Surely you can't choose a profession based solely on either intrinsic motivation or employment prospects. If you can't get a job, your education is a bad investment. But if you hate your job so much you downshift to a different field for a 50% paycut, you're in the same boat. (I know a gainfully employed but miserable lawyer who did just that).
I'll never make as much as a researcher as my brother will as a dentist. But we both make plenty to get by, and I really love the perpetual novelty, smart co-workers, and somewhat flexible hours of what I do.
Then again, my degree is in CS (now the "least employable degree"!?) so I guess I owe a lot to the pure dumb luck of graduating during the.com boom.
I think starting with a job below your credentials hurts your long-term career, putting you on a low trajectory. Once your place in the pecking order is established, it is extremely difficult to overtake others.
That said, it is rather a moot point, since nobody wants to start their career badly, but in this economy there are few options.
They left it lying around... their home. The reason it was compromised was because (apparently) the FBI had a warrant to go in their home, meaning they were already under suspicion because of something else they had done.
Here is my point: if you do something that causes the FBI to monitor your every move and scour your home for clues for over 10 years, it is going to be very hard to keep many secrets, regardless of how you configure your WiFi or whether you try to memorize random 27 character passwords.
All modeling is exactly this - pay people who look a certain way to be associated with your brand. It's not logical, it's highly effective, and it's so ubiquitous in every culture I know about that it's hard to even notice.
Unsurprisingly, being white isn't quite the only requirement: ""There are job opportunities for girls who are pretty and for men who can look good in a suit."
No, those were not "young, impressionable, college-educated people to their cause and then trying to guide them into positions where they can gain intel." They were simply sellouts. (Then again, neither were they defectors who wanted money, as the parent claimed...)
Teslas aren't "just" electric cars, they're very nice cars, period. What is the purely economic justification for buying a Lexus over a Yaris? There is none. People do buy them though.
CO2 is not a pollutant. It is in fact essential for the Earth's life cycle. Plants would not survive without it.
A meaningless statement. The fact is, nothing is a harmful in a small enough quantity, and nothing is safe in high enough quantity. You may as well argue that reducing salt intake to combat heart disease is stupid because sodium is necessary for survival.
However, you make a good point that methane is a horrible greenhouse gas, so reducing leaks of unburned methane would have to be a priority if we ramp up the natural gas infrastructure.
Really? Maybe you should go into business selling futures on Roadsters. I will pay you $10K for a 2 year future on a Roadster right now. Where do I sign?
manufacturing hydrocarbons will mitigate the advantage that China has accrued in cornering the rare earth market.
The only reason China dominates this market is because they sell cheaper than anybody else. China isn't controlling production outside their own borders. Production would increase around the world if it were profitable to do so.
I really don't understand your math. Assume a Prius lifetime of 16 years. You will pay for ONE $2.5K battery replacement in that time. That's $156/yr on average for batteries. That's less than 2 tanks of gas for an H2.
Then I'm sticking with internal combustion, where each new car rolls off the lot with an iron-clad guarantee against rising gasoline costs in the future.
Since we're arguing about some dude's speculative model of future battery life and cost, let's speculate about gas costs 8 years from now, shall we?
"Imagine if these companies sought to block Pakistan or any other Islamic country. There would be uproar and claims of racism, anti-religious behaviour etc. etc. Yet when these same governments block sites for religious purposes it's considered some sort of right to choose"... by whom exactly? This claim of hypocrisy will be so much more interesting if you can take it past the straw man phase and make it stick to a notable person.
Hold them to the standards expected of the military, which is to do your job or suffer appropriate punishment.
From the article: "the Army has reprimanded Superintendent John C. Metzler Jr., who is retiring July 2, and [No. 2 administrator] Higginbotham, who was placed on administrative leave pending a disciplinary review." So, yeah, they're shitcanned. I'm sure some will say that's not enough, though keep in mind they were also juggling many other responsibilities besides IT upgrades.
From the article, it's not correct to say no progress was made. For example, they digitized the microfiche. However, they didn't index them correctly.
IMHO, this whole issue is philosophically interesting. I think it is a mistake to try and indefinitely preserve the bodies of everyone who ever lived. Rather than be a rotting corpse, I would rather come back sooner as pine needles in an alpine forest and affect the future through writings, or photography, or my descendents.
Of course, none of that really pertains to the issue at hand - if somebody's job is to manage a cemetery in a certain way, they should.
Computer geeks have always lusted after big high-res displays just like everybody else. I think he's just being contrary because "retinal-displays" is linked to a current Apple offering and thus tainted with hype. But obviously identifying the point of diminishing returns for display resolution is of interest (though especially when size is constrained by device form factor).
In flight simulation they have talked about so-called 20/20 displays for decades. (I think that terminology is a bit better than "retinal display" since it accounts for people's varying visual acuity.) Medical imaging has also long been a driver of big high-resolution display tech.
tell me again why a company on the opposite side of the country should fund our local parks and schools?
I think there is a very good case for federalizing school funding because people often move from the state where they receive their education. If cheap states derive all the same long-term economic benefits from good schools in other states as higher-tax states that pay for those schools, it is a race to the bottom for states to defund public schooling, resulting in an overall poorer nation. (E.g. grow up in Rhode Island to get a good education, then move to Texas as an adult to pay lower taxes on the higher income your education helps you earn) In fact I think this has always been a handicap for public education in the US.
Let's not just assume hiking the Saturday price would increase revenue. My guess is people would think of it as "the expensive day" even if it were just a few cents more, and avoid mailing anything. Meanwhile, the carriers would still have to do their whole route.
- loses $25 billion (Yep, lost as in nobody knows what happened to it. Yep, $25 billion)- google "Unreconciled Transactions Affecting the Change in Net Position" section in the Treasury Dept financial report
That means the accounting did not add up, it probably does not mean that somebody got away with $25 billion in diamonds or something.
- wastes $60 billion annually on Medicare fraud. Just wait until Obamacare kicks in.
How much do private insurers lose to insurance fraud?
- spends at least $90 billion on programs that are "ineffective, marginally adequate, or operating under a flawed purpose" (partial audit by the white house)
Well, that's the hard part, isn't it. Getting everybody to agree what is pork.
Look, I'm not saying government is perfect, but right now I do think there's an unwarranted streak of paranoia that most tax money goes straight into a bonfire, which isn't true.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll never make as much as a researcher as my brother will as a dentist. But we both make plenty to get by, and I really love the perpetual novelty, smart co-workers, and somewhat flexible hours of what I do.
Then again, my degree is in CS (now the "least employable degree"!?) so I guess I owe a lot to the pure dumb luck of graduating during the .com boom.
That said, it is rather a moot point, since nobody wants to start their career badly, but in this economy there are few options.
Here is my point: if you do something that causes the FBI to monitor your every move and scour your home for clues for over 10 years, it is going to be very hard to keep many secrets, regardless of how you configure your WiFi or whether you try to memorize random 27 character passwords.
Unsurprisingly, being white isn't quite the only requirement: ""There are job opportunities for girls who are pretty and for men who can look good in a suit."
No, those were not "young, impressionable, college-educated people to their cause and then trying to guide them into positions where they can gain intel." They were simply sellouts. (Then again, neither were they defectors who wanted money, as the parent claimed...)
That would explain why they weren't arrested for the last 10 years, but not why they were arrested now.
Teslas aren't "just" electric cars, they're very nice cars, period. What is the purely economic justification for buying a Lexus over a Yaris? There is none. People do buy them though.
That's like saying 5 word per minute typist is just as good as a 60 wpm typist.
Granted, there is no way P=NP, but as long as you're being a little rebellious and impractical why not take a leap of faith?
A meaningless statement. The fact is, nothing is a harmful in a small enough quantity, and nothing is safe in high enough quantity. You may as well argue that reducing salt intake to combat heart disease is stupid because sodium is necessary for survival.
However, you make a good point that methane is a horrible greenhouse gas, so reducing leaks of unburned methane would have to be a priority if we ramp up the natural gas infrastructure.
Really? Maybe you should go into business selling futures on Roadsters. I will pay you $10K for a 2 year future on a Roadster right now. Where do I sign?
The only reason China dominates this market is because they sell cheaper than anybody else. China isn't controlling production outside their own borders. Production would increase around the world if it were profitable to do so.
I really don't understand your math. Assume a Prius lifetime of 16 years. You will pay for ONE $2.5K battery replacement in that time. That's $156/yr on average for batteries. That's less than 2 tanks of gas for an H2.
Since we're arguing about some dude's speculative model of future battery life and cost, let's speculate about gas costs 8 years from now, shall we?
I'll start the guessing at $6 / gallon.
They could always go hiking and pee on my stump.
"Imagine if these companies sought to block Pakistan or any other Islamic country. There would be uproar and claims of racism, anti-religious behaviour etc. etc. Yet when these same governments block sites for religious purposes it's considered some sort of right to choose"... by whom exactly? This claim of hypocrisy will be so much more interesting if you can take it past the straw man phase and make it stick to a notable person.
From the article: "the Army has reprimanded Superintendent John C. Metzler Jr., who is retiring July 2, and [No. 2 administrator] Higginbotham, who was placed on administrative leave pending a disciplinary review." So, yeah, they're shitcanned. I'm sure some will say that's not enough, though keep in mind they were also juggling many other responsibilities besides IT upgrades.
IMHO, this whole issue is philosophically interesting. I think it is a mistake to try and indefinitely preserve the bodies of everyone who ever lived. Rather than be a rotting corpse, I would rather come back sooner as pine needles in an alpine forest and affect the future through writings, or photography, or my descendents.
Of course, none of that really pertains to the issue at hand - if somebody's job is to manage a cemetery in a certain way, they should.
In flight simulation they have talked about so-called 20/20 displays for decades. (I think that terminology is a bit better than "retinal display" since it accounts for people's varying visual acuity.) Medical imaging has also long been a driver of big high-resolution display tech.
I think there is a very good case for federalizing school funding because people often move from the state where they receive their education. If cheap states derive all the same long-term economic benefits from good schools in other states as higher-tax states that pay for those schools, it is a race to the bottom for states to defund public schooling, resulting in an overall poorer nation. (E.g. grow up in Rhode Island to get a good education, then move to Texas as an adult to pay lower taxes on the higher income your education helps you earn) In fact I think this has always been a handicap for public education in the US.
Let's not just assume hiking the Saturday price would increase revenue. My guess is people would think of it as "the expensive day" even if it were just a few cents more, and avoid mailing anything. Meanwhile, the carriers would still have to do their whole route.
In all my years of attempting to use suspend-to-RAM on Linux, it has always been, ahem, highly probabilistic.
I like your proposal. Here is a link adding meat to your assertion that high frequency trading tilts the playing field, and how.
That means the accounting did not add up, it probably does not mean that somebody got away with $25 billion in diamonds or something.
How much do private insurers lose to insurance fraud?
Well, that's the hard part, isn't it. Getting everybody to agree what is pork.
Look, I'm not saying government is perfect, but right now I do think there's an unwarranted streak of paranoia that most tax money goes straight into a bonfire, which isn't true.
Glad to see the govt. fighting to get more for our tax dollars, not just sitting there getting bilked by dishonest vendors.