Thanks for the tip. I saw it yesterday... and had to pee so I ducked out after the acting credits (I do usually sit through all of them). After seeing the OP's "stay for all the credits," I'm glad all I missed was a trailer that I can catch on the web in a few weeks.
Helping her throw a party wont impress her. It will only make her less attracted to you romantically. Friend in HS was trying to plan a surprise birthday party for her boyfriend. Since he was also a good friend of mine, she asked me to help. Long story short, within two weeks we were dating, and, oh yeah, everybody enjoyed the party, including the guy she'd dumped.
The writer has not omitted the "not only" portion of the (compound) conjunction (which makes the first clause subordinate to the second). Either put in the "but rather" and change the semicolon to a comma, or omit the "not only:"
"I am unintimidated by litigation; I sometimes rather miss it."
What about employers measuring time spent in the bathroom and bringing that up on a performance review? Some of us have more, ah, contemplative digestive tracts, and, well, sometimes ya gotta go at work.
Of course, if you post Google's "Testing on the Toilet" blogs in the stalls, you could say you were still working.
Is NJ an open primary state (like MI)? Why couldn't a Dem have voted for one of the Republicans? That "option" (counting the number of Ds and Rs) might be a tally of the party of the voter rather than a total of the votes for candidates in that party.
Indiana, which was the subject of the study, lags quite a bit. The eastern edge of the state (Fort Wayne) is about 85 degrees west longitude, 10 degrees west of the notional center of "GMT+5" (360 / 24 = 15; 5 * 15 = 75). So the eastern edge of the state is already ten minutes into the notional "GMT+6", and the western edge (Vincennes, Terre Haute; Gary is on Chicago time anyway) is about 87.5, a full twenty minutes into GMT+6.
So the particular money-wasters mentioned in TFA, heating in the morning (from getting up earlier) and cooling in the afternoon (getting home from work/school earlier) are exaggerated by the fact that the state's solar time is already, on average, forty-five minutes behind the clock time. I've long maintained that Indiana (and Michigan and western Ohio, for that matter) belong on GMT+6 anyway. But nobody listens to mathematicians.
The marginal cost post, and the "Harry and Louise" ad post.
As far as favorability to the insurance companies, I understand that both versions prohibit insurers from denying coverage based on prior health. I don't know what could make those less palatable to the corps.
I believe the plan includes a government payer as well as private corps (public/private competition). There's no way to take down the health insurance industry all at once. It's got to be death by a thousand cuts as people gradually choose the government payer over the corporate payer.
None of the candidates (even Kucinich, who was my favorite until he pulled out just before the FL primary) could give us universal single-payer healthcare. But mandated universal care, even with most of the premiums going to the corps, is cheaper (per covered person) than Obama's plan. Krugman (NYT) cites an MIT study showing that the marginal cost for each remaining 22M covered (those missed without mandates) is about 21% of the cost for someone who would seek coverage without the mandate (naturally; it's mostly healthy people who'd skip coverage if it weren't mandated).
Policy differences between Clinton and Obama? Minor.
Biggest difference I can see is that Obama wants to make universal health care optional. Huh?! "I do not think that word means what you think it means." He's even been sending out a "Harry and Louise" flier scaring people off mandated coverage.
Why was she the head of the Healthcare task force? A recognized health expert? A well-known elected official? Wife of a guy who got 43% of the vote?
Smartest person in the room picked to manage the health-care experts?
That 'mandate', plus too much secrecy, doomed a not-so-bad health care plan and has cost us a lot of jobs and bankrupt Americans in the last 14 years.
If only Bush's mandate, plus too much secrecy, had doomed Cheney's "energy plan." Or Rummy's Iraq plan. Or the top 5% income bracket's tax plan.
But to give NY drivers their due: The BQE was the very first place I ever saw true alternate merge in reaction to a lane closure (for construction). Each driver in the travelling lane was letting in exactly one driver from the disappearing lane, and nobody from the disappearing lane was trying to "jump". Smoothest construction merge I have ever seen. Everybody seemed to realize that "playing by the rules" would get everybody there faster. This is true "enlightened self-interest."
[T]hese types of things go on for[e]ver and evolve into useless side items that burn up tax dollars and never complete the original goal. [emphasis added]
True basic research doesn't have a goal. It has a question. If you already know your goal, you're not doing basic research.
No, take the money and offer it as a prize. First two companies to do X get Y.... The last thing we need is even more government involvement. It already stifles innovation.
So (a) the government is setting the goal and (b) it's providing (some) funding on the back end rather than the front end. This is not research.
Research is when a scientist has an interesting question, hypothesizes an answer, and then goes about trying to (frequently dis-)prove it. A typical grant proposal has to lay out those three items, with the last part (the experimental method) in some detail, including materials and timelines ("deadlines"). Most grants I know of are for specific time periods, and you're not going to get any kind of renewal without showing progress (one way or another).
Often, one project will spawn many new questions ("uesless side items"), which should be the only "goal" of pure research. Each would, of course, require approval of a new grant application.
Then we'll have to look at countries like the UK & Australia, which banned leaded gas in the early '80s, so would be seeing a drop in the crime rate about now. When did these countries legalize abortions?
I've heard that, too. But note (as poster above you did) that Reyes found correlation dependent on the lead levels in the air on a state-by-state basis. Can they do that with abortion data?
I said nothing about my inability to cope with a gap closed in two seconds; I'm worried about the guy coming up behind me. I'm pretty good at judging how quickly someone's approaching, and letting the guy who's going 80 pass me before I pull out to do 70 around the guy who's going 65.
What I'd hoped to express is that someone going 140 is completely out of the ken of the American driver. It's entirely possible that someone going 70mph faster than me is not even visible when I form the intent to pass (and first check my mirror: I was taught check, signal, then check again), or is just so far back that his speed can't be accurately judged.
And as far as biting babies' heads off: Someone roared up behind a couple I know who were passing someone else, and sat on their bumper at 75mph (in a 55mph zone) honking and flashing. As soon as they were ahead of the car they were passing, they signalled and pulled back into the center lane only to be creamed by someone coming in from the right. The asshole who'd forced them over probably never knew he'd been the effective cause of an accident behind him. Their toddler, properly strapped in the back seat, was killed by a bumper that came over the back deck. Amazingly, they're still together.
Harder raod tests? Sure. Mountain hairpin turns? In snow? There aren't enough taxes in the state of Florida to bus everyone who wants a license to West Virginia or something.
Where I live, roads are mostly straight, mostly flat, and occasionally under water; that's what they need to test. My mom used to say she'd much rather drive in snow than rain, since the idiots thought they could drive in rain.
But regardless of driver training, nothing can prepare you for some idiot coming up behind you at twice your speed. I'm good about using my mirrors (unlike most Americans, I have almost no overlap between my rear-view and side-view mirrors, so I have almost no blind spot). If I want to change lanes, I signal, check the mirror, and go. What looks like a two-second following distance disappears in, you guessed it, two seconds if the idiot is travelling at twice my speed.
Don't undersestimate the startle factor, either, as somebody blows by you at 70mph, relatively. How many accidents (and near accidents) did this guy leave in his wake, with people he never touched?
You might say it's the American sheep culture, that on European roads you have to expect people to pass you at high rates of speed. But that's because it's legal in (parts of) Europe. Here, we expect "bad boys" to whip by at maybe twenty over the limit. This guy's a moron if he thinks he can't hurt anyone he doesn't hit.
Besides, Scotty always seemed older than everyone except Bones McCoy on TOS.
Give MsGeek a cigar! For completeness: In 1966, Doohan and Kelley turned 46, Shatner and Nimoy 35, Barrett and Nichols 34, Koenig 30, and Takei 29. I had forgotten how much older than the others Doohan was until I checked IMDB last week (The Blonde & I were rooting for Paul McGillion). If we're shooting for "eight years before" ST:TOS, Pegg is just the right age (and so is Pine, who's 27). Spock, of course, doesn't age the way humans do, so should be played by someone just about Nimoy's age; Quinto just turned 30, so that's not too far off. Yelchin is 18, which isn't too far off, but Cho is 35! Well, as long as he looks the part....
I'm still considering your post. Allow me to expand on mine.
As I said, any of our customers that wants to can expend the resources to create the (subset of the) financial calculations they require (we, of course, need to program to handle the requirements of all our customers). Any of them could then open their own source to their competitors. I think that's what prevents our customers from doing this. That, and the fact that when they lay out a small (compared to software costs) amount of money in consulting fees to look over their results, we often find they've managed to get it wrong:(.
I think what's going on in my industry is that we haven't reached the (as you say) "relatively easy to implement" stage (the calculations are all common knowledge and have been for decades). Some of the calculations are the result of government regulation, and many of the interested parties fail to properly read the regulation completely.
I don't know what will happen to my current company when someone decides to do this on a FOSS basis. We may be reduced to support and consulting (we already make it a selling point to have a research department whose responsibility is to follow all the financial laws at the federal and state level); we might be able to charge for bespoke programming that we know the client will release with an open license. In any case, I can hope the company is bought (presumably by one of our clients) before that happens.
In the field my employer works in, namely, financial software, we are mostly competing with our customers. What we do isn't necessarily hard, but is complex. We've put years of experience into the software. Any of our customers is trying to decide whether to do these calculations in-house or farm it out to us. If our source code was readily available, we'd get a lot of "Thanks, but we've got what we need now!" instead of sales. It's not proprietary algorithms, it's not trade secrets, it's simply the thousands of programmer-hours that have made an intricate piece of software what appears obvious in hindsight.
We do occasionally release the source under an NDA for a customer with an odd platform we can't provide some kind of object module for, but that's certainly the exception. We aren't embarrassed by the state of our code; we just want to make sure we're paid for the work.
I suppose the question is, how long does it take you when you think you're going 65 and when you think you're going 80? What are you using to time yourself, the digital clock on the dashboard (which still reads 8:24 at 8:24:58, of course), or a watch with a sweep second hand (and are you sure you're reading the right time when you're trying to merge)?
Have your passenger use a stopwatch and record the mileage (and the mile markers!). This will also tell you whether your speedometer (and odometer) are correct.
My brother had a jeep for a while where the previous owner had replaced the stock tires/wheels with ones with a two inch larger radius, so the speedometer and odometer under-reported by something over ten percent.
Thank you! Finally, an answer I can give to people who insist on extrapolating my (carefully created) math to unusual circumstances! ("But I save BLAH by driving 95 instead of 65," "But I save BLAH by driving 75 instead of 65 for 3,500 miles").
Frankly, when moderating, I automatically set responses to sigs as "off-topic".
For Fortune 150, the company is probably large, so account maintenance is probably a non-negligible portion of time. To "trouble tickets"/problems, I'd add "help desk" items (adding/deleting accounts, rescuing email, re-issuing passwords, etc.) with both qty and response time reported. Otherwise, metlin has a great list.
Not always, but in this case, yes. A general statement about religious leaders is made, and the parent to my comment specifically says "most popes." No mention of Orthodox Patriarchs, or Archbishops of Canterbury (which, since the Anglican church was created specifically as a state religion, is inherently a political appointment), or the leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention, just to name three. To single out the Roman Catholic church is ipso facto anti-Catholic.
There is no doubt in my mind that, historically, the papacy has been influenced, and inhabited, by power-seekers. But most of them? Over centuries? Could it really be that most were not believers? I had to take issue with that.
Anti-Catholic bias is at the root of a number of libels, including, for example, the wide-spread belief that people in the middle ages didn't realize the earth was round (cue the Bugs Bunny version of Christopher Columbus: "De eart', she's-a round!"). The committee Colombus appealed to at Salamanca University was well aware that the earth was round; they just thought it was bigger than he did, and of course, they were right.
What happened to the "full faith and credit" clause? Last I heard, we still had this piece of paper called the Constitution, although all three of the branches of government have had their scissors out....
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for the tip. I saw it yesterday ... and had to pee so I ducked out after the acting credits (I do usually sit through all of them). After seeing the OP's "stay for all the credits," I'm glad all I missed was a trailer that I can catch on the web in a few weeks.
The writer has not omitted the "not only" portion of the (compound) conjunction (which makes the first clause subordinate to the second). Either put in the "but rather" and change the semicolon to a comma, or omit the "not only:"
"I am unintimidated by litigation; I sometimes rather miss it."
As written, it's not correct English.
What about employers measuring time spent in the bathroom and bringing that up on a performance review? Some of us have more, ah, contemplative digestive tracts, and, well, sometimes ya gotta go at work.
Of course, if you post Google's "Testing on the Toilet" blogs in the stalls, you could say you were still working.
Is NJ an open primary state (like MI)? Why couldn't a Dem have voted for one of the Republicans? That "option" (counting the number of Ds and Rs) might be a tally of the party of the voter rather than a total of the votes for candidates in that party.
Indiana, which was the subject of the study, lags quite a bit. The eastern edge of the state (Fort Wayne) is about 85 degrees west longitude, 10 degrees west of the notional center of "GMT+5" (360 / 24 = 15; 5 * 15 = 75). So the eastern edge of the state is already ten minutes into the notional "GMT+6", and the western edge (Vincennes, Terre Haute; Gary is on Chicago time anyway) is about 87.5, a full twenty minutes into GMT+6. So the particular money-wasters mentioned in TFA, heating in the morning (from getting up earlier) and cooling in the afternoon (getting home from work/school earlier) are exaggerated by the fact that the state's solar time is already, on average, forty-five minutes behind the clock time. I've long maintained that Indiana (and Michigan and western Ohio, for that matter) belong on GMT+6 anyway. But nobody listens to mathematicians.
The marginal cost post, and the "Harry and Louise" ad post. As far as favorability to the insurance companies, I understand that both versions prohibit insurers from denying coverage based on prior health. I don't know what could make those less palatable to the corps.
I believe the plan includes a government payer as well as private corps (public/private competition). There's no way to take down the health insurance industry all at once. It's got to be death by a thousand cuts as people gradually choose the government payer over the corporate payer.
None of the candidates (even Kucinich, who was my favorite until he pulled out just before the FL primary) could give us universal single-payer healthcare. But mandated universal care, even with most of the premiums going to the corps, is cheaper (per covered person) than Obama's plan. Krugman (NYT) cites an MIT study showing that the marginal cost for each remaining 22M covered (those missed without mandates) is about 21% of the cost for someone who would seek coverage without the mandate (naturally; it's mostly healthy people who'd skip coverage if it weren't mandated).
Biggest difference I can see is that Obama wants to make universal health care optional. Huh?! "I do not think that word means what you think it means." He's even been sending out a "Harry and Louise" flier scaring people off mandated coverage.
Why was she the head of the Healthcare task force? A recognized health expert? A well-known elected official? Wife of a guy who got 43% of the vote?Smartest person in the room picked to manage the health-care experts?
That 'mandate', plus too much secrecy, doomed a not-so-bad health care plan and has cost us a lot of jobs and bankrupt Americans in the last 14 years.If only Bush's mandate, plus too much secrecy, had doomed Cheney's "energy plan." Or Rummy's Iraq plan. Or the top 5% income bracket's tax plan.
But to give NY drivers their due: The BQE was the very first place I ever saw true alternate merge in reaction to a lane closure (for construction). Each driver in the travelling lane was letting in exactly one driver from the disappearing lane, and nobody from the disappearing lane was trying to "jump". Smoothest construction merge I have ever seen. Everybody seemed to realize that "playing by the rules" would get everybody there faster. This is true "enlightened self-interest."
True basic research doesn't have a goal. It has a question. If you already know your goal, you're not doing basic research.
No, take the money and offer it as a prize. First two companies to do X get Y.So (a) the government is setting the goal and (b) it's providing (some) funding on the back end rather than the front end. This is not research.
Research is when a scientist has an interesting question, hypothesizes an answer, and then goes about trying to (frequently dis-)prove it. A typical grant proposal has to lay out those three items, with the last part (the experimental method) in some detail, including materials and timelines ("deadlines"). Most grants I know of are for specific time periods, and you're not going to get any kind of renewal without showing progress (one way or another).
Often, one project will spawn many new questions ("uesless side items"), which should be the only "goal" of pure research. Each would, of course, require approval of a new grant application.
Then we'll have to look at countries like the UK & Australia, which banned leaded gas in the early '80s, so would be seeing a drop in the crime rate about now. When did these countries legalize abortions?
I've heard that, too. But note (as poster above you did) that Reyes found correlation dependent on the lead levels in the air on a state-by-state basis. Can they do that with abortion data?
I said nothing about my inability to cope with a gap closed in two seconds; I'm worried about the guy coming up behind me. I'm pretty good at judging how quickly someone's approaching, and letting the guy who's going 80 pass me before I pull out to do 70 around the guy who's going 65.
What I'd hoped to express is that someone going 140 is completely out of the ken of the American driver. It's entirely possible that someone going 70mph faster than me is not even visible when I form the intent to pass (and first check my mirror: I was taught check, signal, then check again), or is just so far back that his speed can't be accurately judged.
And as far as biting babies' heads off: Someone roared up behind a couple I know who were passing someone else, and sat on their bumper at 75mph (in a 55mph zone) honking and flashing. As soon as they were ahead of the car they were passing, they signalled and pulled back into the center lane only to be creamed by someone coming in from the right. The asshole who'd forced them over probably never knew he'd been the effective cause of an accident behind him. Their toddler, properly strapped in the back seat, was killed by a bumper that came over the back deck. Amazingly, they're still together.
Harder raod tests? Sure. Mountain hairpin turns? In snow? There aren't enough taxes in the state of Florida to bus everyone who wants a license to West Virginia or something.
Where I live, roads are mostly straight, mostly flat, and occasionally under water; that's what they need to test. My mom used to say she'd much rather drive in snow than rain, since the idiots thought they could drive in rain.
But regardless of driver training, nothing can prepare you for some idiot coming up behind you at twice your speed. I'm good about using my mirrors (unlike most Americans, I have almost no overlap between my rear-view and side-view mirrors, so I have almost no blind spot). If I want to change lanes, I signal, check the mirror, and go. What looks like a two-second following distance disappears in, you guessed it, two seconds if the idiot is travelling at twice my speed.
Don't undersestimate the startle factor, either, as somebody blows by you at 70mph, relatively. How many accidents (and near accidents) did this guy leave in his wake, with people he never touched?
You might say it's the American sheep culture, that on European roads you have to expect people to pass you at high rates of speed. But that's because it's legal in (parts of) Europe. Here, we expect "bad boys" to whip by at maybe twenty over the limit. This guy's a moron if he thinks he can't hurt anyone he doesn't hit.
Give MsGeek a cigar! For completeness: In 1966, Doohan and Kelley turned 46, Shatner and Nimoy 35, Barrett and Nichols 34, Koenig 30, and Takei 29. I had forgotten how much older than the others Doohan was until I checked IMDB last week (The Blonde & I were rooting for Paul McGillion). If we're shooting for "eight years before" ST:TOS, Pegg is just the right age (and so is Pine, who's 27). Spock, of course, doesn't age the way humans do, so should be played by someone just about Nimoy's age; Quinto just turned 30, so that's not too far off. Yelchin is 18, which isn't too far off, but Cho is 35! Well, as long as he looks the part....
So...how many hours of unpaid overtime did your boss get out of you?
I like getting paid for my awesome work. Kudos, though.
I'm still considering your post. Allow me to expand on mine.
As I said, any of our customers that wants to can expend the resources to create the (subset of the) financial calculations they require (we, of course, need to program to handle the requirements of all our customers). Any of them could then open their own source to their competitors. I think that's what prevents our customers from doing this. That, and the fact that when they lay out a small (compared to software costs) amount of money in consulting fees to look over their results, we often find they've managed to get it wrong :(.
I think what's going on in my industry is that we haven't reached the (as you say) "relatively easy to implement" stage (the calculations are all common knowledge and have been for decades). Some of the calculations are the result of government regulation, and many of the interested parties fail to properly read the regulation completely.
I don't know what will happen to my current company when someone decides to do this on a FOSS basis. We may be reduced to support and consulting (we already make it a selling point to have a research department whose responsibility is to follow all the financial laws at the federal and state level); we might be able to charge for bespoke programming that we know the client will release with an open license. In any case, I can hope the company is bought (presumably by one of our clients) before that happens.
In the field my employer works in, namely, financial software, we are mostly competing with our customers. What we do isn't necessarily hard, but is complex. We've put years of experience into the software. Any of our customers is trying to decide whether to do these calculations in-house or farm it out to us. If our source code was readily available, we'd get a lot of "Thanks, but we've got what we need now!" instead of sales. It's not proprietary algorithms, it's not trade secrets, it's simply the thousands of programmer-hours that have made an intricate piece of software what appears obvious in hindsight. We do occasionally release the source under an NDA for a customer with an odd platform we can't provide some kind of object module for, but that's certainly the exception. We aren't embarrassed by the state of our code; we just want to make sure we're paid for the work.
I suppose the question is, how long does it take you when you think you're going 65 and when you think you're going 80? What are you using to time yourself, the digital clock on the dashboard (which still reads 8:24 at 8:24:58, of course), or a watch with a sweep second hand (and are you sure you're reading the right time when you're trying to merge)?
Have your passenger use a stopwatch and record the mileage (and the mile markers!). This will also tell you whether your speedometer (and odometer) are correct.
My brother had a jeep for a while where the previous owner had replaced the stock tires/wheels with ones with a two inch larger radius, so the speedometer and odometer under-reported by something over ten percent.
Thank you! Finally, an answer I can give to people who insist on extrapolating my (carefully created) math to unusual circumstances! ("But I save BLAH by driving 95 instead of 65," "But I save BLAH by driving 75 instead of 65 for 3,500 miles").
Frankly, when moderating, I automatically set responses to sigs as "off-topic".
For Fortune 150, the company is probably large, so account maintenance is probably a non-negligible portion of time. To "trouble tickets"/problems, I'd add "help desk" items (adding/deleting accounts, rescuing email, re-issuing passwords, etc.) with both qty and response time reported. Otherwise, metlin has a great list.
Not always, but in this case, yes. A general statement about religious leaders is made, and the parent to my comment specifically says "most popes." No mention of Orthodox Patriarchs, or Archbishops of Canterbury (which, since the Anglican church was created specifically as a state religion, is inherently a political appointment), or the leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention, just to name three. To single out the Roman Catholic church is ipso facto anti-Catholic.
There is no doubt in my mind that, historically, the papacy has been influenced, and inhabited, by power-seekers. But most of them? Over centuries? Could it really be that most were not believers? I had to take issue with that.
Anti-Catholic bias is at the root of a number of libels, including, for example, the wide-spread belief that people in the middle ages didn't realize the earth was round (cue the Bugs Bunny version of Christopher Columbus: "De eart', she's-a round!"). The committee Colombus appealed to at Salamanca University was well aware that the earth was round; they just thought it was bigger than he did, and of course, they were right.
And you know this how?
I'll grant there are likely some (perhaps a Medici among them), but most?
Anti-Catholicism: The last acceptable prejudice.
What happened to the "full faith and credit" clause? Last I heard, we still had this piece of paper called the Constitution, although all three of the branches of government have had their scissors out....