Seriously? I know full well that at least in SFO, ATL and PDX that a solid sysadmin, DevOps, or DBA has no shortage of openings to pursue. I get pestered at least 6-10 times a week with reputable offers (and don't ask how many fly-by-night Indian outfits I've had to spam-can).
I think I know what's going on... or at least part of it. It's because the market is short-handed in many areas.
I'm trying to hire sysadmins right now - once we weed out the bullshitters and the obviously incompetent, the rest demand one hell of a high salary (call it at least $95k/yr outside of SFO, and $150k/yr inside SFO), and odds are good that management is going to be forced to cut loose with the funds to do it (and for myself as well, damnit). We managed to hire exactly one out of the four slots we have open... in the past 5 months. Meanwhile, I'm trying to make do with the staff I got. We avoid pushing anyone above 50hrs/week, but I often catch a lot of them working 60+ hours anyway.
IMHO, given the amount of work that is out there (at least in my neighborhood of tech), any employer who thinks they can treat employees like crap will quickly find that they're stuck with either no staff, or incompetent staff - either way they're screwed. Example? No problem. A local company around here tried to recruit me as a DevOps (they call it a "Systems Engineer" position.) However, not only was it named as one of the worst companies in tech to work for, but nearly everyone in the local area I asked has warned me off from 'em (there was plenty to say about them, and little of it good. To top that off, my own research backed it up.)
In some environments, keeping documentation of any official communications off-site is a breach of your employment contract.
First, never sign such a contract or work for someone who demands such a thing - you know you can cross that line out and initial it, right?
Second, let 'em try to sue - they'll be too damned busy fending off reporters from major media outlets who won't stop asking why they refused to do something about it after you warned them, and why they're now trying to sue you for it. I know they say no publicity is bad publicity, but there are exceptions where bad publicity will cost them a whole lot more than they bargained for (starting with their largest and most vulnerable clients...)
Third, send an email to that effect to all VPs, and demand that all answers be sent back via email - then print those bastards out so you can take a copy of them home with you.
In such cases if you implemented the simple security solutions without telling them they would be none the wiser.
Sometimes that breaks things.
I worked at a certain software firm that had a nasty habit of requiring that a few service account user/pass sit right in plain text in an XML file on the front-facing web servers, else the whole thing wouldn't work. Their MSFT kool-aid drinking habit aside, I always found it hilarious that they preached security so hard, yet left such stupid flaws in place for many years (and many versions). Yelling about it got us approximately nowhere, and implementing a fix on our own w/o going through a very strict review and certification process meant that we'd violate at least a half-dozen laws (the industry they work in is regulated very heavily in that regard...)...and yeah, the vuln is still there to this very day, every time I get bored and go look for it (from the outside, with a simple web browser).
Let's just say that I avoid doing any business with any and all known clients of that company.
I'd start with asking what kind of access you have as a random SAP user. If that's locked down and restricted, then no big deal. If it allows access that's no different (and yields no real info other) than what you'd find as the logged-in user on the 'main system'** , then again no change, really.
Now if that random SAP user had god-like access or gets way more info than a normal 'main system' login gives them, then yeah, it's a much bigger deal (and your SAP admin needs a good hard bitch-slapping as well).
Again, context is king here, and determines what's worth scrutiny and what ain't.
** does "main system" mean an RDP Server, ssh session, Citrix session, VPN, local AD, what? We need some context there, eh?
and then some cost cutting cutting yoho says why does the HVAC need it's own network cabling and or DSL/cable line?
Bet they won't be asking that anymore - if they do, pointing them to a simple webpage describing the Target hack will shut 'em up in a hurry.
My best answer to such yohos is to demand that the request be in writing, that it be specific, and incldue the text of an email I send them with all the risks listed. Otherwise, no change is made.
You'd be amazed at how many middle-management types quickly decide that maybe their idea isn't as important as they thought when it's their ass on the line...;)
Ditto here... once you make the employees know that their screw-ups will end up costing them, they tend to not screw up as much, and tend to report things much, much faster should something go awry.
That said, the Target penetration wasn't directly caused by a Target employee/user - the bad guys snuck in through a contractor that was given network access that they should have never had. This was more due to lazy architecture/vlan partitioning than it was $random_employee with a bad post-it note habit.
If anything, the network admins should be facing the barrel before anyone else, followed very closely by most of the security admins, if not simultaneously (excepting the guy who shouted the warning and those who demonstrably supported him; that dude should be promoted post-haste.)
Interesting that this was not an issue with the (expensive) wired satphone handsets that are already in many airplane cabins.Passengers were somehow able to avoid making a nuisance of themselves with wired handsets... what makes mobile phones so different?
Different frequency bands, the sat phones were standardized and approved by the FAA, there's only one antenna to shield against (or plan for)...
Lots of surprisingly valid technical reasons, actually.
If someone is really annoying you on a phone, all you have to do is start saying the same words they are, back at them. This will highly distract them to the point they can't keep up a conversation.
Even better - scribble it all down verbatim, or point a voice recorder (or the one on your smartphone) at them, and make a point of ensuring they see you do it.
I'm very certain that most folks are eager to stop talking so loudly if they knew their words were recorded, no matter how trivial the conversation.
In your own airplane, sure - smoke all you want, as long as your cockpit doesn't end up looking like a scene out of a Cheech and Chong movie, no problemo.
Dude - "Interstate Commerce" is the backdoor password to all kinds of unconstitutional crap (e.g. drinking age laws, etc).... pity the US Supreme Court has yet to put at least some sort of definitive stop to that shit.
Part of the problem is me, I have some ADD, and I choose not to take medication, and I have a hard time tuning things out pretty much all the time. In 99% of my life I can avoid it by personal choice, my own earphones, etc. But when I'm stuck on public transportation, I don't have that luxary.
If you can identify the problem, you can solve it.
As often as I fly, I *rarely* have someone who blares noise out of a device loud enough to overpower the all-encompassing engine noise, and of those few, they were always kids. Those rare times were solved with a simple "...dude, turn that down." Most times, I'm the one with earphones in, or if sleeping, earplugs (which has the bonus of blocking out all noise.) I also make my life easier by taking flights that only business travelers would be on. That almost always gives me more room to stretch and sleep (as a bonus, there's rarely any screaming kids/babies on the red-eye flights.)
The vast majority of humanity is smart enough to realize that being jammed into tight quarters means that you have to pretty much be courteous. Anything else quickly escalates into something that gets you arrested and/or banned from flying.
Some things you simply cannot avoid: screaming babies who aren't old enough to have figured out that whole ear-popping thing, rambunctious toddlers/kids, the morbidly obese dude who smells like a garlic factory and drapes over both armrests, the occasional half-drunken dumbass(es) on the way to some booze-cruise, and suchlike. You simply make do stand your ground etiquette-wise, and most importantly know when to ignore it and when to get involved. Anything else can be solved with a quick ring-up of the steward/ess (because anything above that involves an air marshal, and again, most folks are smart enough to realize that it only gets ugly beyond that point.) If all else fails and there's an empty seat somewhere else, you can move to that seat.
IMHO though, the absolute best way I've found to ensure courtesy in a flight is to chat up everyone around me as they sit down. They either join in and courtesy kicks in (since you're no longer some nameless stranger), or they do their level best to tune you out (which means they don't want to get your attention, so they'll be very quiet, etc.)
I, for one, will mock you deniers at every opportunity. You are a small minority, about 1/3 of Americans and nearly nonexistent elsewhere. As Max Planck pointed out, we can't change your opinions, only wait for you to die. In the meantime, the mocking will continue. Get used to it, deniers.
Reminds me of a bio professor I had who would crack jokes at creationist theory in class whenever the opportunity came up. Haha, good times.
Way to prove his point, and doubly so.
Care to shoot for the hat-trick and claim that he's a fundamentalist Christian?
Depends - if you rip off something from a well-established scientist, the idea was posted clearly (and completely), and then he/she complains loudly, then sure.
If you rip off something from some unknown and struggling post-doc, and used an incomplete or poorly-worded idea as your source, then it's safe to say that you're not going to be blackballed.
The legal blogs are a bit different, but they're not without their own unique hazards...
I mean, PJ's little blog (I'm sure the readers have heard of it ) got a metric ton of attention, and likely boosted Pamela's career nicely, but she had to put up with some rather vicious human beings trying to root her out (and force her to testify) during SCO v. IBM, and eventually shut down thanks to the NSA, and continued harassment from various corners.
Agreed on Feynman, though... Me, I think that Albert Einstein would have made a truly badassed blogger, if his surviving witticisms are any measure.:)
As someone typing this missive on OSX 10.9, I can tell you right now that "locked" or "closed" is simply wrong. We'll start with this as Exhibit A. I defy you to show me a similar Windows site that doesn't require a metric ton of money (e.g. that abortion they refer to as "shared source.")
Also, your experience is just that - your experience. It's subjective. My experience differs greatly, and I have yet to find a program I want/need for this OS that isn't not only 'just as good', but better in many aspects. There was only once when I found any trouble at all (my ancient PPC-only copy of Quake3 wouldn't run, but one quick (and free!) drop-in later, it runs just fine).
Same with Linux, really. It doesn't get any easier than to go hit up the Ubuntu software 'store', and download whatever you need or desire.
Good point - I think it began way back when DOS 2 (or was it 3?) came out, and Windows was just a bonus option that came with the machine (I had an old Amstrad 286 that arrived that way, and Windows was just a shitty TUI interface you turned on if you forgot where you put something, or wanted to organize stuff on your uber-expensive 10MB hard disk.)
As for the Vaios, I liked the one I did have - a Z1RA with an early P4 and a whole 2GB of RAM. Slick as hell, and for its time a very light (as in low-weight) little laptop.
Only two problems I had with it was the ungodly high pricetag, and Sony's nasty habit of making everything so proprietary, that you wasted CPU cycles on the crapware.
Ones that had an interest it keeping rural internet access viable. Internet access is ONLY profitable in city centers.
Not exactly...
Tillamook County, OR only has around 25,000 souls living in it, yet CenturyLink and Charter are currently fighting tooth-and-nail for their business. Let me put this into perspective: the county's biggest income centers are beef, cheese, some seafood, and a handful of tourist beach towns ( mostly visited by folks from Portland - 80+ miles away, but a metro area holding approx. 3 million residents).
CL was there first (riding the DSL lines), but cannot seem to give more than 6mb/sec (if you're lucky), and you're paying nearly $70/mo for the dubious honor. Charter came in and began offering 30mb/sec for $30/mo.
In other news, it may be a touch slower (and unsuitable for gaming due to lag), but you can get somewhat serviceable Internet connectivity from various sat providers (Dish, HughesNet, etc), all of whom have been forced to up the speeds and lower the prices.
Overall, we're beginning to see a revolution of sorts when it comes to rural broadband. It'll be a bit slower in most cases, but the competition is heating up, and geography + sat providers (with some 3/4G wireless providers tossed in) tends to make sure that mono/duopolies are going to be hard to form.
Paper disintegrates over time, takes much longer, but still a rental.
Given the time periods involved, it may as well be considered ownership.
I have some books in my home library that are well over 150 years old. They're still perfectly legible, and as long as I care for them properly they'll likely outlast me.
Hell, there are books in some uni libraries that are well over 200-300 years old. Sure, you have to handle them with gloves and such, but honestly, 100+ years is plenty of time to make a backup copy of the thing.
It ain't the Sovs that present the biggest danger to Europe, but yes, I agree that NATO's biggest reason for existing is no longer... so why not dismantle it?
A lot of those European social democracies are pretty nice places to live and have been for decades.
Of course they are - their defense budget is pretty much taken care of (see also "NATO"), so that's one huge expense they don't have to bother with. Those who do excel and gain wealth get taxed into the dirt in order to pay for everyone else. Ultra-cheap labor (form Turkey, Eastern Europe, etc) help keep costs/wages way down and the low end... much like how the US uses Immigrant labor for the same reason (the only difference being that the EU actually admits it openly.)
I guarantee you that if NATO were to shut down and the US were to pull out of all but maybe one or two bases, the EU would be faced with a massive defense ramp-up that would in turn kill their economies... well, those economies that aren't already being kept alive by Germany.
Well, pets are pets. They share no genetic lineage or source with you. Pets completely lack senescence.
I figure that unless there is at least some emotion disturbance, there is a clear and sharp distinction between Fido and Grandma, and how you would treat each of them at the end of their lives.
...that most pets only live around dozen years, so the vast majority of pet owners are going to see them die regardless of how well they're being taken care of.
True, but it's a cost/benefit calculation, with some very subjective factors.
A few years back, I had a dachshund that was roughly 14-ish years old (the rescue we got her from had to guess at her age when we got her at ~2yrs old). She had a habit of chasing squirrels at all costs - the last one had her hit a tree wrong and break her back. The choice was either a $6,000 surgery that would have still left her paralyzed and in need of care, or a $100 lethal injection and cremation. I wrote the check for $100, but only after having to talk the missus out of the more expensive option. Why? Well, my wife was already an emotional wreck over the ordeal, and putting a.38 slug through the dog's head, while perfectly humane IMO, would have definitely made for an ugly turn in my marriage.
To the missus, the benefit still outweighed the cost. To me, it was the opposite: the dog had lived a long and happy life, she was an awesome companion, but putting it out of its misery was the best course of action IMHO.
That was five years ago or so... now we have two more, and they're a positive joy to have around.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously? I know full well that at least in SFO, ATL and PDX that a solid sysadmin, DevOps, or DBA has no shortage of openings to pursue. I get pestered at least 6-10 times a week with reputable offers (and don't ask how many fly-by-night Indian outfits I've had to spam-can).
I think I know what's going on... or at least part of it. It's because the market is short-handed in many areas.
I'm trying to hire sysadmins right now - once we weed out the bullshitters and the obviously incompetent, the rest demand one hell of a high salary (call it at least $95k/yr outside of SFO, and $150k/yr inside SFO), and odds are good that management is going to be forced to cut loose with the funds to do it (and for myself as well, damnit). We managed to hire exactly one out of the four slots we have open... in the past 5 months. Meanwhile, I'm trying to make do with the staff I got. We avoid pushing anyone above 50hrs/week, but I often catch a lot of them working 60+ hours anyway.
IMHO, given the amount of work that is out there (at least in my neighborhood of tech), any employer who thinks they can treat employees like crap will quickly find that they're stuck with either no staff, or incompetent staff - either way they're screwed. Example? No problem. A local company around here tried to recruit me as a DevOps (they call it a "Systems Engineer" position.) However, not only was it named as one of the worst companies in tech to work for, but nearly everyone in the local area I asked has warned me off from 'em (there was plenty to say about them, and little of it good. To top that off, my own research backed it up.)
If I used a traceable connection instead of a public proxy, you might have had a point. ;)
In some environments, keeping documentation of any official communications off-site is a breach of your employment contract.
First, never sign such a contract or work for someone who demands such a thing - you know you can cross that line out and initial it, right?
Second, let 'em try to sue - they'll be too damned busy fending off reporters from major media outlets who won't stop asking why they refused to do something about it after you warned them, and why they're now trying to sue you for it. I know they say no publicity is bad publicity, but there are exceptions where bad publicity will cost them a whole lot more than they bargained for (starting with their largest and most vulnerable clients...)
Third, send an email to that effect to all VPs, and demand that all answers be sent back via email - then print those bastards out so you can take a copy of them home with you.
In such cases if you implemented the simple security solutions without telling them they would be none the wiser.
Sometimes that breaks things.
I worked at a certain software firm that had a nasty habit of requiring that a few service account user/pass sit right in plain text in an XML file on the front-facing web servers, else the whole thing wouldn't work. Their MSFT kool-aid drinking habit aside, I always found it hilarious that they preached security so hard, yet left such stupid flaws in place for many years (and many versions). Yelling about it got us approximately nowhere, and implementing a fix on our own w/o going through a very strict review and certification process meant that we'd violate at least a half-dozen laws (the industry they work in is regulated very heavily in that regard...) ...and yeah, the vuln is still there to this very day, every time I get bored and go look for it (from the outside, with a simple web browser).
Let's just say that I avoid doing any business with any and all known clients of that company.
Well, yes no and maybe.
I'd start with asking what kind of access you have as a random SAP user. If that's locked down and restricted, then no big deal. If it allows access that's no different (and yields no real info other) than what you'd find as the logged-in user on the 'main system'** , then again no change, really.
Now if that random SAP user had god-like access or gets way more info than a normal 'main system' login gives them, then yeah, it's a much bigger deal (and your SAP admin needs a good hard bitch-slapping as well).
Again, context is king here, and determines what's worth scrutiny and what ain't.
** does "main system" mean an RDP Server, ssh session, Citrix session, VPN, local AD, what? We need some context there, eh?
and then some cost cutting cutting yoho says why does the HVAC need it's own network cabling and or DSL/cable line?
Bet they won't be asking that anymore - if they do, pointing them to a simple webpage describing the Target hack will shut 'em up in a hurry.
My best answer to such yohos is to demand that the request be in writing, that it be specific, and incldue the text of an email I send them with all the risks listed. Otherwise, no change is made.
You'd be amazed at how many middle-management types quickly decide that maybe their idea isn't as important as they thought when it's their ass on the line... ;)
Ditto here... once you make the employees know that their screw-ups will end up costing them, they tend to not screw up as much, and tend to report things much, much faster should something go awry.
That said, the Target penetration wasn't directly caused by a Target employee/user - the bad guys snuck in through a contractor that was given network access that they should have never had. This was more due to lazy architecture/vlan partitioning than it was $random_employee with a bad post-it note habit.
If anything, the network admins should be facing the barrel before anyone else, followed very closely by most of the security admins, if not simultaneously (excepting the guy who shouted the warning and those who demonstrably supported him; that dude should be promoted post-haste.)
Interesting that this was not an issue with the (expensive) wired satphone handsets that are already in many airplane cabins.Passengers were somehow able to avoid making a nuisance of themselves with wired handsets... what makes mobile phones so different?
Different frequency bands, the sat phones were standardized and approved by the FAA, there's only one antenna to shield against (or plan for)...
Lots of surprisingly valid technical reasons, actually.
If someone is really annoying you on a phone, all you have to do is start saying the same words they are, back at them. This will highly distract them to the point they can't keep up a conversation.
Even better - scribble it all down verbatim, or point a voice recorder (or the one on your smartphone) at them, and make a point of ensuring they see you do it.
I'm very certain that most folks are eager to stop talking so loudly if they knew their words were recorded, no matter how trivial the conversation.
In your own airplane, sure - smoke all you want, as long as your cockpit doesn't end up looking like a scene out of a Cheech and Chong movie, no problemo.
Dude - "Interstate Commerce" is the backdoor password to all kinds of unconstitutional crap (e.g. drinking age laws, etc).... pity the US Supreme Court has yet to put at least some sort of definitive stop to that shit.
Part of the problem is me, I have some ADD, and I choose not to take medication, and I have a hard time tuning things out pretty much all the time. In 99% of my life I can avoid it by personal choice, my own earphones, etc. But when I'm stuck on public transportation, I don't have that luxary.
If you can identify the problem, you can solve it.
As often as I fly, I *rarely* have someone who blares noise out of a device loud enough to overpower the all-encompassing engine noise, and of those few, they were always kids. Those rare times were solved with a simple "...dude, turn that down." Most times, I'm the one with earphones in, or if sleeping, earplugs (which has the bonus of blocking out all noise.) I also make my life easier by taking flights that only business travelers would be on. That almost always gives me more room to stretch and sleep (as a bonus, there's rarely any screaming kids/babies on the red-eye flights.)
The vast majority of humanity is smart enough to realize that being jammed into tight quarters means that you have to pretty much be courteous. Anything else quickly escalates into something that gets you arrested and/or banned from flying.
Some things you simply cannot avoid: screaming babies who aren't old enough to have figured out that whole ear-popping thing, rambunctious toddlers/kids, the morbidly obese dude who smells like a garlic factory and drapes over both armrests, the occasional half-drunken dumbass(es) on the way to some booze-cruise, and suchlike. You simply make do stand your ground etiquette-wise, and most importantly know when to ignore it and when to get involved. Anything else can be solved with a quick ring-up of the steward/ess (because anything above that involves an air marshal, and again, most folks are smart enough to realize that it only gets ugly beyond that point.) If all else fails and there's an empty seat somewhere else, you can move to that seat.
IMHO though, the absolute best way I've found to ensure courtesy in a flight is to chat up everyone around me as they sit down. They either join in and courtesy kicks in (since you're no longer some nameless stranger), or they do their level best to tune you out (which means they don't want to get your attention, so they'll be very quiet, etc.)
I, for one, will mock you deniers at every opportunity. You are a small minority, about 1/3 of Americans and nearly nonexistent elsewhere. As Max Planck pointed out, we can't change your opinions, only wait for you to die. In the meantime, the mocking will continue. Get used to it, deniers.
Reminds me of a bio professor I had who would crack jokes at creationist theory in class whenever the opportunity came up. Haha, good times.
Way to prove his point, and doubly so.
Care to shoot for the hat-trick and claim that he's a fundamentalist Christian?
Depends - if you rip off something from a well-established scientist, the idea was posted clearly (and completely), and then he/she complains loudly, then sure.
If you rip off something from some unknown and struggling post-doc, and used an incomplete or poorly-worded idea as your source, then it's safe to say that you're not going to be blackballed.
The legal blogs are a bit different, but they're not without their own unique hazards...
I mean, PJ's little blog (I'm sure the readers have heard of it ) got a metric ton of attention, and likely boosted Pamela's career nicely, but she had to put up with some rather vicious human beings trying to root her out (and force her to testify) during SCO v. IBM, and eventually shut down thanks to the NSA, and continued harassment from various corners.
Agreed on Feynman, though... Me, I think that Albert Einstein would have made a truly badassed blogger, if his surviving witticisms are any measure. :)
Wait, what?
As someone typing this missive on OSX 10.9, I can tell you right now that "locked" or "closed" is simply wrong. We'll start with this as Exhibit A. I defy you to show me a similar Windows site that doesn't require a metric ton of money (e.g. that abortion they refer to as "shared source.")
Also, your experience is just that - your experience. It's subjective. My experience differs greatly, and I have yet to find a program I want/need for this OS that isn't not only 'just as good', but better in many aspects. There was only once when I found any trouble at all (my ancient PPC-only copy of Quake3 wouldn't run, but one quick (and free!) drop-in later, it runs just fine).
Same with Linux, really. It doesn't get any easier than to go hit up the Ubuntu software 'store', and download whatever you need or desire.
Good point - I think it began way back when DOS 2 (or was it 3?) came out, and Windows was just a bonus option that came with the machine (I had an old Amstrad 286 that arrived that way, and Windows was just a shitty TUI interface you turned on if you forgot where you put something, or wanted to organize stuff on your uber-expensive 10MB hard disk.)
As for the Vaios, I liked the one I did have - a Z1RA with an early P4 and a whole 2GB of RAM. Slick as hell, and for its time a very light (as in low-weight) little laptop.
Only two problems I had with it was the ungodly high pricetag, and Sony's nasty habit of making everything so proprietary, that you wasted CPU cycles on the crapware.
Ones that had an interest it keeping rural internet access viable. Internet access is ONLY profitable in city centers.
Not exactly...
Tillamook County, OR only has around 25,000 souls living in it, yet CenturyLink and Charter are currently fighting tooth-and-nail for their business. Let me put this into perspective: the county's biggest income centers are beef, cheese, some seafood, and a handful of tourist beach towns ( mostly visited by folks from Portland - 80+ miles away, but a metro area holding approx. 3 million residents).
CL was there first (riding the DSL lines), but cannot seem to give more than 6mb/sec (if you're lucky), and you're paying nearly $70/mo for the dubious honor. Charter came in and began offering 30mb/sec for $30/mo.
In other news, it may be a touch slower (and unsuitable for gaming due to lag), but you can get somewhat serviceable Internet connectivity from various sat providers (Dish, HughesNet, etc), all of whom have been forced to up the speeds and lower the prices.
Overall, we're beginning to see a revolution of sorts when it comes to rural broadband. It'll be a bit slower in most cases, but the competition is heating up, and geography + sat providers (with some 3/4G wireless providers tossed in) tends to make sure that mono/duopolies are going to be hard to form.
Paper disintegrates over time, takes much longer, but still a rental.
Given the time periods involved, it may as well be considered ownership.
I have some books in my home library that are well over 150 years old. They're still perfectly legible, and as long as I care for them properly they'll likely outlast me.
Hell, there are books in some uni libraries that are well over 200-300 years old. Sure, you have to handle them with gloves and such, but honestly, 100+ years is plenty of time to make a backup copy of the thing.
It ain't the Sovs that present the biggest danger to Europe, but yes, I agree that NATO's biggest reason for existing is no longer... so why not dismantle it?
A lot of those European social democracies are pretty nice places to live and have been for decades.
Of course they are - their defense budget is pretty much taken care of (see also "NATO"), so that's one huge expense they don't have to bother with. Those who do excel and gain wealth get taxed into the dirt in order to pay for everyone else. Ultra-cheap labor (form Turkey, Eastern Europe, etc) help keep costs/wages way down and the low end... much like how the US uses Immigrant labor for the same reason (the only difference being that the EU actually admits it openly.)
I guarantee you that if NATO were to shut down and the US were to pull out of all but maybe one or two bases, the EU would be faced with a massive defense ramp-up that would in turn kill their economies... well, those economies that aren't already being kept alive by Germany.
We need Elop, not Nadella!
No worries - Elop will still be well rewarded for his efforts. Expect a new VP in MSFT soon.
(I only wish this were a conspiracy theory...)
They share no genetic lineage or source with you.
So people who are adopted don't take care of grandma? Or wait, do they?
The adopted kid and Grandma do have distinct human DNA, or do you think differently? ;)
Well, pets are pets. They share no genetic lineage or source with you. Pets completely lack senescence.
I figure that unless there is at least some emotion disturbance, there is a clear and sharp distinction between Fido and Grandma, and how you would treat each of them at the end of their lives.
...that most pets only live around dozen years, so the vast majority of pet owners are going to see them die regardless of how well they're being taken care of.
True, but it's a cost/benefit calculation, with some very subjective factors.
A few years back, I had a dachshund that was roughly 14-ish years old (the rescue we got her from had to guess at her age when we got her at ~2yrs old). She had a habit of chasing squirrels at all costs - the last one had her hit a tree wrong and break her back. The choice was either a $6,000 surgery that would have still left her paralyzed and in need of care, or a $100 lethal injection and cremation. I wrote the check for $100, but only after having to talk the missus out of the more expensive option. Why? Well, my wife was already an emotional wreck over the ordeal, and putting a .38 slug through the dog's head, while perfectly humane IMO, would have definitely made for an ugly turn in my marriage.
To the missus, the benefit still outweighed the cost. To me, it was the opposite: the dog had lived a long and happy life, she was an awesome companion, but putting it out of its misery was the best course of action IMHO.
That was five years ago or so... now we have two more, and they're a positive joy to have around.