This solves or decreases two problems: 1. Illegal Immagration from Mexico decreases - It puts jobs in Mexico. A lot of them. Improves the Mexico economy. Because so many more jobs are in Mexico, and because the economy imrpoves, the number of illegal aliens decreases significantly. Now you don't need to build a wall between Mexico. 2. With less immigration, there are more jobs in the US, even though the Apple Jobs didn't come here, the result is actuall more jobs, because when you add a job in Mexico, you keep the entire family in Mexico, where, so you remove not just one illegal immigrant, but with families, there are two adults, and with children, that is a lot of future jobs that stay.
I can tell you are European. You think that transit succes in one of your Countries (which is is the size of one or two of our 50 states) is awesome. But if you look at 30+ nations in Europe, you are just as bad when lumped together as the US is when lumped together.
Transit in New York is quite good, despite the article's mentioning that its use isn't at its peak. Transit in the highly populated areas of the US is comparable to transit in Europe.
Also, you have no idea what it is like to live in the Western United States, Utah, Wyoming, Nevada, Colorado, Montana, Dakotas, Arizon, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas (which by itself is larger in land than any Western European country) etc...? All of these states are as big as your single counties. In these states, large areas of land are populated by people who live a mile or more between every house. Do you have any towns where there are only 2,000 people living in the town, yet the town looks like a far bigger town, almost a city, because there are 30,000 people who live in the surrounding thirty mile radius, highly spread out? Or if you have a couple of these towns, are the norm, not the exception?
I hear the same uneducated garbage about the british mailing system. You can send a letter anywhere in England and it will be there by the next morning. Why can't the US mailing system be just as good. Well, it is in highly populated areas the size of England, but we are about 50 times the size of England.
Too many poeple have an unhealthy sense of entitlement. We also have too many people who claim to be victims and don't take personal responsibility. If the job a perosn does is only worth $10 an hour, that person is only entitled to $10 an hour. If that is the only job that person can get, the problem is likely that person and/or that person's life decisions. There are exceptions to deal with. People with severe mental disabilities like Down Syndrome, etc. But if you drink and do drugs till you are 40 and look around and say: I need a living wage, it just doesn't sit well. When you drop out of high school, get no education, live in your parents' basement till your late thirties, then say: I need a living wage, it doesn't sit well.
But instead of taking responsibility for yourselves, blame the government and big organizations. Yet continue to spend your entire paycheck, zero savings or investing, on Beer and Amazon prime as you badmouth both on social media while drinking Beer and watching a movie.
Sure Amazon pays a lot of warehouse workers low wages. They also pay thousands of Software Developers very high wages, often over six figures. If a subset of Amazon workers need better pay, they need to either get another job, which might require spending free time learning a new skill instead of watching Prime.
Work in an Amazon factory for low wages? Spend every lunch hour for four years learning software engineering, then move up in (or out of) the company.
Take responsibility for yourself. Sure there are times to strike. This isn't one of them.
I wrote an add-on to my companies product and got a bonus for it. A 300k customer changed their mind of switching to another vendor in large part due to this plugin.
I saved my company 180K by submitting a bug report to an open source project. Turns out they were going to buy software because 1 feature of an open source project didn't work. Since I submitted the bug with very easy to reproduce step-by-step instructions, the bug was confirmed in 1 day and fixed withint 30 days.
I saved my company 175k a year for replacing it with a internally built app. The app we bought was like buying an 18 wheeler to handle a 5 mile commute to work for 1. We couldn't edit it. We didn't use 95% of its features.
I increased quality of code among a team of developers that wasn't even my team. Since joining the department I share with them, their code has vastly improved.
I wrote a tool that saved one of our network IT teams three weeks of work. They use it once a year, every year.
Another tool I wrote replaced 2 heads. They were headcount that only makes 45k, but that means they have been saved 90k a year for the past few years.
I took a couple products that caused daily tickets and redesigned them so we never get tickets.
From the perspective of how much money I have made and have saved my company, I am vastly underpaid. However, I am happy with my salary and my company.
Actually the law can be ignored now. It is a first amendment breach and a huge one. You can hinder sales of firearms, but you can't hinder DIY guns.
This is going to become and afterthought soon. 3d Printers haven't made it big yet. They aren't in every home. Car parts aren't provided with a 3d printer yet, but all that will be soon. As soon as you can print high quality car, motorcycle, backhoe, tractor, diesel, 4-wheeler, or any other machinery parts, there really is nothing preventing guns from being printed.
Even if there is an attempt to prevent printing, there will be firmware that ignores it.
If Vertex Inc was public, I would buy their stock. Also, sounds like a business opportunity. Charge 8% higher, and give 8% to some escrow company who pays all the tax for you.
Also, why can't we get Virtual Reality involved. If kids put on glasses and 100% of their vision is placed in VR to learn History, Math, English, Geography, etc, we could teach in 5 minutes concepts that takes days.
Most kids could reach High School level knowledge before they are in High School. Let every kid go forward at their own pace. List everything they have to learn K-12. Make a top notch, engaging, Virtual Reality simulation for everything they have to learn. Follow each up with a quiz. Make these videos available to the world. We could educate the world.
With his funds, he could pay a team to decide what 5 to 10 minute VR educational sessions need to exist, create them, and put them online for free. He could start an online high school and everyone in the world could get a High School diploma with nothing more than internet access.
All of Microsoft and he can figure out the simplest and easiest way to fix education.
1. The worst form of teaching is lecture. 2. The #1 most used for of teaching is lecture.
What really happens: Teach drones on. Kids hear the first five minutes (if they last that long) and then daydream the rest of the time.
With all the power of Microsoft, he can't engage kids in learning that is actually engaging?
Remove lectures. Teachers should teach, they should organize and project plan existing content.
Letter Factory does a better job teaching my young preschool kids than school teachers do. Go LeapFrog. My kids know their letters because they weren't lectured their letters, they watched a fun (at least fun for the kids) video that teaches them their letters. There are two senses involved: Visual and Audio, plus there is a tune, and some humor, like those old E guys saying, "Ehhh."
Want to teach a kid Math, show them some videos that explains and shows: 1. Who uses this math. 2. How they use it. 3. Visuals of math concepts.
Want to teach them history. Instead of paying a million teachers to drone on about history boringly, pay Hollywood filmmakers to make an educational movie with blockbuster budget. Need to know about George Washington? Watch his movie. Need to know about Egypt, there is a movie for each Pharaoh. Such educational films must be created in an engaging way.
Another way to engage kids that is effective is with games. Why are we wasting time lecturing kids, the least effective form of learning, when they will spend hours playing a game that could teach them the same thing. Video games have one up on movies as they engage three sense, sight, sound, and touch. Touch is powerful. Doing usually is orders of magnitude more effective than only listening.
JavaScript itself sucks. So no matter how good a framework appears to be, it sucks because it's foundation sucks, which leads to someone trying to fix it.
Don't worry, it will be fixed.
By removing JavaScript in favor of a type-safe languages compiling to WebAssembly.
I live in Utah. It looks like the temperature will go up 1 or 2 degrees by 2100. So my kids will be dead before this is a concern.
But that doesn't take into account the fact that we are already switching to solar and electric cars. One discovery could change all this. Heck, a large astral body could pass between us an the sun and shade us for two days, which would nearly freeze the world and then maybe global warming is a good thing.
So what is the problem? Are we going to die? No. Are we going to starve? No. Are we facing the end of the species? No. We are looking at a rise of 1 to 2 degrees by 2100.
The rising oceans isn't really a problem. It actually means that the seas will go inland further, the air will have more moisture, there will be more precipitation.
No to mention, the oceans rising a few feet over about 80 years is not nearly as dramatic as the ocean rising a few feet in one day. Will there be homes and business affected? Yes. But they will have time to move or be torn down, except in hurricane areas.
I dislike pollution. That is a problem. It causes asthma in kids. It causes could. Inversions actually hurt lungs, kill old people. So I am all for cleaner air.
But Global Warming beyond 1 or 2 degrees is only a possibility. Solar panel roofs and roads and electric cars and so many other changes will happen by 2100. What if we run out of warming CO2 and start cooling?
So I am not denying global warming. I asking, what is the problem?
Global Warming deniers are funny. Global Warming doomsdayer's are just as funny. Both seem to be fanatics.
I agree that global warming exists, but I deny that global warming is a problem now or that it will be much of a problem in the future.
I also deny that we have to take active part in global warming prevention. The market will take care of itself. We will get electric cars. Continued efficiencies in light bulbs. We will discover more energy sources. We will begin to desalinate the ocean at a very rapid rate. We haven't even really begun that. What if we start pumping water to Utah's Great Salt Lake from California, which makes sense, because water pumped to Utah flows back to California, so everyone benefits. We fill up the Great Salt Lake, which causes increased precipitation in the Rockie Mountains, rebuilds the snow packs, etc.
By 2100, if scorching of the earth looks likely I feel it will be solvable. What if we build a paper thin shield and deploy it to space and shade portions of the earth to prevent it from scorching? What would be the effect of shading 1 square mile of earth from the sun? What if that becomes an industries and we start shading thousands of square miles of earth from the sun? What if the cost to do that is nothing by 2100, as we have a new thriving community on Mars by then? Or what if we put a large asteroid between the earth and the sun? What if we start mining asteroids and bring air back to earth? What if we just pump desalinzed water into the Sahara or Ghobi deserts and turn it back into a tropical forest and the increased plants absorb our extra C02?
Don't spend billions solving a problem that first, is not even for sure a problem, and second is likely to solve itself, and third we are likely to have way better technology to solve well before it actually becomes a problem.
Why don't we just stick cleaning up pollution. That is for sure a problem. That also would possibly result in hindering global warming.
Pollution is a problem, "Global Warming" or going up a degree or two or the next century is not.
2. Human rights. If a country has poor labor laws/basic rights/etc and doesn't treat people fairly, then it is fair game to tariff there.
Who decides what is a human rights violation? Remember, the US went through a sweat shop phase. What if another country needs a sweat shop phase to take the next step in their industrial evolution?
In the Dominican Republic, I met a man who just got a job making clothes for a popular name brand. He was so excited. He said: I *only* have to work 12 hours a day six days a week and I get 700 pesos a month. Some celebrity came out in the news crying about how unfairly this man was being treated. However, the celebrity forgot to mention that before taking these jobs that were supposed human rights violations this man was working 14 hours a day, 7 days a week and getting about twelve pesos a day. He was paid twice a day, about 6 pesos for working in the morning and about 6 pesos for working afternoon and evening. About 360 pesos if he worked all 30 days in a month. But they didn't talk monthly, because he would immediately spend the money on food as he lived paycheck to paycheck, every half-day. SO if there was no work a day or a half day, he and his family didn't eat lunch or dinner. They already never ate breakfast as they never had food.
So this so-called human rights violations, that allowed this man to double his income, have Sundays off and work two hours less a day, is something you would like to tariff or block?
First world solutions don't always solve third world problems. The world is not so simple as our first world problems make it appear to be.
Someone else should monitor code coverage, cylcomatic complexity, etc., and push us for more and better tests. Someone else should do QA. Someone else should write system integration tests (where you test the installed system, not an isolated piece of code)
All this sounds bad, but you know what, once the production issues are sorted, we will finally have a mass production of cars that don't use gas. Of course, regular car companies are scrambling to keep up. They want to be fast enough that they are ready if Tesla fails, to purchase the failed factories on auction, hire the same workers at 75 cents on the dollar, and not have have the burden of cost to train them, and add their expertise from gas car manufacturing, and turn a profit.
Remember, many companies that bear the cost of innovation, die by that cost. And then success rises from the ashes.
"Openly pro-union workers were among those fired this week. Some believe they were targeted. . . "
Were they targeted or did their "Union attitude" also result in poor performance?
Never been part of a union, but have worked with a few union workers before. My limited anecdotal personal experience is that union workers are slow. Have an attitude where you should never sweat on work time and never poop on your own time. They do about 1/4th the work as non-union laborers.
I believe unions were critical to move the US forward during the early to mid 1900s. However, are unions still solving major problems? Or have the problems unions were needed for been mostly solved and now are unions mostly just creating new problems?
Show me a union that inspires workers to excel instead of inspiring them to slack off and hide behind the union to avoid being fired for poor performance and then I might consider unions useful again.
No. Just a lot of entry level courses in college have changed to it. Entry level courses result in the most searches per user.
Since all the tools that check for the most popular language are heavily influenced by browser searches, it is skewed quite a bit. It is probably between twice as much and ten times as much, but the data of internet searches is so generic it is impossible to ever know for sure.
I have never seen it used by any production company near me and rarely see job posting for it that are for development. I have only seen it mentioned in build/test positions and even then rarely.
I support population growth, why don't you? This world can support 1 Trillion. Take a drive across the US sometime. If you really think it is even 10% filled up, it isn't.
Space: Most western like Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, have one city with a couple dozen sky scrapers. We don't even have Skyscraper apartment buildings yet. We can drive hours between cities in some areas.
Water: Water is not something the world is short on. We are just reaching a point where desalinization is now becoming necessary to get water from the ocean. It is not even common yet. We haven't even started piping desalinated water further inland that the cities it is desalinated in.
Food: People talk about feeding everyone. Not a problem for a long time. The government is still paying farmers to NOT grow food. When they start paying people to stop working in the city and start growing food, then we can worry about food shortages. When we start reaching a point where we need to find ways to grow food in the desert, then we can worry about food shortages. We haven't even made an effort to reclaim Sahara or Gobi deserts or most other deserts. But we have started learning to grow food upwards on Sky scrapers, though we know how to do it, it is really rare. Also we we have exhausted those avenues and also have exhausted our ability to start building massive green houses in Northern Canada and Alaska, we can move to growing editable Sea weed in the oceans. I think there is a little of bit of room on the oceans.
We are still traveling on roads. When we've reclaimed the deserts, and have no more space, we can put the roads underneath us in tunnels, like New York's subways, and reclame millions of miles of land, world-wide.
Are we exhausting our resources to mine for our needs in space yet?
Not to mention that in 100 years, barring a Global catasrophic even that puts us back into the dark ages, we will likely be trading with the 'New world'. Only the new world is no longer the American Hemispheres, it is Mars. We are living in domes and mining air from Mars's oceans. Or maybe we terraformed it by crashing a moon-sized meteor of frozen water on it that we propelled from the Asteroid belt.
Every time I hear that the earth is full, I laugh at people complete idiocy.
- So a wife that wants to send a strip tease video to her loving husband who is away should send it without encryption so that anybody can see and so that it shows up on some porn site someday? Or live strip tease during a face to face chat session, that shouldn't be encrypted? - So the tax lawyer shouldn't encrypt communication end to end when sharing sensitive tax data? - So the defense attorney shouldn't encrypt communication end to end when communicating with a client? - So a startup shouldn't encrypt communication about their proprietary software and should just let corporate espionage happen? - A broker/financial adviser shouldn't use end-to-end encryption when passing data to and from his clients? - What about HIPPA? Shouldn't medical records be transferred with end-to-end encryption?
I am pretty sure that I could go on finding use cases for real people to use end-to-end encryption, but the above is plenty.
The bikers complaining about the $15 are probably the same ones that complained about the bike lanes.
I ride my bike to work often enough. Utah doesn't have this law but makes efforts to create bike lanes.
If I had to pay $15 a year to bike on streets or sidewalks to get to work, and I knew that that money was keeping my bike lanes safe and going to improving bike paths, I would gladly pay that tax.
This is one example of where capitalism needs government help. We would never get bike lanes based on capitalism. The government must step in to manage bicycle lanes and paths.
Slashdot Mirror
This solves or decreases two problems:
1. Illegal Immagration from Mexico decreases - It puts jobs in Mexico. A lot of them. Improves the Mexico economy. Because so many more jobs are in Mexico, and because the economy imrpoves, the number of illegal aliens decreases significantly. Now you don't need to build a wall between Mexico.
2. With less immigration, there are more jobs in the US, even though the Apple Jobs didn't come here, the result is actuall more jobs, because when you add a job in Mexico, you keep the entire family in Mexico, where, so you remove not just one illegal immigrant, but with families, there are two adults, and with children, that is a lot of future jobs that stay.
I can tell you are European. You think that transit succes in one of your Countries (which is is the size of one or two of our 50 states) is awesome. But if you look at 30+ nations in Europe, you are just as bad when lumped together as the US is when lumped together.
Transit in New York is quite good, despite the article's mentioning that its use isn't at its peak. Transit in the highly populated areas of the US is comparable to transit in Europe.
http://www.mylifeelsewhere.com...
http://www.mylifeelsewhere.com...
http://www.mylifeelsewhere.com...
Also, you have no idea what it is like to live in the Western United States, Utah, Wyoming, Nevada, Colorado, Montana, Dakotas, Arizon, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas (which by itself is larger in land than any Western European country) etc...? All of these states are as big as your single counties. In these states, large areas of land are populated by people who live a mile or more between every house. Do you have any towns where there are only 2,000 people living in the town, yet the town looks like a far bigger town, almost a city, because there are 30,000 people who live in the surrounding thirty mile radius, highly spread out? Or if you have a couple of these towns, are the norm, not the exception?
I hear the same uneducated garbage about the british mailing system. You can send a letter anywhere in England and it will be there by the next morning. Why can't the US mailing system be just as good. Well, it is in highly populated areas the size of England, but we are about 50 times the size of England.
Too many poeple have an unhealthy sense of entitlement.
We also have too many people who claim to be victims and don't take personal responsibility.
If the job a perosn does is only worth $10 an hour, that person is only entitled to $10 an hour.
If that is the only job that person can get, the problem is likely that person and/or that person's life decisions.
There are exceptions to deal with. People with severe mental disabilities like Down Syndrome, etc.
But if you drink and do drugs till you are 40 and look around and say: I need a living wage, it just doesn't sit well.
When you drop out of high school, get no education, live in your parents' basement till your late thirties, then say: I need a living wage, it doesn't sit well.
But instead of taking responsibility for yourselves, blame the government and big organizations. Yet continue to spend your entire paycheck, zero savings or investing, on Beer and Amazon prime as you badmouth both on social media while drinking Beer and watching a movie.
Sure Amazon pays a lot of warehouse workers low wages. They also pay thousands of Software Developers very high wages, often over six figures.
If a subset of Amazon workers need better pay, they need to either get another job, which might require spending free time learning a new skill instead of watching Prime.
Work in an Amazon factory for low wages? Spend every lunch hour for four years learning software engineering, then move up in (or out of) the company.
Take responsibility for yourself. Sure there are times to strike. This isn't one of them.
I wrote an add-on to my companies product and got a bonus for it. A 300k customer changed their mind of switching to another vendor in large part due to this plugin.
I saved my company 180K by submitting a bug report to an open source project. Turns out they were going to buy software because 1 feature of an open source project didn't work. Since I submitted the bug with very easy to reproduce step-by-step instructions, the bug was confirmed in 1 day and fixed withint 30 days.
I saved my company 175k a year for replacing it with a internally built app. The app we bought was like buying an 18 wheeler to handle a 5 mile commute to work for 1. We couldn't edit it. We didn't use 95% of its features.
I increased quality of code among a team of developers that wasn't even my team. Since joining the department I share with them, their code has vastly improved.
I wrote a tool that saved one of our network IT teams three weeks of work. They use it once a year, every year.
Another tool I wrote replaced 2 heads. They were headcount that only makes 45k, but that means they have been saved 90k a year for the past few years.
I took a couple products that caused daily tickets and redesigned them so we never get tickets.
From the perspective of how much money I have made and have saved my company, I am vastly underpaid. However, I am happy with my salary and my company.
Actually the law can be ignored now. It is a first amendment breach and a huge one. You can hinder sales of firearms, but you can't hinder DIY guns.
This is going to become and afterthought soon. 3d Printers haven't made it big yet. They aren't in every home. Car parts aren't provided with a 3d printer yet, but all that will be soon. As soon as you can print high quality car, motorcycle, backhoe, tractor, diesel, 4-wheeler, or any other machinery parts, there really is nothing preventing guns from being printed.
Even if there is an attempt to prevent printing, there will be firmware that ignores it.
Legislating this is a waste of time and money.
It has to have a plan to be good enough to replace Notepad++ or it is a waste of time.
At least Upwork.com has location verification.
Is Upwork.com not good?
If Vertex Inc was public, I would buy their stock.
Also, sounds like a business opportunity. Charge 8% higher, and give 8% to some escrow company who pays all the tax for you.
Also, why can't we get Virtual Reality involved. If kids put on glasses and 100% of their vision is placed in VR to learn History, Math, English, Geography, etc, we could teach in 5 minutes concepts that takes days.
Most kids could reach High School level knowledge before they are in High School. Let every kid go forward at their own pace. List everything they have to learn K-12. Make a top notch, engaging, Virtual Reality simulation for everything they have to learn. Follow each up with a quiz. Make these videos available to the world. We could educate the world.
With his funds, he could pay a team to decide what 5 to 10 minute VR educational sessions need to exist, create them, and put them online for free. He could start an online high school and everyone in the world could get a High School diploma with nothing more than internet access.
I hate that I can't edit typos on slashdot. Could thing I pay an editor for when it matters. :-)
All of Microsoft and he can figure out the simplest and easiest way to fix education.
1. The worst form of teaching is lecture.
2. The #1 most used for of teaching is lecture.
What really happens: Teach drones on. Kids hear the first five minutes (if they last that long) and then daydream the rest of the time.
With all the power of Microsoft, he can't engage kids in learning that is actually engaging?
Remove lectures. Teachers should teach, they should organize and project plan existing content.
Letter Factory does a better job teaching my young preschool kids than school teachers do. Go LeapFrog. My kids know their letters because they weren't lectured their letters, they watched a fun (at least fun for the kids) video that teaches them their letters. There are two senses involved: Visual and Audio, plus there is a tune, and some humor, like those old E guys saying, "Ehhh."
Want to teach a kid Math, show them some videos that explains and shows:
1. Who uses this math.
2. How they use it.
3. Visuals of math concepts.
Want to teach them history. Instead of paying a million teachers to drone on about history boringly, pay Hollywood filmmakers to make an educational movie with blockbuster budget. Need to know about George Washington? Watch his movie. Need to know about Egypt, there is a movie for each Pharaoh. Such educational films must be created in an engaging way.
Another way to engage kids that is effective is with games. Why are we wasting time lecturing kids, the least effective form of learning, when they will spend hours playing a game that could teach them the same thing. Video games have one up on movies as they engage three sense, sight, sound, and touch. Touch is powerful. Doing usually is orders of magnitude more effective than only listening.
I think you underestimate the reputation of Microsoft to the eyes of the general public.
JavaScript itself sucks. So no matter how good a framework appears to be, it sucks because it's foundation sucks, which leads to someone trying to fix it.
Don't worry, it will be fixed.
By removing JavaScript in favor of a type-safe languages compiling to WebAssembly.
Can someone explain the problem?
I live in Utah. It looks like the temperature will go up 1 or 2 degrees by 2100. So my kids will be dead before this is a concern.
But that doesn't take into account the fact that we are already switching to solar and electric cars. One discovery could change all this. Heck, a large astral body could pass between us an the sun and shade us for two days, which would nearly freeze the world and then maybe global warming is a good thing.
So what is the problem? Are we going to die? No. Are we going to starve? No. Are we facing the end of the species? No. We are looking at a rise of 1 to 2 degrees by 2100.
The rising oceans isn't really a problem. It actually means that the seas will go inland further, the air will have more moisture, there will be more precipitation.
No to mention, the oceans rising a few feet over about 80 years is not nearly as dramatic as the ocean rising a few feet in one day. Will there be homes and business affected? Yes. But they will have time to move or be torn down, except in hurricane areas.
I dislike pollution. That is a problem. It causes asthma in kids. It causes could. Inversions actually hurt lungs, kill old people. So I am all for cleaner air.
But Global Warming beyond 1 or 2 degrees is only a possibility. Solar panel roofs and roads and electric cars and so many other changes will happen by 2100. What if we run out of warming CO2 and start cooling?
So I am not denying global warming. I asking, what is the problem?
Global Warming deniers are funny. Global Warming doomsdayer's are just as funny. Both seem to be fanatics.
I agree that global warming exists, but I deny that global warming is a problem now or that it will be much of a problem in the future.
I also deny that we have to take active part in global warming prevention. The market will take care of itself. We will get electric cars. Continued efficiencies in light bulbs. We will discover more energy sources. We will begin to desalinate the ocean at a very rapid rate. We haven't even really begun that. What if we start pumping water to Utah's Great Salt Lake from California, which makes sense, because water pumped to Utah flows back to California, so everyone benefits. We fill up the Great Salt Lake, which causes increased precipitation in the Rockie Mountains, rebuilds the snow packs, etc.
By 2100, if scorching of the earth looks likely I feel it will be solvable. What if we build a paper thin shield and deploy it to space and shade portions of the earth to prevent it from scorching? What would be the effect of shading 1 square mile of earth from the sun? What if that becomes an industries and we start shading thousands of square miles of earth from the sun? What if the cost to do that is nothing by 2100, as we have a new thriving community on Mars by then?
Or what if we put a large asteroid between the earth and the sun?
What if we start mining asteroids and bring air back to earth?
What if we just pump desalinzed water into the Sahara or Ghobi deserts and turn it back into a tropical forest and the increased plants absorb our extra C02?
Don't spend billions solving a problem that first, is not even for sure a problem, and second is likely to solve itself, and third we are likely to have way better technology to solve well before it actually becomes a problem.
Why don't we just stick cleaning up pollution. That is for sure a problem. That also would possibly result in hindering global warming.
Pollution is a problem, "Global Warming" or going up a degree or two or the next century is not.
2. Human rights. If a country has poor labor laws/basic rights/etc and doesn't treat people fairly, then it is fair game to tariff there.
Who decides what is a human rights violation? Remember, the US went through a sweat shop phase. What if another country needs a sweat shop phase to take the next step in their industrial evolution?
In the Dominican Republic, I met a man who just got a job making clothes for a popular name brand. He was so excited. He said: I *only* have to work 12 hours a day six days a week and I get 700 pesos a month. Some celebrity came out in the news crying about how unfairly this man was being treated. However, the celebrity forgot to mention that before taking these jobs that were supposed human rights violations this man was working 14 hours a day, 7 days a week and getting about twelve pesos a day. He was paid twice a day, about 6 pesos for working in the morning and about 6 pesos for working afternoon and evening. About 360 pesos if he worked all 30 days in a month. But they didn't talk monthly, because he would immediately spend the money on food as he lived paycheck to paycheck, every half-day. SO if there was no work a day or a half day, he and his family didn't eat lunch or dinner. They already never ate breakfast as they never had food.
So this so-called human rights violations, that allowed this man to double his income, have Sundays off and work two hours less a day, is something you would like to tariff or block?
First world solutions don't always solve third world problems. The world is not so simple as our first world problems make it appear to be.
We should do our own Unit Tests.
Someone else should monitor code coverage, cylcomatic complexity, etc., and push us for more and better tests.
Someone else should do QA.
Someone else should write system integration tests (where you test the installed system, not an isolated piece of code)
All this sounds bad, but you know what, once the production issues are sorted, we will finally have a mass production of cars that don't use gas. Of course, regular car companies are scrambling to keep up. They want to be fast enough that they are ready if Tesla fails, to purchase the failed factories on auction, hire the same workers at 75 cents on the dollar, and not have have the burden of cost to train them, and add their expertise from gas car manufacturing, and turn a profit.
Remember, many companies that bear the cost of innovation, die by that cost. And then success rises from the ashes.
"Openly pro-union workers were among those fired this week. Some believe they were targeted. . . "
Were they targeted or did their "Union attitude" also result in poor performance?
Never been part of a union, but have worked with a few union workers before. My limited anecdotal personal experience is that union workers are slow. Have an attitude where you should never sweat on work time and never poop on your own time. They do about 1/4th the work as non-union laborers.
I believe unions were critical to move the US forward during the early to mid 1900s. However, are unions still solving major problems? Or have the problems unions were needed for been mostly solved and now are unions mostly just creating new problems?
Show me a union that inspires workers to excel instead of inspiring them to slack off and hide behind the union to avoid being fired for poor performance and then I might consider unions useful again.
No. Just a lot of entry level courses in college have changed to it. Entry level courses result in the most searches per user.
Since all the tools that check for the most popular language are heavily influenced by browser searches, it is skewed quite a bit. It is probably between twice as much and ten times as much, but the data of internet searches is so generic it is impossible to ever know for sure.
I have never seen it used by any production company near me and rarely see job posting for it that are for development. I have only seen it mentioned in build/test positions and even then rarely.
Speaking of complete idiocy . . . my typing and grammar sucked in that last post. Yes, yes, I did post without proofreading. :-)
I support population growth, why don't you? This world can support 1 Trillion. Take a drive across the US sometime. If you really think it is even 10% filled up, it isn't.
Space: Most western like Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, have one city with a couple dozen sky scrapers. We don't even have Skyscraper apartment buildings yet. We can drive hours between cities in some areas.
Water: Water is not something the world is short on. We are just reaching a point where desalinization is now becoming necessary to get water from the ocean. It is not even common yet. We haven't even started piping desalinated water further inland that the cities it is desalinated in.
Food: People talk about feeding everyone. Not a problem for a long time. The government is still paying farmers to NOT grow food. When they start paying people to stop working in the city and start growing food, then we can worry about food shortages. When we start reaching a point where we need to find ways to grow food in the desert, then we can worry about food shortages. We haven't even made an effort to reclaim Sahara or Gobi deserts or most other deserts. But we have started learning to grow food upwards on Sky scrapers, though we know how to do it, it is really rare. Also we we have exhausted those avenues and also have exhausted our ability to start building massive green houses in Northern Canada and Alaska, we can move to growing editable Sea weed in the oceans. I think there is a little of bit of room on the oceans.
We are still traveling on roads. When we've reclaimed the deserts, and have no more space, we can put the roads underneath us in tunnels, like New York's subways, and reclame millions of miles of land, world-wide.
Are we exhausting our resources to mine for our needs in space yet?
Not to mention that in 100 years, barring a Global catasrophic even that puts us back into the dark ages, we will likely be trading with the 'New world'. Only the new world is no longer the American Hemispheres, it is Mars. We are living in domes and mining air from Mars's oceans. Or maybe we terraformed it by crashing a moon-sized meteor of frozen water on it that we propelled from the Asteroid belt.
Every time I hear that the earth is full, I laugh at people complete idiocy.
The only difference to the Global Cooling hype and the current Global Warming hype is one has the internet to spread it rapidly, the other did not.
And yes, there was a big deal about global cooling, hence the sci-fi books in the late 70's and early 80's about global cooling.
- So a wife that wants to send a strip tease video to her loving husband who is away should send it without encryption so that anybody can see and so that it shows up on some porn site someday? Or live strip tease during a face to face chat session, that shouldn't be encrypted?
- So the tax lawyer shouldn't encrypt communication end to end when sharing sensitive tax data?
- So the defense attorney shouldn't encrypt communication end to end when communicating with a client?
- So a startup shouldn't encrypt communication about their proprietary software and should just let corporate espionage happen?
- A broker/financial adviser shouldn't use end-to-end encryption when passing data to and from his clients?
- What about HIPPA? Shouldn't medical records be transferred with end-to-end encryption?
I am pretty sure that I could go on finding use cases for real people to use end-to-end encryption, but the above is plenty.
The bikers complaining about the $15 are probably the same ones that complained about the bike lanes.
I ride my bike to work often enough. Utah doesn't have this law but makes efforts to create bike lanes.
If I had to pay $15 a year to bike on streets or sidewalks to get to work, and I knew that that money was keeping my bike lanes safe and going to improving bike paths, I would gladly pay that tax.
This is one example of where capitalism needs government help. We would never get bike lanes based on capitalism. The government must step in to manage bicycle lanes and paths.