Sorry, I come from a world where we normally view people five years or less as "college hires" and those after as "mid career." Basically meant anyone who has had time to establish their career and build a financial base where they can actually afford to live in the city. Also, I would add that those who are a bit older as pointed out by someone else, were able to establish their career and actually pay off some of their debts before the double whammy of the college loan fiasco and the collapse of the new hire market. Agreed that the current world is a much worse place for those younger kids.
Sorry, I come from a world where we normally view people five years or less as "college hires" and those after as "mid career." Basically meant anyone who has had time to establish their career and build a financial base where they can actually afford to live in the city.
This has already been happening for quite a while, and among friends who live in the area, San Francisco has already developed a reputation as being a sort of fortress of elite upper middle income people. The city's demographic, according to friends, is most favorable to mid-career types in their late twenties and early thirties: people who have already established their careers and have the money to afford the skyrocketing cost of living in the city but at the same time do not need space for raising children. Lower-middle incomes, poor people and families are being replaced by yuppies. You see similar trends in major cities across the United States, New York, Washington DC, etc., but San Francisco is noteworthy because of the sheer amounts of money being thrown around thanks to the new tech boom.
To be fair though, there has been an attitude amongst a lot of technical people to "go mercenary". That is, they go work for a company for a year or two then bail out chasing a bigger salary as soon as they feel they can do so. Under those circumstances, why should a company start investing serious money into training up an employee, especially when they'll use that training to go find a new job? Why shouldn't companies try to hire people who they can have working from day one?
I would point out however that the people who make Earth-Observing Satellites are also the very military contractors that you blame for taking money away from these programs. They build the buses, the optics, electronics and launch vehicles that put these satellites into orbit, and these companies are in fact pretty desperately looking for money to keep their currently under-capacity satellite factories busy. The real problem is that the US elected leadership runs on a four year cycle that does not deal well with projects that go beyond a four or even two year cycle. So I wouldn't pin the blame on them for starving this program... unless you believe that the satellite industry is a failed business model.
There were rumors of a possible coup by a faction of PLA officers who allegedly supported Bo Xilai, a former Politburo candidate who was sacked on allegations of corruption and murder. No real evidence, but the central government was already uneasy because such a high profile scandal has introduced significant uncertainty to their succession planning. Therefore, the Chinese government did not appreciate such rumors and speculation spreading like wildfire on the Internet.
It should be noted that the Federal prison system and 11 states already ban this type of search. The SCOTUS decision may allow jurisdictions to do this, but local governments and state legislatures still have the power to ban this practice.
I have to look up the article, but I did read a few analyses on this. They all came to the same conclusion: that the price of a ticket from the 1960s and 1970s is equivalent to about a Business or First class ticket today. We get less service today because people have expressed through their wallets that they would rather pay less for their ticket than have the extra frills.
That being said, some argue that foreign airlines have better service than US domestics. That is true due to two reasons. One, foreign airlines tend to do more international travel which is much more profitable than domestic routes. Two, their labor costs are significantly cheaper.
Just to be objective, but this sort of pandering has gone on throughout the history of the United States and pretty much every other democratic government. In the United States, we've had candidates run commercials that said electing the other guy would make us slaves of the King, slaves of the French, lead chaste white daughters to be violated by scary black people, lead to people beating their waves, lead to our blood poured out upon the soil we farm, lead to nuclear weapons raining down upon our children, and the list goes on and on. Candidates have called each other brutes, hermaphrodites, socialists, communists, fascists, fanatics and heathens. Note that none of these examples even come from the last twenty to thirty years either. Sad part is that this is just a normal part of democracy, and the best we can hope for is that we've sufficiently educated enough of the populace to inoculate them against this sort of rubbish.
The nuclear weapons program is also equally about buying off the Korean Workers' Army. Generals like shiny toys, and few things are shinier for a third world dictatorship than a nuclear weapon.
Doesn't sound all too different from the thousands of interns that work unpaid internships in Washington DC. Instead of working for Foxconn assembling useful products however, they slave away for the US government, think tanks and NGO's making coffee, churning out white papers no one reads and other drudge work with the promise that the networks they build will one day land them a magical job in the political machinery.
But wait, aren't most politicians also lawyers? Here in the United States, the President is a lawyer, the largest occupational block of Congress are lawyers (43% as a whole or 60% of the Senate) and of course, the entire Supreme Court consists of lawyers. Therefore, shifting blame to government and Congress in particular merely takes the hate from lawyers as a whole to a subsection of more successful lawyers.
I think it's unfair to dismiss a suggestion by a member of Congress just because their educational and experience background doesn't match up with every possible legislative issue that could possibly cross their desk. This is why Congressmen have staffs with more diverse educational backgrounds, and I'm 99% certain that whatever he proposes is going to have been written by one of his staffers. Of course, if you're a cynic, then it was written by a lobbyist, vetted by a staffer then proposed by the Representative from Maine, but hey, I don't think what he's proposing is all that unreasonable.
The only exception I might make for this is if the SSID nonsense is a part of a larger campaign by this person to harass that individual. Whereas, they combine this with other forms of harassment to try and intimidate their neighbors. If that's the case, then you may have a real case for harassment and intimidation. Otherwise, I agree: it's just another asshat being a douche.
No, but there are many countries who have similar laws to and treaties with the United States. I'm pretty sure that this wasn't simply a case of the United States throwing it's weight around. The other entities involved, Hong Kong, Germany and New Zealand, were equally interested in bringing Dotcom down. Otherwise, they would have simply told the US to pound sand.
This is nice and all, but how many people need to be killed by a serial killer in order to get a sufficient data set to mathematically model his killing pattern?
In case you haven't noticed, NASA is the FORMER leader in space and aeronautics
I think you're taking a VERY narrow view of what national space agencies does. Yes, in terms of manned space flight, we've fallen a bit behind (though certainly not out of the game with future capsules in play). However, as some other posters mentioned, we are still doing a lot in terms of actual aeronautics and space exploration. The Mars probes and operation of the space station are the best known, but there's still a whole slew of projects in play.
Congratulations to the People's Liberation Army's Navy for its glorious accomplishment of joining the rank of nations like Thailand, Brazil and India in fielding in foreign built aircraft carrier.
Perhaps, but from a safety standpoint, wouldn't it be better to enforce the ban on cell phone usage instead of having to charge them later with property damage and vehicular manslaughter?
Come now, do you really think those laws did not have public support? The PATRIOT Act would probably have passed even with a plebiscite because people were so freaked out, they would have gone along if it was promised to prevent the next 9/11. Vietnam War at the beginning would have easily started given the near anti-communist hysteria; remember that war didn't turn around until way into its execution. Same with the Iraq War, TSA, etc.
Education is no guarantee either. What you're implying is that people are educated to YOUR viewpoints, but not everyone shares your opinions on all those particular issues, "educated" or not.
I would politely point out that your statement implies that the rest of the world does not use social media ("after all, if they're mining social media, it must be domestic because foreign barbarians aren't as sophisticated as America in this regard"). Contrary to what you may have heard, the rest of the world does actively use it, and the CIA has too many headaches translating and spying on the rest of the world to worry about to be wasting time sorting through what America thinks about Kim Kardashian's divorce. The FBI on the other hand...:P
Why is this a surprise? Given the prominence of social media and public online forums in a lot of the unrest over the last several years, I would be disappointed in the CIA if they were NOT examining this data. Like every other intelligence source, the social media data alone won't provide a complete picture, but combined with other data gathered from more traditional methods, it can provide a real-time indicator of what is going on in a particular part of the world.
People thought the magical Apple App Store was somehow a market that defied typical market behaviors only to realize that *gasp* it operates just like any market. To be fair to people however, perhaps it's more that people thought the Apple App Store would operate more like a small and limited market, not realizing the sheer size and scale of the Apple App Store means that they're competing with millions, not hundreds or even thousands of other applications. In other words, they didn't fully realize the sheer scale of the competition they faced and understand the implications to their business models.
A group like Anonymous can only operate in a free society where the rule of law constrains the actions of large and powerful actors. Shame and humiliation of powerful players is possible because they are unable to fully marshal their resources to strike back. Sure, Western governments have made some arrests, but in the end, the military and large corporations are limited in what they can do (yes, they can illegally and secretly do things, but the complexity, costs and risks of doing it are extremely high). The cartels however are a different animal, an opponent in an environment with no such constraints. They have repeatedly killed with impunity, and Anonymous members in Mexico are no different. Unless Anonymous' entire membership is in Pakistan and Afghanistan, the cartels are much more likely to drop a bomb on a member of Anonymous than the CIA is.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, I come from a world where we normally view people five years or less as "college hires" and those after as "mid career." Basically meant anyone who has had time to establish their career and build a financial base where they can actually afford to live in the city. Also, I would add that those who are a bit older as pointed out by someone else, were able to establish their career and actually pay off some of their debts before the double whammy of the college loan fiasco and the collapse of the new hire market. Agreed that the current world is a much worse place for those younger kids.
Sorry, I come from a world where we normally view people five years or less as "college hires" and those after as "mid career." Basically meant anyone who has had time to establish their career and build a financial base where they can actually afford to live in the city.
This has already been happening for quite a while, and among friends who live in the area, San Francisco has already developed a reputation as being a sort of fortress of elite upper middle income people. The city's demographic, according to friends, is most favorable to mid-career types in their late twenties and early thirties: people who have already established their careers and have the money to afford the skyrocketing cost of living in the city but at the same time do not need space for raising children. Lower-middle incomes, poor people and families are being replaced by yuppies. You see similar trends in major cities across the United States, New York, Washington DC, etc., but San Francisco is noteworthy because of the sheer amounts of money being thrown around thanks to the new tech boom.
To be fair though, there has been an attitude amongst a lot of technical people to "go mercenary". That is, they go work for a company for a year or two then bail out chasing a bigger salary as soon as they feel they can do so. Under those circumstances, why should a company start investing serious money into training up an employee, especially when they'll use that training to go find a new job? Why shouldn't companies try to hire people who they can have working from day one?
I would point out however that the people who make Earth-Observing Satellites are also the very military contractors that you blame for taking money away from these programs. They build the buses, the optics, electronics and launch vehicles that put these satellites into orbit, and these companies are in fact pretty desperately looking for money to keep their currently under-capacity satellite factories busy. The real problem is that the US elected leadership runs on a four year cycle that does not deal well with projects that go beyond a four or even two year cycle. So I wouldn't pin the blame on them for starving this program... unless you believe that the satellite industry is a failed business model.
There were rumors of a possible coup by a faction of PLA officers who allegedly supported Bo Xilai, a former Politburo candidate who was sacked on allegations of corruption and murder. No real evidence, but the central government was already uneasy because such a high profile scandal has introduced significant uncertainty to their succession planning. Therefore, the Chinese government did not appreciate such rumors and speculation spreading like wildfire on the Internet.
It should be noted that the Federal prison system and 11 states already ban this type of search. The SCOTUS decision may allow jurisdictions to do this, but local governments and state legislatures still have the power to ban this practice.
I have to look up the article, but I did read a few analyses on this. They all came to the same conclusion: that the price of a ticket from the 1960s and 1970s is equivalent to about a Business or First class ticket today. We get less service today because people have expressed through their wallets that they would rather pay less for their ticket than have the extra frills.
That being said, some argue that foreign airlines have better service than US domestics. That is true due to two reasons. One, foreign airlines tend to do more international travel which is much more profitable than domestic routes. Two, their labor costs are significantly cheaper.
Just to be objective, but this sort of pandering has gone on throughout the history of the United States and pretty much every other democratic government. In the United States, we've had candidates run commercials that said electing the other guy would make us slaves of the King, slaves of the French, lead chaste white daughters to be violated by scary black people, lead to people beating their waves, lead to our blood poured out upon the soil we farm, lead to nuclear weapons raining down upon our children, and the list goes on and on. Candidates have called each other brutes, hermaphrodites, socialists, communists, fascists, fanatics and heathens. Note that none of these examples even come from the last twenty to thirty years either. Sad part is that this is just a normal part of democracy, and the best we can hope for is that we've sufficiently educated enough of the populace to inoculate them against this sort of rubbish.
The nuclear weapons program is also equally about buying off the Korean Workers' Army. Generals like shiny toys, and few things are shinier for a third world dictatorship than a nuclear weapon.
Doesn't sound all too different from the thousands of interns that work unpaid internships in Washington DC. Instead of working for Foxconn assembling useful products however, they slave away for the US government, think tanks and NGO's making coffee, churning out white papers no one reads and other drudge work with the promise that the networks they build will one day land them a magical job in the political machinery.
But wait, aren't most politicians also lawyers? Here in the United States, the President is a lawyer, the largest occupational block of Congress are lawyers (43% as a whole or 60% of the Senate) and of course, the entire Supreme Court consists of lawyers. Therefore, shifting blame to government and Congress in particular merely takes the hate from lawyers as a whole to a subsection of more successful lawyers.
I think it's unfair to dismiss a suggestion by a member of Congress just because their educational and experience background doesn't match up with every possible legislative issue that could possibly cross their desk. This is why Congressmen have staffs with more diverse educational backgrounds, and I'm 99% certain that whatever he proposes is going to have been written by one of his staffers. Of course, if you're a cynic, then it was written by a lobbyist, vetted by a staffer then proposed by the Representative from Maine, but hey, I don't think what he's proposing is all that unreasonable.
The only exception I might make for this is if the SSID nonsense is a part of a larger campaign by this person to harass that individual. Whereas, they combine this with other forms of harassment to try and intimidate their neighbors. If that's the case, then you may have a real case for harassment and intimidation. Otherwise, I agree: it's just another asshat being a douche.
No, but there are many countries who have similar laws to and treaties with the United States. I'm pretty sure that this wasn't simply a case of the United States throwing it's weight around. The other entities involved, Hong Kong, Germany and New Zealand, were equally interested in bringing Dotcom down. Otherwise, they would have simply told the US to pound sand.
This is nice and all, but how many people need to be killed by a serial killer in order to get a sufficient data set to mathematically model his killing pattern?
In case you haven't noticed, NASA is the FORMER leader in space and aeronautics
I think you're taking a VERY narrow view of what national space agencies does. Yes, in terms of manned space flight, we've fallen a bit behind (though certainly not out of the game with future capsules in play). However, as some other posters mentioned, we are still doing a lot in terms of actual aeronautics and space exploration. The Mars probes and operation of the space station are the best known, but there's still a whole slew of projects in play.
Congratulations to the People's Liberation Army's Navy for its glorious accomplishment of joining the rank of nations like Thailand, Brazil and India in fielding in foreign built aircraft carrier.
Perhaps, but from a safety standpoint, wouldn't it be better to enforce the ban on cell phone usage instead of having to charge them later with property damage and vehicular manslaughter?
It would be less funny if a potential client or employer does the same thing.
Come now, do you really think those laws did not have public support? The PATRIOT Act would probably have passed even with a plebiscite because people were so freaked out, they would have gone along if it was promised to prevent the next 9/11. Vietnam War at the beginning would have easily started given the near anti-communist hysteria; remember that war didn't turn around until way into its execution. Same with the Iraq War, TSA, etc.
Education is no guarantee either. What you're implying is that people are educated to YOUR viewpoints, but not everyone shares your opinions on all those particular issues, "educated" or not.
I would politely point out that your statement implies that the rest of the world does not use social media ("after all, if they're mining social media, it must be domestic because foreign barbarians aren't as sophisticated as America in this regard"). Contrary to what you may have heard, the rest of the world does actively use it, and the CIA has too many headaches translating and spying on the rest of the world to worry about to be wasting time sorting through what America thinks about Kim Kardashian's divorce. The FBI on the other hand... :P
Why is this a surprise? Given the prominence of social media and public online forums in a lot of the unrest over the last several years, I would be disappointed in the CIA if they were NOT examining this data. Like every other intelligence source, the social media data alone won't provide a complete picture, but combined with other data gathered from more traditional methods, it can provide a real-time indicator of what is going on in a particular part of the world.
People thought the magical Apple App Store was somehow a market that defied typical market behaviors only to realize that *gasp* it operates just like any market. To be fair to people however, perhaps it's more that people thought the Apple App Store would operate more like a small and limited market, not realizing the sheer size and scale of the Apple App Store means that they're competing with millions, not hundreds or even thousands of other applications. In other words, they didn't fully realize the sheer scale of the competition they faced and understand the implications to their business models.
A group like Anonymous can only operate in a free society where the rule of law constrains the actions of large and powerful actors. Shame and humiliation of powerful players is possible because they are unable to fully marshal their resources to strike back. Sure, Western governments have made some arrests, but in the end, the military and large corporations are limited in what they can do (yes, they can illegally and secretly do things, but the complexity, costs and risks of doing it are extremely high). The cartels however are a different animal, an opponent in an environment with no such constraints. They have repeatedly killed with impunity, and Anonymous members in Mexico are no different. Unless Anonymous' entire membership is in Pakistan and Afghanistan, the cartels are much more likely to drop a bomb on a member of Anonymous than the CIA is.