I saw a UFO, until the baseball hit me in the head.
I just don't approve of congress bailing out the already rich baseball players, and then refusing to prosecute them.
If *I* threw a baseball at someone's head I'd probably get in trouble.
If they are smart they will be compliant, and advertise that highly. How long until a competitor springs up who is compliant? When it comes to business needs, security is rightly a key focus. Not catering to that is ignoring the very market they want to serve.
So switch to an online bank. Or switch banks. Not all of them suck as horribly. I'm checking sites like this (http://www.mybanktracker.com/bank-reviews). Switch from one of the big banks, and let them know you are leaving because of their fees.
Why not turn the tables? I'd love to see a website that tracks the companies that help violate human rights. I'd also like to see it tied to products. In the market for a cell phone? Find out if the maker of your cell phone helps Iran oppress its own people. Or maybe a badge system maintained by Amnesty International, where the badge is displayed if there are no violations, and revoked when something like this comes to light... Let's track the companies that track citizens, and make it easier to put some economic pressure on them.
If they are suspected of having lied in the past, and having issued the lying provision to provide cover for past lies, how can we trust their commitment to not seek approval for lying is truthful? (Debating this question would make a fantastic drinking game).
I've seen the other side of things, where I've gotten "pop quizzes" about useless trivia about a specific language, or been asked to spend upwards of 6 hours - for free - working on a problem to see if the company would like me. I've also had interviews where I've been asked simple questions "with no right answer" to see how I went about solving a problem. I was encouraged to think out loud. I LOVE this kind of question, and when I've been on the other side of the table, I've employed it with great success. Ask anything, and throw in random obstacles. Do they ask for help? How do they handle the obstacles? This can tell you far more about an employee than whether they know which file does what in an obscure web framework.
Apples recent* habit of blaming what seem to be hardware issues on the software makes me a little nervous about taking the plunge into what otherwise looks like a cool product. *If it goes back further I just haven't been paying attention.
“Wherever I look I see new ideas and possibility for progress,” he says. “Some turn out to be impossible, some are prohibited by the economy, but some do work. These are worth thinking of.”
I wonder what ideas he's had he felt were prohibited by the economy.
Because in some countries you can give consent and then withdraw it, which appears to be the case in the allegations (http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2010/12/06/some-thoughts-on-sex-by-surprise/). Without saying whether the allegations are true, or going into the mountains of intrigue or motivation behind the case itself, look simply at the nature of the alleged crimes. In one instance a man said he was using a condom, then did not. What if the woman had caught an STD? What about the fear of wondering "oh shit did I catch something?" and going to a doctor, getting tests, and wondering "why did this man lie about using a condom? Was he trying to get me pregnant? Does he have something?". After all there was that case in the US of a man going around spreading aids on purpose (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27286268/ns/health-aids/t/man-charged-murder-spreading-hiv/). As for the woman who withdrew consent, imagine what a scary world this would be if when you agree to start having sex you are bound by law to continue. Changed your mind? Too bad, you consented once. Get his pants off and see an obvious STD? Too bad, you gave consent. That's not right at all. And that is why sex between consenting adults can be considered rape: If you deceive someone on the conditions for sex - especially if those conditions include safe sex, or if consent is withdrawn and you have sex anyway - yeah, that is rape.
Its a shame, some of the petitions are quite interesting. The drug czar's response is bullshit for precisely the reasons stated in your comment, and those above. So now there are petitions to remove him. (I also found the petition to ban using tear gas on civilians given it is illegal to use it in warfare quite intriguing). That said, the response seems to be "now we know what the American public wants so we can be more effective at condescendingly dismissing it." WTF.
Why does education always come down to jobs? Yes jobs are VITAL, but we are losing any sense of an education that prepares young people to take an active part in our country's politics. We are losing any sense of an education that exposes young people to ideas other than those they grew up with. This is not a recipe for progress.
Exactly. Flooding the FBI with information and hoping for privacy is like talking to the police and hoping for clemency. Everything in the fascinating "Why you shouldn't talk to the police" lecture (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc) applies here.
"We shall defend our homeland, whatever the budget may be. We shall fight in the airport security lines, we shall fight in the bus terminals, we shall fight in the train stations and in the subway stations, we shall fight at the public sporting events."
The idea that they pay nothing in Federal Income taxes ignores all the other taxes they do pay, and the extreme lack of income they have to qualify for no federal income taxes. That is a misleading figure to quote out of context. If you want an interesting figure, notice how most red-states seem to be on the take from the federal government, while most blue-states have the opposite financial relationship. If you want people to be punished for their personal actions, how about letting people be punished for their choices in the voting booth?
Thinking that they have no skin in the game and supposing the rich are paying their fare share (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/27/324204/report-right-wing-misleading-taxes/) is the result of not being fully informed.
That's quite a privileged viewpoint. If you make 70k a year, and live frugally enough to survive on 35k a year, how would you be able to survive at a job flipping burgers? Minimum wage in NY is 7.25/hr. For hourly positions, the usual figure is 40 hours * 50 weeks (14.5k). You'd have to work two full time jobs flipping burgers, that's 80 hours a week, to come up with 29k a year, still 6k short of half your previous income!! That's presuming you can find two minimum wage jobs that give you the hours, and don't stiff you at 32 because for full time employees they give out health care, and they don't want to be bothered with the additional cost. So you might need 3 jobs. That's also presuming your 2+ jobs don't have scheduling conflicts. Now imagine you have kids to take care of, and were juggling a 40/hr a week job with parenting responsibilities (which can be quite the task even in a two parent household). Or imagine that you suddenly get sick. Does your burger flipping job offer health insurance? No? Are you on cobra? Do you know how much that costs just for an individual plan? How about for a family plan?
You can keep your quips about a nice tan, and your statements that you are trying to "keep yourself marketable" in the spare time 80 hours a week leaves you.
If we had a real living wage as our minimum wage, then your point would stand. As it is, your points are as divorced from reality as a jobs creation speech at a GOP Presidential debate.
Fair enough, but where do you get this claim of "most" from? If I got fired from a white collar job that paid 70k a year, I'd be trying to get something even somewhat close to that, not going for a minimum wage manual labor job. Perhaps some of the "now hiring" signs are in retail establishments, which tend to pay just barely at or below a living wage. Its easy to say "just change careers and give up on ever finding the same kind of job you lost" to people you don't know, but when its you in that situation, you are probably going to try and keep from slipping down enough income brackets to go from middle class to working poor. The poverty rate (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/poverty-rate-increases-recession-highest-level-1994-census/story?id=11652753) is increasing, and the middle class is shrinking. The middle class's spending money has been driving a pretty significant chunk of the economy. With real estate agents, project managers, journalists, and other workers fighting for less jobs, or being told "just become an auto mechanic (as if that is an easy transition), you have less consumer spending as a result of less cash. Less spending drags the economy down for everyone. So it isn't as simple as *gasp* learning a new job. Not if the end goal is a healthy economy.
The kind of slave and self-sacrifice dedication long gone in western civilization whom would rather milk the titty of the Federal Gov than do that kind of work.
Why did you slip that in? As if universal health care is "milking the titty of the federal government". Or do you mean basic protections for workers?
Slashdot Mirror
Will they get their money back? Because pursuing them so doggedly then banning them could probably also "be perceived as criminal".
I saw a UFO, until the baseball hit me in the head. I just don't approve of congress bailing out the already rich baseball players, and then refusing to prosecute them. If *I* threw a baseball at someone's head I'd probably get in trouble.
If they are smart they will be compliant, and advertise that highly. How long until a competitor springs up who is compliant? When it comes to business needs, security is rightly a key focus. Not catering to that is ignoring the very market they want to serve.
So switch to an online bank. Or switch banks. Not all of them suck as horribly. I'm checking sites like this (http://www.mybanktracker.com/bank-reviews). Switch from one of the big banks, and let them know you are leaving because of their fees.
Not leak info from the companies, but provide a list for consumers so they can actively avoid these companies. Different things.
That is a good point.
Why not turn the tables? I'd love to see a website that tracks the companies that help violate human rights. I'd also like to see it tied to products. In the market for a cell phone? Find out if the maker of your cell phone helps Iran oppress its own people. Or maybe a badge system maintained by Amnesty International, where the badge is displayed if there are no violations, and revoked when something like this comes to light... Let's track the companies that track citizens, and make it easier to put some economic pressure on them.
If they are suspected of having lied in the past, and having issued the lying provision to provide cover for past lies, how can we trust their commitment to not seek approval for lying is truthful? (Debating this question would make a fantastic drinking game).
I've seen the other side of things, where I've gotten "pop quizzes" about useless trivia about a specific language, or been asked to spend upwards of 6 hours - for free - working on a problem to see if the company would like me. I've also had interviews where I've been asked simple questions "with no right answer" to see how I went about solving a problem. I was encouraged to think out loud. I LOVE this kind of question, and when I've been on the other side of the table, I've employed it with great success. Ask anything, and throw in random obstacles. Do they ask for help? How do they handle the obstacles? This can tell you far more about an employee than whether they know which file does what in an obscure web framework.
Apples recent* habit of blaming what seem to be hardware issues on the software makes me a little nervous about taking the plunge into what otherwise looks like a cool product. *If it goes back further I just haven't been paying attention.
I wonder what ideas he's had he felt were prohibited by the economy.
WHEN will Gnome finally design a UI to accommodate my tiny tiny fingers? We are stuck waiting for Frodo to fork Gnome and give us GnomeHobbit.
+1. What mario_grgic said, plus it seems like marcello_dl's point can essentially be boiled down to a confusing version of "god of the gaps".
If things that were too absurd to bother with were ignore, I imagine a great many debates wouldn't happen.
Because in some countries you can give consent and then withdraw it, which appears to be the case in the allegations (http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2010/12/06/some-thoughts-on-sex-by-surprise/). Without saying whether the allegations are true, or going into the mountains of intrigue or motivation behind the case itself, look simply at the nature of the alleged crimes. In one instance a man said he was using a condom, then did not. What if the woman had caught an STD? What about the fear of wondering "oh shit did I catch something?" and going to a doctor, getting tests, and wondering "why did this man lie about using a condom? Was he trying to get me pregnant? Does he have something?". After all there was that case in the US of a man going around spreading aids on purpose (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27286268/ns/health-aids/t/man-charged-murder-spreading-hiv/). As for the woman who withdrew consent, imagine what a scary world this would be if when you agree to start having sex you are bound by law to continue. Changed your mind? Too bad, you consented once. Get his pants off and see an obvious STD? Too bad, you gave consent. That's not right at all. And that is why sex between consenting adults can be considered rape: If you deceive someone on the conditions for sex - especially if those conditions include safe sex, or if consent is withdrawn and you have sex anyway - yeah, that is rape.
Its a shame, some of the petitions are quite interesting. The drug czar's response is bullshit for precisely the reasons stated in your comment, and those above. So now there are petitions to remove him. (I also found the petition to ban using tear gas on civilians given it is illegal to use it in warfare quite intriguing). That said, the response seems to be "now we know what the American public wants so we can be more effective at condescendingly dismissing it." WTF.
Why does education always come down to jobs? Yes jobs are VITAL, but we are losing any sense of an education that prepares young people to take an active part in our country's politics. We are losing any sense of an education that exposes young people to ideas other than those they grew up with. This is not a recipe for progress.
Exactly. Flooding the FBI with information and hoping for privacy is like talking to the police and hoping for clemency. Everything in the fascinating "Why you shouldn't talk to the police" lecture (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc) applies here.
Well, this definitely puts a new spin on those "Speed Limit Enforced by Aircraft" signs...
"We shall defend our homeland, whatever the budget may be. We shall fight in the airport security lines, we shall fight in the bus terminals, we shall fight in the train stations and in the subway stations, we shall fight at the public sporting events."
+1!
The idea that they pay nothing in Federal Income taxes ignores all the other taxes they do pay, and the extreme lack of income they have to qualify for no federal income taxes. That is a misleading figure to quote out of context. If you want an interesting figure, notice how most red-states seem to be on the take from the federal government, while most blue-states have the opposite financial relationship. If you want people to be punished for their personal actions, how about letting people be punished for their choices in the voting booth?
Thinking that they have no skin in the game and supposing the rich are paying their fare share (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/27/324204/report-right-wing-misleading-taxes/) is the result of not being fully informed.
That's quite a privileged viewpoint. If you make 70k a year, and live frugally enough to survive on 35k a year, how would you be able to survive at a job flipping burgers? Minimum wage in NY is 7.25/hr. For hourly positions, the usual figure is 40 hours * 50 weeks (14.5k). You'd have to work two full time jobs flipping burgers, that's 80 hours a week, to come up with 29k a year, still 6k short of half your previous income!! That's presuming you can find two minimum wage jobs that give you the hours, and don't stiff you at 32 because for full time employees they give out health care, and they don't want to be bothered with the additional cost. So you might need 3 jobs. That's also presuming your 2+ jobs don't have scheduling conflicts. Now imagine you have kids to take care of, and were juggling a 40/hr a week job with parenting responsibilities (which can be quite the task even in a two parent household). Or imagine that you suddenly get sick. Does your burger flipping job offer health insurance? No? Are you on cobra? Do you know how much that costs just for an individual plan? How about for a family plan?
You can keep your quips about a nice tan, and your statements that you are trying to "keep yourself marketable" in the spare time 80 hours a week leaves you.
If we had a real living wage as our minimum wage, then your point would stand. As it is, your points are as divorced from reality as a jobs creation speech at a GOP Presidential debate.
Fair enough, but where do you get this claim of "most" from? If I got fired from a white collar job that paid 70k a year, I'd be trying to get something even somewhat close to that, not going for a minimum wage manual labor job. Perhaps some of the "now hiring" signs are in retail establishments, which tend to pay just barely at or below a living wage. Its easy to say "just change careers and give up on ever finding the same kind of job you lost" to people you don't know, but when its you in that situation, you are probably going to try and keep from slipping down enough income brackets to go from middle class to working poor. The poverty rate (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/poverty-rate-increases-recession-highest-level-1994-census/story?id=11652753) is increasing, and the middle class is shrinking. The middle class's spending money has been driving a pretty significant chunk of the economy. With real estate agents, project managers, journalists, and other workers fighting for less jobs, or being told "just become an auto mechanic (as if that is an easy transition), you have less consumer spending as a result of less cash. Less spending drags the economy down for everyone. So it isn't as simple as *gasp* learning a new job. Not if the end goal is a healthy economy.
Why did you slip that in? As if universal health care is "milking the titty of the federal government". Or do you mean basic protections for workers?