One of these days, I'm going to write an economics paper on what I call convergopolies. These are markets where the players converge to offering very similar products, targeted at identical segments at similar pricing. UK supermarkets are a great example - I don't know if US ones are the same, but here we have several supermarkets who offer almost identical product ranges, with similar segmentation (premium/standard/value) and fairly close pricing. The effect of a convergopoly is that the players believe they are competing with each other, but in fact they aren't. They're all raking in fat profits.
Convergopolies seem to be common in areas where you can extract economies of scale, where customers are 'liquid', and where the barriers to entry are not that high. I suspect hearing aids fit that definition quite nicely.
Actually, clearance to secret isn't particularly heavy - they check your records, your family's, and ask the spooks if they have a file on you, or at least that's all they used to do. If that doesn't turn up anything exciting, you are now secret-cleared (though in general, secret documents are pretty boring).
There are two types. I'm not sure about the English equivalent terminology, but in Scotland we have Disclosure and Enhanced Disclosure. They're essentially the same except with the latter, a police officer pulls out your police record and adds anything he thinks is germane. Anyone can get a Disclosure report for themselves and it can be a condition of employment, especially for sensitive positions, such as IT contracting in financial services. Enhanced Disclosures can only be applied for by approved bodies, such as schools or whatever. And of course, employers can and do run credit checks as well...
Personally, I've swore off using the kitchen for non-food-preparation related activities...too many awkward corners to hit bits off at inappropriate moments.
What I've never understood is why a reasonable compromise (I do sympathise with the second amendment on libertarian grounds, even though I can't really square it with the practical consequences) isn't simply requiring gun owners to pass a test and pay a small annual fee to hold a firearm. No-one complains about rights being infringed when they don't give driving licences to blind people...
It was a semi-automatic, not a revolver, and it had no safety. As for trigger pull, well three-year-olds aren't as weak as everyone thinks, and there's nothing to say the pull hadn't been cut down anyway.
But what's the point? What does punishing someone achieve? It doesn't restore the damage the criminal did. It doesn't make the criminal less likely to do it again. It costs money, and it has no benefit for society. We just do it because we've always done it. Now don't get me wrong: there are people who need to be kept separate from society. But punishment? It's pointless.
No, but in general the circumstances are taken into account. Accidentally running over someone, while sober, who drunkenly chose to try and cross the road on a blind bend in driving rain in the middle of the night would be seen in a very different light to consuming a bottle of vodka and playing Mario Kart on the high street. Both drivers have indeed done something wrong, but the idea that they should then be treated the same is just ridiculous.
Speaking as someone who's packed stuff for a living, I doubt it (apart from the other arguments posters have raised). The boxing is almost certainly done by hand - the boxes themselves may be machine folded, though I doubt it. In the kinds of run sizes typical for this kind of thing, cheap labour is far more effective than machinery.
The fabs tend to be in countries with good infrastructure and a pool of skilled labour, but assembly and packaging can be done anywhere you can load containers.
Bait and switch, boys, the old bait and switch. A lot of people do have legitimate worries about the nature of the EU project and what it means for them. The fact is there's only one party that acts as if it's listening. You can't blame voters for not looking much further.
The difference is I can't help refactor the internet, which I don't mind doing when I come across something I can fix easily enough. As for Poland, well, how hard is it to work a disambiguation page - presuming I wasn't following a relevant link to start with?
No, you know that family income is correlated with educational outcomes, but you do not know that there is a linkage. Perhaps it is because good teachers do not want to teach in such an area and hence schools only employ bad teachers. And given the divergence in outcomes when you *do* employ better teachers, I would say that your thesis is not true.
That's bullshit. That is a lazy teacher talking who isn't getting behind their students and giving them the kick they need. A teacher's job is not to whine about they kind of students they have, it's to do the best they can for the ones they get. Teach for America has proved this inside out and upside down, over and over again. How is it they can bring in people with no teaching experience who go on to produce better results than every incumbent teacher in their school? Why?
Total bullshit. The quality of wikipedia is the sum total of information it contains, which is found by integrating over the article space, not averaging it. Nobody goes looking for an article on the lead singer of, say, Mouse & The Trapps expecting to read Greil Marcus's inside story. And not finding the article...I mean, how often have you gone looking for Poland and instead been sucked into Pubic Hair and just not been able to extricate yourself? Nonsense.
Because most of us are not wiki-fucking-lawyers and don't give a flying monkeys about the ridiculous accretion of bullshit the project has built up over the years. Engage in "dispute resolution" with some asshat that you know is wrong over some tedious bullshit point that noone really cares about? Sorry, I have more interesting things to do, like stick my genitals in a mechanical cheesegrater. At least it would give me something to talk about at parties.
Newegg's responsibility in this situation is to close the issue down and deal with the problem. If you can read between the lines as far as you have, you can get the rest of the way. What do they stand to gain from making a fuss about it?
Strictly, if you as a Brit went after an American archiving a British website, it would be judged under British law anyway (rather like Corel v. Bridgeman was). However, I am not sure that the law isn't actually more or less the same and the British Library is just being a bit of a pussy on this one. I particularly don't see why they don't just start archiving and hold it out of public view for, say, a hundred years.
Slashdot Mirror
Convergopolies seem to be common in areas where you can extract economies of scale, where customers are 'liquid', and where the barriers to entry are not that high. I suspect hearing aids fit that definition quite nicely.
Actually, clearance to secret isn't particularly heavy - they check your records, your family's, and ask the spooks if they have a file on you, or at least that's all they used to do. If that doesn't turn up anything exciting, you are now secret-cleared (though in general, secret documents are pretty boring).
There are two types. I'm not sure about the English equivalent terminology, but in Scotland we have Disclosure and Enhanced Disclosure. They're essentially the same except with the latter, a police officer pulls out your police record and adds anything he thinks is germane. Anyone can get a Disclosure report for themselves and it can be a condition of employment, especially for sensitive positions, such as IT contracting in financial services. Enhanced Disclosures can only be applied for by approved bodies, such as schools or whatever. And of course, employers can and do run credit checks as well...
Not to mention the bloody stupid idiot went happily to her death. Whatever age she was she wouldn't have pressed it.
Personally, I've swore off using the kitchen for non-food-preparation related activities...too many awkward corners to hit bits off at inappropriate moments.
Exit, pursued by a lion.
What I've never understood is why a reasonable compromise (I do sympathise with the second amendment on libertarian grounds, even though I can't really square it with the practical consequences) isn't simply requiring gun owners to pass a test and pay a small annual fee to hold a firearm. No-one complains about rights being infringed when they don't give driving licences to blind people...
It was a semi-automatic, not a revolver, and it had no safety. As for trigger pull, well three-year-olds aren't as weak as everyone thinks, and there's nothing to say the pull hadn't been cut down anyway.
But what's the point? What does punishing someone achieve? It doesn't restore the damage the criminal did. It doesn't make the criminal less likely to do it again. It costs money, and it has no benefit for society. We just do it because we've always done it. Now don't get me wrong: there are people who need to be kept separate from society. But punishment? It's pointless.
No, but in general the circumstances are taken into account. Accidentally running over someone, while sober, who drunkenly chose to try and cross the road on a blind bend in driving rain in the middle of the night would be seen in a very different light to consuming a bottle of vodka and playing Mario Kart on the high street. Both drivers have indeed done something wrong, but the idea that they should then be treated the same is just ridiculous.
Speaking as someone who's packed stuff for a living, I doubt it (apart from the other arguments posters have raised). The boxing is almost certainly done by hand - the boxes themselves may be machine folded, though I doubt it. In the kinds of run sizes typical for this kind of thing, cheap labour is far more effective than machinery.
The fabs tend to be in countries with good infrastructure and a pool of skilled labour, but assembly and packaging can be done anywhere you can load containers.
Many are not paying, in any meaningful sense, as they have mostly not learnt the value of money.
Bait and switch, boys, the old bait and switch. A lot of people do have legitimate worries about the nature of the EU project and what it means for them. The fact is there's only one party that acts as if it's listening. You can't blame voters for not looking much further.
Meh, he probably bought it on eBay or found it in a cornflakes packet or something.
The difference is I can't help refactor the internet, which I don't mind doing when I come across something I can fix easily enough. As for Poland, well, how hard is it to work a disambiguation page - presuming I wasn't following a relevant link to start with?
Well, if only you weren't a late adopter you would have an option to turn off /. ads like us old ones do...
No, you know that family income is correlated with educational outcomes, but you do not know that there is a linkage. Perhaps it is because good teachers do not want to teach in such an area and hence schools only employ bad teachers. And given the divergence in outcomes when you *do* employ better teachers, I would say that your thesis is not true.
So, pretty much the same as any other job which involves responsibility for a significant number of other people then?
That's bullshit. That is a lazy teacher talking who isn't getting behind their students and giving them the kick they need. A teacher's job is not to whine about they kind of students they have, it's to do the best they can for the ones they get. Teach for America has proved this inside out and upside down, over and over again. How is it they can bring in people with no teaching experience who go on to produce better results than every incumbent teacher in their school? Why?
Total bullshit. The quality of wikipedia is the sum total of information it contains, which is found by integrating over the article space, not averaging it. Nobody goes looking for an article on the lead singer of, say, Mouse & The Trapps expecting to read Greil Marcus's inside story. And not finding the article...I mean, how often have you gone looking for Poland and instead been sucked into Pubic Hair and just not been able to extricate yourself? Nonsense.
Because most of us are not wiki-fucking-lawyers and don't give a flying monkeys about the ridiculous accretion of bullshit the project has built up over the years. Engage in "dispute resolution" with some asshat that you know is wrong over some tedious bullshit point that noone really cares about? Sorry, I have more interesting things to do, like stick my genitals in a mechanical cheesegrater. At least it would give me something to talk about at parties.
Huh. That's nothing, we got a visit from the company nurse after the boss misheard that we needed some eunuchs programmers.
Newegg's responsibility in this situation is to close the issue down and deal with the problem. If you can read between the lines as far as you have, you can get the rest of the way. What do they stand to gain from making a fuss about it?
Strictly, if you as a Brit went after an American archiving a British website, it would be judged under British law anyway (rather like Corel v. Bridgeman was). However, I am not sure that the law isn't actually more or less the same and the British Library is just being a bit of a pussy on this one. I particularly don't see why they don't just start archiving and hold it out of public view for, say, a hundred years.