On short flights and budget airlines, they hardly serve a purpose.
... unless something goes wrong. For instance, in the US Air LaGuardia Airport->Hudson River flight, the flight attendants were critical to evacuating the passengers safely. The pilots can't take care of the passengers in those sorts of situations, because they're busy trying to save the plane.
Of course, I should point out that the second option is an excellent idea.
Usually it's the enforcement that changes most significantly. For instance, inspectors are told to not notice things in their reports, or their inspections are less frequent, or the target of the inspection gets warned that the inspectors are coming (to make everything look good).
But you also have standards that were in place getting conveniently removed.
Maybe, just maybe, safety standards for places like mines and oil rigs go down when the people appointed to head the inspection agencies for mines and oil rigs were former executives for mine and oil companies. And even if a new guy gets in charge, it can take a long time before their changes take any effect.
It should be pointed out that establishing exactly what happened to cause the Big Bang is damned near impossible, because there's just no direct observations that can be made. There's a lot of agreement of what happened at T+0.000000000001 seconds after the Big Bang, and observations that help prove it, but before that point, you're pretty much SOL.
Which means that there's no way for the study of astrophysics to stop people from thinking the universe was sneezed out of the Great Green Arkleseizure.
Especially since so many of them jumped to the defense of Judith Miller for refusing to identify who had told her Valarie Plame was a CIA agent. They should not only be ashamed of themselves, they should realize that they're complete hypocrites.
On the other hand, your list of extra rights and responsibilities means that there are 2 flaws that various people and organizations have driven a freight train through: 1. Sources spreading classified information to journalists, using anonymity to protect themselves from prosecution. For instance, we still don't actually know who outed Valarie Plame as a CIA asset, but we do know that somebody did, and it was worth it to them for Scooter Libby to take the fall to prevent them from getting caught.
2. Journalists suppressing stories when they found out about them, even if the stories in question point to things the public ought to know, like massive illegal (and presumably unconstitutional) wiretapping of US citizens, which the New York Times sat on for a year just because the people committing the crime asked them to.
(Just because I picked examples from the Bush administration rather than Obama administration has nothing to do with my political leanings and everything to do with these being very well documented cases.)
Of course, even if he's convicted of the relatively minor "molestation" crime, you can be darn sure that the major newspapers here in the US will be blaring "Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange Convicted of Molestation", and any Wikileaks-related articles will describe him as "convicted molester Julian Assange".
It also stops companies from charging you more for expediting certain kinds of data. Well, what if I as a consumer WANT to pay a bit more to have my Comcast voice work really well with video, or to get faster bandwidth to some CDN's so that I could really replace cable video with internet video? Why should they and I not be allowed to do that?
Because you doing that slows my other traffic down. There is a 0-sum game at work here, so this results in the good old negative externality.
The second problem is that because there's a network, if you have non-net neutral AT&T throttling your traffic to Youtube, it doesn't matter whether your connection to AT&T's portion of the connection between you and Youtube is owned by AT&T, Verizon, or Time Warner.
Or to use the inevitable car analogy here: Let's you're trying to drive from San Antonio to Dallas, and someone sets and enforces a 25 mph speed limit on I35 between Austin and Dallas. You're only able to choose how to get to Austin, and regardless of how you do so, it's going to be slow going to get to Dallas. Now, some enterprising person might try an alternate route through Houston, but no matter what you do the speed limit is going to slow you down.
But beer was actually one of the earliest inventions of civilized humans, because it allowed them to drink liquids without having to worry much about waterborne diseases such as dysentery and cholera, and acted as a fantastic way of storing the food energy of grains. Basically, if a culture grew grains, they made alcohol with it.
The kinds of foreign countries I'm talking about are places where the latest and greatest ATC technology hasn't gotten there yet. Europe and Canada are generally pretty good, Burma not so much.
Stephen Hawking really has the most interesting position on this map, because besides his contributions to 20th century physics, he also has (according to the map) built a time machine and contributed to 18th century astronomy. Really remarkable achievement there.
Also, I'm surprised that Rene Descartes doesn't get anything for his work in philosophy, which was really his primary focus. The mathematics was just a fun side project.
"Well, I don't think there is any question about it. It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before and it has always been due to human error." -HAL 9000
But seriously, the actual source of most plane crashes is a combination of a lot of factors: mechanical problems, pilot error, management practices (such as overworking pilots to the point where they're more likely to commit a pilot error), weather, a certain amount of bad luck, poorly maintained airport facilities (particularly in foreign countries), and errors by air traffic controllers. There's tons of redundancy and other checks to make it hard for any one of these to cause a crash (even pilot error: there are alarms and such that make it much easier for the pilot to do the right thing).
No, you think you're good. You won't actually know until somebody else looks at your results. One of the first things to go when brains start getting impaired is the ability to judge your own capabilities.
I also take some exception to the goal of "creative juices". For any system that needs to be reliable and maintainable, the last thing I want is a developer that got overly creative. That doesn't mean that there's no room for appropriate refactoring and the like, but a lot of "creative" code can quickly turn into "wtf!" code when somebody else looks at it. Great software is often the most simple, straightforward, even boring stuff imaginable.
Actually, inexperienced programming doesn't require that either.
I've pulled exactly 1 all-nighter in my entire career, and that only because my boss specifically told me to do so. Anyone with any knowledge of human psychology knows that when you work late, you get slowly more and more stupid, which ends up costing you more than you gained in bugs you need to fix.
The image of the all-night programmer needs to go away. (Ditto for other professions that call upon people to lose sleep, like medical residencies.)
fresh blood out of college ( less than 2 yrs xp) worthless trash (2 to 7 years experience) Gods walking amongst mere mortals (over 7 years experience and guaranteed to be able to do anything you desire)
The classifications vary a bit by what area you live in, what your education level is, and so on. Here's what the recruiters I've talked to about this have to say (so take it with a grain of salt):
3 years of experience: unemployable, especially in today's economy. 3-5 years: entry level 5-10 years: intermediate level 10-20 years: prime time 20-30 years: competent but expensive, and not a long-term solution 30+ years: unemployable, especially in today's economy
What everyone is looking for when they go to hire programmers is someone about 25-35 years old, with enough experience to not be making any rookie technical mistakes but not so much experience that they'll react in a way that's adverse to the company when you work them 60+ hours a week. They really love a guy who's about 25 and thinks that by putting in long hours doing top-notch work they'll end up rich and famous, and actually puts in the 60+ hours a week voluntarily and is mad at his coworkers for not doing the same.
In other words, a prosecutor should know that in court, if you need to cite the DSM-IV, you need to cite the DSM-IV, not a Wikipedia article citing the DSM-IV. I mean, it's not like somebody's life (or at least a significant portion of their future) is on the line or anything in a criminal trial.
You probably also need an appropriate expert witness to explain why the diagnosis in question would apply to the behavior in question.
Obviously we have no rulings to go on, since she's never been a judge. All we have are Kagan's arguments to the Supreme Court as Solicitor General in cases regarding spying and torture, in which she sounded an awful lot like John Yoo. Now, that could be viewed as merely zealous representation of the Obama Administration, except that most cases are not argued by the solicitor general themselves.
It's probably because he's using this to demonstrate to the Microsoft Board of Directors that he's shameless enough to be Microsoft's CEO after they boot out Ballmer.
We'll start with CBS, which carried a story at the time that pointed out this:
What you are not hearing is a room with thousands of people screaming and cheering.
What you are not seeing are hundreds upon hundreds of American flags waving.
What you are not hearing are members of the audience shouting out state names urging Dean to list more.
What you are not seeing is the way Dean's supporters were lifted out of their slump by the speech.
In a nutshell, you are not seeing that Dean's speech fit the tone of the room.
Alternately, listen for yourself: Version A, Version B, and Version C. Most potential voters heard Version C, some heard Version B, practically none heard Version A at the time.
Slashdot Mirror
On short flights and budget airlines, they hardly serve a purpose.
... unless something goes wrong. For instance, in the US Air LaGuardia Airport->Hudson River flight, the flight attendants were critical to evacuating the passengers safely. The pilots can't take care of the passengers in those sorts of situations, because they're busy trying to save the plane.
Of course, I should point out that the second option is an excellent idea.
Hermes: What do we do when we break somebody's window?
Dwight: Pay for it?
Hermes: Heavens, no! We apologize! With nice, cheap words.
Usually it's the enforcement that changes most significantly. For instance, inspectors are told to not notice things in their reports, or their inspections are less frequent, or the target of the inspection gets warned that the inspectors are coming (to make everything look good).
But you also have standards that were in place getting conveniently removed.
Maybe, just maybe, safety standards for places like mines and oil rigs go down when the people appointed to head the inspection agencies for mines and oil rigs were former executives for mine and oil companies. And even if a new guy gets in charge, it can take a long time before their changes take any effect.
It should be pointed out that establishing exactly what happened to cause the Big Bang is damned near impossible, because there's just no direct observations that can be made. There's a lot of agreement of what happened at T+0.000000000001 seconds after the Big Bang, and observations that help prove it, but before that point, you're pretty much SOL.
Which means that there's no way for the study of astrophysics to stop people from thinking the universe was sneezed out of the Great Green Arkleseizure.
Especially since so many of them jumped to the defense of Judith Miller for refusing to identify who had told her Valarie Plame was a CIA agent. They should not only be ashamed of themselves, they should realize that they're complete hypocrites.
On the other hand, your list of extra rights and responsibilities means that there are 2 flaws that various people and organizations have driven a freight train through:
1. Sources spreading classified information to journalists, using anonymity to protect themselves from prosecution. For instance, we still don't actually know who outed Valarie Plame as a CIA asset, but we do know that somebody did, and it was worth it to them for Scooter Libby to take the fall to prevent them from getting caught.
2. Journalists suppressing stories when they found out about them, even if the stories in question point to things the public ought to know, like massive illegal (and presumably unconstitutional) wiretapping of US citizens, which the New York Times sat on for a year just because the people committing the crime asked them to.
(Just because I picked examples from the Bush administration rather than Obama administration has nothing to do with my political leanings and everything to do with these being very well documented cases.)
Of course, even if he's convicted of the relatively minor "molestation" crime, you can be darn sure that the major newspapers here in the US will be blaring "Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange Convicted of Molestation", and any Wikileaks-related articles will describe him as "convicted molester Julian Assange".
It also stops companies from charging you more for expediting certain kinds of data. Well, what if I as a consumer WANT to pay a bit more to have my Comcast voice work really well with video, or to get faster bandwidth to some CDN's so that I could really replace cable video with internet video? Why should they and I not be allowed to do that?
Because you doing that slows my other traffic down. There is a 0-sum game at work here, so this results in the good old negative externality.
Why are people having such a hard time understanding what network neutrality means?
Because shills and PR flaks are getting paid to intentionally confuse the meaning of the term. Next question?
The second problem is that because there's a network, if you have non-net neutral AT&T throttling your traffic to Youtube, it doesn't matter whether your connection to AT&T's portion of the connection between you and Youtube is owned by AT&T, Verizon, or Time Warner.
Or to use the inevitable car analogy here: Let's you're trying to drive from San Antonio to Dallas, and someone sets and enforces a 25 mph speed limit on I35 between Austin and Dallas. You're only able to choose how to get to Austin, and regardless of how you do so, it's going to be slow going to get to Dallas. Now, some enterprising person might try an alternate route through Houston, but no matter what you do the speed limit is going to slow you down.
Making beer - so easy a caveman can do it!
But beer was actually one of the earliest inventions of civilized humans, because it allowed them to drink liquids without having to worry much about waterborne diseases such as dysentery and cholera, and acted as a fantastic way of storing the food energy of grains. Basically, if a culture grew grains, they made alcohol with it.
The kinds of foreign countries I'm talking about are places where the latest and greatest ATC technology hasn't gotten there yet. Europe and Canada are generally pretty good, Burma not so much.
Stephen Hawking really has the most interesting position on this map, because besides his contributions to 20th century physics, he also has (according to the map) built a time machine and contributed to 18th century astronomy. Really remarkable achievement there.
Also, I'm surprised that Rene Descartes doesn't get anything for his work in philosophy, which was really his primary focus. The mathematics was just a fun side project.
"Well, I don't think there is any question about it. It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before and it has always been due to human error."
-HAL 9000
But seriously, the actual source of most plane crashes is a combination of a lot of factors: mechanical problems, pilot error, management practices (such as overworking pilots to the point where they're more likely to commit a pilot error), weather, a certain amount of bad luck, poorly maintained airport facilities (particularly in foreign countries), and errors by air traffic controllers. There's tons of redundancy and other checks to make it hard for any one of these to cause a crash (even pilot error: there are alarms and such that make it much easier for the pilot to do the right thing).
When you're in the zone, you're GOOD!
No, you think you're good. You won't actually know until somebody else looks at your results. One of the first things to go when brains start getting impaired is the ability to judge your own capabilities.
I also take some exception to the goal of "creative juices". For any system that needs to be reliable and maintainable, the last thing I want is a developer that got overly creative. That doesn't mean that there's no room for appropriate refactoring and the like, but a lot of "creative" code can quickly turn into "wtf!" code when somebody else looks at it. Great software is often the most simple, straightforward, even boring stuff imaginable.
Actually, inexperienced programming doesn't require that either.
I've pulled exactly 1 all-nighter in my entire career, and that only because my boss specifically told me to do so. Anyone with any knowledge of human psychology knows that when you work late, you get slowly more and more stupid, which ends up costing you more than you gained in bugs you need to fix.
The image of the all-night programmer needs to go away. (Ditto for other professions that call upon people to lose sleep, like medical residencies.)
fresh blood out of college ( less than 2 yrs xp)
worthless trash (2 to 7 years experience)
Gods walking amongst mere mortals (over 7 years experience and guaranteed to be able to do anything you desire)
The classifications vary a bit by what area you live in, what your education level is, and so on. Here's what the recruiters I've talked to about this have to say (so take it with a grain of salt):
3 years of experience: unemployable, especially in today's economy.
3-5 years: entry level
5-10 years: intermediate level
10-20 years: prime time
20-30 years: competent but expensive, and not a long-term solution
30+ years: unemployable, especially in today's economy
What everyone is looking for when they go to hire programmers is someone about 25-35 years old, with enough experience to not be making any rookie technical mistakes but not so much experience that they'll react in a way that's adverse to the company when you work them 60+ hours a week. They really love a guy who's about 25 and thinks that by putting in long hours doing top-notch work they'll end up rich and famous, and actually puts in the 60+ hours a week voluntarily and is mad at his coworkers for not doing the same.
In other words, a prosecutor should know that in court, if you need to cite the DSM-IV, you need to cite the DSM-IV, not a Wikipedia article citing the DSM-IV. I mean, it's not like somebody's life (or at least a significant portion of their future) is on the line or anything in a criminal trial.
You probably also need an appropriate expert witness to explain why the diagnosis in question would apply to the behavior in question.
What, you've never heard of Dr No before?
Obviously we have no rulings to go on, since she's never been a judge. All we have are Kagan's arguments to the Supreme Court as Solicitor General in cases regarding spying and torture, in which she sounded an awful lot like John Yoo. Now, that could be viewed as merely zealous representation of the Obama Administration, except that most cases are not argued by the solicitor general themselves.
I fail to see how this would be any different in the eyes of SCOTUS and that ruling.
Well, we've recently replaced one of the "no" votes (Justice Stevens) with a potential "yes" vote (Kagan). That would make it different.
It's probably because he's using this to demonstrate to the Microsoft Board of Directors that he's shameless enough to be Microsoft's CEO after they boot out Ballmer.
I was rather wondering what happens if you put a Garmin inside a Ford Pinto.
We'll start with CBS, which carried a story at the time that pointed out this:
What you are not hearing is a room with thousands of people screaming and cheering.
What you are not seeing are hundreds upon hundreds of American flags waving.
What you are not hearing are members of the audience shouting out state names urging Dean to list more.
What you are not seeing is the way Dean's supporters were lifted out of their slump by the speech.
In a nutshell, you are not seeing that Dean's speech fit the tone of the room.
Alternately, listen for yourself: Version A, Version B, and Version C. Most potential voters heard Version C, some heard Version B, practically none heard Version A at the time.