In many (most?) states you can be "let go" for no reason at all. Not liking your hat today is a perfectly legal reason.
Obviously this isn't done very often, and no big corporations typically allow that sort of capricious at will severance, largely on the grounds that either A) if you are doing it you're simply a bad manager or B) fearing they will later discover that the hat was a yamaka*.
*so to speak; the point being that not likely you today (the at will employment termination) can't be used as a thin veil for racial or religious discrimination
The short story is, only those most closely connected with a problem have much of a chance of optimizing it well. There are exceptions, but. Well, not really.
The context we're discussing is particularly ironic. I say this, because here we're citing the number one reason why central planning committees (and ergo, socialism/state-communism, et al) fail in the midst of a discussion about how large capitalist interests fail. I've thought for a long time that capitalism versus socialism discussion isn't really the right discussion at all.
Sort of. While it's true that the tectonic plates are slowly doing their business, there's huge standard deviation in the outcomes, and even a larger error ellipse for the locations where earthquakes will occur and cause a tsunami of such concern. Speaking post hoc about the event in language that portrays knowledge of the event in the way described is just plain silly.
You therefore have handy some bit of science, such as that coming out of the Pacific Disaster Center, that will have, prior to the event asserted some sort of probability for the event in 1:N in low number years?
while the last huge tsunami at this place was 1100 years before... AND SO WAS FOOKING OVERDUE
While I appreciate what you are trying to say here, probability doesn't work like this.
The above statement reflects the same sort of erroneous thinking that is expressed by those folks who hover around roulette wheels thinking that if it comes up black 3 times in a row, the fourth time is now more likely to be red.
Obviously the risk was that they lost their entire investment, and then that very thing materialized. What can happen here is a sort of delusion, where the assessors of the risk only see the reward, and not the actual risk.. even to themselves. That's why you need objective third parties, even when the risk is only to your business. The fact that there were lots of other people being risked only makes the inability to actually assess risk properly that much more dangerous.
Simply dieting and simply exercising; either one of these are known to fail a great deal of the time, in most people. The only way to be sure is to do both.
For example, dieting alone leads to metabolic drops and starvation responses which are hard to cope with.
Exercising alone most often results in various compensation behaviors.
Both together are untouchable.
Anyway, you calorie burn example is a bit flawed. You are presuming that the measured calorie expenditure of the 30 minute 8MPH run is all the calories that run will cause to be expended. This is emphatically not true; for example, that 30 minute run will cause calorie burns during that 8 hours sleep you mentioned to be quite a lot higher. Weight lifting is even better, as you could discern from TFA.
Re:That's why I like the basic Kindle
on
The eBook Backlash
·
· Score: 1
I suppose a small amount of backlight on my Kindle would be okay. But I'll tell you. The e-ink on the kindle is so incredibly, shockingly, daaaarkly black. When I first got my kindle, it was in that screen saver mode with some famous author on the screen. I thought this was a piece of plastic with printed ink on it pasted to the front of the screen, and spent about 5-10 seconds trying to lift up the corners with my finger nail.
The Kindle is vastly superior to paper; only disadvantages are: 1) would be nice to have slightly larger screen, 2) formating sometimes gets garbled, and 3) the barrier to entry to ebook authoring is a lot lower than paper, so you have to watch out or you'll get drivel for an ebook.
HOA's are an exercise of freedom, where the collective people living there have mutually agreed to increase their property values by excluding the tasteless. Are you implying that people shouldn't be free to make that agreement? Or is "free" something you only selectively believe in?
These lack State power, and here in San Diego if you don't want one, you can certainly pick a region without one. God help you if you do, though. Then if your neighbor paints his house pink and parks his pink plumbing company truck in the street every day, your SOL.
There are essentially zero such benchmarks for virtualization environments. The difficulty is the degree of completeness for a benchmark, and how much labor is involved in setting up and testing the requisite number of virtual machines on one of the types of heavy metal servers that are common in virtual workloads today (32 core servers with 256GB of RAM are what I use... a benchmark of that would be hell hard to set up and coordinate).
You can fail to put your faith in VMmwark. Totally up to you. But my guess is that if you don't do that, you'll just be using faith.
Being that even medium sized VMware environments run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, I do hope you can find a better methodology than prayer.:-P
You can easily quit your day job with $6M. Buy a ridiculous home for $1M. Take $2M and buy an annuity that will produce $100K/year for the rest of your life. Do what I don't know with the $3M balance.
Sure about that? A local pho restaraunt was sold to new owners. After the sale, the food quality dropped. I noticed it, all my friends noticed it. I don't go there any more. I did find where the old owners opened their new place, though, and go there. And that's with what amounts to beef noodle stew.
While technically the old owners sold their recipes, I suspect that they weren't the real recipes. If that's not true, the new owner's cut back on ingredients or something.
That place gets a lot less busy these days.
And you're quite wrong about recipes not being coveted assets.
A well-run standup meeting keeps the effort on schedule, reveals problems early, and most importantly increases the "span of control" of the boss. "Span of control" is a management notion of how many people a boss can effectively manage. I absolutely don't need stand up meetings with team sizes = 4 or so, but with my current team size of 8 do have to have them. If I didn't run the stand up, it would just be that many phone calls, serialized, and my team does work that doesn't always place them at their desk, so it would be an enormous pain to get done.
You should report briefly what you are working on today, what you expect tomorrow, if you are stuck, and if you could use the help of any team mate or the boss. That is all. The risk of any standup is that it degenerates into a technical problem resolution meeting. When that happens, the meetings waste everyone's time. You'll find yourself constantly correcting meeting degeneration. A good meeting runner will be a meeting nazi this way.
As a technology forecaster, I can personally attest to the strategy of "taking these reports with a grain of salt until I see them going into industrial production" is quite wise. While the sheer volume of work going on in nanomaterials suggests quite strongly that interesting nanomaterial innovations are in our future, the specific innovations are gated quite firmly by commercial production problems that for some specific innovations may never materialize at all.
Well, I pretty well despise both of the main parties of entrenched politics. During the last big round of budgetary show down, I sifted through a lot of polls. It appeared, at first, as if there was a stark divide amongst the American people. On the one hand, you had the "balanced budget amendment" crowd, and on the other, the "close up the crazy loopholes and raise actual taxes collected" crowd. These appeared at first blush to be two different crowds. However, on close inspection, it was not two crowds, but one. The American people were signalling both.
The Republicans listed to the half of the argument they liked, the Democrats the other. While each party portrayed itself as the voice of reason in selectively editing out the one of the two positions it didn't like, another nasty bit of political realty was also clear: amongst us mere mortal voters, both positions had majority support in both parties. I.e., the majority of Democrat voters were in favor of balanced budget, and the majority of Republican voters were in favor of a raise in effective tax rates.
So our entire political system has been hijacked.
And any time I hear a shrill voice decrying how one of the specific two parties is to blame, but not the other, the only thing that is clear to me is that I'm hearing one of the many voices that is part of the disease and not the cure.
Bad bet for you. You underestimate the influence conservative talk show radio. The language negative language you describe is practically word for word from Rush and others.
Slashdot Mirror
Well; easily enough handled:
Him: "Would you like to come to church with me?"
Me: "No, but I will come in your hand."
Okay I kid. A little. Oh, but not much.
In many (most?) states you can be "let go" for no reason at all. Not liking your hat today is a perfectly legal reason.
Obviously this isn't done very often, and no big corporations typically allow that sort of capricious at will severance, largely on the grounds that either A) if you are doing it you're simply a bad manager or B) fearing they will later discover that the hat was a yamaka*.
*so to speak; the point being that not likely you today (the at will employment termination) can't be used as a thin veil for racial or religious discrimination
The short story is, only those most closely connected with a problem have much of a chance of optimizing it well. There are exceptions, but. Well, not really.
The context we're discussing is particularly ironic. I say this, because here we're citing the number one reason why central planning committees (and ergo, socialism/state-communism, et al) fail in the midst of a discussion about how large capitalist interests fail. I've thought for a long time that capitalism versus socialism discussion isn't really the right discussion at all.
C//
Sort of. While it's true that the tectonic plates are slowly doing their business, there's huge standard deviation in the outcomes, and even a larger error ellipse for the locations where earthquakes will occur and cause a tsunami of such concern. Speaking post hoc about the event in language that portrays knowledge of the event in the way described is just plain silly.
You therefore have handy some bit of science, such as that coming out of the Pacific Disaster Center, that will have, prior to the event asserted some sort of probability for the event in 1:N in low number years?
*queue sound of crickets chirping*
Your measure of merit for equivalency (deaths per terawatt hour) is dubious.
while the last huge tsunami at this place was 1100 years before... AND SO WAS FOOKING OVERDUE
While I appreciate what you are trying to say here, probability doesn't work like this.
The above statement reflects the same sort of erroneous thinking that is expressed by those folks who hover around roulette wheels thinking that if it comes up black 3 times in a row, the fourth time is now more likely to be red.
Not at all true, ...
C//
Obviously the risk was that they lost their entire investment, and then that very thing materialized. What can happen here is a sort of delusion, where the assessors of the risk only see the reward, and not the actual risk.. even to themselves. That's why you need objective third parties, even when the risk is only to your business. The fact that there were lots of other people being risked only makes the inability to actually assess risk properly that much more dangerous.
Usually when people say "eat," they don't mean "ingest chemical substance." Welcome to English, where indeed the OP was correct.
Simply dieting and simply exercising; either one of these are known to fail a great deal of the time, in most people. The only way to be sure is to do both.
For example, dieting alone leads to metabolic drops and starvation responses which are hard to cope with.
Exercising alone most often results in various compensation behaviors.
Both together are untouchable.
Anyway, you calorie burn example is a bit flawed. You are presuming that the measured calorie expenditure of the 30 minute 8MPH run is all the calories that run will cause to be expended. This is emphatically not true; for example, that 30 minute run will cause calorie burns during that 8 hours sleep you mentioned to be quite a lot higher. Weight lifting is even better, as you could discern from TFA.
I suppose a small amount of backlight on my Kindle would be okay. But I'll tell you. The e-ink on the kindle is so incredibly, shockingly, daaaarkly black. When I first got my kindle, it was in that screen saver mode with some famous author on the screen. I thought this was a piece of plastic with printed ink on it pasted to the front of the screen, and spent about 5-10 seconds trying to lift up the corners with my finger nail.
The Kindle is vastly superior to paper; only disadvantages are: 1) would be nice to have slightly larger screen, 2) formating sometimes gets garbled, and 3) the barrier to entry to ebook authoring is a lot lower than paper, so you have to watch out or you'll get drivel for an ebook.
Flash the bios. Don't tell anyone. Plead ignorance. ;-P
HOA's are an exercise of freedom, where the collective people living there have mutually agreed to increase their property values by excluding the tasteless. Are you implying that people shouldn't be free to make that agreement? Or is "free" something you only selectively believe in?
These lack State power, and here in San Diego if you don't want one, you can certainly pick a region without one. God help you if you do, though. Then if your neighbor paints his house pink and parks his pink plumbing company truck in the street every day, your SOL.
There are essentially zero such benchmarks for virtualization environments. The difficulty is the degree of completeness for a benchmark, and how much labor is involved in setting up and testing the requisite number of virtual machines on one of the types of heavy metal servers that are common in virtual workloads today (32 core servers with 256GB of RAM are what I use... a benchmark of that would be hell hard to set up and coordinate).
You can fail to put your faith in VMmwark. Totally up to you. But my guess is that if you don't do that, you'll just be using faith.
Being that even medium sized VMware environments run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, I do hope you can find a better methodology than prayer. :-P
You can also buy annuities with CPI indexing built into them, if that's totally important to you.
Or you could invest the $3M left over.
It would be a triviality to retire to a life of comfort with $6M (if that was important to you).
Try actually performing some real financial calculations yourself.
Clearly, you haven;t,
It's designed for the server market, in other words.
If a parallel chip designed for the server market isn't tearing down the house on VMmark results in this day and age: epic fail.
C//
You can easily quit your day job with $6M. Buy a ridiculous home for $1M. Take $2M and buy an annuity that will produce $100K/year for the rest of your life. Do what I don't know with the $3M balance.
Only if it is intentional.
Oh, really?
Reckless disregard of others isn't particularly nice.
That's what narcissists do, man. They disregard others.
Most whistleblowers don't commit crimes to get their whistleblowing done.
Sure about that? A local pho restaraunt was sold to new owners. After the sale, the food quality dropped. I noticed it, all my friends noticed it. I don't go there any more. I did find where the old owners opened their new place, though, and go there. And that's with what amounts to beef noodle stew.
While technically the old owners sold their recipes, I suspect that they weren't the real recipes. If that's not true, the new owner's cut back on ingredients or something.
That place gets a lot less busy these days.
And you're quite wrong about recipes not being coveted assets.
A well-run standup meeting keeps the effort on schedule, reveals problems early, and most importantly increases the "span of control" of the boss. "Span of control" is a management notion of how many people a boss can effectively manage. I absolutely don't need stand up meetings with team sizes = 4 or so, but with my current team size of 8 do have to have them. If I didn't run the stand up, it would just be that many phone calls, serialized, and my team does work that doesn't always place them at their desk, so it would be an enormous pain to get done.
You should report briefly what you are working on today, what you expect tomorrow, if you are stuck, and if you could use the help of any team mate or the boss. That is all. The risk of any standup is that it degenerates into a technical problem resolution meeting. When that happens, the meetings waste everyone's time. You'll find yourself constantly correcting meeting degeneration. A good meeting runner will be a meeting nazi this way.
As a technology forecaster, I can personally attest to the strategy of "taking these reports with a grain of salt until I see them going into industrial production" is quite wise. While the sheer volume of work going on in nanomaterials suggests quite strongly that interesting nanomaterial innovations are in our future, the specific innovations are gated quite firmly by commercial production problems that for some specific innovations may never materialize at all.
Well, I pretty well despise both of the main parties of entrenched politics. During the last big round of budgetary show down, I sifted through a lot of polls. It appeared, at first, as if there was a stark divide amongst the American people. On the one hand, you had the "balanced budget amendment" crowd, and on the other, the "close up the crazy loopholes and raise actual taxes collected" crowd. These appeared at first blush to be two different crowds. However, on close inspection, it was not two crowds, but one. The American people were signalling both.
The Republicans listed to the half of the argument they liked, the Democrats the other. While each party portrayed itself as the voice of reason in selectively editing out the one of the two positions it didn't like, another nasty bit of political realty was also clear: amongst us mere mortal voters, both positions had majority support in both parties. I.e., the majority of Democrat voters were in favor of balanced budget, and the majority of Republican voters were in favor of a raise in effective tax rates.
So our entire political system has been hijacked.
And any time I hear a shrill voice decrying how one of the specific two parties is to blame, but not the other, the only thing that is clear to me is that I'm hearing one of the many voices that is part of the disease and not the cure.
C//
Bad bet for you. You underestimate the influence conservative talk show radio. The language negative language you describe is practically word for word from Rush and others.