That's actually not a bad idea! That way only the shooter who'll have the feature removed from his/her gun will have a functioning gun in the case of a school shooting... oh wait.
Are you the jerk from the article? Oh no wait, he was brilliant. JK:)
Being a brilliant business person is identifying market trends and acting on them. Which means finding out what people want and delivering it to them at prices they can afford. To do this you need to get people with the right skills together on a voluntary basis by offering them compensation that they need to agree with.
In other words, it's up to the business person to get people together in such a way that everyone involved is benefiting and is better of than they would have been otherwise.
I wish people would get this riled up when people in government did the very same thing. It's too bad we don't hold up individuals in public positions to the same moral standards as individuals in private positions.
>Occupy Wall Street was the first/best civil protest we've had in *decades*!
This tells me you reside on the left side of the political spectrum. Because for all it's flaws, the Tea Party were united in that they wanted a balanced budget... and they were ridiculed. Now the right is doing the same thing to the left with OWS. The fact that you recognize one and not the other tells me that you're a useful idiot in their plot to use ridicule as you described it.
As a person who is involved in hiring, we just want to get a sense of whether the position is right for you or whether you'll just flake out because you rather be doing something else. For example maybe in 5 years you expect to be a manager or a team leader but we don't expect openings. Or the opposite, maybe we do expect an opening and we are looking for someone with aspirations to become management so we can groom them for that position. Personally I like to see candidates achieve their objectives in our company. So if we can hire them on and both our goals align then both parties can potentially be satisfied or even happy.
It may seem like a stupid question but it's actually quite relevant. I guess relevance does depend on the job though.
Only 50 people to manage a huge center like that... that's amazing levels of productivity. We need more business that can work that efficiently not less!
“It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.”
The FCC's original mandate was to regulate the airwaves not their content. Eventually of course that all changed. I expect the very same thing to happen to the internet... you know... to protect children, america's business interests and to fight terrorists of course.
I like it the way it is. Department is a standard in the US, homeland has a very nazi feel to the name and you want people to believe that the massive overarching department that spies on it's own citizens is trying to do so for people's security. Don't be so modest DHS, I think you've succeeded with your name. Though I suppose you could call it the comity instead of department, much like the 'K' in KGB (Komitet Gosudarstvennoy Bezopasnosti) State Security Committee. It may not match other department names but it would fit in with the new Russian theme you're going with such as having tzars.
>He's one of those fucking crazy idiots who thinks that economies magically regulate themselves.
Actually libertarians believe in what's called Public Choice Theory. Public choice is the application of economic principles to the political realm. You see some economists believe that somethings shouldn't be handled by the free-market so they advocate we place those industries in the hands of politicians. The problem with that implicit assumption that the incentives in the public realm are structured in a way that will give better result. Public choice explodes that assumption. The rampant corporatism in the US (and in other nations) drives that point in quite nicely. So it's not so much that markets do it well, it's that they do it less bad.
So my argument would be that maybe we shouldn't be so quick to think that those who believe in free-markets are doing wishful thinking. There is a lot of theory behind that statement.
But I'm compelled to say, it's much easier to attack the man then argue the facts. It will avoid me having to do any kind of research and it's easier emotionally to maintain my current worldview.
Cuba has some of the worst healthcare in the world. Here is a lecture by Yuri Maltsev, an ex-soviet economic adviser, describing one of his many trips to Cuba with some of his students. I've linked it to the relevant part of his lecture, it lasts about 5 minutes.
I read another one of your comments and you state something completely different, namely that for the amount they spend healthcare they have low infant mortality, low maternal mortality and relatively high life expectancy. This say nothing about the quality of their healthcare which is what you seemed to be saying in the comment I'm replying to.
I live in Canada near it's capital city and when my friend got a severe concussion and his head was bleeding it took him 12 hours in the emergency room to get help, they thought my sister had an aneurysm and it took 6 months before she got testing and it took my ex-girlfriend 8 months to get tested for cancer. There is a saying we have here: "There are those Canadians who love socialized medicine and there are those who have used it."
Austrian economics teaches that value is subjective. It also advocates ordinal utility as opposed to cardinal utility. Now it's nearly impossible to know what everyone's subjective valuations and were it sits on their ordinal scale. But if people are discussing a product it means that's it's important to them, chances are that they place a higher value on it and place it higher on their value scale.
The top-down approach hasn't served us too well when it comes to predicting so this bottom-up approach is actually kind of exciting. If they can get good at predicting the data, IMHO, this has real potential.
"Currently it looks like more liberal-inclined individuals are registering, but it would make for a healthier system if more viewpoints were represented."
Translation: Currently we only have 20 some year olds who know nothing about economics or the world. It would be nice to get some older people in here because currently we are so far left we might as well just rename ourselves to "the communist party".
I've been an AdWords client before and it' not any better. Back in '08' they adjusted all advertising to suddenly cost 10 times the price because certain things they wanted on my website were missing. It took about a year before I got a straight answer so I could make the changes and start advertising again.
It wasn't a big deal for me, but a few people I know make their living off the products they sell online. Getting your source of income cut off because you don't have a site map or their robots deem that the content on your site is not up to par is fine, as long as they tell you about it so you can makes the changes! I loath having to deal with Google about as much having to deal with the IRS.
Other users are finding themselves locked out of their accounts without an explanation of how they violated the ToS.
Google being Google.
A similar thing happened to me back in '08 with my AdWords account. They just made all advertising suddenly cost 10 times the price because certain things they wanted on my website were missing. It took about a year before I got a straight answer so I could make the changes and start advertising again.
I don't know if it's the strong engineering culture, but Google have always been terrible at client services. I love their products, but whenever I have client relationship to them (a.k.a. giving them money), I'm always left severely wanting. It's too bad, because not only do I love their other services, I really appreciate their contributions to the world. I would much rather spend money there then Bing or Yahoo if only they didn't make it so frustrating.
If he creates a game that sells millions of copies it's because he's created experience that people want. It may not be re-inventing the wheel, but if people purchase it, it's because they want the familiar experience but in this new and creative perspective. It's precisely this bizarre sense of entitlement, of him needing to cater to your view of what he should produce or what you believe would give the industry "artistic legitimacy", that he's saddened by. Each time a new ID game is released, millions of people show they appreciate the creative direction his company is taking whether it fits your own narrow minded notion of creativity or not.
I personally love ID games, they are fun, thrilling and they games they produce have a better and more polished feel each time around. It's amazing that they can take the same concept, FPSs, and continuous reinvent them that they blow you away each time.
> Visuals are a solved problem, and the days of the tech demo are over.
Who wasn't blown away by the new Battlefield 3 previews? "Visuals are a solved problem" my ass!
Instead of shifting those dollars over why don't you just lower the tax burden on your citizens to help stimulate the economy and get out of your financial mess?
Government needs a certain amount of strength to protect people from economic predation and the return to a class based society where most people are virtual or actual slaves.
And the more power you give them to "protect you" to power it gives their banking/corporate friends. The left seems to think that we need more laws to protect us from economic predation which is of course created by the state through issued monopolies (patents, copyright), subsidies, unfair regulation etc. The right thinks we need protection from terrorists which is again created by the state by what's referred to by the CIA as blowback for meddling in the middle east (massive bombing campaigns, invasions, backing dictators). Advocates for both sides are asking the us government to take away our liberties to protect ourselves which only serves banking/corporate friends.
The libertarian stance is that government officials are fucking stupid and destructive (whether intentionally or unintentionally), let's give them least possible power and manage our own affairs.
But why do this, especially as there is no apparent causal link between quantum mechanics and the conscious mind?
I was under the impression that there was a link between consciousness and matter due to the observer problem. It really doesn't help that the wikipedia article has a bunch of [who's] and [citation needed].
Does someone with more knowledge about the subject care to explain?
I mean the value is derived from scarcity but is also tied to what... computational complexity?
The same can be said about most currencies nowadays. The difference is that this one can't be inflated.
only interests it serves will be those industries that want easy untraceable ways to exchange value for illegal products or to avoid taxation.
... and don't want to suffer the ravages of inflation and want to hold a currency that is actually appreciating in value.
I agree that Vegas casinos will probably never use them since they are brick and mortar and can be stopped. But I can certainly see it used on the Internet for transactions between individuals, small companies that don't attract too much attention or even companies that are located in less oppressive regimes.
Slashdot Mirror
That's actually not a bad idea! That way only the shooter who'll have the feature removed from his/her gun will have a functioning gun in the case of a school shooting ... oh wait.
Are you the jerk from the article? Oh no wait, he was brilliant. JK :)
Being a brilliant business person is identifying market trends and acting on them. Which means finding out what people want and delivering it to them at prices they can afford. To do this you need to get people with the right skills together on a voluntary basis by offering them compensation that they need to agree with.
In other words, it's up to the business person to get people together in such a way that everyone involved is benefiting and is better of than they would have been otherwise.
Not to mention that oil prices are currently at a record low relative to other commodity prices. The prices are going to have to go up some time.
I wish people would get this riled up when people in government did the very same thing. It's too bad we don't hold up individuals in public positions to the same moral standards as individuals in private positions.
>Occupy Wall Street was the first/best civil protest we've had in *decades*!
This tells me you reside on the left side of the political spectrum. Because for all it's flaws, the Tea Party were united in that they wanted a balanced budget ... and they were ridiculed. Now the right is doing the same thing to the left with OWS. The fact that you recognize one and not the other tells me that you're a useful idiot in their plot to use ridicule as you described it.
As a person who is involved in hiring, we just want to get a sense of whether the position is right for you or whether you'll just flake out because you rather be doing something else. For example maybe in 5 years you expect to be a manager or a team leader but we don't expect openings. Or the opposite, maybe we do expect an opening and we are looking for someone with aspirations to become management so we can groom them for that position. Personally I like to see candidates achieve their objectives in our company. So if we can hire them on and both our goals align then both parties can potentially be satisfied or even happy.
It may seem like a stupid question but it's actually quite relevant. I guess relevance does depend on the job though.
I thought those slanty eyes helped asians focus more!
Only 50 people to manage a huge center like that ... that's amazing levels of productivity. We need more business that can work that efficiently not less!
“It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.”
-Murray N. Rothbard
The FCC's original mandate was to regulate the airwaves not their content. Eventually of course that all changed. I expect the very same thing to happen to the internet ... you know ... to protect children, america's business interests and to fight terrorists of course.
I like it the way it is. Department is a standard in the US, homeland has a very nazi feel to the name and you want people to believe that the massive overarching department that spies on it's own citizens is trying to do so for people's security. Don't be so modest DHS, I think you've succeeded with your name. Though I suppose you could call it the comity instead of department, much like the 'K' in KGB (Komitet Gosudarstvennoy Bezopasnosti) State Security Committee. It may not match other department names but it would fit in with the new Russian theme you're going with such as having tzars.
>He's one of those fucking crazy idiots who thinks that economies magically regulate themselves.
Actually libertarians believe in what's called Public Choice Theory. Public choice is the application of economic principles to the political realm. You see some economists believe that somethings shouldn't be handled by the free-market so they advocate we place those industries in the hands of politicians. The problem with that implicit assumption that the incentives in the public realm are structured in a way that will give better result. Public choice explodes that assumption. The rampant corporatism in the US (and in other nations) drives that point in quite nicely. So it's not so much that markets do it well, it's that they do it less bad.
So my argument would be that maybe we shouldn't be so quick to think that those who believe in free-markets are doing wishful thinking. There is a lot of theory behind that statement.
But I'm compelled to say, it's much easier to attack the man then argue the facts. It will avoid me having to do any kind of research and it's easier emotionally to maintain my current worldview.
FIFY
>And that's not to mention the literally thousands of jobs he would be cutting to serve his agenda.
Don't worry he'll be passing out bricks to break some windows to help stimulate the economy.
Statistically it was bound to happen.
Becoming more efficient in these hard economic times ... oh the horror!
Cuba has some of the worst healthcare in the world. Here is a lecture by Yuri Maltsev, an ex-soviet economic adviser, describing one of his many trips to Cuba with some of his students. I've linked it to the relevant part of his lecture, it lasts about 5 minutes.
I read another one of your comments and you state something completely different, namely that for the amount they spend healthcare they have low infant mortality, low maternal mortality and relatively high life expectancy. This say nothing about the quality of their healthcare which is what you seemed to be saying in the comment I'm replying to.
I live in Canada near it's capital city and when my friend got a severe concussion and his head was bleeding it took him 12 hours in the emergency room to get help, they thought my sister had an aneurysm and it took 6 months before she got testing and it took my ex-girlfriend 8 months to get tested for cancer. There is a saying we have here: "There are those Canadians who love socialized medicine and there are those who have used it."
Austrian economics teaches that value is subjective. It also advocates ordinal utility as opposed to cardinal utility. Now it's nearly impossible to know what everyone's subjective valuations and were it sits on their ordinal scale. But if people are discussing a product it means that's it's important to them, chances are that they place a higher value on it and place it higher on their value scale.
The top-down approach hasn't served us too well when it comes to predicting so this bottom-up approach is actually kind of exciting. If they can get good at predicting the data, IMHO, this has real potential.
"Currently it looks like more liberal-inclined individuals are registering, but it would make for a healthier system if more viewpoints were represented." Translation: Currently we only have 20 some year olds who know nothing about economics or the world. It would be nice to get some older people in here because currently we are so far left we might as well just rename ourselves to "the communist party".
I've been an AdWords client before and it' not any better. Back in '08' they adjusted all advertising to suddenly cost 10 times the price because certain things they wanted on my website were missing. It took about a year before I got a straight answer so I could make the changes and start advertising again.
It wasn't a big deal for me, but a few people I know make their living off the products they sell online. Getting your source of income cut off because you don't have a site map or their robots deem that the content on your site is not up to par is fine, as long as they tell you about it so you can makes the changes! I loath having to deal with Google about as much having to deal with the IRS.
Google being Google.
A similar thing happened to me back in '08 with my AdWords account. They just made all advertising suddenly cost 10 times the price because certain things they wanted on my website were missing. It took about a year before I got a straight answer so I could make the changes and start advertising again.
I don't know if it's the strong engineering culture, but Google have always been terrible at client services. I love their products, but whenever I have client relationship to them (a.k.a. giving them money), I'm always left severely wanting. It's too bad, because not only do I love their other services, I really appreciate their contributions to the world. I would much rather spend money there then Bing or Yahoo if only they didn't make it so frustrating.
If he creates a game that sells millions of copies it's because he's created experience that people want. It may not be re-inventing the wheel, but if people purchase it, it's because they want the familiar experience but in this new and creative perspective. It's precisely this bizarre sense of entitlement, of him needing to cater to your view of what he should produce or what you believe would give the industry "artistic legitimacy", that he's saddened by. Each time a new ID game is released, millions of people show they appreciate the creative direction his company is taking whether it fits your own narrow minded notion of creativity or not.
I personally love ID games, they are fun, thrilling and they games they produce have a better and more polished feel each time around. It's amazing that they can take the same concept, FPSs, and continuous reinvent them that they blow you away each time.
> Visuals are a solved problem, and the days of the tech demo are over.
Who wasn't blown away by the new Battlefield 3 previews? "Visuals are a solved problem" my ass!
Instead of shifting those dollars over why don't you just lower the tax burden on your citizens to help stimulate the economy and get out of your financial mess?
And the more power you give them to "protect you" to power it gives their banking/corporate friends. The left seems to think that we need more laws to protect us from economic predation which is of course created by the state through issued monopolies (patents, copyright), subsidies, unfair regulation etc. The right thinks we need protection from terrorists which is again created by the state by what's referred to by the CIA as blowback for meddling in the middle east (massive bombing campaigns, invasions, backing dictators). Advocates for both sides are asking the us government to take away our liberties to protect ourselves which only serves banking/corporate friends.
The libertarian stance is that government officials are fucking stupid and destructive (whether intentionally or unintentionally), let's give them least possible power and manage our own affairs.
I was under the impression that there was a link between consciousness and matter due to the observer problem. It really doesn't help that the wikipedia article has a bunch of [who's] and [citation needed].
Does someone with more knowledge about the subject care to explain?
I mean the value is derived from scarcity but is also tied to what ... computational complexity?
The same can be said about most currencies nowadays. The difference is that this one can't be inflated.
only interests it serves will be those industries that want easy untraceable ways to exchange value for illegal products or to avoid taxation.
... and don't want to suffer the ravages of inflation and want to hold a currency that is actually appreciating in value.
I agree that Vegas casinos will probably never use them since they are brick and mortar and can be stopped. But I can certainly see it used on the Internet for transactions between individuals, small companies that don't attract too much attention or even companies that are located in less oppressive regimes.