In the shopping example, the results returned in the modified screen shot are crap. Did the EU force that too? That's not anti-competitive, that's anti-user.
The companies that hire Infosys require a certain number of H1B workers. How is that legal? They mandate ratios, such as 4 H1Bs to one non. It's obviously not about talent, it's 100% about driving wages down.
Except that you have to hire 4-6 offshore to do the job of one onshore. Skill levels, ability to manage technical complications, lost cycles when there are data or server issues, it never works out for companies and I don't understand why they keep doing it. It looks good on paper but the gains never gets realized.
It's another skirmish in the GOP's anti-union and anit-government wars. They can't afford to let the USPS function because it proves unions don't destroy industry and that government can actually work.
If we had this, I think I'd check mail weekly. I'm also not willing to walk a block for ads.
I was wondering though, will this help with the obesity problem? 5 minutes a day adds up.
It's the GOP that's determined to shut them down and is forcing them to pre-paid retirement benefits the next 20 years that's breaking their budget. Retirement benefits, for employees they won't hire for another two decades.
The problem is political and ideological, not fiscal. The GOP wants to destroy the USPS because it's a) government that functions and b) unionized.
It's significant from a health and evolutionary perspective. X inactivation in women makes expression of these genes mosaic which can prevent disease as well as cause some interesting immune responses. A gene can be beneficial in a pair but fatal solo which creates an interesting evolutionary tradeoff. If a woman can't have sons, is that a significant evolutionary disadvantage?
This is nothing new. The Y-Chromosome is too small to actually code for anything, and no one ever thought that it could contain more than a handful of genes. The Y is just a set of GOTOs pointing to the X.
Slashdot Mirror
In the shopping example, the results returned in the modified screen shot are crap. Did the EU force that too? That's not anti-competitive, that's anti-user.
The companies that hire Infosys require a certain number of H1B workers. How is that legal? They mandate ratios, such as 4 H1Bs to one non. It's obviously not about talent, it's 100% about driving wages down.
Skilled H1B workers will always have jobs, but corps like infosys are just looking for warm bodies and headcount.
Except that you have to hire 4-6 offshore to do the job of one onshore. Skill levels, ability to manage technical complications, lost cycles when there are data or server issues, it never works out for companies and I don't understand why they keep doing it. It looks good on paper but the gains never gets realized.
It's another skirmish in the GOP's anti-union and anit-government wars. They can't afford to let the USPS function because it proves unions don't destroy industry and that government can actually work.
If we had this, I think I'd check mail weekly. I'm also not willing to walk a block for ads. I was wondering though, will this help with the obesity problem? 5 minutes a day adds up.
It's the GOP that's determined to shut them down and is forcing them to pre-paid retirement benefits the next 20 years that's breaking their budget. Retirement benefits, for employees they won't hire for another two decades. The problem is political and ideological, not fiscal. The GOP wants to destroy the USPS because it's a) government that functions and b) unionized.
I wish I could vote up on this account. This is such a fascinating topic.
Really? I though feminist were more concerned about domestic violence, education access and maternal mortality rates.
Oppression of women is as natural and greed and cruelty, and just as avoidable.
He'd truly have to never get hurt, he'd be unable to clot and would bleed out from a paper cut.
Pacifiers. Although, men do actually lactate, they just can't produce very much.
It's significant from a health and evolutionary perspective. X inactivation in women makes expression of these genes mosaic which can prevent disease as well as cause some interesting immune responses. A gene can be beneficial in a pair but fatal solo which creates an interesting evolutionary tradeoff. If a woman can't have sons, is that a significant evolutionary disadvantage?
This is nothing new. The Y-Chromosome is too small to actually code for anything, and no one ever thought that it could contain more than a handful of genes. The Y is just a set of GOTOs pointing to the X.