No but Starbucks wants to employ the upper end of the no to low skill work force.
By offering school it thinks it can get more people in that range to apply even if they never follow through with taking the classes.
Which is why net neutrality needs to die and application neutrality needs to be passed.
Application neutrality recognizes QoS, and that ISPs customers would like to have certain sites blocked.
It would require ISPs to treat similar traffic the same way so if you want to block or slow down streaming videos you have to treat all sites the same, want to block email spam good but you have to apply the same set of rules to all email.
However if you go read the bills that have been proposed for net neutrality you will see that ISP that did implement QoS would be breaking the law.
Same as if the ISP were to setup email spam filtering or a school run provider that decided to block out site such as MAMBLA.
All of those actions would be illegal under the majority of Net Neutrality bills.
The liberals are not pushing for the increase in minimum wage because of the people who earn it but because of all the poeple who make a higher salary that is tied to the minimum wage.
So you will now have a bunch of people get a similar percent increase in salaries, which will then push those not tied to have a an increase in salary. If you are currently making $15 an hour you will not want to stay making that when the minimum wage is $15, you will be looking for $20-$24 jobs. That keeps pushing up until it does affect your area.
The coffee was not at an above normal temperature, in fact the temperature is lower then the temperature recommended by various coffee drinking group.
The way the low temperature got in was the lawyer sueing went around to places that were selling less amounts of coffee and recorded the temperatures of those places.
McDonalds stilll tells its franchises to sell at the temperature of the lawsuit and if you purchase from any major coffe chain that is the temperature range you will mostly likely get.
Except that Oracle had control on some of the healthcare sites for larger states and delivered a working product on time; also Oracle was part of the team that was brought in to fix the main site and are credited by Obama himself for getting that working.
Oregon is just an example of poor management, from picking the products to use before having requirements, using the wrong type of contract, and then not doing proper check and those checks that were done were ignored by the government management.
Looked this up and they were off by a under three months. They were suppose to deliver the four computers by August and it did not happen until October.
One major difference between this and what Oregon didn't do was the for that contract they had well designed requirements(according to the people doing the work) the company that was awarded the contract was expected to deliver a working product(something not in the Oregon contract) and there was contract management.
Far to many battery companies around for any major profit.
Besides most energy companies are rather bad in the profit margin ranking; they are steady company but just don't have that big of profits.
Again for account purposes yes they should be, for the amount of money they have to actually have to pay future dues owned to employees is less then the amount other government organizations do. Also the USPS is a government organization they just have a some laws that give them some independance; those same laws gave them the responsibility to care for thier employees seperatly from the government norm; something management failed to plan for until forced to.
For financial years 2007 to 2013 the USPS had a total loss of around $40 billion, if they did not have to pay the money to make sure thier current employees were set for health insurance at retirement it would of been a loss of $8 billion. Except for a few times they have not paid into the future health care fund. The future needs of thier employees does not factor into them not having a profit.
It is a lie, everyone has access to thier earning and the laws governing it; and if interested in the topic could easily read them It got started by USPS management wanting the US public to pick up the responsibities that the USPS said they would cover for thier employees so they could continue business as normal with no care. It is the same reason USPS management is wanting to dump its employees totally into obamacare at retirement and not pay any insurance costs for them.
If the USPS differences under law are to considered to be a standard it is a low one, if you say the standard requirement of governement agencies is an A then the standard required from the USPS is a C. They are not required to care about future needs as much as other governement agencies, they do now have to keep accounting planning to the higher standards but don't have to actually use the knowledge.
This is not USPS delivery this is about making sure employees have the health care they worked for at retirement BTW except for a few places, that I very rarely do business with, I require that all packages I get come through USPS.
Please stop reading posting this lie.
Go read the laws, they were not required to pre-finance for 75 year, the 75 years is what is required by the government for calcuating future needs it is for ACCOUNTING purposes only, no money has to saved based on this. The 75 years is used by other governent organizations ranging from IRS, DoD, HUD, CIA, FBI,etc, etc,etc.
THe post office was required to start pre-funding for the expect life after retiring which is around 20 years. And the reason for that is that the USPS was not planning and just taking money out each year to cover insurance costs for their retires; and with profits decreasing the financial forecast was they would not beable to continue this without taking precaustions. So the real question is why do the people that keep repeating this HATE the retired employees of the postal services that you want to place them in a position where the money need for benefits they worked for are not available?
BTW pull up the actual numbers release by the USPS and those and not the numbers you find in that link you posted.
Not under the EU proposal or under most bills proposed elsewhere.
Lets take the three initial example I brought up:
For the email:
The initial EU proposal did have some language that would of allowed ISPs to continue to do block SPAM that was removed. Even under the initial proposal an ISP could of only deleted the email if I gave them specific permission or it was a "serious crime", is herbal viagra email a "serious crime"
The block of web attacks, lets say a DDOS.
I would guess most people would consider that a temporary or exceptional traffic condition, in which case the ISP would be allow block the traffic to minimize the interruption however they have to do that to all traffic of the same type.
For schools blocking various sites, in the USA most schools are considered as ISPs not sure how Europe is, the EU proposal would prevent ISPs from blocking or discriminating between equivalent services and sites; no matter the legality or desire of the customer unless you get a court order. The EU proposal does allow for speciality services to be treated differently.
There are a bunch of nice things in the EU proposal that would be great in some of the bills in the USA such as having to document changes, mentioning of application neutrality and an initial aim at application neutraility vs net neutrality.
And as it is my ISP blocks alot of those that qualify as legal but for all purposes are still SPAM.
Under almost most net neutrality bills that have come up that would now be illegal.
Net neutrality proposals needs to die and quickly.
I like that my ISP can scan my email for spam and remove it, I like that the ISP I use for web hosting blocks traffic from sites that are trying attacks against my web site and I am sure the vast majoity of parents like that their school blocks various web sites that are designed to prey on kids. All of this would be prevented by the various net neutrality bills that have come up; it is good that someone in the U.K. with a technical understanding is reading these proposals.
Once net neutrality is killed we can switch to the family of laws that are need and that is application neutrality. Application Neutrality is the principle that ISP don't have to treat all sites and data on the internet the same but that they have to treat with a same set of rules for all traffic for a application type. ISP should be able to block email or block various web sites and application neutrality allows them to do so provide they filter email the same or block web content by the same set of rules for all sites.
Stop cherry picking parts of the trial and what happened before and after!
The fact is he was given a trial to prove this idea and when he could not got slammed hard for it.
Actually organic pesticides are far worse. Neonicatines are a family of pesticides that are focused on certain insect types. Nicotine will kill everything and does so very, very good. It will also kill pets, animals, humans, etc which is why modern pesticides are prefered.
The reasons all these states have this law related to cars is because they are big purchase items and based on past problems they are requiring that the purchaser has some in state method of getting the product fix or for resolving problems. If I purchase a $59 game and the the only method of recorse is to take it to court in California it is not a major problem, however with a $80,000 car it is.
Why is there so much about tesla anyways this is a product designed for the 0.0001%.
I like that my ISP can scan my email for spam and remove it, I like that the ISP I for web hosting blocks traffic from sites that are trying attacks against my web site and I am sure the vast majoity of parents like that their school blocks various web sites that are designed to prey on kids. All of this would be prevented by the various net neutrality bills that have come up.
Once net neutrality is killed we can switch to the family of laws that are need and that is application neutrality. Application Neutrality is the principle that ISP don't have to treat all sites and data on the internet the same but that they have to treat with a same set of rules for all traffic for a application type. ISP should be able to block email or block various web sites and application neutrality allows them to do so provide they filter email the same or block web content by the same set of rules for all sites.
There is no scientific proof that is does.
You can prove that smoking increases the chances of getting some types of cancer and that most lung cancer is caused by smoking.
Please show a single instance where Monsanto has gone after a seed cleaner who has not specificlly targeted non-monsanto to be removed; meaning they were cleaning to ensure they got round-up resistant seed.
You really need to educate yourself on this topic, the idiot sites that are you telling you that monsanto is going after "ANY farmer that does not buy their product" or everything is "now the property of Monsanto" or making seed cleaner illegal are just lieing to you.
Nope that is not the case. What happened is the farmer found some plants that were resistanct to Round-up and had knowledge that the other farmers around him were using the round-up resistant seed.
He then went and did some additional testing to verify the plants. He then went out and collect the seed from the resistant and did additional seed cleaning to remove plant seed that were not resistant. Once he had a high percent of seed he was sure were round-up resistant he proceed to use that and also to sell it.
If they had just been seeds he harvested and had not tried to make special use of the round-up resistant nature he would of been ok. That he made special effort to use the round-up resistance nature of the seed he got into trouble.
Why? Because guy/company that is donating some of them have them marked are garbage variations that normally would of never seen the light of day outside of his lab?
I guess they would not like the free publicity that is going to that lab for the variations that are actually of value and that they will continue to sell the same way as Monsanto.
Slashdot Mirror
No but Starbucks wants to employ the upper end of the no to low skill work force.
By offering school it thinks it can get more people in that range to apply even if they never follow through with taking the classes.
Which is why net neutrality needs to die and application neutrality needs to be passed.
Application neutrality recognizes QoS, and that ISPs customers would like to have certain sites blocked.
It would require ISPs to treat similar traffic the same way so if you want to block or slow down streaming videos you have to treat all sites the same, want to block email spam good but you have to apply the same set of rules to all email.
However if you go read the bills that have been proposed for net neutrality you will see that ISP that did implement QoS would be breaking the law.
Same as if the ISP were to setup email spam filtering or a school run provider that decided to block out site such as MAMBLA.
All of those actions would be illegal under the majority of Net Neutrality bills.
Probably, it has been long observed in various life prolonging studies that a near starvation died is the way to prolong your life.
The liberals are not pushing for the increase in minimum wage because of the people who earn it but because of all the poeple who make a higher salary that is tied to the minimum wage.
So you will now have a bunch of people get a similar percent increase in salaries, which will then push those not tied to have a an increase in salary. If you are currently making $15 an hour you will not want to stay making that when the minimum wage is $15, you will be looking for $20-$24 jobs. That keeps pushing up until it does affect your area.
The coffee was not at an above normal temperature, in fact the temperature is lower then the temperature recommended by various coffee drinking group.
The way the low temperature got in was the lawyer sueing went around to places that were selling less amounts of coffee and recorded the temperatures of those places.
McDonalds stilll tells its franchises to sell at the temperature of the lawsuit and if you purchase from any major coffe chain that is the temperature range you will mostly likely get.
Except that Oracle had control on some of the healthcare sites for larger states and delivered a working product on time; also Oracle was part of the team that was brought in to fix the main site and are credited by Obama himself for getting that working.
Oregon is just an example of poor management, from picking the products to use before having requirements, using the wrong type of contract, and then not doing proper check and those checks that were done were ignored by the government management.
Looked this up and they were off by a under three months. They were suppose to deliver the four computers by August and it did not happen until October.
One major difference between this and what Oregon didn't do was the for that contract they had well designed requirements(according to the people doing the work) the company that was awarded the contract was expected to deliver a working product(something not in the Oregon contract) and there was contract management.
Far to many battery companies around for any major profit.
Besides most energy companies are rather bad in the profit margin ranking; they are steady company but just don't have that big of profits.
Again for account purposes yes they should be, for the amount of money they have to actually have to pay future dues owned to employees is less then the amount other government organizations do. Also the USPS is a government organization they just have a some laws that give them some independance; those same laws gave them the responsibility to care for thier employees seperatly from the government norm; something management failed to plan for until forced to.
For financial years 2007 to 2013 the USPS had a total loss of around $40 billion, if they did not have to pay the money to make sure thier current employees were set for health insurance at retirement it would of been a loss of $8 billion. Except for a few times they have not paid into the future health care fund. The future needs of thier employees does not factor into them not having a profit.
It is a lie, everyone has access to thier earning and the laws governing it; and if interested in the topic could easily read them It got started by USPS management wanting the US public to pick up the responsibities that the USPS said they would cover for thier employees so they could continue business as normal with no care. It is the same reason USPS management is wanting to dump its employees totally into obamacare at retirement and not pay any insurance costs for them.
If the USPS differences under law are to considered to be a standard it is a low one, if you say the standard requirement of governement agencies is an A then the standard required from the USPS is a C. They are not required to care about future needs as much as other governement agencies, they do now have to keep accounting planning to the higher standards but don't have to actually use the knowledge.
This is not USPS delivery this is about making sure employees have the health care they worked for at retirement BTW except for a few places, that I very rarely do business with, I require that all packages I get come through USPS.
Please stop reading posting this lie. ,etc, etc,etc.
Go read the laws, they were not required to pre-finance for 75 year, the 75 years is what is required by the government for calcuating future needs it is for ACCOUNTING purposes only, no money has to saved based on this. The 75 years is used by other governent organizations ranging from IRS, DoD, HUD, CIA, FBI
THe post office was required to start pre-funding for the expect life after retiring which is around 20 years. And the reason for that is that the USPS was not planning and just taking money out each year to cover insurance costs for their retires; and with profits decreasing the financial forecast was they would not beable to continue this without taking precaustions. So the real question is why do the people that keep repeating this HATE the retired employees of the postal services that you want to place them in a position where the money need for benefits they worked for are not available?
BTW pull up the actual numbers release by the USPS and those and not the numbers you find in that link you posted.
Not under the EU proposal or under most bills proposed elsewhere.
Lets take the three initial example I brought up:
For the email:
The initial EU proposal did have some language that would of allowed ISPs to continue to do block SPAM that was removed. Even under the initial proposal an ISP could of only deleted the email if I gave them specific permission or it was a "serious crime", is herbal viagra email a "serious crime"
The block of web attacks, lets say a DDOS.
I would guess most people would consider that a temporary or exceptional traffic condition, in which case the ISP would be allow block the traffic to minimize the interruption however they have to do that to all traffic of the same type.
For schools blocking various sites, in the USA most schools are considered as ISPs not sure how Europe is, the EU proposal would prevent ISPs from blocking or discriminating between equivalent services and sites; no matter the legality or desire of the customer unless you get a court order. The EU proposal does allow for speciality services to be treated differently.
There are a bunch of nice things in the EU proposal that would be great in some of the bills in the USA such as having to document changes, mentioning of application neutrality and an initial aim at application neutraility vs net neutrality.
And as it is my ISP blocks alot of those that qualify as legal but for all purposes are still SPAM.
Under almost most net neutrality bills that have come up that would now be illegal.
Net neutrality proposals needs to die and quickly.
I like that my ISP can scan my email for spam and remove it, I like that the ISP I use for web hosting blocks traffic from sites that are trying attacks against my web site and I am sure the vast majoity of parents like that their school blocks various web sites that are designed to prey on kids. All of this would be prevented by the various net neutrality bills that have come up; it is good that someone in the U.K. with a technical understanding is reading these proposals.
Once net neutrality is killed we can switch to the family of laws that are need and that is application neutrality. Application Neutrality is the principle that ISP don't have to treat all sites and data on the internet the same but that they have to treat with a same set of rules for all traffic for a application type. ISP should be able to block email or block various web sites and application neutrality allows them to do so provide they filter email the same or block web content by the same set of rules for all sites.
Stop cherry picking parts of the trial and what happened before and after!
The fact is he was given a trial to prove this idea and when he could not got slammed hard for it.
Actually organic pesticides are far worse. Neonicatines are a family of pesticides that are focused on certain insect types. Nicotine will kill everything and does so very, very good. It will also kill pets, animals, humans, etc which is why modern pesticides are prefered.
look up frozen pizza as a vegetable.
They will just go and convert their product to be disposible water spherification carriers.
The reasons all these states have this law related to cars is because they are big purchase items and based on past problems they are requiring that the purchaser has some in state method of getting the product fix or for resolving problems. If I purchase a $59 game and the the only method of recorse is to take it to court in California it is not a major problem, however with a $80,000 car it is.
Why is there so much about tesla anyways this is a product designed for the 0.0001%.
Net neutrality needs to die and quickly.
I like that my ISP can scan my email for spam and remove it, I like that the ISP I for web hosting blocks traffic from sites that are trying attacks against my web site and I am sure the vast majoity of parents like that their school blocks various web sites that are designed to prey on kids. All of this would be prevented by the various net neutrality bills that have come up.
Once net neutrality is killed we can switch to the family of laws that are need and that is application neutrality. Application Neutrality is the principle that ISP don't have to treat all sites and data on the internet the same but that they have to treat with a same set of rules for all traffic for a application type. ISP should be able to block email or block various web sites and application neutrality allows them to do so provide they filter email the same or block web content by the same set of rules for all sites.
There is no scientific proof that is does.
You can prove that smoking increases the chances of getting some types of cancer and that most lung cancer is caused by smoking.
There is more leg room in the wheel well.
Please show a single instance where Monsanto has gone after a seed cleaner who has not specificlly targeted non-monsanto to be removed; meaning they were cleaning to ensure they got round-up resistant seed.
You really need to educate yourself on this topic, the idiot sites that are you telling you that monsanto is going after "ANY farmer that does not buy their product" or everything is "now the property of Monsanto" or making seed cleaner illegal are just lieing to you.
Nope that is not the case. What happened is the farmer found some plants that were resistanct to Round-up and had knowledge that the other farmers around him were using the round-up resistant seed.
He then went and did some additional testing to verify the plants. He then went out and collect the seed from the resistant and did additional seed cleaning to remove plant seed that were not resistant. Once he had a high percent of seed he was sure were round-up resistant he proceed to use that and also to sell it.
If they had just been seeds he harvested and had not tried to make special use of the round-up resistant nature he would of been ok. That he made special effort to use the round-up resistance nature of the seed he got into trouble.
Why?
Because guy/company that is donating some of them have them marked are garbage variations that normally would of never seen the light of day outside of his lab?
I guess they would not like the free publicity that is going to that lab for the variations that are actually of value and that they will continue to sell the same way as Monsanto.