You are correct. This is only what I've heard from my two friends (who had strikingly similar experiences even though they worked at different places), both of whom have worked at multiple different companies. So, if you want to be very specific, it only holds for a sample of some 4-8 large companies.
99% of the ideas workers submit today tend to be on "how to make the men's restroom more inclusive" or "affirming the voices of the marginalized employees". That's not innovation, that's madness.
Furthermore, most suggested "innovations" add something to an existing process or create a new one to follow, very few remove/reorganize the workflow into something less inefficient, which is usually what's needed. It's a hell of a lot easier to see the benefits in reducing daily workload than it is in yet another process that needs to be followed.
Yeah, I reason in a similar vein. If we want to have a competitive market we have to make sure both players can stay in the race.
At least that's my reasoning for the upcoming Ryzen debut, and unless the reviews are as scathing as for the previous architectures I will be going with them for this round.
"It's not the cost saving that matters more, but the fact that the Free Software license enables not only teachers and students but also the general public an opportunity to copy, distribute and share the contents and use it as they wish," K. Anwar Sadath, executive director IT@School said.
Strange, because here I thought it was the quality of education that mattered more. I suspect that the extra time spent fidgeting with FOSS to make it work will ultimately lower that quality. The only silver lining I see is the "education" of fidgeting with stuff you don't understand until it works (which is how I got started on my computer interest).
Is this confirmed by other sources as well? It's retarded enough to be true, granted, but it sounds exactly like so many fake stories that have popped up in the wake of the cheeto monster. The Verge being one of the worse tabloids doesn't help either.
That zero year old baby IS "damaged", that's why two copies of separate DNA are needed (and why inbreeding is so damaging).
The rest of your body is mutating constantly, and the "information" you mentioned is no longer the same in your skin as it is in your heart since those cells now have different somatic mutations caused by various factors, and every time a cell mutates, it's replicates will carry on the those mutations as well as acquire their own.
Telomeres are the attempted markers for how far from the baseline the current setup is expected to be, which is why replication stops in cells where the telomeres are too short (indicating that the DNA material is no longer reliable enough).
All of this should rightly remind you of cancer since it is in this system it works and causes serious havoc with the rules.
Over the year, plaque buildup in the coronary artery -- which is a risk factor for heart disease -- increased in 73 men on testosterone compared with 65 on placebo. However, other studies have found mixed results on this
What are you smoking? 73 against 65 IS a mixed result!
73/247 against 65/246 is 29% against 26%. An increased risk of 11% in a small sample is well within bounds of expected variance.
I say "you cannot claim it is there". I say nothing at all about claiming "it is not there". Then you respond with something about me claiming "it is not there". This sounds an awful lot like cognitive dissonance ( http://blog.dilbert.com/post/1... )
I would shrug it off as a strange fluke but this is the second response I have gotten with the same illiterate analysis. Is it a language barrier thing? Is it that you haven't ever read a text with precise formulations? Is it that you need this article to be true to justify your views?
I have not observed Saturn, yet I refrain from pointing out it's lack of existence to anyone that claims it exists.
Why would you equate 'I cannot assert it exists' with 'I can definitely assert it does not exist'. Do you not understand that these are different?
As to why we should disbelieve, it's simple. The source of the news is untrustworthy, the publisher of the news has a strong reputation for posting slanted and biased articles, and combined with the fact that the "enemy" is Uber (which journo's love to rail on these days) it all points to an "opinion" piece to show the dirty masses that Uber is evil. I wouldn't trust Fox News on the time of day, I wouldn't trust The Rolling Stone on campus rapes, and I don't trust the Verge on this. Given how polarized media is getting and how easy it is to spot, I'd say only a fool takes this article at face value. Heck, the final line in the summary states "Journalist Paul Carr summing up the situation, says, "Uber's ability to be on the wrong side of every moral and ethical issue is bordering on magical.". If that doesn't scream out loud "we have chosen our side" I don't know what does.
So, let me get this straight. A company that journalists love to rail against is accused by one of those persons that shout sexism!, racism!, bigotry! around fifty-eleven times a day. Furthermore, this is reported on one of the most biased and slanderous "news" sites around? Yeah no, I'll believe this one just as hard as I believed the Rolling Stone article on Jackie, or the alternative facts about the Trump inauguration ceremony.
Isn't this the same effects we see in drug addicts (of downer drugs obv.) ? An almost immediate reduction in activity as contentment sets in. At least I haven't seen an "active" potsmoker.
I wonder if the long-term effects would be the same for humans and mice as well.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm more interested in when Linux can make it easy for me to stop using Windows.
I would love nothing more than a fully game-functional OS that doesn't come with a Bill Gates buttsexing me.
You are correct. This is only what I've heard from my two friends (who had strikingly similar experiences even though they worked at different places), both of whom have worked at multiple different companies. So, if you want to be very specific, it only holds for a sample of some 4-8 large companies.
There you have it, people! Corporations are just waiting to throw rocks at you from the moon!
Can someone please give this woman an award for being so stunning and brave?
Well, if it's not in the Player's Handbook it should be rejected. If he wanted to implement something new he should have talked to the DM first.
99% of the ideas workers submit today tend to be on "how to make the men's restroom more inclusive" or "affirming the voices of the marginalized employees". That's not innovation, that's madness.
Furthermore, most suggested "innovations" add something to an existing process or create a new one to follow, very few remove/reorganize the workflow into something less inefficient, which is usually what's needed. It's a hell of a lot easier to see the benefits in reducing daily workload than it is in yet another process that needs to be followed.
Sounds great. If there's one guy you know you can trust, it's the one that gets paid for lying and selling you out to corporate interests.
I feel how America is getting greater and greater every day - in my anus.
Yeah, I reason in a similar vein. If we want to have a competitive market we have to make sure both players can stay in the race.
At least that's my reasoning for the upcoming Ryzen debut, and unless the reviews are as scathing as for the previous architectures I will be going with them for this round.
Holy moly! Intel's initial markups must have been higher than Lindsay Lohan on an average Tuesday.
"It's not the cost saving that matters more, but the fact that the Free Software license enables not only teachers and students but also the general public an opportunity to copy, distribute and share the contents and use it as they wish," K. Anwar Sadath, executive director IT@School said.
Strange, because here I thought it was the quality of education that mattered more.
I suspect that the extra time spent fidgeting with FOSS to make it work will ultimately lower that quality. The only silver lining I see is the "education" of fidgeting with stuff you don't understand until it works (which is how I got started on my computer interest).
Is this confirmed by other sources as well?
It's retarded enough to be true, granted, but it sounds exactly like so many fake stories that have popped up in the wake of the cheeto monster. The Verge being one of the worse tabloids doesn't help either.
Wow.
Your guy Trump sure is sticking it to the corporations and elites, eh?
I'm a robot, so I'm pretty sure I'm safe.
And are there any bushes nearby their bathroom window.
That zero year old baby IS "damaged", that's why two copies of separate DNA are needed (and why inbreeding is so damaging).
The rest of your body is mutating constantly, and the "information" you mentioned is no longer the same in your skin as it is in your heart since those cells now have different somatic mutations caused by various factors, and every time a cell mutates, it's replicates will carry on the those mutations as well as acquire their own.
Telomeres are the attempted markers for how far from the baseline the current setup is expected to be, which is why replication stops in cells where the telomeres are too short (indicating that the DNA material is no longer reliable enough).
All of this should rightly remind you of cancer since it is in this system it works and causes serious havoc with the rules.
Have you not heard of AMD?
Of course it's a paper launch!
I'm using the same discretization as TFA...
Second, I only need to get the OR, which is 1.16 (0.7880 - 1.7320). Tadaaa, no significance whatsoever at 95% CI.
Over the year, plaque buildup in the coronary artery -- which is a risk factor for heart disease -- increased in 73 men on testosterone compared with 65 on placebo. However, other studies have found mixed results on this
What are you smoking? 73 against 65 IS a mixed result!
73/247 against 65/246 is 29% against 26%. An increased risk of 11% in a small sample is well within bounds of expected variance.
I'm not sure how to respond to this.
I say "you cannot claim it is there". I say nothing at all about claiming "it is not there". Then you respond with something about me claiming "it is not there". This sounds an awful lot like cognitive dissonance ( http://blog.dilbert.com/post/1... )
I would shrug it off as a strange fluke but this is the second response I have gotten with the same illiterate analysis. Is it a language barrier thing? Is it that you haven't ever read a text with precise formulations? Is it that you need this article to be true to justify your views?
It's alright, literacy is more of an adult thing anyway. You'll understand when you're older.
I have not observed Saturn, yet I refrain from pointing out it's lack of existence to anyone that claims it exists.
Why would you equate 'I cannot assert it exists' with 'I can definitely assert it does not exist'. Do you not understand that these are different?
As to why we should disbelieve, it's simple. The source of the news is untrustworthy, the publisher of the news has a strong reputation for posting slanted and biased articles, and combined with the fact that the "enemy" is Uber (which journo's love to rail on these days) it all points to an "opinion" piece to show the dirty masses that Uber is evil.
I wouldn't trust Fox News on the time of day, I wouldn't trust The Rolling Stone on campus rapes, and I don't trust the Verge on this. Given how polarized media is getting and how easy it is to spot, I'd say only a fool takes this article at face value. Heck, the final line in the summary states "Journalist Paul Carr summing up the situation, says, "Uber's ability to be on the wrong side of every moral and ethical issue is bordering on magical.". If that doesn't scream out loud "we have chosen our side" I don't know what does.
Perhaps AmiMojo and PopeRatzo both got mod-points at the same time?
Speaking as a student of the real sciences, when we cannot observe something we cannot make claims about it being there.
I like your stuff better though, it must be really easy to write the conclusions.
Does TFA count?
So, let me get this straight.
A company that journalists love to rail against is accused by one of those persons that shout sexism!, racism!, bigotry! around fifty-eleven times a day. Furthermore, this is reported on one of the most biased and slanderous "news" sites around?
Yeah no, I'll believe this one just as hard as I believed the Rolling Stone article on Jackie, or the alternative facts about the Trump inauguration ceremony.
Isn't this the same effects we see in drug addicts (of downer drugs obv.) ? An almost immediate reduction in activity as contentment sets in.
At least I haven't seen an "active" potsmoker.
I wonder if the long-term effects would be the same for humans and mice as well.