Except that the guy in question wasn't claiming that Russia was any better, or even as good. He was strictly talking about what the US and Russia had done to him, and with his money. He doesn't pay Russian taxes. He doesn't see people he knows thrown into Russian prisons.
Are we agreed that the government of Russia is in more need of change than the government of the US? However, I do attempt to exert some influence to change the US government, and not the Russian government. The Russian government is basically the problem of the Russians, and the US government is basically the problem of the US populace. The Russian government has no legal power over me, and the US government does. Therefore, what the US government does influences me more, and I'm of more interest to the US government.
Stalin was interested in annexing parts of what had been the Russian Empire, and didn't push too hard on that. He took advantage of the power vacuum created with the defeat of Nazi Germany to make puppet states. Considering what had happened to the Soviet Union, he had legitimate reasons to fear Western aggression.
IIRC, you'll find Erickson, "The Road to Berlin", to describe what went on with the Soviet offensive during the Warsaw Uprising. The Germans threw in four Panzer divisions, two of them in bad shape, and at least one Tiger battalion. They definitely wanted to stop the Red Army in front of Warsaw.
I'm not talking about bottom-feeders. I'm talking about companies that get more applications than they can easily handle, and have HR departments. There's some good jobs in those companies. They may be willing to pay well, but may not consider an application not filled out.
Simplistic? I said that twelve years of experience in the job is going to be about as valuable as fifteen, most of the time. That's all I said about 35-year-olds.
True; I was thinking of the ARM chips on iDevices. Apple in fact got bad PR from the dispute with the FBI relating to the work iPhone 5C that the San Bernardino shooter almost certainly didn't leave evidence on, so I'll give them credit for that. Apple appears to want user security.
Conservation of energy has nothing to do with body mass. Conservation of mass does, but it's not useful. You're talking about complicated physiology, not basic physics.
Ever read the Hippocratic Oath? A good chunk of it is the duties of the physician towards the person he was apprenticed to to learn medicine. Anyone taking it would have to have mental reservations about parts of it, and that's a bad thing in an oath.
Being poor sucks and socialized medicine doesn't change that. What socialized medicine does do is reduce freedom, raise costs, and generally assure more people suffer in poverty than without socialized medicine.
As far as poor people are concerned, socialized medicine increases freedom and covers costs. They can actually get decent health care with it. In the meantime, care in the US costs about 50% more per capita than the most lavish socialized medicine system, so those economies can put more money towards things that people want when they're healthy.
How does Edge go for downloading Firefox and Chrome? I used Internet Explorer for that on my current computer. (I can't think of a better use for a Microsoft browser.)
Why do you think their engineering team would care? Obviously and correctly, it's a browser problem. Approximately all Facebook users will not see that Facebook's changed, so they'll decide that the browser has suddenly gone wonky.
Unfortunately, whether a site is worth using under Lynx depends on how the site is written, and not what anyone else does. (Hey, I've got a soft spot for Lynx.)
Except that you're paying dearly for what the site gets. Cryptocurrency mining requires oodles of computation (or everybody would be doing it as a background app on their phone), and is generally done on GPUs or more efficient devices. Doing it in Javascript on your browser is going to be horribly inefficient, so a page that brings your computer to its knees and heats up to machine limits and consumes electricity like it was going out of style will get the site only a teeny bit of value.
I have no problem with paying a site I use in some manner. I only started using ad blockers because NoScript was no longer cutting it on my main systems (sites started requiring scripts from all over, and I couldn't tell them from ad scripts) and because my phone browser was practically unusable (I can only be so precise with my fingers, and if I want to scroll and the ads are 2mm apart, well...). However, I want the wealth transfer to be not too wasteful.
Good encryption means precisely one thing: that it is necessary to know the key to access the information, but otherwise it's safe. When using something like AES-256, the only problem is key management. Nobody who can't find or guess my iPhone unlock code is going to be able to read anything off it, and the Secure Enclave makes it very difficult to guess.
There's a big difference between levels of security. If they're willing to haul you in and torture you for the information, they're almost certainly going to get it. Most people aren't in that situation, and don't have to worry about.
Your "less than perfectly secured" is awfully optimistic. Most people aren't prepared to jump to a new encryption method when the old back door is compromised. Moreover, the system can't ever be trusted, since the user never knows who might know the back door. It might be of some use to some people, but nobody with any sort of security requirements could rely on the system.
but zero support for any measures that facilitate blanket surveillance of people "just because".
FTFY.
If a measure can be used for mass surveillance, it doesn't make any difference how sincere the legislators sound as they say it won't be. Law enforcement will us that measure despite what it was aimed for.
It's a lot more complicated than that. Sure, you can control for various things and get the gap to largely go away, but are you getting a real result or just a superficial one that agrees with your prejudices?
For 35-year-olds, what amount of experience will matter? If the woman took off three years for childbearing, that's 12 years rather than 15, and that's pretty much meaningless. As far as hours go, isn't it more important who gets more done? In any sort of intellectual field, working 10 hours a day won't necessarily produce more than 8 hours a day, but it will often be rewarded with higher pay for the one who can't manage time well as opposed to one who gets her job done efficiently.
That doesn't make sense. The applicant who made $100K is going to want to get it again, sure, but can the guy get it? If the applicant is good enough to get $100K in the job market, he or she will jump ship if only paid $75K no matter what the salary history says. Ask what the applicant expects, and make an estimate of whether the applicant could get significantly more than you can offer. If you think the applicant would be able to do significantly better than what you can pay, think twice about extending an offer.
You're referring to contracting firms. They'will keep a substantial portion of what the employer is paying. For standard full-time jobs, they take their bonus as a lump sum, typically based on starting salary. This does give them incentive to try to get your salary up, but also incentive to keep it to what they're confident the company will pay, because getting a smaller bonus is better than not getting a larger one.
I would suspect that it's more about you being a soft target for extortion. Drug addicts can get themselves into precarious positions of having to find a way to repay large sums of money.
By far the worst case of that that I ever encountered was a gambling addiction, no drugs required.
Why would I care if the guy at the next desk uses drugs? If the guy can't get the work done, or causes emotional or physical problems, or steals stuff, let the guy go, sure. That applies whether they're on drugs or not.
You're assuming that you'll get into the process in the first place if you don't give salary information. Clearly, the first person to name a dollar figure is at a disadvantage, but employers don't have to look at you without gaining an advantage. This doesn't apply for everybody at every job opening, but it's important a lot of the time.
If an employer gets more applications than they want to handle, HR will look for reasons to throw out applications to get the pile down to a reasonable number. Not filling out the form completely is an easy-to-use reason.
Slashdot Mirror
Except that the guy in question wasn't claiming that Russia was any better, or even as good. He was strictly talking about what the US and Russia had done to him, and with his money. He doesn't pay Russian taxes. He doesn't see people he knows thrown into Russian prisons.
Are we agreed that the government of Russia is in more need of change than the government of the US? However, I do attempt to exert some influence to change the US government, and not the Russian government. The Russian government is basically the problem of the Russians, and the US government is basically the problem of the US populace. The Russian government has no legal power over me, and the US government does. Therefore, what the US government does influences me more, and I'm of more interest to the US government.
Stalin was interested in annexing parts of what had been the Russian Empire, and didn't push too hard on that. He took advantage of the power vacuum created with the defeat of Nazi Germany to make puppet states. Considering what had happened to the Soviet Union, he had legitimate reasons to fear Western aggression.
IIRC, you'll find Erickson, "The Road to Berlin", to describe what went on with the Soviet offensive during the Warsaw Uprising. The Germans threw in four Panzer divisions, two of them in bad shape, and at least one Tiger battalion. They definitely wanted to stop the Red Army in front of Warsaw.
I'm not talking about bottom-feeders. I'm talking about companies that get more applications than they can easily handle, and have HR departments. There's some good jobs in those companies. They may be willing to pay well, but may not consider an application not filled out.
Simplistic? I said that twelve years of experience in the job is going to be about as valuable as fifteen, most of the time. That's all I said about 35-year-olds.
True; I was thinking of the ARM chips on iDevices. Apple in fact got bad PR from the dispute with the FBI relating to the work iPhone 5C that the San Bernardino shooter almost certainly didn't leave evidence on, so I'll give them credit for that. Apple appears to want user security.
Can you mine ten cents of cryptocurrency in ten hours?
Conservation of energy has nothing to do with body mass. Conservation of mass does, but it's not useful. You're talking about complicated physiology, not basic physics.
Ever read the Hippocratic Oath? A good chunk of it is the duties of the physician towards the person he was apprenticed to to learn medicine. Anyone taking it would have to have mental reservations about parts of it, and that's a bad thing in an oath.
As far as poor people are concerned, socialized medicine increases freedom and covers costs. They can actually get decent health care with it. In the meantime, care in the US costs about 50% more per capita than the most lavish socialized medicine system, so those economies can put more money towards things that people want when they're healthy.
How does Edge go for downloading Firefox and Chrome? I used Internet Explorer for that on my current computer. (I can't think of a better use for a Microsoft browser.)
Why do you think their engineering team would care? Obviously and correctly, it's a browser problem. Approximately all Facebook users will not see that Facebook's changed, so they'll decide that the browser has suddenly gone wonky.
Unfortunately, whether a site is worth using under Lynx depends on how the site is written, and not what anyone else does. (Hey, I've got a soft spot for Lynx.)
Except that you're paying dearly for what the site gets. Cryptocurrency mining requires oodles of computation (or everybody would be doing it as a background app on their phone), and is generally done on GPUs or more efficient devices. Doing it in Javascript on your browser is going to be horribly inefficient, so a page that brings your computer to its knees and heats up to machine limits and consumes electricity like it was going out of style will get the site only a teeny bit of value.
I have no problem with paying a site I use in some manner. I only started using ad blockers because NoScript was no longer cutting it on my main systems (sites started requiring scripts from all over, and I couldn't tell them from ad scripts) and because my phone browser was practically unusable (I can only be so precise with my fingers, and if I want to scroll and the ads are 2mm apart, well...). However, I want the wealth transfer to be not too wasteful.
Good encryption means precisely one thing: that it is necessary to know the key to access the information, but otherwise it's safe. When using something like AES-256, the only problem is key management. Nobody who can't find or guess my iPhone unlock code is going to be able to read anything off it, and the Secure Enclave makes it very difficult to guess.
There's a big difference between levels of security. If they're willing to haul you in and torture you for the information, they're almost certainly going to get it. Most people aren't in that situation, and don't have to worry about.
Apple designs its own ARM chips, and they've been clear about standing up for user security. I'm not at all convinced that all CPUs have back doors.
Your "less than perfectly secured" is awfully optimistic. Most people aren't prepared to jump to a new encryption method when the old back door is compromised. Moreover, the system can't ever be trusted, since the user never knows who might know the back door. It might be of some use to some people, but nobody with any sort of security requirements could rely on the system.
FTFY.
If a measure can be used for mass surveillance, it doesn't make any difference how sincere the legislators sound as they say it won't be. Law enforcement will us that measure despite what it was aimed for.
It's a lot more complicated than that. Sure, you can control for various things and get the gap to largely go away, but are you getting a real result or just a superficial one that agrees with your prejudices?
For 35-year-olds, what amount of experience will matter? If the woman took off three years for childbearing, that's 12 years rather than 15, and that's pretty much meaningless. As far as hours go, isn't it more important who gets more done? In any sort of intellectual field, working 10 hours a day won't necessarily produce more than 8 hours a day, but it will often be rewarded with higher pay for the one who can't manage time well as opposed to one who gets her job done efficiently.
Depends on how badly you really need a job. It can be worth it to wear the suit while looking for a job at a more reasonable place.
That doesn't make sense. The applicant who made $100K is going to want to get it again, sure, but can the guy get it? If the applicant is good enough to get $100K in the job market, he or she will jump ship if only paid $75K no matter what the salary history says. Ask what the applicant expects, and make an estimate of whether the applicant could get significantly more than you can offer. If you think the applicant would be able to do significantly better than what you can pay, think twice about extending an offer.
You're referring to contracting firms. They'will keep a substantial portion of what the employer is paying. For standard full-time jobs, they take their bonus as a lump sum, typically based on starting salary. This does give them incentive to try to get your salary up, but also incentive to keep it to what they're confident the company will pay, because getting a smaller bonus is better than not getting a larger one.
By far the worst case of that that I ever encountered was a gambling addiction, no drugs required.
So, what drugs were the people who wrote U3D on, and can I get them nuked from orbit?
Why would I care if the guy at the next desk uses drugs? If the guy can't get the work done, or causes emotional or physical problems, or steals stuff, let the guy go, sure. That applies whether they're on drugs or not.
You're assuming that you'll get into the process in the first place if you don't give salary information. Clearly, the first person to name a dollar figure is at a disadvantage, but employers don't have to look at you without gaining an advantage. This doesn't apply for everybody at every job opening, but it's important a lot of the time.
If an employer gets more applications than they want to handle, HR will look for reasons to throw out applications to get the pile down to a reasonable number. Not filling out the form completely is an easy-to-use reason.