There are two kinds of graduate students - those who do research and those who just take classes.
The class kind pay large tuitions (like $50k/year), because they are gaining a career-valuable credential, and they are giving nothing to the university in return.
The research kind don't pay tuitions, because the research is of great value to the university.
So, how do you charge tuition for the first kind, while not having the second kind hit by an enormous tax penalty?
Where do you draw the line? One skinny guy? A bunch of skinny guys? A bunch of skinny guys who might have concealed weapons?
Since it's difficult to draw the line well, it's simpler to just have a societal convention "never say this word to people of that race". It's not like anyone really *needs* to say the word, after all.
I wonder why can black people use the N word freely among themselves, but as soon as a white person uses it, they're screwed to no avail?
Because in the past, a lot of white racists have used the word, and then gone on to assault or kill the black person they are saying it to.
When a white person says the N word, the black person being addressed has a legitimate fear of being in a dangerous situation.
When a black person uses the N word, it's pretty clear they're not using the word because they hate black people, so there is no danger and nothing needs to be avoided.
The same goes for other racial slurs, and many other "offensive" behaviors in general (for example, Holocaust jokes are more likely to be considered in good taste if made by a Jew).
That's because Germans mostly live in dense cities, while US residents mostly live in suburbs.
NYC has 1/3 of the CO2 emissions per capita of the US, because the amount of fossil-fuel transportation and heating needed are so much lower than the US on average.
The US has a major suburban sprawl problem, that doesn't negate the fact that Germany has a major coal problem.
So, if entirely by accident we produced enough aerosol emissions in order to neutralize global warming for decades, shouldn't it be easy right now to intentionally release aerosols which will neutralize global warming? Wouldn't this be cheaper, quicker, and less disruptive than reworking our entire economy to avoid carbon emissions?
You have no sympathy for the rapists, that's fine, but what about sympathy for their victims? Not to mention the kids, who may shit in the street, but they're still kids.
People post what they CHOOSE to post. They don't choose to be listened to nonstop. That's a fundamental difference.
You might as well justify stealing from a generous person - "he gives money to so money other people, why would he care if a little money also goes to me?"
I think most Asian-Americans are recent immigrants or their children, not descended from 1860s railway worker immigrants. The recent immigrants generally were intelligent, hard-working, and accomplished in their native countries. A lot of them came to the US for college, graduate school, or tech jobs. So it's no surprise that they succeed in the US, but that doesn't necessarily say anything about Asian societies in general.
San Francisco was never reduced to rubble by an earthquake. In the 1906 quake, more than 90% of the damage was caused by resulting fires, not the earthquake itself. And modern building codes are well equipped to deal with both earthquakes and fires, so it certainly wouldn't be reduced to rubble by an earthquake now.
China has land (Hong Kong's population density is 44 times as high as the mainland). Hong Kong has money. Can't they figure out an arrangement to bury Hong Kong's dead on the mainland?
$100k spend unethically can have a much bigger impact than $100k spent ethically (not that either Trump or Clinton are ethical people, but they have to deal with the consequences of unethical behavior being discovered and blamed on them, unlike Russia).
Also, the election just happened to be extremely close, which is how a small push to one side could put them over the edge.
My impression is that right now driverless cars are extremely safe (i.e. much safer than a human) in most circumstances. But in certain circumstances, like rain or snow or sunset, they are still quite unsafe.
So you can set up a driverless car service now, and only allow it to run when it's safe (which is probably more than 90% of the time).
90% availability is unacceptable for the average consumer. But for elderly people who would otherwise not be able to move at all (and tend to have flexible schedules, being retired), it's a massive improvement.
We use up our year's allotment of resources by mid-August. We need to do less work as a species, or we will surely perish.
No, we don't. We are wasting a large fraction of the resources we already have, particularly the sunshine which hits the ground every day. Put solar panels everywhere and we won't run out of fossil fuels. And we won't run out of rarer compounds either, because with extra energy we can recycle and retrieve those as needed.
When 267mph maglev is already in service in other countries?
Let's face it, there is no innovation in Hyperloop. It's just vaporware.
The conspiracy theorist in me would say it's an attempt to undermine real technologies such as high-speed rail, in order to eliminate competition for his car company.
Slashdot Mirror
For people doing it, this is you "a3727fd0a20d5eef697d3c2f41bf0e4d".
No, this is you: ID "a3727fd0a20d5eef697d3c2f41bf0e4d", username bob123, email address bobsmith123@gmail.com.
And email address bobsmith123@gmail.com can be correlated with a Facebook account, medical history, credit rating, and much more.
But the research kind take classes too.
There are two kinds of graduate students - those who do research and those who just take classes.
The class kind pay large tuitions (like $50k/year), because they are gaining a career-valuable credential, and they are giving nothing to the university in return.
The research kind don't pay tuitions, because the research is of great value to the university.
So, how do you charge tuition for the first kind, while not having the second kind hit by an enormous tax penalty?
Where do you draw the line? One skinny guy? A bunch of skinny guys? A bunch of skinny guys who might have concealed weapons?
Since it's difficult to draw the line well, it's simpler to just have a societal convention "never say this word to people of that race". It's not like anyone really *needs* to say the word, after all.
I wonder why can black people use the N word freely among themselves, but as soon as a white person uses it, they're screwed to no avail?
Because in the past, a lot of white racists have used the word, and then gone on to assault or kill the black person they are saying it to.
When a white person says the N word, the black person being addressed has a legitimate fear of being in a dangerous situation.
When a black person uses the N word, it's pretty clear they're not using the word because they hate black people, so there is no danger and nothing needs to be avoided.
The same goes for other racial slurs, and many other "offensive" behaviors in general (for example, Holocaust jokes are more likely to be considered in good taste if made by a Jew).
That's because Germans mostly live in dense cities, while US residents mostly live in suburbs.
NYC has 1/3 of the CO2 emissions per capita of the US, because the amount of fossil-fuel transportation and heating needed are so much lower than the US on average.
The US has a major suburban sprawl problem, that doesn't negate the fact that Germany has a major coal problem.
Someone just needs to get the ball rolling.
The problem is, we've been waiting for about 20 years for someone to "get the ball rolling". When is it going to happen?
So, if entirely by accident we produced enough aerosol emissions in order to neutralize global warming for decades, shouldn't it be easy right now to intentionally release aerosols which will neutralize global warming? Wouldn't this be cheaper, quicker, and less disruptive than reworking our entire economy to avoid carbon emissions?
You have no sympathy for the rapists, that's fine, but what about sympathy for their victims? Not to mention the kids, who may shit in the street, but they're still kids.
The tech jobs are in Bangalore and Mumbai, not Delhi.
Anyway, tech jobs provide national wealth, which in the long run gives you the means to fix the problem of filth.
And what's your address? :)
People post what they CHOOSE to post. They don't choose to be listened to nonstop. That's a fundamental difference.
You might as well justify stealing from a generous person - "he gives money to so money other people, why would he care if a little money also goes to me?"
Can you explain? I don't see the correspondence. For example, from what I read, back then Catalonia was the poor region, but now it's reversed...
I think most Asian-Americans are recent immigrants or their children, not descended from 1860s railway worker immigrants. The recent immigrants generally were intelligent, hard-working, and accomplished in their native countries. A lot of them came to the US for college, graduate school, or tech jobs. So it's no surprise that they succeed in the US, but that doesn't necessarily say anything about Asian societies in general.
San Francisco was never reduced to rubble by an earthquake. In the 1906 quake, more than 90% of the damage was caused by resulting fires, not the earthquake itself. And modern building codes are well equipped to deal with both earthquakes and fires, so it certainly wouldn't be reduced to rubble by an earthquake now.
China has land (Hong Kong's population density is 44 times as high as the mainland). Hong Kong has money. Can't they figure out an arrangement to bury Hong Kong's dead on the mainland?
$100k spend unethically can have a much bigger impact than $100k spent ethically (not that either Trump or Clinton are ethical people, but they have to deal with the consequences of unethical behavior being discovered and blamed on them, unlike Russia).
Also, the election just happened to be extremely close, which is how a small push to one side could put them over the edge.
Peas roll down the straw, bumping the sides along thew way. I don't think people would enjoy bumping the sides of their tunnel at 700mph.
My impression is that right now driverless cars are extremely safe (i.e. much safer than a human) in most circumstances. But in certain circumstances, like rain or snow or sunset, they are still quite unsafe.
So you can set up a driverless car service now, and only allow it to run when it's safe (which is probably more than 90% of the time).
90% availability is unacceptable for the average consumer. But for elderly people who would otherwise not be able to move at all (and tend to have flexible schedules, being retired), it's a massive improvement.
It's not economic protectionism. It's to prevent Russia from cutting off their energy supply in a crisis.
Solar is a lot cheaper to install in fields (or on big-box-store roofs) than to install one-panel-at-a-time on private houses.
We use up our year's allotment of resources by mid-August. We need to do less work as a species, or we will surely perish.
No, we don't. We are wasting a large fraction of the resources we already have, particularly the sunshine which hits the ground every day. Put solar panels everywhere and we won't run out of fossil fuels. And we won't run out of rarer compounds either, because with extra energy we can recycle and retrieve those as needed.
Only for long term users. This therapy is short term.
When 267mph maglev is already in service in other countries?
Let's face it, there is no innovation in Hyperloop. It's just vaporware.
The conspiracy theorist in me would say it's an attempt to undermine real technologies such as high-speed rail, in order to eliminate competition for his car company.
In addition to the fuel savings, you also save having a driver in 2 of the 3 trucks.