IBM engineers aren't actually crappy. It's the fucking MBAs in management who have no clue about how to run a software development company. Their engineers will want to do good work, but management will worry more about headcount and sales.
IBM buys a company, fires all the transferred employees and hopes they can keep selling their acquired software without further development. If they were serious, they'd have improved their own Linux contribution efforts. But they literally think they can somehow keep selling software without anyone with knowledge of the software, or for transferring skills to their own employees. They literally have no interest in actual software development. It's all about sales targets.
IBM acquisitions never go well. All companies acquired by IBM go through a process of "Blue washing", in which the heart and soul of the acquired company is ripped out, the body burnt, and the remaining ashes to be devoured and defecated by its army of clueless salesmen and consultants.
It's a sad, and infuriating, repeated pattern. They no longer develop internal talent. They drive away the remaining people left over from the time when they still did develop things. They think they can just buy their way into a market or technology, somehow completely oblivious to the fact that their strategy of firing all their acquired employees/knowledge and hoping to sell software they have no interest in developing would somehow still retain customers.
They literally could have just reshuffled and/or hired more developers to work on the kernel, but the fact they didn't shows they have no intention of actually contributing.
You presented one figure as if that proves your point. But now you're basically proving my point that your one single number doesn't paint an accurate or complete picture. You claimed Portland "recovered" "faster", but you make no attempt to recognize there are different forms of recovery, some of which are meaningless and is only there to trick people who only like to choose the one number that suits their argument and ignore the others that don't.
Looks like Portland with a lower minimum wage had a larger and faster recovery especially since portland had a peak unemployment rate of 11.4% in Jun of 09
You're conflating many different kinds of recovery. So what if they improved their employment rate when they're getting paid less? You could lower the minimum wage to $1 and get 100% employment on that basis. Would that be a recovery?
The problem in the recent humanities fields is that the core tenants of most disciplines are constructed in such a way as to be undisprovable. The moment you're learning things where it is impossible to construct a research project to disprove those things, you've moved into the realm of ideology.
This also applies to any argument for the status quo, and yet people like you still make it. So why do you get to break your own rules?
What the world needs is more "Humanities" flunkies who can't pay for their basket weaving and feminist studies degrees running shit.
The fact that people can't be mature about this shows there definitely is a problem. If your education and experience can't save you from making really stupid strawmen (just to get mod points), then you just proved them right.
And why does Taiwan still stick with traditional characters, and have absolutely no problem educating millions of people?
Why do YOU think they simplified the characters? Do you really buy the communist line that it needed to be simplified? It couldn't be because controlling the language allows them to also control the country's politics, allowing them to rewrite history knowing that it would be harder for people to go back to older, "dangerous" writings? Your sig talks about shutting down free speech, yet you clearly think the communist's controlling of speech through reinventing the language is okay.
Have you seen two english speaking people arguing about how to spell a word? Tremendously vindicating.
If the parents can't afford high school, why would you use that as evidence that Chinese is too difficult? That would be irrelevant, yet you would use that in a sample in order to "prove your point"? That's very scientifically ignorant of you.
I also use "high school" for the very fact that primary school children in english speaking countries also find english difficult. You really think people english speaking children have no problem with language? I migrated from Hong Kong to Australia just before primary school age, and I could spell better than any kids in my class.
Because that's what opposition to nuclear power does - it supports coal. Whether you mean it or not, all your scaremongering about nuclear power only helps the coal industry and no one else.
Why don't you accept reality for what it is and accept that your scaremongering is giving the fossil fuel industry air.
There's no evidence that Chinese characters give Chinese people any trouble. I learned Chinese in kindergarten and I remember finding english very hard - because it was foreign. Nowadays I do find Chinese hard because I've forgotten most of it. But ask any Chinese person from high school onwards. There's no trouble at all.
It's like people asking me why I still use chopsticks, considering that knife and fork is easier. Well, it isn't for me, because I've been using chopsticks most of my life, but for some reason people assume that familiarity plays no role whatsoever and if they find chopsticks and Chinese hard, it must be hard for everyone.
There are plenty of places where no one will ever live in 7000 years. We're already living in fucked up places and people don't seem to mind. Nuclear would make energy related fucked up places fewer in number.
his is what happens when we allow behavioural economists and marketing people dabbling in psychology to be treated like serious scientists.
So the actual psychologists they have working on it are really behavioural economists and marketing people dabbling in psychology, as opposed to being actual psychologists that they actually are?
What a load of nonsense. That Japanese clearly have no trouble learning the same amount of things as people in the West, being one of the highly educated countries in the world, and being successful in making that education work for them. The problems you listed are precisely the problems of the inability to retain information, which is what happens now.
People dismiss rote learning, but recalling information quickly and accurately is vital to the learning process. Rote learning is only bad when memorization is the sole aim. Rote learning is an aid to memory, so that when learning advanced knowledge that builds on earlier knowledge is more effective.
The amount of toxic waste that is actually created is miniscule for the amount of energy we get from it. Who cares if it lingers for tens of thousands of years, when it can be kept in a small area? Compared to the toxic waste of coal burning, which sends radioactive matter and heavy metals over a large area that also lingers for tens of thousands of years.
Slashdot Mirror
IBM engineers aren't actually crappy. It's the fucking MBAs in management who have no clue about how to run a software development company. Their engineers will want to do good work, but management will worry more about headcount and sales.
IBM buys a company, fires all the transferred employees and hopes they can keep selling their acquired software without further development. If they were serious, they'd have improved their own Linux contribution efforts. But they literally think they can somehow keep selling software without anyone with knowledge of the software, or for transferring skills to their own employees. They literally have no interest in actual software development. It's all about sales targets.
IBM acquisitions never go well. All companies acquired by IBM go through a process of "Blue washing", in which the heart and soul of the acquired company is ripped out, the body burnt, and the remaining ashes to be devoured and defecated by its army of clueless salesmen and consultants. It's a sad, and infuriating, repeated pattern. They no longer develop internal talent. They drive away the remaining people left over from the time when they still did develop things. They think they can just buy their way into a market or technology, somehow completely oblivious to the fact that their strategy of firing all their acquired employees/knowledge and hoping to sell software they have no interest in developing would somehow still retain customers. They literally could have just reshuffled and/or hired more developers to work on the kernel, but the fact they didn't shows they have no intention of actually contributing.
But those same bakers don't want to advertize they don't bake gay wedding cakes.
Porque no los dos?
No, the problem really is screen time. Because any screen time is unmoderated with no overarching purpose.
So basically, if police gets called to a residence, you think they should have licence to kill literally anyone they come across, even the victim.
You presented one figure as if that proves your point. But now you're basically proving my point that your one single number doesn't paint an accurate or complete picture. You claimed Portland "recovered" "faster", but you make no attempt to recognize there are different forms of recovery, some of which are meaningless and is only there to trick people who only like to choose the one number that suits their argument and ignore the others that don't.
Looks like Portland with a lower minimum wage had a larger and faster recovery especially since portland had a peak unemployment rate of 11.4% in Jun of 09
You're conflating many different kinds of recovery. So what if they improved their employment rate when they're getting paid less? You could lower the minimum wage to $1 and get 100% employment on that basis. Would that be a recovery?
The summary also talks about dozens of other incidents. Who ever procured his services for dozens of other potential murders should be arrested.
Now arrest the fuckers who procured his services.
Sorry, was I not politically correct enough for you, you snowflake?
Shame the Republican party now worships a senile actor who consulted astrologers.
Why "of it's type"? Surely it is the largest and most expensive weapons program anywhere.
The problem in the recent humanities fields is that the core tenants of most disciplines are constructed in such a way as to be undisprovable. The moment you're learning things where it is impossible to construct a research project to disprove those things, you've moved into the realm of ideology.
This also applies to any argument for the status quo, and yet people like you still make it. So why do you get to break your own rules?
What the world needs is more "Humanities" flunkies who can't pay for their basket weaving and feminist studies degrees running shit.
The fact that people can't be mature about this shows there definitely is a problem. If your education and experience can't save you from making really stupid strawmen (just to get mod points), then you just proved them right.
And why does Taiwan still stick with traditional characters, and have absolutely no problem educating millions of people?
Why do YOU think they simplified the characters? Do you really buy the communist line that it needed to be simplified? It couldn't be because controlling the language allows them to also control the country's politics, allowing them to rewrite history knowing that it would be harder for people to go back to older, "dangerous" writings? Your sig talks about shutting down free speech, yet you clearly think the communist's controlling of speech through reinventing the language is okay.
Have you seen two english speaking people arguing about how to spell a word? Tremendously vindicating.
If the parents can't afford high school, why would you use that as evidence that Chinese is too difficult? That would be irrelevant, yet you would use that in a sample in order to "prove your point"? That's very scientifically ignorant of you.
I also use "high school" for the very fact that primary school children in english speaking countries also find english difficult. You really think people english speaking children have no problem with language? I migrated from Hong Kong to Australia just before primary school age, and I could spell better than any kids in my class.
Because that's what opposition to nuclear power does - it supports coal. Whether you mean it or not, all your scaremongering about nuclear power only helps the coal industry and no one else.
Why don't you accept reality for what it is and accept that your scaremongering is giving the fossil fuel industry air.
Designers just seem to be complete wankers.
There's no evidence that Chinese characters give Chinese people any trouble. I learned Chinese in kindergarten and I remember finding english very hard - because it was foreign. Nowadays I do find Chinese hard because I've forgotten most of it. But ask any Chinese person from high school onwards. There's no trouble at all.
It's like people asking me why I still use chopsticks, considering that knife and fork is easier. Well, it isn't for me, because I've been using chopsticks most of my life, but for some reason people assume that familiarity plays no role whatsoever and if they find chopsticks and Chinese hard, it must be hard for everyone.
There are plenty of places where no one will ever live in 7000 years. We're already living in fucked up places and people don't seem to mind. Nuclear would make energy related fucked up places fewer in number.
his is what happens when we allow behavioural economists and marketing people dabbling in psychology to be treated like serious scientists.
So the actual psychologists they have working on it are really behavioural economists and marketing people dabbling in psychology, as opposed to being actual psychologists that they actually are?
What a load of nonsense. That Japanese clearly have no trouble learning the same amount of things as people in the West, being one of the highly educated countries in the world, and being successful in making that education work for them. The problems you listed are precisely the problems of the inability to retain information, which is what happens now.
People dismiss rote learning, but recalling information quickly and accurately is vital to the learning process. Rote learning is only bad when memorization is the sole aim. Rote learning is an aid to memory, so that when learning advanced knowledge that builds on earlier knowledge is more effective.
The amount of toxic waste that is actually created is miniscule for the amount of energy we get from it. Who cares if it lingers for tens of thousands of years, when it can be kept in a small area? Compared to the toxic waste of coal burning, which sends radioactive matter and heavy metals over a large area that also lingers for tens of thousands of years.
Without further due
For all intensive purposes, this has peaked my interest in one foul swoop.