Right, but I could do all kinds of things during the day that could accidentally kill someone. I could trip on my shoelaces at the top of the stairs going into a tube station and kill someone as I fall down the stairs. But the state doesn't mandate that I double-tie my shoelaces! Where do you draw the line?
And on the other - suppose I'm driving, without my seatbelt, and a truck swerves out of his lane (he's driving drunk), and head-on's my car. My friend is killed and somehow I survive. Is it MY fault that he died? Just because I wasn't wearing my seatbelt?
I'm sure there are plenty of ways for me to cause an accident that kills a passenger. But I doubt that in most cases it would be because the driver was not wearing a seatbelt. By the time you need a seatbelt, it's too late!
I'm not a CE, but it seems in my driving, I've seen more concrete highways in the south. Could this be because of longer, hotter seasons?
I've stepped in gooey asphalt on a hot summer day. Unless this is defective asphalt, my guess is that lots of heavy (truck) traffic would quickly deform an asphalt road when it's warm and gooey.
I'm not sure, though, how my wearing a seatbelt or not contributes directly to my passenger's death. In any case, it's an issue between me and my passengers, the state still has no compelling interest to interfere here.
I have a friend who complains mightily if he feels I drive too close to another car, or too fast. That's between him and me. If I didn't wear a seatbelt, I'm sure I'd hear about that too. And that's fine. It's my choice to have him as a passenger, and it's his choice to be my passenger.
Is it smarter to wear a seatbelt? Yes. Should the state mandate it? I say no.
The state shouldn't be in the position of mandating everything that might be smarter and safer. I don't want the state telling me I can't eat red meat, or that I can't have stairs in my house, or that I can't go hiking in the mountains. All of these are risky, but it's my choice to accept these risks and it's my responsibility to accept the consequences of those risks.
Besides, shit happens and we all die anyway. You can't be perfectly safe, and you're dellusional if you think you can be, and when you try, life is much less interesting.
If driving without a seatbelt is illegal, why shouldn't you be ticketed?
Just because it's a law, it's not necessarily right. Slavery was allowed by law, but no right-thinking person would say it's right.
So, in what is the vital interest of the state, or anyone else but my family, that I wear a seatbelt? If I die in an auto accident because I'm not wearing a seatbelt, it's my problem, not the state's. This is just an extension of the nanny-state that knows better than you, and will tell you how to live and behave.
BTW, I DO wear a seatbelt, but it should be a choice, not a law.
Well, if you really think about it, fossil fuels are just as much an energy storage medium as H2.
The energy that comes from burning methane, oil, or coal all comes from energy pulled from the environment at some time in history. The plants that eventually make coal took in solar energy to grow. Heat from the earth helped cause reactions that made them into coal and oil.
We're fortunate at this time that we have so much oil and coal to burn to get this energy. But it's all energy that has been stored in the past.
H2 just happens faster, but it's still a process of putting energy in to change its form, and then doing something to get the energy back out again.
When we burn gas in our cars, and most other fossil fuels, I was under the impression that H2O and CO2 are the two major products.
It might be interesting to see how much H2O is introduced into desert regions by current levels of burning fossil fuels.
What is the work that can be done by combusting H2 compared to gas and other fuels? Is the amount of H2O comparable? Could we already be causing a problem in desert areas?
But isn't the stuff in italics Cliff's work, and the non-italics at the bottom from the Slashdot Editor? That's always how I've read it, since there often seems to be a change in voice.
Now damn, where is my walker... it's time to change my diaper!
There are parts that are very faded... and those pieces on the left... how do they know where to put them - they are totally connected.
On a program that might have been Nova, or on Discovery, theyed showed people generating the digital versions. They would take the images and darken and lighten parts with a touch-up brush to make the letters stand out. But, the girl doing the work admitted that you could easily make it say anything you want - even to include putting her own name in there.
Part of their work was based on arranging the pieces to match other documents. So, of course, they match other documents!
I'm not saying what is written on those scrolls is not true, but I don't believe they are conclusive of much.
interesting thing is that free market economics doesn't take into account well intangibles such as quality of service levels, employee knowledge
Well, IAMAE,BIHTSEC (I am not an economist, but I've taken several economics classes)... It seems to me that free market economics are good at taking into account what people value - as long as they are willing to back up those values with their dollar.
Most people say they value high quality and good service, but at the end of the day, they are standing in the checkout line at Walmart. So it seems that if anything, free market economics are good at ferreting out the truth about what people will do, rather than what they say.
Of course, this sucks for those of us who value good service and high quality.
I would say, though, that we can't really blame Walmart - we have to blame the people that flock to the store as soon as it opens. Walmart wouldn't go there if the people wouldn't come.
Wasn't there something about strength of these radial things changing by 1/sqrt(distance)? Is that just gravity? Or does it apply to most point-source kinds of things?
IANAP (physicist), and this Slashdot reader wants to know!
suppose this student didn't settle... then loses the case. Under loser pays, would he, as the defendant, be reponsible for the RIAA's court costs? Or does the idea of loser pays only apply to the defendant's costs?
IANAL, so I don't know, so I'm just out of curiosity, what happens in the case of a settlement?
Or, suppose the student loses here. Does he have to pay for RIAA's legal team?
Does "loser pays" only apply to the defense costs? Or does it mean the loser pays the costs for both sides?
If the student would have to pay the RIAA's fees, how is that determined? Could the RIAA then simply put 1000's of attorneys on the case to simply increase the potential costs of the case?
At present what the masses get to see is decided for them. This is a rather 'right wing' concept where a bunch of suit wearers sit round a table and decide what the consumers need.....
Or it's very 'left wing' where the masses aren't smart enough or responsible enough to make their own decisions, so the nanny-state makes the decisions for them.
It goes both ways... left-wing, right-wing... In any case, I wouldn't want to fly in that plane, and if it were a bird, it could only be a dodo.1
No doubt the amount of good public discourse on the television today is minimal
Indeed. After Friends, Drew Carey, and Elimidate, there are hours and hours of paid infomercials. I really hope those aren't the cornerstone of our democracy!
But then again, it would explain stupid things like our county voting itself an income tax so we can hire Klingon translators and put tons of dirt and grass on top of one of the county office buildings.
In my MBA program, I've written countless papers and done many presentations on my own. Since it's a graduate program, students should already know how to write papers and do research - they should have done some of this in their undergrad.
For the group projects, almost all of them have had the main goal of teaching us how to organize into a group and accomplish a large project. In one class, we were specifically forced into groups that contained people of different personality types and learning styles (abstract vs concrete, type-A, type-B), and from diverse backgrounds if possible. The project was very large in scope and could not have been accomplished by each as an individual - we HAD to break the project up into pieces and try to arrive at a solid, well-written paper and presentation.
In these cases, the teachers already assume you know how to do research or write - we're stuck with the goal of learning how to work beyond each others differences while completing that task.
This makes me think of a former boss of mine who spent several tours in Viet Nam. His advice was "dump everything out of your rucksack, and fill it with extra socks and ammo. You can dump all the other stuff because you won't need it."
If the editor is not getting what he needs, then he needs to ask for more. This is more-or-less the role of a supervisor/manager/group leader... to find the most efficient way to divide tasks and make sure people are producing what they need to. If someone is slacking, then they need to find a way to redistribute that work. It's like the "real world" - not everyone at a company pulls their weight, and this means others pull more. They have to - if they want to stay in business. If you want to stay in business (get a good grade), those who care do what they have to in order to get the job done.
For example, I'm in a 2 part group project in one of my classes. The first presentation sucked in a major way. I'm now the "editor" for the 2nd presentation, and I'm actively working hard to make sure each person knows what I need and when I need it. If someone slacks, well, I'll have to make up the difference, or get the others to make it up. I HOPE it will be a better presentation - but it's been my experience that as the "editor", I need to maintain an active role in the process and make sure I'm getting what I need.
It has been my MBA class experience that these group projects are designed more to get people to function as groups - and not to see if each person can do the whole project. It's trying to prepare you for the "real world".
Most of the projects I've worked on are bigger than one person can normally do - so you are forced to learn how to organize as a group and work together and complete the project. It's in your best interest to distribute the work in accordance with each person's skill.
In the "real world", the accountant does the accounting, the graphics designer does the graphics, and the coder writes the programs. This is usually the best way to get things done. If you want the accountant to learn graphics design, send him to a graphics design class - but at work, you have him do the accounting, because he can do it better than the coder and the graphics designer.
Consider a class where there are 3 groups doing a presentation. The teacher says each group will grade the others, and the grades will be given: A for the best, B for the next, and C for the worst.
How will you organize your group? Will you force people to work on area where they are weakest just for an educational experience? Or will you assign tasks according to skill and try to beat the other groups - that's how the "real world" should work - if you want to stay in business.
I dont want your corperate education because unlike you, I dont CARE about the corperate world, I hate the corperate world.
Then an MBA might not be the degree you want to pursue! I would suggest a philosophy or math degree - or a dual degree. Then you can learn how to model the world in useful ways, and to think about things that can't be modelled.
Okay, so I'm working on a Global Management MBA, but I'm a systems administrator in a liberal arts school. The only thing "global" about my job is that we use Sony monitors and some of the students are from other countries.
There are very few "cases" in my work that would really contribute to this course of study. It sounds like a flawed requirement. My school doesn't need to know anything about my work, and my work doesn't need to know anything about my school.
That can be a big waste of time. Suppose you have 6 people - you have now have six people writing complete papers. The whole point of group work is to learn how to distribute a work load so that as a group, you can get the work done with less individual effort.
What I find works well for group projects (papers, particularly) is to appoint a group "editor". They will actually do the writing. As a group, you all get together and determine the outline and form of the document, and what you want to accomplish. Then, divide up the portions of the outline and assign the specific research to each person - but keeping it lighter on the editor - they'll work harder in the end.
As research is completed, the parts are sent to everyone for review and comment - but these parts aren't fully written, but again, more like an outline.
Once everyone is happy with the content that will be included, the "editor" then takes the outlines of everything and writes the paper based on that. That draft then goes out to everyone and people comment, revise, correct, etc... but the writing is done through one person.
This way, everyone contributes to the work, and knows where it is going before they start. The paper has "one voice" and sounds coherent.
If you think of a product assembly process, it's stilly to have each person do every step of the process. It's better to have people focus on what they are good at - some at editing, some at researching, etc.
There has been an interesting and similar situation with recyclers who handle the US Postal Service material. Many people join those book and CD clubs that automatically send stuff, hoping that you'll just pay for it. Many, though, return those to the company - or so they think.
The book/CD goes back to the USPS, who then takes out the scrap of paper saying you returned it, and they toss the book/cd in the recycling bin. They would report to the publisher that the product was destroyed, but you would still get credited for returning it. It's amazing that it costs less to just discard the book/cd than resell it.
So, the recyclers were getting these books and CD in their recycled material. Instead of just baling the books and cds, several I know were actually taking the books and cd's out and selling them on ebay and amazon!
Lawyers eventually came to one of the recyclers I worked with. The laywers say they are only purchasing waste paper and plastic in the recycling, and that they cannot sell the products as books and CD. The recyclers say they bought the material and that they own it and can sell it as anything they want.
Well, in my local case, the recycler decided not to fight due to the high court costs and the probability of losing.
I would blame the USPS - they should be rendering the books and cd's unserviceable before selling them to someone else.
Slashdot Mirror
Right, but I could do all kinds of things during the day that could accidentally kill someone. I could trip on my shoelaces at the top of the stairs going into a tube station and kill someone as I fall down the stairs. But the state doesn't mandate that I double-tie my shoelaces! Where do you draw the line?
And on the other - suppose I'm driving, without my seatbelt, and a truck swerves out of his lane (he's driving drunk), and head-on's my car. My friend is killed and somehow I survive. Is it MY fault that he died? Just because I wasn't wearing my seatbelt?
I'm sure there are plenty of ways for me to cause an accident that kills a passenger. But I doubt that in most cases it would be because the driver was not wearing a seatbelt. By the time you need a seatbelt, it's too late!
I'm not a CE, but it seems in my driving, I've seen more concrete highways in the south. Could this be because of longer, hotter seasons?
I've stepped in gooey asphalt on a hot summer day. Unless this is defective asphalt, my guess is that lots of heavy (truck) traffic would quickly deform an asphalt road when it's warm and gooey.
Am I totally off base?
The problem is that nature has the source code and the compiler, in addition to the raw data for the program.
We only have the raw data, and we know what the result is. But, we're trying to simulate the source code and the compiler. It's tough problem!
Imagine the comparatively simple problem of simulating a word processor, only given a pile of hand written notes, and a finished type-written letter!
I'm not sure, though, how my wearing a seatbelt or not contributes directly to my passenger's death. In any case, it's an issue between me and my passengers, the state still has no compelling interest to interfere here.
I have a friend who complains mightily if he feels I drive too close to another car, or too fast. That's between him and me. If I didn't wear a seatbelt, I'm sure I'd hear about that too. And that's fine. It's my choice to have him as a passenger, and it's his choice to be my passenger.
Is it smarter to wear a seatbelt? Yes.
Should the state mandate it? I say no.
The state shouldn't be in the position of mandating everything that might be smarter and safer. I don't want the state telling me I can't eat red meat, or that I can't have stairs in my house, or that I can't go hiking in the mountains. All of these are risky, but it's my choice to accept these risks and it's my responsibility to accept the consequences of those risks.
Besides, shit happens and we all die anyway. You can't be perfectly safe, and you're dellusional if you think you can be, and when you try, life is much less interesting.
If driving without a seatbelt is illegal, why shouldn't you be ticketed?
Just because it's a law, it's not necessarily right.
Slavery was allowed by law, but no right-thinking person would say it's right.
So, in what is the vital interest of the state, or anyone else but my family, that I wear a seatbelt? If I die in an auto accident because I'm not wearing a seatbelt, it's my problem, not the state's. This is just an extension of the nanny-state that knows better than you, and will tell you how to live and behave.
BTW, I DO wear a seatbelt, but it should be a choice, not a law.
Well, if you really think about it, fossil fuels are just as much an energy storage medium as H2.
The energy that comes from burning methane, oil, or coal all comes from energy pulled from the environment at some time in history. The plants that eventually make coal took in solar energy to grow. Heat from the earth helped cause reactions that made them into coal and oil.
We're fortunate at this time that we have so much oil and coal to burn to get this energy. But it's all energy that has been stored in the past.
H2 just happens faster, but it's still a process of putting energy in to change its form, and then doing something to get the energy back out again.
When we burn gas in our cars, and most other fossil fuels, I was under the impression that H2O and CO2 are the two major products.
It might be interesting to see how much H2O is introduced into desert regions by current levels of burning fossil fuels.
What is the work that can be done by combusting H2 compared to gas and other fuels? Is the amount of H2O comparable? Could we already be causing a problem in desert areas?
I may be wrong - you know I'm 32..
But isn't the stuff in italics Cliff's work, and the non-italics at the bottom from the Slashdot Editor? That's always how I've read it, since there often seems to be a change in voice.
Now damn, where is my walker... it's time to change my diaper!
The writing probably means, "check out the zawongas on THAT babe!"
It is also my understanding that the reassembly and "translations" of the Dead Sea Scrolls have required a lot of guess work and artistic license.
i t/full-images/enoch-b.gif
Take a look at this image:
http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/deadsea.scrolls.exhib
There are parts that are very faded... and those pieces on the left... how do they know where to put them - they are totally connected.
On a program that might have been Nova, or on Discovery, theyed showed people generating the digital versions. They would take the images and darken and lighten parts with a touch-up brush to make the letters stand out. But, the girl doing the work admitted that you could easily make it say anything you want - even to include putting her own name in there.
Part of their work was based on arranging the pieces to match other documents. So, of course, they match other documents!
I'm not saying what is written on those scrolls is not true, but I don't believe they are conclusive of much.
interesting thing is that free market economics doesn't take into account well intangibles such as quality of service levels, employee knowledge
Well, IAMAE,BIHTSEC (I am not an economist, but I've taken several economics classes)... It seems to me that free market economics are good at taking into account what people value - as long as they are willing to back up those values with their dollar.
Most people say they value high quality and good service, but at the end of the day, they are standing in the checkout line at Walmart. So it seems that if anything, free market economics are good at ferreting out the truth about what people will do, rather than what they say.
Of course, this sucks for those of us who value good service and high quality.
I would say, though, that we can't really blame Walmart - we have to blame the people that flock to the store as soon as it opens. Walmart wouldn't go there if the people wouldn't come.
Wasn't there something about strength of these radial things changing by 1/sqrt(distance)? Is that just gravity? Or does it apply to most point-source kinds of things?
IANAP (physicist), and this Slashdot reader wants to know!
suppose this student didn't settle... then loses the case. Under loser pays, would he, as the defendant, be reponsible for the RIAA's court costs? Or does the idea of loser pays only apply to the defendant's costs?
IANAL, so I don't know, so I'm just out of curiosity, what happens in the case of a settlement?
Or, suppose the student loses here. Does he have to pay for RIAA's legal team?
Does "loser pays" only apply to the defense costs? Or does it mean the loser pays the costs for both sides?
If the student would have to pay the RIAA's fees, how is that determined? Could the RIAA then simply put 1000's of attorneys on the case to simply increase the potential costs of the case?
At present what the masses get to see is decided for them. This is a rather 'right wing' concept where a bunch of suit wearers sit round a table and decide what the consumers need.....
Or it's very 'left wing' where the masses aren't smart enough or responsible enough to make their own decisions, so the nanny-state makes the decisions for them.
It goes both ways... left-wing, right-wing... In any case, I wouldn't want to fly in that plane, and if it were a bird, it could only be a dodo.1
No doubt the amount of good public discourse on the television today is minimal
Indeed. After Friends, Drew Carey, and Elimidate, there are hours and hours of paid infomercials. I really hope those aren't the cornerstone of our democracy!
But then again, it would explain stupid things like our county voting itself an income tax so we can hire Klingon translators and put tons of dirt and grass on top of one of the county office buildings.
You make some good points.
In my MBA program, I've written countless papers and done many presentations on my own. Since it's a graduate program, students should already know how to write papers and do research - they should have done some of this in their undergrad.
For the group projects, almost all of them have had the main goal of teaching us how to organize into a group and accomplish a large project. In one class, we were specifically forced into groups that contained people of different personality types and learning styles (abstract vs concrete, type-A, type-B), and from diverse backgrounds if possible. The project was very large in scope and could not have been accomplished by each as an individual - we HAD to break the project up into pieces and try to arrive at a solid, well-written paper and presentation.
In these cases, the teachers already assume you know how to do research or write - we're stuck with the goal of learning how to work beyond each others differences while completing that task.
"This is 27 pounds I *don't* need."
This makes me think of a former boss of mine who spent several tours in Viet Nam. His advice was "dump everything out of your rucksack, and fill it with extra socks and ammo. You can dump all the other stuff because you won't need it."
Which tournequets would that activate?
If the editor is not getting what he needs, then he needs to ask for more. This is more-or-less the role of a supervisor/manager/group leader... to find the most efficient way to divide tasks and make sure people are producing what they need to. If someone is slacking, then they need to find a way to redistribute that work. It's like the "real world" - not everyone at a company pulls their weight, and this means others pull more. They have to - if they want to stay in business. If you want to stay in business (get a good grade), those who care do what they have to in order to get the job done.
:)
For example, I'm in a 2 part group project in one of my classes. The first presentation sucked in a major way. I'm now the "editor" for the 2nd presentation, and I'm actively working hard to make sure each person knows what I need and when I need it. If someone slacks, well, I'll have to make up the difference, or get the others to make it up. I HOPE it will be a better presentation - but it's been my experience that as the "editor", I need to maintain an active role in the process and make sure I'm getting what I need.
God, I hope this 2nd presentation is better!
That depends on the point of the exercise.
It has been my MBA class experience that these group projects are designed more to get people to function as groups - and not to see if each person can do the whole project. It's trying to prepare you for the "real world".
Most of the projects I've worked on are bigger than one person can normally do - so you are forced to learn how to organize as a group and work together and complete the project. It's in your best interest to distribute the work in accordance with each person's skill.
In the "real world", the accountant does the accounting, the graphics designer does the graphics, and the coder writes the programs. This is usually the best way to get things done. If you want the accountant to learn graphics design, send him to a graphics design class - but at work, you have him do the accounting, because he can do it better than the coder and the graphics designer.
Consider a class where there are 3 groups doing a presentation. The teacher says each group will grade the others, and the grades will be given: A for the best, B for the next, and C for the worst.
How will you organize your group? Will you force people to work on area where they are weakest just for an educational experience? Or will you assign tasks according to skill and try to beat the other groups - that's how the "real world" should work - if you want to stay in business.
I dont want your corperate education because unlike you, I dont CARE about the corperate world, I hate the corperate world.
Then an MBA might not be the degree you want to pursue! I would suggest a philosophy or math degree - or a dual degree. Then you can learn how to model the world in useful ways, and to think about things that can't be modelled.
Okay, so I'm working on a Global Management MBA, but I'm a systems administrator in a liberal arts school. The only thing "global" about my job is that we use Sony monitors and some of the students are from other countries.
There are very few "cases" in my work that would really contribute to this course of study. It sounds like a flawed requirement. My school doesn't need to know anything about my work, and my work doesn't need to know anything about my school.
What next, you have to be married? Or have a cat?
That can be a big waste of time. Suppose you have 6 people - you have now have six people writing complete papers. The whole point of group work is to learn how to distribute a work load so that as a group, you can get the work done with less individual effort.
What I find works well for group projects (papers, particularly) is to appoint a group "editor". They will actually do the writing. As a group, you all get together and determine the outline and form of the document, and what you want to accomplish. Then, divide up the portions of the outline and assign the specific research to each person - but keeping it lighter on the editor - they'll work harder in the end.
As research is completed, the parts are sent to everyone for review and comment - but these parts aren't fully written, but again, more like an outline.
Once everyone is happy with the content that will be included, the "editor" then takes the outlines of everything and writes the paper based on that. That draft then goes out to everyone and people comment, revise, correct, etc... but the writing is done through one person.
This way, everyone contributes to the work, and knows where it is going before they start. The paper has "one voice" and sounds coherent.
If you think of a product assembly process, it's stilly to have each person do every step of the process. It's better to have people focus on what they are good at - some at editing, some at researching, etc.
There has been an interesting and similar situation with recyclers who handle the US Postal Service material. Many people join those book and CD clubs that automatically send stuff, hoping that you'll just pay for it. Many, though, return those to the company - or so they think.
The book/CD goes back to the USPS, who then takes out the scrap of paper saying you returned it, and they toss the book/cd in the recycling bin. They would report to the publisher that the product was destroyed, but you would still get credited for returning it. It's amazing that it costs less to just discard the book/cd than resell it.
So, the recyclers were getting these books and CD in their recycled material. Instead of just baling the books and cds, several I know were actually taking the books and cd's out and selling them on ebay and amazon!
Lawyers eventually came to one of the recyclers I worked with. The laywers say they are only purchasing waste paper and plastic in the recycling, and that they cannot sell the products as books and CD. The recyclers say they bought the material and that they own it and can sell it as anything they want.
Well, in my local case, the recycler decided not to fight due to the high court costs and the probability of losing.
I would blame the USPS - they should be rendering the books and cd's unserviceable before selling them to someone else.