So not only does a mobile user need to pay T-Mobile, Sprint, etc for data, but then they need pay Comcast for the ability to use that data if it's >480p?!
Wow. Good thing the FCC / FTC / current administration all have the consumers back.........
Okay, so quick question: would the Net Neutrality rules, as implemented by the FCC before the recent walk-back, have prevented this?
I use my real name here, and on Reddit. It's a credibility thing. I did get sued for $3 Million for something I wrote on my personal blog. That person ended up swearing a $300,000 bond for my defense, which should be a warning to others.
I use my real name here, and on Reddit. It's a credibility thing. I did get sued for $3 Million for something I wrote on my personal blog. That person ended up swearing a $300,000 bond for my defense, which should be a warning to others.
Suppose you say something that the community doesn't like. Suppose it's OK to say that today, but tomorrow the community standards change. (Such as the thing with Apu in "The Simpsons". Poking fun at Indian convenience store owners was OK up until recently.)
(Or gun enthusiasts.)
The community could ostracize you, they could call up your employer and complain about you. Your business could be downrated to 1 star on Yelp (or GlassDoor or whatever). You could be doxxed, you could be swatted. If you were a Facebook user, Facebook could ban you, and the community could talk about you all day and you wouldn't be able to respond. Your voice of protest wouldn't be heard.
And as to your court case, how much did you have to pay up front to fund that? And it was a gamble up front, meaning that you might not have gotten that investment back. Additionally, how much of your time and energy went into proving yourself in a court of law?
You're honestly saying that regular people - people full-time of families and jobs, who don't have ten grand to wager on a court case - should shoulder that sort of burden?
Using your real name works for you, but don't expect it to be the right solution for everyone.
I can tell you from my experience on Facebook that having your account tied to your personal identity doesn't mean shit for how credible your posts are.
You're missing the point.
It isn't for credibility, it's for control. If you say something that Facebook doesn't like, it can ban you, and if you're *required* to prove your identity Facebook can keep you banned. (Gun enthusiast sites, for instance.)
There's also the issue of consequences. If you say something that the community doesn't like (but is otherwise legal), the community can pound you into the ground for it. For example, harass your employer until you get fired (this actually happens).
While there is certainly a lot of trolls and general assinine behaviour on the net, forcing people to use their real identity has more important consequences. It's throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Closed toed shoes...probably lead with something a little more exacting. But I do like that a remote place like this has access to Amazon.
Closed toed shoes is probably a safety issue, it protects the feet in case you drop something. We have that restriction here in the US in light workshop areas.
I'm curious about the economic position of the town. Purchasing goods requires money, so money leaves the town, and to be sustainable money has to also come into the town, which means the town produces something that is saleable.
What saleable item does [a small town high in the Himalayas] produce? Just wondering.
Actually I didn't lose. Trump is going to prison for the rest of his life and Republican faggot cowards like yourself will have to just deal with it ongoing forever, bitch. Don't cry snowflake, Donald doesn't care if you live or die lol. Moron.
Actually, you did.
There's a movement afoot (check the hashtag #WalkAway) of people fleeing the Democratic party. It began with this video.
Watched and reposted by hundreds of thousands of people, it has sparked a wave of dissent and abandonment of the Democratic ideals in this country. People fed up with suppression of free speech, insults, false reporting, and general hatred from the left.
The movement is reportedly huge, with over a billion related views and reposts on the subject, and an estimated several million (!) adherents.
Your incessant hatred has brought you to ruin, and good riddance.
It got attention because of Russia meddling in US politics. Don't be obtuse.
It got attention because Hillary lost, and there had to be *some* reason for it that didn't put the blame on Hillary or the Democrats.
Along with sexism, misogyny, Bernie Sanders, Wikileaks, low information voters, women under pressure from men, and James Comey.
Hillary's comment is informative:
"I never imagined that [Putin] would have the audacity to launch a massive covert attack against our own democracy, right under our noses - and that he'd get away with it."
The Russian interference amounted to about $1.25 million per month, compared to the $1.2 billion spent by Hillary, or $617 the million spent by Trump.
But it's probably good to be able to tell who's purchasing ads in future elections.
So... just to be clear, you're saying it's the victim's fault, and Uber shouldn't take a look at their security practices and maybe change things to prevent this in the future.
If you count those as successes, you're profoundly retarded and there's nothing that can be done for you anymore. You're too detached from reality. Sorry!
Yes, I count Trump meeting with Kim Jong-un a success, as does most non-retarded people.
(The excellent economic results didn't hurt, either - something else non-retarded people can appreciate.)
When the vote for Net Neutrality comes get ready for the sock puppet silly flying monkey circus. The game will play out like this:
1. Create a compelling distraction a week or two before the NN vote
2. Ensure it is big news
3. make the news even bigger
4. sell the drama
5. make the disaster or kim kardashian's ass an imminent national security threat
6. whip the electorate into a frenzy, a snowstorm of outraged snowflakes looking to feel powerless, morally superior and useless
7. When everyone looks at the shiny ass, quietly defeat NN
8. Examine Kim's ass more closely
9. Politician on both sides high five each other at fucking over the electorate....again
Unless this issue is focused on until the vote your NN is fucked.
While there is some merit in that recap of the last two weeks, the word on the street is that it was done by democrats as a distraction from Trump's successes.
Trump had a particularly good week, with three popular successes: really good economic news, North Korea (Trump/Kim summit, June 12), and Trump metaphorically "gave the finger" to the G7 folks by withdrawing the US endorsement of their statement.
The analysis conjectures that the Democrats ginned up the populace with all the "children ripped from parents" rhetoric as a way to distract everyone from Trump's success. Then the restaurant thing happened, and Maxine Waters encouraged Democrats everywhere to harass government employees, DHS advised government employees to start carrying handguns... and thankfully that rhetoric has started to cool off.
I'm not saying that your description didn't happen, I just don't think NN is a big enough issue to have caused it.
Also, note that this was a vote to reinstate the NN that we already had, and not new legislation in the form of a compromise that everyone could agree on, protecting the needs of society while allowing providers to run their business and innovate.
Oh no, it could never have been *that*. Whatever was I thinking?
Protectionist trade policy is the knee-jerk reaction of the weak. Retaliation by not just the Chinese, but America's traditional allies in Europe, Canada, and Mexico will cost US jobs, not create them.
There were originally 6 good reasons for the tariffs:
1) Chinese manufacturers take our designs, make extras, and sell counterfeits as if they were original(*) 2) Chinese manufacturers steal our IP and trade secrets for other products 3) The Chinese violate licensing agreements (ie - hacked copies of software) and the government does nothing about it. 4) Chinese working in the US commit industrial espionage and send the information back to China 5) The Chinese government subsidizes certain industries so that they can sell goods under cost, driving industries from other countries out of business 6) (I forgot what the 6th big item was. Maybe allowing companies to do business with N. Korea?)
On #5 above, China has been subsidizing their steel production, pushing US foundries out of business. The US has only one foundry left that can make the steel plates needed for ships, so this is a national security risk. You can't make battleships without steel plates. See Canadian Aluminum subsidies.
Everyone who has taken Econ 101 will parrot the old saw "trade sanctions are bad", and everyone will wail and moan about how the sanctions have hurt *them* (so they must be bad - ya!).
China violates their trade agreements in every possible way, so much so that it would *almost* be better to not trade with China at all.
Note that for the first time in ever we have a businessman leading the country. This was not a capricious decision, it came from a long history of abuse. It's intended to fix the many and long-term existing problems, it's good for the majority of domestic businesses, and it was a campaign promise.
Take the long view.
(*) This has happened so frequently, it's a meme. Make your monitor or VCR or other electronic device in China, and see eBay flooded with counterfeit copies overnight. Does no one remember that?
I used to watch John Oliver, back when it was funny.
Raw, un-insightful insults are not funny, and half the country will turn it off to watch something else.
For comparison, check out Dave Chapelle's monologue and hosting of SNL right after the 2016 election. His jokes were witty, showing a wry take on the situation, with a sense of humor.
For a non-contrast, check out any of Bill Maher's monologues - they're invariably pointed, mean, and with no insight or content. He's selling shock and promoting outrage instead of humor(*).
I thought Oliver's original take - getting the audience involved with his antics - was brilliant, and his research brought real issues into focus...until he ran a segment about a subject I actually knew something about (vitamin D), which was completely in error, and I suddenly realized that I was taking his results as gospel without skepticism. Fell into the trap and didn't know it.
Anyway, I don't like contempt dressed up as comedy. Lena Dunham, Cathy Griffin, Bill Maher, Steven Colbert, and all the rest.
It's not creative, and it's not funny.
(*) Which is sad, because he's the only liberal celebrity I've seen who can rub two thoughts together to come up with a rational argument. He's very bright, but doesn't use his talent in any effective way.
What possible benefit could there be to posting on Slashdot? Yet you are doing it.
You can't come up with a reason for posting - so there's none?
I post on Slashdot specifically to practice writing and debating skills. It gives immediate feedback, so meshes well with Gladwell's "20,000 hours of practice" theory.
I also post to help innoculate myself against insults and reduce my dependence on "what other people think", a character flaw of mine that many people have. (Note: I don't consider your response matching one of those.)
I can understand the need to talk, and for social empathy and all that.
It's just that to make a promise and enter into a binding agreement (for money) and then *break* that promise...
Is the need for social empathy so great that people will take a chance on ruining their lives for it?
It doesn't *seem* like a good trade-off, but then I'm less on the emotional side of things than most people.
To be sure, it's a pretty stupid idea. But one can almost understand where he was coming from. Anything else, including the Extended Universe, would just have been variations on the pre-existing themes.
I dunno about the "anything else" part.
I read a story somewhere about a hypothetical origin of the Sith, being a temple on a long-abandoned planet somewhere that still held a sort of sentient psychic malevolence. A story revolving around finding this out (the origins of the Sith), tracking down the planet, and the subsequent battle to destroy it might be pretty interesting. The original Sith don't need to be even remotely human, and could make for some creative backstory.
Part of good storytelling is creativity and color - things that are simply interesting to find out. Add a little surprise and unexpected development, enforce interior logic, and you've got the makings of a good movie.
...or you could just foreshadow the solution in the one out-of-place scene at the beginning of the movie, have a lot of things happen for no apparent reason, use a lot of special effects, have the characters verbally explain what's going on, and let the outcome depend on the heroic efforts of one special person.
In short, it's manufactured outrage intended to gin up exactly this sort of reaction in people.
1) Trump is only enforcing the law 2) Many children arrive unaccompanied 3) Children can only be separated for 20 days 4) Their conditions are actually pretty good, better than most poor American children get, and better than where they came from. 5) We separate citizen children from their parents, when we put parents in jail 6) Obama did it
And finally:
7) Asylum seekers not breaking the law are not separated from their children.
(*) To say Breitbart is not a valid source, you would have to point out that these facts are in error. Are any of these facts in error? No? Then Breitbart is a perfectly acceptable source for these facts.
About 25% of the stock is shorted (varies day-to-day, but it's a single-digit fraction of the total).
When you short a stock on margin and the price goes up, you have to add money to your margin account to cover the potential loss.
Tesla stock is up almost 100 points over the last month, roughly 35% ($370 up from $275).
Tesla short sellers are taking a bath right now, to the tune of $2 billion in the last month.
A fair number of those short sellers would be interested in throwing a pile of cash (say $100,000) at a disgruntled employee to damage the production line.
Anyone care to bet against that prediction?
(The next step will probably be to get the FBI involved.)
Tell us about your struggles being white and priviledged.. go on.. it must have been so hard for you never going hungry.
P.S. The world thinks you're a total piece of dogshit for supporting your pussy-grabbing child molester of a President. The ENTIRE fucking world. Soak up that hate, you've earned it.
Yet another awful person. Can't let other people be happy, can't say anything nice.
I guess 4th grade was too hard for your tiny, tiny brain. Every time you post your mindless dribble it lowers the I.Q. of the entire Internet.
You got modded down, but your comment is spot on.
The left has been just relentlessly awful the past couple of weeks, and the bad part is that it'll only get worse as the midterms get closer.
Trump's son posts a picture enjoying father's day with his kid, and gets a torrent of insults. Trump's daughter shares a picture cuddling her infant son and triggers a tidal wave of hatred.
she gave President Obama a computing history lesson on the same day he learned to code in 2014.
I'm curious. Do any of you know if President Trump has learned to code? And if so, in which language would he work?
Since he's considered by many to be the highest-IQ president ever, I assume this would have been an easy task for him.
I know many very high IQ people who don't know the first thing about coding. Many scientists and college professors don't know even the basics, and some of the ones that do think making a spreadsheet equation is coding.
There's lots of easy tasks that people just don't get around to learning, or who don't find an immediate need for. I don't repair my own vehicle, for instance, even though many of the people at my local hackerspace think nothing of replacing brakes or fixing a blown head gasket.
To them, it's straightforward and anyone can do it. "Howcome you never learned to do this?"
It's the same with other skills like home wiring and plumbing. Many people shy away from doing electronics, while engineers at Hackaday can make complex electronics boards but can't program a microcontroller.
(Programming a microcontroller is easy! Howcome you never learned to do it?)
I grew up helping my dad wire homes professionally, so electronics - even high-voltage electronics (that can kill) - doesn't scare me.
That's also a skill everyone should have - right?
(Home wiring is easy! Howcome you never learned to do it?)
Trump has a lot of life accomplishments, so I don't think calling him down for not having learned coding is a particularly fruitful avenue for insults.
Statistical methods are based on what are known as "stable distributions". A stable distribution is one where a subset of examples, selected randomly, will have the same characteristics as the full set. Normally this refers to a bell curve, so if you have a bell curve population and you select a sample at random, then the sample mean will tend towards the population mean and the sample width will tend towards the population width.
It is this characteristic that lets us extend measurements of characteristics from a subset to the characteristics of the whole population.
(There are a couple of other distributions that are stable, but they are fairly rare in the real world. IIRC, Nile river flooding follows a Levy distribution, and was the first instance of a stable distribution that wasn't a bell curve.)
This only works if the subset selection is random. If the selection isn't random, then the results can be skewed towards randomness (you won't see an effect that's there, the most likely outcome) or phantom effects that aren't really there.
That is the defect in the Mediterranean diet study, that the participants were not placed on one diet (or the other) at random. In particular, husband and wife participants were both placed on the same diet, and in one case an entire town of participants were placed on the same diet.
Of note: When the flawed placements are deleted from the data, the Mediterranean diet still stands and there is still a clear effect indicated by the data.
"This affected only a small part of the trial," says Martínez González. When the researchers reanalyzed the data excluding the nonrandomized people, the results were the same, he adds.
So the conclusions of the study are still strong: the diet correlates well and strongly with reduced heart attacks.
Out of an abundance of caution and professional ethics, the study was adjusted with softer language in the conclusions.
And yet, our noble MSM is reporting only that the study was retracted, comparing it to 50-ish other studies that were similarly flawed.
With predictable results, such as the post this is in reply to.
(Exercise for the reader: Is the MSM doing more harm than good here, or is it the other way around? Many, many other articles report the news with an opinion, such as "Trump meets with Kim, but it won't result in anything useful". Why couldn't NPR have a similar headline for *this* article, such as "Diet study retracted, despite being accurate"?)
but somebody made a good point about this switch to solar & renewables: it's going to crash the economy.
Let me explain. We've got massive amounts of investment wealth tied up in fossil fuels. People's retirements are heavily vested in them. At the rate we're going their value, while not worthless, is going to be massively diminished. And it's happening fast. Plus there's no massive natural resource to replace it.
We're going to wipe out trillions in value and replace it with, well, nothing really. Now, from a practical standpoint we've still got power. But human beings aren't very practical. When that wealth shift happens it's going to make a mess of things. The people who lose their shirts in oil futures are likely to be abandoned. And that's before we start talking about what's going to happen to the middle east.
While I agree with your assessment, I think there's more context to this.
Tesla is about to come online at 5,000 cars a week (250,000 cars/year) and ramping up from there. Tesla is a highly desired car, and will probably be a big seller.
It's likely that Tesla charging will take up some of the slack. America (and much of China and a few other places like Canada) will transition away from gasoline and rely on electricity instead. The extra burden will be taken up by solar and other renewables, while gasoline use diminishes.
The big losers in the future will probably be gasoline producers and ICE car manufacturers. Gas stations and repair shops will either switch or go out of business (Teslas don't have many moving parts, and so don't need many repairs).
Once the country is largely running on electricity, we can look into replacing fossil fuel generation plants with something more eco-friendly.
Want to prevent this horrible nightmare future? It's really easy in principle, but impossible to implement in reality: Put a stop to the ever increasing wage gap, drive up baseline wages, and drive down top earnings, so that the middle class grows again instead of shrinks.
I agree with your analysis completely, now let's discuss actions.
One thing that consistently drives down wages is cheap imported labor, and this is mostly caused in the US by unrestricted illegal immigration and specialized visa programs such as H1B.
That unrestricted immigration drives down wages is both common sense and shown by economic models. Yes, a *little* immigration is good for the economy, but not at the level we have.
(Of note: The US allows about 1.1 million *legal* immigrants each year, which is more than most countries. I'm not referring to them.)
Yes, there are dozens of studies that show how imported cheap labor is good for the economy, which look at the effects of only a small slice of the economy. Companies can make cheaper goods, and that's good for the companies and their aggregate increased profit means a better economy.
... and yet, other studies have shown that wages have stagnated over the last 10 years, not keeping up with inflation. The cheap labor studies don't look at the economy as a whole - they focus completely on GDP and disregard the welfare of the American people.
Want to prevent this horrible nightmare future?
One way is to stop the influx of illegal immigration, and then allow a yearly number of immigrants calculated to benefit the economy.
This is a common-sense action that can be taken to prevent the "horrible nightmare" scenario.
Slashdot Mirror
So not only does a mobile user need to pay T-Mobile, Sprint, etc for data, but then they need pay Comcast for the ability to use that data if it's >480p?!
Wow. Good thing the FCC / FTC / current administration all have the consumers back.........
Okay, so quick question: would the Net Neutrality rules, as implemented by the FCC before the recent walk-back, have prevented this?
Asking for a friend...
I use my real name here, and on Reddit. It's a credibility thing. I did get sued for $3 Million for something I wrote on my personal blog. That person ended up swearing a $300,000 bond for my defense, which should be a warning to others.
I use my real name here, and on Reddit. It's a credibility thing. I did get sued for $3 Million for something I wrote on my personal blog. That person ended up swearing a $300,000 bond for my defense, which should be a warning to others.
Suppose you say something that the community doesn't like. Suppose it's OK to say that today, but tomorrow the community standards change. (Such as the thing with Apu in "The Simpsons". Poking fun at Indian convenience store owners was OK up until recently.)
(Or gun enthusiasts.)
The community could ostracize you, they could call up your employer and complain about you. Your business could be downrated to 1 star on Yelp (or GlassDoor or whatever). You could be doxxed, you could be swatted. If you were a Facebook user, Facebook could ban you, and the community could talk about you all day and you wouldn't be able to respond. Your voice of protest wouldn't be heard.
And as to your court case, how much did you have to pay up front to fund that? And it was a gamble up front, meaning that you might not have gotten that investment back. Additionally, how much of your time and energy went into proving yourself in a court of law?
You're honestly saying that regular people - people full-time of families and jobs, who don't have ten grand to wager on a court case - should shoulder that sort of burden?
Using your real name works for you, but don't expect it to be the right solution for everyone.
I can tell you from my experience on Facebook that having your account tied to your personal identity doesn't mean shit for how credible your posts are.
You're missing the point.
It isn't for credibility, it's for control. If you say something that Facebook doesn't like, it can ban you, and if you're *required* to prove your identity Facebook can keep you banned. (Gun enthusiast sites, for instance.)
There's also the issue of consequences. If you say something that the community doesn't like (but is otherwise legal), the community can pound you into the ground for it. For example, harass your employer until you get fired (this actually happens).
While there is certainly a lot of trolls and general assinine behaviour on the net, forcing people to use their real identity has more important consequences. It's throwing the baby out with the bath water.
It's about control, not credibility.
Closed toed shoes...probably lead with something a little more exacting. But I do like that a remote place like this has access to Amazon.
Closed toed shoes is probably a safety issue, it protects the feet in case you drop something. We have that restriction here in the US in light workshop areas.
I'm curious about the economic position of the town. Purchasing goods requires money, so money leaves the town, and to be sustainable money has to also come into the town, which means the town produces something that is saleable.
What saleable item does [a small town high in the Himalayas] produce? Just wondering.
Actually I didn't lose. Trump is going to prison for the rest of his life and Republican faggot cowards like yourself will have to just deal with it ongoing forever, bitch. Don't cry snowflake, Donald doesn't care if you live or die lol. Moron.
Actually, you did.
There's a movement afoot (check the hashtag #WalkAway) of people fleeing the Democratic party. It began with this video.
Watched and reposted by hundreds of thousands of people, it has sparked a wave of dissent and abandonment of the Democratic ideals in this country. People fed up with suppression of free speech, insults, false reporting, and general hatred from the left.
The movement is reportedly huge, with over a billion related views and reposts on the subject, and an estimated several million (!) adherents.
Your incessant hatred has brought you to ruin, and good riddance.
It got attention because of Russia meddling in US politics. Don't be obtuse.
It got attention because Hillary lost, and there had to be *some* reason for it that didn't put the blame on Hillary or the Democrats.
Along with sexism, misogyny, Bernie Sanders, Wikileaks, low information voters, women under pressure from men, and James Comey.
Hillary's comment is informative:
"I never imagined that [Putin] would have the audacity to launch a massive covert attack against our own democracy, right under our noses - and that he'd get away with it."
The Russian interference amounted to about $1.25 million per month, compared to the $1.2 billion spent by Hillary, or $617 the million spent by Trump.
But it's probably good to be able to tell who's purchasing ads in future elections.
Some Uber drivers aren't particularly bright.
So... just to be clear, you're saying it's the victim's fault, and Uber shouldn't take a look at their security practices and maybe change things to prevent this in the future.
It's the victim's fault - right?
If you count those as successes, you're profoundly retarded and there's nothing that can be done for you anymore. You're too detached from reality. Sorry!
Yes, I count Trump meeting with Kim Jong-un a success, as does most non-retarded people.
(The excellent economic results didn't hurt, either - something else non-retarded people can appreciate.)
Trump's overall approval rating has been consistently low compared to other recent presidents. But among Republicans, his approval rating is at 90%.
The Republican party is Trump's bitch.
Trump's approval rating is the same as Obama at the same point in his presidency.
I didn't know Obama also had consistently low approval ratings compared to other recent presidents - thanks for the info!
Defend it or loose it. That's the game.
When the vote for Net Neutrality comes get ready for the sock puppet silly flying monkey circus. The game will play out like this:
1. Create a compelling distraction a week or two before the NN vote
2. Ensure it is big news
3. make the news even bigger
4. sell the drama
5. make the disaster or kim kardashian's ass an imminent national security threat
6. whip the electorate into a frenzy, a snowstorm of outraged snowflakes looking to feel powerless, morally superior and useless
7. When everyone looks at the shiny ass, quietly defeat NN
8. Examine Kim's ass more closely
9. Politician on both sides high five each other at fucking over the electorate....again
Unless this issue is focused on until the vote your NN is fucked.
While there is some merit in that recap of the last two weeks, the word on the street is that it was done by democrats as a distraction from Trump's successes.
Trump had a particularly good week, with three popular successes: really good economic news, North Korea (Trump/Kim summit, June 12), and Trump metaphorically "gave the finger" to the G7 folks by withdrawing the US endorsement of their statement.
The analysis conjectures that the Democrats ginned up the populace with all the "children ripped from parents" rhetoric as a way to distract everyone from Trump's success. Then the restaurant thing happened, and Maxine Waters encouraged Democrats everywhere to harass government employees, DHS advised government employees to start carrying handguns... and thankfully that rhetoric has started to cool off.
I'm not saying that your description didn't happen, I just don't think NN is a big enough issue to have caused it.
Also, note that this was a vote to reinstate the NN that we already had, and not new legislation in the form of a compromise that everyone could agree on, protecting the needs of society while allowing providers to run their business and innovate.
Oh no, it could never have been *that*. Whatever was I thinking?
Protectionist trade policy is the knee-jerk reaction of the weak. Retaliation by not just the Chinese, but America's traditional allies in Europe, Canada, and Mexico will cost US jobs, not create them.
There were originally 6 good reasons for the tariffs:
1) Chinese manufacturers take our designs, make extras, and sell counterfeits as if they were original(*)
2) Chinese manufacturers steal our IP and trade secrets for other products
3) The Chinese violate licensing agreements (ie - hacked copies of software) and the government does nothing about it.
4) Chinese working in the US commit industrial espionage and send the information back to China
5) The Chinese government subsidizes certain industries so that they can sell goods under cost, driving industries from other countries out of business
6) (I forgot what the 6th big item was. Maybe allowing companies to do business with N. Korea?)
On #5 above, China has been subsidizing their steel production, pushing US foundries out of business. The US has only one foundry left that can make the steel plates needed for ships, so this is a national security risk. You can't make battleships without steel plates. See Canadian Aluminum subsidies.
Everyone who has taken Econ 101 will parrot the old saw "trade sanctions are bad", and everyone will wail and moan about how the sanctions have hurt *them* (so they must be bad - ya!).
China violates their trade agreements in every possible way, so much so that it would *almost* be better to not trade with China at all.
Note that for the first time in ever we have a businessman leading the country. This was not a capricious decision, it came from a long history of abuse. It's intended to fix the many and long-term existing problems, it's good for the majority of domestic businesses, and it was a campaign promise.
Take the long view.
(*) This has happened so frequently, it's a meme. Make your monitor or VCR or other electronic device in China, and see eBay flooded with counterfeit copies overnight. Does no one remember that?
Thin skinned snowflakes threatened by comedy.
I used to watch John Oliver, back when it was funny.
Raw, un-insightful insults are not funny, and half the country will turn it off to watch something else.
For comparison, check out Dave Chapelle's monologue and hosting of SNL right after the 2016 election. His jokes were witty, showing a wry take on the situation, with a sense of humor.
For a non-contrast, check out any of Bill Maher's monologues - they're invariably pointed, mean, and with no insight or content. He's selling shock and promoting outrage instead of humor(*).
I thought Oliver's original take - getting the audience involved with his antics - was brilliant, and his research brought real issues into focus ...until he ran a segment about a subject I actually knew something about (vitamin D), which was completely in error, and I suddenly realized that I was taking his results as gospel without skepticism. Fell into the trap and didn't know it.
Anyway, I don't like contempt dressed up as comedy. Lena Dunham, Cathy Griffin, Bill Maher, Steven Colbert, and all the rest.
It's not creative, and it's not funny.
(*) Which is sad, because he's the only liberal celebrity I've seen who can rub two thoughts together to come up with a rational argument. He's very bright, but doesn't use his talent in any effective way.
What possible benefit could there be to posting on Slashdot? Yet you are doing it.
You can't come up with a reason for posting - so there's none?
I post on Slashdot specifically to practice writing and debating skills. It gives immediate feedback, so meshes well with Gladwell's "20,000 hours of practice" theory.
I also post to help innoculate myself against insults and reduce my dependence on "what other people think", a character flaw of mine that many people have. (Note: I don't consider your response matching one of those.)
I can understand the need to talk, and for social empathy and all that.
It's just that to make a promise and enter into a binding agreement (for money) and then *break* that promise...
Is the need for social empathy so great that people will take a chance on ruining their lives for it?
It doesn't *seem* like a good trade-off, but then I'm less on the emotional side of things than most people.
one engineer said, who asked to remain anonymous so he wouldn't lose his severance package...
In return for a severance package, he agreed not to talk publicly about problems in the company, so... WTF?
That particular employee is not trustworthy. If for some reason his identity gets out he'll be unemployable.
What possible benefit could there be to talk to the media about this? Does the MSM pay for interviews?
I'm baffled by this behaviour.
To be sure, it's a pretty stupid idea. But one can almost understand where he was coming from. Anything else, including the Extended Universe, would just have been variations on the pre-existing themes.
I dunno about the "anything else" part.
I read a story somewhere about a hypothetical origin of the Sith, being a temple on a long-abandoned planet somewhere that still held a sort of sentient psychic malevolence. A story revolving around finding this out (the origins of the Sith), tracking down the planet, and the subsequent battle to destroy it might be pretty interesting. The original Sith don't need to be even remotely human, and could make for some creative backstory.
Part of good storytelling is creativity and color - things that are simply interesting to find out. Add a little surprise and unexpected development, enforce interior logic, and you've got the makings of a good movie.
Like *that's* never been done before...
Breitbart had a good summary of the situation(*).
In short, it's manufactured outrage intended to gin up exactly this sort of reaction in people.
1) Trump is only enforcing the law
2) Many children arrive unaccompanied
3) Children can only be separated for 20 days
4) Their conditions are actually pretty good, better than most poor American children get, and better than where they came from.
5) We separate citizen children from their parents, when we put parents in jail
6) Obama did it
And finally:
7) Asylum seekers not breaking the law are not separated from their children.
(*) To say Breitbart is not a valid source, you would have to point out that these facts are in error. Are any of these facts in error? No? Then Breitbart is a perfectly acceptable source for these facts.
About 25% of the stock is shorted (varies day-to-day, but it's a single-digit fraction of the total).
When you short a stock on margin and the price goes up, you have to add money to your margin account to cover the potential loss.
Tesla stock is up almost 100 points over the last month, roughly 35% ($370 up from $275).
Tesla short sellers are taking a bath right now, to the tune of $2 billion in the last month.
A fair number of those short sellers would be interested in throwing a pile of cash (say $100,000) at a disgruntled employee to damage the production line.
Anyone care to bet against that prediction?
(The next step will probably be to get the FBI involved.)
Tell us about your struggles being white and priviledged.. go on.. it must have been so hard for you never going hungry.
P.S. The world thinks you're a total piece of dogshit for supporting your pussy-grabbing child molester of a President. The ENTIRE fucking world. Soak up that hate, you've earned it.
Yet another awful person. Can't let other people be happy, can't say anything nice.
I guess 4th grade was too hard for your tiny, tiny brain. Every time you post your mindless dribble it lowers the I.Q. of the entire Internet.
You got modded down, but your comment is spot on.
The left has been just relentlessly awful the past couple of weeks, and the bad part is that it'll only get worse as the midterms get closer.
Trump's son posts a picture enjoying father's day with his kid, and gets a torrent of insults. Trump's daughter shares a picture cuddling her infant son and triggers a tidal wave of hatred.
To believe some celebrities, the US is torturing children at the border right now! It's exactly the same as nazi concentration camps, young children are ripped (note: actual word used) from their mothers and held in cages by the hundreds!
If we could find a way to harness hatred we could run the entire country off of leftist ideals.
I'm curious. Do any of you know if President Trump has learned to code? And if so, in which language would he work?
Since he's considered by many to be the highest-IQ president ever, I assume this would have been an easy task for him.
I know many very high IQ people who don't know the first thing about coding. Many scientists and college professors don't know even the basics, and some of the ones that do think making a spreadsheet equation is coding.
There's lots of easy tasks that people just don't get around to learning, or who don't find an immediate need for. I don't repair my own vehicle, for instance, even though many of the people at my local hackerspace think nothing of replacing brakes or fixing a blown head gasket.
To them, it's straightforward and anyone can do it. "Howcome you never learned to do this?"
It's the same with other skills like home wiring and plumbing. Many people shy away from doing electronics, while engineers at Hackaday can make complex electronics boards but can't program a microcontroller.
(Programming a microcontroller is easy! Howcome you never learned to do it?)
I grew up helping my dad wire homes professionally, so electronics - even high-voltage electronics (that can kill) - doesn't scare me.
That's also a skill everyone should have - right?
(Home wiring is easy! Howcome you never learned to do it?)
Trump has a lot of life accomplishments, so I don't think calling him down for not having learned coding is a particularly fruitful avenue for insults.
Plural of mongoose? Now my OCD is acting up again.
Mongooses?
Mongeese?
First, some background:
Statistical methods are based on what are known as "stable distributions". A stable distribution is one where a subset of examples, selected randomly, will have the same characteristics as the full set. Normally this refers to a bell curve, so if you have a bell curve population and you select a sample at random, then the sample mean will tend towards the population mean and the sample width will tend towards the population width.
It is this characteristic that lets us extend measurements of characteristics from a subset to the characteristics of the whole population.
(There are a couple of other distributions that are stable, but they are fairly rare in the real world. IIRC, Nile river flooding follows a Levy distribution, and was the first instance of a stable distribution that wasn't a bell curve.)
This only works if the subset selection is random. If the selection isn't random, then the results can be skewed towards randomness (you won't see an effect that's there, the most likely outcome) or phantom effects that aren't really there.
That is the defect in the Mediterranean diet study, that the participants were not placed on one diet (or the other) at random. In particular, husband and wife participants were both placed on the same diet, and in one case an entire town of participants were placed on the same diet.
Of note: When the flawed placements are deleted from the data, the Mediterranean diet still stands and there is still a clear effect indicated by the data.
"This affected only a small part of the trial," says Martínez González. When the researchers reanalyzed the data excluding the nonrandomized people, the results were the same, he adds.
So the conclusions of the study are still strong: the diet correlates well and strongly with reduced heart attacks.
Out of an abundance of caution and professional ethics, the study was adjusted with softer language in the conclusions.
And yet, our noble MSM is reporting only that the study was retracted, comparing it to 50-ish other studies that were similarly flawed.
With predictable results, such as the post this is in reply to.
(Exercise for the reader: Is the MSM doing more harm than good here, or is it the other way around? Many, many other articles report the news with an opinion, such as "Trump meets with Kim, but it won't result in anything useful". Why couldn't NPR have a similar headline for *this* article, such as "Diet study retracted, despite being accurate"?)
but somebody made a good point about this switch to solar & renewables: it's going to crash the economy.
Let me explain. We've got massive amounts of investment wealth tied up in fossil fuels. People's retirements are heavily vested in them. At the rate we're going their value, while not worthless, is going to be massively diminished. And it's happening fast. Plus there's no massive natural resource to replace it.
We're going to wipe out trillions in value and replace it with, well, nothing really. Now, from a practical standpoint we've still got power. But human beings aren't very practical. When that wealth shift happens it's going to make a mess of things. The people who lose their shirts in oil futures are likely to be abandoned. And that's before we start talking about what's going to happen to the middle east.
While I agree with your assessment, I think there's more context to this.
Tesla is about to come online at 5,000 cars a week (250,000 cars/year) and ramping up from there. Tesla is a highly desired car, and will probably be a big seller.
It's likely that Tesla charging will take up some of the slack. America (and much of China and a few other places like Canada) will transition away from gasoline and rely on electricity instead. The extra burden will be taken up by solar and other renewables, while gasoline use diminishes.
The big losers in the future will probably be gasoline producers and ICE car manufacturers. Gas stations and repair shops will either switch or go out of business (Teslas don't have many moving parts, and so don't need many repairs).
Once the country is largely running on electricity, we can look into replacing fossil fuel generation plants with something more eco-friendly.
Want to prevent this horrible nightmare future? It's really easy in principle, but impossible to implement in reality: Put a stop to the ever increasing wage gap, drive up baseline wages, and drive down top earnings, so that the middle class grows again instead of shrinks.
I agree with your analysis completely, now let's discuss actions.
One thing that consistently drives down wages is cheap imported labor, and this is mostly caused in the US by unrestricted illegal immigration and specialized visa programs such as H1B.
That unrestricted immigration drives down wages is both common sense and shown by economic models. Yes, a *little* immigration is good for the economy, but not at the level we have.
(Of note: The US allows about 1.1 million *legal* immigrants each year, which is more than most countries. I'm not referring to them.)
Yes, there are dozens of studies that show how imported cheap labor is good for the economy, which look at the effects of only a small slice of the economy. Companies can make cheaper goods, and that's good for the companies and their aggregate increased profit means a better economy.
Want to prevent this horrible nightmare future?
One way is to stop the influx of illegal immigration, and then allow a yearly number of immigrants calculated to benefit the economy.
This is a common-sense action that can be taken to prevent the "horrible nightmare" scenario.
Are people for or against this?
The reason this is happening is because our POTUS uses the platform to dictate his every thought of governance, or personal whim.
Yeah - on the one hand we have a narcissist who is not very reserved or classy.
On the other hand we have peace and prosperity, with a generally favourable outlook.
Take a moment, sit back, relax, and enjoy the good times while they last.