I happen to be considering exactly the same thing. Company I'm doing a project for- promise of probable job- has decided to simply be a 'pimp' and connect consultant programmers with clients. So, there's no job, but they like my work, and have lots of clients, so probable contracts.
There's a lot of good advice in this discussion, in particular for coming up with rates, and some good books and links.
And yes, of course I'm going to do more research on my own. Anyone who makes life changing decisions based on the advice of the/. crowd has a decidedly mixed group for advisors. But this does give me a good place to start.
It's a lot easier to add a rider to an existing bill you think will pass, than to write a new one.
It also creates all sorts of back-room deal making. Basically, "I'll vote for your bill if you add this pork for my local constituancy". It'a also why attack ads can say "So and so voted against mothers and apple pie!". What they really voted against was some other thing the bill, the "mom and applie pie" was added on.
It's really really stupid, and it's very American.
More than one item yes, but your reasoning is compltely baseless. It has nothing to do with parlimentary or not. They vote for people in Canada, too. They just don't for a bunch of other crap at the same time as they vote for MPs (Members of Parliment) which is as close as they come to our presidental election.
I disagree. I had a hard time finding the job I have. I can (and have) build a server with Win2K, BSD, Linux or AIX. I can (and have) diagnose network problems at layers 1 through 7. I can (and have) write code in everything from Fortran to C#.
There's a lot more to finding a job than having the skills. Contacts make up for a lot. That paper MCSE is a lot more likely to get a job because the boss's siser's husband's friend knows him.
It also depends on what the HR people are looking for. I have a wide variety of experience because I've done a lot of different jobs. Instructor, Unix admin, Windows admin, Network admin, Security analyst. But the only one for more than 5 years (unix admin) was 4 years ago. My programming experience, for example, compares to that of an entry level. But on the other hand, I have 10+ years of IT experience. Where do I fit in? Places looking for entry level find it easier to get a kid out of college. People looking for a guru want 5+ recent years in a specific field.
My plan is to pay the bills with whatever I can, no matter how crappy it is, and hang out the shingle for what I really enjoy.
I would also suggest reading "Body of Secrets" by James Bamford. Find out about the Northwoods plan. A plan to inflict terrorist attacks on US targets, and blame them on Cuba as an excuse to invade Cuba. A plan dreamt up by the Joints Chiefs of Staff after Kennedy took office.
This will only work until some idiot falls asleep anyway, and doesn't wake up, kills somone, and sues because the system promised him it would keep him awake.
It's dangerous to sell Americans things to protect themselves, that require even a modicom of common sense.
At least in B.C. Medicare cards don't have pictures. Sure, you can get picture ID, but why should a kid have to go to the hassle just to buy video games?
'First past the post' also doesn't lead to what would be considered the preferred choice if there are more than 2 choices. People tend to vote for the choice with the greatest chance of winning, which they would accept.
A better system would allow you to vote for as many candidates as you like. So, if there are 3 candidates, you could vote for 2 of them, effectively voting _against_ one candidates.
2000 example- A liberal could vote for Gore and Nader, a Conservative could vote for Bush and Buchannan. You're basically sorting the candidates into who you would accept, and who not. Third parties get support and can build, but not at the expense of the big parties.
Right now, we have no chance of a real alternative developing. Too many of us are chickenshits, waiting for someone else to vote for the 3rd party first. I suspect a lot of people would be happy to vote for someone other than Bush or Kerry. But the Dems and GOPs have a vested interest in keeping things the way they are.
I charge that we are not far from the USSR. They had elections, it's just that there was only one party. There were ballot choices, just all on the same party. The only difference here is that we have 2 parties, not one. And as we move from convention to election, the difference between the two gets smaller and smaller.
In Canada you can't have a live music house party, and pass the hat, without paying a tithe to the local music industry association. I've forgotten the acronym. Well, you can, but you may not.
"Censorship is the intentional destruction of information in order to kill off a taboo topic. That's not what's going on here"
I havn't watched any coverage this year, no cable, but based on '88-'02 (summer and winter) the 'taboo topic' is anything that doesn't make the USA look like a) #1, b) gracious in undeserved defeat c) benevolent big brother.
Every country shows some bias, but the US is extreme.
Not telling us when an American won gold due to a blatent judging error (gold given to 2nd place after inquiry years later)- that's cencorship.
I don't care about commercials, it's getting the chance to even see the coverage that bugs me. Since NBC has a legal monopoly on Olympics coverage, there is no other (legal) option. If I want to watch modern pentathelon, I can't.
It took Lance Armstrong to get the US to pay attention to the Tour de France. I'd hate to see the Olympics with a US cancer survivor dominating every event, but that's what it would take to get the NBC to provide coverage like the BBC or CBC.
In my case you get 5 tries, then you have to wait 5 minutes. Makes brute force harder. Failures are audited, so if the same account has multiple attempts, we know something's up.
Not everybody is in a top secret installation. Some of just have to keep out the casual browsers and kiddies.
Accidental intake of drugs is easy. Just ask Silken Laumen, the Canadian rower who took the wrong cold medication durring the PanAm games. She got it cleared with her team doctors, who basically screwed up. Canada had to give up the medal (I think it was for the Coxless 4s). Since it was an obvious honest mistake, there were no long term repercussions against Lauman. This was after her '92 comeback from having her quadracept severed from her thigh. She went on to win a bronze in Barcelona.
http://www.cbc.ca/sports/olympians/laumann.shtml (IE only link, sorry, or google and use the cache)
There's a low limit weight on the bikes. 6.8 kg I think. Lance's bike was under that, and they had to add stuff to make it heavier. They can easily add a 100g or so device, and stay at the 6.8kg mark.
It's now not so much a matter of making the bike lighter, as what part to make lighter.
They (Postal) use special lightweight clothes for the climbing stages. No joke.
I am sure that in the early 90s there was no specific rule banning recumbants, according to Les Earnest (a UCI official and also a prof at Stanford- you out there Les?) always said there was nothing to specificly rule out a recumbant. Now, there were major changes in response to advances to beat the hour record. I think the 'double diamond' part came in then. I would think a recumbant would be far superior for a TT, and Les's only speculation as to why they were not used then is that it position is different enough from an upright, that it uses a different muscle set.
That is, at that level, one could train for one or the other, but not both.
Sam Whittingham is a (former?) HPPVA world record holder is a pretty mean upright sprinter as well, but he's not world class as a roadie.
I have to run, but google on 'les earnest rec.bicycles recumbant uci' might turn something up.
I used to race an old steel frame with downtube friction 7-speed. Everyone else was on Titanium/Carbon/Aluminum STI shifters, min 3K outlay. Give me my terrain (a short steep hill finish) and I'd still cream them.
The technology is great, and makes a difference, sure, but it's the engine that counts most. Any tour rider will cream any of us, no matter what kind of bike we're each riding (within reason, I can beat Lance if he's on a tricycle...)
I see the sunglasses as being a better replacement to the current radio ear-bud.
What I'd like to know more about is what kind of technology is in place to protect those radio conversations. You'd have to bet that Saiz, Godefroot and Riis would love to listen in on Bruyneel and Armstrong. (directors sportif for Heras, Ullrich, Hamilton and Armstrong)
Slashdot Mirror
I happen to be considering exactly the same thing. Company I'm doing a project for- promise of probable job- has decided to simply be a 'pimp' and connect consultant programmers with clients. So, there's no job, but they like my work, and have lots of clients, so probable contracts.
/. crowd has a decidedly mixed group for advisors. But this does give me a good place to start.
There's a lot of good advice in this discussion, in particular for coming up with rates, and some good books and links.
And yes, of course I'm going to do more research on my own. Anyone who makes life changing decisions based on the advice of the
It's a lot easier to add a rider to an existing bill you think will pass, than to write a new one.
It also creates all sorts of back-room deal making. Basically, "I'll vote for your bill if you add this pork for my local constituancy". It'a also why attack ads can say "So and so voted against mothers and apple pie!". What they really voted against was some other thing the bill, the "mom and applie pie" was added on.
It's really really stupid, and it's very American.
More than one item yes, but your reasoning is compltely baseless. It has nothing to do with parlimentary or not. They vote for people in Canada, too. They just don't for a bunch of other crap at the same time as they vote for MPs (Members of Parliment) which is as close as they come to our presidental election.
I disagree. I had a hard time finding the job I have. I can (and have) build a server with Win2K, BSD, Linux or AIX. I can (and have) diagnose network problems at layers 1 through 7. I can (and have) write code in everything from Fortran to C#.
There's a lot more to finding a job than having the skills. Contacts make up for a lot. That paper MCSE is a lot more likely to get a job because the boss's siser's husband's friend knows him.
It also depends on what the HR people are looking for. I have a wide variety of experience because I've done a lot of different jobs. Instructor, Unix admin, Windows admin, Network admin, Security analyst. But the only one for more than 5 years (unix admin) was 4 years ago. My programming experience, for example, compares to that of an entry level. But on the other hand, I have 10+ years of IT experience. Where do I fit in? Places looking for entry level find it easier to get a kid out of college. People looking for a guru want 5+ recent years in a specific field.
My plan is to pay the bills with whatever I can, no matter how crappy it is, and hang out the shingle for what I really enjoy.
I would also suggest reading "Body of Secrets" by James Bamford. Find out about the Northwoods plan. A plan to inflict terrorist attacks on US targets, and blame them on Cuba as an excuse to invade Cuba. A plan dreamt up by the Joints Chiefs of Staff after Kennedy took office.
I'd like to know how slashdotting yourself compares to getting a google high rank (Ashlee Simpson) wrt your server load.
Paypal problems:
p or tedly-penalizes/
s on -on/
http://www.politechbot.com/2004/09/27/paypal-re
and alternatives
http://www.politechbot.com/2004/09/29/jim-david
This will only work until some idiot falls asleep anyway, and doesn't wake up, kills somone, and sues because the system promised him it would keep him awake.
It's dangerous to sell Americans things to protect themselves, that require even a modicom of common sense.
At least in B.C. Medicare cards don't have pictures. Sure, you can get picture ID, but why should a kid have to go to the hassle just to buy video games?
or "Maybe to funny."
Read the article. It's already hosted in Germany.
'First past the post' also doesn't lead to what would be considered the preferred choice if there are more than 2 choices. People tend to vote for the choice with the greatest chance of winning, which they would accept.
A better system would allow you to vote for as many candidates as you like. So, if there are 3 candidates, you could vote for 2 of them, effectively voting _against_ one candidates.
2000 example- A liberal could vote for Gore and Nader, a Conservative could vote for Bush and Buchannan. You're basically sorting the candidates into who you would accept, and who not. Third parties get support and can build, but not at the expense of the big parties.
Right now, we have no chance of a real alternative developing. Too many of us are chickenshits, waiting for someone else to vote for the 3rd party first. I suspect a lot of people would be happy to vote for someone other than Bush or Kerry. But the Dems and GOPs have a vested interest in keeping things the way they are.
I charge that we are not far from the USSR. They had elections, it's just that there was only one party. There were ballot choices, just all on the same party. The only difference here is that we have 2 parties, not one. And as we move from convention to election, the difference between the two gets smaller and smaller.
In Canada you can't have a live music house party, and pass the hat, without paying a tithe to the local music industry association. I've forgotten the acronym. Well, you can, but you may not.
"Censorship is the intentional destruction of information in order to kill off a taboo topic. That's not what's going on here"
I havn't watched any coverage this year, no cable, but based on '88-'02 (summer and winter) the 'taboo topic' is anything that doesn't make the USA look like a) #1, b) gracious in undeserved defeat c) benevolent big brother.
Every country shows some bias, but the US is extreme.
Not telling us when an American won gold due to a blatent judging error (gold given to 2nd place after inquiry years later)- that's cencorship.
I don't care about commercials, it's getting the chance to even see the coverage that bugs me. Since NBC has a legal monopoly on Olympics coverage, there is no other (legal) option. If I want to watch modern pentathelon, I can't.
It took Lance Armstrong to get the US to pay attention to the Tour de France. I'd hate to see the Olympics with a US cancer survivor dominating every event, but that's what it would take to get the NBC to provide coverage like the BBC or CBC.
You're making a lot of assumptions.
In my case you get 5 tries, then you have to wait 5 minutes. Makes brute force harder. Failures are audited, so if the same account has multiple attempts, we know something's up.
Not everybody is in a top secret installation. Some of just have to keep out the casual browsers and kiddies.
It also helps to poop golden droppings that the Rats are addicted to. So long as you poop more golden poop than the next mouse.
And you don't intentionally take methadone if you're going to race a bike.
Accidental intake of drugs is easy. Just ask Silken Laumen, the Canadian rower who took the wrong cold medication durring the PanAm games. She got it cleared with her team doctors, who basically screwed up. Canada had to give up the medal (I think it was for the Coxless 4s). Since it was an obvious honest mistake, there were no long term repercussions against Lauman. This was after her '92 comeback from having her quadracept severed from her thigh. She went on to win a bronze in Barcelona.
l
http://www.cbc.ca/sports/olympians/laumann.shtm
(IE only link, sorry, or google and use the cache)
There's a low limit weight on the bikes. 6.8 kg I think. Lance's bike was under that, and they had to add stuff to make it heavier. They can easily add a 100g or so device, and stay at the 6.8kg mark.
It's now not so much a matter of making the bike lighter, as what part to make lighter.
They (Postal) use special lightweight clothes for the climbing stages. No joke.
I'd like to know what tires Phonak was using in the TTT.
9 riders * 64.5 km / 5 flats = 116.1 km per flat.
No thanks!
Bio-pace was a huge success. It helped Shimano kill Suntour. That and the Kobe earthquake.
Bio-pace sucked, but it was marketing genius. Everyone had to have it on their bike. Kinda like IE...
I am sure that in the early 90s there was no specific rule banning recumbants, according to Les Earnest (a UCI official and also a prof at Stanford- you out there Les?) always said there was nothing to specificly rule out a recumbant. Now, there were major changes in response to advances to beat the hour record. I think the 'double diamond' part came in then. I would think a recumbant would be far superior for a TT, and Les's only speculation as to why they were not used then is that it position is different enough from an upright, that it uses a different muscle set.
That is, at that level, one could train for one or the other, but not both.
Sam Whittingham is a (former?) HPPVA world record holder is a pretty mean upright sprinter as well, but he's not world class as a roadie.
I have to run, but google on 'les earnest rec.bicycles recumbant uci' might turn something up.
I used to race an old steel frame with downtube friction 7-speed. Everyone else was on Titanium/Carbon/Aluminum STI shifters, min 3K outlay. Give me my terrain (a short steep hill finish) and I'd still cream them.
The technology is great, and makes a difference, sure, but it's the engine that counts most. Any tour rider will cream any of us, no matter what kind of bike we're each riding (within reason, I can beat Lance if he's on a tricycle...)
I see the sunglasses as being a better replacement to the current radio ear-bud.
What I'd like to know more about is what kind of technology is in place to protect those radio conversations. You'd have to bet that Saiz, Godefroot and Riis would love to listen in on Bruyneel and Armstrong. (directors sportif for Heras, Ullrich, Hamilton and Armstrong)