She and her friends learned pretty early on that they couldn't go to the restroom in less than a group of three. Not their fault, and not even related to "I see your underpants!" teasing.
One classic sf writer went to a private school and discovered that getting someone expelled who is bringing the school tuition checks is even harder than it is in a public school.
I've had painful experience of this on more than one job. Something to consider the next time someone runs with the pitch "I have a lot of money, so I know how to run the country". Some people are rich through connections, looting, or luck.
Generic News Network is all about ratings, but people like Karl Rove get paid immense amounts to provide information to their customers. There was a different failure mechanism at work for that set of pundits.
>(Incidentally, I see a lot of people proposing reformed voting systems that include a hard confirmation that your vote for X was counted. Voting reform is good, but that particular idea is bad, for this exact reason. Cut it out).
That exact idea is bad, but there is cryptographic High Magic which allows taking home a token which cannot be used to determine how you voted, but which can be used to check online that your vote was counted the way you cast it, still not proving which way you cast it. See Chaum and Shamir.
There are too many exceptions to make it your only criterion, but in my area when an attorney runs against an incumbent, it's often because the incumbent is vulnerable, which is often because s/he is bad.
Dig down several levels on the bar association web site. They may have posted the questionnaires they ask candidates to fill out. Those won't tell you how good the candidates are but will give you an idea how they think and what's important to them.
Then if you have any business relationship with a lawyer, ask for gossip. They won't antagonize judges by going to the press, but they do know who's competent and who isn't.
>Why do we need a union if we can just demand what we want and get it? In our industry, companies have even been caught uniting against workers [techcrunch.com].
If companies are uniting against workers, workers need to unite to match them.
Doesn't have to, not if the members don't want it to.
Besides, how many of the people you know who've been fired lost their jobs for incompetence, as opposed to being gay, outperforming their supervisor, or some other bogus reason?
Without a union contract, under US law it is perfectly legal to fire a truck driver for reporting unsafe conditions to the government. There's no way I can find a citation, but that's not a hypothetical.
"Get it done right by a union electrician!" was a slogan once. *Some* unions train and certify their members so that going to the union for workers is like going to a good temp service. The Bar Association disciplines members, requires continuing education, and makes them pass a rigorous exam to join. They're not a union on paper but work the same in many ways.
>Besides, programming jobs are one of the most in-demand careers out there. If you can't make good money without a union, you should bone up on your skills.
Slashdot Mirror
She and her friends learned pretty early on that they couldn't go to the restroom in less than a group of three. Not their fault, and not even related to "I see your underpants!" teasing.
In traditional societies, people who outperformed not only in warfare but also in council rhetoric got chosen as leaders.
It's significant that it hasn't changed in forty years when so much else has.
It may be news that people are hiding their abilities: I don't remember seeing that question asked on previous surveys.
One classic sf writer went to a private school and discovered that getting someone expelled who is bringing the school tuition checks is even harder than it is in a public school.
A dear friend was working at a university in the days of the Unabomber and got an unexpected package with no return address.
The responding officer picked it up, shook it, and said "it doesn't seem like a bomb".
Either that, or get subsidized mail service and then be referred to as moochers who refuse to take responsibility for their lives.
Look up the "Flynn Effect".
I've taken Amtrak or my car for every trip since they began treating passengers like jail inmates.
Hmm!
I don't have any inside information here, but lots of reports suggest that Microsoft's top executives are "team players" like scorpions in a bottle.
I've had painful experience of this on more than one job. Something to consider the next time someone runs with the pitch "I have a lot of money, so I know how to run the country". Some people are rich through connections, looting, or luck.
Generic News Network is all about ratings, but people like Karl Rove get paid immense amounts to provide information to their customers. There was a different failure mechanism at work for that set of pundits.
Syria is Utah's path to the sea!
Especially in small samples, like the size of a neighborhood.
Not to mention that the Fourth Amendment is about privacy.
The governing Supreme Court precedent at the moment is that there's a right to privacy.
The standard in the Constitution is "probable cause". It worked then, no reason to change it now.
>(Incidentally, I see a lot of people proposing reformed voting systems that include a hard confirmation that your vote for X was counted. Voting reform is good, but that particular idea is bad, for this exact reason. Cut it out).
That exact idea is bad, but there is cryptographic High Magic which allows taking home a token which cannot be used to determine how you voted, but which can be used to check online that your vote was counted the way you cast it, still not proving which way you cast it. See Chaum and Shamir.
Which is objectionable because it's contrary to hundreds of years of law. Simply disagreeing with it would have been a bad reason to throw him out.
There are too many exceptions to make it your only criterion, but in my area when an attorney runs against an incumbent, it's often because the incumbent is vulnerable, which is often because s/he is bad.
Dig down several levels on the bar association web site. They may have posted the questionnaires they ask candidates to fill out. Those won't tell you how good the candidates are but will give you an idea how they think and what's important to them.
Then if you have any business relationship with a lawyer, ask for gossip. They won't antagonize judges by going to the press, but they do know who's competent and who isn't.
Then there's votingforjudges.org.
A specific advantage of pay phones is that the phone company knows the public will use them and gives them priority in service restoration.
Don't count on being able to put out a fire by yourself unless it's a really small one.
Your main point is well taken, of course: self-sufficiency is the first thing to aim for.
>Why do we need a union if we can just demand what we want and get it? In our industry, companies have even been caught uniting against workers [techcrunch.com].
If companies are uniting against workers, workers need to unite to match them.
Doesn't have to, not if the members don't want it to.
Besides, how many of the people you know who've been fired lost their jobs for incompetence, as opposed to being gay, outperforming their supervisor, or some other bogus reason?
Without a union contract, under US law it is perfectly legal to fire a truck driver for reporting unsafe conditions to the government. There's no way I can find a citation, but that's not a hypothetical.
"Get it done right by a union electrician!" was a slogan once. *Some* unions train and certify their members so that going to the union for workers is like going to a good temp service. The Bar Association disciplines members, requires continuing education, and makes them pass a rigorous exam to join. They're not a union on paper but work the same in many ways.
>Besides, programming jobs are one of the most in-demand careers out there. If you can't make good money without a union, you should bone up on your skills.
Under 30, are you?
The Screen Actor's Guild clearly allows spectacular pay for outstanding actors.
A democratically run union could avoid some of the pitfalls you mention if the membership didn't want it that way.