Arguably, a two-thousand pound car with skinny tires probably has the least effect on roads and road repair.
Actually skinny tires are a problem. From a load perspective you want to tires to be as wide as possible for better load distribution. Hence the double tires on trucks.
The implication of the article was that it is not possible for him to get a work visa. A work visa requires a corporate sponsor, and no Indian firm was even willing to talk to him.
Boo-hoo! Shame! Life is so hard! Do you have ANY idea how many American companies turned me down before I managed to pick up a job in the US?
That's the way the cookie crumbles my friends whether you are American or not. If you want to live and work in another country prepare yourself for a lot of hardship.
This is what gets me the most about these anti-H1B types on/. here. They have no idea - no idea whatsoever - what it takes to get a job here in the first place, go through the visa process and the relocate your entire family to another country. Then guess what? I still have to compete with Americans in the same shitty economy - paying the same rent and the same taxes! Interestingly enough I still have a job here. Guess what- I am really good at my job and my attitude doesn't suck. I wonder if that has anything to do with it. No, obviously not.
Do you catch me complaining about it though? No of course not! I knew about the hassles up front and not being American I didn't expect to have everything handed to me on a plate the very first time I asked for it.
Honestly, the average American these days seems to have grown too soft and that is the root cause of a lot of the problems in the USA today.
OK, All the Anti-H1B zealots please line up on the left. All the Anti-"Any Foreigners" please line up on the right. You may flame at your leisure.
On Sept. 12, 2001, I bet you would have found a clear majority of people that would have voted "yes" on a law that deported every person with a middle eastern heritage. (My God! Who'd serve us the Slurpees?)
I don't doubt that for a second. However, as you point out the lack of Slurpee servers would result in a vote of "let's bring them back in again" next time around. Either that, or locals would have to fill those positions. Either way it's a win-win situation.
And just before you go flying off the handle telling me I don't care about people - I would have been 1 of those voted out of the country.
For example, several years ago we voted a rollback and limit on property taxes. Instead of this resulting in an actual limitation in taxes, it resulted in:
* Dramatic increases in assesed value for property, thus putting the actual dollar amount for taxes back to what they used to be.
* Weasly politicians who sneak new taxes into anything they can, so they don't have to think about cutting budgets. (We pay a 5% tax on water, not to fund water related things, but for the city general fund. It's called a 'franchise fee', so it isn't a tax. Really. It isn't.)
Ha-ha! Thank you for pointing out my side of the argument. With direct democracy you would not have ended up in this situation. Here's why;
With direct democracy we wouldn't have politicians as we have today. They would not have decision making powers. Instead we would have civil servants who would be paid a fixed salary to carry out the direct wishes of their constituents. Note, the constituents - not the corporations, because they wouldn't get a vote in the issues affecting the real live humans.
Re:why not direct democracy
on
Public Net-work
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Because a president, legislator, or other elected official (good or bad) is much less fickle (and potentially more compassionate) than a mob.
I am still looking for the mob here. You have failed to answer my original question as to why direct democracy will result in this so-called "mob".
How do you figure that 1 person - who as we have seen first hand can be "bought" with campaign contributions will be more compassionate? In that instance we only have to sway 1 person and bam we can ram something down people's throats. With direct democracy, we would have to sway the majority of the peoples opinions to do the same.
Now, remember with direct democracy there are no politicians as we know them today, so less incentive for campaigns.
Sure, nobody denies the fact that people will vote for stupid things the first time around.
e.g. we will have no speed limits on freeways, virtually non-existent taxes, etc.
However, 2nd time round once the consequences of their direct actions become evident, then I believe the vote will start changing.
1. Because mob-rule (pure democracy) is a bad idea.
Why? When the majority of people want a certain action to be taken then that is what will be voted for. How is this bad? Why is that when the general populace votes for a president then it's democracy and it's a good thing, but when the general populace votes on an issue then suddenly it's mob rule and it's a bad thing.
2. Because most people don't even give a shit about who's PRESIDENT, let alone every minor issue our representatives get paid (well) to address.
Delete just the html file, and the graphics dir will be deleted too automatically.
Ha-ha! That happened to me this morning. Deleted the HTML and then spent a full minute looking for the associated directory before figuring out that it had been deleted as well.
Hell, you would think that Georgia (and any other state) would have a "Hack the System" type contest.
This is what they were planning on before this woman came and upset their plans. The "Hack the System" contest was scheduled for... let's check the calendar here...hmm found it, next election date. Yes, that's the "Hack the System" date.
There was actually a bunch of workers that did this at the BMW assembly plant in South Africa. They smuggled the parts out in the tanker which housed all the cleaning fluids for the factory.
The plant owners became a bit suspicious when their records showed that they were missing 3 entire BMWs and then an assortment of other little pieces.
Downside, a few people spamming on behalf of "legitmate" companies will reap a windfall when they get to sell a whole lot of leads. But that will dry up quick when the companies paying for these leads find that the leads are all bogus.
How is this a downside? I think of it more in terms of a fine on the "legitimate" company for using spammers in the first place.
Interesting analogy, but not quite correct. A VCR is primarily an entertainment good, and is marketed as such. Panasonic doesn't go around saying "This new VCR will change the way you live your life!"
No, but Sony did say that. Remember they won the court case brought against the VCR's because they said it would be used primarily for time-shifting. I.e. they were saying you would no longer be living your life the way you were before, when the TV execs determined when you could watch something.
The Dictator list linked by Tackhead... Source: Planet Earth's High Score List, sorted by dictator: H: Saddam Hussein isn't very comprehensive at all.
We are missing some very friendly people like Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe who regularly throws his political opponents in jail where they often simply die.
We are also missing other prime tourist destinations like the very aptly named "Democratic Republic of the Congo" which was name thusly after a very bloody coup and continues to have thousands of its citizens massacred every year.
Oh, but I forget these countries don't have OIL^H^H^H WMD so their problems don't really count.
...I lay the blame on US companies for selling out their own people -- but I believe the US may have no choice but to take a dim view of this. Unfortunately there seems to be no good solution.
Of course the companies have a choice in this. IBM recorded $1400 000 000 in profitlink last quarter. Just how "competitive" do you need to be to stop shafting your own people?
Consider this: What if a paedophile managed to hack into the system, and then had instant access to the exact locations of thousands of children ? Maybe he can find one on their own, somewhere quiet.
Consider this: Now the cops can use the GPS ID that you have just supplied to them and they can nail the guy immediately.
I think the key is to execute only the leaders that declare war. Not the ones that fight back once they have been attacked.
Of course Bush will cop out on this one by saying that he declared war on some foreign country as a result of a third party attacking the US.
The relatively easy way to stop that sort of thing of course is to put in a proviso that you can only retaliate towards the people that have actively attacked you. No expansion plan to other sovereign nations without getting yourself executed at the end of your term.
Mind you this is not because you can't just jump in and pick right back up--you can. but there's a whole mentality surrounding all the work that says "sorry, you can't come back in". So something along those lines.
As somebody who has been working in the SAP field for the last 5 years, all I can say is AMEN!
It is a really tough field to break into because of this mindset problem. (See my ID.)
I have recently moved into the CRM module and have found this work very stimulating. All this while making fairly decent money as well. Let's hope this trend continues!
Then I decided to do the only good thing; go back to school.
This must be about the third post like this that I have read. How on earth do you go back to school / college / university if you don't have any money?
No, obviously not. However, we are all required by law to pay taxes. Thus, by them not paying taxes, it is the same as getting money from the government.
Let me spell it out clearly. I pay $100 in taxes and then I get $100 back. I am no better off than before, but the IRS is out of $100. They have to get the $100 from somewhere, so they ask you to pay it instead of me.
So, not paying taxes is the same as the IRS giving you a handout.
You are ignorant, plain and simple. The USPS has not received one cent in tax dollars for at least 20 years. The only significant regulatory break they get is that post offices are exempt from state and local taxes.
I am afraid that it is you that is ignorant. If they don't have to pay taxes then by default they are getting money from the government.
Think about it a bit. You will see that I am right.
Of course, if you were speaking to your computer rather than typing to it on a keyboard, this argument would be irrelevant. It's not difficult to imagine that within 100 years we'll be talking to computers.
What are you talking about man? I already talk to my computer today. Admittedly the thing doesn't understand me. It also doesn't change any of the code when tell it - often rather loudly and expressively - to STOP adding here and START adding there for example.
The point he was trying to make was that the building blocks used to build up the language must be as simple as possible.
Thus, in the core of the language you don't need to build in the ability to do multiplication if you have built in the ability to do addition. Multiplication is just a special case.
However, you then add another layer to this simple core. In that layer you provide functionality for multiplication, subtraction etc.
The key here being that the layer will have been written in the language itself. There is no need to go "outside" the language syntax to some kind of machine language.
If this was adhered to in a strict enough fashion then it would probably make porting of the compilers to different platforms a lot easier as we would only really need to port the core. The rest of the language simply consists of layers that will just need to be recompiled within the language again.
Why can't the cable and DSL provider settle on a reasonable limit, such as "no more than 4 computers from the same household"? That way, it allows 99% of persons with routers to do what they want to do (allow multiple family members to surf the net, or allow them to surf the net from any of their computers).
Or, how about this. They sell you a certain amount of bandwidth. If you can exceed that bandwidth with a single PC, then you buy more. If you can't exceed it with your 10 PC's at home then you - and they - are ok.
They should be selling you bandwidth - nothing else!
Here in the US, calls all cost the same amount of money regardless of who you call. I've even called people in Canada and not been charged.
Not true. My plan, with t-mobile, allows me to call any other t-mobile caller at any time for free. Phoning other carriers will consume my monthly minutes if used during the week. Thus, with plans like these it's important to know which network you are dialling.
Slashdot Mirror
Arguably, a two-thousand pound car with skinny tires probably has the least effect on roads and road repair.
Actually skinny tires are a problem. From a load perspective you want to tires to be as wide as possible for better load distribution. Hence the double tires on trucks.
The implication of the article was that it is not possible for him to get a work visa. A work visa requires a corporate sponsor, and no Indian firm was even willing to talk to him.
/. here. They have no idea - no idea whatsoever - what it takes to get a job here in the first place, go through the visa process and the relocate your entire family to another country. Then guess what? I still have to compete with Americans in the same shitty economy - paying the same rent and the same taxes! Interestingly enough I still have a job here. Guess what- I am really good at my job and my attitude doesn't suck. I wonder if that has anything to do with it. No, obviously not.
Boo-hoo! Shame! Life is so hard! Do you have ANY idea how many American companies turned me down before I managed to pick up a job in the US?
That's the way the cookie crumbles my friends whether you are American or not. If you want to live and work in another country prepare yourself for a lot of hardship.
This is what gets me the most about these anti-H1B types on
Do you catch me complaining about it though? No of course not! I knew about the hassles up front and not being American I didn't expect to have everything handed to me on a plate the very first time I asked for it.
Honestly, the average American these days seems to have grown too soft and that is the root cause of a lot of the problems in the USA today.
OK, All the Anti-H1B zealots please line up on the left. All the Anti-"Any Foreigners" please line up on the right. You may flame at your leisure.
On Sept. 12, 2001, I bet you would have found a clear majority of people that would have voted "yes" on a law that deported every person with a middle eastern heritage. (My God! Who'd serve us the Slurpees?)
I don't doubt that for a second. However, as you point out the lack of Slurpee servers would result in a vote of "let's bring them back in again" next time around. Either that, or locals would have to fill those positions. Either way it's a win-win situation.
And just before you go flying off the handle telling me I don't care about people - I would have been 1 of those voted out of the country.
For example, several years ago we voted a rollback and limit on property taxes. Instead of this resulting in an actual limitation in taxes, it resulted in: * Dramatic increases in assesed value for property, thus putting the actual dollar amount for taxes back to what they used to be. * Weasly politicians who sneak new taxes into anything they can, so they don't have to think about cutting budgets. (We pay a 5% tax on water, not to fund water related things, but for the city general fund. It's called a 'franchise fee', so it isn't a tax. Really. It isn't.)
Ha-ha! Thank you for pointing out my side of the argument. With direct democracy you would not have ended up in this situation. Here's why;
With direct democracy we wouldn't have politicians as we have today. They would not have decision making powers. Instead we would have civil servants who would be paid a fixed salary to carry out the direct wishes of their constituents. Note, the constituents - not the corporations, because they wouldn't get a vote in the issues affecting the real live humans.
Because a president, legislator, or other elected official (good or bad) is much less fickle (and potentially more compassionate) than a mob.
I am still looking for the mob here. You have failed to answer my original question as to why direct democracy will result in this so-called "mob".
How do you figure that 1 person - who as we have seen first hand can be "bought" with campaign contributions will be more compassionate? In that instance we only have to sway 1 person and bam we can ram something down people's throats. With direct democracy, we would have to sway the majority of the peoples opinions to do the same.
Now, remember with direct democracy there are no politicians as we know them today, so less incentive for campaigns.
Sure, nobody denies the fact that people will vote for stupid things the first time around.
e.g. we will have no speed limits on freeways, virtually non-existent taxes, etc.
However, 2nd time round once the consequences of their direct actions become evident, then I believe the vote will start changing.
1. Because mob-rule (pure democracy) is a bad idea.
Why? When the majority of people want a certain action to be taken then that is what will be voted for. How is this bad? Why is that when the general populace votes for a president then it's democracy and it's a good thing, but when the general populace votes on an issue then suddenly it's mob rule and it's a bad thing.
2. Because most people don't even give a shit about who's PRESIDENT, let alone every minor issue our representatives get paid (well) to address.
Delete just the html file, and the graphics dir will be deleted too automatically.
Ha-ha! That happened to me this morning. Deleted the HTML and then spent a full minute looking for the associated directory before figuring out that it had been deleted as well.
Caught me completely off guard.
Hell, you would think that Georgia (and any other state) would have a "Hack the System" type contest.
This is what they were planning on before this woman came and upset their plans. The "Hack the System" contest was scheduled for... let's check the calendar here...hmm found it, next election date. Yes, that's the "Hack the System" date.
There was actually a bunch of workers that did this at the BMW assembly plant in South Africa. They smuggled the parts out in the tanker which housed all the cleaning fluids for the factory.
The plant owners became a bit suspicious when their records showed that they were missing 3 entire BMWs and then an assortment of other little pieces.
Downside, a few people spamming on behalf of "legitmate" companies will reap a windfall when they get to sell a whole lot of leads. But that will dry up quick when the companies paying for these leads find that the leads are all bogus.
How is this a downside? I think of it more in terms of a fine on the "legitimate" company for using spammers in the first place.
Interesting analogy, but not quite correct. A VCR is primarily an entertainment good, and is marketed as such. Panasonic doesn't go around saying "This new VCR will change the way you live your life!"
No, but Sony did say that. Remember they won the court case brought against the VCR's because they said it would be used primarily for time-shifting. I.e. they were saying you would no longer be living your life the way you were before, when the TV execs determined when you could watch something.
The Dictator list linked by Tackhead ... Source: Planet Earth's High Score List, sorted by dictator: H: Saddam Hussein
isn't very comprehensive at all.
We are missing some very friendly people like Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe who regularly throws his political opponents in jail where they often simply die.
We are also missing other prime tourist destinations like the very aptly named "Democratic Republic of the Congo" which was name thusly after a very bloody coup and continues to have thousands of its citizens massacred every year.
Oh, but I forget these countries don't have OIL^H^H^H WMD so their problems don't really count.
They will have to be offshore otherwise they don't stand a chance in this job market.
...I lay the blame on US companies for selling out their own people -- but I believe the US may have no choice but to take a dim view of this. Unfortunately there seems to be no good solution.
Of course the companies have a choice in this. IBM recorded $1400 000 000 in profit link last quarter. Just how "competitive" do you need to be to stop shafting your own people?
Consider this: What if a paedophile managed to hack into the system, and then had instant access to the exact locations of thousands of children ? Maybe he can find one on their own, somewhere quiet.
Consider this: Now the cops can use the GPS ID that you have just supplied to them and they can nail the guy immediately.
I think the key is to execute only the leaders that declare war. Not the ones that fight back once they have been attacked.
Of course Bush will cop out on this one by saying that he declared war on some foreign country as a result of a third party attacking the US.
The relatively easy way to stop that sort of thing of course is to put in a proviso that you can only retaliate towards the people that have actively attacked you. No expansion plan to other sovereign nations without getting yourself executed at the end of your term.
Mind you this is not because you can't just jump in and pick right back up--you can. but there's a whole mentality surrounding all the work that says "sorry, you can't come back in". So something along those lines.
As somebody who has been working in the SAP field for the last 5 years, all I can say is AMEN!
It is a really tough field to break into because of this mindset problem. (See my ID.)
I have recently moved into the CRM module and have found this work very stimulating. All this while making fairly decent money as well. Let's hope this trend continues!
A new reusable space shuttle that dosent require expendable fuel tanks or boosters would be a big benifit
Maybe we should throw a few dollars towards education first? Hmmm?
Then I decided to do the only good thing; go back to school.
This must be about the third post like this that I have read. How on earth do you go back to school / college / university if you don't have any money?
No, obviously not. However, we are all required by law to pay taxes. Thus, by them not paying taxes, it is the same as getting money from the government.
Let me spell it out clearly. I pay $100 in taxes and then I get $100 back. I am no better off than before, but the IRS is out of $100. They have to get the $100 from somewhere, so they ask you to pay it instead of me.
So, not paying taxes is the same as the IRS giving you a handout.
QED
You are ignorant, plain and simple. The USPS has not received one cent in tax dollars for at least 20 years. The only significant regulatory break they get is that post offices are exempt from state and local taxes.
I am afraid that it is you that is ignorant. If they don't have to pay taxes then by default they are getting money from the government.
Think about it a bit. You will see that I am right.
And remember, running supports terrorism.
No, driving off in your SUV supports terrorism.
Of course, if you were speaking to your computer rather than typing to it on a keyboard, this argument would be irrelevant. It's not difficult to imagine that within 100 years we'll be talking to computers.
What are you talking about man? I already talk to my computer today. Admittedly the thing doesn't understand me. It also doesn't change any of the code when tell it - often rather loudly and expressively - to STOP adding here and START adding there for example.
But, we are talking to computers already.
The point he was trying to make was that the building blocks used to build up the language must be as simple as possible.
Thus, in the core of the language you don't need to build in the ability to do multiplication if you have built in the ability to do addition. Multiplication is just a special case.
However, you then add another layer to this simple core. In that layer you provide functionality for multiplication, subtraction etc.
The key here being that the layer will have been written in the language itself. There is no need to go "outside" the language syntax to some kind of machine language.
If this was adhered to in a strict enough fashion then it would probably make porting of the compilers to different platforms a lot easier as we would only really need to port the core. The rest of the language simply consists of layers that will just need to be recompiled within the language again.
Why can't the cable and DSL provider settle on a reasonable limit, such as "no more than 4 computers from the same household"? That way, it allows 99% of persons with routers to do what they want to do (allow multiple family members to surf the net, or allow them to surf the net from any of their computers).
Or, how about this. They sell you a certain amount of bandwidth. If you can exceed that bandwidth with a single PC, then you buy more. If you can't exceed it with your 10 PC's at home then you - and they - are ok.
They should be selling you bandwidth - nothing else!
Here in the US, calls all cost the same amount of money regardless of who you call. I've even called people in Canada and not been charged.
Not true. My plan, with t-mobile, allows me to call any other t-mobile caller at any time for free. Phoning other carriers will consume my monthly minutes if used during the week. Thus, with plans like these it's important to know which network you are dialling.