Well, in the process where an agency could apply for an exemption to the default rule they could certainly raise it if a supplier made such a claim. At that point they could consider
1) A different supplier
2) Developing it in-house instead (if it's cheaper than the revised price)
or if neither is viable - they may grant an exemption - or a temporary one which says the government will wait at least 5 years to make it public or something.
True, but one problem is the procurement process. If it required allowing free public use by default the bids would already incorporate that so government would have no idea what the premium was; and once they open the bidding they have to either take the lowest bid from a qualified bidder or cancel the RFP and start the process all over which is very painful.
As for in house development, many agencies do not have the staff to do that and often hire contractors to do the development; which is one way to fully own the software since they essentially are paying for it based on a T&M contract. That can get quite expensive as specs get clarified and or changed.
Oh I know - I agree NASA is doing it the right way - my argument is that this should be the default for ALL software produced with ANY tax dollars - whether by a government agency or under a government contract. I would even extend it beyond "software" to "information".
In other words, I was arguing that the rest of government should copy NASA's policies regarding openness.
While I applaud NASA's actions, a quick browse of the catalogue shows a number of the items are for "U.S. Government Purpose Release" which precludes its release to the public, per NASA:
U.S. Government Purpose Release: This large, but restrictive, release category includes five subcategories. An SUA is required, and appropriate nondisclosure and export control provisions may be included. The following subcategories are included under this release category.
Beta Release: A limited release of the Software Code Baseline for government purposes of acquiring evaluation comments and feedback.
Project Release: Any release of the Software Product Baseline or the Software Accepted (As-Built) Baseline to be used on behalf of the U.S. government.
Developmental Release: A release of the Software Product Baseline specifically for further development on behalf of the government and not including operational use.
Interagency Release: A release of any software for use by another U.S. government agency.
NASA Release: A release of any software for use only by NASA personnel and NASA contractors.
Oh I know - I agree NASA is doing it the right way - my argument is that this should be the default for ALL software produced with ANY tax dollars - whether by a government agency or under a government contract. I would even extend it beyond "software" to "information".
In other words, I was arguing that the rest of government should copy NASA's policies regarding openness.
While I am in general agreement my concern is in some cases it would significantly raise the cost to the government since companies would now have to factor in the loss of rights to the software and thus potential future sales. Years ago I developed some courseware for the government which the agency that contracted it has full rights to its use. Had they said, "We will release it to the public free of charge" my price would have been significantly higher to offset any potential impact on revenue from other companies that also contract with me. I suspect other companies would do the same if the product they sold has commercial applications.
The locked phones tethering apps tell the phone company that you are using the phone as a hotspot/get authorization. The unlocked phones just pump data.
So it sounds like you really need an non-carrier provided firmware phone rather than one merely unlocked; or will tethering data stop being sent if the carrier unlocks your phone?
If the phone is locked, it won't even accept the SIM in the first place. The phone will refuse to boot or give any relevant service at all.
I think the OP's point was an unlocked phone will not supply tethered data usage information that a SIM locked phone to your carrier, so if yo use an unlocked phone on your carrier, rather than a phone locked to your carrier, the tethering limit cannot be enforced.
what really counts is being able to answer yes to the question "Would I want to spend 8 hours sitting next to this person on an airplane seat?"
That's not at the top of my requirements. They have to be professional but they don't have to be friendly. I don't need to personally like someone to work with them.
It has nothing to do with liking them and everything to do with them not being a jerk and disrupting my team, causing me to spend inordinate amounts of time dealing with them. I'm not looking for a drinking buddy, I want someone who adds value to my team by bringing in new ideas, a different perspective and will work well with them. You can have differing viewpoints and disagree in a professional manner that helps solve or avoid problems; I actually want people who are willing to express their opinion and contribute ideas because that results in better outcomes. However, some people seem to have to be jerks and create hostile environments as a result. No matter how smart they are if they cause problems they are not worth it. I've dealt with too many people who think they are so good they can get away with being a jerk to bring such a person onboard.
You gotta love it when HR decides who you can hire. I once was asked to apply for a job at a company I was currently doing work for as a consultant. They had to post the job and HR decided I wasn't qualified enough, even though I was currently doing it, to forward my resume so the hiring manager couldn't offer me the job. As a result, I stayed on as a contractor at 1.5x the pay and they didn't hire anyone.
The reason sounds stupid but the overhead multiplier for a full-time employee is about 2.5 for skilled/tech work.
I am not sure where yo get that multiplier, it seems a bit high. I've seen 50% to maybe 75% as the additional overhead. How did you come to 2.5? At any rate, once you tacked on the overhead cost my contracting company charged they were at about 2x.
I know someone who has a BSME from Texas A&M. He's a skeptic of human caused global climate change, will analyze and critique many things and will find problems but when it comes to the Bible, accepts it without question.
Being educated doesn't mean one can't have such beliefs; in fact getting such an education, where oftentimes information that conflicts with your beliefs is introduced, will act to reinforce your beliefs. While we like to think that evidence contrary to our beliefs would cause us to reassess them; studies show that often simply makes us more firm in our beliefs; no matter if we are liberal or conservative, for example.
... I was interviewing a lady for a clerk job at Mobil Oil, where she'd be doing data entry.
I was looking for:
1.) Dedication to accuracy and detail
2.) Willingness to work overtime
3.) Ability to get along with others
She was a single mom who was hungry to work; liked people; her children were almost grown, so she had the time.
SHE FLUNKED THE GODDAM TYPEWRITER TEST!
Typewriter? I told HR I didn't have a goddam typewriter -- test her keyboard skills.
Nope.
That was in the mid-Dilbert years at Corporation.
You gotta love it when HR decides who you can hire. I once was asked to apply for a job at a company I was currently doing work for as a consultant. They had to post the job and HR decided I wasn't qualified enough, even though I was currently doing it, to forward my resume so the hiring manager couldn't offer me the job. As a result, I stayed on as a contractor at 1.5x the pay and they didn't hire anyone.
Hi, my name is Vince. I interviewed for Amazon, specifically for their PHP API for AWS development team. Despite an entire background of 10+ years of developing front-facing PHP APIs for other businesses, plus having a major part of my code available for public review on GitHub, I failed their interview process because they wanted me to write a specific type of searching and sorting algorithm, by hand, on white-board. This type of code would never have been used on the job, ever. Yet this is what they interview on. The job was to build a PHP API so PHP developers can call basic PHP functions, and the library would translate them over to HHTPS calls to AWS. All of the complex computing/searching/sorting is handled by the existing AWS services.
It's not just the coding side that is broken, most interviews are; at lest what I've seen from both sides. From my experience, what really counts is being able to answer yes to the question "Would I want to spend 8 hours sitting next to this person on an airplane seat?" I can read a resume and assume most of it is true or at least not overly hyped, verify it with a question or two and ask a question out of left field simply to see if you can think on your feet; but that doesn't really tell me if you can do the job, nor would 8 hours of grilling. If I think I can get along with you then I can help you learn the job assuming your resume is reasonably accurate in regards to your skill set; if you are an insufferable jerk than I really don't care how good you are, go make someone else's life miserable; life's too short and work hours too long to deal with you.
I think the test is "should have known" rather than actually know it is dangerous. Some people unfortunately have no concept of danger and as a result do stupid things all the time.
That's why we have the concept of the "reasonable person" to determine if an act is negligent. Just because someone is too stupid to realize they are acting unreasonably doesn't absolve them of liability for their actions.
If I'm riding my bicycle down the sidewalk (which is illegal in this city btw, you're supposed to keep to the streets to avoid hitting peds) and I am talking with my friend behind me and don't see that ped on the sidewalk and run into them, knock them down, I'm likely to do more damage to them than most drones. Maybe I even give the 'ol gal a mild concussion when she hits the sidewalk. There was no criminal intent, I didn't intend to be negligent but in the end I was. (and in this case I was even breaking a law, which here is used primarily simply to make the collision undeniably my fault, rather than to ticket or arrest me) Now, in addition to any civil case she may file against me, do I deserve a month in jail?
Yes. While criminal intent may come into play for an action that is clearly criminal - such as accidentally walking out of a store with an item may not qualify as shoplifting; negligence is enough to justify a criminal charge, absent intent, depending on the circumstances. Riding a bike as you describe may be enough to make you criminally negligent, merely not intending to no cause harm isn't enough to absolve you of a crime. Is 30 days too much? That's a separate argument from whether criminal charges were appropriate.
In the drone operator's case, a reasonable person, flying a drone over a parade and around obstacles, should be aware that his actions could cause harm and ensure is does not; so I agree with the negligence charge. He may not have intended any harm, but should know that a 2 lb drone falling from any height is dangerous and been more careful.
This depends on the course delivery system, and how much your instructor both knows how to use the system and its quirks and how much your instructor cares about doing a decent job.
The platform I use (Canvas) is pretty good about a lot of stuff, but instead of entering possible answers that are an exact match of what a student might type in (for questions like "On a machine running Debian Jessie what command would you use to display the routing table?") and having to hunt down each occurrence of the question across 40 exams and check to be sure the student didn't "out think me", I simply don't enter ANY correct answers, and the system marks it as "needs grading" which lets me get to it with a single click on each exam.
Sounds like you are using it in a way that supports learning. My experience has been the prof simply lets Canvas grade the paper for them since scores get posted as soon as the test is complete.
Good points but this wasn't spoofing a number but rather using the TTY service setup for deaf people to make the call. Scammers use them as well because they are required by law to transcribe verbatim dialogue. They may also be prevented from identifying themselves as an intermediary.
Seems like he collected an ~500k$ bug bounty. The interesting part is "Zero Coin is a project to fix a major weakness in Bitcoin: the lack of privacy guarantees we take for granted in using credit cards and cash. Our goal is to build a cryptocurrency where your neighbors, friends and enemies can’t see what you bought or for how much" per Zero Coin. It seems they succeeded in their goal and were hoist by their own petard. Of course, had they recovered the funds then ZeroCoin would have failed at its purpose. I wonder who took the loss.
We're still trying to find the magic bullet that motivates people to review other people's courses when they're not being paid.
I think I've spotted the flaw in this plan. Anyone else?
Damn. I knew there was a flaw somewhere; but I have a fix: give away the course free to the first 1000 participants in exchange for feedback; then ignore the feedback and publish it as is because fixing it would cost to much and you're already in the red from the free beta test. Of course, the as soon as you say "give it away for free to the first..." no one will like the idea anyway.
Yeah, I've been to my fair share of technical classes where the self practice projects were broken to the point where they couldn't be completed.
Some proper QA testing would probably catch that, but most companies seem to be cheaping out on proper QA now. Sure, why not try a "public beta" first to work out the bugs.
That seems to be a common problem. I've seen online course where you had to type in an answer, and if you didn't type exactly what they wanted verbatim, even if your answer was correct, it was marked wrong. Online coursework have become a crutch for lazy professors to avoid as much work as possible while teaching.
Unemployable? Do you think that what people do has to fit into a predetermined set of boxes simply so that the High School guidance counselors know how to orient young minds? Where does your 'must fit in square peg' mentality originate?
Nice attack that did not address my comment. As some one who escaped the box a high school guidance counselor defined for me, abnd seen friends do the same, I understand the ability of individuals to achieve. I've also seen friends struggle as their jobs went away. However, if automation eliminates many jobs there is a segment of the population that will be come unemployable, especially at a level that currently supports a middle class lifestyle. We are already seeing that in manufacturing as factories become automated, not everyone can be retrained to be a programmer or some other job that pays as well as what they currently do. Unless we accept that as a by product of automation and find a way to deal with it, which includes revamping our educational system, we are in for rough times. Trump's election will only be a foreshadowing of the class warfare to come. So you can either accuse the messanger of being some sort of elitist or work towards a solution; IMHO the later is a more productive course.
Why keep people working at tasks they are second-rate at? Doesn't make any sense. People should be free to find something actually meaningful and useful to do, given their unique experience and talent. They shouldn't do make-work projects that a robot can do better. That's just a dumb policy.
Perhaps, but absent a retooling of the educational system so people gain the ability and skills to do more "meaningful" work all you will do is create a group of unemployable people.
Most routes round here have an interchange or large station at one or both ends, usually with at least 10 minute waits. So they could be topped up through the day. There is also the idea of inductive pads at each bus stop. Even if electric buses currently only worked on 50% of routes that would be a nice saving in emissions.
In addition to your excellent points, buses have the ability to change their routes, unless they use overhead electric power, without any infrastructure costs beyond a few signs. By redesigning routes you could probably add in enough time to do a quick charge, without disrupting travel. Bus companies have a lot of passenger use data that can be used to redo routes to make electric busses viable on most routes..
Jesus, you could pass for Chamberlain in a heart beat.
"So yeah, Germany has had it rough lately and isnt getting any respect (the The Treaty of Versailles was not kind to them). So what if they invaded a few countries? Let's just pretend we all didnt see it and know that nothing bad could possibly come from just letting Germany invade a little bit."
I'm sure anyone living in the Baltic states felt very reasured by your post.
All they wanted was peace. A little piece of Poland,
A little piece of France,
A little piece of Austria
And Hungary, perchance!
A little slice of Turkey
And all that that entails,
And then a bit of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales!"
Slashdot Mirror
Print the category in bold easy to read type on the outside flap of the envelop where the presenter sees it while opening the envelop.
Well, in the process where an agency could apply for an exemption to the default rule they could certainly raise it if a supplier made such a claim. At that point they could consider 1) A different supplier 2) Developing it in-house instead (if it's cheaper than the revised price)
or if neither is viable - they may grant an exemption - or a temporary one which says the government will wait at least 5 years to make it public or something.
True, but one problem is the procurement process. If it required allowing free public use by default the bids would already incorporate that so government would have no idea what the premium was; and once they open the bidding they have to either take the lowest bid from a qualified bidder or cancel the RFP and start the process all over which is very painful.
As for in house development, many agencies do not have the staff to do that and often hire contractors to do the development; which is one way to fully own the software since they essentially are paying for it based on a T&M contract. That can get quite expensive as specs get clarified and or changed.
Oh I know - I agree NASA is doing it the right way - my argument is that this should be the default for ALL software produced with ANY tax dollars - whether by a government agency or under a government contract. I would even extend it beyond "software" to "information".
In other words, I was arguing that the rest of government should copy NASA's policies regarding openness.
While I applaud NASA's actions, a quick browse of the catalogue shows a number of the items are for "U.S. Government Purpose Release" which precludes its release to the public, per NASA:
U.S. Government Purpose Release: This large, but restrictive, release category includes five subcategories. An SUA is required, and appropriate nondisclosure and export control provisions may be included. The following subcategories are included under this release category.
Beta Release: A limited release of the Software Code Baseline for government purposes of acquiring evaluation comments and feedback.
Project Release: Any release of the Software Product Baseline or the Software Accepted (As-Built) Baseline to be used on behalf of the U.S. government.
Developmental Release: A release of the Software Product Baseline specifically for further development on behalf of the government and not including operational use.
Interagency Release: A release of any software for use by another U.S. government agency.
NASA Release: A release of any software for use only by NASA personnel and NASA contractors.
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/johnson/techtransfer/technology/software-release.html#gov
Oh I know - I agree NASA is doing it the right way - my argument is that this should be the default for ALL software produced with ANY tax dollars - whether by a government agency or under a government contract. I would even extend it beyond "software" to "information".
In other words, I was arguing that the rest of government should copy NASA's policies regarding openness.
While I am in general agreement my concern is in some cases it would significantly raise the cost to the government since companies would now have to factor in the loss of rights to the software and thus potential future sales. Years ago I developed some courseware for the government which the agency that contracted it has full rights to its use. Had they said, "We will release it to the public free of charge" my price would have been significantly higher to offset any potential impact on revenue from other companies that also contract with me. I suspect other companies would do the same if the product they sold has commercial applications.
The locked phones tethering apps tell the phone company that you are using the phone as a hotspot/get authorization. The unlocked phones just pump data.
So it sounds like you really need an non-carrier provided firmware phone rather than one merely unlocked; or will tethering data stop being sent if the carrier unlocks your phone?
If the phone is locked, it won't even accept the SIM in the first place. The phone will refuse to boot or give any relevant service at all.
I think the OP's point was an unlocked phone will not supply tethered data usage information that a SIM locked phone to your carrier, so if yo use an unlocked phone on your carrier, rather than a phone locked to your carrier, the tethering limit cannot be enforced.
Get an unlocked phone. They have no way of knowing, data is data.
I'm curious - what difference does an unlocked phone make?
what really counts is being able to answer yes to the question "Would I want to spend 8 hours sitting next to this person on an airplane seat?"
That's not at the top of my requirements. They have to be professional but they don't have to be friendly. I don't need to personally like someone to work with them.
It has nothing to do with liking them and everything to do with them not being a jerk and disrupting my team, causing me to spend inordinate amounts of time dealing with them. I'm not looking for a drinking buddy, I want someone who adds value to my team by bringing in new ideas, a different perspective and will work well with them. You can have differing viewpoints and disagree in a professional manner that helps solve or avoid problems; I actually want people who are willing to express their opinion and contribute ideas because that results in better outcomes. However, some people seem to have to be jerks and create hostile environments as a result. No matter how smart they are if they cause problems they are not worth it. I've dealt with too many people who think they are so good they can get away with being a jerk to bring such a person onboard.
You gotta love it when HR decides who you can hire. I once was asked to apply for a job at a company I was currently doing work for as a consultant. They had to post the job and HR decided I wasn't qualified enough, even though I was currently doing it, to forward my resume so the hiring manager couldn't offer me the job. As a result, I stayed on as a contractor at 1.5x the pay and they didn't hire anyone.
The reason sounds stupid but the overhead multiplier for a full-time employee is about 2.5 for skilled/tech work.
I am not sure where yo get that multiplier, it seems a bit high. I've seen 50% to maybe 75% as the additional overhead. How did you come to 2.5? At any rate, once you tacked on the overhead cost my contracting company charged they were at about 2x.
Distressingly common for people to be told they aren't qualified to do the job that they've been doing for the past 2 years.
Yup, although my client wanted to hire me but HR turned out to be a roadblock.
I know someone who has a BSME from Texas A&M. He's a skeptic of human caused global climate change, will analyze and critique many things and will find problems but when it comes to the Bible, accepts it without question.
Being educated doesn't mean one can't have such beliefs; in fact getting such an education, where oftentimes information that conflicts with your beliefs is introduced, will act to reinforce your beliefs. While we like to think that evidence contrary to our beliefs would cause us to reassess them; studies show that often simply makes us more firm in our beliefs; no matter if we are liberal or conservative, for example.
... I was interviewing a lady for a clerk job at Mobil Oil, where she'd be doing data entry.
I was looking for:
1.) Dedication to accuracy and detail 2.) Willingness to work overtime 3.) Ability to get along with others
She was a single mom who was hungry to work; liked people; her children were almost grown, so she had the time.
SHE FLUNKED THE GODDAM TYPEWRITER TEST!
Typewriter? I told HR I didn't have a goddam typewriter -- test her keyboard skills.
Nope.
That was in the mid-Dilbert years at Corporation.
You gotta love it when HR decides who you can hire. I once was asked to apply for a job at a company I was currently doing work for as a consultant. They had to post the job and HR decided I wasn't qualified enough, even though I was currently doing it, to forward my resume so the hiring manager couldn't offer me the job. As a result, I stayed on as a contractor at 1.5x the pay and they didn't hire anyone.
Hi, my name is Vince. I interviewed for Amazon, specifically for their PHP API for AWS development team. Despite an entire background of 10+ years of developing front-facing PHP APIs for other businesses, plus having a major part of my code available for public review on GitHub, I failed their interview process because they wanted me to write a specific type of searching and sorting algorithm, by hand, on white-board. This type of code would never have been used on the job, ever. Yet this is what they interview on. The job was to build a PHP API so PHP developers can call basic PHP functions, and the library would translate them over to HHTPS calls to AWS. All of the complex computing/searching/sorting is handled by the existing AWS services.
It's not just the coding side that is broken, most interviews are; at lest what I've seen from both sides. From my experience, what really counts is being able to answer yes to the question "Would I want to spend 8 hours sitting next to this person on an airplane seat?" I can read a resume and assume most of it is true or at least not overly hyped, verify it with a question or two and ask a question out of left field simply to see if you can think on your feet; but that doesn't really tell me if you can do the job, nor would 8 hours of grilling. If I think I can get along with you then I can help you learn the job assuming your resume is reasonably accurate in regards to your skill set; if you are an insufferable jerk than I really don't care how good you are, go make someone else's life miserable; life's too short and work hours too long to deal with you.
I think the test is "should have known" rather than actually know it is dangerous. Some people unfortunately have no concept of danger and as a result do stupid things all the time.
That's why we have the concept of the "reasonable person" to determine if an act is negligent. Just because someone is too stupid to realize they are acting unreasonably doesn't absolve them of liability for their actions.
If I'm riding my bicycle down the sidewalk (which is illegal in this city btw, you're supposed to keep to the streets to avoid hitting peds) and I am talking with my friend behind me and don't see that ped on the sidewalk and run into them, knock them down, I'm likely to do more damage to them than most drones. Maybe I even give the 'ol gal a mild concussion when she hits the sidewalk. There was no criminal intent, I didn't intend to be negligent but in the end I was. (and in this case I was even breaking a law, which here is used primarily simply to make the collision undeniably my fault, rather than to ticket or arrest me) Now, in addition to any civil case she may file against me, do I deserve a month in jail?
Yes. While criminal intent may come into play for an action that is clearly criminal - such as accidentally walking out of a store with an item may not qualify as shoplifting; negligence is enough to justify a criminal charge, absent intent, depending on the circumstances. Riding a bike as you describe may be enough to make you criminally negligent, merely not intending to no cause harm isn't enough to absolve you of a crime. Is 30 days too much? That's a separate argument from whether criminal charges were appropriate.
In the drone operator's case, a reasonable person, flying a drone over a parade and around obstacles, should be aware that his actions could cause harm and ensure is does not; so I agree with the negligence charge. He may not have intended any harm, but should know that a 2 lb drone falling from any height is dangerous and been more careful.
This depends on the course delivery system, and how much your instructor both knows how to use the system and its quirks and how much your instructor cares about doing a decent job.
The platform I use (Canvas) is pretty good about a lot of stuff, but instead of entering possible answers that are an exact match of what a student might type in (for questions like "On a machine running Debian Jessie what command would you use to display the routing table?") and having to hunt down each occurrence of the question across 40 exams and check to be sure the student didn't "out think me", I simply don't enter ANY correct answers, and the system marks it as "needs grading" which lets me get to it with a single click on each exam.
Sounds like you are using it in a way that supports learning. My experience has been the prof simply lets Canvas grade the paper for them since scores get posted as soon as the test is complete.
The physical risk to the driver, and the driver's skill under pressure are what makes watching motor racing exciting.
Take them both away by replacing it with software and all you have is another boring nerdfest.
No excitement means no spectators. No spectators means no money. No money means no sport.
Plus, could you see Omega trying to sell watches with some geek spokesperson?
Good points but this wasn't spoofing a number but rather using the TTY service setup for deaf people to make the call. Scammers use them as well because they are required by law to transcribe verbatim dialogue. They may also be prevented from identifying themselves as an intermediary.
Seems like he collected an ~500k$ bug bounty. The interesting part is "Zero Coin is a project to fix a major weakness in Bitcoin: the lack of privacy guarantees we take for granted in using credit cards and cash. Our goal is to build a cryptocurrency where your neighbors, friends and enemies can’t see what you bought or for how much" per Zero Coin. It seems they succeeded in their goal and were hoist by their own petard. Of course, had they recovered the funds then ZeroCoin would have failed at its purpose. I wonder who took the loss.
I think I've spotted the flaw in this plan. Anyone else?
Damn. I knew there was a flaw somewhere; but I have a fix: give away the course free to the first 1000 participants in exchange for feedback; then ignore the feedback and publish it as is because fixing it would cost to much and you're already in the red from the free beta test. Of course, the as soon as you say "give it away for free to the first..." no one will like the idea anyway.
Yeah, I've been to my fair share of technical classes where the self practice projects were broken to the point where they couldn't be completed.
Some proper QA testing would probably catch that, but most companies seem to be cheaping out on proper QA now. Sure, why not try a "public beta" first to work out the bugs.
That seems to be a common problem. I've seen online course where you had to type in an answer, and if you didn't type exactly what they wanted verbatim, even if your answer was correct, it was marked wrong. Online coursework have become a crutch for lazy professors to avoid as much work as possible while teaching.
Unemployable? Do you think that what people do has to fit into a predetermined set of boxes simply so that the High School guidance counselors know how to orient young minds? Where does your 'must fit in square peg' mentality originate?
Nice attack that did not address my comment. As some one who escaped the box a high school guidance counselor defined for me, abnd seen friends do the same, I understand the ability of individuals to achieve. I've also seen friends struggle as their jobs went away. However, if automation eliminates many jobs there is a segment of the population that will be come unemployable, especially at a level that currently supports a middle class lifestyle. We are already seeing that in manufacturing as factories become automated, not everyone can be retrained to be a programmer or some other job that pays as well as what they currently do. Unless we accept that as a by product of automation and find a way to deal with it, which includes revamping our educational system, we are in for rough times. Trump's election will only be a foreshadowing of the class warfare to come. So you can either accuse the messanger of being some sort of elitist or work towards a solution; IMHO the later is a more productive course.
Why keep people working at tasks they are second-rate at? Doesn't make any sense. People should be free to find something actually meaningful and useful to do, given their unique experience and talent. They shouldn't do make-work projects that a robot can do better. That's just a dumb policy.
Perhaps, but absent a retooling of the educational system so people gain the ability and skills to do more "meaningful" work all you will do is create a group of unemployable people.
Most routes round here have an interchange or large station at one or both ends, usually with at least 10 minute waits. So they could be topped up through the day. There is also the idea of inductive pads at each bus stop. Even if electric buses currently only worked on 50% of routes that would be a nice saving in emissions.
In addition to your excellent points, buses have the ability to change their routes, unless they use overhead electric power, without any infrastructure costs beyond a few signs. By redesigning routes you could probably add in enough time to do a quick charge, without disrupting travel. Bus companies have a lot of passenger use data that can be used to redo routes to make electric busses viable on most routes..
Jesus, you could pass for Chamberlain in a heart beat.
"So yeah, Germany has had it rough lately and isnt getting any respect (the The Treaty of Versailles was not kind to them). So what if they invaded a few countries? Let's just pretend we all didnt see it and know that nothing bad could possibly come from just letting Germany invade a little bit."
I'm sure anyone living in the Baltic states felt very reasured by your post.
All they wanted was peace. A little piece of Poland, A little piece of France, A little piece of Austria And Hungary, perchance! A little slice of Turkey And all that that entails, And then a bit of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales!"