It could also simply be that the killer is mentally ill and none of the above applies.
Not could, is.
The graph of human behaviour is not a straight line, so what triggers on person doesn't necessarily trigger another. To plan out an action like this and also pull it off puts you firmly in the nuts end of the spectrum.
...and get clean Industry Standard Bottles delivered to them. They paste on their labels, fill, and cap with custom twist-off caps, and sell to the consumer. On average, a bottle will make it through the system 10 times before it breaks or is lost.
So yeah, it can be done, people just need to get off their asses and do it.
First issue, why bother with a label? Surely that adds energy to both add and remove that isn't really required?
Second, I realise this won't work for everyone, but with the explosion in microbreweries I now have 5 of them within walking distance of my house. Most of them do takeaway Growlers so you simply use your own vessel, vastly reducing waste.
Seriously, now is the time for Robotics to be brought up to speed on separating goods.
Cardboard made from plantation trees and stored in landfill is actually a form of carbon sequestration which a good for the environment. It just makes it hard to process when the paper/cardboard is glued to plastic or glass. Simplified packaging would go a long way to solving this issue.
If the crooks were stupid, they would have transferred it from the victim bank into the crook's personal Wells Fargo account, and left it there. The crooks weren't stupid.
I used to work in a bank and even if you put it in your own account it would take a lot of time and effort including a court order to get it back.
Banks are in the business of protecting their customer's money, even if their customer is a crook.
The move it around through several countries right away, then use burner accounts in whichever countries to buy goods, things like laptops, gold, diamonds, etc. Move the diamonds, laptops, gold, whatever to another country where the government officials are part of a fencing operation, etc.
Casinos are the easy option. Transfer to a foreign bank, withdraw the cash and buy chips, lose a little to wash it, come out with clean money. We had a case here where one guy washed $90M at the local casino and no-one batted an eyelid until it was too late.
In practice a President has only a limited effect on the economy, at least in the short term.
Only if he has an uncooperative Congress and Senate which a lot of Presidents still a manage to do ok with. If you control Executive, AG, Supreme Court and Congress and Senate and you still blow everything up, it is all you.
The American working class doesn't have to give ground so the rest of the world can be lifted out of poverty. That's one way to do it, but not the _only_ way.
I agree, but that seems to be the way the American conservatives prefer it to go. Convince the voters that foreigners are the enemy in order to manipulate them into giving themselves more power and wealth.
As I said, the happy path lies in accepting globalisation as an unstoppable force of nature, and tweak your economy to take advantage of it rather than wasting energy fighting an unwinnable battle
We could just as easily take it from the extremely rich. If we were willing to, that is.
For some reason the rich have convinced the poor and middle class that this a bad idea. The US is the only place I know of where this has happened, so it's a interesting case study into how such a crazy situation like that can occur.
In 1980 in both Europe and the US, the top 1% took in 10% of their respective incomes. Today the top 1% in Europe take in 12% while in the US it's 20%. So inequality is getting much worse in the US and the disadvantaged somehow keep voting in the people keep the cycle going. It really is nuts.
The richest 3 people in the US have more wealth than the bottom 50%. Why don't you simply confiscate their wealth and double the wealth of half the country overnight? It sounds unjust on the surface, but in a country where over 500,000 people die each year from poverty, isn't it better to sacrifice 3 people for the sake of 160 million? And the flow on effect from that one action would trickle up to the other 160 million within weeks.
If we're ok with sacrificing conscripts in wars, why aren't we ok with sacrificing a handful of conscripts to save the economy and millions of lives? We don't even have to kill them, just strip them of all their assets and leave them on a median wage to live on for the rest of their lives.
This too is bullshit since keeping the higher paid jobs here in the USA spreads the wealth to local service industry which creates more customers that can afford airpods and other imported chinese garbage. You think poor Chinese or Indonesian workers are buying Harley Davidson? No, USA factory and service workers are.
Answering those questions would have made the setting for "The Force Awakens" much less jarring, but would have made it more difficult to incorporate the original three actors of the first trilogy.
I don't think so, in fact it could've have been a whole lot better.
The Rebels establish a new Republic and the next era starts there +30 years. Rather than simply re-do A New Hope, have a fresh story where Leia is the Queen, or President or something, Han is an old drunk hanging out a dingy bars, Lando could've been included as he should be as a local boss, with Chewy as head of security, Luke can still be a hermit, and the Rey and Kylo could be written-in easily as the precocious next generation upstarts coming through the ranks. (Screw Finn, his character sucked) The story would start out that something isn't right in the crumbling Republic, and Lando and Chewy are tasked by Leia to investigate. During this mission they collect Rey and Kylo somehow along the way, shit happens, they bump into Han and Luke, they join up, then split up and Kylo goes bad, ultimately resulting in the discovery (to the audience) of a new dark side of the Force. Some end-battle ensues which the Rebels win a Pyrrhic victory and sets the scene for the next film, ie the Republic beat a mysterious Sith boss, but it uncovers a larger menace that they realise that because of their 30 years of peace they aren't equipped to deal with. So it leaves the audience with anticipation about all the possibilities for the next film
I thought of that in 5 minutes and it's already better than any Star Wars film produced since 1980. And it also would've allowed the original cast including Lando to hand over the baton with an original story, not a crap remake. Then the second film would be all original with no more old characters.
but with no Jedi to maintain order and only evil force users the First Order rises out of the ashes.
Hang on, that's not right. After RoTJ, both Jedi and Sith are gone, and more importantly the Rebels win, so there's no more bad guys. In TFA, the setting is completely inconsistent as somehow the First Order, which have an unoriginally identical setup to the Empire with all the same format military hardware, is in charge, and the Resistance are made up of the ex-Rebels, who from RoTJ would now actually be the incumbent government rather than a 'resistance'.
It's only 30 years between RoTJ and TFA, nowhere near enough time to for a First Order, or Snoke to establish themselves as the dominant force in the galaxy with associated armies and hardware. At what point do the rebels rename themselves resistance? Why aren't they in charge now that the Empire is destroyed?The whole thing was a mess.
Had this been done properly, the story should have maybe been about how the Rebels, now in power have fragmented factions and are starting to crumble, which allows a dark element to take seed. Instead they just went for 'A New Hope now with added SJW!'. It sucked arse and is just getting worse.
Obviously there will be a showdown between Ray and Kylo Ren, echoing Return of the Jedi but surely with a different outcome.
Don't kid yourself. It will be exactly the same and you know it.
If you look at the trade balances between the U.S and the countries/blocks Trump has so far threatened or actually started a trade war with you can see that they all have a trade imbalance in their favor.
But it doesn't work like that. Because you're talking millions of businesses that are all interdependent, when you turn the tap off they all suffer.
Global prosperity increased massively with global trade, the only result of closing that off if is a reduced overall economy. ie Nobody wins.
Remember Xi is there for life, he knows he can simply wait Trump out and allow him to squander the US's position in the world. The Chinese probably can't believe their luck. They will already have a strategy in place to drag this out for 6.5 more years ready to pounce once Trump leaves with the US in tatters.
It actually is. Nature abhors a vacuum, and once global trade became easy, thanks to improved comms and transport technology, then the only possible outcome is a rebalancing of wealth from the extreme rich (on a global scale) to everyone else.
To give you an idea, what is an unskilled labour salary in the US, $13/hour? In Indonesia it's $10/day. You simply cannot compete with that, so the only option is to find something else to do that can't be exported easily.
It may be that the $13/hour labourer was facing a decline to $12/hour and thought they had nothing to lose, but only because you don't fully grasp that it could easily be $6/hour. Under Trump's trade war that is now a possibility.
The point here, is that thinking there is nothing to lose is a trap. Especially when you live in the richest country in the world. It's a long way down from the top, be careful what you wish for.
China has leverage because we've let them take over virtually all our manufacturing.
Technology (cheap easy communication and transport) unleashed Globalisation and no amount of complaining will get that genie back in the bottle. The smart move is to deal with the new environment we are all in and try and make it work in your favour, the dumb move is to pretend you can wish the world back to the 1950's. Trump is firmly in the latter camp, and it can't possibly work.
If you don't want desperate people destabilizing the world then you need to do something about their desperation.
The rich can afford to wait out storms, and even get richer from recessions by buying low and selling high: be it stocks, co's, or real-estate. Recession bargain-hunting is Warren Buffett's main financial weapon, and he's arguably the richest dude on the planet.
Trump himself said the same thing back in 80's when discussing his wealth. NYC in the 70's was in a slump, and he knew that slumps are the best time to buy.
It could be that he might even engineer a recession in order to get some more bargains. He only cares about himself so anything is possible.
Trump may unfairly get the blame for a slump.
It's only unfair if it happens in his first 1-2 years like poor old Obama who inherited the country one of the worst positions in a decades. After that it's all you. You are the boss, you take responsibility.
FWIW, Australia with a mix of conservative and liberal leadership is currently into it's 26th year without a recession, the Dutch managed the same thing until the GFC screwed things up. So if Trump can't make the good times last a piddly 8 years he deserves blame.
At least in America, protectionism is popular with the left, and much less so with conservatives.
Left, right, liberal and conservative are meaningless in America. Democrats and Republicans have a mish-mash of policy that seems to only exist to satiate their need for power than actually improve the outcomes for the people.
United we stand, divided we fall. Ask yourself which direction we are going in and if you choose to continue down that path....
Why would any study of marine life in the early 1900's be considered reliable? Underwater technology was almost no-existent so any information from this time would've been based on guessing and black magic.
I am having a hard time reconciling the following two parts of the write-up: "Historically, startups have been the engine of US economy" vs. "While companies that were less than two years old made up about 13% of all companies in 1985, they only accounted for 8% in 2014". Even at their highest number of 13% during the, supposedly, "good old days", how can they be considered "the engine"?..
Engine is probably the wrong word, maybe fertiliser or seed is better. With less fertiliser or seed you eventually produce less food. This will have consequences sooner or later.
NUMMI built about 7,000 cars and trucks per week; Tesla isn't even to that level yet. And Tesla loves to talk about how much simpler EVs are to build than ICEs, so perhaps Tesla simply isn't as space efficient at GM or Toyota - needing the same space to build half the number of vehicles?
We've already been over this. It's not my problem that you don't understand it.
You have not made a single argument to support the statement that "the US is very rightwing and right extremist". All you have done is repeatedly argued for the supposed benefits of socialism, argued that Western Europe is supposedly socialist, and argued that Western Europe is supposedly doing economically better than the US.
If that's your interpretation then it's clear you don't really understand, so there's not much point continuing...
Depends. A penalty shouldn't be based on how much you hate a company, it is proportional to damage done. I can't work out the detail, but TFA implies there were 5000 customers affected which means the penalty is about the price of two new iPhones per customer,
This seems appropriate to me.
Yes: the US is about average among OECD nations, which is what you would expect for the biggest OECD member.
No, it is below average, and I would expect the richest nation to be at the top, or at least in the top 10. It is under-performing, mostly due to poor right wing policy. We know this because there is a clear pattern between not only successful nations (as per OECD), but even successful states within the US (more left wing states are represented towards the top, more right wings states toward the bottom). I get that you refuse to believe this because of cognitive dissonance, but the data disagrees with you.
(WIthout 10-20 million illegals and without Democrats f*cking up the lives of African Americans, the US would do even better.)
Yeah, yeah, whatever excuse you need to keep the cognitive dissonance alive...
In any case, how does that support your view that the US is "very rightwing and right extremist"?
We've already been over this. It's not my problem that you don't understand it.
Slashdot Mirror
It could also simply be that the killer is mentally ill and none of the above applies.
Not could, is.
The graph of human behaviour is not a straight line, so what triggers on person doesn't necessarily trigger another. To plan out an action like this and also pull it off puts you firmly in the nuts end of the spectrum.
I'm a colored person
No you're not, your a troll trotting out the same old trolly statements week in week out. It's all getting very boring...
...and get clean Industry Standard Bottles delivered to them. They paste on their labels, fill, and cap with custom twist-off caps, and sell to the consumer. On average, a bottle will make it through the system 10 times before it breaks or is lost.
So yeah, it can be done, people just need to get off their asses and do it.
First issue, why bother with a label? Surely that adds energy to both add and remove that isn't really required?
Second, I realise this won't work for everyone, but with the explosion in microbreweries I now have 5 of them within walking distance of my house. Most of them do takeaway Growlers so you simply use your own vessel, vastly reducing waste.
Exactly. So why hasn't anyone created an AI robot that can do this? I'll wait for an answer.
You are anyone, maybe you could start us off with your reason?
Seriously, now is the time for Robotics to be brought up to speed on separating goods.
Cardboard made from plantation trees and stored in landfill is actually a form of carbon sequestration which a good for the environment. It just makes it hard to process when the paper/cardboard is glued to plastic or glass. Simplified packaging would go a long way to solving this issue.
If the crooks were stupid, they would have transferred it from the victim bank into the crook's personal Wells Fargo account, and left it there. The crooks weren't stupid.
I used to work in a bank and even if you put it in your own account it would take a lot of time and effort including a court order to get it back.
Banks are in the business of protecting their customer's money, even if their customer is a crook.
The move it around through several countries right away, then use burner accounts in whichever countries to buy goods, things like laptops, gold, diamonds, etc. Move the diamonds, laptops, gold, whatever to another country where the government officials are part of a fencing operation, etc.
Casinos are the easy option. Transfer to a foreign bank, withdraw the cash and buy chips, lose a little to wash it, come out with clean money. We had a case here where one guy washed $90M at the local casino and no-one batted an eyelid until it was too late.
In practice a President has only a limited effect on the economy, at least in the short term.
Only if he has an uncooperative Congress and Senate which a lot of Presidents still a manage to do ok with. If you control Executive, AG, Supreme Court and Congress and Senate and you still blow everything up, it is all you.
The American working class doesn't have to give ground so the rest of the world can be lifted out of poverty. That's one way to do it, but not the _only_ way.
I agree, but that seems to be the way the American conservatives prefer it to go. Convince the voters that foreigners are the enemy in order to manipulate them into giving themselves more power and wealth.
As I said, the happy path lies in accepting globalisation as an unstoppable force of nature, and tweak your economy to take advantage of it rather than wasting energy fighting an unwinnable battle
We could just as easily take it from the extremely rich. If we were willing to, that is.
For some reason the rich have convinced the poor and middle class that this a bad idea. The US is the only place I know of where this has happened, so it's a interesting case study into how such a crazy situation like that can occur.
In 1980 in both Europe and the US, the top 1% took in 10% of their respective incomes. Today the top 1% in Europe take in 12% while in the US it's 20%. So inequality is getting much worse in the US and the disadvantaged somehow keep voting in the people keep the cycle going. It really is nuts.
The richest 3 people in the US have more wealth than the bottom 50%. Why don't you simply confiscate their wealth and double the wealth of half the country overnight? It sounds unjust on the surface, but in a country where over 500,000 people die each year from poverty, isn't it better to sacrifice 3 people for the sake of 160 million? And the flow on effect from that one action would trickle up to the other 160 million within weeks.
If we're ok with sacrificing conscripts in wars, why aren't we ok with sacrificing a handful of conscripts to save the economy and millions of lives? We don't even have to kill them, just strip them of all their assets and leave them on a median wage to live on for the rest of their lives.
This too is bullshit since keeping the higher paid jobs here in the USA spreads the wealth to local service industry which creates more customers that can afford airpods and other imported chinese garbage. You think poor Chinese or Indonesian workers are buying Harley Davidson? No, USA factory and service workers are.
I've actually been in a Harley Davidson dealer in Indonesia, so someone there is buying them.
Size of US Market: 320M
Size of Global Market: 7500M
There are now more billionaires in Asia than the US
Do the maths
Answering those questions would have made the setting for "The Force Awakens" much less jarring, but would have made it more difficult to incorporate the original three actors of the first trilogy.
I don't think so, in fact it could've have been a whole lot better.
The Rebels establish a new Republic and the next era starts there +30 years. Rather than simply re-do A New Hope, have a fresh story where Leia is the Queen, or President or something, Han is an old drunk hanging out a dingy bars, Lando could've been included as he should be as a local boss, with Chewy as head of security, Luke can still be a hermit, and the Rey and Kylo could be written-in easily as the precocious next generation upstarts coming through the ranks. (Screw Finn, his character sucked)
The story would start out that something isn't right in the crumbling Republic, and Lando and Chewy are tasked by Leia to investigate. During this mission they collect Rey and Kylo somehow along the way, shit happens, they bump into Han and Luke, they join up, then split up and Kylo goes bad, ultimately resulting in the discovery (to the audience) of a new dark side of the Force. Some end-battle ensues which the Rebels win a Pyrrhic victory and sets the scene for the next film, ie the Republic beat a mysterious Sith boss, but it uncovers a larger menace that they realise that because of their 30 years of peace they aren't equipped to deal with. So it leaves the audience with anticipation about all the possibilities for the next film
I thought of that in 5 minutes and it's already better than any Star Wars film produced since 1980. And it also would've allowed the original cast including Lando to hand over the baton with an original story, not a crap remake. Then the second film would be all original with no more old characters.
but with no Jedi to maintain order and only evil force users the First Order rises out of the ashes.
Hang on, that's not right. After RoTJ, both Jedi and Sith are gone, and more importantly the Rebels win, so there's no more bad guys. In TFA, the setting is completely inconsistent as somehow the First Order, which have an unoriginally identical setup to the Empire with all the same format military hardware, is in charge, and the Resistance are made up of the ex-Rebels, who from RoTJ would now actually be the incumbent government rather than a 'resistance'.
It's only 30 years between RoTJ and TFA, nowhere near enough time to for a First Order, or Snoke to establish themselves as the dominant force in the galaxy with associated armies and hardware. At what point do the rebels rename themselves resistance? Why aren't they in charge now that the Empire is destroyed?The whole thing was a mess.
Had this been done properly, the story should have maybe been about how the Rebels, now in power have fragmented factions and are starting to crumble, which allows a dark element to take seed. Instead they just went for 'A New Hope now with added SJW!'. It sucked arse and is just getting worse.
Obviously there will be a showdown between Ray and Kylo Ren, echoing Return of the Jedi but surely with a different outcome.
Don't kid yourself. It will be exactly the same and you know it.
If you look at the trade balances between the U.S and the countries/blocks Trump has so far threatened or actually started a trade war with you can see that they all have a trade imbalance in their favor.
But it doesn't work like that. Because you're talking millions of businesses that are all interdependent, when you turn the tap off they all suffer.
Global prosperity increased massively with global trade, the only result of closing that off if is a reduced overall economy. ie Nobody wins.
Remember Xi is there for life, he knows he can simply wait Trump out and allow him to squander the US's position in the world. The Chinese probably can't believe their luck. They will already have a strategy in place to drag this out for 6.5 more years ready to pounce once Trump leaves with the US in tatters.
Not an argument.
It actually is. Nature abhors a vacuum, and once global trade became easy, thanks to improved comms and transport technology, then the only possible outcome is a rebalancing of wealth from the extreme rich (on a global scale) to everyone else.
To give you an idea, what is an unskilled labour salary in the US, $13/hour? In Indonesia it's $10/day. You simply cannot compete with that, so the only option is to find something else to do that can't be exported easily.
It may be that the $13/hour labourer was facing a decline to $12/hour and thought they had nothing to lose, but only because you don't fully grasp that it could easily be $6/hour. Under Trump's trade war that is now a possibility.
The point here, is that thinking there is nothing to lose is a trap. Especially when you live in the richest country in the world. It's a long way down from the top, be careful what you wish for.
China has leverage because we've let them take over virtually all our manufacturing.
Technology (cheap easy communication and transport) unleashed Globalisation and no amount of complaining will get that genie back in the bottle. The smart move is to deal with the new environment we are all in and try and make it work in your favour, the dumb move is to pretend you can wish the world back to the 1950's.
Trump is firmly in the latter camp, and it can't possibly work.
If you don't want desperate people destabilizing the world then you need to do something about their desperation.
Agree 100%
The rich can afford to wait out storms, and even get richer from recessions by buying low and selling high: be it stocks, co's, or real-estate. Recession bargain-hunting is Warren Buffett's main financial weapon, and he's arguably the richest dude on the planet.
Trump himself said the same thing back in 80's when discussing his wealth. NYC in the 70's was in a slump, and he knew that slumps are the best time to buy.
It could be that he might even engineer a recession in order to get some more bargains. He only cares about himself so anything is possible.
Trump may unfairly get the blame for a slump.
It's only unfair if it happens in his first 1-2 years like poor old Obama who inherited the country one of the worst positions in a decades. After that it's all you. You are the boss, you take responsibility.
FWIW, Australia with a mix of conservative and liberal leadership is currently into it's 26th year without a recession, the Dutch managed the same thing until the GFC screwed things up. So if Trump can't make the good times last a piddly 8 years he deserves blame.
At least in America, protectionism is popular with the left, and much less so with conservatives.
Left, right, liberal and conservative are meaningless in America. Democrats and Republicans have a mish-mash of policy that seems to only exist to satiate their need for power than actually improve the outcomes for the people.
United we stand, divided we fall. Ask yourself which direction we are going in and if you choose to continue down that path....
Is "fertilizer" really a better word for something — anything — you'd wish to praise?
Is Fertiliser not a good thing where you live? Strange comment....
Speaking of fish... in a barrel... BANG!
I'm sure you had a point here, maybe read the question next time....
Why would any study of marine life in the early 1900's be considered reliable? Underwater technology was almost no-existent so any information from this time would've been based on guessing and black magic.
I am having a hard time reconciling the following two parts of the write-up: "Historically, startups have been the engine of US economy" vs. "While companies that were less than two years old made up about 13% of all companies in 1985, they only accounted for 8% in 2014". Even at their highest number of 13% during the, supposedly, "good old days", how can they be considered "the engine"?..
Engine is probably the wrong word, maybe fertiliser or seed is better. With less fertiliser or seed you eventually produce less food. This will have consequences sooner or later.
I would think dust and dirt would be a bigger problem than humidity....the first problem is going to be the temperature ...
Because no-one else thought about this until now...quick get Elon on the phone!
NUMMI built about 7,000 cars and trucks per week; Tesla isn't even to that level yet. And Tesla loves to talk about how much simpler EVs are to build than ICEs, so perhaps Tesla simply isn't as space efficient at GM or Toyota - needing the same space to build half the number of vehicles?
I think you are confusing simple with small...
You have not made a single argument to support the statement that "the US is very rightwing and right extremist". All you have done is repeatedly argued for the supposed benefits of socialism, argued that Western Europe is supposedly socialist, and argued that Western Europe is supposedly doing economically better than the US.
If that's your interpretation then it's clear you don't really understand, so there's not much point continuing...
Depends. A penalty shouldn't be based on how much you hate a company, it is proportional to damage done. I can't work out the detail, but TFA implies there were 5000 customers affected which means the penalty is about the price of two new iPhones per customer,
This seems appropriate to me.
No OECD member is socialist. Socialists are totalitarian mass murderers, and I would thank you to stop referring to Western democracies that way.
Says you... http://www.lmfgtfy.com/?q=soci...
Yes: the US is about average among OECD nations, which is what you would expect for the biggest OECD member.
No, it is below average, and I would expect the richest nation to be at the top, or at least in the top 10. It is under-performing, mostly due to poor right wing policy. We know this because there is a clear pattern between not only successful nations (as per OECD), but even successful states within the US (more left wing states are represented towards the top, more right wings states toward the bottom). I get that you refuse to believe this because of cognitive dissonance, but the data disagrees with you.
(WIthout 10-20 million illegals and without Democrats f*cking up the lives of African Americans, the US would do even better.)
Yeah, yeah, whatever excuse you need to keep the cognitive dissonance alive...
In any case, how does that support your view that the US is "very rightwing and right extremist"?
We've already been over this. It's not my problem that you don't understand it.