High school course selection is a better predictor of college success than GPA or SAT scores.
I had always heard that SAT/ACT were among the better predictors of college success. Do you happen to remember where you read this?
And don't knock the State U's. In nearly every case, it's better to go to your state's flagship university on a scholarship than to pay full freight at a non-Ivy. Long-term, the earnings differences are mostly determined by skill and intelligence, not undergrad institution.
Christ, did it take all year to work? I can't imagine how you could get decent throughput with an Archimedean screw that small. A plain bit of semi-rigid tubing hooked to a pump would seem to work better.
This is about requirements, not options. When I was a teenager, you didn't have to require me to go to school. I didn't like it, mind you, but a necessary component of getting ahead in life is putting in effort to become good at things that people will pay you to do, and I was smart enough to understand this.
"Education" in the abstract is one of the most overrated things around. A good elementary education covers the vast majority of people's needs. Anything beyond that ought to be up to parents and kids to decide - we certainly aren't doing any favors to 16 year olds who don't like school, don't do well in school, and serve primarily to disrupt other people from learning when we force them to go to class instead of going out and getting a job. Maybe the job will teach them that they ought to go back to school; maybe it will teach them that they're much better suited for the real world. Housing them in a brick building for two more years while they smoke weed, skip classes, and do nothing productive is a waste of money.
You know, if you want it to serve as a TV, it's hardly overspec'd. And the iPad has a huge advantage over the netbook: weight and portability. I can hold an iPad in the air with one hand and type on it with the other; that's nearly impossible with the netbook (you'll need to rest it on something). The iPad can switch orientation from landscape to portrait in seconds, and if you really need to type long-form stuff, you can buy a Bluetooth keyboard.
I'm not an Apple fanboi, and I've never owned a Mac, but the iPad is just a far better device at a far better price than any other tablet maker is producing. I like my Android phone, but I've seen Android on a tablet - in another year or so, it will be a real competitor, but it's not there yet. And you'll still have the pricing issue.
Is it a suburb, or is it in the city? And what benighted tip do you occupy, that homes' infrastructure costs are paid by the city, rather than the developer? If they're never going to make any money on the process, why in the hell does the city extend services to those areas?
All of the suburbs surrounding my hometown contract with the central city for sewage treatment, and a few of them buy their water from the central city - but they pay full freight. I'm not subsidizing them at all.
enough cash to make most things go away that would cut into their profits
I'm not going to say that's never happened, but if it's cheaper and/or better than the existing products, why wouldn't the big boys take the huge PR benefit of being "renewable", save a ton on industrial-scale production, and leverage the advantages of their existing product distribution networks to make more money?
Nothing is essential to my survival in a courthouse except oxygen, but there's no rational reason to ban electronic devices for anyone except jury members who are actually conducting a trial. A newspaper poses every problem a smartphone does, after all, and my iPad, Kindle, and phone all have data service. Furthermore, as fishbowl noted upthread, courts have been known to seize books.
I'll grant the rest, but this? The US has pretty decent violent crime stats for everything but murder, IIRC. And getting murdered in the US is overwhelmingly a result of living with a sociopath or being in the drug trade - random murders are quite rare.
Well, if you're not a moron, it's still not too hard. I have numerous beliefs that I'm pretty sure would disqualify me from any criminal jury (jury nullification is probably the most generally-applicable, although a complete lack of belief in the credibility of LEOs should do the job just as well). A contempt citation for failure to agree with the judge isn't going to hold, anyway, and I've got enough money and time to make the judge regret it if he issues one.
Let's just hope you didn't make any of the 48 Hours Mystery mistakes, like Googling "how to kill my wife without getting caught" or "how to knock someone in the head" (yes, really) or "how to get away with murder" or even "how to get rid of a body". While signed in to your Google account. And then leaving it in your computer's history.
Active jurors hearing a current trial, yes. But banning them from jurors is very different from banning them from a courthouse, or from the pool of potential jurors.
As others have pointed out in the past, though I can't remember where, the entire jury experience is miserable because jurors are the only part of the system that has no control or way to influence future behavior - judges have immense control over lawyers appearing before them, of course, but the lawyers also have some feedback into the system, while no jury can "punish" a judge or lawyer for misleading them.
There's nothing wrong with the behaviors - as someone pointed out upthread, he had a book confiscated by the court. Trying to kill time until chosen to serve or dismissed is perfectly respectable - it's not as though the judges are required not to listen to the radio in chambers while doing a bit of paperwork before a court session.
Yes, when a trial is going on, the jurors should be paying attention. But until then?
How about "Self-righteous assholes pulling power trips on the citizens of the state will be turned over to the inmates for their amusement"? Seriously, it's one thing to ban the use of a phone during a trial, but potential jurors spend an enormous amount of time waiting before they're even picked.
Ultimately, if you have enough money, you can set up a not for profit foundation to do a few charitable works... and employ a dozen or so family members at surprisingly high rates for relatively little work. All the schemes you aim at "the rich" end up hitting people at the top end of the middle class and the very bottom of the upper class. (Upper middle class estates tend to escape death taxes, but suffer harshly from high income taxes while accumulating wealth; by contrast, the lower end of the upper class can tax advantage its income, but can't afford to do the serious wealth protection that large estates can.)
They're just improving the distance their signal will carry. Output power is regulated by the FCC; "how far your signal carries" isn't. 50 kW on AM is a big, big station. I've clearly picked up Chicago's WLS over 700 miles away at night.
You might be surprised. Taxes start to be a real bear over $100k as all the exemptions disappear, and tax-advantaged savings plans like IRAs and 401(k)'s have limits to contributions.
Yes, well, what do you do when you hit your planned retirement age in 2009? Or 2001, for that matter? At some point, you're going to have to step out of the risk that equities have in order to consolidate your gains.
The next time you want to say this, say it with style. I've gotten a ton of +5's out of this old gem:
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary." - James Nicoll, in rec.arts.sf-lovers
That's actually a bit too timid; I'd say that English is a vocabulary vampire/zombie hybrid that wants nothing but more words.
If you want to tax gas, tax gas. If you want to tax miles, tax miles. People aren't going to like paying either one, but they'll go nuts if you try to tax both.
Slashdot Mirror
High school course selection is a better predictor of college success than GPA or SAT scores.
I had always heard that SAT/ACT were among the better predictors of college success. Do you happen to remember where you read this?
And don't knock the State U's. In nearly every case, it's better to go to your state's flagship university on a scholarship than to pay full freight at a non-Ivy. Long-term, the earnings differences are mostly determined by skill and intelligence, not undergrad institution.
Christ, did it take all year to work? I can't imagine how you could get decent throughput with an Archimedean screw that small. A plain bit of semi-rigid tubing hooked to a pump would seem to work better.
With the correct upbringing, people won't try to destroy others' fun simply because they can.
Sadly, this just isn't true. Some people are born assholes.
This is about requirements, not options. When I was a teenager, you didn't have to require me to go to school. I didn't like it, mind you, but a necessary component of getting ahead in life is putting in effort to become good at things that people will pay you to do, and I was smart enough to understand this.
"Education" in the abstract is one of the most overrated things around. A good elementary education covers the vast majority of people's needs. Anything beyond that ought to be up to parents and kids to decide - we certainly aren't doing any favors to 16 year olds who don't like school, don't do well in school, and serve primarily to disrupt other people from learning when we force them to go to class instead of going out and getting a job. Maybe the job will teach them that they ought to go back to school; maybe it will teach them that they're much better suited for the real world. Housing them in a brick building for two more years while they smoke weed, skip classes, and do nothing productive is a waste of money.
You know, if you want it to serve as a TV, it's hardly overspec'd. And the iPad has a huge advantage over the netbook: weight and portability. I can hold an iPad in the air with one hand and type on it with the other; that's nearly impossible with the netbook (you'll need to rest it on something). The iPad can switch orientation from landscape to portrait in seconds, and if you really need to type long-form stuff, you can buy a Bluetooth keyboard.
I'm not an Apple fanboi, and I've never owned a Mac, but the iPad is just a far better device at a far better price than any other tablet maker is producing. I like my Android phone, but I've seen Android on a tablet - in another year or so, it will be a real competitor, but it's not there yet. And you'll still have the pricing issue.
Is it a suburb, or is it in the city? And what benighted tip do you occupy, that homes' infrastructure costs are paid by the city, rather than the developer? If they're never going to make any money on the process, why in the hell does the city extend services to those areas?
All of the suburbs surrounding my hometown contract with the central city for sewage treatment, and a few of them buy their water from the central city - but they pay full freight. I'm not subsidizing them at all.
enough cash to make most things go away that would cut into their profits
I'm not going to say that's never happened, but if it's cheaper and/or better than the existing products, why wouldn't the big boys take the huge PR benefit of being "renewable", save a ton on industrial-scale production, and leverage the advantages of their existing product distribution networks to make more money?
Nothing is essential to my survival in a courthouse except oxygen, but there's no rational reason to ban electronic devices for anyone except jury members who are actually conducting a trial. A newspaper poses every problem a smartphone does, after all, and my iPad, Kindle, and phone all have data service. Furthermore, as fishbowl noted upthread, courts have been known to seize books.
a massive problem with violent crime
I'll grant the rest, but this? The US has pretty decent violent crime stats for everything but murder, IIRC. And getting murdered in the US is overwhelmingly a result of living with a sociopath or being in the drug trade - random murders are quite rare.
Well, if you're not a moron, it's still not too hard. I have numerous beliefs that I'm pretty sure would disqualify me from any criminal jury (jury nullification is probably the most generally-applicable, although a complete lack of belief in the credibility of LEOs should do the job just as well). A contempt citation for failure to agree with the judge isn't going to hold, anyway, and I've got enough money and time to make the judge regret it if he issues one.
Let's just hope you didn't make any of the 48 Hours Mystery mistakes, like Googling "how to kill my wife without getting caught" or "how to knock someone in the head" (yes, really) or "how to get away with murder" or even "how to get rid of a body". While signed in to your Google account. And then leaving it in your computer's history.
Active jurors hearing a current trial, yes. But banning them from jurors is very different from banning them from a courthouse, or from the pool of potential jurors.
As others have pointed out in the past, though I can't remember where, the entire jury experience is miserable because jurors are the only part of the system that has no control or way to influence future behavior - judges have immense control over lawyers appearing before them, of course, but the lawyers also have some feedback into the system, while no jury can "punish" a judge or lawyer for misleading them.
There's nothing wrong with the behaviors - as someone pointed out upthread, he had a book confiscated by the court. Trying to kill time until chosen to serve or dismissed is perfectly respectable - it's not as though the judges are required not to listen to the radio in chambers while doing a bit of paperwork before a court session.
Yes, when a trial is going on, the jurors should be paying attention. But until then?
How about "Self-righteous assholes pulling power trips on the citizens of the state will be turned over to the inmates for their amusement"? Seriously, it's one thing to ban the use of a phone during a trial, but potential jurors spend an enormous amount of time waiting before they're even picked.
Ultimately, if you have enough money, you can set up a not for profit foundation to do a few charitable works... and employ a dozen or so family members at surprisingly high rates for relatively little work. All the schemes you aim at "the rich" end up hitting people at the top end of the middle class and the very bottom of the upper class. (Upper middle class estates tend to escape death taxes, but suffer harshly from high income taxes while accumulating wealth; by contrast, the lower end of the upper class can tax advantage its income, but can't afford to do the serious wealth protection that large estates can.)
Ah, but if you were out of risky investments you'd not be getting the 8% long-term average yields.
They're just improving the distance their signal will carry. Output power is regulated by the FCC; "how far your signal carries" isn't. 50 kW on AM is a big, big station. I've clearly picked up Chicago's WLS over 700 miles away at night.
Even at $2500 a month, you're not going to have your entire retirement funded in a handful of years, which is what the AC alleged.
You might be surprised. Taxes start to be a real bear over $100k as all the exemptions disappear, and tax-advantaged savings plans like IRAs and 401(k)'s have limits to contributions.
Unions rocks !
So long as they're properly funding that pension plan. It might be more expensive than you think - just ask UAW retirees.
Yes, well, what do you do when you hit your planned retirement age in 2009? Or 2001, for that matter? At some point, you're going to have to step out of the risk that equities have in order to consolidate your gains.
The next time you want to say this, say it with style. I've gotten a ton of +5's out of this old gem:
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary." - James Nicoll, in rec.arts.sf-lovers
That's actually a bit too timid; I'd say that English is a vocabulary vampire/zombie hybrid that wants nothing but more words.
If you want to tax gas, tax gas. If you want to tax miles, tax miles. People aren't going to like paying either one, but they'll go nuts if you try to tax both.
You don't "need" more than the 50 sf and common bathroom you get at a single-room-occupancy flophouse. Good luck selling that model.