Any but the very most sparsely populated areas have schools big enough to handle all but the wildest extremes
You know this how? I have talked to parents of children with special needs, and it is very common for them to put them on a long bus ride to that one special school in the district to find teachers with the appropriate training, and these are reasonable wealthy suburban districts. So those schools that look "big enough" to you do not have the resources you think they do. Perhaps they could, if only we stopped pretending that they have too much money.
The very idea of merit is eroding under pressure from all across the political spectrum and social spectrum. Real Gifted programs for genuine talent was teetering on its last legs 40 years ago. Now everyone considered "college bound" is swept into the same pool, and college prep track classes is the only accommodation for Giftedness, no matter how much that is holding some students back.
Once it has been decided on the basis of political convenience that the clean cut kid with 110 IQ and rich parents who hire tutors is an appropriate peer for the 150 IQ kid in his or her mental wheelhouse academic subject, we have given up on the idea of merit already. Who is to say 105 IQ is too low? 95? This is a game about race/class, and it always was -- we just did not bother to notice when only white people played the game. Now that brown people want to play the same game by the already established rules, who is to say they are wrong? We gave up on taking merit seriously long ago!
Smaller cheaper schools add up to cost more money. Scale has advantages and disadvantages. Small independent schools do not have the resources to handle outliers. Public school districts could be much cheaper if they focused on the most normal 90%, and ignored the needs of the students at both the top and bottom of the bell curve like in the Goode Olde Days. If they do not fit in, just ignore them or kick them out.
There are reasons that Gifted children were once categorized under the law as having a learning disability in many states: they literally had lower school success/graduation rates than kids with average IQs in the school systems as they existed.
Well, a clearinghouse could have the expertise to formulate boilerplate agreements under the advice of lawyers, that would bear legal scrutiny from both parties. And there could even be clauses about an arbitration process in case of dispute, that could go to a recognized third party expert to analyze.
I agree that thinking you can make the "sell" your maybe threat for good money is not something for amateurs.
I get your drift, but what exactly does "can resuse" mean?
The engine change introduced a new failure mode. The software change does seem to mitigate that particular risk effectively, while adding a worse failure mode.
If the software change is viewed only through the lens of fixing a narrow problem, then it makes sense. But that is bollocks engineering. The software change itself was very clearly not analyzed as a feature that might have its own novel failure mode(s).
It is really expensive computer diagnostic equipment only because the manufacturer is trying to control the repair market. Modern engines are run by computers that know a lot about what is going right and what is going wrong, without any outside guidance. Simple error codes or status codes should be sufficient.
In most cases, an experienced mechanic could figure out what needs to be replaced even without the aid of a computer, by observing what does not work or listening to the engine.
But your John Deere combine might shut itself down if it detects a non-John Deere part. For your protection, of course.
Oracle is already known for cutting positions all the time. It is surprising that anyone would bother to be more cutthroat than the usual. Probably someone's MBO gave a number for shifting resources out of some divisions, so that those salaries could be spent building up their cloud offering, and that executive realized that the easiest way to make the quarter's full bonus was to just take the direct path.
Liquidity is a complex concept, which includes both the ability to convert into and out of an "asset class" at all, but also certain degree of short term price stability. Short term price stability does not easily come from a distributed model. Large exchanges have the resources and skills to help maintain price stability (even imperfectly), and pocket a bit of profit along the way.
It is true that fuel efficiency drops in the winter, but it is not a huge amount. In a lot of states, it is required to add ethanol into the fuel mix sold at gas stations for winters months, nominally for pollution reasons (but probably more due the political clout of farmers). Ethanol will reduce your "gas mileage", even if you warm up your engine block on a warmish winter day drive.
(I do not have experience to address your question about batteries.)
In some cases, not even 15 minutes. Called my credit card to tell the delivery did not happen, in spite of the vendor saying it was delivered. Since the vendor was Amazon, they did not even ask if I tried to contact them -- they just credited me the money with no questions asked.
Oh you don't like Last Jedi? Sexist! You only think Black Panther is 'good' instead of 'the biggest cultural moment evar!!!eleventy!'? Racist! Actual reasons for the opinion are irrelevant, something made abundantly clear.
I, for one, never make assumptions for merely disliking or liking any movie.
But I have seen enough "actual reasons" provided to know with certainty there are quite a few sexists and racists, and then a huge bunch of fellow travelers who enthusiastically agree and are too cowardly to name a reason why.
I wonder if back then the '70s version of today's insecure basement-dwelling neckbeard trolls were all complaining about a strong female lead, the way they do today about Rey, Carol Danvers et al.
It was so rare that there was not really a reaction -- just a strange detail in already very unusual movie.
Keep in mind that even in the late 80s, Star Trek: The Next Generation, as proto-PC as it was, treated strong women as a bit of an anomaly. Yes, they had Yar, but she was a bit of a weirdo from a psychotically violent planet, thus easily explained away as a bizarre outlier that did not matter to the civilized world. Either Crusher and Troi, as Starfleet officers, could easily have had some very modest degree of martial arts competence, yet they basically fell into the standard helpless female role when it came to fisticuffs.
The first true strong action hero female was Linda Hamilton's jaw-dropping performance as Sara Connor in Terminator 2, released in 1991. Arguably, the character Connor was riding the edge of sanity. And ripped. And hawt. And I am sure the neckbeards found some way to approve of that.
As pointed out in 1984, the proles can start unrest, but they do not create revolutions, although other groups can take advantage of unrest to make try to start a revolution.
But probably a detail that is a telling thing is that her father was an executive at Enron. So she is no stranger to corruption in business.
My guess is that she is a disciple of the "fake it until to make it" school of success, in an extreme form. I think it is telling that she thought indefatigable chirpiness is a necessary ingredient to visionary success, especially when faced with bad news.
A number of Enron executives seem to believe that their shenanigans were merely technically illegal, and that if only their gambits had succeeded in keeping the stock price rising, all would have been forgiven.
I think that Holmes here thought a little fudging of the truth was okay, because a few hundred million thrown at the problem would make the lies true enough eventually, and all would have been forgiven. Of course, a little fudging of the truth set her up to need to fudge more and more extravagantly to maintain the aura of success. We know where that usually ends up.
When I think Political Correctness, who doesn't think Henry Kissinger as part of the feel good package? After all, no company has ever failed big based on fraud when men were in charge.
Holmes is the daughter of an Enron executive. Need I say more?
Some are amateurs who just like reactions. Some, being actual paid Russian trolls, are probably rated by the number of responses. Angry responses are easier to elicit than thoughtful ones, thus...this stuff.
If 2% can motivate someone to take on extra hassles of cash, like precisely tallying the materials for the job, then we do not have to guess what dodging ~25% (IRS) and 14% (SSI) can get via chucking the paperwork in the trash.
And I bet you are right about the fun and games part, too. The temptation would be to shove the materials costs of 6 jobs into that one job that paid with a big check, to whittle down the profits you are forced to declare. That works until someone asks questions about why plumber who is often claiming to always mismanage expenses to his detriment can live on less than 1000 hours of labor.
We are already past ten toes over that line. When there is a power outage most businesses shut down, because they cannot process credit cards. Many cannot even process cash.
Obviously much of this is still solvable with cash around. Supposedly.
Of course, this larger ominous question is why the banks were bailed out with the 2008 meltdown. Because if all the big banks were suddenly forced to file for bankruptcy, would the credit cards still work? Could you get gas and get to work? Can that gas station actually get gasoline delivered? Can your grocery store get restocked?
Once a business, say, a gasoline distributor, goes into bankruptcy, they cannot suddenly create a novel procedure to extend credit to the corner station without approval from a judge.
If the Post Office is not a person, why can you sue it for violating a patent?
Personally, I think it would be all kinds of exciting for plaintiff to win here, so we can shave down the "rights" of the legal fictions called corporations. But I suspect the Supremes will see the trap.
"Cancer survival rates" are a baloney statistic. What matters are mortality rates. If I diagnose a cancer earlier and the treatment does exactly nothing, my survival rate improves while the mortality rate stays the same. In fact, if I can diagnose false positives, my survival rate looks even better while mortality stays constant. The more harmless lumps I remove from the breasts of healthy women, the better and better my survival statistics look.
Measured by mortality rate the US is not substantially better or worse than any other rich industrial nation, including the UK. It is a myth that the US system is better at all.
That is why The Vatican easily came to terms with Darwinian Evolution, because any beautiful and true theory/mechanism could be a useful towards His purposes when applied as a tool in God's hands.
Many so-called believers cannot actually accept a God that they cannot easily understand.
Slashdot Mirror
Any but the very most sparsely populated areas have schools big enough to handle all but the wildest extremes
You know this how? I have talked to parents of children with special needs, and it is very common for them to put them on a long bus ride to that one special school in the district to find teachers with the appropriate training, and these are reasonable wealthy suburban districts. So those schools that look "big enough" to you do not have the resources you think they do. Perhaps they could, if only we stopped pretending that they have too much money.
The very idea of merit is eroding under pressure from all across the political spectrum and social spectrum. Real Gifted programs for genuine talent was teetering on its last legs 40 years ago. Now everyone considered "college bound" is swept into the same pool, and college prep track classes is the only accommodation for Giftedness, no matter how much that is holding some students back.
Once it has been decided on the basis of political convenience that the clean cut kid with 110 IQ and rich parents who hire tutors is an appropriate peer for the 150 IQ kid in his or her mental wheelhouse academic subject, we have given up on the idea of merit already. Who is to say 105 IQ is too low? 95? This is a game about race/class, and it always was -- we just did not bother to notice when only white people played the game. Now that brown people want to play the same game by the already established rules, who is to say they are wrong? We gave up on taking merit seriously long ago!
Smaller cheaper schools add up to cost more money. Scale has advantages and disadvantages. Small independent schools do not have the resources to handle outliers. Public school districts could be much cheaper if they focused on the most normal 90%, and ignored the needs of the students at both the top and bottom of the bell curve like in the Goode Olde Days. If they do not fit in, just ignore them or kick them out.
There are reasons that Gifted children were once categorized under the law as having a learning disability in many states: they literally had lower school success/graduation rates than kids with average IQs in the school systems as they existed.
Well, a clearinghouse could have the expertise to formulate boilerplate agreements under the advice of lawyers, that would bear legal scrutiny from both parties. And there could even be clauses about an arbitration process in case of dispute, that could go to a recognized third party expert to analyze.
I agree that thinking you can make the "sell" your maybe threat for good money is not something for amateurs.
I get your drift, but what exactly does "can resuse" mean?
The engine change introduced a new failure mode. The software change does seem to mitigate that particular risk effectively, while adding a worse failure mode.
If the software change is viewed only through the lens of fixing a narrow problem, then it makes sense. But that is bollocks engineering. The software change itself was very clearly not analyzed as a feature that might have its own novel failure mode(s).
It is really expensive computer diagnostic equipment only because the manufacturer is trying to control the repair market. Modern engines are run by computers that know a lot about what is going right and what is going wrong, without any outside guidance. Simple error codes or status codes should be sufficient.
In most cases, an experienced mechanic could figure out what needs to be replaced even without the aid of a computer, by observing what does not work or listening to the engine.
But your John Deere combine might shut itself down if it detects a non-John Deere part. For your protection, of course.
Oracle is already known for cutting positions all the time. It is surprising that anyone would bother to be more cutthroat than the usual. Probably someone's MBO gave a number for shifting resources out of some divisions, so that those salaries could be spent building up their cloud offering, and that executive realized that the easiest way to make the quarter's full bonus was to just take the direct path.
They are still bundled in a manner that does not easily make sense to the customer.
When consumers say they want a la carte, they literally want to buy one movie or one season of a TV show or Sunday NFL games this year. A la carte.
It is not impossible, but I am skeptical.
Liquidity is a complex concept, which includes both the ability to convert into and out of an "asset class" at all, but also certain degree of short term price stability. Short term price stability does not easily come from a distributed model. Large exchanges have the resources and skills to help maintain price stability (even imperfectly), and pocket a bit of profit along the way.
It is true that fuel efficiency drops in the winter, but it is not a huge amount. In a lot of states, it is required to add ethanol into the fuel mix sold at gas stations for winters months, nominally for pollution reasons (but probably more due the political clout of farmers). Ethanol will reduce your "gas mileage", even if you warm up your engine block on a warmish winter day drive.
(I do not have experience to address your question about batteries.)
In some cases, not even 15 minutes. Called my credit card to tell the delivery did not happen, in spite of the vendor saying it was delivered. Since the vendor was Amazon, they did not even ask if I tried to contact them -- they just credited me the money with no questions asked.
Oh you don't like Last Jedi? Sexist! You only think Black Panther is 'good' instead of 'the biggest cultural moment evar!!!eleventy!'? Racist! Actual reasons for the opinion are irrelevant, something made abundantly clear.
I, for one, never make assumptions for merely disliking or liking any movie.
But I have seen enough "actual reasons" provided to know with certainty there are quite a few sexists and racists, and then a huge bunch of fellow travelers who enthusiastically agree and are too cowardly to name a reason why.
Walk like a duck. Talk like a duck. Consequences.
I wonder if back then the '70s version of today's insecure basement-dwelling neckbeard trolls were all complaining about a strong female lead, the way they do today about Rey, Carol Danvers et al.
It was so rare that there was not really a reaction -- just a strange detail in already very unusual movie.
Keep in mind that even in the late 80s, Star Trek: The Next Generation, as proto-PC as it was, treated strong women as a bit of an anomaly. Yes, they had Yar, but she was a bit of a weirdo from a psychotically violent planet, thus easily explained away as a bizarre outlier that did not matter to the civilized world. Either Crusher and Troi, as Starfleet officers, could easily have had some very modest degree of martial arts competence, yet they basically fell into the standard helpless female role when it came to fisticuffs.
The first true strong action hero female was Linda Hamilton's jaw-dropping performance as Sara Connor in Terminator 2, released in 1991. Arguably, the character Connor was riding the edge of sanity. And ripped. And hawt. And I am sure the neckbeards found some way to approve of that.
As pointed out in 1984, the proles can start unrest, but they do not create revolutions, although other groups can take advantage of unrest to make try to start a revolution.
Burying the survivors has a more powerful deterrent effect, you must admit.
But probably a detail that is a telling thing is that her father was an executive at Enron. So she is no stranger to corruption in business.
My guess is that she is a disciple of the "fake it until to make it" school of success, in an extreme form. I think it is telling that she thought indefatigable chirpiness is a necessary ingredient to visionary success, especially when faced with bad news.
A number of Enron executives seem to believe that their shenanigans were merely technically illegal, and that if only their gambits had succeeded in keeping the stock price rising, all would have been forgiven.
I think that Holmes here thought a little fudging of the truth was okay, because a few hundred million thrown at the problem would make the lies true enough eventually, and all would have been forgiven. Of course, a little fudging of the truth set her up to need to fudge more and more extravagantly to maintain the aura of success. We know where that usually ends up.
When I think Political Correctness, who doesn't think Henry Kissinger as part of the feel good package? After all, no company has ever failed big based on fraud when men were in charge.
Holmes is the daughter of an Enron executive. Need I say more?
Try the first link in TFA.
I know, I know -- it does not look like it right one, but it is.
I think that the point is to spur responses.
Some are amateurs who just like reactions. Some, being actual paid Russian trolls, are probably rated by the number of responses. Angry responses are easier to elicit than thoughtful ones, thus...this stuff.
Yes. That.
If 2% can motivate someone to take on extra hassles of cash, like precisely tallying the materials for the job, then we do not have to guess what dodging ~25% (IRS) and 14% (SSI) can get via chucking the paperwork in the trash.
And I bet you are right about the fun and games part, too. The temptation would be to shove the materials costs of 6 jobs into that one job that paid with a big check, to whittle down the profits you are forced to declare. That works until someone asks questions about why plumber who is often claiming to always mismanage expenses to his detriment can live on less than 1000 hours of labor.
What you say makes sense, but my most recent credit cards will not work with that imprint technology.
We are already past ten toes over that line. When there is a power outage most businesses shut down, because they cannot process credit cards. Many cannot even process cash.
Obviously much of this is still solvable with cash around. Supposedly.
Of course, this larger ominous question is why the banks were bailed out with the 2008 meltdown. Because if all the big banks were suddenly forced to file for bankruptcy, would the credit cards still work? Could you get gas and get to work? Can that gas station actually get gasoline delivered? Can your grocery store get restocked?
Once a business, say, a gasoline distributor, goes into bankruptcy, they cannot suddenly create a novel procedure to extend credit to the corner station without approval from a judge.
Overly romanticizing "sincerity" is very comforting to the sheep.
If the Post Office is not a person, why can you sue it for violating a patent?
Personally, I think it would be all kinds of exciting for plaintiff to win here, so we can shave down the "rights" of the legal fictions called corporations. But I suspect the Supremes will see the trap.
"Cancer survival rates" are a baloney statistic. What matters are mortality rates. If I diagnose a cancer earlier and the treatment does exactly nothing, my survival rate improves while the mortality rate stays the same. In fact, if I can diagnose false positives, my survival rate looks even better while mortality stays constant. The more harmless lumps I remove from the breasts of healthy women, the better and better my survival statistics look.
Measured by mortality rate the US is not substantially better or worse than any other rich industrial nation, including the UK. It is a myth that the US system is better at all.
That is why The Vatican easily came to terms with Darwinian Evolution, because any beautiful and true theory/mechanism could be a useful towards His purposes when applied as a tool in God's hands.
Many so-called believers cannot actually accept a God that they cannot easily understand.