IF you where paying for your power, you'd not have a 60 day ROI. Not by a mile.
I challenge you to actually look at how much power you use and figure out what you could pay and turn a profit. I'm guessing your return per KWH wouldn't be enough to turn a profit at the average power costs in the USA. Just a guess, but it would be interesting to know actuals. I was watching a guy discussing his multiple rig mining setup (I think he had like 5, running a dozen GPU's each) and he was discussing how running the box fan to keep things cool was a significant enough power cost to notice in hos returns. That's pitiful.
I live in Texas. You can get power at the residential rate of about 11 cents per KWH flat rate. If you are paying for power to remove the heat along with the power to run your GPU's AND for the hardware, it's going to be really tough to make a go of it. You'd be better off sinking your money into CD's at the local bank.
IF you have actually been there, you have to realize that foreign visitors are only shown what the regime wants them to see. Stores full of western merchandise is an illusion, a facade put on for the benefit of the tourists.
I assure you, there is nothing behind the counter that a nuclear scientists would be allowed to buy. Nor would it be anything they 1. want/need or 2. wouldn't be obvious was obtained though resources other than his allotment. Walking around with a fancy purse would be a dead giveaway that something was wrong and would more than likely get you frog marched in front of the anti aircraft battery as target practice.
And ANY gig in NK, other than being in the ruling party, is not a sweet one. Sure, being a nuclear scientist might be better than most, being able to live in the big city and have larger food rations than most, but you serve at the pleasure of the party. That "sweet gig" can turn into prison for you and your family for just the suspicion that you are not loyal is raised, with or without cause. So no thanks...
But you are correct, money wouldn't matter one wit to a NK scientist. In fact, it would be seen as a danger.
This has to be a joke... checks date... nope not April 1st....
Microsoft has demonstrated repeatedly that they do not have a clue how to do security, and its very much an after thought, after its been compromised.
Be fair please. M$'s security issues mostly stem from legacy design and support issues, not from original design. The need for security wasn't foreseen when legacy implementations where conceived for much of their environment.
Now if you want to argue that M$ should have foreseen and designed their original implementations to avoid security problems, you might have a minor point, but M$, like any other company of the day, was running under the same constraints that software developers have today, limited resources and firm delivery dates. Good enough for now, fix the issues that come up later when you can is how software engineering is actually done in the real world. You do a risk/reward analysis and go with good enough, but not gold plated. And that's not a M$ specific problem, but an industry one.
False. If gpu mining was costing money people wouldn't do it. Yet millions do.
I'm not convinced that GPU mining is actually a valid business model with acceptable ROI. I know a number of guys try to make it pay, but I seriously doubt that when you factor in energy costs, hardware costs and management costs the time it takes to pay your costs is about that of the hardware's useful life span. If you live where you have to use A/C units to keep things cool and you are paying your own electric bill, there is zero chance of making mining pay. Now, if you live someplace where it's cold outside and/or where electricity is substantially lower cost than most, you might make a go of it.
You got to go big and watch every penny, because the established players are sucking all the O2 out of the room and they can hash circles around you. Adding hash capacity to the cloud only drives the return rate down even more, making the small time operator less and less profitable and driving them off. So the big guys love it and you end up helping them make money by driving off the competition and operating your system at a loss.
No sir.. Sorry, the latest ruling says Unions cannot collect from dues public employees via payroll deductions at all, unless they have written permission from the employee. They already had to refund non-members for the funds they spent on political things. Now they simply cannot collect "dues" from employees who do not authorize the payroll deduction up front.
THE STATE can fund colleges and universities using local tax dollars if they wish but the issue with the federal student loan guarantees remains. They have allowed tuition rates to sky rocket by taking the incentive to control costs out of the equation. No worries, just BORROW 60K for a degree in business and spend the next 20 years trying to pay it off. Stupid begets Stupid. Tell me you don't see the problem here?
It's like buying education from those "Rent to Own" outfits. Have you ever sat down and calculated how much you will pay before you "own" that couch? Think of a young couple, newly married making 30K each but having a combined $120K in debt for student loans. They won't be able to pay back that debt for decades...
How are two business degrees worth $120K + interest when your income only went from $25k/year to $30k/year and it only means $10K/year? That's 12 years without interest, more with interest included. But what usually happens is they cannot pay and end up making the minimum payments until they are in their 40's or more, dragging down their credit ratings and sapping their buying power. For what?
If you were around after the tech meltdown in 2000, tech jobs were considered just as useless as gender studies and law.
Oh I remember that it was my degree and experience that got me that new job in September of 2000. It was hard to get a job, but having a degree was helpful. Woe to the job seeker who didn't have a STEM degree looking for a STEM job. So the degree wasn't a "get a job immediately card" it was what it always was, "get the job before the High School graduate" card.
I had some HP printers once, a long time ago. They were such POS that I swore I'd never buy another. And I never have.
I'm with you on this, except I have a Brother now. I gave up on HP when the "replacement" printer they sent me was a refurbished one that normally comes with a 90 day warranty. Well I had 5 months left and, you guessed it, the refurbished one broke too. When I called them, they tried to claim I only had a 90 day warranty and that had expired.... Well, to make a really long story involving phone trees, cussing and legal threats short, they sent me a second refurbished printer, which died just after the 1 year mark (when my original warranty expired). I couldn't dump that thing fast enough.. The good thing though is they kept sending new ink supplies in all those printers, so I only had to buy one set.
Never again, I will never own an HP anything unless it's given to me.
Actually, I understand that the latest was really only about collecting union dues from paychecks without explicit permission. The right to organize or being a member of a union wasn't effected, nor was a union's right to negotiate on behalf of their members. What WAS effected was a host of unions loosing income because they where collecting dues from non-members under the pretense of it being a union shop.
I'm Canadian and I have not studied this ruling in detail, knowing only what I have seen on the news, but I'm assuming that while people will be able to forego paying union dues while still retaining the benefits of the union collective bargaining on their behalf, they probably will not be eligible for the other things that paying union dues provides, such as group insurance plans, a mediated grievance procedure, representation for disciplinary matters, strike pay in the event of job actions, etc., nor would they have a vote in choosing who is representing them at the bargaining table.
Am I correct in this assumption?
I believe you are correct, but I don't work in an effected shop myself and I'm not an employment lawyer nor did I play one on TV.
Also, this ruling only applied to government employees. Private employer / union contracts and situations are not affected by the legal reasoning used for this.
Bush not only didn't see it and didn't avoid it, he took additional actions, such as military adventurism and tax cuts which exacerbated the problem.
Military adventurism? You mean the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions? You act like we got into those just for the thrill of blowing stuff up..
Tax Cuts? How on earth did that make the situation with the subprime mess worse? And Didn't the next administration not do the same things and more?
And you are totally discounting the facts behind how this whole house of cards got built and haven't admitted to the players or their motives in the setup phase. Had this house of cards not been built in the first place, there would have been no problem.
So What exactly is the Problem you are discussing? It doesn't seem to be what I'm discussing.
Sorry. I understand why you think I was tacking socialist, but I assure you I'm not. My point was that going into debt for a un-marketable degree was stupid, regardless of if it's federally back or not. The free market wouldn't let you borrow for a useless degree, yet the Fed doesn't even look at that, anything goes.
I think a focus on specific degree programs might have harmed the system less, but the REAL solution is exactly the market solution you suggest. I'm not sure, though, how you fix the liberal mess from where we find ourselves. Simply stopping the program will adversely upset the apple cart and disrupt a lot of things, but letting it continue isn't a good answer either.
Does anyone have any idea what could have happened 10 years ago that caused worker pay and benefits to stagnate for a whole damn decade?
Anyone?
Bueller?
I'll bite, but the problem started about 20 years ago... With the creation of the "subprime mortgage" which was needed to loan money to unqualified borrowers, backed by two Federally backed mortgage companies. A pile of money got loaned to people who couldn't pay it back and real estate prices shot though the roof as the market was awash in cheap money loaned by banks, converted into questionable securities backed by the fed. Why did banks do this in the first place? Anybody have a clue how this could take place, banks loaning money that would never get paid back?
Bueller?
Bueller?
Here's a hint.... WHO demanded that subprime borrowers be given loans and why?
Here's a statement: What happened at the end of Bush's administration is the house of cards finally fell, but the building of that structure took YEARS so the cause of the problem wasn't the economy and wasn't really Bush's fault (except in that he didn't see and avoid it). The REAL reason happened years before when banks started loaning money to unqualified people and why do you suppose they did that?
Many many many people do not have that luxury. They get any job they can.
Unless they're on a sex offender registry (or similarly ostracized in the workplace)... why? Unemployment is at record lows, and still dropping as I type this.
The labor market is fairly tight right now, and all indications are that it's only going to get tighter. This means more competition for workers' time and attention, and if Amazon becomes known as a shithole to work for, they're going to have an impossible time finding people willing to work for them as time passes and as things continue on their current economic trajectory.
Exactly this. As a friend of mine said back in 2000 when getting a job was hard and they where not handing out raises where we worked... "Don't worry, it's a buyer's market right now, but eventually it will be a seller's market, best be ready." Well, it took 18 years but it's a seller's market for what I got to sell.
It's almost like we have a GOP-controlled government that got a SCOTUS appointment and now has another, which will guarantee a court that will basically start from the Janus case and make all labor organization illegal because it infringes on imaginary people (corporations).
Straw-man much?
Janus merely noted that coerced union membership is unconstitutional.
Nothing's stopping Amazon's employees from unionizing.
Actually, I understand that the latest was really only about collecting union dues from paychecks without explicit permission. The right to organize or being a member of a union wasn't effected, nor was a union's right to negotiate on behalf of their members. What WAS effected was a host of unions loosing income because they where collecting dues from non-members under the pretense of it being a union shop.
This is the free market at work. Exactly as intended by the corporations in charge.
Really? I don't think you are being fair. As I understand this there ARE laws about on the job injuries and ways to obtain such compensation from employers both by enforcement agencies and civil lawsuits.
The problem I see with this story is that the employee has yet to exhaust their possible legal remedies with Amazon's Workman's compensation insurance and with Amazon itself. Yea, it seems Amazon is dragging it's feet and isn't all that concerned with safety, but this anti Amazon PR campaign is a bit premature looking to me.
Then I guess, getting $$ from the federal government isn't on your list of acceptable ways to pay for college. Your choice. I was just pointing to a specific option to get college paid for by working for it. If you are not willing to do that kind of work, then you will have to make other arrangements.
At which point, I suggest you learn a trade and be prepared to pay your own way though college the old fashioned way, by earning the money, or doing it the REALLY old fashioned way and get your rich parents to pay for it if you have them.
Slashdot Mirror
IF you where paying for your power, you'd not have a 60 day ROI. Not by a mile.
I challenge you to actually look at how much power you use and figure out what you could pay and turn a profit. I'm guessing your return per KWH wouldn't be enough to turn a profit at the average power costs in the USA. Just a guess, but it would be interesting to know actuals. I was watching a guy discussing his multiple rig mining setup (I think he had like 5, running a dozen GPU's each) and he was discussing how running the box fan to keep things cool was a significant enough power cost to notice in hos returns. That's pitiful.
I live in Texas. You can get power at the residential rate of about 11 cents per KWH flat rate. If you are paying for power to remove the heat along with the power to run your GPU's AND for the hardware, it's going to be really tough to make a go of it. You'd be better off sinking your money into CD's at the local bank.
IF you have actually been there, you have to realize that foreign visitors are only shown what the regime wants them to see. Stores full of western merchandise is an illusion, a facade put on for the benefit of the tourists.
I assure you, there is nothing behind the counter that a nuclear scientists would be allowed to buy. Nor would it be anything they 1. want/need or 2. wouldn't be obvious was obtained though resources other than his allotment. Walking around with a fancy purse would be a dead giveaway that something was wrong and would more than likely get you frog marched in front of the anti aircraft battery as target practice.
And ANY gig in NK, other than being in the ruling party, is not a sweet one. Sure, being a nuclear scientist might be better than most, being able to live in the big city and have larger food rations than most, but you serve at the pleasure of the party. That "sweet gig" can turn into prison for you and your family for just the suspicion that you are not loyal is raised, with or without cause. So no thanks...
But you are correct, money wouldn't matter one wit to a NK scientist. In fact, it would be seen as a danger.
Software vendors are protected from your politics!
Or is it they are "protecting" you from politics???
This has to be a joke... checks date... nope not April 1st....
Microsoft has demonstrated repeatedly that they do not have a clue how to do security, and its very much an after thought, after its been compromised.
Be fair please. M$'s security issues mostly stem from legacy design and support issues, not from original design. The need for security wasn't foreseen when legacy implementations where conceived for much of their environment.
Now if you want to argue that M$ should have foreseen and designed their original implementations to avoid security problems, you might have a minor point, but M$, like any other company of the day, was running under the same constraints that software developers have today, limited resources and firm delivery dates. Good enough for now, fix the issues that come up later when you can is how software engineering is actually done in the real world. You do a risk/reward analysis and go with good enough, but not gold plated. And that's not a M$ specific problem, but an industry one.
will listen in. CIA will phone NK nuclear scientists with offers of cash.
Offers of cash? How's that going to work in NK where there is nothing to buy?
Politics IS influence. Good luck getting the politics out of politics.
Yup.. One man's "interference" is another's "campaign" and one man's "News" is another's "propaganda". All part of the game.
False. If gpu mining was costing money people wouldn't do it. Yet millions do.
I'm not convinced that GPU mining is actually a valid business model with acceptable ROI. I know a number of guys try to make it pay, but I seriously doubt that when you factor in energy costs, hardware costs and management costs the time it takes to pay your costs is about that of the hardware's useful life span. If you live where you have to use A/C units to keep things cool and you are paying your own electric bill, there is zero chance of making mining pay. Now, if you live someplace where it's cold outside and/or where electricity is substantially lower cost than most, you might make a go of it.
You got to go big and watch every penny, because the established players are sucking all the O2 out of the room and they can hash circles around you. Adding hash capacity to the cloud only drives the return rate down even more, making the small time operator less and less profitable and driving them off. So the big guys love it and you end up helping them make money by driving off the competition and operating your system at a loss.
No sir.. Sorry, the latest ruling says Unions cannot collect from dues public employees via payroll deductions at all, unless they have written permission from the employee. They already had to refund non-members for the funds they spent on political things. Now they simply cannot collect "dues" from employees who do not authorize the payroll deduction up front.
THE STATE can fund colleges and universities using local tax dollars if they wish but the issue with the federal student loan guarantees remains. They have allowed tuition rates to sky rocket by taking the incentive to control costs out of the equation. No worries, just BORROW 60K for a degree in business and spend the next 20 years trying to pay it off. Stupid begets Stupid. Tell me you don't see the problem here?
It's like buying education from those "Rent to Own" outfits. Have you ever sat down and calculated how much you will pay before you "own" that couch? Think of a young couple, newly married making 30K each but having a combined $120K in debt for student loans. They won't be able to pay back that debt for decades...
How are two business degrees worth $120K + interest when your income only went from $25k/year to $30k/year and it only means $10K/year? That's 12 years without interest, more with interest included. But what usually happens is they cannot pay and end up making the minimum payments until they are in their 40's or more, dragging down their credit ratings and sapping their buying power. For what?
Double woosh!
If you were around after the tech meltdown in 2000, tech jobs were considered just as useless as gender studies and law.
Oh I remember that it was my degree and experience that got me that new job in September of 2000. It was hard to get a job, but having a degree was helpful. Woe to the job seeker who didn't have a STEM degree looking for a STEM job. So the degree wasn't a "get a job immediately card" it was what it always was, "get the job before the High School graduate" card.
If each time your argument's basis is questioned you refute it by saying it was a joke, eventually your basis of argument gets too weak to hold water.
Right.. Could it be you are nitpicking stuff and yanking it out of context? I think so.
HOWEVER, don't think it goes unnoticed that you are not adding to the discussion in any way or exchanging any worthwhile ideas.
You sound like my old boss... Mike is that you?
Mining currency w/o my permission? Really? It wasn't a good game anyway.
I'm really steamed about this.
Print cartridges (remanufactured) and photo paper for your printer. Enough for 500 pages.
Never mind.
I had some HP printers once, a long time ago. They were such POS that I swore I'd never buy another. And I never have.
I'm with you on this, except I have a Brother now. I gave up on HP when the "replacement" printer they sent me was a refurbished one that normally comes with a 90 day warranty. Well I had 5 months left and, you guessed it, the refurbished one broke too. When I called them, they tried to claim I only had a 90 day warranty and that had expired.... Well, to make a really long story involving phone trees, cussing and legal threats short, they sent me a second refurbished printer, which died just after the 1 year mark (when my original warranty expired). I couldn't dump that thing fast enough.. The good thing though is they kept sending new ink supplies in all those printers, so I only had to buy one set.
Never again, I will never own an HP anything unless it's given to me.
Actually, I understand that the latest was really only about collecting union dues from paychecks without explicit permission. The right to organize or being a member of a union wasn't effected, nor was a union's right to negotiate on behalf of their members. What WAS effected was a host of unions loosing income because they where collecting dues from non-members under the pretense of it being a union shop.
I'm Canadian and I have not studied this ruling in detail, knowing only what I have seen on the news, but I'm assuming that while people will be able to forego paying union dues while still retaining the benefits of the union collective bargaining on their behalf, they probably will not be eligible for the other things that paying union dues provides, such as group insurance plans, a mediated grievance procedure, representation for disciplinary matters, strike pay in the event of job actions, etc., nor would they have a vote in choosing who is representing them at the bargaining table.
Am I correct in this assumption?
I believe you are correct, but I don't work in an effected shop myself and I'm not an employment lawyer nor did I play one on TV.
Also, this ruling only applied to government employees. Private employer / union contracts and situations are not affected by the legal reasoning used for this.
We have a winner here in the A/C's post. You are correct on all counts and exactly what I was driving at.
Bush not only didn't see it and didn't avoid it, he took additional actions, such as military adventurism and tax cuts which exacerbated the problem.
Military adventurism? You mean the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions? You act like we got into those just for the thrill of blowing stuff up..
Tax Cuts? How on earth did that make the situation with the subprime mess worse? And Didn't the next administration not do the same things and more?
And you are totally discounting the facts behind how this whole house of cards got built and haven't admitted to the players or their motives in the setup phase. Had this house of cards not been built in the first place, there would have been no problem.
So What exactly is the Problem you are discussing? It doesn't seem to be what I'm discussing.
Sorry. I understand why you think I was tacking socialist, but I assure you I'm not. My point was that going into debt for a un-marketable degree was stupid, regardless of if it's federally back or not. The free market wouldn't let you borrow for a useless degree, yet the Fed doesn't even look at that, anything goes.
I think a focus on specific degree programs might have harmed the system less, but the REAL solution is exactly the market solution you suggest. I'm not sure, though, how you fix the liberal mess from where we find ourselves. Simply stopping the program will adversely upset the apple cart and disrupt a lot of things, but letting it continue isn't a good answer either.
Worker pay and benefits climbing at fastest pace in 10 years, ECI finds
Does anyone have any idea what could have happened 10 years ago that caused worker pay and benefits to stagnate for a whole damn decade?
Anyone?
Bueller?
I'll bite, but the problem started about 20 years ago... With the creation of the "subprime mortgage" which was needed to loan money to unqualified borrowers, backed by two Federally backed mortgage companies. A pile of money got loaned to people who couldn't pay it back and real estate prices shot though the roof as the market was awash in cheap money loaned by banks, converted into questionable securities backed by the fed. Why did banks do this in the first place? Anybody have a clue how this could take place, banks loaning money that would never get paid back?
Bueller?
Bueller?
Here's a hint.... WHO demanded that subprime borrowers be given loans and why?
Here's a statement: What happened at the end of Bush's administration is the house of cards finally fell, but the building of that structure took YEARS so the cause of the problem wasn't the economy and wasn't really Bush's fault (except in that he didn't see and avoid it). The REAL reason happened years before when banks started loaning money to unqualified people and why do you suppose they did that?
Many many many people do not have that luxury. They get any job they can.
Unless they're on a sex offender registry (or similarly ostracized in the workplace)... why? Unemployment is at record lows, and still dropping as I type this.
The labor market is fairly tight right now, and all indications are that it's only going to get tighter. This means more competition for workers' time and attention, and if Amazon becomes known as a shithole to work for, they're going to have an impossible time finding people willing to work for them as time passes and as things continue on their current economic trajectory.
Exactly this. As a friend of mine said back in 2000 when getting a job was hard and they where not handing out raises where we worked... "Don't worry, it's a buyer's market right now, but eventually it will be a seller's market, best be ready." Well, it took 18 years but it's a seller's market for what I got to sell.
It's almost like we have a GOP-controlled government that got a SCOTUS appointment and now has another, which will guarantee a court that will basically start from the Janus case and make all labor organization illegal because it infringes on imaginary people (corporations).
Straw-man much?
Janus merely noted that coerced union membership is unconstitutional.
Nothing's stopping Amazon's employees from unionizing.
Actually, I understand that the latest was really only about collecting union dues from paychecks without explicit permission. The right to organize or being a member of a union wasn't effected, nor was a union's right to negotiate on behalf of their members. What WAS effected was a host of unions loosing income because they where collecting dues from non-members under the pretense of it being a union shop.
Well, shipping is free if you're a Prime member...
Um.... Sir.. Not for everything, only stuff that Amazon chooses... AND it's not always 2 days anymore, it can be longer, much longer.
This is the free market at work. Exactly as intended by the corporations in charge.
Really? I don't think you are being fair. As I understand this there ARE laws about on the job injuries and ways to obtain such compensation from employers both by enforcement agencies and civil lawsuits.
The problem I see with this story is that the employee has yet to exhaust their possible legal remedies with Amazon's Workman's compensation insurance and with Amazon itself. Yea, it seems Amazon is dragging it's feet and isn't all that concerned with safety, but this anti Amazon PR campaign is a bit premature looking to me.
Then I guess, getting $$ from the federal government isn't on your list of acceptable ways to pay for college. Your choice. I was just pointing to a specific option to get college paid for by working for it. If you are not willing to do that kind of work, then you will have to make other arrangements.
At which point, I suggest you learn a trade and be prepared to pay your own way though college the old fashioned way, by earning the money, or doing it the REALLY old fashioned way and get your rich parents to pay for it if you have them.