If they are a better Level 4 Software Engineer, then they should be promoted to Level 5 more quickly. Paying people the same for the same job doesn't prevent merit based career advancement.
From the first line of the article: Scientists have long known the stones came from the Preseli Hills, but the new research helps disprove claims about the original rock locations made in 1923 by famous British geologist H.H. Thomas. The correct quarries, called Carn Goedog and Craig Rhos-y-felin, are on the north side of the hills -- opposite their long-suspected location, the new findings indicate.
So it seems that yes, we have know for almost 100 years that the rocks came from quarries in western Wales. This has just changed the precise location of those quarries within the Preseli Hills.
It certainly has good potential to contain the racist trolls in their own echo chamber. But I'm not sure it would work, as it defeats their whole purpose of posting if nobody who sees their comment is offended by it, so I expect they will continue their shitposting in the general comments sections.
It's lucky for Google that there is no way this policy could be abused to demonetize your competitors videos. Otherwise there could have been a lawsuit coming their way.
Presumably 4 days during an emergency situation, you are not going to be using as much electricity as a normal day. If electricity is out, there's a good chance that water supply is also affected, so hot water isn't going to be needed. And you're probably not going to be spending your time streaming Netflix on your 65" TV. That 4 days is just for minimal LED lighting and basic cooking and maybe keeping the refrigerator running.
Peak electricity consumption at mid-day comes from industrial use, not houses. The peak for housing areas is evening. Household usage is dwarfed by industrial usage, so even a 70% household increase overnight (when spare capacity is at its highest, as no electrical grid is all solar, and all other forms of generation do not disappear overnight) is easily absorbed by current generating capacity.
Present your face within 10 inches of the screen to accept. If you don't want to accept, then upgrade to a seat where you can move your face further away for the special price of S$2000 per hour of flight.
The article compares the end cost of running a CD or record player to all the costs associated with streaming. This is not a fair comparison. The media companies are likely storing those songs for other purposes anyway, so the cooling cost of the servers that are storing the music online is not attributable to streaming alone, and certainly they are spreading those costs over thousands of streamers, so they are not attributable to a single instance of the stream. Likewise, the network equipment at your end is likely on for other reasons as well, not just for streaming. So you need to calculate the marginal additional cost that streaming puts on all that equipment, which is likely orders of magnitude lower than the full costs the article is trying to push onto streaming to make their hipster point that vinyl is the environmentally friendly option.
I haven't done the analysis myself, but my gut feeling is that the primitive motors that power mechanical spinning things will end up using more energy than solid state storage and distribution. Also your record player is likely hooked up to an inefficient class AB or even class A amp, while a modern streaming audio player is more likely to use a class D amp, which is where the real energy savings are going to be.
It doesn't have to be a lucky few with perpetual 3-day weekends. They could cycle the days off so that everyone got three day weekends 40% of the time and a midweek day off the rest of the time. Or they could allocate everyone to have Mondays or Fridays off unless someone had a strong preference for one of the in-between days, and take a bigger productivity hit on those days. Holidays already have law governing how to allocate a different day off when it falls on a non-working day, so that isn't difficult to manage either.
Not necessarily. Singapore Airlines has a "direct" flight between Singapore and Canberra which stops in Sydney on the way, and another between Singapore and Wellington which stops in Melbourne. These replace a previous Singapore-Canberra-Wellington flight that did not have enough demand to fill the plane.
Conversely, you could also say that the 787 was a reaction to the A330 taking Airbus from a minor player in the medium size airliner market to 50% market share within the space of a few years. Airbus ignored it until it became obvious that the 787 wasn't just to recover Boeing's competitiveness (minor updates to the 777 did that), it was to leapfrog them and take that market back.
Having witnessed an airport that went from almost exclusively B737 / A320s to a 50/50 mix of those and B777 / A330s, I hate to tell you that airport capacity is much more than the number of planes the runway and gates can handle. Airports also need to upgrade their parking, check-in counters, restaurants, security scanners, immigration desks (if international) and seating areas inside the terminal if they are going to handle more passengers. It ends up being just as easy to build another terminal and perhaps runway than finding space inside the terminal to cater to all the extra passengers getting off the bigger planes.
Part of what held the A380 back though is the extra airbridge it needed at the gates. This limited the slots available to them, though this seems to be slowly resolving itself now - initially Singapore airport had specific gates in Terminal 3 (A1 - A6, B1 - B6) which A380s had to use. Now, they seem to be using gates all over the three full-service terminals.
To make a start on high speed rail, you need a non-stop (or perhaps one stop at SFO) service on dedicated tracks San Jose to San Francisco, not commuter rail.
Add to that, they are doing it ass backwards. The sensible approach would have been to build high speed rail San Diego - LA and San Jose - SF first, then once people get used to the idea, build the longer distance link in between. Building the link between two minor cities first for cost reasons is just going to doom the project from the start, as there will never be enough demand for that service to pay for the route (even if that route is much cheaper per mile than the more densely populated routes).
Typical American approach to high speed rail. Build a line from Hicksville to Nowhere, then when it opens and fails due to lack of demand: "see, we told you High Speed Rail can never work in the US".
Airlines and Restaurants have different reasons for their pricing though. In the restaurant case, it is easier for the kitchen to be making lots of the same thing during busy periods, so they make lunch and dinner time set meals and price them to strongly encourage customers to order a limited range of dishes. You could have safely mentioned to the waiting staff that you were ordering the meal but only wanted the filet, and they would have happily delivered you only part of the special meal, saving the kitchen even more time. In the airline case it is more of a supply-demand equation, they are subject to competition via other hubs for those legs that go minor city -> hub -> other minor city (perhaps with other hubs in between), whereas hub to hub they tend to be able to fill the plane regardless, so can get away with higher pricing on those high demand routes. But while I can see why they are upset at customers outsmarting their pricing tactics, I can't support them having legal recourse, the risk of customers finding and exploiting the holes in their pricing strategy should simply be factored into their pricing equations.
Many car rental places have special rates for longer term rental starting at 7 days. I just checked Avis, and they seem to cap to their weekly rate, so 5 days is exactly the same price as 7 days, not more, but YMMV with other companies.
Slashdot Mirror
Most Japanese manufacturers have long capped their cars at 180km/h (the same limit used here by Volvo).
Volvos are not Fords. They are Geelys since 2010.
Then you give the first one a promotion, and hold the second back.
If they are a better Level 4 Software Engineer, then they should be promoted to Level 5 more quickly. Paying people the same for the same job doesn't prevent merit based career advancement.
From the first line of the article: Scientists have long known the stones came from the Preseli Hills, but the new research helps disprove claims about the original rock locations made in 1923 by famous British geologist H.H. Thomas. The correct quarries, called Carn Goedog and Craig Rhos-y-felin, are on the north side of the hills -- opposite their long-suspected location, the new findings indicate.
So it seems that yes, we have know for almost 100 years that the rocks came from quarries in western Wales. This has just changed the precise location of those quarries within the Preseli Hills.
Haven't we established that 3000 BC people had figured out rolling large rocks on logs?
150 miles over the hills of Wales and across the Severn into England?
It certainly has good potential to contain the racist trolls in their own echo chamber. But I'm not sure it would work, as it defeats their whole purpose of posting if nobody who sees their comment is offended by it, so I expect they will continue their shitposting in the general comments sections.
That would be USB 4.8 Gen 27 2x2x2x2x2x2x2x2x2x2x2x2x2x2x2
It's lucky for Google that there is no way this policy could be abused to demonetize your competitors videos. Otherwise there could have been a lawsuit coming their way.
Presumably 4 days during an emergency situation, you are not going to be using as much electricity as a normal day. If electricity is out, there's a good chance that water supply is also affected, so hot water isn't going to be needed. And you're probably not going to be spending your time streaming Netflix on your 65" TV. That 4 days is just for minimal LED lighting and basic cooking and maybe keeping the refrigerator running.
Peak electricity consumption at mid-day comes from industrial use, not houses. The peak for housing areas is evening. Household usage is dwarfed by industrial usage, so even a 70% household increase overnight (when spare capacity is at its highest, as no electrical grid is all solar, and all other forms of generation do not disappear overnight) is easily absorbed by current generating capacity.
Video chat from $5 min now on sias air!
Present your face within 10 inches of the screen to accept. If you don't want to accept, then upgrade to a seat where you can move your face further away for the special price of S$2000 per hour of flight.
The article compares the end cost of running a CD or record player to all the costs associated with streaming. This is not a fair comparison. The media companies are likely storing those songs for other purposes anyway, so the cooling cost of the servers that are storing the music online is not attributable to streaming alone, and certainly they are spreading those costs over thousands of streamers, so they are not attributable to a single instance of the stream. Likewise, the network equipment at your end is likely on for other reasons as well, not just for streaming. So you need to calculate the marginal additional cost that streaming puts on all that equipment, which is likely orders of magnitude lower than the full costs the article is trying to push onto streaming to make their hipster point that vinyl is the environmentally friendly option.
I haven't done the analysis myself, but my gut feeling is that the primitive motors that power mechanical spinning things will end up using more energy than solid state storage and distribution. Also your record player is likely hooked up to an inefficient class AB or even class A amp, while a modern streaming audio player is more likely to use a class D amp, which is where the real energy savings are going to be.
It doesn't have to be a lucky few with perpetual 3-day weekends. They could cycle the days off so that everyone got three day weekends 40% of the time and a midweek day off the rest of the time. Or they could allocate everyone to have Mondays or Fridays off unless someone had a strong preference for one of the in-between days, and take a bigger productivity hit on those days. Holidays already have law governing how to allocate a different day off when it falls on a non-working day, so that isn't difficult to manage either.
Half a dozen messages a day are where I need to spend my time, and there aren't enough minutes in the day to be replying, or even reading the 99%.
Not necessarily. Singapore Airlines has a "direct" flight between Singapore and Canberra which stops in Sydney on the way, and another between Singapore and Wellington which stops in Melbourne. These replace a previous Singapore-Canberra-Wellington flight that did not have enough demand to fill the plane.
Conversely, you could also say that the 787 was a reaction to the A330 taking Airbus from a minor player in the medium size airliner market to 50% market share within the space of a few years. Airbus ignored it until it became obvious that the 787 wasn't just to recover Boeing's competitiveness (minor updates to the 777 did that), it was to leapfrog them and take that market back.
Having witnessed an airport that went from almost exclusively B737 / A320s to a 50/50 mix of those and B777 / A330s, I hate to tell you that airport capacity is much more than the number of planes the runway and gates can handle. Airports also need to upgrade their parking, check-in counters, restaurants, security scanners, immigration desks (if international) and seating areas inside the terminal if they are going to handle more passengers. It ends up being just as easy to build another terminal and perhaps runway than finding space inside the terminal to cater to all the extra passengers getting off the bigger planes.
Part of what held the A380 back though is the extra airbridge it needed at the gates. This limited the slots available to them, though this seems to be slowly resolving itself now - initially Singapore airport had specific gates in Terminal 3 (A1 - A6, B1 - B6) which A380s had to use. Now, they seem to be using gates all over the three full-service terminals.
To make a start on high speed rail, you need a non-stop (or perhaps one stop at SFO) service on dedicated tracks San Jose to San Francisco, not commuter rail.
Add to that, they are doing it ass backwards. The sensible approach would have been to build high speed rail San Diego - LA and San Jose - SF first, then once people get used to the idea, build the longer distance link in between. Building the link between two minor cities first for cost reasons is just going to doom the project from the start, as there will never be enough demand for that service to pay for the route (even if that route is much cheaper per mile than the more densely populated routes).
Typical American approach to high speed rail. Build a line from Hicksville to Nowhere, then when it opens and fails due to lack of demand: "see, we told you High Speed Rail can never work in the US".
Airlines and Restaurants have different reasons for their pricing though. In the restaurant case, it is easier for the kitchen to be making lots of the same thing during busy periods, so they make lunch and dinner time set meals and price them to strongly encourage customers to order a limited range of dishes. You could have safely mentioned to the waiting staff that you were ordering the meal but only wanted the filet, and they would have happily delivered you only part of the special meal, saving the kitchen even more time. In the airline case it is more of a supply-demand equation, they are subject to competition via other hubs for those legs that go minor city -> hub -> other minor city (perhaps with other hubs in between), whereas hub to hub they tend to be able to fill the plane regardless, so can get away with higher pricing on those high demand routes. But while I can see why they are upset at customers outsmarting their pricing tactics, I can't support them having legal recourse, the risk of customers finding and exploiting the holes in their pricing strategy should simply be factored into their pricing equations.
I'm curious, which fare rules did they allege you violated if you took all your flights as booked?
Gate check is only ever for that leg - you pick up your bags in the airbridge when you exit the plane.
Many car rental places have special rates for longer term rental starting at 7 days. I just checked Avis, and they seem to cap to their weekly rate, so 5 days is exactly the same price as 7 days, not more, but YMMV with other companies.