The above post hits the nail on the head, but this being Slashdot, the majority of the rest of the comments in this thread will be from those who have missed the nail and crushed their thumb.
If I'm reading the article correctly, there were 14 suicides in 4/3 years (16 months) from a 500,000 workers.
From Wikipedia, the suicide rate in the United States is 11.1 suicides per year per 100,000 people. Which means 11.1 * 4/3 * 5 = 74 suicides would have occured over an average US population of the same size over the same time. By the same calculations the number of people from the People's Republic of China (with 6.6/year/100,000people) to commit suicide would be 44.
I'm not saying at all that they way they are treated is right or that they're being paid enough or that it could be better. The fact that Apple and other companies would make it's items thousands of miles away from where they are consumed seems to mean something is out of balance.
But 14 suicides doesn't seem to be an alarming rate at all from the numbers I'm looking at. And it's is significantly smaller than both 44 and 74. Someone please tell me where my logic is wrong. Is the statement of 500,000 employees correct the 14 suicides came from correct? Although again Foxconn's Wikipedia article lists 920,000+ (2010) employees.
No, it is similar in the US for many Chemistry majors. They often end up running a QC bench without a PhD.
A PhD these days is more often a certification, can you work on a large nebulous problem? Can you work continuously for four or five years on a problem? Can you work with limited direct supervision?
Students do work in their sub-field or sub-subfield. Sometimes they get a truly relevant job, sometimes they get a job in that general area, sometimes they go completely afield. It just depends.
from the link in my sig:
"The undergraduate sits back waiting to be filled with learning. The Professor speaks, the undergraduate absorbs. Regurgitate the data on a few tests correctly enough and you are home. The Ph.D., on the other hand, means that you have done some original research. Sounds simple, but what it really means is that you have to be constantly defending yourself, explaining what you did and why. It leads to questioning all of the work of everyone else. Why did they do it this way? Were their conclusions correct, their evidence airtight, their reasoning sound? You need to be a skeptic. A doubter, a demander of proof. A B.S. given an SOP might think it comes down from on high, cast in stone. He or she will handle it with care. A Ph.D. will immediately get out a hammer and beat on it to see if any rotten pieces fly off."
Investigators could have taken an extra step before going inside the house and used a laptop or other device outside the home to see whether there was an unsecured signal. That alone wouldn't have exonerated the homeowner, but it would have raised the possibility that someone else was responsible for the downloads.
Yes, they could. And that is going to be cited in the lawsuit the first time a homeowner picks up his gun and defends himself against an armed invasion. Somebody is going to get killed this way.
Why can't they just knock on the door? You can't flush a computer down the toilet. What's the rush?
Discovery of the Higgs will lead to the theory which describes the unification of all forces, which will trigger the end times: Heaven on earth and the revealing of all truth.
Basically, the rate of correlation when measuring entangled things is a function of the orientations of the detectors.
OK, so suppose I have two boxes and one ball. I put the ball in one of the boxes at random and mail one box to a friend in Australia and the other box to a friend in Japan. Then, when my friend in Japan opens his box, he "instantly" knows whether the ball is in the box in Australia. The information about the Australian box has instantly teleported from Australia to Japan, so to speak.
But what you seem to be saying is that if the box in Japan is opened from the top then there is always exactly one ball - which is either in the Japan box or the Australia box. But that if the box in Japan is opened from the side then there might be zero, one, or even two balls - neither box could contain a ball - or both boxes could each contain a ball.
With the classic double-slit experiment, the argument is that the quantum particle goes through both slits because of the way it interferes with itself at the detector (interference pattern). But can we do something similar with quantum teleportation: have my friends in Japan and Australia mail the boxes back unopened, merge the contents of the two boxes and show that the single resulting ball has been to both Japan and Australia?
What if you have three boxes, you open one, then Monty Hall opens another one?
anyone else manually dismantle the things and remove the magnets because they're decently strong?
I took an old hard drive apart several years ago to get the magnets. Played with them a bit, then stuck them on a metallic surface in the garage and forgot about them. Sometime after, I was replacing a picture window. The frame was held in place by some large finish nails which had been sunk way below the surface of the wood and in places not that obvious. I went and found the old magnets. It turned out that if I let one rest on top of my finger and then ran the finger slowly down the frame, the magnet would stop and hang onto the wood over the head of the nail.
As much as I like Monty Python, their body of work is large enough that you can find support for any idea, ideology, hypothesis, etc. buried therein. It is like the people who comb the Bible for its prediction of 9/11 events.
Except that Microsoft spends more on R&D than most other companies combined and often enters markets long before anyone else. (See Smart Phone, MP3 Players, Tablets etc...)
I think the complaint is that PhD's in biology are getting trained for the specific task of a not just their field, but whatever their advisors happen to be working with.
As I remarked to my advisor a couple of years into graduate school: "You wouldn't train a medical doctor this way."
only the grad students (and the crazier entrepreneurs) are paying tens of thousands of dollars to do it.
Graduate students in most sciences are paid while they are in school. Some to teach, some to do research. Their tuition is also paid by the school if teaching or by grant if researching.
Oh no. A former biology graduate student applies her scientific training to conclude that - surprise - biology graduate students have it worser than anyone.
You want worse? See the link in my sig. Those poor bastards had to deal with the usual academic incompetence as well as malevolent ghosts and the occasional fatal explosion.
It doesn't beg the question. It RAISES the question.
Same difference. "begs the question" is now colloquially synonymous to "raises the question". Languages evolve with use. Get over it. If you still want to be a nitpicking d-bag grammar nazi go harass people in Latin.
Ha ha. Some thin-skinned AC who can't speak the King's English got owned.
Slashdot Mirror
"Sample says it isn't stealth creationism - he says the intelligent agency might just as well be aliens."
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/disingenuous
The above post hits the nail on the head, but this being Slashdot, the majority of the rest of the comments in this thread will be from those who have missed the nail and crushed their thumb.
guess i'm not sure why it should be saved. just because it's been around awhile?
Because it is a service mandated by our Constitution?
If I'm reading the article correctly, there were 14 suicides in 4/3 years (16 months) from a 500,000 workers.
From Wikipedia, the suicide rate in the United States is 11.1 suicides per year per 100,000 people. Which means 11.1 * 4/3 * 5 = 74 suicides would have occured over an average US population of the same size over the same time. By the same calculations the number of people from the People's Republic of China (with 6.6/year/100,000people) to commit suicide would be 44.
I'm not saying at all that they way they are treated is right or that they're being paid enough or that it could be better. The fact that Apple and other companies would make it's items thousands of miles away from where they are consumed seems to mean something is out of balance.
But 14 suicides doesn't seem to be an alarming rate at all from the numbers I'm looking at. And it's is significantly smaller than both 44 and 74. Someone please tell me where my logic is wrong. Is the statement of 500,000 employees correct the 14 suicides came from correct? Although again Foxconn's Wikipedia article lists 920,000+ (2010) employees.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_rate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxconn
I read the same statistics. The title of the Wired article just as well could have been "Apple's iPad Saves Chinese Lives"
From what I have heard of Ben Mezrich's liberal reimaging of reality, I would take any account by him with big error bars.
Ban company pages. Ban movie pages. Ban everything except people. Make it harder to become a 'friend'.
I bet the orbit will take an hour - so they'll be back around as soon as you are hungry again.
No, it is similar in the US for many Chemistry majors. They often end up running a QC bench without a PhD.
A PhD these days is more often a certification, can you work on a large nebulous problem? Can you work continuously for four or five years on a problem? Can you work with limited direct supervision?
Students do work in their sub-field or sub-subfield. Sometimes they get a truly relevant job, sometimes they get a job in that general area, sometimes they go completely afield. It just depends.
from the link in my sig:
"The undergraduate sits back waiting to be filled with learning. The Professor speaks, the undergraduate absorbs. Regurgitate the data on a few tests correctly enough and you are home. The Ph.D., on the other hand, means that you have done some original research. Sounds simple, but what it really means is that you have to be constantly defending yourself, explaining what you did and why. It leads to questioning all of the work of everyone else. Why did they do it this way? Were their conclusions correct, their evidence airtight, their reasoning sound? You need to be a skeptic. A doubter, a demander of proof. A B.S. given an SOP might think it comes down from on high, cast in stone. He or she will handle it with care. A Ph.D. will immediately get out a hammer and beat on it to see if any rotten pieces fly off."
Investigators could have taken an extra step before going inside the house and used a laptop or other device outside the home to see whether there was an unsecured signal. That alone wouldn't have exonerated the homeowner, but it would have raised the possibility that someone else was responsible for the downloads.
Yes, they could. And that is going to be cited in the lawsuit the first time a homeowner picks up his gun and defends himself against an armed invasion. Somebody is going to get killed this way.
Why can't they just knock on the door? You can't flush a computer down the toilet. What's the rush?
And these days, that Chinese or Indian scientists will probably be of higher calibre than the American.
You obviously don't work in the sciences.
"After a private ceremony, Mr. Ohga will be microwaved."
I hear the Mythbusters are going to spin him on a modified Rotozip.
Discovery of the Higgs will lead to the theory which describes the unification of all forces, which will trigger the end times: Heaven on earth and the revealing of all truth.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19550880/GUT-The-Grand-Unified-Theory-A-oneact-play-with-seven-blackouts
Basically, the rate of correlation when measuring entangled things is a function of the orientations of the detectors.
OK, so suppose I have two boxes and one ball. I put the ball in one of the boxes at random and mail one box to a friend in Australia and the other box to a friend in Japan. Then, when my friend in Japan opens his box, he "instantly" knows whether the ball is in the box in Australia. The information about the Australian box has instantly teleported from Australia to Japan, so to speak.
But what you seem to be saying is that if the box in Japan is opened from the top then there is always exactly one ball - which is either in the Japan box or the Australia box. But that if the box in Japan is opened from the side then there might be zero, one, or even two balls - neither box could contain a ball - or both boxes could each contain a ball.
With the classic double-slit experiment, the argument is that the quantum particle goes through both slits because of the way it interferes with itself at the detector (interference pattern). But can we do something similar with quantum teleportation: have my friends in Japan and Australia mail the boxes back unopened, merge the contents of the two boxes and show that the single resulting ball has been to both Japan and Australia?
What if you have three boxes, you open one, then Monty Hall opens another one?
anyone else manually dismantle the things and remove the magnets because they're decently strong?
I took an old hard drive apart several years ago to get the magnets. Played with them a bit, then stuck them on a metallic surface in the garage and forgot about them. Sometime after, I was replacing a picture window. The frame was held in place by some large finish nails which had been sunk way below the surface of the wood and in places not that obvious. I went and found the old magnets. It turned out that if I let one rest on top of my finger and then ran the finger slowly down the frame, the magnet would stop and hang onto the wood over the head of the nail.
As much as I like Monty Python, their body of work is large enough that you can find support for any idea, ideology, hypothesis, etc. buried therein. It is like the people who comb the Bible for its prediction of 9/11 events.
Except that Microsoft spends more on R&D than most other companies combined and often enters markets long before anyone else. (See Smart Phone, MP3 Players, Tablets etc...)
Black powder, printing, noodles.
the concept remains the same, sexual stimulation.
Fine. Now define 'sexual' and define 'stimulation'.
Aww, somebody didn't make a billion dollars even though they are smarter than everyone else.
Do people buy wedding rings which are intertwined? If so, why? You can't wear them that way.
Get off my lawn!!
And do it at a leisurely and efficient speed of your choice.
I studied Biology at University and I am still a creationist.
Email the Consumerist about getting your money back.
I think the complaint is that PhD's in biology are getting trained for the specific task of a not just their field, but whatever their advisors happen to be working with.
As I remarked to my advisor a couple of years into graduate school: "You wouldn't train a medical doctor this way."
only the grad students (and the crazier entrepreneurs) are paying tens of thousands of dollars to do it.
Graduate students in most sciences are paid while they are in school. Some to teach, some to do research. Their tuition is also paid by the school if teaching or by grant if researching.
Oh no. A former biology graduate student applies her scientific training to conclude that - surprise - biology graduate students have it worser than anyone.
You want worse? See the link in my sig. Those poor bastards had to deal with the usual academic incompetence as well as malevolent ghosts and the occasional fatal explosion.
It doesn't beg the question. It RAISES the question.
Same difference. "begs the question" is now colloquially synonymous to "raises the question". Languages evolve with use. Get over it. If you still want to be a nitpicking d-bag grammar nazi go harass people in Latin.
Ha ha. Some thin-skinned AC who can't speak the King's English got owned.