Of all the Patriot act increased surveillence practices made legal after 9/11, the FBI to my knowledge has not used a single one against a suspected terrorist, yet you will find reams of evidence of use of these tactics in drug investigations.
The war on drugs has perverted law enforcement, now all time and money is spent on the crimes (drug crime) that pays the officers themselves.
So a written medium that relies on imagination translated to the moving image should forgo the very substance of the book because you can't imagine it like you did in the book? Are you serious?
If you want to imagine the book you read it. If you want to see a representation of one persons interpretation of the book you watch the movie/tv show. There are a lot of people that would argue that by sticking to the actual plot of the books instead of changing it, the directors and producers of GOT are doing the right thing.
Maybe I'm just silly but it's probably because it's in the fucking book. If you want to watch a soap opera that "focuses on character development and plot" they are on in the afternoon.
There is no scientific medical evidence that such a condition exists and their claims should be tossed until such a time that such a sensativity can be proven to exist. They should be encouraged to move to Alaska and homestead like all the other idiots that think they have this "disease".
The greatest fear of the power industry isn't solar displacing residential revenue. It's solar wiping out demand and peak power pricing on the commercial/industrial side. Solar output aligns relatively well with commercial/industrial power use. The demand and rate charges that this demand causes generate mega dollars for the power company. Solar could chop that off and make the peak power price at night, this would decimate power company profits.
This is what the power companies fear, a world where solar makes commercial power cheap.
Oh my lord, it must be communism when the government owns infrastructure!
The horror! They should immediately sell (coincidentally of course to a republican donor) all those power lines and get back into the monopoly power business.
The answer is an affirmative no, and the evidence is a look at the installation rate when the subsidy was allowed to expire a few years ago. The industry has made major strides over the last subsidy run. I completely support an extension and sun setting of the subsidies. They shouldn't be cut off immediately but they should end as the market is now producing power at rates cheaper than coal. The subsidies should be extended for 5 years with a gradual reduction in subsidy every year of that 5 years to taper off the support.
Residential turbines are crap. Solar far outclasses them, but this is not true with commercial wind turbines. You get a modern 90m high turbine or the new recommended standard 140m high turbine and you generate serious power in a very small foot print. Solar can't come anywhere near that energy density, the trick is tapping those strong winds because the power output is a function of wind speed, turbine height and blade length. The small residential turbines they sell excel at none of those strengths and as a result are essentially worthless unless you could get it for free.
Usually because the wind towers create shadows and shadows are bad for panels. There is an operational reason as well, you want your panels as densely packed as possible to allow for reduced maintenance costs.
That's not a straw man, it's a false equivalency. Solar and wind have dramatically lower environmental costs than coal, oil or even gas. The impacts aren't equivalent and shouldn't be compared as such.
Solyndra was never going to be a successful company. They were created and based on government subsidies. All the other players in the US market were trying to build markets and only using the subsidies to give them an equal footing against other energy sources. Solyndra should have never been approved for a government loan. But even given that the program produced a successful investment rate of 98%, significantly better than even the best investors. Solyndra was one of only a handful of failures out of hundreds of companies that have moved on to become big players including Tesla.
There is a legitimate argument that, like usual, Solyndra was pushed up and given the loan because of political connections when a fair handling using the program parameters would have disqualified them for insufficient outside investment. This usually happens in government contracting and it's one of the things that needs to be stomped out with some more red tape.
Most of the time when such disparity occurs that the general population starts to starve results in the leaders and top 1% getting their heads cut off. Never underestimate the power of an entire population with nothing to lose. Some of the rich people realize this, others don't, but in the end if what you claim comes true it won't be very long before it's not true anymore.
Until a true AI can be developed automation could only replace manual labor jobs, any job that needs thought involved is going to be out. There is also the problem of troubleshooting and fixing the robots, something I doubt could be automated except for the most routine breakage. For every advance in robots we've seen a loss of some pretty crappy jobs and the addition of some very high paid technical jobs. The welders in the auto plants were replaced with robots and then the auto companies had to hire engineers to maintain and program the robots.
This has been a pretty consistent trend, manual labor replaced with white collar high wage jobs (in lower numbers), often the cost savings aren't very high in labor rates, but the savings come from more precise work by the robots. For example, automotive welding now is perfect almost every time. In the end between the robot companies, the programers and the robot maintainers you end up with more or less the same number of jobs than those that were lost just with higher productivity and better results.
The hackers have posted sufficient data to back up the claim. They've also posted emails from the CEO refusing to pay for security requested by their IT staff.
Your analogy is poor. There is a third party here who claimed to hold data security paramount and failed at that job. In your example you would pay your neighbor to make sure your car was locked up and when the thief steals from the car because it was unlocked don't you feel the person you were paying to secure it should be liable?
AM is as responsible for this as the hackers. Their entire job was data security, to allow people to put very personal data and details online in a secure manner. If they had told the truth about their data security no one would have ever used the web site. IMO they probably hold higher responsibility for this action than the hackers.
Upper management probably never heard about this because it's the culture they've built. Employees have tools to basically feed comments on co-workers where there is a practical guarantee of anonymity without the ability to confront the accusation. Because they fire a certain percent every year regardless of quality there is this competition to see other people fail so you can succeed.
In such an environment is it surprising that the person who had a devastating personal event suddenly starts seeing negative performance reviews because other employees that may not even know them are sending in negative comments to try to secure their own position? And that managers under pressure to fire a certain percent every few months wouldn't take advantage of this because their own employees performance metric effects their performance metric?
It's not really that hard to believe IMO. It's a cultural thing. As long as everyone is 20 or in upper management it's probably a great place to work.
The article makes is pretty clear that these stories aren't applicable to every department in Amazon.
They also make clear that you will either love or hate working there. Did you even read the whole thing? Does it surprise you that this stuff goes on? Or are you in denial about the stories presented?
The article was pretty balanced as far as content, the only hit piece nature was that all the good stuff was said upfront so you forgot it by the time you get past the stories about employee that just lost children, spouses or parents and were fired.
But honestly, those stories about people being fired after loosing someone or having health problems are a pretty good reason do the order they did. It was bad enough that Bezos made the public claim in the summary above about not being the amazon he knows. But the authors make a pretty good point early on that it's exactly the type of cutthroat performance at all cost Amazon that he's built. This is what happens when you build monsters where you are encouraged to attack your coworkers, they become monsters and attack them when they are down at the worst moments in their life. Because by attacking their coworkers they can advance.
This is the Amazon Bezos has built, one without empathy where the ends justifies the means. It's the reason every other fortune 500 is abandoning the very hiring and performance metrics Bezo's champions. Bezos shouldn't be disturbed by this (if he actually is) but I do understand his need to inject PR speak about how he wants everyone to email him or HR if this occurs. Which would probably just get you fired quicker.
The US didn't stop the Russians from invading Western Europe with better weapons. They stopped them with tactical nukes. In the event 2000+ Soviet tanks tried to cross into western Europe tactical nukes would have landed on the front line, middle line and back line, eastern Europe would have been incinerated along with the rest of the world.
Later in the 80's with Regan spending the Social Security surplus on Defense they developed things like the F-16, Abrahms and other tech that would have possibly allowed us to counter a Soviet standing army. But in the 50's and 60's the only thing that stopped a Soviet expansion was the US threat of and demonstrated willingness to use Nuclear weapons in defense.
You fail to respond to his point. When you put people in jail for 10 years for two completely different crimes, unintentionally killing someone (manslaughter) and copying music for money you've got a problem. This is the same problem the US has experienced with the drug laws where you'll serve more time in jail for a drug charge than you will for rape or murder.
The problem is that conservatives view more punishment as a good thing without regard to sanity. Killing someone and copyright violations aren't even in the same ballpark. If manslaughter gets 10 years copyright infringement should have a penalty about 1/10th that.
There are dozens of medical based exo-skeltons under development all over the west. Most are much better advanced than the pictures of this monstrosity (it's huge). The most famous of the western prototypes allowed a woman with below the neck paralysis (no arm or leg control) to walk across a room unaided by any other human. Based on the pictures of this "Russian version" this is at best a crutches assistance, not a full assist in that it requires the user to use crutches.
Frankly this isn't even newsworthy. They've had better technology for far longer elsewhere. There are even systems being developed that directly interfaces to the nervous system of the operator requiring no outside control, IIRC correctly the full paralysis version I mentioned above had such an interface.
I wish you blind assange supporters would at least stick to the truth. But of course this has never been about the truth.
Claes Borgström, a Stockholm lawyer who represents one of the women whose allegations against Assange will now never be tested in court, said the woman was ambivalent about the situation. “On the one hand, she wanted Assange to face trial and answer for what he has done. On the other, she wants to put this behind her.”
HFT has reduced the total arbitrage, decreased market to market differences and provides a massive liquidity boost to the entire market. The only time one of these HFT systems went bad the only people it hurt was the HFT company.
People like you that are opposed to HFT because you read an article about it don't realize how markets work. If there wasn't HFT there would be market makers and they take far MORE than a the miniscule percentage that HFT takes. When I first started trading you couldn't trade a stock without giving 3% to the market maker on the trade. Today HFT supplies that market liquidity and you can make trades with less than 1/4 of a percent going to the HFT supplying the liquidity.
Learn how the markets work before you lambast HFT.
They already know who owns the phones, it's the phones of the two people that were murdered. The prosecutor believes there would be something on the phone to indicate who committed it without an ounce of evidence for the belief. He's a liar, and you are foolish to believe him that the phones contain anything that would help him.
Slashdot Mirror
Of all the Patriot act increased surveillence practices made legal after 9/11, the FBI to my knowledge has not used a single one against a suspected terrorist, yet you will find reams of evidence of use of these tactics in drug investigations.
The war on drugs has perverted law enforcement, now all time and money is spent on the crimes (drug crime) that pays the officers themselves.
So a written medium that relies on imagination translated to the moving image should forgo the very substance of the book because you can't imagine it like you did in the book? Are you serious?
If you want to imagine the book you read it. If you want to see a representation of one persons interpretation of the book you watch the movie/tv show. There are a lot of people that would argue that by sticking to the actual plot of the books instead of changing it, the directors and producers of GOT are doing the right thing.
Maybe I'm just silly but it's probably because it's in the fucking book. If you want to watch a soap opera that "focuses on character development and plot" they are on in the afternoon.
They can't kill VPN without basically making the service useless for business. This reason alone will protect VPN.
There is no scientific medical evidence that such a condition exists and their claims should be tossed until such a time that such a sensativity can be proven to exist. They should be encouraged to move to Alaska and homestead like all the other idiots that think they have this "disease".
The greatest fear of the power industry isn't solar displacing residential revenue. It's solar wiping out demand and peak power pricing on the commercial/industrial side. Solar output aligns relatively well with commercial/industrial power use. The demand and rate charges that this demand causes generate mega dollars for the power company. Solar could chop that off and make the peak power price at night, this would decimate power company profits.
This is what the power companies fear, a world where solar makes commercial power cheap.
Oh my lord, it must be communism when the government owns infrastructure!
The horror! They should immediately sell (coincidentally of course to a republican donor) all those power lines and get back into the monopoly power business.
The answer is an affirmative no, and the evidence is a look at the installation rate when the subsidy was allowed to expire a few years ago. The industry has made major strides over the last subsidy run. I completely support an extension and sun setting of the subsidies. They shouldn't be cut off immediately but they should end as the market is now producing power at rates cheaper than coal. The subsidies should be extended for 5 years with a gradual reduction in subsidy every year of that 5 years to taper off the support.
Residential turbines are crap. Solar far outclasses them, but this is not true with commercial wind turbines. You get a modern 90m high turbine or the new recommended standard 140m high turbine and you generate serious power in a very small foot print. Solar can't come anywhere near that energy density, the trick is tapping those strong winds because the power output is a function of wind speed, turbine height and blade length. The small residential turbines they sell excel at none of those strengths and as a result are essentially worthless unless you could get it for free.
Usually because the wind towers create shadows and shadows are bad for panels. There is an operational reason as well, you want your panels as densely packed as possible to allow for reduced maintenance costs.
That's not a straw man, it's a false equivalency. Solar and wind have dramatically lower environmental costs than coal, oil or even gas. The impacts aren't equivalent and shouldn't be compared as such.
Solyndra was never going to be a successful company. They were created and based on government subsidies. All the other players in the US market were trying to build markets and only using the subsidies to give them an equal footing against other energy sources. Solyndra should have never been approved for a government loan. But even given that the program produced a successful investment rate of 98%, significantly better than even the best investors. Solyndra was one of only a handful of failures out of hundreds of companies that have moved on to become big players including Tesla.
There is a legitimate argument that, like usual, Solyndra was pushed up and given the loan because of political connections when a fair handling using the program parameters would have disqualified them for insufficient outside investment. This usually happens in government contracting and it's one of the things that needs to be stomped out with some more red tape.
Most of the time when such disparity occurs that the general population starts to starve results in the leaders and top 1% getting their heads cut off. Never underestimate the power of an entire population with nothing to lose. Some of the rich people realize this, others don't, but in the end if what you claim comes true it won't be very long before it's not true anymore.
Until a true AI can be developed automation could only replace manual labor jobs, any job that needs thought involved is going to be out. There is also the problem of troubleshooting and fixing the robots, something I doubt could be automated except for the most routine breakage. For every advance in robots we've seen a loss of some pretty crappy jobs and the addition of some very high paid technical jobs. The welders in the auto plants were replaced with robots and then the auto companies had to hire engineers to maintain and program the robots.
This has been a pretty consistent trend, manual labor replaced with white collar high wage jobs (in lower numbers), often the cost savings aren't very high in labor rates, but the savings come from more precise work by the robots. For example, automotive welding now is perfect almost every time. In the end between the robot companies, the programers and the robot maintainers you end up with more or less the same number of jobs than those that were lost just with higher productivity and better results.
The hackers have posted sufficient data to back up the claim. They've also posted emails from the CEO refusing to pay for security requested by their IT staff.
Your analogy is poor. There is a third party here who claimed to hold data security paramount and failed at that job. In your example you would pay your neighbor to make sure your car was locked up and when the thief steals from the car because it was unlocked don't you feel the person you were paying to secure it should be liable?
AM is as responsible for this as the hackers. Their entire job was data security, to allow people to put very personal data and details online in a secure manner. If they had told the truth about their data security no one would have ever used the web site. IMO they probably hold higher responsibility for this action than the hackers.
Exactly what side would the company have?
Upper management probably never heard about this because it's the culture they've built. Employees have tools to basically feed comments on co-workers where there is a practical guarantee of anonymity without the ability to confront the accusation. Because they fire a certain percent every year regardless of quality there is this competition to see other people fail so you can succeed.
In such an environment is it surprising that the person who had a devastating personal event suddenly starts seeing negative performance reviews because other employees that may not even know them are sending in negative comments to try to secure their own position? And that managers under pressure to fire a certain percent every few months wouldn't take advantage of this because their own employees performance metric effects their performance metric?
It's not really that hard to believe IMO. It's a cultural thing. As long as everyone is 20 or in upper management it's probably a great place to work.
The article makes is pretty clear that these stories aren't applicable to every department in Amazon.
They also make clear that you will either love or hate working there. Did you even read the whole thing? Does it surprise you that this stuff goes on? Or are you in denial about the stories presented?
The article was pretty balanced as far as content, the only hit piece nature was that all the good stuff was said upfront so you forgot it by the time you get past the stories about employee that just lost children, spouses or parents and were fired.
But honestly, those stories about people being fired after loosing someone or having health problems are a pretty good reason do the order they did. It was bad enough that Bezos made the public claim in the summary above about not being the amazon he knows. But the authors make a pretty good point early on that it's exactly the type of cutthroat performance at all cost Amazon that he's built. This is what happens when you build monsters where you are encouraged to attack your coworkers, they become monsters and attack them when they are down at the worst moments in their life. Because by attacking their coworkers they can advance.
This is the Amazon Bezos has built, one without empathy where the ends justifies the means. It's the reason every other fortune 500 is abandoning the very hiring and performance metrics Bezo's champions. Bezos shouldn't be disturbed by this (if he actually is) but I do understand his need to inject PR speak about how he wants everyone to email him or HR if this occurs. Which would probably just get you fired quicker.
The US didn't stop the Russians from invading Western Europe with better weapons. They stopped them with tactical nukes. In the event 2000+ Soviet tanks tried to cross into western Europe tactical nukes would have landed on the front line, middle line and back line, eastern Europe would have been incinerated along with the rest of the world.
Later in the 80's with Regan spending the Social Security surplus on Defense they developed things like the F-16, Abrahms and other tech that would have possibly allowed us to counter a Soviet standing army. But in the 50's and 60's the only thing that stopped a Soviet expansion was the US threat of and demonstrated willingness to use Nuclear weapons in defense.
You fail to respond to his point. When you put people in jail for 10 years for two completely different crimes, unintentionally killing someone (manslaughter) and copying music for money you've got a problem. This is the same problem the US has experienced with the drug laws where you'll serve more time in jail for a drug charge than you will for rape or murder.
The problem is that conservatives view more punishment as a good thing without regard to sanity. Killing someone and copyright violations aren't even in the same ballpark. If manslaughter gets 10 years copyright infringement should have a penalty about 1/10th that.
There are dozens of medical based exo-skeltons under development all over the west. Most are much better advanced than the pictures of this monstrosity (it's huge). The most famous of the western prototypes allowed a woman with below the neck paralysis (no arm or leg control) to walk across a room unaided by any other human. Based on the pictures of this "Russian version" this is at best a crutches assistance, not a full assist in that it requires the user to use crutches.
Frankly this isn't even newsworthy. They've had better technology for far longer elsewhere. There are even systems being developed that directly interfaces to the nervous system of the operator requiring no outside control, IIRC correctly the full paralysis version I mentioned above had such an interface.
I wish you blind assange supporters would at least stick to the truth. But of course this has never been about the truth.
http://www.theguardian.com/med...
HFT has reduced the total arbitrage, decreased market to market differences and provides a massive liquidity boost to the entire market. The only time one of these HFT systems went bad the only people it hurt was the HFT company.
People like you that are opposed to HFT because you read an article about it don't realize how markets work. If there wasn't HFT there would be market makers and they take far MORE than a the miniscule percentage that HFT takes. When I first started trading you couldn't trade a stock without giving 3% to the market maker on the trade. Today HFT supplies that market liquidity and you can make trades with less than 1/4 of a percent going to the HFT supplying the liquidity.
Learn how the markets work before you lambast HFT.
They already know who owns the phones, it's the phones of the two people that were murdered. The prosecutor believes there would be something on the phone to indicate who committed it without an ounce of evidence for the belief. He's a liar, and you are foolish to believe him that the phones contain anything that would help him.