That's my experience here as well. In fact, almost every job application I've been through was one of either:
A. Completely dodgy employer that wouldn't even tell me the expected hours. If my questions turn them off, that's saving me time, since I'll quit in a week anyway.
B. Completely upfront to the point that they ASK you if you have questions regarding benefits, hours, agreements, etc. It's all decided in the interviews, and the final written offer doesn't arrive until AFTER negotiation.
I always assumed this was just how it was done everywhere, since it makes more sense for the employer as well, as they can negotiate with several people at once, and then only make an offer to the one they got the best agreement from.
If you want to cherry pick your sources for data, you'll never achieve anything.
The GP listed Australia and New Zealand, and you decided to cite the EU. All you're doing is proving their original point; there are countries with low and high unemployment with all sorts of employment regulations. Holiday time is not a deciding factor on this.
I've never seen a job with less than 4 weeks holiday time here; in Australia. They don't exist.
So please, enlighten us why America is in economic meltdown and Australia is not?
Because the meltdown, job availability, and holiday times are virtually unrelated and you're assigning some magic property to holiday times that does not exist.
Setting minimums on holidays prevents abuse of the poorer workers, and increases general health of people (which also reduces strain on the medical systems).
If they don't want to, they can move somewhere else. I thought that was damn obvious... The point was, that allowing people free wifi doesn't mean having it leached; you can kick people out, or only allow people to stay that are generating income.
Are you serious? Unless the premises are smallish, or the place is constantly full, people sitting around drinking coffee are a great source of income.
The profit margin on coffee is HUGE; to the point it costs like 20 cents to make a coffee, but they commonly sell for $3-$4 (in Melbourne). Tell customers that they can sit and use the wifi if they purchase a minimum of a coffee every 30 minutes. After a while, ask them if they feel like a snack and make $5 more on a sandwich.
If the place starts getting too full, kindly inform them that people ordering meals have priority (or place a sign next to the door!) and ask them to come back a bit later after people have had their dinner.
I've seen cafes use this approach and it works quite well. People that want to sit around and leech wifi tend to do so during the morning and afternoon, when most seats tend to be empty anyway.
Fill that in with coffee and snack profits! Kindly point out that meals take priority from 11-13, and 18-20.
But then, the level of effort involved is also a factor, and if they don't want to deal with the added effort, I can't really blame them; I'm a lazy sap too!:D
I have no wisdom teeth, and I know others that didn't have any either.
But, somehow I don't think it gives any reproductive advantage. So while such genes may spread over time, there's no reason to believe the phenotype will ever be common; let alone ubiquitous.
While I disagree with the feelings of the op, the statement is not incorrect.
It's perfectly reasonable to hate the medium because you dislike it; and it has nothing to do with content.
For the inevitable car analogy; their statement is akin to saying "Fords suck" (which is an opinion!), which has nothing to do with the destination. It's likely they'd use a different vehicle to get from A to B; just as presenting a story from a comic book in a film will often appeal to many people that dislike the comic format.
Disliking presentation is perfectly valid, and a very important issue if you have something important to say; deciding the format or media to convey your story may be just as important as the content, if it means you reach different audiences.
And FYI, I've met people that do in fact think "music is stupid", because they don't enjoy that format at all. Some people lack an appreciation for aural art, some lack it for visual art, and some just don't appreciate any form of art.
Their bad taste doesn't make their statements wrong; just very poor taste!
This is pretty close to what I've seen in public schools here (in Australia) as well.
Part of the issue isn't simply that administrators don't want to go through the process though. It's because they don't understand all the rationale for the bureaucratic process.
They see a long difficult process, and think, "Why can't I just get it done and get on with my other responsibilities".
For an education system, there's not much focus on educating the educators, and they need to be taught why and how to use these processes. How can such a large proportion of firings be found to be lacking compelling evidence, or the right evidence? They clearly don't know the right way to gather such requirements.
It's systematic failures at all levels; not just teachers, not just administrators.
Do you disagree with this, do you think that I'm wrong to think they stole my code? What would you call it, please fill in the blank: "you bastard, you ____ my code".
"you bastard, you plagiarised my code".
Can we move on from the stealing concept please. Ideas, works of art, intangibles, cannot be stolen.
It doesn't mean it's ethical to copy software; in most cases it's not. But it's not stealing, it's copyright violation.
Copyright is the legal right to determine who is allowed to make and distribute copies. This is not stealing and shouldn't be considered the same for two very good reasons.
1. It doesn't deprive the original owner. Yes it's a tired point now, but when I make copies of stuff I did pay for, it should be fine. (Making copies of stuff not paid for is a different matter)
2. It can cause MORE harm than stealing. If I copy your game and sell it to 50 people, I AM affecting your sales, as those people DID pay for it, and that money would have gone to you had I not done so. In that case, the damage is 50 copies, NOT ONE. Stealing implies only ONE copy of damage.
Copyright infringement is different because context matters when dealing with it. Case 1 is ethically okay, while case 2 is not.
Stealing is NEVER okay, because you're taking something from someone, and they no longer have it!
Please resist combining these both under the name of stealing, because in case 1 it's unfair to the consumer, and in case 2 it's unfair to the producer! Calling it stealing is bad for EVERYONE; so call it what it is and move on.
Attacking someone as such only indicates that you're unable to convey your point in a civil manner.
I have the game on pre-order with a store here, but they won't have it for a few more weeks.
I've put my money down, I'm supporting the developer, and I want to play the game now.
I do not harm anyone by downloading the game to play NOW. I don't have to pirate it, but it's absolutely not harming anyone.
If my actions harm no one, what's the point of being a damn arse about stupid points like, "The release date". Who cares about that? I know the company don't care, they demonstrated so by offering it up immediately for download when the date was breeched.
I however don't want to punish my local stores by withdrawing my pre-order so I can take up the legitimate download from the distributor.
By downloading it now, I can play it now, as the company has shown they wish to allow me to do.
GPG have done the right thing, and I'm very impressed by their ethical approach to this. They don't wish to punish people because of idiotic rules around making copies, they wish to reward the people that CONTRIBUTE back to them. This is the best, most ethical approach.
Heck, have you read the manual for the game, or are you just trying to be a complete arsehole online? The manual states that for LAN play, they don't care if you make copies for your mates, so you can enjoy a game together. We're talking about a company that care enough about the people that SUPPORT them, that they want us to be able to play a multiplayer game in the comfort of our homes, because we PAID for the game.
At no point in any of this was piracy a concern for them, and nor should it be. Just ignore the fucking pirates, they aren't important.
The only mistake was that they put in an auto-update that meant pirates could impact the legitimate users. This was their mistake, and they've tried to address it.
GPG are right, and have likely earnt a lot of respect from the people that matter; the gamers like myself that buy their games. And guess what... we downloaded it too.
In addition, by downloading it via BT, I saved the developer the bandwidth. Now I need only download the updates from them.
Get it?
EVERY SINGLE PERSON ON THE INTERNET IS NOT THE SAME; So your generalisation is WRONG.
That's mostly because entropy becomes the determining factor before space is ripped to shreds.:P
When space is cold and dark and dead though, inflation will still be going, assuming it doesn't reverse or stop for some other reason. I was just addressing the case of inflation itself, not which outcome is most likely.
Inflation acts by increasing the space. As the rate of inflation becomes faster and faster, eventually it's fast enough to separate galaxies, then solar systems, then planets, etc
Eventually the inflation is so fast the electrons would be pulled from the atoms. Eventually so fast the atoms would be pulled apart.
These effects ARE present in local space, but are so small to be negligible. The whole point is that inflation eventually ends in these being locally significant.
It's pointless to make assertions about a site visitor, because they do not know the content (or the existence of advertisements) until they visit the page.
To assume otherwise is a slippery slope indeed. Punish those who engage in making profit, or contribute to profits directly.
If someone broke into a building and placed a huge advertisement on the side at night, would you fine all the people that viewed the building? They cannot know it's there until they've already looked, and they may not support the monetisation of the crime in the slightest (in this case, trespassing).
If you hit the advertisers though, you discourage people from funding such a business model, which seems the only fair method to discourage.
It's not a perfect solution, it's just the least flawed solution; like many things in life.
Probably the better approach is to teach people how to cool their car better.
Whether it's a white car or a black car, if you get in and wind up the windows and turn on the aircon, it's inefficient. You get in, wind the windows down and drive a couple minutes until the temperature equalises with outside, THEN you wind up the windows.
This has nothing to do with the colour of the car; it's all about the silly misconception people have that you need to wind up the windows when you want to use aircon. You don't, you wind them up if, and only if the temperature inside the car is equal or lower than the temperature outside the car.
Not only does it save you some power, but it also gets the car cool faster.
In Australia it is illegal to even ask those questions.
You cannot make it an optional test, you cannot make some questions optional. Even asking questions about religion, sexuality, or unrelated health concerns is ILLEGAL.
The best that can be done is that most employers will ask, "Do you have a medical condition that might interfere with your ability to perform this job?" or similar.
To even ask these questions the employer needs a legal exemption, and must prove that these are relevant to the job, and even then there is often controversy, such as when a gay bar wanted to only hire gay people.
So yes, the law would come crashing down in some places. Just because it doesn't happen in the US doesn't mean it's not true elsewhere. The US is not the 'world'.
They frequently earn a senator in their own right, as the Senate Quota results clearly show, where in Tas they easily had a senator by direct right. Bob Brown was elected in his own right, very much so. In every state (except NT) they were by far the highest polled minority party.
Say what you want about disliking the minority parties; but to state they lack electoral support is simply wrong.
It's explicitly so here in Australia too. Any contract changes and you have the right to void the contract if you disagree.
If they don't want you to void contract (like phone companies that signed you up on a long term contract) they have the wonderful option to leave the contract exactly as it is.:)
The challenge is making these things easy to learn to a 'useful' competency in a very short period; but actual competency would rise with more usage, and ultimately it could very easily exceed your skill with other parts of the body.
And THAT is what TFA claims to have achieved.
The prosthesis is different to your old limb, thus starting competency is higher than learning from nothing, but it's no where near 30 years training! They are similar, but not the same, thus competency is not the same.
If I learn to juggle balls, then when I pick up pins to juggle I'll have a good idea how it's done, but I won't have the same skill level as juggling balls.
What they have achieved is similar. Consider the limb to be learning to juggle with balls, and the prosthesis is juggling pins. People will immediately have a high level of familiarity, and a corresponding level of reasonable competence; but it is by no means equal.
It's a wonderful advance, but unless the limb is exactly replaced there will be a learning curve, because the brain is VERY finely tuned. Something as small as lowering the muscle power in an arm causes a severe drop in competency because the brain is finely tuned for power application and manipulation, and it takes time for people to adjust after such things - that's why we need physical therapy even in cases without prosthesis!
Slashdot Mirror
That's my experience here as well.
In fact, almost every job application I've been through was one of either:
A. Completely dodgy employer that wouldn't even tell me the expected hours. If my questions turn them off, that's saving me time, since I'll quit in a week anyway.
B. Completely upfront to the point that they ASK you if you have questions regarding benefits, hours, agreements, etc.
It's all decided in the interviews, and the final written offer doesn't arrive until AFTER negotiation.
I always assumed this was just how it was done everywhere, since it makes more sense for the employer as well, as they can negotiate with several people at once, and then only make an offer to the one they got the best agreement from.
If you want to cherry pick your sources for data, you'll never achieve anything.
The GP listed Australia and New Zealand, and you decided to cite the EU.
All you're doing is proving their original point; there are countries with low and high unemployment with all sorts of employment regulations. Holiday time is not a deciding factor on this.
I've never seen a job with less than 4 weeks holiday time here; in Australia. They don't exist.
So please, enlighten us why America is in economic meltdown and Australia is not?
Because the meltdown, job availability, and holiday times are virtually unrelated and you're assigning some magic property to holiday times that does not exist.
Setting minimums on holidays prevents abuse of the poorer workers, and increases general health of people (which also reduces strain on the medical systems).
Who wants to drink a coffee every 30mins
If they don't want to, they can move somewhere else. I thought that was damn obvious...
The point was, that allowing people free wifi doesn't mean having it leached; you can kick people out, or only allow people to stay that are generating income.
Are you serious?
Unless the premises are smallish, or the place is constantly full, people sitting around drinking coffee are a great source of income.
The profit margin on coffee is HUGE; to the point it costs like 20 cents to make a coffee, but they commonly sell for $3-$4 (in Melbourne).
Tell customers that they can sit and use the wifi if they purchase a minimum of a coffee every 30 minutes. After a while, ask them if they feel like a snack and make $5 more on a sandwich.
If the place starts getting too full, kindly inform them that people ordering meals have priority (or place a sign next to the door!) and ask them to come back a bit later after people have had their dinner.
I've seen cafes use this approach and it works quite well. People that want to sit around and leech wifi tend to do so during the morning and afternoon, when most seats tend to be empty anyway.
Fill that in with coffee and snack profits!
Kindly point out that meals take priority from 11-13, and 18-20.
But then, the level of effort involved is also a factor, and if they don't want to deal with the added effort, I can't really blame them; I'm a lazy sap too! :D
I have no wisdom teeth, and I know others that didn't have any either.
But, somehow I don't think it gives any reproductive advantage. So while such genes may spread over time, there's no reason to believe the phenotype will ever be common; let alone ubiquitous.
Eh, 780p is actually better than 1080i.
You sure you got your details right there?
While I disagree with the feelings of the op, the statement is not incorrect.
It's perfectly reasonable to hate the medium because you dislike it; and it has nothing to do with content.
For the inevitable car analogy; their statement is akin to saying "Fords suck" (which is an opinion!), which has nothing to do with the destination. It's likely they'd use a different vehicle to get from A to B; just as presenting a story from a comic book in a film will often appeal to many people that dislike the comic format.
Disliking presentation is perfectly valid, and a very important issue if you have something important to say; deciding the format or media to convey your story may be just as important as the content, if it means you reach different audiences.
And FYI, I've met people that do in fact think "music is stupid", because they don't enjoy that format at all. Some people lack an appreciation for aural art, some lack it for visual art, and some just don't appreciate any form of art.
Their bad taste doesn't make their statements wrong; just very poor taste!
This is pretty close to what I've seen in public schools here (in Australia) as well.
Part of the issue isn't simply that administrators don't want to go through the process though. It's because they don't understand all the rationale for the bureaucratic process.
They see a long difficult process, and think, "Why can't I just get it done and get on with my other responsibilities".
For an education system, there's not much focus on educating the educators, and they need to be taught why and how to use these processes.
How can such a large proportion of firings be found to be lacking compelling evidence, or the right evidence? They clearly don't know the right way to gather such requirements.
It's systematic failures at all levels; not just teachers, not just administrators.
You have again ignored many of the important points, so I'll point it out for you.
I said:
It was released EARLY for download because ONE store broke release date.
I don't want to punish the store I placed my order with, because they respected the release date the distributor set.
A preorder from a B&M store does NOT include a download.
It must be very difficult to ignore key points in a post, so that you can rationalise abusing the poster.
Some places (such as here in Aus) it's required by law that they take back something that didn't work.
Sure, they will tell you they don't do refunds, but usually they back down very quickly at the mention of legal obligations.
"you bastard, you plagiarised my code".
Can we move on from the stealing concept please. Ideas, works of art, intangibles, cannot be stolen.
It doesn't mean it's ethical to copy software; in most cases it's not.
But it's not stealing, it's copyright violation.
Copyright is the legal right to determine who is allowed to make and distribute copies. This is not stealing and shouldn't be considered the same for two very good reasons.
1. It doesn't deprive the original owner.
Yes it's a tired point now, but when I make copies of stuff I did pay for, it should be fine. (Making copies of stuff not paid for is a different matter)
2. It can cause MORE harm than stealing.
If I copy your game and sell it to 50 people, I AM affecting your sales, as those people DID pay for it, and that money would have gone to you had I not done so.
In that case, the damage is 50 copies, NOT ONE. Stealing implies only ONE copy of damage.
Copyright infringement is different because context matters when dealing with it. Case 1 is ethically okay, while case 2 is not.
Stealing is NEVER okay, because you're taking something from someone, and they no longer have it!
Please resist combining these both under the name of stealing, because in case 1 it's unfair to the consumer, and in case 2 it's unfair to the producer!
Calling it stealing is bad for EVERYONE; so call it what it is and move on.
Attacking someone as such only indicates that you're unable to convey your point in a civil manner.
I have the game on pre-order with a store here, but they won't have it for a few more weeks.
I've put my money down, I'm supporting the developer, and I want to play the game now.
I do not harm anyone by downloading the game to play NOW. I don't have to pirate it, but it's absolutely not harming anyone.
If my actions harm no one, what's the point of being a damn arse about stupid points like, "The release date".
Who cares about that?
I know the company don't care, they demonstrated so by offering it up immediately for download when the date was breeched.
I however don't want to punish my local stores by withdrawing my pre-order so I can take up the legitimate download from the distributor.
By downloading it now, I can play it now, as the company has shown they wish to allow me to do.
GPG have done the right thing, and I'm very impressed by their ethical approach to this.
They don't wish to punish people because of idiotic rules around making copies, they wish to reward the people that CONTRIBUTE back to them. This is the best, most ethical approach.
Heck, have you read the manual for the game, or are you just trying to be a complete arsehole online?
The manual states that for LAN play, they don't care if you make copies for your mates, so you can enjoy a game together.
We're talking about a company that care enough about the people that SUPPORT them, that they want us to be able to play a multiplayer game in the comfort of our homes, because we PAID for the game.
At no point in any of this was piracy a concern for them, and nor should it be. Just ignore the fucking pirates, they aren't important.
The only mistake was that they put in an auto-update that meant pirates could impact the legitimate users. This was their mistake, and they've tried to address it.
GPG are right, and have likely earnt a lot of respect from the people that matter; the gamers like myself that buy their games.
And guess what... we downloaded it too.
In addition, by downloading it via BT, I saved the developer the bandwidth. Now I need only download the updates from them.
Get it?
EVERY SINGLE PERSON ON THE INTERNET IS NOT THE SAME; So your generalisation is WRONG.
Perhaps what you missed is context.
The Australian government is not short of cash, and this won't require printing money.
I think you're looking for complexity to muddle this issue.
Simply not true.
Very clearly not rural (and not considered rural by government) areas:
VIC: Geelong
NSW: Newcastle
QLD: Gold Coast
There are many more too, but those are the damn obvious.
That's mostly because entropy becomes the determining factor before space is ripped to shreds. :P
When space is cold and dark and dead though, inflation will still be going, assuming it doesn't reverse or stop for some other reason. I was just addressing the case of inflation itself, not which outcome is most likely.
Inflation acts by increasing the space.
As the rate of inflation becomes faster and faster, eventually it's fast enough to separate galaxies, then solar systems, then planets, etc
Eventually the inflation is so fast the electrons would be pulled from the atoms. Eventually so fast the atoms would be pulled apart.
These effects ARE present in local space, but are so small to be negligible. The whole point is that inflation eventually ends in these being locally significant.
Surely no one would do...
Damn.
Then the advertisers are creating the market.
It's pointless to make assertions about a site visitor, because they do not know the content (or the existence of advertisements) until they visit the page.
To assume otherwise is a slippery slope indeed.
Punish those who engage in making profit, or contribute to profits directly.
If someone broke into a building and placed a huge advertisement on the side at night, would you fine all the people that viewed the building?
They cannot know it's there until they've already looked, and they may not support the monetisation of the crime in the slightest (in this case, trespassing).
If you hit the advertisers though, you discourage people from funding such a business model, which seems the only fair method to discourage.
It's not a perfect solution, it's just the least flawed solution; like many things in life.
Probably the better approach is to teach people how to cool their car better.
Whether it's a white car or a black car, if you get in and wind up the windows and turn on the aircon, it's inefficient.
You get in, wind the windows down and drive a couple minutes until the temperature equalises with outside, THEN you wind up the windows.
This has nothing to do with the colour of the car; it's all about the silly misconception people have that you need to wind up the windows when you want to use aircon.
You don't, you wind them up if, and only if the temperature inside the car is equal or lower than the temperature outside the car.
Not only does it save you some power, but it also gets the car cool faster.
In Australia it is illegal to even ask those questions.
You cannot make it an optional test, you cannot make some questions optional. Even asking questions about religion, sexuality, or unrelated health concerns is ILLEGAL.
The best that can be done is that most employers will ask, "Do you have a medical condition that might interfere with your ability to perform this job?" or similar.
To even ask these questions the employer needs a legal exemption, and must prove that these are relevant to the job, and even then there is often controversy, such as when a gay bar wanted to only hire gay people.
So yes, the law would come crashing down in some places. Just because it doesn't happen in the US doesn't mean it's not true elsewhere. The US is not the 'world'.
Have you looked at the actual voting numbers?
The greens were the second tallied on some lower house seats last election. (surprising isn't it?)
In the lower house, they received higher than the nationals. That's not even their target, they aim for the senate.
Try Melbourne for example, with 22.8% primary, and second in two party preferred.
They frequently earn a senator in their own right, as the Senate Quota results clearly show, where in Tas they easily had a senator by direct right. Bob Brown was elected in his own right, very much so.
In every state (except NT) they were by far the highest polled minority party.
Say what you want about disliking the minority parties; but to state they lack electoral support is simply wrong.
I'll make it easy for you. They have not been dropping.
Try considering world temperatures instead of just your local region.
Here in Australia, the past couple years have been hotter than ever; and we recently had the longest hottest heatwave on record.
It's explicitly so here in Australia too.
Any contract changes and you have the right to void the contract if you disagree.
If they don't want you to void contract (like phone companies that signed you up on a long term contract) they have the wonderful option to leave the contract exactly as it is. :)
Not legal in quite a few places. Like here in Australia.
Unless Facebook plans to withdraw its Australian presence, I don't see this going far.
Incorrect, that's not what TFA said at all.
As I stated:
And THAT is what TFA claims to have achieved.
The prosthesis is different to your old limb, thus starting competency is higher than learning from nothing, but it's no where near 30 years training!
They are similar, but not the same, thus competency is not the same.
If I learn to juggle balls, then when I pick up pins to juggle I'll have a good idea how it's done, but I won't have the same skill level as juggling balls.
What they have achieved is similar. Consider the limb to be learning to juggle with balls, and the prosthesis is juggling pins.
People will immediately have a high level of familiarity, and a corresponding level of reasonable competence; but it is by no means equal.
It's a wonderful advance, but unless the limb is exactly replaced there will be a learning curve, because the brain is VERY finely tuned.
Something as small as lowering the muscle power in an arm causes a severe drop in competency because the brain is finely tuned for power application and manipulation, and it takes time for people to adjust after such things - that's why we need physical therapy even in cases without prosthesis!