Based on the facts of the system. Fossil fuels are subsidized at rates that no other industry achieves. Oil alone nets close to 5 billion dollars
Sorry, but your math is wonky. $5 billion is a negligible amount of subsidies relative to the amount of energy derived from fossil fuels. In fact, renewables are subsidized at rates about 10x that of renewables.
You can find the numbers here. You need to set that in relationship to the amount of energy delivered by these sources; see here.
That's sort of like saying we should have waited for business interests to build us a road system. Incentives is part of what got us to this point.
No, it's not like saying that at all, since roads aren't solar cells. Incentives for solar cells have done nothing to bring down the price faster or increase innovation, and solar cells don't need rights of way, centralized infrastructure or distribution, or eminent domain.
Furthermore, the first road systems in the US and UK were private. The US only got massive federal interstate highway system when a bunch of US presidents got a boner for a Nazi-style Autobahn system and its military applications.
Yes, and once that happens, people will switch in large numbers. Until that happens, neither government incentives nor carbon taxes make much sense. That's precisely why government should just stay out of it.
I'm for all of these things: default opt-in / explicit opt-out, opt-ins getting preference over opt-outs, and legalization of organ sale (particularly kidneys, livers, and other organs that can be removed from a live donor) with safeguards in place to minimize the chance of nastiness.
Once you treat organs like any other personal property, you don't need anything else: the last will becomes the organ donation opt-in/out. And if there is no specific provision in the last will, the heirs have a $100000+ incentive to opt in.
You're arguing for something that will make the world a worse place.
No, you are arguing for a feel-good policy that would do nothing to increase the number of organs available for transplants: the small number of people needing a transplant would become donors (many of them unsuitable anyway), and nobody else would care one way or another.
What's "making the world a worse place" is that some special interests managed to push through legislation decades ago that allowed hospitals to take people's private property (i.e. their organs) without compensation; it's no wonder that that creates scarcity and hoarding.
You want more organs for transplantation? Create a free market in them and have recipients (or their insurance companies) pay the estate of organ donors what those organs are actually worth, as determined by auctions.
I think its much more reasonable to trust the opinions of major medical organizations than put stock in baseless fears pulled out the usual place.
If organ donations are your concern, then it is those "major medical organizations" that are principally responsible for the shortage and unwillingness to donate in the first place, because they have put a system into place in which they get control of a very valuable resource (organs) without compensating the donor or his estate.
That's a useless suggestion: people who need organ donations are generally not suitable to donate, and they know it long ahead of time.
I just don't get the mentality of people who refuse organ donation. If you're dead, you're dead, why take other people with you?
Well, one reason is a concern that doctors and hospitals might be less interested in saving you if that means potentially damaging donatable organs. There are many other reasons as well.
How big of a prick do you have to be to look at that proposition and reject it?
I should say not as big of a prick as you, who is ready to attribute base motives to everybody at the drop of a pin.
Please research papers about Liveness before commenting here.
You're welcome to share references to papers you consider important and that make the distinction between interactive development in Smalltalk vs other languages you are trying to make.
Displaying initiative and ingenuity in order to work around idiotic managerial policies & decisions. Give 'em a raise!
Sure, it seems pretty harmless for library books, but it's the same kind of "initiative and ingenuity" that causes government budgets to balloon and government services to deteriorate.
Libraries need to comply with the rules set by the people who provide the money for them. And keeping books around that people don't read means that space isn't available for books that people actually want.
Smalltalk has a unique “live coding and debugging” IDE
Many scripting languages have that.
that is largely responsible for its incredible productivity.
Do you have any solid evidence of high Smalltalk productivity compared to modern scripting languages, or even functional programming languages?
Personally, I don't find Smalltalk productivity all that high, for the simple reason that its libraries are far more limited than those of other languages, and that it integrates poorly with the operating system and other tools.
I didn't realize that programming languages were supposed to give you "insights." I always thought they were just tools for expressing algorithms. Silly me...
Yes, that is quite silly of you, not to mention quite ignorant. There are indeed quite a few different approaches to programming beyond "Python, Ruby, JavaScript, PHP", Smalltalk, C++, or Java. You should try them sometime.
Smalltalk was an amazing language for the 1970's and 1980's. But pretty much all of its features have been incorporated into other languages, so learning Smalltalk won't give you amazing new insights if you know or learn languages like Python or JavaScript.
Having said that, Smalltalk is fun to play around with. Fortunately, there are several excellent, faithful, and free Smalltalk implementations, including Squeak and Pharo. Just download them and play with them. Smalltalk is simple enough and similar enough to other languages that it shouldn't take you long to pick up.
About Java ME. The last press release from Oracle about Java ME is from 2014, and that didn't even mention phone applications. No phones sold on Amazon or Verizon seem to mention "Java ME".
I've had similar experiences: employees claiming falsely that the phone is blocked on their network when there actually is a simple technical problem (like a new SIM).
A marriage is a legal commitment between two adults; personhood is a requirement. That's why adult men and women can marry each other, and by gender neutrality of law, that extends to homosexual relations. Dogs, robots, and toasters are not legal adults; they don't have personhood or the ability to enter legally binding commitments, therefore they cannot marry. And I seriously doubt AI will advance fast enough for robots to be reasonably granted personhood by 2030.
I think you're assuming that management always know who's the best at what, and their offers reflect that.
No, I'm merely assuming that it is the responsibility of management to determine how much employee retention is worth to the company. They may get it wrong, but it's still their choice to make.
In cases like this the skills/knowledge are obviously somewhat important, otherwise what it there to teach your "replacement" or offer in the "contact firm"
Carnival probably offered high retention offers to a few key employees. For the rest, like this guy, they couldn't care less whether he stays, which is why they didn't make him a big offer.
Pretty impossible unless you are only using mobile devices;D
By Sun/Oracle's own standards, Android doesn't run Java. Android succeeded because it threw out the Java UI and provides its own, better replacement. It's also not WORA.
Since the company has only announced their intent to break the law in the near future, this person is only providing an offer back to the company to not break the law and be reported for those crimes.
Which crime do you believe Carnival is committing?
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, but your math is wonky. $5 billion is a negligible amount of subsidies relative to the amount of energy derived from fossil fuels. In fact, renewables are subsidized at rates about 10x that of renewables.
You can find the numbers here. You need to set that in relationship to the amount of energy delivered by these sources; see here.
No, it's not like saying that at all, since roads aren't solar cells. Incentives for solar cells have done nothing to bring down the price faster or increase innovation, and solar cells don't need rights of way, centralized infrastructure or distribution, or eminent domain.
Furthermore, the first road systems in the US and UK were private. The US only got massive federal interstate highway system when a bunch of US presidents got a boner for a Nazi-style Autobahn system and its military applications.
Yes, and once that happens, people will switch in large numbers. Until that happens, neither government incentives nor carbon taxes make much sense. That's precisely why government should just stay out of it.
Once you treat organs like any other personal property, you don't need anything else: the last will becomes the organ donation opt-in/out. And if there is no specific provision in the last will, the heirs have a $100000+ incentive to opt in.
No, you are arguing for a feel-good policy that would do nothing to increase the number of organs available for transplants: the small number of people needing a transplant would become donors (many of them unsuitable anyway), and nobody else would care one way or another.
What's "making the world a worse place" is that some special interests managed to push through legislation decades ago that allowed hospitals to take people's private property (i.e. their organs) without compensation; it's no wonder that that creates scarcity and hoarding.
You want more organs for transplantation? Create a free market in them and have recipients (or their insurance companies) pay the estate of organ donors what those organs are actually worth, as determined by auctions.
If organ donations are your concern, then it is those "major medical organizations" that are principally responsible for the shortage and unwillingness to donate in the first place, because they have put a system into place in which they get control of a very valuable resource (organs) without compensating the donor or his estate.
That's a useless suggestion: people who need organ donations are generally not suitable to donate, and they know it long ahead of time.
Well, one reason is a concern that doctors and hospitals might be less interested in saving you if that means potentially damaging donatable organs. There are many other reasons as well.
I should say not as big of a prick as you, who is ready to attribute base motives to everybody at the drop of a pin.
You're welcome to share references to papers you consider important and that make the distinction between interactive development in Smalltalk vs other languages you are trying to make.
If they aren't, there's something wrong with the library.
Ah, you poor poor Ruby hackers... so full of anger, envy, and disappointment.
Sure, it seems pretty harmless for library books, but it's the same kind of "initiative and ingenuity" that causes government budgets to balloon and government services to deteriorate.
Libraries need to comply with the rules set by the people who provide the money for them. And keeping books around that people don't read means that space isn't available for books that people actually want.
Many scripting languages have that.
Do you have any solid evidence of high Smalltalk productivity compared to modern scripting languages, or even functional programming languages?
Personally, I don't find Smalltalk productivity all that high, for the simple reason that its libraries are far more limited than those of other languages, and that it integrates poorly with the operating system and other tools.
Yes, that is quite silly of you, not to mention quite ignorant. There are indeed quite a few different approaches to programming beyond "Python, Ruby, JavaScript, PHP", Smalltalk, C++, or Java. You should try them sometime.
Smalltalk was an amazing language for the 1970's and 1980's. But pretty much all of its features have been incorporated into other languages, so learning Smalltalk won't give you amazing new insights if you know or learn languages like Python or JavaScript.
Having said that, Smalltalk is fun to play around with. Fortunately, there are several excellent, faithful, and free Smalltalk implementations, including Squeak and Pharo. Just download them and play with them. Smalltalk is simple enough and similar enough to other languages that it shouldn't take you long to pick up.
About Java ME. The last press release from Oracle about Java ME is from 2014, and that didn't even mention phone applications. No phones sold on Amazon or Verizon seem to mention "Java ME".
You're kidding, right?
Maybe you need a new SIM?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Googl...
I've had similar experiences: employees claiming falsely that the phone is blocked on their network when there actually is a simple technical problem (like a new SIM).
Which part of "And I seriously doubt AI will advance fast enough for robots to be reasonably granted personhood by [2050]." did you have trouble with?
I used to be an AT&T customer, and I never had problems with third party phones.
Why do they "need to"? You can buy a Pixel phone if you want an iPhone-like carrier free experience.
A marriage is a legal commitment between two adults; personhood is a requirement. That's why adult men and women can marry each other, and by gender neutrality of law, that extends to homosexual relations. Dogs, robots, and toasters are not legal adults; they don't have personhood or the ability to enter legally binding commitments, therefore they cannot marry. And I seriously doubt AI will advance fast enough for robots to be reasonably granted personhood by 2030.
No, I'm merely assuming that it is the responsibility of management to determine how much employee retention is worth to the company. They may get it wrong, but it's still their choice to make.
Carnival probably offered high retention offers to a few key employees. For the rest, like this guy, they couldn't care less whether he stays, which is why they didn't make him a big offer.
By Sun/Oracle's own standards, Android doesn't run Java. Android succeeded because it threw out the Java UI and provides its own, better replacement. It's also not WORA.
The end result being... that he defeated a race baiting, war mongering, corrupt liar who exposes national security secrets to the Russians?
Which crime do you believe Carnival is committing?