I am not replying to be a Wal-Mart appologist, this is just a little exercise in analysis of a random "+5 Insightful Whine" post...
Wal-Mart has a lot of employees (1.7 Million). It is a BIG company. Everything else follows from there.
The full-timers do have insurance. But there many are part-timers who do not, just like many other businesses. Seems to me, giving instructions for finding free clinics is more of a public service for those employees who need it than an exploitive scheme. Do other companies tell their non-covered employees about free clinics?
You might as well say Poor people exploit the taxpayer by using government services.
Exploiting the US Taxpayer Did you know that Wal-Mart has 1500 International stores (3600 US)? Does Wal-Mart exploite the taxpayes of these other countries too?
How does Wal-Mart compare to any large employer? How much health care does McDonalds provide for part-time employees? How about Starbucks - they have lots of part-timers.
I don't know what all this hatred of WMT is, of late. What's the difference between a valid business model and an evil scheme? I guess it has to do with how big you are.
At the end of the day, I think it all comes down to the fact that WMT has money and other people want to get at it because it is there.
Let's check that last one... Is Wal-Mart making "obscene" amounts of money? WMT
Profit margin: 3.6% - Doesn't look obscene to me, Sure it is billions of dollars. MCD makes 12.7% and so does PEP. TGT (Target) makes 4.58% - maybe they exploit their workers even more to squeeze that extra 1% profit out of them.
As far as the environment goes, aren't we best off just letting Western countries use up the worlds supply of oil? Just because some soccer mom in a Hummer doesn't burn the gas, don't you think someone else will?
If the industrialized countries suddenly stopped using petroleum in the current quantities, the price would drop, which, in turn, would make it more economical for developing nations to consume more of it. Either way, the oil gets burned.
All of the economically viable petroleum reserves will get used. So, do you want nice, clean, regulated use or not? Poorer nations can't afford all the environmental rig-a-ma-role that western nations impose upon themselves.
Replacement energy sources will come when they are economically viable.
I have been in the working world for over 20 years and I am constantly amazed at how little one has to do to really stand out.
The world is full of clock-punchers. If you just do a reasonable job, use a spell-checker, and do work that needs to be done (not just what was asked for) you will do well.
The larger the organization, the less you need to do. The trap, however is that you become one of them. If that happens, you too can be a whiner and complain about people who do get stuff done.
The parent post cites Tetris; If it weren't that, it would most likely be planing the next "re-org" or mindlessly filling in "progress" in their Project charts, without reguard to reality...
Next you are going to tell me all those John Grisham and Tom Clancy books I read are bunk too!
Anyhow, I read it, was entertained by it, and am rapidly forgetting it. It is just another suspense novel, as far as I am concerned. The parent poster, on the other hand sounds like he is about ready to go on an anit-muhammed-cartoon style rampage!
Hundreds of pages of documentation saying that they delivered a bunch of documentation and that it is not their fault if nobody understands it...
On the one hand, maybe MSFT deliberatly delivered obtuse documents.
Another possibility is that there is no clear documentation. Many software projects start with vague specifications and grow organically. What little documentation there was, if any, quickly becomes obsolete.
I know I would hate to have to promise that my documentation matches the current state of my latest software...
You can so have a perpetual motion machine* - as long as you capture some of the stray energy of the gawkers who come to look at your machine. (Say, the "oohing" and "ahhing" noises they make.) Heck, call it "all natural" and "homeopathic" and you will get plenty of interest. Toss in a "crystal" or two, for good luck!
* ok, technically this would not be "perpetual motion (tm) **", but THEY (the rubes) don't know that. Besides, if you charge admission, you might have enough coin left over to keep the lights on, say, if you had lights on all the time, a little solar panel might help to run the perpetual motion machine too...
** I am sure there is a submarine patent somewhere that covers this technology.
Crap, I think I just described a side-show. Maybe when I am too old for engineering I will just become a huckster after all.
Don't even worry about that few billions of people who will be be dead/starving/living
I don't. A giant rock, some freak quaser X-rays, etc. could smash the Earth to smitherines or otherwise sterilize it. Or, if you want to take the long view, the Sun will expand and fry the planet. Anywhichway, EVERYONE living here at that time will be dead. What's your point?
Before you respond, you must refute hihilism, in no uncertain terms. Please google it, if you don't know what that is.
Don't worry - it's not like all of the oil in the world will stop at once.
Day N-1: oil is $100/barrel...
Day N: Sorry, no more oil.
It won't happen that way. As we come to an end of oil supply (if ever) the price will obviously rise, but it won't do that overnight either. As it does, the big switch-over you are worrying about will just happen. This is the real world - not a binary on/off simulation. Real people don't follow static simulations, they tend to squirm around a bit and do odd things when conditions change.
So far, in my personal observation, gasoline prices haven't even kept up with inflation over the last 30 years or so, which kind of tells me, on a fundemental, imperical level, it isn't scarce yet.
Many problems are politcal problems before they are engineering problems.
The faster we use up all of the economically obtainable oil, the sooner people can stop whining about using it all up and the sooner we can get on with whatever is next.
Making people spend additional money in order to be able to do the same things they already do
Spending money on crap they don't need is almost the very definition of modern economies.
In this particular case, if people are just going to do the same things why would they upgrade?
You mention "efficiency" - that implies an overall goal. Can you tell me what the economic goal of society is? I can't, but I don't think you want it planned, we all know how planned economies work out.
For example, by your argument, nobody should buy dry-clean only clothes, because they have to spend additional money in order to maintain them. Those clothes do the same job as Wal-Mart clothes. I am sure if every single dry-cleaning business in the world disappeared, it would have no negative affect on the economy...
Nobody ought to buy cell-phone ringtones either - the phones already ring.
Nobody needs professional sports - that's a huge industry. Aside from food, and shelter, what does anyone need?
The point is that nobody makes you buy Windows Vista (even if it is "bundled" with some hardware - you'd only be buying that particular hardware if the entire package was a good deal for you.)
So what if this OS requires new hardware? What do you care?
I know this is really a dig at MSFT, but it's all just part of our economy... Beefier hardware requirements will make some people avoid the Vista "upgrade", and others will go ahead and contribute to the health of the hardware industry (as well as MSFT).
Bring it on! Let the market decide, I say.
There are any number of goods and services that I personally don't use, but I love living in a society where they are freely offered to those who want them!
Come on! This is a government employee we're talking about!
You want more of that product!
sheesh!
Just because *you* don't like radio...
on
How Songs Get Popular
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Just because *you* don't like a radio station doesn't mean others don't like it.
Maybe you are listening to the wrong radio station? Maybe your radio station doesn't exist.
Some people like to listen to rock, some like country. Others like "contemporary" or whatever. Others still, listen to NPR and some listen to Rush Limbaugh. Not many listen to all of the above.
Radio is not about pleasing you it is about making money by attracting enough listeners. MP3 downloads not withstanding, you are not entitled to free entertainment that you like.
Just as there are not enough listeners for an all-opera-all-the-time station. Maybe there are not enough listeners to support your odd taste in music (maybe you want all-opera?). If you think most people have crappy musical tastes, what do you think most people will think of your choices in music?
If you don't like the radio, buy your own music. If you don't like the normal labels, try "independent" sellers. I have purchased several albums from "cdbaby.com" - but, you know what? Much of the music is unremarkable... maybe the labels do know something about picking music that people will like?
Sometimes you do find a gem; one indy album I bought was the www.solvingforx.com album. At least I like it, but that's the problem - there is no objective standard to test music. So, you are left with markets, marketers, hucksters and hype. People like what they like, or what they think they like; What's the difference?
If global warming / global cooling / asteroid event / etc. changes the Earth's climate and the only human survivors are some obscure primative tribe who has never heard of/. and doesn't care about RIM vs NTP... does it matter?
I seem to recall, maybe it is urban lore, that having an alias is perfectly legal, as long as it is not for fraudulent purposes. I posit that being "anonymous" is not a fraudulent purpose...
So, is there a law saying you can only have one legal identity?
This is all begging the question of how you would legally obtain an alternate valid id, that was not tracable to the real you...
Unlike the FICA portion, which caps out at 94,200 (2006) there is no cap on Medicare... so 1.36% of eleventy googillian, billion, trillion dollars is A LOT!
I know, I know, there is an absolute temperature scale, but I'll bet most people wouldn't bat an eye at relative temperature comments like "wow, it's 50 degress today - it was twice as hot last summer when it was 100!".
Oh - here's a good one. In Farenheit - boiling water is only 6.625 times hotter than ice! Of course on the Celsius scale boiling water is infinitely hotter than ice!
Slashdot Mirror
Wal-Mart has a lot of employees (1.7 Million). It is a BIG company. Everything else follows from there.
The full-timers do have insurance. But there many are part-timers who do not, just like many other businesses. Seems to me, giving instructions for finding free clinics is more of a public service for those employees who need it than an exploitive scheme. Do other companies tell their non-covered employees about free clinics?
You might as well say Poor people exploit the taxpayer by using government services .
Exploiting the US Taxpayer Did you know that Wal-Mart has 1500 International stores (3600 US)? Does Wal-Mart exploite the taxpayes of these other countries too?
How does Wal-Mart compare to any large employer? How much health care does McDonalds provide for part-time employees? How about Starbucks - they have lots of part-timers.
I don't know what all this hatred of WMT is, of late. What's the difference between a valid business model and an evil scheme? I guess it has to do with how big you are. At the end of the day, I think it all comes down to the fact that WMT has money and other people want to get at it because it is there.
Let's check that last one... Is Wal-Mart making "obscene" amounts of money? WMT
Profit margin: 3.6% - Doesn't look obscene to me, Sure it is billions of dollars. MCD makes 12.7% and so does PEP. TGT (Target) makes 4.58% - maybe they exploit their workers even more to squeeze that extra 1% profit out of them.
If the industrialized countries suddenly stopped using petroleum in the current quantities, the price would drop, which, in turn, would make it more economical for developing nations to consume more of it. Either way, the oil gets burned.
All of the economically viable petroleum reserves will get used. So, do you want nice, clean, regulated use or not? Poorer nations can't afford all the environmental rig-a-ma-role that western nations impose upon themselves.
Replacement energy sources will come when they are economically viable.
The world is full of clock-punchers. If you just do a reasonable job, use a spell-checker, and do work that needs to be done (not just what was asked for) you will do well.
The larger the organization, the less you need to do. The trap, however is that you become one of them. If that happens, you too can be a whiner and complain about people who do get stuff done.
The parent post cites Tetris; If it weren't that, it would most likely be planing the next "re-org" or mindlessly filling in "progress" in their Project charts, without reguard to reality...
God himself told me that when I am dead, He will not ask me any more questions, and all the other voices in my head will stop too!
Next you are going to tell me all those John Grisham and Tom Clancy books I read are bunk too!
Anyhow, I read it, was entertained by it, and am rapidly forgetting it. It is just another suspense novel, as far as I am concerned. The parent poster, on the other hand sounds like he is about ready to go on an anit-muhammed-cartoon style rampage!
lighten up!
On the one hand, maybe MSFT deliberatly delivered obtuse documents.
Another possibility is that there is no clear documentation. Many software projects start with vague specifications and grow organically. What little documentation there was, if any, quickly becomes obsolete.
I know I would hate to have to promise that my documentation matches the current state of my latest software...
* ok, technically this would not be "perpetual motion (tm) **", but THEY (the rubes) don't know that. Besides, if you charge admission, you might have enough coin left over to keep the lights on, say, if you had lights on all the time, a little solar panel might help to run the perpetual motion machine too...
** I am sure there is a submarine patent somewhere that covers this technology.
Crap, I think I just described a side-show. Maybe when I am too old for engineering I will just become a huckster after all.
I just made that up, but the obvious corollary is this; If you don't want something to be known, don't say it!
Thank you very much, I'll be here all week. (Mostly because I have nowhere else to go.)
Have a nice day!
I don't. A giant rock, some freak quaser X-rays, etc. could smash the Earth to smitherines or otherwise sterilize it. Or, if you want to take the long view, the Sun will expand and fry the planet. Anywhichway, EVERYONE living here at that time will be dead. What's your point?
Before you respond, you must refute hihilism, in no uncertain terms. Please google it, if you don't know what that is.
Have a nice day.
Day N-1: oil is $100/barrel...
Day N: Sorry, no more oil.
It won't happen that way. As we come to an end of oil supply (if ever) the price will obviously rise, but it won't do that overnight either. As it does, the big switch-over you are worrying about will just happen. This is the real world - not a binary on/off simulation. Real people don't follow static simulations, they tend to squirm around a bit and do odd things when conditions change.
So far, in my personal observation, gasoline prices haven't even kept up with inflation over the last 30 years or so, which kind of tells me, on a fundemental, imperical level, it isn't scarce yet.
Many problems are politcal problems before they are engineering problems.
The faster we use up all of the economically obtainable oil, the sooner people can stop whining about using it all up and the sooner we can get on with whatever is next.
Someday, I expect tonnes of valuable goods created with resources from "out there" may find their way down here too.
Personally, I am not the least bit worried about it.
Better wait a few versions...
Spending money on crap they don't need is almost the very definition of modern economies.
In this particular case, if people are just going to do the same things why would they upgrade?
You mention "efficiency" - that implies an overall goal. Can you tell me what the economic goal of society is? I can't, but I don't think you want it planned, we all know how planned economies work out.
For example, by your argument, nobody should buy dry-clean only clothes, because they have to spend additional money in order to maintain them. Those clothes do the same job as Wal-Mart clothes. I am sure if every single dry-cleaning business in the world disappeared, it would have no negative affect on the economy...
Nobody ought to buy cell-phone ringtones either - the phones already ring. Nobody needs professional sports - that's a huge industry. Aside from food, and shelter, what does anyone need?
The point is that nobody makes you buy Windows Vista (even if it is "bundled" with some hardware - you'd only be buying that particular hardware if the entire package was a good deal for you.)
I know this is really a dig at MSFT, but it's all just part of our economy... Beefier hardware requirements will make some people avoid the Vista "upgrade", and others will go ahead and contribute to the health of the hardware industry (as well as MSFT).
Bring it on! Let the market decide, I say.
There are any number of goods and services that I personally don't use, but I love living in a society where they are freely offered to those who want them!
You want more of that product!
sheesh!
Some people like to listen to rock, some like country. Others like "contemporary" or whatever. Others still, listen to NPR and some listen to Rush Limbaugh. Not many listen to all of the above.
Radio is not about pleasing you it is about making money by attracting enough listeners. MP3 downloads not withstanding, you are not entitled to free entertainment that you like.
Just as there are not enough listeners for an all-opera-all-the-time station. Maybe there are not enough listeners to support your odd taste in music (maybe you want all-opera?). If you think most people have crappy musical tastes, what do you think most people will think of your choices in music?
If you don't like the radio, buy your own music. If you don't like the normal labels, try "independent" sellers. I have purchased several albums from "cdbaby.com" - but, you know what? Much of the music is unremarkable... maybe the labels do know something about picking music that people will like?
Sometimes you do find a gem; one indy album I bought was the www.solvingforx.com album. At least I like it, but that's the problem - there is no objective standard to test music. So, you are left with markets, marketers, hucksters and hype. People like what they like, or what they think they like; What's the difference?
When space travel gets cheap enough - especially if eBay is still around by then.
Or maybe sooner - might not an Indian or Chinese souvineer seeker stop by?
What are the salvage rights to that kind of stuff?
Without a PSP or Gamecube to wile away the hours, it probably felt like a lifetime!
If global warming / global cooling / asteroid event / etc. changes the Earth's climate and the only human survivors are some obscure primative tribe who has never heard of /. and doesn't care about RIM vs NTP... does it matter?
Humanity will survive.
If it doesn't...
Shrug
So, is there a law saying you can only have one legal identity?
This is all begging the question of how you would legally obtain an alternate valid id, that was not tracable to the real you...
In Soviet U.K. God Creates You!
Unlike the FICA portion, which caps out at 94,200 (2006) there is no cap on Medicare... so 1.36% of eleventy googillian, billion, trillion dollars is A LOT!
Oh - here's a good one. In Farenheit - boiling water is only 6.625 times hotter than ice! Of course on the Celsius scale boiling water is infinitely hotter than ice!
Quick - what's the opposite of circle?