Funding the creation is nice, but how are they going to fund the exploitation of the site? Good journalism has a price, and not paying it means copying news from other mainstream or unreliable outlets.
Of course, your original question was: why privatize it? They probably did it because the college/university entrance exams have been privatized for a long time, and those seem to be okay, so why not? Sounds kind of lazy, but I don't have any better ideas:)
Well, it is odd to me since you already pay teachers that could take care of it.
Looking at this from outside the US: it looks really strange to privatize high school final exam. What could be the benefit? You have public schools with teachers on payroll, why not pick randomly 100 of them each year, ask them to write a test, then randomly pick what is your exam.
"How do you imagine life on US east coast with 10 Katrina-class hurricanes every year?" was a question aiming to imagine a climate changes making human life as we know it impossible. I did not say this was going to happen. In fact just a Katrina every few years would be enough to be a real economical problem.
I was ironic. But to be serious, there is still some information in my prediction: capitalism is unstable, and crisis do happen. Just like there is a difference when I say "it will rain at some point on earth", and "it will not rain at some point on mercury".
And to prevent the next question: I do not have a crisis-free economical system to propose.
From what I have seen with elite schools, they have bright graduate, but this is because they hired bright students. That suggests elite schools are just a waste of resources for education. They are just there so that employers can hire the bright persons by just looking at what school they have graduated.
That's fucking par for the course for PHP devs: "I don't know what this code does, but I pasted it into my website so I have a twitter feed now! You should too!
You could say the same thing with Java, except that the result is slower
Do yourself a favor and read what the scientist say and not headlines from tabloids.
Like the fact that a warm ocean in tropical zone is the source for hurricanes that move toward the poles, and that warming the ocean helps hurricane creation?
That is correct. Life does not care how much we can wreck the climate. The problem is that new condition can create an ecosystem incompatible with human life as we know it.
It already happens with pacific island, where global warming kills coral reefs, leaving beached vulnerable to erosion from the sea. How do you imagine life on US east coast with 10 Katrina-class hurricanes every year?
Who needs an asteroid to destroy the ecosystem that allows human life as we know it? Our greenhouse gas emission are doing the job fine, and we seem unable to prepare a plan against that threat. Most of the effort is spent arguing with industry-raised deniers.
This is why there is no risk with an asteroid impact : nobody is making money on it, therefore we will be able to defend against it without first wasting years arguing whether the asteroid is real or if its impact would be really harmful
Another possible interpretation: 11 of the 12 vulnerable implementation were in java. Perhaps they are all bloatwares written by programmers that struggle to master an overcomplicated language? (that suggestion will probably not rise my karma:-)
individual freedom results in wealth creation and it takes wealthy individuals and thus a wealthy society to be able to take care of the ecosystem.
This seemed to me so obviously wrong that I did reply at that time, but since I have a few minutes this morning: A quick search on your favorite search engine will show a correlation between a country wealth and its impact on the ecosystem. Take greenhouse gas emissions vs GDP, for instance, the correlation is quite good.
There should be no surprise there, since free market does not take into account the negative impact on the ecosystem. Economic actors have no interest of taking care of it.
AFAIC a right is protection against government abuse of an individual, nothing else.
Does that means you take position against inheritance rights? Let us imagine the state takes all your belongings after you death, leaving nothing for your children. You are not abused since you are no more. Your children are not abused since that wealth were not theirs. I do not advocate for such an extreme inheritance regime, but I wonder how your narrow definition of right will fit here.
The part about 'brotherhood' only means to me: do onto others as you would want others to do to you.
At least! This means you agree that means there is a limit to your freedom, right?
As to what a 'nation' is, it's a set of people found in close territorial proximity from each other
You are confusing the country and the nation. Come on, try harder.
Slashdot Mirror
Funding the creation is nice, but how are they going to fund the exploitation of the site? Good journalism has a price, and not paying it means copying news from other mainstream or unreliable outlets.
Of course, your original question was: why privatize it? They probably did it because the college/university entrance exams have been privatized for a long time, and those seem to be okay, so why not? Sounds kind of lazy, but I don't have any better ideas :)
Well, it is odd to me since you already pay teachers that could take care of it.
I missed that point. But why two different exams? (I assume there is a high school final exam, is that right?)
Looking at this from outside the US: it looks really strange to privatize high school final exam. What could be the benefit? You have public schools with teachers on payroll, why not pick randomly 100 of them each year, ask them to write a test, then randomly pick what is your exam.
"How do you imagine life on US east coast with 10 Katrina-class hurricanes every year?" was a question aiming to imagine a climate changes making human life as we know it impossible. I did not say this was going to happen. In fact just a Katrina every few years would be enough to be a real economical problem.
I was ironic. But to be serious, there is still some information in my prediction: capitalism is unstable, and crisis do happen. Just like there is a difference when I say "it will rain at some point on earth", and "it will not rain at some point on mercury".
And to prevent the next question: I do not have a crisis-free economical system to propose.
Libertarians don't like it so they pretend there is no underlying problem
And by the time reality will force them to recognize there is a problem, it will probably be too late to fix it
Can we predict the economy?
Yes we can: there will be a crisis
From what I have seen with elite schools, they have bright graduate, but this is because they hired bright students. That suggests elite schools are just a waste of resources for education. They are just there so that employers can hire the bright persons by just looking at what school they have graduated.
Given that everyone in first world is going fat and getting the diabetes, a smart phone able to measure blood glucose level could have some success.
That's fucking par for the course for PHP devs: "I don't know what this code does, but I pasted it into my website so I have a twitter feed now! You should too!
You could say the same thing with Java, except that the result is slower
Do yourself a favor and read what the scientist say and not headlines from tabloids.
Like the fact that a warm ocean in tropical zone is the source for hurricanes that move toward the poles, and that warming the ocean helps hurricane creation?
Sweden has a multi-party parliamentary system.(...) In other words, Swedes change their mind because they've some choice
Ifi I had mod points today you would got one +1 instightful
There are no corals on the equator now? Species of corals will shift away from the equator, same as species on land.
Islands that exist because of coral presence will not move. Too bad for the people that live on them!
Since new ecosystems replace the old.
That is correct. Life does not care how much we can wreck the climate. The problem is that new condition can create an ecosystem incompatible with human life as we know it.
It already happens with pacific island, where global warming kills coral reefs, leaving beached vulnerable to erosion from the sea. How do you imagine life on US east coast with 10 Katrina-class hurricanes every year?
Please make standard-compliant shell-scripts, use #!/bin/sh
Who needs an asteroid to destroy the ecosystem that allows human life as we know it? Our greenhouse gas emission are doing the job fine, and we seem unable to prepare a plan against that threat. Most of the effort is spent arguing with industry-raised deniers.
This is why there is no risk with an asteroid impact : nobody is making money on it, therefore we will be able to defend against it without first wasting years arguing whether the asteroid is real or if its impact would be really harmful
TFA says one type of rocket uses water as fuel. How do they extract energy from water?
Another possible interpretation: 11 of the 12 vulnerable implementation were in java. Perhaps they are all bloatwares written by programmers that struggle to master an overcomplicated language? (that suggestion will probably not rise my karma :-)
Theses are implementation vulnerabilities, not protocol vulnerabilities.
Beside this, as a user of simpleSAMLphp, I am happy to see it was not vulnerable in this paper
individual freedom results in wealth creation and it takes wealthy individuals and thus a wealthy society to be able to take care of the ecosystem.
This seemed to me so obviously wrong that I did reply at that time, but since I have a few minutes this morning: A quick search on your favorite search engine will show a correlation between a country wealth and its impact on the ecosystem. Take greenhouse gas emissions vs GDP, for instance, the correlation is quite good.
There should be no surprise there, since free market does not take into account the negative impact on the ecosystem. Economic actors have no interest of taking care of it.
AFAIC a right is protection against government abuse of an individual, nothing else.
Does that means you take position against inheritance rights? Let us imagine the state takes all your belongings after you death, leaving nothing for your children. You are not abused since you are no more. Your children are not abused since that wealth were not theirs. I do not advocate for such an extreme inheritance regime, but I wonder how your narrow definition of right will fit here.
The part about 'brotherhood' only means to me: do onto others as you would want others to do to you.
At least! This means you agree that means there is a limit to your freedom, right?
As to what a 'nation' is, it's a set of people found in close territorial proximity from each other
You are confusing the country and the nation. Come on, try harder.
It isn't an XML and SOAP powered enterprise style sea of complexity?
The XML and SOAP stuff in SAML is almost transparent to the users and administrators, as far as I experienced
The European Comission is not really voted into power.
You could say it is not voted into power at all. Citizen votes have almost no influence on who is in EC
At one time there will not be any oil left, therefore air travel will vanish, and the problem will only happen for birds and zepplins.