Because if every state assigns electoral votes by the popular vote, then the popular vote determines the election. That means a state like California, with its massive population, would get more attention than smaller swing states currently do. If I lived in CA, I'd passionately support the Compact.
Mod parent up. Candidates are forced to play to swing states and their specific concerns (car companies, corn subsidies) vs larger national concerns. They also have to play towards states that tend to be more conservative than the rest of the country. Look at the population centers and the maps of votes by district. If the campaign was aiming at the popular vote, issues would more accurately reflect what the majority of the nation wants. Things like universal healthcare, for one.
Perhaps in complaining Google hopes to swing enough public opinion their way to alter the expected decision?
Either way, if there is a perception of unfairness, or a delay in the process, either could be worth discussing. Its like talking about an election before the election takes place - there are insights to be found for those who care to look.
Power to mid and lower Manhattan means a lot of people who have been without power will finally have it (and all the modern conveniences like refrigeration we rely so heavily on). It also means subway service between Manhattan and Brooklyn will come back sooner, which will be huge.
What the AC said. Existing weather patterns will become, gradually, more extreme. The question isn't whether it is happening, but whether we will take action while it is still reversible.
Why is this marked insightful? If we expect storms of strength X, and we are getting storms of strength X *.30, that alone suggests something is afoot. The nature of Sandy, not its hurricane category, is what made it so powerful and unusual. It was a large storm that hit under a pressure front producing a storm some are calling historic. The idea is that climate change would... change the weather. It already has, and the effect is accelerating. Do you want to wait until the death toll is higher, the economic damage exceeds the billions Sandy already caused, and there is no way to reverse the damage? I can't see why that viewpoint is given any credibility.
It isn't about ignoring the negative in life. It is changing your mind so that you react to life (whether its good or bad) in a healthy, positive way. Does a negative experience send you into a crushing depression, or do you find a way to move on (or even find within that negative experience seeds of motivation to improve your life)?
The article itself hints at the applications - the research focused on emotional balance. We have a growing problem with depression in the US. If we can find a reliable way to alter brain chemistry through meditation - that provides a very compelling alternative to medication. Even if the impact isn't strong enough or reliable enough to use instead of medication - it might improve one's prognosis when used in tandem with medication or traditional therapy. Exciting research with practical use.
I wonder how accurate this study is, but that being said, the relationship between eyes and emotion is well established. Don't take it from me, take it from Sir Michael Caine! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Njs6ZNSoFC0
An argument that might be persuasive: high quality, high speed internet access for all could boost the economy significantly. It could also make social innovations possible. If we can assume nearly everyone has high speed internet access, what new possibilities open up for bringing some government functions online? Not saying I agree with it, but there is an interesting argument to be considered.
If we continue to treat internet access as a commodity to be purchased rather than a public service - this will not fly on a large scale. Outside of a few generous individuals and companies that stand to benefit from expanding access - this is an uphill battle. The question is, when access is such a lucrative source of income for telecom companies and pressure against government provided services is so high in the US, would a publicly funded "access anywhere" campaign have legs?
Providing users with a clear, easy to change choice up front ought to be the new standard. Maybe some users will want to see sponsored search results (advertising) when they search for photos they took on their vacation to Scotland. Others may prefer to just see the photos they are looking for. Either way, letting the user choose and being honest about what they are choosing, rather than simply having sponsored results appear in a local search, is a much better user experience.
The fact that nearly every device we use, every article of clothing, and most of our food comes from companies that in one way or another abuse people and the environment - should not keep us from protesting and fighting back. Rather than demanding purity - we should encourage MORE people to stand up and fight.
This is an opening to attack the credibility of the software.
Let's say major flaws are found. What would that do to the credibility of the RIAA? If they hired an expert who would give flawed software a passing grade, does that expose them to any sort of liability?
Your distinction of "pure" religion rings a bell, it sounds like apologists discussing communism in a positive light. That being said - religion is never pure. Politics is innately a part of religion. The premises leading up to your conclusion are flawed.
Offer it up for a price you think works for you. Let teachers know that they can email you for a free copy if they can't afford the price. Honestly if you made it $5 and it is really useful, most teachers will likely spring for it.
This isn't the sort of thing anyone really disagrees with. It is more of a learning article, or a "I have expertise in this field and here is proof" article, than anything really worth discussing on its own merits. Even the inevitable tabs vs spaces, same line vs next line bracket discussions have little merit: In a large organization/community - its best to stick to published guidelines for a given language.
Apparently disagreeing with something = mod it troll. I'm guessing its the tea party racist bit - which is a very accurate reflection of the comments section on a yahoo article. Accuracy can sometimes sting just a little.
Yahoo leads the way forward, whether it is in their innovative email platform with intuitive ui (ads), their reporting (entertainming/advertising) with an insightful comments from the community (tea partying racists), or their home page that I haven't visited but I hear has relevant content (ads) - Yahoo is the future. We can't expect anything less than a rejection of IE's fascist desire to make advertising less lucrative. After all, users want nothing more than for the advertising they see to be as intrusive and lucrative for companies as possible.
Slashdot Mirror
Because if every state assigns electoral votes by the popular vote, then the popular vote determines the election. That means a state like California, with its massive population, would get more attention than smaller swing states currently do. If I lived in CA, I'd passionately support the Compact.
If all the states joined the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Mod parent up. Candidates are forced to play to swing states and their specific concerns (car companies, corn subsidies) vs larger national concerns. They also have to play towards states that tend to be more conservative than the rest of the country. Look at the population centers and the maps of votes by district. If the campaign was aiming at the popular vote, issues would more accurately reflect what the majority of the nation wants. Things like universal healthcare, for one.
Perhaps in complaining Google hopes to swing enough public opinion their way to alter the expected decision?
Either way, if there is a perception of unfairness, or a delay in the process, either could be worth discussing. Its like talking about an election before the election takes place - there are insights to be found for those who care to look.
Matt Ridley doesn't seem like the most reliable source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cif-green/2010/jun/18/matt-ridley-rational-optimist-errors
According to MTA officials, some brooklyn-manhattan service will shortly follow power restoration. http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/limited-mta-subway-service-continues-friday-article-1.1195659
Power to mid and lower Manhattan means a lot of people who have been without power will finally have it (and all the modern conveniences like refrigeration we rely so heavily on). It also means subway service between Manhattan and Brooklyn will come back sooner, which will be huge.
At this point, people with their head in the sand can't entice the rest of us to join them. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/26/us-climate-thresholds-idUSBRE82P0UJ20120326
What the AC said. Existing weather patterns will become, gradually, more extreme. The question isn't whether it is happening, but whether we will take action while it is still reversible.
Why is this marked insightful? If we expect storms of strength X, and we are getting storms of strength X * .30, that alone suggests something is afoot. The nature of Sandy, not its hurricane category, is what made it so powerful and unusual. It was a large storm that hit under a pressure front producing a storm some are calling historic. The idea is that climate change would ... change the weather. It already has, and the effect is accelerating. Do you want to wait until the death toll is higher, the economic damage exceeds the billions Sandy already caused, and there is no way to reverse the damage? I can't see why that viewpoint is given any credibility.
I dunno, Laying down and prospering sounds like a pretty good deal.
It isn't about ignoring the negative in life. It is changing your mind so that you react to life (whether its good or bad) in a healthy, positive way. Does a negative experience send you into a crushing depression, or do you find a way to move on (or even find within that negative experience seeds of motivation to improve your life)?
The article itself hints at the applications - the research focused on emotional balance. We have a growing problem with depression in the US. If we can find a reliable way to alter brain chemistry through meditation - that provides a very compelling alternative to medication. Even if the impact isn't strong enough or reliable enough to use instead of medication - it might improve one's prognosis when used in tandem with medication or traditional therapy. Exciting research with practical use.
I wonder how accurate this study is, but that being said, the relationship between eyes and emotion is well established. Don't take it from me, take it from Sir Michael Caine! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Njs6ZNSoFC0
An argument that might be persuasive: high quality, high speed internet access for all could boost the economy significantly. It could also make social innovations possible. If we can assume nearly everyone has high speed internet access, what new possibilities open up for bringing some government functions online? Not saying I agree with it, but there is an interesting argument to be considered.
If we continue to treat internet access as a commodity to be purchased rather than a public service - this will not fly on a large scale. Outside of a few generous individuals and companies that stand to benefit from expanding access - this is an uphill battle. The question is, when access is such a lucrative source of income for telecom companies and pressure against government provided services is so high in the US, would a publicly funded "access anywhere" campaign have legs?
Providing users with a clear, easy to change choice up front ought to be the new standard. Maybe some users will want to see sponsored search results (advertising) when they search for photos they took on their vacation to Scotland. Others may prefer to just see the photos they are looking for. Either way, letting the user choose and being honest about what they are choosing, rather than simply having sponsored results appear in a local search, is a much better user experience.
The fact that nearly every device we use, every article of clothing, and most of our food comes from companies that in one way or another abuse people and the environment - should not keep us from protesting and fighting back. Rather than demanding purity - we should encourage MORE people to stand up and fight.
This is an opening to attack the credibility of the software.
Let's say major flaws are found. What would that do to the credibility of the RIAA? If they hired an expert who would give flawed software a passing grade, does that expose them to any sort of liability?
Your distinction of "pure" religion rings a bell, it sounds like apologists discussing communism in a positive light. That being said - religion is never pure. Politics is innately a part of religion. The premises leading up to your conclusion are flawed.
Offer it up for a price you think works for you. Let teachers know that they can email you for a free copy if they can't afford the price. Honestly if you made it $5 and it is really useful, most teachers will likely spring for it.
Proprietary software does not equal being an enemy of FOSS. Google is very FOSS friendly, their problem is they are not very privacy friendly.
This isn't the sort of thing anyone really disagrees with. It is more of a learning article, or a "I have expertise in this field and here is proof" article, than anything really worth discussing on its own merits. Even the inevitable tabs vs spaces, same line vs next line bracket discussions have little merit: In a large organization/community - its best to stick to published guidelines for a given language.
Ah, to their US site. How typically American of me to ignore the .others
Apparently disagreeing with something = mod it troll. I'm guessing its the tea party racist bit - which is a very accurate reflection of the comments section on a yahoo article. Accuracy can sometimes sting just a little.
Yahoo leads the way forward, whether it is in their innovative email platform with intuitive ui (ads), their reporting (entertainming/advertising) with an insightful comments from the community (tea partying racists), or their home page that I haven't visited but I hear has relevant content (ads) - Yahoo is the future. We can't expect anything less than a rejection of IE's fascist desire to make advertising less lucrative. After all, users want nothing more than for the advertising they see to be as intrusive and lucrative for companies as possible.