I'm not a minimum wage expert, but assuming an average 60 hour work week they're paid around $11/hr. Certainly above the bare minimum unless they're pulling 80 hour weeks ever week. I agree it's low. Lower than it should be for sure.
https://gradadmissions.mit.edu...
I don't mean this in a condescending way, more in an educational way, but if you bought anything that's marketed as a "Gun Safe" you can get into them in about 20 minutes with an angle grinder. No thermal lance required. Gun safes aren't even safes, they're "Residential Security Containers" and the fireproofing rating on them (if any) is literally made up by the manufacturer and it's method of action is drywall insulation. Most (all?) gun safes have a nice think huge metal door with literal sheet metal siding reinforced with drywall so it sounds think and secure when you knock on it, but again, angle grinder.
I don't think most *sane* people have an issue with GMO/GE crops cross-pollinating. I think they have an issue with the patent on those crops being used to sue the ever loving shit out of the poor farmer who ended up with somebody's intellectual property growing in his field.
I also understand that there are sterile GMO seeds being produced as well, ones that can't reproduce at all without a farmer having to buy more. All in the name of protecting intellectual property
You seem to be suggesting that since you can see one group earning less than another group that the answer must be discrimination, and not some other known or unknown factor.
I was curious where the data for this report was being sourced, and we can see it's from hired.com. Under their methodology section we see "This report is based on proprietary data gathered and analyzed by Hired’s research and strategy data scientist, Dr. Jessica Kirkpatrick. The analysis in this study was done using a combination of voluntary, self-reported demographic data and a classifier that identified the gender of the candidate based on their first name."
Searching for Jessica Kirkpatrick in Google returns a few articles about her where the highlight is.... that she is in fact a woman. Her own public social media is nothing but a torrent of women's rights and equal pay stories and articles. So we have a clearly opinionated data scientist working with a set of "proprietary data" gathered by a private recruiting organization which focuses on diversity. Was there some other conclusion that anybody expected other then "MUH WAGE GAP IS REAL?"
If twitter removes check-marks because they *know* that some people *think* the check-mark serves as endorsement, then the check-mark as become De facto endorsement. So when a verified individual tweets about wanting white genocide for Christmas I can at the very least reasonably assume that whomever is in charge of removing check-marks does not believe that this persons actions warrant a removal of a check-mark.
Twitter *knows* that certain people *believe* the check-mark is endorsement. That's why they remove them because they don't want people to *think* they're being endorsed. But twitter only seems to ever remove check-marks when it's a far right account. Usually not (if not ever) a far left account despite both of them tweeting racist comments and garnering a fair amount of negative press. So I am going to conclude that twitter is just fine with comments about white genocide.
Because whether the check-mark is meant to be seen as an endorsement, people do anyway.
So now I can reasonably assume that anybody with a check-mark is seen as a good boy by twitter? So I can also assume the guy that tweets about white genocide and vomiting when he sees a uniformed service member being treated well is considered a good boy by twitter because he *still* has a check-mark?
The check-mark is there to say "Yep, this person is this person" and that's supposed to be it. However, we've seen twitter remove people's check-marks as some form of punishment in the past. That person's account has not been taken over, the legitimacy of the person is not being questioned, just the behavior. So why remove the check-mark?
I've been using this PC Engines board for over a year now and it's been the best router I've ever owned. Has 3 Gigabit Interfaces, SD Card, USB, RS232, M.SATA, Mini PCIe, SATA, and GPIO. Packs a 1Ghz Dual Core and 4 or 2 GB of RAM. It's case is also designed to mount antennas for the WiFi card so it looks sleek while doing it.
Even a Hi-Point or a Jimenez will manage to empty it's magazine without a misfire 99% of the time, and they're the cheapest 'gangsta' guns you can possibly buy. The idea this this $1k+ firearm only has mechanical issues is a joke.
Also here's the full review linked at the bottom, in case anybody missed it. http://www.americas1stfreedom....
Rather well, actually. Thanks for asking. It's far from perfect or finished but there's been nonstop definable progress
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
There's a few open source/custom hardware platforms out there geared towards custom networking equipment. Personally I use the PC Engines APU http://pcengines.ch/apu.htm
It's the best router I've ever owned
Slashdot Mirror
I believe both of those arguments. The only people who don't are paid shills
I'm not a minimum wage expert, but assuming an average 60 hour work week they're paid around $11/hr. Certainly above the bare minimum unless they're pulling 80 hour weeks ever week. I agree it's low. Lower than it should be for sure. https://gradadmissions.mit.edu...
Jesus fucking christ Stallman. How did you figure out how to comment on slashdot with you're retarted Emacs/email based web browsing system?
I don't mean this in a condescending way, more in an educational way, but if you bought anything that's marketed as a "Gun Safe" you can get into them in about 20 minutes with an angle grinder. No thermal lance required. Gun safes aren't even safes, they're "Residential Security Containers" and the fireproofing rating on them (if any) is literally made up by the manufacturer and it's method of action is drywall insulation. Most (all?) gun safes have a nice think huge metal door with literal sheet metal siding reinforced with drywall so it sounds think and secure when you knock on it, but again, angle grinder.
I don't think most *sane* people have an issue with GMO/GE crops cross-pollinating. I think they have an issue with the patent on those crops being used to sue the ever loving shit out of the poor farmer who ended up with somebody's intellectual property growing in his field. I also understand that there are sterile GMO seeds being produced as well, ones that can't reproduce at all without a farmer having to buy more. All in the name of protecting intellectual property
Is this the post-truth world that I keep hearing about?
They reported facts. You just don't like the facts.
Just the facts they want you to hear, of course http://www.washingtontimes.com...
Vee's Law. Never fails
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
You seem to be suggesting that since you can see one group earning less than another group that the answer must be discrimination, and not some other known or unknown factor.
I figured you were going to call me out on being a paid shill for PC Engines but w/e
I didn't say person. I said "sex/race/gender/anything (applying any other non-choice trait a person my have)"
I was curious where the data for this report was being sourced, and we can see it's from hired.com. Under their methodology section we see "This report is based on proprietary data gathered and analyzed by Hired’s research and strategy data scientist, Dr. Jessica Kirkpatrick. The analysis in this study was done using a combination of voluntary, self-reported demographic data and a classifier that identified the gender of the candidate based on their first name."
Searching for Jessica Kirkpatrick in Google returns a few articles about her where the highlight is.... that she is in fact a woman. Her own public social media is nothing but a torrent of women's rights and equal pay stories and articles. So we have a clearly opinionated data scientist working with a set of "proprietary data" gathered by a private recruiting organization which focuses on diversity. Was there some other conclusion that anybody expected other then "MUH WAGE GAP IS REAL?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Did you know it's illegal to pay one sex/race/gender/anything less than another?
>be honest
kek
What was Twitter's intention in unverifying Milo?
If twitter removes check-marks because they *know* that some people *think* the check-mark serves as endorsement, then the check-mark as become De facto endorsement. So when a verified individual tweets about wanting white genocide for Christmas I can at the very least reasonably assume that whomever is in charge of removing check-marks does not believe that this persons actions warrant a removal of a check-mark. Twitter *knows* that certain people *believe* the check-mark is endorsement. That's why they remove them because they don't want people to *think* they're being endorsed. But twitter only seems to ever remove check-marks when it's a far right account. Usually not (if not ever) a far left account despite both of them tweeting racist comments and garnering a fair amount of negative press. So I am going to conclude that twitter is just fine with comments about white genocide.
Because whether the check-mark is meant to be seen as an endorsement, people do anyway.
So now I can reasonably assume that anybody with a check-mark is seen as a good boy by twitter? So I can also assume the guy that tweets about white genocide and vomiting when he sees a uniformed service member being treated well is considered a good boy by twitter because he *still* has a check-mark?
The check-mark is there to say "Yep, this person is this person" and that's supposed to be it. However, we've seen twitter remove people's check-marks as some form of punishment in the past. That person's account has not been taken over, the legitimacy of the person is not being questioned, just the behavior. So why remove the check-mark?
Forgot to link http://pcengines.ch/apu.htm
I've been using this PC Engines board for over a year now and it's been the best router I've ever owned. Has 3 Gigabit Interfaces, SD Card, USB, RS232, M.SATA, Mini PCIe, SATA, and GPIO. Packs a 1Ghz Dual Core and 4 or 2 GB of RAM. It's case is also designed to mount antennas for the WiFi card so it looks sleek while doing it.
Even a Hi-Point or a Jimenez will manage to empty it's magazine without a misfire 99% of the time, and they're the cheapest 'gangsta' guns you can possibly buy. The idea this this $1k+ firearm only has mechanical issues is a joke. Also here's the full review linked at the bottom, in case anybody missed it. http://www.americas1stfreedom....
Yes http://www.americas1stfreedom....
how are your star citizen ships working out?
Rather well, actually. Thanks for asking. It's far from perfect or finished but there's been nonstop definable progress https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
It is massive overkill, but so is an old PC. I use full Debian with Shorewall handling firewall/routing.
There's a few open source/custom hardware platforms out there geared towards custom networking equipment. Personally I use the PC Engines APU http://pcengines.ch/apu.htm It's the best router I've ever owned