A Core M3, 4GB of RAM, integrated graphics, and a 128GB hard drive is not much better than a Core 2, 4 GB of RAM, and Vista. The thing benchmarks about the same.
The SSD packs a punch, but not an extra $600-$700 worth over an equivalent desktop, performance wise. What you're paying for is the smaller form factor / footprint, and the accessories.
3 years at a 2 year CC comes down to working full time, or at least 32 hours. To pay for living expenses, and for books, and whatever else isn't covered by financial aid.
A scholarship to a 4 year college likely means a part time job for a little spending money, and maybe living in a dorm or such.
How much of advertising is simply brand awareness, and otherwise a gamble?
Kind of like athletes who experience diminished returns from exercise the more fit they are. Despite those diminished returns, those small increases are still an edge in competition, and can be the difference between winning and losing.
83% might be a little high. The Surface is a $1,000 buy at minimum, for a device with decade old specs, and is non-upgradeable.
It is a very expensive toy, and perhaps business device.
If my Executives didn't need technical support for such a complex device, or had bought me one to get the "lay of the land", I wouldn't have bought one myself.
It is a nice piece of tech, but there are less expensive options which accomplish similar.
Hillary's personality was that of a stuck up b****h. Trump's personality is more of an entertainer, loud and flashy, and dependent on the day of the week.
The voters might have voted for those other candidates in Trump's absence.
However, as far as a candidate which could beat Trump, especially given that they didn't, I don't see any stand out characteristics.
Trump was elected to clean house. To drain the swamp. To be a middle finger and outside candidate. Trump was elected as a man who knows how to make money, as one who would make us more profitable as a nation. Trump was chosen to unite the Republican party on its ideals. Trump was elected for his personality, to bring out voters. He was a very powerful player, and it isn't surprising he won.
Jill Stein had that outsider position, being from a third party. She also had being a woman on her list. If Trump hadn't run, there is a possibility that Jill Stein might have won just to give Hillary the finger.
Ben Carson was an outside candidate. He was also one of the more openly religously if I remembered correctly. This is what got him on the republican ticket. And he might have won if he didn't bow out, simply for being an outsider which was not Trump, and not Hillary, but was one who ran as a Republican. Otherwise Carson didn't have much going for him. Not much against him, but not much for him either.
Bernie's self proclaimed socialist position likely did him in. However he had a lot of potentially good ideas he was pitching. He just didn't have the other half of the combo,...
You do know the number of companies willing to pay for a six figure paycheck is relatively low right now, right?
Do not think that because you managed to beat the odds, that your success is the norm. Be grateful you succeeded, and/or will succeed. Most people do not achieve a level of success to make it worth the cost.
I make 30k, and graduating did nothing for that. I came up about 100 points short on my Cisco cert on my first attempt. Working full time and taking the minimum fulltime hours for classes meant I was not fully prepared. I haven't seen where an education affects pay so I haven't pursued further. Mostly just been trying to catch up on some upkeep, and survive.
What I was trying to say about Pat, was that it would be worthwhile to gather more information about how well his campaign went, outside of his own circles and funding. Doesn't seem like he's a popular guy. And I would expect a run for the presidency would undermine his reputation as a "humble Christian".
Of course Georgia was unlikely to vote for Hillary anyway, but the cities were likely to vote along the same lines as the nation as a whole. Georgia may not have voted for Obama or Hillary, but I normally can get a pretty good bead on the political outcome. Since I've started voting, I've voted for the winning president. Til Trump, and then it was a vote against the winning president, rather than for anybody.
Hillary's troubles with email were about as damaging to her reputation as Equifax's recent breach was to them. Hillary had a shot at getting some of the more urban counties, until her email fiasco. Know a few fans of Bill Clinton in Georgia, probably would have extended to Hillary until that point. After that, Bernie was a much more popular candidate. Jill Stein might have had a chance, had she been able to convince anyone a third party stood a chance. Ben Carson might have been a threat, but his demeanor wasn't as brash or defiant as the south seems to expect from a leader.
Pat Robertson made his run while I was in diapers, so I don't have any clue what the talk was in the churches here in Georgia, nor what was being said on the radio at the time, nor how my parents and siblings viewed that nomination. Trump, however, was a pretty popular pitch.
While it sounds like you get it, for the most part. There are somewhat differing economic conditions, and shifting cultural norms. So, yeah, Millennials do exist. They just are not this arbitrary typecast nonsense which has been ballyhooed in the media so much. - A millennial.
Well, if the student is not burdened with having to anticipate job availability, they can then choose from the best of available options, rather than pipe dreams and debt. Having an outside source control funding, which can be better funded through means other than a wing and a prayer, is probably for the best.
Was it Trump, or was it the religious for-profits? Lot of propaganda leading up to the election from the right encouraging people to vote for "God's Candidate" Trump.
Protecting the aristocracy may have been part of it, but it wasn't entirely to protect the aristocracy, and it isn't a bad idea.
We are a diverse nation with separate judicial boundaries. Laws do not have to be national, and often should not be national or federal. Take the legalized marijuana stuff. If you ignore Federal overreach, the status of legality in each state is probably what it should be at this point in time. Making decisions for all states all at once isn't good practice. I don't deploy untested changes to the entire company I work for, I roll those changes out in phases, by department or region. The electoral college encourages the same restraint in making changes at a a national level.
Anytime!
*resolve*. An iPhone is a pain to create comments on. Autocorrect changes a word to something entirely incorrect, and the editor doesn't highlight typos. Worse, line breaks don't work on Slashdot.
Yep, most people who would know the contact the admistrator of the domain would know how to get in touch with the administrator of the domain, who should be competent enough to get the information to a qualified person to rewolve the issue.
I'm with Octorian. In addition, I suspect that those unsympathetic fail to realize that salaries and education are typically linked. Failing to get an education dooms one to a lower salary, and there is a ripple effect on one's life as a result of settling for a lesser lifestyle in a nation which opposes settling, and promotes risk taking for opportunity and reward.
Everyone's vote counting equal is exactly what the electoral college was designed to prevent.
People crammed into cities or higher populace states have different needs than rural areas and farm country, or other areas which support the ability of a majority to live in cities. However, that majority typically isn't important to rural self-supporting communities. The needs of those cities should not affect those who don't need cities, especially when those cities often need the rural communities.
In order to meet the needs of the nation as a whole, everybody's vote cannot be equal.
What they are talking about now is foreign born undocumented migrants who came into the country as a child. DACA
So idiot on the radio (Sean Hannity?) was claiming that Democracts were pitching these as not being bilingual. While the situation is not quite so severe, it is still damaging to deport a child who doesn't speak the dialect of the country being deported to (not all Spanish is the same, like US vs British English). In addition to cultural differences. However the segment was supposedly about how Trump revoking DACA, and refusing to admit this was hurtful in anyway. Obama's DACA delivered a promise to those migrants, that they were US citizens, and would be treated as such. This gave them hope. If Trump were to repeal this DACA, it is the breaking of a promise from our Nation, for which there should be consequences for the US. I'm not saying it was right to begin with, but lets not dismiss the "sin" of revoking it. Even if it should be revoked.
Slashdot Mirror
The higher end models cost close to $2,000, when all is said and done. And none of the Surface Pros are quad core, they are merely hyperthreaded.
Surface Pros are not laptops, they are three-in-one devices. A tablet, a laptop, and a desktop. By desktop standards the specs are a decade old.
The base model is $1,000 by the time you add up the essential accessories. Not much point in buying a Surface without any accessories.
The keyboard is a defining characteristic device, but as a desktop replacement, its specs are a decade old.
It functions as a business device in a space where other devices will function for a lower price.
It really is a luxury item, and thus is an expensive toy.
A Core M3, 4GB of RAM, integrated graphics, and a 128GB hard drive is not much better than a Core 2, 4 GB of RAM, and Vista. The thing benchmarks about the same.
The SSD packs a punch, but not an extra $600-$700 worth over an equivalent desktop, performance wise. What you're paying for is the smaller form factor / footprint, and the accessories.
Not where I'm from. I got sick of the Trumpsters here in the bible belt.
3 years at a 2 year CC comes down to working full time, or at least 32 hours. To pay for living expenses, and for books, and whatever else isn't covered by financial aid. A scholarship to a 4 year college likely means a part time job for a little spending money, and maybe living in a dorm or such.
How much of advertising is simply brand awareness, and otherwise a gamble? Kind of like athletes who experience diminished returns from exercise the more fit they are. Despite those diminished returns, those small increases are still an edge in competition, and can be the difference between winning and losing.
83% might be a little high. The Surface is a $1,000 buy at minimum, for a device with decade old specs, and is non-upgradeable. It is a very expensive toy, and perhaps business device. If my Executives didn't need technical support for such a complex device, or had bought me one to get the "lay of the land", I wouldn't have bought one myself. It is a nice piece of tech, but there are less expensive options which accomplish similar.
Hillary's personality was that of a stuck up b****h. Trump's personality is more of an entertainer, loud and flashy, and dependent on the day of the week. The voters might have voted for those other candidates in Trump's absence.
However, as far as a candidate which could beat Trump, especially given that they didn't, I don't see any stand out characteristics.
Trump was elected to clean house. To drain the swamp. To be a middle finger and outside candidate. Trump was elected as a man who knows how to make money, as one who would make us more profitable as a nation. Trump was chosen to unite the Republican party on its ideals. Trump was elected for his personality, to bring out voters. He was a very powerful player, and it isn't surprising he won.
Jill Stein had that outsider position, being from a third party. She also had being a woman on her list. If Trump hadn't run, there is a possibility that Jill Stein might have won just to give Hillary the finger.
Ben Carson was an outside candidate. He was also one of the more openly religously if I remembered correctly. This is what got him on the republican ticket. And he might have won if he didn't bow out, simply for being an outsider which was not Trump, and not Hillary, but was one who ran as a Republican. Otherwise Carson didn't have much going for him. Not much against him, but not much for him either.
Bernie's self proclaimed socialist position likely did him in. However he had a lot of potentially good ideas he was pitching. He just didn't have the other half of the combo,...
You do know the number of companies willing to pay for a six figure paycheck is relatively low right now, right?
Do not think that because you managed to beat the odds, that your success is the norm. Be grateful you succeeded, and/or will succeed. Most people do not achieve a level of success to make it worth the cost.
I make 30k, and graduating did nothing for that. I came up about 100 points short on my Cisco cert on my first attempt. Working full time and taking the minimum fulltime hours for classes meant I was not fully prepared. I haven't seen where an education affects pay so I haven't pursued further. Mostly just been trying to catch up on some upkeep, and survive.
What I was trying to say about Pat, was that it would be worthwhile to gather more information about how well his campaign went, outside of his own circles and funding. Doesn't seem like he's a popular guy. And I would expect a run for the presidency would undermine his reputation as a "humble Christian".
Of course Georgia was unlikely to vote for Hillary anyway, but the cities were likely to vote along the same lines as the nation as a whole. Georgia may not have voted for Obama or Hillary, but I normally can get a pretty good bead on the political outcome. Since I've started voting, I've voted for the winning president. Til Trump, and then it was a vote against the winning president, rather than for anybody.
Hillary's troubles with email were about as damaging to her reputation as Equifax's recent breach was to them. Hillary had a shot at getting some of the more urban counties, until her email fiasco. Know a few fans of Bill Clinton in Georgia, probably would have extended to Hillary until that point. After that, Bernie was a much more popular candidate. Jill Stein might have had a chance, had she been able to convince anyone a third party stood a chance. Ben Carson might have been a threat, but his demeanor wasn't as brash or defiant as the south seems to expect from a leader.
Looks like HTML tags work here.
Line break.
Yep. Safari on iOS 10. I have line breaks in nearly every post I type. (n \n br
) Whenever I view my comments, there is not anline break to be found.
Pat Robertson made his run while I was in diapers, so I don't have any clue what the talk was in the churches here in Georgia, nor what was being said on the radio at the time, nor how my parents and siblings viewed that nomination. Trump, however, was a pretty popular pitch.
While it sounds like you get it, for the most part. There are somewhat differing economic conditions, and shifting cultural norms. So, yeah, Millennials do exist. They just are not this arbitrary typecast nonsense which has been ballyhooed in the media so much. - A millennial.
Well, if the student is not burdened with having to anticipate job availability, they can then choose from the best of available options, rather than pipe dreams and debt. Having an outside source control funding, which can be better funded through means other than a wing and a prayer, is probably for the best.
Was it Trump, or was it the religious for-profits? Lot of propaganda leading up to the election from the right encouraging people to vote for "God's Candidate" Trump.
Protecting the aristocracy may have been part of it, but it wasn't entirely to protect the aristocracy, and it isn't a bad idea. We are a diverse nation with separate judicial boundaries. Laws do not have to be national, and often should not be national or federal. Take the legalized marijuana stuff. If you ignore Federal overreach, the status of legality in each state is probably what it should be at this point in time. Making decisions for all states all at once isn't good practice. I don't deploy untested changes to the entire company I work for, I roll those changes out in phases, by department or region. The electoral college encourages the same restraint in making changes at a a national level.
Anytime! *resolve*. An iPhone is a pain to create comments on. Autocorrect changes a word to something entirely incorrect, and the editor doesn't highlight typos. Worse, line breaks don't work on Slashdot.
Zing!
You left a couple of things out: #I'llGetRightOnThat /sarcasm
Yep, most people who would know the contact the admistrator of the domain would know how to get in touch with the administrator of the domain, who should be competent enough to get the information to a qualified person to rewolve the issue.
I'm with Octorian. In addition, I suspect that those unsympathetic fail to realize that salaries and education are typically linked. Failing to get an education dooms one to a lower salary, and there is a ripple effect on one's life as a result of settling for a lesser lifestyle in a nation which opposes settling, and promotes risk taking for opportunity and reward.
Everyone's vote counting equal is exactly what the electoral college was designed to prevent. People crammed into cities or higher populace states have different needs than rural areas and farm country, or other areas which support the ability of a majority to live in cities. However, that majority typically isn't important to rural self-supporting communities. The needs of those cities should not affect those who don't need cities, especially when those cities often need the rural communities. In order to meet the needs of the nation as a whole, everybody's vote cannot be equal.
What they are talking about now is foreign born undocumented migrants who came into the country as a child. DACA So idiot on the radio (Sean Hannity?) was claiming that Democracts were pitching these as not being bilingual. While the situation is not quite so severe, it is still damaging to deport a child who doesn't speak the dialect of the country being deported to (not all Spanish is the same, like US vs British English). In addition to cultural differences. However the segment was supposedly about how Trump revoking DACA, and refusing to admit this was hurtful in anyway. Obama's DACA delivered a promise to those migrants, that they were US citizens, and would be treated as such. This gave them hope. If Trump were to repeal this DACA, it is the breaking of a promise from our Nation, for which there should be consequences for the US. I'm not saying it was right to begin with, but lets not dismiss the "sin" of revoking it. Even if it should be revoked.