increase in supply, and not a result of anyone actually "trying" to exploit anyone. If there were always exactly enough Uber drivers on the road to meet any fluctuation in demand, then surge pricing would not ever happen. There is positively zero reason to take such a thing personally.
So what is stopping people who think that Uber's fluctuating price policy is unfair from taking a taxi, exactly?
It's called contract work, and it's entirely legal.
Since you were self-employed, I would expect that some of the expense of driving your car around, especially during fares, would be tax-deductable. This is not dissimilar to how people who work from home can deduct a portion of their rent as a business expense as well.
Take a CAB if you think Uber's pricing structure is unfair.
Isn't that the whole point of Uber? To give people a broader *choice* in what service they use to get from A to B?
Uber has a notion of surge pricing that comes into effect anytime that a demand for its services exceeds some threshold, and that is just part of how Uber operates. Because of the nature of how demand for such services works, it is characteristically more likely that such surge pricing will occur at times when it might appear exploitative due to the pressing need for travel services that is inherently part of why demand is exceeding supply in the first.
I could understand being upset about this if some evil mastermind in the company were sitting behind a desk waiting for these kinds of crises to come up and then going and adding insult to injury by raising prices at these inconvenient times, but that is not how surge pricing works, as far as I understand it. It is, to the best of my knowledge, just determined by an algorithm that only takes into consideration the demand rates for its services.
But hey.... I'm sure that people would rather think that somehow the raised prices is about them personally.
Honestly, it just makes a whole lot more sense to take a taxi if you think Uber's fluctuating pricing structure is unfair.
git support has been OOB in Netbeaans for quite a while now.
It's my understanding that Mr. Munroe worked for NASA on a contract basis only. The only reason that stopped was because NASA eventually ran out of money to rehire him for another contract, not because he couldn't "cut it", or because they were dissatisfied with his work.
Fortunately again, I use toner and not ink, so my cartridges don't dry out, and I can actually use everything that I paid for, even if it did cost more.
Oh... my bad. Good call.