As has been posted on this article, statistically fewer poor people have IDs. Moreover, it's a lot easier for me to get an ID than a random poor person.
Somebody's position on DST depends partly on their longitude and latitude.
The farther north you are, the more your sunrise and sunset vary.
Each time zone has a central meridian, such that the time is based on that meridian's mean sun time. If you're east of that meridian, you get light earlier. If you're west, you get light later.
Since I'm in Minneapolis, my sunrise and sunset times vary more than for most of the US, and I'm located significantly west of 90W, so sunrise and sunset are delayed about 13 minutes from 90W. Therefore, it stays darker in the morning in winter than it does in most of the rest of the US.
What planet is this where poor people have lots of money for luxuries? The straw planet that Republicans who don't know anybody poor like to talk about?
If the finance system were intelligently run, it would be no problem at all. However, my SSAN is used as an authentication that I'm me, which is stupid. It's an identifier, and it pretty well works for that. An authenticator that can't be changed and which I have to give to a lot of people makes absolutely no sense.
I assume you're proposing that there be enough registration sessions so that anyone with a half-hour lunch break can pop on over, on foot, register, and still have time to wolf something down.
Pi is about 3.1415926535. 3 is 3. 22/7 is about 3.142857, which is accurate to two more decimal places than 3, and only differs by one in the following. 355/113 is 3.1415929, much more accurate. Each of these has more correct significant digits than the last.
Are you cool with killing people? Some elderly people find it very difficult to go places and wait in line. I guarantee you that, on Election Day (or any other day) there will be hospital patients that can't be taken to a polling place.
Ban by-mail voting and these people don't get to vote. Requiring them to go somewhere is inhumane.
It can't be a Federal obligation, since elections aren't a Federal concern. The ACA didn't require people to sign up because it couldn't; all it could do was impose a penalty in the form of a tax.
Present a state issued ID in order to vote. Are you worried about poor people? Then make these IDs free.
Money isn't the only consideration. If the issuing offices are open only during normal business hours, and are few in number, poor people won't generally show up. I can take time off work without penalty and drive a fair distance. Someone who's afraid of losing their job if they don't show up and doesn't have a car is in a much worse situation. Similarly, I can get whatever documentation is desired fairly easily, and poor people will find that more difficult.
The original statement was that climate change wasn't enough to turn anti-nuclear people into pro-nuclear (or at least neutral) people. Websites that cater to people concerned about nuclear power are a very good place to look. I don't trust everything that comes from some of these sites, but the fact that they're advocating nuclear power is telling.
One answer is that, last time, it was much more gradual. Life had a much better chance to adapt. This time around, we've got concerns that aren't just species survival.
Another is that we haven't stopped putting more CO2 into the air, so it's not going to stay 403ppm for long.
We've got a few hundred million years left on the planet. We can afford to take a long view. We're not going to colonize exoplanets any time soon, and we don't have to. What we should do right now is stay in as good a shape as we can for the long run, and if that means temporarily cutting back on industry that's fine.
Ever heard of the Prisoner's Dilemma? That's what we've got. What you do to reduce CO2 emissions is basically irrelevant, so you have no personal incentive to cut back. If a few billion people think that they have no personal incentive, and therefore don't cut back, the world turns into a disaster area, and everybody loses.
One of the functions of government is to solve problems like that, because nothing else is going to.
Climate change activists argue as if the discounting rate should be 0%, which is clearly wrong.
Really? I've never seen a discount rate in a climate discussion.
If you read the IPCC report, you'll see what actual scientists think will happen. Smart people who study this a lot. Make honest estimates of the cost, and use any reasonable discount rate to get present value.
I have no idea why you bother when you can't get anything right.
The ACA established markets for health insurance, defining plans in easily comparable ways. This encourages competition among insurers.
Auto insurance is mandatory, and regulated, but there's lots of companies, each of which wants your business.
There are no regulations that say that you have to deal with one specific insurance company for your house, car, medical, etc. insurance. There are regulations and contractual obligations that say you have to buy it from somebody, and that's where the competition comes in. If you don't buy Allstate, you might have State Farm, which is good for State Farm and not so good for Allstate, so Allstate is going to try to get you to switch.
Except that, if you want Windows, you take what Microsoft offers, which includes built-in IE. (It's perfectly usable to download a decent browser. Don't knock it too much.)
Every Linux distro is a different but similar OS. It's entirely possible to keep systemd out of a distro, but nobody actually does. If it were really that horrible, someone would have a non-systemd distro that would become popular. Until this actually happens, I don't see how systemd can be that bad.
Unless you consider military doctrine to be technology, no, there was no game-changing technology France could get. The nukes came out after the wars were essentially won, and required air superiority to use. Radar was quite useful, although the US Navy used it pretty badly for a year or so. Enigma was very useful but not, I think, a game changer.
And, yes, murdering your own scientists and fostering anti-intellectualism is self-defeating. It would be a lot more important now than it was in the French revolution, since science and technology are more important, but by the time it would have been a serious problem, France had had a lot of time to recover.
White Christians should and do be considered just like everyone else. However, the government in the past has normally pursued policies that favored white Christians, and this is going to change. Demographically, the white Christian majority is going away, as the country becomes increasingly nonwhite and non-Christian, so that white Christians will be less than 50% of the population. That majority has had power for a long, long time, and many of them don't want to cede it peacefully. That's the culture war I'm talking about - white Christian identity politics.
Race is a social construct without biological basis. If your parents were mixed white and black, you're black. Logic has little to do with it.
Trump isn't a leader. He's a figurehead with loose cannons, if I can mix metaphors. He's on the white supremacist side, though, and that's the wrong one. (X supremacist is almost always the wrong side, for whatever value of X.) Trump's a liar, as are many on his side of the culture war, which tries to present the culture war as something leftists do, that attempts to better the lot of minorities and women are racism and sexism, that a lack of health insurance is healthy, that sort of thing. There are assholes all over all political spectra, but some areas are less assholish than others.
The Republicans are certainly showing us now that policy and good governance are secondary, at best, to securing and maintaining power. They can't keep it, but they can do a lot of damage on the way down.
That is not how I understand unemployment compensation in the US. The basic assumption is that the employee is being let go and deserves unemployment compensation. It would be far too easy for employers to make up causes and fire people for cause, to ease their unemployment insurance requirements, and that is why the panels in question require documentation of cause.to show that the basic assumption is wrong.
You don't even mention unemployment insurance, which is what my point is entirely about. You say to talk to an employment lawyer about whether you can win a case, and don't mention what the case is. If it's to contest being dismissed, it's going to fail under most circumstances. If it's to contest being denied unemployment benefits, that's something entirely different.
The reason for dismissal matters for only three reasons: it's potential libel, it affects unemployment compensation, and the reason can't be one of some certain legally defined reasons. Assuming the third doesn't apply, there are no legal grounds for contesting the dismissal. If a reason is given that's harmful to the ex-employee, the employer needs to document some reason for believing the reason to be true. If a reason is given that would deny the ex-employee unemployment compensation, the employer needs to document the reason, because in a he-said they-said situation, unemployment compensation will be awarded.
In this case, Solar City employees were fired for cause, which would normally mean they wouldn't get unemployment pay. The denial of unemployment pay can be contested, and Solar City would need to give evidence and documentation to show that the reason was true..
Something is falsifiable if there are possible observations that would show it to be false. It's a basic principle of doing science: Anything scientific is falsifiable by definition (if it isn't, we've erred in think it scientific). Mathematics is not falsifiable. Math is a very large system of tautologies. Mathematicians are fallible, so sometimes an error will be found in a previously accepted proof, but this isn't the same thing.
I'm using a strict and formal definition of mathematics, of course, because that's the definition of mathematics. Ask any mathematician. Mathematics started out based on practical arithmetic and planar drawings, but that's not what it is. The idea that math has any special application to the real world was around for quite a few centuries, and it's only comparatively recently that this was realized to be false. Arithmetic is now normally based on the Peano axioms, and any real-world arithmetic that differs will be found to not obey these axioms.
A physical map that appears to be planar and not colorable with four colors would be an expression of a mathematical concept called a graph that is a counterexample to the theorem. The physical form of the map or whatever would be completely unimportant as long as it could be turned into a planar graph. It isn't a matter of physics or the physical world, except in that mathematical abstractions have to be represented by physical things to be communicated or used.
Physics is not based on mathematical principles. It turns out that certain areas of mathematics (derivable with certain definitions from the Peano axioms and basic logic) model physics extremely well. These are mathematical models. If physical reality differs from the mathematical model, it doesn't mean the math is wrong, but that the model in use is inaccurate. That's a well-known situation in the history of physics and other sciences.
You're letting your prejudices run wild here. Apple has a right to operate as it sees fit, regardless of your personal feelings about Apple and hardware and software, and Apple spends a lot of money on carefully orchestrated PR. Apple establishes rules for its employees, like any other company, and needs to enforce these rules.
The daughter isn't getting the blame, the father is. The daughter is not getting fired. As a parent, you need to either supervise your child or keep your child out of certain situations. If you give your child the opportunity to take videos the child should not be taking and then post them to Youtube, you've failed as a parent. If you don't react fast when the child climbs on the arm of a dinette chair with castors and swivels to reach the sharp knives, well....
Not to mention that the "child" is apparently over 20 and married, and, in general, old enough to know better, and that the parent apparently cooperated in this. For flagrantly disregarding basic security rules, the parent's firing is completely reasonable.
My experience with pills in doggy treats is that dogs are extremely good at eating very fast and leaving the pill sitting on the floor. It was amazing to see a dog that could eat a pile of chicken not much smaller than her head in 90 seconds being able to eat her way around any pill we mixed with food.
Slashdot Mirror
As has been posted on this article, statistically fewer poor people have IDs. Moreover, it's a lot easier for me to get an ID than a random poor person.
DFT?
Somebody's position on DST depends partly on their longitude and latitude.
The farther north you are, the more your sunrise and sunset vary.
Each time zone has a central meridian, such that the time is based on that meridian's mean sun time. If you're east of that meridian, you get light earlier. If you're west, you get light later.
Since I'm in Minneapolis, my sunrise and sunset times vary more than for most of the US, and I'm located significantly west of 90W, so sunrise and sunset are delayed about 13 minutes from 90W. Therefore, it stays darker in the morning in winter than it does in most of the rest of the US.
What planet is this where poor people have lots of money for luxuries? The straw planet that Republicans who don't know anybody poor like to talk about?
If the finance system were intelligently run, it would be no problem at all. However, my SSAN is used as an authentication that I'm me, which is stupid. It's an identifier, and it pretty well works for that. An authenticator that can't be changed and which I have to give to a lot of people makes absolutely no sense.
I assume you're proposing that there be enough registration sessions so that anyone with a half-hour lunch break can pop on over, on foot, register, and still have time to wolf something down.
Pi is about 3.1415926535. 3 is 3. 22/7 is about 3.142857, which is accurate to two more decimal places than 3, and only differs by one in the following. 355/113 is 3.1415929, much more accurate. Each of these has more correct significant digits than the last.
Are you cool with killing people? Some elderly people find it very difficult to go places and wait in line. I guarantee you that, on Election Day (or any other day) there will be hospital patients that can't be taken to a polling place.
Ban by-mail voting and these people don't get to vote. Requiring them to go somewhere is inhumane.
It can't be a Federal obligation, since elections aren't a Federal concern. The ACA didn't require people to sign up because it couldn't; all it could do was impose a penalty in the form of a tax.
Money isn't the only consideration. If the issuing offices are open only during normal business hours, and are few in number, poor people won't generally show up. I can take time off work without penalty and drive a fair distance. Someone who's afraid of losing their job if they don't show up and doesn't have a car is in a much worse situation. Similarly, I can get whatever documentation is desired fairly easily, and poor people will find that more difficult.
The original statement was that climate change wasn't enough to turn anti-nuclear people into pro-nuclear (or at least neutral) people. Websites that cater to people concerned about nuclear power are a very good place to look. I don't trust everything that comes from some of these sites, but the fact that they're advocating nuclear power is telling.
You're assuming that land is fungible. Just because we warm up a stretch of land doesn't mean it will grow crops well.
One answer is that, last time, it was much more gradual. Life had a much better chance to adapt. This time around, we've got concerns that aren't just species survival.
Another is that we haven't stopped putting more CO2 into the air, so it's not going to stay 403ppm for long.
Water is not a danger. It's essential for life. That doesn't mean you'll be just fine if I drop you in the middle of Lake Superior.
We've got a few hundred million years left on the planet. We can afford to take a long view. We're not going to colonize exoplanets any time soon, and we don't have to. What we should do right now is stay in as good a shape as we can for the long run, and if that means temporarily cutting back on industry that's fine.
Ever heard of the Prisoner's Dilemma? That's what we've got. What you do to reduce CO2 emissions is basically irrelevant, so you have no personal incentive to cut back. If a few billion people think that they have no personal incentive, and therefore don't cut back, the world turns into a disaster area, and everybody loses.
One of the functions of government is to solve problems like that, because nothing else is going to.
Really? I've never seen a discount rate in a climate discussion.
If you read the IPCC report, you'll see what actual scientists think will happen. Smart people who study this a lot. Make honest estimates of the cost, and use any reasonable discount rate to get present value.
I have no idea why you bother when you can't get anything right.
The ACA established markets for health insurance, defining plans in easily comparable ways. This encourages competition among insurers.
Auto insurance is mandatory, and regulated, but there's lots of companies, each of which wants your business.
There are no regulations that say that you have to deal with one specific insurance company for your house, car, medical, etc. insurance. There are regulations and contractual obligations that say you have to buy it from somebody, and that's where the competition comes in. If you don't buy Allstate, you might have State Farm, which is good for State Farm and not so good for Allstate, so Allstate is going to try to get you to switch.
Except that, if you want Windows, you take what Microsoft offers, which includes built-in IE. (It's perfectly usable to download a decent browser. Don't knock it too much.)
Every Linux distro is a different but similar OS. It's entirely possible to keep systemd out of a distro, but nobody actually does. If it were really that horrible, someone would have a non-systemd distro that would become popular. Until this actually happens, I don't see how systemd can be that bad.
Unless you consider military doctrine to be technology, no, there was no game-changing technology France could get. The nukes came out after the wars were essentially won, and required air superiority to use. Radar was quite useful, although the US Navy used it pretty badly for a year or so. Enigma was very useful but not, I think, a game changer.
And, yes, murdering your own scientists and fostering anti-intellectualism is self-defeating. It would be a lot more important now than it was in the French revolution, since science and technology are more important, but by the time it would have been a serious problem, France had had a lot of time to recover.
White Christians should and do be considered just like everyone else. However, the government in the past has normally pursued policies that favored white Christians, and this is going to change. Demographically, the white Christian majority is going away, as the country becomes increasingly nonwhite and non-Christian, so that white Christians will be less than 50% of the population. That majority has had power for a long, long time, and many of them don't want to cede it peacefully. That's the culture war I'm talking about - white Christian identity politics.
Race is a social construct without biological basis. If your parents were mixed white and black, you're black. Logic has little to do with it.
Trump isn't a leader. He's a figurehead with loose cannons, if I can mix metaphors. He's on the white supremacist side, though, and that's the wrong one. (X supremacist is almost always the wrong side, for whatever value of X.) Trump's a liar, as are many on his side of the culture war, which tries to present the culture war as something leftists do, that attempts to better the lot of minorities and women are racism and sexism, that a lack of health insurance is healthy, that sort of thing. There are assholes all over all political spectra, but some areas are less assholish than others.
The Republicans are certainly showing us now that policy and good governance are secondary, at best, to securing and maintaining power. They can't keep it, but they can do a lot of damage on the way down.
That is not how I understand unemployment compensation in the US. The basic assumption is that the employee is being let go and deserves unemployment compensation. It would be far too easy for employers to make up causes and fire people for cause, to ease their unemployment insurance requirements, and that is why the panels in question require documentation of cause.to show that the basic assumption is wrong.
You don't even mention unemployment insurance, which is what my point is entirely about. You say to talk to an employment lawyer about whether you can win a case, and don't mention what the case is. If it's to contest being dismissed, it's going to fail under most circumstances. If it's to contest being denied unemployment benefits, that's something entirely different.
The reason for dismissal matters for only three reasons: it's potential libel, it affects unemployment compensation, and the reason can't be one of some certain legally defined reasons. Assuming the third doesn't apply, there are no legal grounds for contesting the dismissal. If a reason is given that's harmful to the ex-employee, the employer needs to document some reason for believing the reason to be true. If a reason is given that would deny the ex-employee unemployment compensation, the employer needs to document the reason, because in a he-said they-said situation, unemployment compensation will be awarded.
In this case, Solar City employees were fired for cause, which would normally mean they wouldn't get unemployment pay. The denial of unemployment pay can be contested, and Solar City would need to give evidence and documentation to show that the reason was true..
Something is falsifiable if there are possible observations that would show it to be false. It's a basic principle of doing science: Anything scientific is falsifiable by definition (if it isn't, we've erred in think it scientific). Mathematics is not falsifiable. Math is a very large system of tautologies. Mathematicians are fallible, so sometimes an error will be found in a previously accepted proof, but this isn't the same thing.
I'm using a strict and formal definition of mathematics, of course, because that's the definition of mathematics. Ask any mathematician. Mathematics started out based on practical arithmetic and planar drawings, but that's not what it is. The idea that math has any special application to the real world was around for quite a few centuries, and it's only comparatively recently that this was realized to be false. Arithmetic is now normally based on the Peano axioms, and any real-world arithmetic that differs will be found to not obey these axioms.
A physical map that appears to be planar and not colorable with four colors would be an expression of a mathematical concept called a graph that is a counterexample to the theorem. The physical form of the map or whatever would be completely unimportant as long as it could be turned into a planar graph. It isn't a matter of physics or the physical world, except in that mathematical abstractions have to be represented by physical things to be communicated or used.
Physics is not based on mathematical principles. It turns out that certain areas of mathematics (derivable with certain definitions from the Peano axioms and basic logic) model physics extremely well. These are mathematical models. If physical reality differs from the mathematical model, it doesn't mean the math is wrong, but that the model in use is inaccurate. That's a well-known situation in the history of physics and other sciences.
You're letting your prejudices run wild here. Apple has a right to operate as it sees fit, regardless of your personal feelings about Apple and hardware and software, and Apple spends a lot of money on carefully orchestrated PR. Apple establishes rules for its employees, like any other company, and needs to enforce these rules.
The daughter isn't getting the blame, the father is. The daughter is not getting fired. As a parent, you need to either supervise your child or keep your child out of certain situations. If you give your child the opportunity to take videos the child should not be taking and then post them to Youtube, you've failed as a parent. If you don't react fast when the child climbs on the arm of a dinette chair with castors and swivels to reach the sharp knives, well....
Not to mention that the "child" is apparently over 20 and married, and, in general, old enough to know better, and that the parent apparently cooperated in this. For flagrantly disregarding basic security rules, the parent's firing is completely reasonable.
My experience with pills in doggy treats is that dogs are extremely good at eating very fast and leaving the pill sitting on the floor. It was amazing to see a dog that could eat a pile of chicken not much smaller than her head in 90 seconds being able to eat her way around any pill we mixed with food.