Intersections often have red lights because there isn't sufficient visibility to see intersecting traffic coming in order to determine if it's safe to proceed.
Great points, but re: "Murdoch Loses 90% of Readers with Times Paywall", this headline is unlikely because Rupert Murdoch does not own the publisher of the Times; he own the publisher of the Wall Street Journal, among others.
I'm neither a gun owner or gun demonizer, and I agree with your points about educating the kids. If I kept a gun, I would keep it locked up anyway. Kids have friends who come over to play, babysitters can get curious, etc. A loaded firearm is not something I would want easy access to.
For each skill you require, have the candidate rank himself or herself on a scale of 1 to 6. Each step must have specific criteria. E.g., step 1 is "never heard of it", step 2 is "heard of it, haven't used it", step 3 is "used but would need a refresher before using again", step 4 is "Used a lot, still have a lot to learn", step 5 is "expert", step 6 is "have published or lectured articles on it". Can use more or fewer steps, but I think you get the idea. To save your time, this should be done before the interview.
You can probably use this to filter out a lot of the candidates. People who lie will get caught in the next round.
During the interview, ask specific technical questions based on the individual's self-ranking for that skill. You can pull the questions from Q&A forums, your own experience, etc. Probably want to ask 2-3 questions per skill, but you might need 10 or so questions with varying skill levels to ask the different candidates.
You should ask questions until you're confident that the person has answered their self-ranking accurately, but if you have to ask about more than 5 skills, you probably don't trust the person and you should end the interview.
I should add that technical skills are quickly obsolete, so unless you're hiring contractors, which you're apparently not, you shouldn't use skill in specific technologies as the primary criterion for hiring decisions. Ability to learn, people skills, and work ethic are much more important and harder to teach. Of course, if they have few technical skills, then their ability to learn may be low, so they're not exactly independent criteria.
While Microsoft is pushing 64-bit as a way to gain performance in the OS, it earlier this year advised users to install the 32-bit version of Office 2010, 'because currently many common add-ins for Office will not function in the 64-bit edition.'"
may be technically true, but is irrelevant to whether people should use 32-bit or 64-bit. 32-bit programs such as Office run just fine in 64-bit Windows. Running a 64-bit OS is going to improve performance (in most situations) if your other applications use a lot of memory.
The DMCA makes it legal UNTIL a takedown notice is issued.
The DMCA does not make the exchange legal or illegal; rather, it provides a mechanism that allows ISPs to host user-uploaded content without liability for copyright infringement, provided the procedures are followed with respect to takedown notices. A person who makes infringing copies is still liable for making those copies, regardless of whether the copies are uploaded to an ISP, sold on the street, etc. Of course, not all copies are infringing (though the RIAA would probably disagree with this last statement).
I'm with you on the trusted root certificate and MITM, but why redirect from https://www.google.com/ to http://www.google.com/ ? Other than performance, why not have the transparent proxy use https to www.google.com ? Just because you can snoop on their data doesn't mean that other people should be able to.
At the risk of being labeled an AT&T stooge, a better analogy would be, "Captain, I discovered that the bulkheads that seal the ship in case of a hull breach actually stop several floors short. I verified this by damaging the hull with an iceberg and observing that the water lapped over the bulkheads. That's why your feet are wet."
Unlikely. She was the first female Googler and is listed on Google's executives page. She's not going anywhere and even if she did, she could spend the rest of her life snorting coke off the backs of hookers through $100 bills and never come close to spending all her money.
Was $5 the copay or the reimbursement from the insurer to the provider? I'm thinking the former. The reimbursement from the insurer to the provider was probably much higher -- maybe a big discount from the $580, to be sure -- but nowhere near $5. You might never see the reimbursement, since it may be considered a trade secret, but sometimes bills from the provider will include the info. The bill will essentially say, "This test costs $580 but your insurer reimbursed us $300 and we'll settle for that because that's what our contract with the insurer says we have to do". Or if it's an out-of-network provider, the message may be, "This test costs $580 but your insurer reimbursed us $300; cough up the $280".
I don't know resolution from revolution, but I'd bet that some class-action lawyer read this article and thought, "I can start a case based on this. I'll settle for a few hundred thousand for me and $5 coupons to the app store for the plaintiffs."
Then you're left with the question of which is right? Did Google Maps add a fake street, or did MapQuest miss a newly constructed street? I suppose you could go with the (set theory) intersection, but then you're going to miss some streets.
Pursuant to Title 17 USC 105, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), United States Department of Commerce, is authorized to receive and hold copyrights transferred to it by assignment or otherwise. Authors of the works appearing in the Digital Library of Mathematical Functions (DLMF) have assigned copyright to the works to NIST, United States Department of Commerce, as represented by the Secretary of Commerce.
Reasons why sticker meters are better (as far as city government is concerned), in no particular order:
Faster to empty 1 machine than vs. collecting the change from all those meters individually
Accepts payment in forms other than change - customers like the convenience, plus it's easier to raise rates (generally, people are willing to spend more when they can charge something)
no free loaders from the last person leaving before the time is up
no need to paint and repaint lines marking the spaces
fits more vehicles in the available space
1 machine is easier to keep in good working condition than several meters
So you have a point about the sticker thing and the wasted time for end-users, but I think 1, 4 and 5 offset that in terms of waste.
Mistrial? Would you mind reading the Wikipedia link, especially this part:
The 1895 decision in Sparf v. U.S. written by Justice John Marshall Harlan held that a trial judge has no responsibility to inform the jury of the right to nullify laws. It was a 5-4 decision. This decision, often cited, has led to a common practice by United States judges to penalize anyone who attempts to present legal argument to jurors and to declare a mistrial if such argument has been presented to them. In some states, jurors are likely to be struck from the panel during voir dire if they will not agree to accept as correct the rulings and instructions of the law as provided by the judge.
Recent court rulings have contributed to the prevention of jury nullification. A 1969 Fourth Circuit decision, U.S. v. Moylan, affirmed the right of jury nullification, but also upheld the power of the court to refuse to permit an instruction to the jury to this effect. In 1972, in United States v. Dougherty, 473 F.2d 1113, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a ruling similar to Moylan that affirmed the de facto power of a jury to nullify the law but upheld the denial of the defense's chance to instruct the jury about the power to nullify. In 1988, the Sixth Circuit upheld a jury instruction that "There is no such thing as valid jury nullification." In 1997, the Second Circuit ruled that jurors can be removed if there is evidence that they intend to nullify the law, under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 23(b). The Supreme Court has not recently confronted the issue of jury nullification.
So there might have been a mistrial if the jurors had been told about nullification, but there certainly wouldn't be a mistrial if the jurors were not told about nullification.
Jury nullification is a power that juries have, but that doesn't mean they have to be told about it.
Maybe you can - ask "Do you offer a cash discount?" every time you're getting ready to buy something with cash. If the answer is yes, then you'll get the "tax" (or at least, part of it) back.
Slashdot Mirror
Good grief, grow a pair. Terrorists can blow up things, big deal. That doesn't make building new things a bad idea.
While you make some good points in your post, "grabbing foreign citizens in other countries against local laws and extradition treaties" is allowed by U.S. courts. See http://www.freeexistence.org/us_extradition.html and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ker%E2%80%93Frisbie_Doctrine
Intersections often have red lights because there isn't sufficient visibility to see intersecting traffic coming in order to determine if it's safe to proceed.
Ooops, I'm the worst kind of pedant - the incorrect kind. I thought "Times" meant New York Times, but it means London Times, which Murdoch does own.
Great points, but re: "Murdoch Loses 90% of Readers with Times Paywall", this headline is unlikely because Rupert Murdoch does not own the publisher of the Times; he own the publisher of the Wall Street Journal, among others.
Agree that camping at Battleship Cove is a lot of fun. http://battleshipcove.org/camping.htm
I'm neither a gun owner or gun demonizer, and I agree with your points about educating the kids. If I kept a gun, I would keep it locked up anyway. Kids have friends who come over to play, babysitters can get curious, etc. A loaded firearm is not something I would want easy access to.
You should ask questions until you're confident that the person has answered their self-ranking accurately, but if you have to ask about more than 5 skills, you probably don't trust the person and you should end the interview.
I should add that technical skills are quickly obsolete, so unless you're hiring contractors, which you're apparently not, you shouldn't use skill in specific technologies as the primary criterion for hiring decisions. Ability to learn, people skills, and work ethic are much more important and harder to teach. Of course, if they have few technical skills, then their ability to learn may be low, so they're not exactly independent criteria.
TFA is heavily based on a Courtney Love speech from 10 years ago at http://www.salon.com/technology/feature/2000/06/14/love/print.html . Prettier charts in TFA, though.
Second, this bit:
may be technically true, but is irrelevant to whether people should use 32-bit or 64-bit. 32-bit programs such as Office run just fine in 64-bit Windows. Running a 64-bit OS is going to improve performance (in most situations) if your other applications use a lot of memory.
The DMCA does not make the exchange legal or illegal; rather, it provides a mechanism that allows ISPs to host user-uploaded content without liability for copyright infringement, provided the procedures are followed with respect to takedown notices. A person who makes infringing copies is still liable for making those copies, regardless of whether the copies are uploaded to an ISP, sold on the street, etc. Of course, not all copies are infringing (though the RIAA would probably disagree with this last statement).
I'm with you on the trusted root certificate and MITM, but why redirect from https://www.google.com/ to http://www.google.com/ ? Other than performance, why not have the transparent proxy use https to www.google.com ? Just because you can snoop on their data doesn't mean that other people should be able to.
At the risk of being labeled an AT&T stooge, a better analogy would be, "Captain, I discovered that the bulkheads that seal the ship in case of a hull breach actually stop several floors short. I verified this by damaging the hull with an iceberg and observing that the water lapped over the bulkheads. That's why your feet are wet."
Unlikely. She was the first female Googler and is listed on Google's executives page. She's not going anywhere and even if she did, she could spend the rest of her life snorting coke off the backs of hookers through $100 bills and never come close to spending all her money.
Was $5 the copay or the reimbursement from the insurer to the provider? I'm thinking the former. The reimbursement from the insurer to the provider was probably much higher -- maybe a big discount from the $580, to be sure -- but nowhere near $5. You might never see the reimbursement, since it may be considered a trade secret, but sometimes bills from the provider will include the info. The bill will essentially say, "This test costs $580 but your insurer reimbursed us $300 and we'll settle for that because that's what our contract with the insurer says we have to do". Or if it's an out-of-network provider, the message may be, "This test costs $580 but your insurer reimbursed us $300; cough up the $280".
You forgot about step 4. Without the copyright grant, the journal won't publish the paper.
I don't know resolution from revolution, but I'd bet that some class-action lawyer read this article and thought, "I can start a case based on this. I'll settle for a few hundred thousand for me and $5 coupons to the app store for the plaintiffs."
Sorry, but Verizon Wireless may not be much help: "Kiss Your Unlimited Data Goodbye: Verizon Wants Tiered Plans with 4G".
Then you're left with the question of which is right? Did Google Maps add a fake street, or did MapQuest miss a newly constructed street? I suppose you could go with the (set theory) intersection, but then you're going to miss some streets.
It's a depressing story, indeed - thanks for the link. Minor correction, though; http://reason.com/archives/2006/10/01/the-case-of-cory-maye/1 says that the warrant was for the correct address, so the search wasn't illegal.
So you have a point about the sticker thing and the wasted time for end-users, but I think 1, 4 and 5 offset that in terms of waste.
Drill, baby, drill!
So there might have been a mistrial if the jurors had been told about nullification, but there certainly wouldn't be a mistrial if the jurors were not told about nullification.
Jury nullification is a power that juries have, but that doesn't mean they have to be told about it.
>I can't get the "tax" back for myself...
Maybe you can - ask "Do you offer a cash discount?" every time you're getting ready to buy something with cash. If the answer is yes, then you'll get the "tax" (or at least, part of it) back.