Plagiarize, Let no one else's work evade your eyes, Remember why the good Lord made your eyes, So don't shade your eyes, But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize... Only be sure always to call it please, "research".
Actually, the legal precedent in cases where a contract is ambiguous is that the person who doesn't write the contract generally gets what they expect. It's a little like the old "one child cuts the cake and the second child chooses the piece" scenario. If you write a contract which may be ambiguous in any way, you can be held liable for the reasonable misinterpretation, especially if there were any extra-contract promises, implications, or if there are certain standards or expectations by a "reasonable" end user. It's through this mechanism that foul play is generally averted, because all lawyers are trained to know this theory. It's also why legal contracts are so damned long and detailed.
Now, if you can pay enough for lawyers, you can usually just bury the little guy - so you're right on that part.
Those programs for high-IQ kids exist. They're not everywhere, though, and they're not always free. Just as the regular public schools don't except everyone on the very low end of the intelligence scale (there's a point below where there is no mainstream opportunity), the regular schools aren't always the best for someone multiple standard deviations above the average. But there are private schools, magnet schools, STEM schools, and universities which will take in the truly gifted - sometimes on scholarship. But at that age, it's the parents who have to recognize the talent and actually take the initiative. And, sadly, most parent don't because - let's face it - it's easier to keep you current job and let little Johnny-genius skate through classes being bored than it would be to do what it takes to get him (or her) into a school where the advance learning is taught.
This is going to sound like a troll, but hear me out:
Their entire way of life is dependent on a few smart people at the top (and by few I mean a couple million) and boatloads of marginally educated farmers and workers. They don't have a wide spread mechanism for private schools, nor do they have a huge labor-base to draw on from outside the country.
The US has a huge labor force just to the south that is willing to work manual labor for reduced wages. We also have an enormous industrial-agricultural complex which uses machines to mass produce food. What we can't have is a population which relies on agricultural or physical labor - we're too mechanized (and gentrified, to be honest) to employ 95% of our population in manual labor jobs and hold only a few percent up for high tech, white collar work. We also have an enormous network of private, for-profit institutions which specialize in educating in every specialty field there is, whether it's sciences or arts. Yes, those are pay-to-play, but there are also scholarships available to the amazingly gifted.
So US schools focus on preparing young minds for the factories of white collar labor in the US. We try to feed them with a basic education which can be used anywhere in any mid-level job, by any mid-level intelligence. The focus of the public system is not on creating 5% superstars and 95% ditch diggers, but 70-80% average workers.
What is lost is that to educate that top 5% and give them individualized instruction and stimulation costs (in the US) about $30,000-$50,000 per year, whereas the average the public school system has to spend is on the order of $11,000 per student. We filter out kids into smart, average and remedial. China segregates into amazing and useless.
The two philosophies really are different. And for every top 5% student who gets "chosen" in China there's a top 10% (5.001%-10%) child who gets put in the useless category and is expected to remain in subsistence farming for the rest of their lives. In China, you are chosen and lifted up or you get kicked to the curb and thrown out with the trash. In the US, the public system offers a chance to keep going even if you are not the brightest in the class. And there's something to be said for that. (and of course, there are still ways to rocket to stardom early if you have the money or insane talent).
Actually, the bigger question is that, if the "pirates" are making so much fucking money on this second-rate content (compressed, poorly packaged, difficult to find, and onerous to collect), how is it that the content creator, which have the ability to make acquisition super-easy are not able to see a dime from their work?
The simple answer is that the entire landscape for distribution has changed, and the laws are still written as if it were pre-internet.
As a consumer listening to songs I find only a small percentage of work of any single artist strikes that perfect mix that makes me want to put a song on a "favorites" playlist. As you look back at your library of songs, is there a group that you think really are just meh and how many do you still really, really enjoy performing? As a followup - if the songs you perform the most get stale for you as a performer do you look to your catalog to keep things fresh or do you prefer to write new material?
I was going to post that the range would be teh suck, and disqualify a tesla, but a stretch version with 2-3x the batteries, and high-performance regenerative breaking might actually make it a better choice. Yes, it takes a shitload of energy to get the 10 ton vehicle moving, but this is mostly an in town car - lots of stop and go. You get a percentage of that kinetic energy back every time you brake. Even with an enhanced fuel tank of 30+ gallons, the Caddy probably doesn't have even a 200 mile range in town (best guess is that it gets 8mpg in the best scenario, on Diesel). An electric vehicle would be more limited by aerodynamics and heat losses, so it might actually be range-competitive except at highway cruising speeds.
Now, there still may be a scenario (extended evacuation distance) which the batteries just couldn't handle, but for normal to moderately-extreme conditions a battery pack car very well could out-perform the ICE version.
And if you really, really, really needed to get the stuff quickly you can "upgrade" to a commercial, highspeed account (100Mbps uncapped is ~$200/mo) and upload everything quickly or - in the case of a failure - download it all back faster than they can write it to a HDD and mail it to you.
Damn straight. I'll remind myself that phones and tablets were never mean to watch movies or listen to music or share vacation photos or pull up a reference document when I'm on a job site. That's the kind of stuff I really should be carrying around a full laptop for.
This actually starts looking a lot better if you're near the TB+ mark. At 1TB, it costs the same as glacier ($0.01/GB) with no bandwidth charges and instant, sync access.
The restore data is a nice feature, but for a few hundred dollars you can almost certainly negotiate access to get your data back that quickly from someone (vs having someone else queue you up, copy to disk, and then ship). Most big cable operators have 100Mb connections now. I don't know this for a fact, but I have this suspicion that if I slipped $200 to the right person at the local comcast office, I'll bet I could use their internet to download my TB to a hard drive in one day. Probably 1/4 of that if I had a friend with comcast business services (which are unmetered).
Are you worried about the NSA? 'Cause here in the states they pretend like they need a reason to gather data. Snooping data in non-US countries is their raison d'etre.
Roanoke Electric Steel, now Steel Dynamics, Inc., is primarily and electric plant. I know because I designed the turning towers to bring the new primary service into the plant just 4 years ago. It's a profitable foundry.
Congratuations, you've just found out what the Republicans felt was the best system for healthcare. If the Democrats had had there way, it would be single payer - not "how much profit can we make" insurance companies.
I actually wish that the ACA had abolished employer paid healthcare. It would be a market-leveling action. Unfortunately, most people have no idea how much their healthcare actually costs, and when they find out they are overwhelmed.
I think you didn't have what you thought you had. Qualifying HDHPs have had a minimum deductible of over $2500 for individuals and over $5000 (yes, deductible) for the last 6+ years. I know because I've been on one. And, yes, it's awesome.
FWIW, a standard, large group medical will run about $1000/mo for a family. If you're curious what the rates are for the biggest healthcare group (i.e. best leverage) in the nation are, see this: http://www.opm.gov/healthcare-...
I am. Cost me 12% more than last year. Which is about how much my plan went up 3 years ago, and about 4% more than it went up last year. I cover myself, wife, and child.
And you must be the shittiest consultant in the world if a 1% penalty (this year) or a 2.5% penalty (cap, in 3 years) on your AGI will cost you more than losing your consultant income. If you get taxed on $100,000 a year, it will cost you $1000 this year; $2500 next year. If you're not making at least 50% more as a consultant as you do as a grunt, you're doing it wrong.
Which is fine. When you're listening in a perfect environment. But unless you've built a listening room, or listen in a quiet environment on good headphones, you won't. The only time I use headphones is in the studio, or when I'm editing tracks.
There's nothing magical about LPs; I grew up on them. I do not, in any way, miss their poor fidelity.
except for that last 1/10% who think they can hear a difference, or the 1/10000% who actually can.
Honestly, it's music we don't need. This is like arguing over whether x264 is sufficient to carry all of the visual information in a motion picture. It's not even close - the best BluRay throws close to 99.9% of the information away, but Neal's reckoning. Thing is, you can't tell. You can't tell in a good set up in a controlled environment, much less in a room where the visual/acoustic treatments aren't designed solely for the experience.
They already do that. That system failed for an unknown reason.
Also, at 900fps, a jet travels in the neighborhood of 50 miles just between 5 minute beacons. It's better than nothing, but a 50 mi x N mi grid search of the ocean floor is pretty much a non-starter in most areas of the globe.
The fine article states that L-3 (who has a bit of a conflict of interest) says that streaming all data real-time would cost $300M/yr. The mfr of the "glass box" says it wouldn't stream data until there was an anomalous event, and so it wouldn't cost nearly that much.
Who's right? Well, TFA states "Of course, that wouldn’t yield much information if a plane is blown out of the sky by a bomb, or suffers a sudden catastrophic structural failure at cruising altitude. But in those rare cases, conventional black boxes are really the only viable technology."
So you either stream data all the time, or you miss the really crazy disappearances. Which is exactly the ones you WANT this data from. So to the families of passengers of MH370 - we don't know where your plane is because we didn't spend billions of dollars to equip every plane and then spend an extra $300Million a year to run the system.
Oh, and since the transponder that relays back basic information failed on this flight, there's a chance that whatever took it out would have also taken out the full-data relay, and after spending all those billions of dollars we might *still* not be able to find it.
Slashdot Mirror
Plagiarize,
Let no one else's work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good Lord made your eyes,
So don't shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize...
Only be sure always to call it please, "research".
-T. Lehrer
Actually, the legal precedent in cases where a contract is ambiguous is that the person who doesn't write the contract generally gets what they expect. It's a little like the old "one child cuts the cake and the second child chooses the piece" scenario. If you write a contract which may be ambiguous in any way, you can be held liable for the reasonable misinterpretation, especially if there were any extra-contract promises, implications, or if there are certain standards or expectations by a "reasonable" end user. It's through this mechanism that foul play is generally averted, because all lawyers are trained to know this theory. It's also why legal contracts are so damned long and detailed.
Now, if you can pay enough for lawyers, you can usually just bury the little guy - so you're right on that part.
Those programs for high-IQ kids exist. They're not everywhere, though, and they're not always free. Just as the regular public schools don't except everyone on the very low end of the intelligence scale (there's a point below where there is no mainstream opportunity), the regular schools aren't always the best for someone multiple standard deviations above the average. But there are private schools, magnet schools, STEM schools, and universities which will take in the truly gifted - sometimes on scholarship. But at that age, it's the parents who have to recognize the talent and actually take the initiative. And, sadly, most parent don't because - let's face it - it's easier to keep you current job and let little Johnny-genius skate through classes being bored than it would be to do what it takes to get him (or her) into a school where the advance learning is taught.
This is going to sound like a troll, but hear me out:
Their entire way of life is dependent on a few smart people at the top (and by few I mean a couple million) and boatloads of marginally educated farmers and workers. They don't have a wide spread mechanism for private schools, nor do they have a huge labor-base to draw on from outside the country.
The US has a huge labor force just to the south that is willing to work manual labor for reduced wages. We also have an enormous industrial-agricultural complex which uses machines to mass produce food. What we can't have is a population which relies on agricultural or physical labor - we're too mechanized (and gentrified, to be honest) to employ 95% of our population in manual labor jobs and hold only a few percent up for high tech, white collar work. We also have an enormous network of private, for-profit institutions which specialize in educating in every specialty field there is, whether it's sciences or arts. Yes, those are pay-to-play, but there are also scholarships available to the amazingly gifted.
So US schools focus on preparing young minds for the factories of white collar labor in the US. We try to feed them with a basic education which can be used anywhere in any mid-level job, by any mid-level intelligence. The focus of the public system is not on creating 5% superstars and 95% ditch diggers, but 70-80% average workers.
What is lost is that to educate that top 5% and give them individualized instruction and stimulation costs (in the US) about $30,000-$50,000 per year, whereas the average the public school system has to spend is on the order of $11,000 per student. We filter out kids into smart, average and remedial. China segregates into amazing and useless.
The two philosophies really are different. And for every top 5% student who gets "chosen" in China there's a top 10% (5.001%-10%) child who gets put in the useless category and is expected to remain in subsistence farming for the rest of their lives. In China, you are chosen and lifted up or you get kicked to the curb and thrown out with the trash. In the US, the public system offers a chance to keep going even if you are not the brightest in the class. And there's something to be said for that. (and of course, there are still ways to rocket to stardom early if you have the money or insane talent).
How much money is made on illicit alcohol in the US?
Actually, the bigger question is that, if the "pirates" are making so much fucking money on this second-rate content (compressed, poorly packaged, difficult to find, and onerous to collect), how is it that the content creator, which have the ability to make acquisition super-easy are not able to see a dime from their work?
The simple answer is that the entire landscape for distribution has changed, and the laws are still written as if it were pre-internet.
As a consumer listening to songs I find only a small percentage of work of any single artist strikes that perfect mix that makes me want to put a song on a "favorites" playlist. As you look back at your library of songs, is there a group that you think really are just meh and how many do you still really, really enjoy performing? As a followup - if the songs you perform the most get stale for you as a performer do you look to your catalog to keep things fresh or do you prefer to write new material?
I was going to post that the range would be teh suck, and disqualify a tesla, but a stretch version with 2-3x the batteries, and high-performance regenerative breaking might actually make it a better choice. Yes, it takes a shitload of energy to get the 10 ton vehicle moving, but this is mostly an in town car - lots of stop and go. You get a percentage of that kinetic energy back every time you brake. Even with an enhanced fuel tank of 30+ gallons, the Caddy probably doesn't have even a 200 mile range in town (best guess is that it gets 8mpg in the best scenario, on Diesel). An electric vehicle would be more limited by aerodynamics and heat losses, so it might actually be range-competitive except at highway cruising speeds.
Now, there still may be a scenario (extended evacuation distance) which the batteries just couldn't handle, but for normal to moderately-extreme conditions a battery pack car very well could out-perform the ICE version.
And if you really, really, really needed to get the stuff quickly you can "upgrade" to a commercial, highspeed account (100Mbps uncapped is ~$200/mo) and upload everything quickly or - in the case of a failure - download it all back faster than they can write it to a HDD and mail it to you.
Damn straight. I'll remind myself that phones and tablets were never mean to watch movies or listen to music or share vacation photos or pull up a reference document when I'm on a job site. That's the kind of stuff I really should be carrying around a full laptop for.
Yeah, but their sync service is total shit.
This actually starts looking a lot better if you're near the TB+ mark. At 1TB, it costs the same as glacier ($0.01/GB) with no bandwidth charges and instant, sync access.
The restore data is a nice feature, but for a few hundred dollars you can almost certainly negotiate access to get your data back that quickly from someone (vs having someone else queue you up, copy to disk, and then ship). Most big cable operators have 100Mb connections now. I don't know this for a fact, but I have this suspicion that if I slipped $200 to the right person at the local comcast office, I'll bet I could use their internet to download my TB to a hard drive in one day. Probably 1/4 of that if I had a friend with comcast business services (which are unmetered).
Are you worried about the NSA? 'Cause here in the states they pretend like they need a reason to gather data. Snooping data in non-US countries is their raison d'etre.
Ahhh, capitalism - where no good deed goes unpunished by the marketplace!
Roanoke Electric Steel, now Steel Dynamics, Inc., is primarily and electric plant. I know because I designed the turning towers to bring the new primary service into the plant just 4 years ago. It's a profitable foundry.
Congratuations, you've just found out what the Republicans felt was the best system for healthcare. If the Democrats had had there way, it would be single payer - not "how much profit can we make" insurance companies.
I actually wish that the ACA had abolished employer paid healthcare. It would be a market-leveling action. Unfortunately, most people have no idea how much their healthcare actually costs, and when they find out they are overwhelmed.
You do realize that Medicare fraud isn't governmental, but rather fraud perpetrated by private corporations on the Medicare insurance system, right?
I think you didn't have what you thought you had. Qualifying HDHPs have had a minimum deductible of over $2500 for individuals and over $5000 (yes, deductible) for the last 6+ years. I know because I've been on one. And, yes, it's awesome.
FWIW, a standard, large group medical will run about $1000/mo for a family. If you're curious what the rates are for the biggest healthcare group (i.e. best leverage) in the nation are, see this: http://www.opm.gov/healthcare-...
I am. Cost me 12% more than last year. Which is about how much my plan went up 3 years ago, and about 4% more than it went up last year. I cover myself, wife, and child.
And you must be the shittiest consultant in the world if a 1% penalty (this year) or a 2.5% penalty (cap, in 3 years) on your AGI will cost you more than losing your consultant income. If you get taxed on $100,000 a year, it will cost you $1000 this year; $2500 next year. If you're not making at least 50% more as a consultant as you do as a grunt, you're doing it wrong.
If you think MP3s are about sampling, you're already too far gone to save.
Which is fine. When you're listening in a perfect environment. But unless you've built a listening room, or listen in a quiet environment on good headphones, you won't. The only time I use headphones is in the studio, or when I'm editing tracks.
There's nothing magical about LPs; I grew up on them. I do not, in any way, miss their poor fidelity.
except for that last 1/10% who think they can hear a difference, or the 1/10000% who actually can.
Honestly, it's music we don't need. This is like arguing over whether x264 is sufficient to carry all of the visual information in a motion picture. It's not even close - the best BluRay throws close to 99.9% of the information away, but Neal's reckoning. Thing is, you can't tell. You can't tell in a good set up in a controlled environment, much less in a room where the visual/acoustic treatments aren't designed solely for the experience.
They already do that. That system failed for an unknown reason.
Also, at 900fps, a jet travels in the neighborhood of 50 miles just between 5 minute beacons. It's better than nothing, but a 50 mi x N mi grid search of the ocean floor is pretty much a non-starter in most areas of the globe.
The fine article states that L-3 (who has a bit of a conflict of interest) says that streaming all data real-time would cost $300M/yr. The mfr of the "glass box" says it wouldn't stream data until there was an anomalous event, and so it wouldn't cost nearly that much.
Who's right? Well, TFA states "Of course, that wouldn’t yield much information if a plane is blown out of the sky by a bomb, or suffers a sudden catastrophic structural failure at cruising altitude. But in those rare cases, conventional black boxes are really the only viable technology."
So you either stream data all the time, or you miss the really crazy disappearances. Which is exactly the ones you WANT this data from. So to the families of passengers of MH370 - we don't know where your plane is because we didn't spend billions of dollars to equip every plane and then spend an extra $300Million a year to run the system.
Oh, and since the transponder that relays back basic information failed on this flight, there's a chance that whatever took it out would have also taken out the full-data relay, and after spending all those billions of dollars we might *still* not be able to find it.