I'm not really convinced on your last part. They scan tickets as you're boarding a flight, so would know if you weren't on it in the case of an accident.
On through flights passengers are not forced to deplane and reboard, they generally stay on the plane, so tickets are not rescanned.
If they don't want people getting off midway through a series of flights, maybe try not pricing an entire trip with multiple legs less than the individual flight to the city in the middle. Their own byzantine pricing system is what led to this result.
It's not always done by airlines for shits and giggles. A lot of airports have frequency requirements for landing slots, so instead of flying completely empty planes on routes to preserve slot allocation (which does happen), they may offer reduced fares to those cities. The airlines may be giving up a revenue premium to generate demand in the other city to help offset the loss that would otherwise occur. This goes for smaller airports as well that may have government subsidies to increase access for smaller markets: to drive up demand in those markets you offer connecting tickets that might be cheaper than flights originating out of a hub.
The simple matter is, if airlines are offering a cheaper ticket to a connecting destination that they would had you terminated somewhere, they are needing to drive traffic to that destination for some reason. Skipping out halfway through a connection can also cause increased costs for the airline having to track/reroute bags, etc. And then of course in today's climate there's the security/safety angle as well. Say you bail on the last leg and the plane goes down. The airline still thinks you are on board (especially if it was a through flight with no equipment change). If the government finds out you left the flight and there's an accident, you immediately become a target of suspicion.
When dealing with people, numbers are not the end all, be all. There are times when the quantitatively correct solution may not necessarily be the qualitatively correct one. Say for example there is a disease that can be treated through regular yet painful treatments at the cost of $1 million. There is a cure for the disease, with a one-time application that costs $1.5 million. Quantitatively the treatment course is the best option as it it cheaper. However, qualitatively, the cure is the best option as it reduces suffering.
For a more real world example, let's looks at the Titanic sinking and the classic "women and children first". From a purely quantitative point of view, it would have more optimal to prioritize men and women of economical or child-bearing productive age as they have the most benefit to society, then the children, and finally the elderly. However, no one would accept that solution as the most optimal one, neither then nor now.
You can accumulate a "life savings" when you've barely lived? I dunno but saving up $500k in a matter of a few years of your career seems like you either got lucky or you're very successful and are going to be just fine.
420k in 7 years is only 60k a year. With a decent-paying tech job in California and humble living conditions he could easily have saved that up.
Blitzkrieg relies on speed and technological advantage to succeed, and succeed it did. However, the comparison is very apt because what did the Germans in wasnt the failure of blitzkrieg. It was the failure of leadership to adapt to changing circumstances and increasing innovation and improvement by the enemy. Basically, innovate or die. If you are sufficiently big enough inertia can carry you a long way, but die you eventually will.
So what? I mean, what do you expect her to do for the rest of her carrier? Dig ditches? This is an area she knows, she should apply her knowledge.
So teach, speak, become a TV talking head, use connections to help towns set up municipal ISPs, etc. You know, jobs/activities that don't involve you taking money from businesses that you used to regulate.
Those Chinese factories literally have storefronts you can go into and they have knockoffs made on extra shifts. I know a guy that goes out to Shanghai about once a month and buys stuff from them all the time. Exact same quality as the "real" stuff.
So you view the south as occupied territories, not a part of the union?
While the war was ongoing, yes, they were occupied territory. They had a functioning government, territorial integrity, (relatively) functional currency, and diplomatic representation. They were literally one victory away from receiving international recognition as an independent state. After surrender and reintegration into the union, they once again became US territory. Just as the original 13 colonies were occupied territory for the areas held by the British during the Revolution.
Yet you still manage to be salty about some bent railroad ties resulting from losing the war that the South started over an unforgivable practice of slavery.
Who says I was salty? I was merely making a tongue in cheek reference to Sherman and the March. However, I am of the camp that argues that boiling down the cause of the Civil War to slavery is a gross simplification. While it may have been about slavery and profits for the landowners and aristocracy behind secession, for the majority of the men behind the guns, it was about the perception (fueled by the pro-secessionist political/economic forces) that outsiders were going to come in and take away or change their way of life. That perception still exists today and can partially explain the rise of the alt-right and white nationalist movements in mainstream American politics.
You do, of course, realize that destroying the tracks was merely an act of genocide. It was a deliberate, malicious act to destroy the economy in order to weaken the southern culture *after the war*.
If a state at war is not trying to destroy it's enemy's ability to make war, that state is ineptly led and most likely destined to lose the war. Atlanta and it's railroads were a valid military target. If you want to blame anyone for the state of the South after the war, blame Booth. He's the idiot that killed Lincoln and let the hardliners take control of Reconstruction.
Speaking as an Atlanta native, we are well aware that Northerners have plenty of experience heating up railroad tracks.
Yeah maybe you'll think about not owning slaves sooner next time and then you could get over a bitch slap that happened 150 years ago.
Eh, my family most likely never owned slaves. Father's side comes from NE TN which was predominately Unionist, mother's side comes from Chicago (although supposedly at one time they were merchants in the Caribbean-what type of trade they were in is up for conjecture).
Going big would only accomplish one of 2 things: get you caught or get you unpaid. The trick is to make it an amount where the loss, hassle, or inconvenience of either not paying or fighting off the extortion is less than the value of just paying the ransom. No one is going to pay 150k. They either dont have the cash or will go to the cops. Almost everyone can scrape up $150, and throw cops would laugh you away at 150.
Some of these bastards are using phone numbers in the same exchange YYY of XXX-YYY-ZZZ, so that the number looks familiar... They don't even have to buy a number, they can just spoof the caller ID.
Why, in 2019 can't I trace calls coming to me? (and have it be accurate)
I love it when they do that. I have only ever known 2 people with my same middle 3 digits, my sister and myself. So any call with my area code and 1st 3 digits I immediately ignore then block. Really cuts down on the spam calls.
IN GENERAL: Dogs are more like kids, they are dependents and look for you for direction. Cats are more like fellow adults/buddies, they're more independent but still enjoy your company but they have a life outside of you.
With a cat I have an arrangement of "here, you eat your food and shit in the litterbox. You have your life and I have mine. If you want to cuddle on the couch, that's cool".
Try getting a wife instead. You eventually end up with basically the same arrangement, but there's also the occasional opportunity for sex.
Maduro and Chavez are/were near the Communist-end of the Socialist political spectrum, where Chomsky also likes to hang out.
From Wikipedia:
In a 2017 interview, after being asked if he would take Venezuela's failing economy as an admission that socialism "wrecked people's lives", philosopher Noam Chomsky said: "I never described Chavez's state capitalist government as 'socialist' or even hinted at such an absurdity. It was quite remote from socialism. Private capitalism remained... Capitalists were free to undermine the economy in all sorts of ways, like massive export of capital."
To blatantly steal from Douglas Adams, Chavismo is almost, but entirely unlike, socialism.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not really convinced on your last part. They scan tickets as you're boarding a flight, so would know if you weren't on it in the case of an accident.
On through flights passengers are not forced to deplane and reboard, they generally stay on the plane, so tickets are not rescanned.
If they don't want people getting off midway through a series of flights, maybe try not pricing an entire trip with multiple legs less than the individual flight to the city in the middle. Their own byzantine pricing system is what led to this result.
It's not always done by airlines for shits and giggles. A lot of airports have frequency requirements for landing slots, so instead of flying completely empty planes on routes to preserve slot allocation (which does happen), they may offer reduced fares to those cities. The airlines may be giving up a revenue premium to generate demand in the other city to help offset the loss that would otherwise occur. This goes for smaller airports as well that may have government subsidies to increase access for smaller markets: to drive up demand in those markets you offer connecting tickets that might be cheaper than flights originating out of a hub.
The simple matter is, if airlines are offering a cheaper ticket to a connecting destination that they would had you terminated somewhere, they are needing to drive traffic to that destination for some reason. Skipping out halfway through a connection can also cause increased costs for the airline having to track/reroute bags, etc. And then of course in today's climate there's the security/safety angle as well. Say you bail on the last leg and the plane goes down. The airline still thinks you are on board (especially if it was a through flight with no equipment change). If the government finds out you left the flight and there's an accident, you immediately become a target of suspicion.
When dealing with people, numbers are not the end all, be all. There are times when the quantitatively correct solution may not necessarily be the qualitatively correct one. Say for example there is a disease that can be treated through regular yet painful treatments at the cost of $1 million. There is a cure for the disease, with a one-time application that costs $1.5 million. Quantitatively the treatment course is the best option as it it cheaper. However, qualitatively, the cure is the best option as it reduces suffering.
For a more real world example, let's looks at the Titanic sinking and the classic "women and children first". From a purely quantitative point of view, it would have more optimal to prioritize men and women of economical or child-bearing productive age as they have the most benefit to society, then the children, and finally the elderly. However, no one would accept that solution as the most optimal one, neither then nor now.
You can accumulate a "life savings" when you've barely lived? I dunno but saving up $500k in a matter of a few years of your career seems like you either got lucky or you're very successful and are going to be just fine.
420k in 7 years is only 60k a year. With a decent-paying tech job in California and humble living conditions he could easily have saved that up.
Geez, with how you tell it you'd swear that the game was promoting a "dine and dash" mentality.
No, in this case it's more a of a "dine and bash".
Hey, I've been on slashdot since I was 15 or 16 and my therapist says after 15 years of therapy I am finally well adjusted!
Takes a lot of guts to open a store that only sells one flavor of pie. I hope it works out for them.
Blitzkrieg relies on speed and technological advantage to succeed, and succeed it did. However, the comparison is very apt because what did the Germans in wasnt the failure of blitzkrieg. It was the failure of leadership to adapt to changing circumstances and increasing innovation and improvement by the enemy. Basically, innovate or die. If you are sufficiently big enough inertia can carry you a long way, but die you eventually will.
So what? I mean, what do you expect her to do for the rest of her carrier? Dig ditches? This is an area she knows, she should apply her knowledge.
So teach, speak, become a TV talking head, use connections to help towns set up municipal ISPs, etc. You know, jobs/activities that don't involve you taking money from businesses that you used to regulate.
Those Chinese factories literally have storefronts you can go into and they have knockoffs made on extra shifts. I know a guy that goes out to Shanghai about once a month and buys stuff from them all the time. Exact same quality as the "real" stuff.
I'm not arguing for the merits of those beliefs, I'm simply stating that they held those beliefs.
So you view the south as occupied territories, not a part of the union?
While the war was ongoing, yes, they were occupied territory. They had a functioning government, territorial integrity, (relatively) functional currency, and diplomatic representation. They were literally one victory away from receiving international recognition as an independent state. After surrender and reintegration into the union, they once again became US territory. Just as the original 13 colonies were occupied territory for the areas held by the British during the Revolution.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/...
If I was on a plane and saw that I would immediately ask to be deplaned as I would not consider that aircraft airworthy.
Eh, my family most likely never owned slaves.
Yet you still manage to be salty about some bent railroad ties resulting from losing the war that the South started over an unforgivable practice of slavery.
Who says I was salty? I was merely making a tongue in cheek reference to Sherman and the March. However, I am of the camp that argues that boiling down the cause of the Civil War to slavery is a gross simplification. While it may have been about slavery and profits for the landowners and aristocracy behind secession, for the majority of the men behind the guns, it was about the perception (fueled by the pro-secessionist political/economic forces) that outsiders were going to come in and take away or change their way of life. That perception still exists today and can partially explain the rise of the alt-right and white nationalist movements in mainstream American politics.
You do, of course, realize that destroying the tracks was merely an act of genocide. It was a deliberate, malicious act to destroy the economy in order to weaken the southern culture *after the war*.
If a state at war is not trying to destroy it's enemy's ability to make war, that state is ineptly led and most likely destined to lose the war. Atlanta and it's railroads were a valid military target. If you want to blame anyone for the state of the South after the war, blame Booth. He's the idiot that killed Lincoln and let the hardliners take control of Reconstruction.
Speaking as an Atlanta native, we are well aware that Northerners have plenty of experience heating up railroad tracks.
Yeah maybe you'll think about not owning slaves sooner next time and then you could get over a bitch slap that happened 150 years ago.
Eh, my family most likely never owned slaves. Father's side comes from NE TN which was predominately Unionist, mother's side comes from Chicago (although supposedly at one time they were merchants in the Caribbean-what type of trade they were in is up for conjecture).
Speaking as an Atlanta native, we are well aware that Northerners have plenty of experience heating up railroad tracks.
The base "Switch Lite" ...
I think "Lite Switch" has a better ring to it.
It will tell you how to install Linux?
Going big would only accomplish one of 2 things: get you caught or get you unpaid. The trick is to make it an amount where the loss, hassle, or inconvenience of either not paying or fighting off the extortion is less than the value of just paying the ransom. No one is going to pay 150k. They either dont have the cash or will go to the cops. Almost everyone can scrape up $150, and throw cops would laugh you away at 150.
Some of these bastards are using phone numbers in the same exchange YYY of XXX-YYY-ZZZ, so that the number looks familiar... They don't even have to buy a number, they can just spoof the caller ID.
Why, in 2019 can't I trace calls coming to me? (and have it be accurate)
I love it when they do that. I have only ever known 2 people with my same middle 3 digits, my sister and myself. So any call with my area code and 1st 3 digits I immediately ignore then block. Really cuts down on the spam calls.
Dogs give you unconditional love...not sure what you get out of a cat.
Apparently schizophrenia.
IN GENERAL: Dogs are more like kids, they are dependents and look for you for direction. Cats are more like fellow adults/buddies, they're more independent but still enjoy your company but they have a life outside of you.
With a cat I have an arrangement of "here, you eat your food and shit in the litterbox. You have your life and I have mine. If you want to cuddle on the couch, that's cool".
Try getting a wife instead. You eventually end up with basically the same arrangement, but there's also the occasional opportunity for sex.
Why not both: a dog to look after and take for walks, and a cat to curl up on your lap as you read a book at night?
Because my 50lb dog already tries to do that second part, too.
Maduro and Chavez are/were near the Communist-end of the Socialist political spectrum, where Chomsky also likes to hang out.
From Wikipedia:
In a 2017 interview, after being asked if he would take Venezuela's failing economy as an admission that socialism "wrecked people's lives", philosopher Noam Chomsky said: "I never described Chavez's state capitalist government as 'socialist' or even hinted at such an absurdity. It was quite remote from socialism. Private capitalism remained ... Capitalists were free to undermine the economy in all sorts of ways, like massive export of capital."
To blatantly steal from Douglas Adams, Chavismo is almost, but entirely unlike, socialism.