>p>
There is absolutely *NO* evidence to substantiate that EM sensitivity is caused by anything external to the person claiming to have it.... numerous double-blind studies have been done, and the only factor that determines whether they are "sensing" any EM is simply when the person claiming to have EMS believes that such phenomena is present, whether or not it actually is.
That does not necessarily mean that their suffering is all in their mind because what a person believes or thinks can sometimes have real, measurable effects on their physiology. Although I think that what it does mean is that EM sensitivity needs to be treated as a psychological matter rather than physiological one.
Not even slightly.... The number of people may be very large, but the amount of money they control and spend is still very small compared to overall consumer spending. The top 20% income earners account for 95% of the economy. Even doubling minimum wage wouldn't impact that number in any appreciable way because of the enormous income disparity between the rich and the poor.
Numerous double blind studies have conclusively shown that such sensitivity ultimately depends on what the subject *believes* to be true, regardless of whether or not it actually is. Whether she would still "sense" anything inside of the Faraday cage actually depends on whether or not she genuinely believes the Faraday cage will truly stop the signals she believes are harming her, and whether or not she believes those signals to be present.
In other words, its all psychosomatic.... and should be treated as such. Psychosomatic disorders can still produce externally measurable changes in a person's body, so the suffering can still be legitimately real, and so I would not think that being simply dismissive of it is necessarily the best approach, but probably psychological help would be for the best so that she can learn how to recognize the false signals that her brain is telling her about, and perhaps eventually overcome the dysfunction.
"Stealing" customers is a different matter... I've seen such agreements before and they are entirely legally enforceable. However, the person *is* still allowed to work for a competitor in the exact same industry, and solicit business from potential customers that did *NOT* have any imminent or active business dealings with the employee's former company while they were there. If the area is not large enough that there are no available customers, then that suggests the market is already saturated anyways, so a person *would* be out of luck in such a case just as if there were no available jobs in an area at all.
.... as long as the woman is getting mandatory psychological treatment.
All available evidence on Electromagnetic sensitivity suggests that is actually a purely psychosomatic disorder, but belief is tremendously powerful thing and can produce real and measurable physiological changes in a person, causing immune reactions without any externally visible cause, change in hormone levels that should otherwise only be explainable by other external phenomonena, etc.
Treating serious psychosomatic disorders requires the person to not just be aware that the problem is all in their own mind, but it also requires that a person be aware of some pathway to a solution to their apparent problem. I have heard it best described by one psychologist as (althouh I am paraphrasing here, this is not a direct quote) "there's nothing actually wrong with your hardware, but basically the software in your brain is misfiring and telling your body the wrong thing.". A person with a psychosomatic disorder needs to learn a skill that is not necessarily easy to come by, and that is to learn how to ignore those essentially false signals that their brain is telling their own body, and causing it to react in ways that might otherwise be attributed to some external phenomena. This is why the person needs psychiatric help.
Simply telling an EHS sufferer that it's just all in their own head and they should be able to simply think their way out of their problem is only going to get you ignored, because their body may still be producing a real reaction to something, even if that something is only imagined.
No noncompete is that long... typically, they are measured in weeks or months. The compensation is typically paid out all at once, much like severance pay, if it is applicable.
In practice, an ex employer is not even going to know what a former employee is doing after he or she leaves, let alone who they are working for without having to spend time and resources following what that person is doing outside of company time. Non-competes really are, for all practical purposes, completely unenforceable, and not generally worth the paper they are printed on... at best they typically only serve as a cautionary warning to not violate any NDA's, which an employer *CAN* legally go after you for violating potentially even years after you leave the company, although the more time that elapses since employment ended, the more difficult (exponentially, even) it becomes to establish any plausible NDA violation, and so NDA's have a practical upper limit to their duration that is usually less than a decade.
If noncompetes were generally legally enforceable, they could be presented as a condition of employment by an employer, and effectively prohibit any employees from legally practising in whatever trade it is that they are trained in after they leave said employer (short of moving to a distant enough jurisdiction), when they have not actually done anything to warrant such treatment. Although a lawyer can be disbarred, and a medical practitioner can lose their license, for example, such people actually have to do something that was *WRONG* to warrant such a thing.
Non-competes are often not enforceable after a person's employment contract is over. If a company doesn't want you to work for a competitor, they can usually be required to compensate you for that, typically in an amount equivalent to salary for the duation of the non-compete.
They may be able to successfully sue you for NDA violation, as long as they have a sufficient factual basis to show that it was more likely than not that you had actually violated the NDA. But that's not the same thing as a non-compete.
You are right... it was the Apple ][+ that could utilize the 16K ram expansion card. My bad. My first experience with an Apple was on a ][+, and I sometimes forget about the +.
What sentiment are you accusing me of propogating, exactly? I'm only suggesting that even guns have a significant chance of not killing their target, and yet somehow they are considered as "lethal" while tasers are frequently not. Sure, guns have a better chance of killing you than tasers do, overall... but that is only because a gunshot wound is simply much more likely to result in medical complications that require a physician and medical treatment than a tasering is (nearly 100% for the former, while the latter is around 33%). Does something that is only about 1/3 as lethal as a gunshot wound barring medical treatment strike you as particularly "non-lethal"?
That said, I'm wondering how AM even made any money.... didn't they offer something like a money-back guarantee or something if people didn't have an affair within some fixed period of signup, like maybe a month or two? Or did they depend on people becoming indifferent about it, and not trying to get their money back?
They just have significantly better chance than not of not killing you. They are, in fact, "less lethal", but definitely not non-lethal.
For what it's worth, getting shot by a gun is statistically only fatal about 5% of the time. While a taser is lethal even less often than that, it's still clearly lethal.
Consumer spending accounts for 70% of the GDP, the less wealthy spend a greater percentage of their income on necessities. The top 20% spend more than 10 times as much on consumer goods as the bottom 80% combined.
The Apple ][ had only 48K of regular RAM. There was 4K of IO-mapped space, and 12K of ROM. With a ram expansion card, could could map the 16K of additional memory using bank switching into the top 12K rom area. In practice, most software did not use this area. When ProDOS came out, the area was not available for end-user programs at all, since it used this space.
Which is why raising minimum wage by some amount does not result in a correspondingly large increase in inflation... it contributes some, but historically the effects of raising minimum wage have always been extremely minor, and is entirely outweighed by the fact that the people whose wages were increased tend to be able to afford a better standard of living.
... if instead of complaining about it, they didn't bother watching it in the first place, and didn't try to sensationalize it, effectively creating a boost in its popularity?
Of course, it's also possible that this is a plot by the show's creators to inflate its own popularity by creating controversy.
There is a direct correlation between income and consumer spending, which accounts for 70% of the GDP. The lowest 80% of all wage earners control only 5% of that figure, while only 20% of all wage earners contribute to 95% of all consumer spending.
The wealthy may only spend a tiny fraction of their money on consumer goods, but that is only because they have more money in the first place.... Over 70% of the GDP is accounted for by consumer spending, and the bottom 80% earners controlled only 5% of all financial wealth in the USA in 2013.
I don't think you realize just how paltry all of those worker's wages are to the overall economy.... there is an absolutely *ENORMOUS* gap between the high income and low income earners, and even despite the vastly larger number of low income earners, they still collectively contribute to only a very tiny percentage of the overall economy.
The $15 minimum wage will contribute minimally to inflation, because the amount of money represented by all of the low wage earners combined is actually still a relatively small percentage of the overall economy.
It will certainly have a modest effect on inflation, but not anywhere near the effect that detractors frequently attribute to it.
True... but even if the device is covered, if the sufferer still believes that the device is on, even if they have absolutely no rational basis for that belief, then they may still suffer from the psychosomatic effects. Belief, as I said elsewhere, is surprisingly powerful... it can induce immune reactions, hormone level changes that are ordinarily only accounted for by external stimuli, or any number of other effects on a person's physiology that may be externally measurable, and are *VERY* real.
Either you have to actually genuinely convince the sufferer that what they are experiencing is caused by their own mind, or else convince the person that what they are sensitive to is simply not present.
Doing either can be extremely difficult, since as I said, there does not need to be any rational reason for them to believe that something they are allegedly sensitive to may be present.... but that belief can still be sufficient to trigger a real physiological reaction... if what they believe to be true actually is true, that only serves to reinforce the belief.
Actually, mass per unit area is a measurement of pressure, not force. Force is actually a product of mass and acceleration. Since you wanted to have a physics rage, I figured you wouldn't mind being corrected.
Now, to familiarize yourself with the colloquial norm, when someone talks about "5kg of force", they are generally not actually talking about 5kg as a mass, they are usually talking about 5kg as a WEIGHT, or to be more specific, approximately 49 Newtons, which *IS* the proper unit for force. Talking about Newtons of force, however, is not as intuitive to most people as talking about the force that is endured by some amount of mass subjected to Earth's gravity because we have daily personal experience with the latter, while the former basically sounds like an arbitrary number to most people, and many would only have an intuitive meaning of it if they had extensively utilized those units in their job or through personal experimentation, etc. Most bathroom scales typically measure a person's body weight in units of mass, for example, despite the fact that what they are really measuring is the force that is being exerted between them and the earth, so there is certainly no lack of precedent for using what are otherwise the same units of mass as a measurement for force. Since the ratio between force and weight is essentially constant, weight is often considered a synonym for force, for all practical purposes, even in the physics community.
Slashdot Mirror
That does not necessarily mean that their suffering is all in their mind because what a person believes or thinks can sometimes have real, measurable effects on their physiology. Although I think that what it does mean is that EM sensitivity needs to be treated as a psychological matter rather than physiological one.
Not even slightly.... The number of people may be very large, but the amount of money they control and spend is still very small compared to overall consumer spending. The top 20% income earners account for 95% of the economy. Even doubling minimum wage wouldn't impact that number in any appreciable way because of the enormous income disparity between the rich and the poor.
Numerous double blind studies have conclusively shown that such sensitivity ultimately depends on what the subject *believes* to be true, regardless of whether or not it actually is. Whether she would still "sense" anything inside of the Faraday cage actually depends on whether or not she genuinely believes the Faraday cage will truly stop the signals she believes are harming her, and whether or not she believes those signals to be present.
In other words, its all psychosomatic.... and should be treated as such. Psychosomatic disorders can still produce externally measurable changes in a person's body, so the suffering can still be legitimately real, and so I would not think that being simply dismissive of it is necessarily the best approach, but probably psychological help would be for the best so that she can learn how to recognize the false signals that her brain is telling her about, and perhaps eventually overcome the dysfunction.
Only if they have a LinkedIn profile, and even then, only if they keep it updated with whatever they are currently doing.
"Stealing" customers is a different matter... I've seen such agreements before and they are entirely legally enforceable. However, the person *is* still allowed to work for a competitor in the exact same industry, and solicit business from potential customers that did *NOT* have any imminent or active business dealings with the employee's former company while they were there. If the area is not large enough that there are no available customers, then that suggests the market is already saturated anyways, so a person *would* be out of luck in such a case just as if there were no available jobs in an area at all.
All available evidence on Electromagnetic sensitivity suggests that is actually a purely psychosomatic disorder, but belief is tremendously powerful thing and can produce real and measurable physiological changes in a person, causing immune reactions without any externally visible cause, change in hormone levels that should otherwise only be explainable by other external phenomonena, etc.
Treating serious psychosomatic disorders requires the person to not just be aware that the problem is all in their own mind, but it also requires that a person be aware of some pathway to a solution to their apparent problem. I have heard it best described by one psychologist as (althouh I am paraphrasing here, this is not a direct quote) "there's nothing actually wrong with your hardware, but basically the software in your brain is misfiring and telling your body the wrong thing.". A person with a psychosomatic disorder needs to learn a skill that is not necessarily easy to come by, and that is to learn how to ignore those essentially false signals that their brain is telling their own body, and causing it to react in ways that might otherwise be attributed to some external phenomena. This is why the person needs psychiatric help.
Simply telling an EHS sufferer that it's just all in their own head and they should be able to simply think their way out of their problem is only going to get you ignored, because their body may still be producing a real reaction to something, even if that something is only imagined.
No noncompete is that long... typically, they are measured in weeks or months. The compensation is typically paid out all at once, much like severance pay, if it is applicable.
In practice, an ex employer is not even going to know what a former employee is doing after he or she leaves, let alone who they are working for without having to spend time and resources following what that person is doing outside of company time. Non-competes really are, for all practical purposes, completely unenforceable, and not generally worth the paper they are printed on... at best they typically only serve as a cautionary warning to not violate any NDA's, which an employer *CAN* legally go after you for violating potentially even years after you leave the company, although the more time that elapses since employment ended, the more difficult (exponentially, even) it becomes to establish any plausible NDA violation, and so NDA's have a practical upper limit to their duration that is usually less than a decade.
If noncompetes were generally legally enforceable, they could be presented as a condition of employment by an employer, and effectively prohibit any employees from legally practising in whatever trade it is that they are trained in after they leave said employer (short of moving to a distant enough jurisdiction), when they have not actually done anything to warrant such treatment. Although a lawyer can be disbarred, and a medical practitioner can lose their license, for example, such people actually have to do something that was *WRONG* to warrant such a thing.
Consider...
Why should you be expecting anyone else to think when you clearly can't even be bothered to?
Non-competes are often not enforceable after a person's employment contract is over. If a company doesn't want you to work for a competitor, they can usually be required to compensate you for that, typically in an amount equivalent to salary for the duation of the non-compete.
They may be able to successfully sue you for NDA violation, as long as they have a sufficient factual basis to show that it was more likely than not that you had actually violated the NDA. But that's not the same thing as a non-compete.
You are right... it was the Apple ][+ that could utilize the 16K ram expansion card. My bad. My first experience with an Apple was on a ][+, and I sometimes forget about the +.
What sentiment are you accusing me of propogating, exactly? I'm only suggesting that even guns have a significant chance of not killing their target, and yet somehow they are considered as "lethal" while tasers are frequently not. Sure, guns have a better chance of killing you than tasers do, overall... but that is only because a gunshot wound is simply much more likely to result in medical complications that require a physician and medical treatment than a tasering is (nearly 100% for the former, while the latter is around 33%). Does something that is only about 1/3 as lethal as a gunshot wound barring medical treatment strike you as particularly "non-lethal"?
That said, I'm wondering how AM even made any money.... didn't they offer something like a money-back guarantee or something if people didn't have an affair within some fixed period of signup, like maybe a month or two? Or did they depend on people becoming indifferent about it, and not trying to get their money back?
They just have significantly better chance than not of not killing you. They are, in fact, "less lethal", but definitely not non-lethal.
For what it's worth, getting shot by a gun is statistically only fatal about 5% of the time. While a taser is lethal even less often than that, it's still clearly lethal.
Consumer spending accounts for 70% of the GDP, the less wealthy spend a greater percentage of their income on necessities. The top 20% spend more than 10 times as much on consumer goods as the bottom 80% combined.
The Apple ][ had only 48K of regular RAM. There was 4K of IO-mapped space, and 12K of ROM. With a ram expansion card, could could map the 16K of additional memory using bank switching into the top 12K rom area. In practice, most software did not use this area. When ProDOS came out, the area was not available for end-user programs at all, since it used this space.
Which is why raising minimum wage by some amount does not result in a correspondingly large increase in inflation... it contributes some, but historically the effects of raising minimum wage have always been extremely minor, and is entirely outweighed by the fact that the people whose wages were increased tend to be able to afford a better standard of living.
Of course, it's also possible that this is a plot by the show's creators to inflate its own popularity by creating controversy.
Just sayin'....
There is a direct correlation between income and consumer spending, which accounts for 70% of the GDP. The lowest 80% of all wage earners control only 5% of that figure, while only 20% of all wage earners contribute to 95% of all consumer spending.
The wealthy may only spend a tiny fraction of their money on consumer goods, but that is only because they have more money in the first place.... Over 70% of the GDP is accounted for by consumer spending, and the bottom 80% earners controlled only 5% of all financial wealth in the USA in 2013.
I don't think you realize just how paltry all of those worker's wages are to the overall economy.... there is an absolutely *ENORMOUS* gap between the high income and low income earners, and even despite the vastly larger number of low income earners, they still collectively contribute to only a very tiny percentage of the overall economy.
Think "Pareto Principle".
The $15 minimum wage will contribute minimally to inflation, because the amount of money represented by all of the low wage earners combined is actually still a relatively small percentage of the overall economy.
It will certainly have a modest effect on inflation, but not anywhere near the effect that detractors frequently attribute to it.
Of course, but units of mass per unit of area is still considered pressure.
Look at your car tires for recommended inflation pressure. Note the abbreviation PSI - pounds per square inch, ie, units of mass per unit area.
True... but even if the device is covered, if the sufferer still believes that the device is on, even if they have absolutely no rational basis for that belief, then they may still suffer from the psychosomatic effects. Belief, as I said elsewhere, is surprisingly powerful... it can induce immune reactions, hormone level changes that are ordinarily only accounted for by external stimuli, or any number of other effects on a person's physiology that may be externally measurable, and are *VERY* real.
Either you have to actually genuinely convince the sufferer that what they are experiencing is caused by their own mind, or else convince the person that what they are sensitive to is simply not present.
Doing either can be extremely difficult, since as I said, there does not need to be any rational reason for them to believe that something they are allegedly sensitive to may be present.... but that belief can still be sufficient to trigger a real physiological reaction... if what they believe to be true actually is true, that only serves to reinforce the belief.
Actually, mass per unit area is a measurement of pressure, not force. Force is actually a product of mass and acceleration. Since you wanted to have a physics rage, I figured you wouldn't mind being corrected.
Now, to familiarize yourself with the colloquial norm, when someone talks about "5kg of force", they are generally not actually talking about 5kg as a mass, they are usually talking about 5kg as a WEIGHT, or to be more specific, approximately 49 Newtons, which *IS* the proper unit for force. Talking about Newtons of force, however, is not as intuitive to most people as talking about the force that is endured by some amount of mass subjected to Earth's gravity because we have daily personal experience with the latter, while the former basically sounds like an arbitrary number to most people, and many would only have an intuitive meaning of it if they had extensively utilized those units in their job or through personal experimentation, etc. Most bathroom scales typically measure a person's body weight in units of mass, for example, despite the fact that what they are really measuring is the force that is being exerted between them and the earth, so there is certainly no lack of precedent for using what are otherwise the same units of mass as a measurement for force. Since the ratio between force and weight is essentially constant, weight is often considered a synonym for force, for all practical purposes, even in the physics community.