No, it is made very clear that Pearson was a subcontractor to Apple. The total contract was Apples, so the fault/responsibility is Apples. If they had simply sold the ipads and said 'go look for some software' it would be very different.. but they did not.
When someone preloads software that you request be preloaded on a device, that does *NOT* make the software vendor of that software a "subcontractor".
Unless, you know, (1) there was a contract between Apple and Pearson relating to contract line items, and (2) There was *no* contract between LA Unified and Pearson, and (3) LA Unified did not specify the curriculum software to use, and (4) Apple was acting as a slaes agent, rather than as an intermediary.
The breakdown they (LA Unified) gave was:
Special Case ($80); 3-year Apple Care warranty ($150); Pre-loaded apps ($13-$21); Pearson curriculum ($150-$300); PD ($20); and Buffer Pool ($20).
So it's pretty clear that they meet none of the criteria for subcontractor under the contract.
OK I've read "various articles in the Seattle Times.
I read the one about the state auditor being indicted.
I read the one about the infant getting shot in the head in Kent in a drive-by.
I read the one about the whooping cough outbreak (which erroneously claims that herd immunity for Pertussis is mathematically even possible, given the diseases R(0) would require 94-96% immunization, and all unimmunized persons be uniformly distributed throughout the population.
I read the one about Shawn Kemp co-hosting a party because Thunder missed the playoffs.
None of these "various articles in the Seattle Times" supported your position.
Link one supporting article from the Seattle Times which is a post-analysis of the job market following the minimum wage being raised. I'll waive the numbers on the small businesses which have gone out of business over the minimum wage being raised (for now).
Read The Fine Manual (it's all online, various articles in Seattle Times, ignore the state numbers, read the last 2-3 paras which cover King County and Seattle)
Seriously, do you guys not grok the 100 Gbps Internet 2 or something?
Sure we grok it. Do you not grok the idea that if you are not pulling numbers out of your ass, then you probably have the reference material right in front of you, and can therefore paste the information a hell of a lot easier than having us go looking for supporting numbers for your made up statistics for you?
But if you raise the minimum wage to say $15/hour like Seattle and other places, statistics show job growth of US citizens will increase and they will hire more Americans to work!
Citation needed. Preferably one with a post-analysis of the Seattle job market, with another graph showing impact (if any) on number of small businesses in the immediate area.
It's a grading system, based on three grading criteria, each of which can score up to an 'A':
Game success among critics/reviewers "Innovative gameplay" Financial success
Given the major reviewers comments on "Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel", the fact that it's "Yet Another First Person Shoot", and the company being unable to afford to remain in business, rather than "AAA Studio", it'd probably be better to describe 2K as a "BCF" studio.
They definitely get an F on their financial success, and YAFPS is hardly innovative game play, so they get a grudging C there, and the reviews at the top sites give them generally in the neighborhood of an 80% approval by reviewers (only GameStop rates them higher than 80%), so that's a B.
I really hate that people hype studios themselves as "AAA", as if that means they are going to get A's in all three categories, just because of who they are, or because of the marketing hype behind their games contributing to a likelihood of good reviews or financial success.
In reality, you are only as good as your last release in all three categories. 2K blew it in at least two of the categories, and turned in B grade work in the third, so it's no surprise they failed.
The article makes this very clear. It wouldn't matter if the Pearson Curriculum were on an iPad or an Android device, they'd still be unhappy with it. The attachment of Apple to the story is a means of click-baiting it. Pretty clear in the quotes from their attorney:
L.A. schools Supt. Ramon C. Cortines “made the decision that he wanted to put them on notice, Pearson in particular, that he’s dissatisfied with their product,” said David Holmquist, general counsel for the nation’s second-largest school system. He said millions of dollars could be at stake.
In a letter sent Monday to Apple, Holmquist wrote that it “will not accept or compensate Apple for new deliveries of [Pearson] curriculum.” Nor does the district want to pay for further services related to the Pearson product.
Pretty ringing condemnation of Pearson's products by the school district; note that the Pearson products might not eve be at fault, given that the complaint was that it didn't help with the standardized testing scores.
I suggested the funnel landing previously. You really wouldn't want to spin it.
I'm pretty sure the problem at that point would be thermal damage to the vehicle. You could perhaps do this on land, and of course you'd probably want fresh water as a coolant and noise suppression, same as the shuttle used to suppress acoustic energy reflected from the pad to prevent it damaging the shuttle. The shuttle usually went through about 1/3 million gallons of water per launch. Of course with the rocket exhause itself, that produced a lot of HCl, and you probably wouldn't want to sit your engines in that, any more than in the ocean.
It's probably be better if they just had flip-down feet to widen the base of the cone ( the falling over was always a result of the center of mass being outside the interior circle of the cone, as described by the landing base -- or it wouldn't have fallen.
The other suggestion would be a big-ass electromagnet to lock the base components into place as it currently exists, but getting power out to the platform for that might be problematic. Maybe they could use a bunch of Tesla batteries, since it's only have to hold until you could mechanically latch the landing legs down.
The news is that NVidia's behavior is getting worse.
Well, given that one of the linked articles on NVidia's firmware signing is now 7 months old (September 2014), it's not getting worse all that quickly, it's just that the people who were complaining about it before are complaining about it again. And as they point out, there's a perfectly fine proprietary driver; they just don't like those drivers. The problem, of course, being that the Open Source driver can't legally use the Sorenson CODECs, or the MPEG-LA patent pool without violating the law in many countries.
This applies to personal income taxes, not corporate income taxes. Although corporations are nominally people in the U.S., it isn't true worldwide, and it's actually not even true in the U.S., or there would be no distinction between personal and corporate income tax rates, or, in the U.S., S-corps vs. C-corps.
Try again: find a specific treaty dealing with apportioning of corporate income tax *which caps that tax*, as a total, to the higher of two states, when apportioned between those states.
You aren't going to find it outside of some place like Myanmar (Burma), a country with which the U.S. does not treat, and which corporations will not touch with an 11 foot pole.
The fact that you asked for something and the other party did not agree to it does not mean it can't be negotiated. It means you could not get the other party to agree to it.
I believe you missed the part where I called up ADP and pretended to be an entirely unrelated company potentially interested in contracting their services. This is what ADP said to me, and it confirmed what Apple had told me. This was in the middle of my negotiation. In the end, I negotiated moves in place where they could move, using the vacation accrual as a lever. So it all worked out.
Also, does Google do phone interviews for hiring anyone other than interns?
Yes.
If you're part of the interview team, and they are in another country. The interview team could be spread all over, but usually, it's only one or two people who do the phone interview. However, in that case, they're usually in the conference room at a google facility, so you have full on video conference capability, even if it's a two person room. Usually they use a 4 person or larger room so that you have a whiteboard on the wall with a camera pointed at it, and can switch viewpoint and see the whiteboard.
If you can't travel, they'll also do them, and if you passed the phone screen, but they want a technical opinion before they bring someone on site (mean fly them in), and they happen to be pretty far from any Google office.
I don't think the above discloses anything that should not be IOTTMCO.
I thought the phone screening and was a relatively easy hoop to jump through, with candidates that don't fail being pulled in for a real interview. Oh, and doesn't Google still have a corporate policy of never giving feedback on interviews or reasons for rejection, for fear of lawsuits?
The phone interviews I've given were all real interviews, not just phone screens. On the other hand, being in a position where the recruiters tend to like you, and the hiring committee tends to trust your opinion, you see more of those than most people.
The corporate policy exists to prevent one bad interview, due to bad chemistry, a hangover, or whatever excuse for having an off day the interviewer happened to have, from damaging the interview process overall. Google employees can screw up too, and if they do, it shouldn't cost Google a good candidate, and it shouldn't cost the interviewee their confidence in the remaining interviewers, where they might prove to be incredible people to hire.
A lot of passing an interview process has to do with confidence, and if you shoot someone's confidence in the head, even if you don't think they'd be a good fit, then (a) you're an incredibly bad interviewer, and should either redo the training or be barred from doing future interviews; that's OK: not everyone can be great at everything!, or (b) you've made a mistake, and you probably need to immediately tell the recruiter managing the interviews, and the next interviewer on the way in, at a minimum, and then disqualify your feedback to the hiring committee, and tell them why, so they can look at the remaining interviews in that light. The absolutely worst thing you could do is make a mistake and not tell anyone about it. They're not rewarded, but unless they are habitual, neither do they cost you; you tend to get +1 integrity points (that's not a real thing).
which begs the question, "Why are you trying to cover the hole while someone is still down there?"
LOL
Made my day!
Usually, it's because someone has travelled a long distance underground, and you are either opening it to let them out, or opening it to provide equipment for their next leg (like an air blower), or you are sending down an expert or tools to do something with whatever cable or whatever they dragged with them from the point the went in.
I'm not seeing the reciprocal agreement here. I'm seeing a cite of a document that says the U.S. is weird about income taxes, and that New York is weird about income taxes, and that establishing a nexus obligates both parties, assuming the foreign power chooses to be obligated (why opt in when you can opt out?!?).
I don't see an 11% income tax in Singapore and a 25% income tax in California for an income generating transaction between the two resulting in no more than 25% out of pocket (however you apportion it) for the person receiving the income.
That just simply wouldn't work. As another poster already pointed out, if you deny them the patent, then they have no reason to involve themselves in researching such, or standardizing.
No one is suggesting denying anyone a patent. What's being suggested is that if something is patented, it shouldn't be part of the standard which everyone has to follow to compete *at all* in the market.
A really good example of this is the Qualcomm CDMA patent. They did a lot of great work, behind that patent, and they deserve the patent. But you shouldn't have to implement it in order to implement a cell phone that works, and be completely locked out of building cell phones otherwise. It should not be part of the standard infrastructure.
And, in fact, it's not. Most of the world is GSM, because they are unwilling to pay the $35 royalty per device for CDMA. And they shouldn't be required to do so, just to be able to build a cell phone. In fact, within the cellular device industry, we call this "the Qualcomm tax". Some are willing to pay the "tax", other are not; neither position prevents them from building cell phones, although the choice tends to restrict your devices to one set of carriers, or another (assuming you even have CDMA carriers in your country), unless you build a device capable of both (at which point, you pay the "tax", even if you never use the capability.
Ok, if you give essential patents for free, won't you also have to give insignificant patents (e.g. slide to unlock) for free?
I think you are confusing de facto standards (like "slide to unlock") and de jure standards (like "RFC 793").
The first is "I'd like to do this because everyone else is doing this, and it's neat". The second is "In order to get your device to talk to the Internet at all, you have to implement this standard".
The term "standard-essential" in this context refers to de jure standards.
While it might be a pain in the rear if you can not "slide to unlock", the only thing that it prohibits you from doing is having an unlock method which has been established in people's minds as a Schelling Point. You being unable to used that Schelling Point just means that you aren't going to be able to easily convert people to using your product as an easy replacement for your competitors product.
"Reverse engineering for interoperability" does not apply to "interoperability with ingrained human habits".
Google should maybe feel a teensy bit of guilt over the fact that it is using government infrastructure and services which derive from tax imposed on corporations [and citizens], in lieu of a subscription fee.
I'm sure they would, if the backbone Google uses for all of its internal traffic weren't wholly owned by Google, including their trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific fiber optic cables. Google has their own separate Internet. And a lot of traffic from other people use Google's Internet as a result of peering agreements. Including government traffic.
Most countries and states have reciprocal tax agreements.
U.S. states are constitutionally prohibited from negotiating agreements with foreign powers.
As all sales taxes in the U.S., other than taxes on specific non-imported items, such as fuel (which therefore do not require reciprocity), are by state, county, or municipality. Counties and municiplaties are likewise enjoined from trade negotiations with foreign powers.
Not sure how you'd handle this through reciprocity...
OK. Where I live the covers are rectangular. Please provide an equivalent set of answers on why manhole covers are rectangular.
1. People where you live are stupid 2. The things have hinges 2a. The Mayor's brother is heavily invested in a hinge factory 3. With hinges on one side, you can put on a lock to keep inquisitive yet still stupid people out 3a. The Mayor's other brother is heavily invested in a manhole lock company 4. The mayor's brother in law owns the rectangular manhole cover factory 5. The covers are rectangular because the holes are rectangular because the pipes are rectangular 5a. The pipes are rectangular because the mayor's other brother in law owns the sewer unclogging company 5b. The mayor's uncle owns the rectangular pipe company 6. More golfballs fit in the holes that way
I'm sure the slashdot community can add many more.
... (I had no paper or pen, just on the telephone)...
What YEAR was this?!? All of the phone interviews I gave candidates while I was at Google and interviewing people involved them having been sent a Google Docs link beforehand that would allow them to do text or (if they were familiar enough with Docs to open one) freehand drawing.
Slashdot Mirror
IIRC FAR 103 doesn't allow flying over cities.
That's a misdemeanor.
No, it is made very clear that Pearson was a subcontractor to Apple. The total contract was Apples, so the fault/responsibility is Apples.
If they had simply sold the ipads and said 'go look for some software' it would be very different.. but they did not.
When someone preloads software that you request be preloaded on a device, that does *NOT* make the software vendor of that software a "subcontractor".
Unless, you know, (1) there was a contract between Apple and Pearson relating to contract line items, and (2) There was *no* contract between LA Unified and Pearson, and (3) LA Unified did not specify the curriculum software to use, and (4) Apple was acting as a slaes agent, rather than as an intermediary.
The breakdown they (LA Unified) gave was:
Special Case ($80);
3-year Apple Care warranty ($150);
Pre-loaded apps ($13-$21);
Pearson curriculum ($150-$300);
PD ($20); and
Buffer Pool ($20).
So it's pretty clear that they meet none of the criteria for subcontractor under the contract.
The felony wasn't.
It's my understanding that the gyrocopter in question was actually under the 250 pound limit that would require FAA registration.
This would mean the felony charge is bogus.
Can anyone confirm the vehicle total unladen weight?
OK I've read "various articles in the Seattle Times.
I read the one about the state auditor being indicted.
I read the one about the infant getting shot in the head in Kent in a drive-by.
I read the one about the whooping cough outbreak (which erroneously claims that herd immunity for Pertussis is mathematically even possible, given the diseases R(0) would require 94-96% immunization, and all unimmunized persons be uniformly distributed throughout the population.
I read the one about Shawn Kemp co-hosting a party because Thunder missed the playoffs.
None of these "various articles in the Seattle Times" supported your position.
Link one supporting article from the Seattle Times which is a post-analysis of the job market following the minimum wage being raised. I'll waive the numbers on the small businesses which have gone out of business over the minimum wage being raised (for now).
Read The Fine Manual (it's all online, various articles in Seattle Times, ignore the state numbers, read the last 2-3 paras which cover King County and Seattle)
Seriously, do you guys not grok the 100 Gbps Internet 2 or something?
Sure we grok it. Do you not grok the idea that if you are not pulling numbers out of your ass, then you probably have the reference material right in front of you, and can therefore paste the information a hell of a lot easier than having us go looking for supporting numbers for your made up statistics for you?
Thats the thing though, there is no cliff, just a pile of people all trying to climb to the top.
Stupidest zombie movie ever. Seriously.
way to stereotype all unions there. While some, or even many, but not all of them.
So.... #NotAllUnions ???
But if you raise the minimum wage to say $15/hour like Seattle and other places, statistics show job growth of US citizens will increase and they will hire more Americans to work!
Citation needed. Preferably one with a post-analysis of the Seattle job market, with another graph showing impact (if any) on number of small businesses in the immediate area.
WTF is AAA?
It's a grading system, based on three grading criteria, each of which can score up to an 'A':
Game success among critics/reviewers
"Innovative gameplay"
Financial success
Given the major reviewers comments on "Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel", the fact that it's "Yet Another First Person Shoot", and the company being unable to afford to remain in business, rather than "AAA Studio", it'd probably be better to describe 2K as a "BCF" studio.
They definitely get an F on their financial success, and YAFPS is hardly innovative game play, so they get a grudging C there, and the reviews at the top sites give them generally in the neighborhood of an 80% approval by reviewers (only GameStop rates them higher than 80%), so that's a B.
I really hate that people hype studios themselves as "AAA", as if that means they are going to get A's in all three categories, just because of who they are, or because of the marketing hype behind their games contributing to a likelihood of good reviews or financial success.
In reality, you are only as good as your last release in all three categories. 2K blew it in at least two of the categories, and turned in B grade work in the third, so it's no surprise they failed.
They were actually unhappy with Pearson.
The article makes this very clear. It wouldn't matter if the Pearson Curriculum were on an iPad or an Android device, they'd still be unhappy with it. The attachment of Apple to the story is a means of click-baiting it. Pretty clear in the quotes from their attorney:
L.A. schools Supt. Ramon C. Cortines “made the decision that he wanted to put them on notice, Pearson in particular, that he’s dissatisfied with their product,” said David Holmquist, general counsel for the nation’s second-largest school system. He said millions of dollars could be at stake.
In a letter sent Monday to Apple, Holmquist wrote that it “will not accept or compensate Apple for new deliveries of [Pearson] curriculum.” Nor does the district want to pay for further services related to the Pearson product.
Pretty ringing condemnation of Pearson's products by the school district; note that the Pearson products might not eve be at fault, given that the complaint was that it didn't help with the standardized testing scores.
"Simulations of fusion are only 50 years away!"
I suggested the funnel landing previously. You really wouldn't want to spin it.
I'm pretty sure the problem at that point would be thermal damage to the vehicle. You could perhaps do this on land, and of course you'd probably want fresh water as a coolant and noise suppression, same as the shuttle used to suppress acoustic energy reflected from the pad to prevent it damaging the shuttle. The shuttle usually went through about 1/3 million gallons of water per launch. Of course with the rocket exhause itself, that produced a lot of HCl, and you probably wouldn't want to sit your engines in that, any more than in the ocean.
It's probably be better if they just had flip-down feet to widen the base of the cone ( the falling over was always a result of the center of mass being outside the interior circle of the cone, as described by the landing base -- or it wouldn't have fallen.
The other suggestion would be a big-ass electromagnet to lock the base components into place as it currently exists, but getting power out to the platform for that might be problematic. Maybe they could use a bunch of Tesla batteries, since it's only have to hold until you could mechanically latch the landing legs down.
IIRC, This has always been the case.
The news is that NVidia's behavior is getting worse.
Well, given that one of the linked articles on NVidia's firmware signing is now 7 months old (September 2014), it's not getting worse all that quickly, it's just that the people who were complaining about it before are complaining about it again. And as they point out, there's a perfectly fine proprietary driver; they just don't like those drivers. The problem, of course, being that the Open Source driver can't legally use the Sorenson CODECs, or the MPEG-LA patent pool without violating the law in many countries.
Quit conflating trademarks with domain names.
Make a ".trademark" TLD. Everyone will ignore it, of course.
Problem solved.
Then maybe you should look harder. The US has tax treaties with plenty of countries.
This applies to personal income taxes, not corporate income taxes. Although corporations are nominally people in the U.S., it isn't true worldwide, and it's actually not even true in the U.S., or there would be no distinction between personal and corporate income tax rates, or, in the U.S., S-corps vs. C-corps.
Try again: find a specific treaty dealing with apportioning of corporate income tax *which caps that tax*, as a total, to the higher of two states, when apportioned between those states.
You aren't going to find it outside of some place like Myanmar (Burma), a country with which the U.S. does not treat, and which corporations will not touch with an 11 foot pole.
The fact that you asked for something and the other party did not agree to it does not mean it can't be negotiated. It means you could not get the other party to agree to it.
I believe you missed the part where I called up ADP and pretended to be an entirely unrelated company potentially interested in contracting their services. This is what ADP said to me, and it confirmed what Apple had told me. This was in the middle of my negotiation. In the end, I negotiated moves in place where they could move, using the vacation accrual as a lever. So it all worked out.
Also, does Google do phone interviews for hiring anyone other than interns?
Yes.
If you're part of the interview team, and they are in another country. The interview team could be spread all over, but usually, it's only one or two people who do the phone interview. However, in that case, they're usually in the conference room at a google facility, so you have full on video conference capability, even if it's a two person room. Usually they use a 4 person or larger room so that you have a whiteboard on the wall with a camera pointed at it, and can switch viewpoint and see the whiteboard.
If you can't travel, they'll also do them, and if you passed the phone screen, but they want a technical opinion before they bring someone on site (mean fly them in), and they happen to be pretty far from any Google office.
I don't think the above discloses anything that should not be IOTTMCO.
I thought the phone screening and was a relatively easy hoop to jump through, with candidates that don't fail being pulled in for a real interview. Oh, and doesn't Google still have a corporate policy of never giving feedback on interviews or reasons for rejection, for fear of lawsuits?
The phone interviews I've given were all real interviews, not just phone screens. On the other hand, being in a position where the recruiters tend to like you, and the hiring committee tends to trust your opinion, you see more of those than most people.
The corporate policy exists to prevent one bad interview, due to bad chemistry, a hangover, or whatever excuse for having an off day the interviewer happened to have, from damaging the interview process overall. Google employees can screw up too, and if they do, it shouldn't cost Google a good candidate, and it shouldn't cost the interviewee their confidence in the remaining interviewers, where they might prove to be incredible people to hire.
A lot of passing an interview process has to do with confidence, and if you shoot someone's confidence in the head, even if you don't think they'd be a good fit, then (a) you're an incredibly bad interviewer, and should either redo the training or be barred from doing future interviews; that's OK: not everyone can be great at everything!, or (b) you've made a mistake, and you probably need to immediately tell the recruiter managing the interviews, and the next interviewer on the way in, at a minimum, and then disqualify your feedback to the hiring committee, and tell them why, so they can look at the remaining interviews in that light. The absolutely worst thing you could do is make a mistake and not tell anyone about it. They're not rewarded, but unless they are habitual, neither do they cost you; you tend to get +1 integrity points (that's not a real thing).
The whole anecdotes smells a bit off to me...
Yup. Me too.
which begs the question, "Why are you trying to cover the hole while someone is still down there?"
LOL
Made my day!
Usually, it's because someone has travelled a long distance underground, and you are either opening it to let them out, or opening it to provide equipment for their next leg (like an air blower), or you are sending down an expert or tools to do something with whatever cable or whatever they dragged with them from the point the went in.
I'm not seeing the reciprocal agreement here. I'm seeing a cite of a document that says the U.S. is weird about income taxes, and that New York is weird about income taxes, and that establishing a nexus obligates both parties, assuming the foreign power chooses to be obligated (why opt in when you can opt out?!?).
I don't see an 11% income tax in Singapore and a 25% income tax in California for an income generating transaction between the two resulting in no more than 25% out of pocket (however you apportion it) for the person receiving the income.
Try again.
That just simply wouldn't work. As another poster already pointed out, if you deny them the patent, then they have no reason to involve themselves in researching such, or standardizing.
No one is suggesting denying anyone a patent. What's being suggested is that if something is patented, it shouldn't be part of the standard which everyone has to follow to compete *at all* in the market.
A really good example of this is the Qualcomm CDMA patent. They did a lot of great work, behind that patent, and they deserve the patent. But you shouldn't have to implement it in order to implement a cell phone that works, and be completely locked out of building cell phones otherwise. It should not be part of the standard infrastructure.
And, in fact, it's not. Most of the world is GSM, because they are unwilling to pay the $35 royalty per device for CDMA. And they shouldn't be required to do so, just to be able to build a cell phone. In fact, within the cellular device industry, we call this "the Qualcomm tax". Some are willing to pay the "tax", other are not; neither position prevents them from building cell phones, although the choice tends to restrict your devices to one set of carriers, or another (assuming you even have CDMA carriers in your country), unless you build a device capable of both (at which point, you pay the "tax", even if you never use the capability.
Ok, if you give essential patents for free, won't you also have to give insignificant patents (e.g. slide to unlock) for free?
I think you are confusing de facto standards (like "slide to unlock") and de jure standards (like "RFC 793").
The first is "I'd like to do this because everyone else is doing this, and it's neat". The second is "In order to get your device to talk to the Internet at all, you have to implement this standard".
The term "standard-essential" in this context refers to de jure standards.
While it might be a pain in the rear if you can not "slide to unlock", the only thing that it prohibits you from doing is having an unlock method which has been established in people's minds as a Schelling Point. You being unable to used that Schelling Point just means that you aren't going to be able to easily convert people to using your product as an easy replacement for your competitors product.
"Reverse engineering for interoperability" does not apply to "interoperability with ingrained human habits".
Google should maybe feel a teensy bit of guilt over the fact that it is using government infrastructure and services which derive from tax imposed on corporations [and citizens], in lieu of a subscription fee.
I'm sure they would, if the backbone Google uses for all of its internal traffic weren't wholly owned by Google, including their trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific fiber optic cables. Google has their own separate Internet. And a lot of traffic from other people use Google's Internet as a result of peering agreements. Including government traffic.
Most countries and states have reciprocal tax agreements.
U.S. states are constitutionally prohibited from negotiating agreements with foreign powers.
As all sales taxes in the U.S., other than taxes on specific non-imported items, such as fuel (which therefore do not require reciprocity), are by state, county, or municipality. Counties and municiplaties are likewise enjoined from trade negotiations with foreign powers.
Not sure how you'd handle this through reciprocity...
OK. Where I live the covers are rectangular. Please provide an equivalent set of answers on why manhole covers are rectangular.
1. People where you live are stupid
2. The things have hinges
2a. The Mayor's brother is heavily invested in a hinge factory
3. With hinges on one side, you can put on a lock to keep inquisitive yet still stupid people out
3a. The Mayor's other brother is heavily invested in a manhole lock company
4. The mayor's brother in law owns the rectangular manhole cover factory
5. The covers are rectangular because the holes are rectangular because the pipes are rectangular
5a. The pipes are rectangular because the mayor's other brother in law owns the sewer unclogging company
5b. The mayor's uncle owns the rectangular pipe company
6. More golfballs fit in the holes that way
I'm sure the slashdot community can add many more.
... (I had no paper or pen, just on the telephone) ...
What YEAR was this?!? All of the phone interviews I gave candidates while I was at Google and interviewing people involved them having been sent a Google Docs link beforehand that would allow them to do text or (if they were familiar enough with Docs to open one) freehand drawing.