Of course, all the firing at AA was matched by hiring elsewhere. It's not like AA's old clients didn't still need accounting services. They just got them from a new corporate structure which got to compete with the other Big 4 to get the best of AA's now-laid-off workers.
Jobs were not lost, overall. They were just moved. Change is part of life, and ongoing change is necessary for most everyone's life to get better.
... where, unless you are upper management, you are getting the shaft. Being a developer, I particularly like how (at my company anyway) our sales staff pulls down Director level salary and obscene commissions on the gross (NOT net) product they push out the door... even when it means a loss for the company.
Actually, yes, freedom of speech DOES and always has meant freedom from consequences.
Freedom of speech means freedom from consequences when such speech does not infringe on other rights.
For example, your right to freedom of speech is trumped by my right to think you're an asshole.
Your right to freedom of speech is trumped by my right to not get killed in a stampede of people fleeing a theater because you yell 'Fire!'
Your right to freedom of speech is trumped by my right to not have knowingly false statements maliciously spread about me, especially if those statements cause permanent harm to my reputation/income/etc.
Your right to freedom of speech does not extend to telling the Chinese state secrets.
But, your right to freedom of speech apparently DOES allow you to trump my right to freedom of speech as long as you spend more money speaking than I do.
Maybe it's the union's fault for refusing to work unless the company promised them benefits it would be impossible to deliver? I bet the union bosses got to keep all their money too...
Using asteroid defense as an excuse to put nukes in space defeats the purpose of having nukes in space.
The power of nuclear weapons isn't the destruction, it's the THREAT of destruction. If we're going to put nukes in space to blow up stuff on earth, we want to make sure everyone knows that we have nukes in space to blow up stuff on earth. You're not going to convince your enemy that you have the ability to hit them first and that their first strike would be completely ineffective if your enemy doesn't know you have the nukes in space....
So if no one knows they are there and that they are there to blow up stuff on earth if necessary, what's the point?
Actually, for Presidential candidates, you would want to use the 'Throws Crap' button. Crap that just sits there and doesn't do anything would be an improvement.
Presidents have Vice Presidents for a reason. What Apple - indeed ANY company - should have is a succession plan in place to deal with the loss of the CEO (be it medical, accident, insanity, stock option back-dating conviction....)
Far more important to me as an investor than the CEO's medical records would be the corporate succession plan.
Trying to use nukes to deflect the asteroid seems like the more difficult solution to me. The asteroid will be far away and moving fast. Earth is close and (relative to us) not moving at all!
Clearly the more practical way to avoid a collision is to use the nukes to deflect Earth out of the path of the asteroid.
I patented the business practice of whoring Karma by posting about patenting the patent trolling business model.
Speaking of rubbish writing...
on
Batman Discussion
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
...it always bothers me when characters that have been portrayed as smart suddenly become especially stupid for the sake of plot.
The Joker has threatened all means of transport other than ferries - that must mean the ferries are safe!
Depends what you mean by effed up...
on
Batman Discussion
·
· Score: 1
Either the guy did or didn't know Bruce is Batman.
If he does know, then it works perfectly.
And if he doesn't know, then Lucius needs to tell him so he doesn't try blackmail. If he thinks Batman is someone else, then there's no reason not to blackmail Wayne enterprises.
The problem is, none of those technologies are superior to mice.
Look at your desktop. Look at where your monitor is. Look at where your mouse is.
Now, what is easier - reaching up to your monitor every time you want to move the cursor, or reaching over to the mouse?
Mice are more precise than fingers. Mice are less strain than pointing devices.
These analysts are idiots. Technology doesn't get replaced with new technology that doesn't work as well as the existing technology. And mice are better at what mice are used for than any other input device available in the desktop/laptop environment.
Actually, that's not, by itself, necessarily bad logic.
If you assume that the chances of a child dying of SIDS is random, then there would, indeed, only be a 1 in 72 million chance that a person with 2 children would have both of them die from SIDS.
But the next part of that analysis is, how many mothers have two children in a row that die of SIDS?
If there are 72 million such mothers, and only one of them has two infants die, then that one is innocent. But if there are 72 million such mothers, and 1,000 had 2 infants die, then 999 of them are guilty and 1 is innocent. Is 1/1000 less than reasonable doubt?
Of course, this ignores the problem that SIDS deaths are not random - like most medical things, if you ahve one baby die of SIDS, you are probably more likely to have a 2nd one die of SIDS, either because of some hidden defect, or you like to sleep with your baby in bed with you, or your a psycho baby killer.
"Never as a question you don't already know the answer to."
You're missing the part about the adversarial system. If the prosecutor presents 'evidence' that is false, that's why there's also a defense attorney and defense witnesses.
Prosecutors are primarily interested in convictions, but defense attorneys are primarily interested in acquittal. No one wants to present something that is definitively false because then the other party will show that what you/your expert says was definitively false, and discredit your expert and you case, hurting your chances of success.
1/113 billion chance a particular person has the same DNA profile as me. 6 million records. So I have a 6 million / 113 billion chance of matching someone else in the database. Drop some zeros and thats 6/113,000. Of course, each of the 6 million people in the database has a the same chance of matching someone - so that's 6/113,000*6,000,000 - which means there should be 318 people who match someone else in CODIS, or 159 'matches'.
# of people matching = size of group * size of group * chance of match
Anytime you have something that has a small chance of matching, but a fairly large sampling group, your chances of matching are high, because your chances of a match existing within the group is the SQUARE of the group size.
So it would be surprising if there were NOT people who matched in CODIS. The question is, are there more or less that 318 of them, and how much more or less?
Depends what the use profile is. If they're setting these things up with sofas, they may be designed for more than one person, in which case 37" would be helpful for collaboration, since they probably are not going to also have conference room pods.
A tired grunt gets himself and maybe his buddies killed.
A tired general gets hundreds or thousands of grunts killed.
You're also missing another aspect.
Your general is going to be making mission-critical decisions on-arrival, or maybe even on the plane. The people 'actually doing the job' have buffer time between when they arrive and when they are in mission-critical environments.
Or put another way, when the 'people doing the job' get off the plane, they get a chance to get a night's sleep before they're involved in battle. That's not a luxury available to your military brass.
Is it the monitor you object to? You realize it's going on a plane, right, where space and weight are at a premium? Who buys monitors that are NOT flat-screen?
As for 37", this is the military. I'd imagine that if you're a military general, you can probably make pretty good use of a large HD monitor. Don't you watch the movies? They normally use entire walls of mini-arena sized control centers!
And who cares if they spend $20 on a full-length mirror?
There are generals. Presumably, they're generals because they have important shit to do.
If you are flying your general around, do you want him able to work, or do you want him twiddling his thumbs in an airplane seat?
The idea behind the capsules is that you can fly generals around WITHOUT it having to take them 'out of action'. They can be on the plane and doing all the things they could do if they were not on the plane.
Hell, we spend hundreds of millions of dollars making sure the President can be productive on his 747. A few hundred thousand for the next level down in the command chain doesn't seem unreasonable.
Slashdot Mirror
Airline websites are cheaper than the search sites because the search sites charge booking fees on top of the airfare.
For most routings, the airline website will always be a few dollars cheaper because they don't have the booking fee.
Of course, all the firing at AA was matched by hiring elsewhere. It's not like AA's old clients didn't still need accounting services. They just got them from a new corporate structure which got to compete with the other Big 4 to get the best of AA's now-laid-off workers.
Jobs were not lost, overall. They were just moved. Change is part of life, and ongoing change is necessary for most everyone's life to get better.
... where, unless you are upper management, you are getting the shaft. Being a developer, I particularly like how (at my company anyway) our sales staff pulls down Director level salary and obscene commissions on the gross (NOT net) product they push out the door ... even when it means a loss for the company.
Then apply to work in sales.
if the workers have the option of quitting and moving on to greener pastures.
Or options available in addition to 'taking a whipping' include 'suing for millions of dollars'.
the fact that I taught myself Basic by age 4
Yeah, but I bet your comments sucked.
... his slow internet connection, and wants to pay something to not have to move files over his slow internet connection.
How about:
- Pay for a hosting provider that DOES provide real backup solutions....
- Pay for a real broadband connection so you CAN download your site....
As with most things that are 'important'...
Right, Fast or Cheap - pick two.
Actually, yes, freedom of speech DOES and always has meant freedom from consequences.
Freedom of speech means freedom from consequences when such speech does not infringe on other rights.
For example, your right to freedom of speech is trumped by my right to think you're an asshole.
Your right to freedom of speech is trumped by my right to not get killed in a stampede of people fleeing a theater because you yell 'Fire!'
Your right to freedom of speech is trumped by my right to not have knowingly false statements maliciously spread about me, especially if those statements cause permanent harm to my reputation/income/etc.
Your right to freedom of speech does not extend to telling the Chinese state secrets.
But, your right to freedom of speech apparently DOES allow you to trump my right to freedom of speech as long as you spend more money speaking than I do.
Maybe it's the union's fault for refusing to work unless the company promised them benefits it would be impossible to deliver? I bet the union bosses got to keep all their money too...
I think you've confused PUZZLES with TEDIUM. Memorizing (or writing down) a map isn't puzzle solving. It's data storage.
Using asteroid defense as an excuse to put nukes in space defeats the purpose of having nukes in space.
The power of nuclear weapons isn't the destruction, it's the THREAT of destruction. If we're going to put nukes in space to blow up stuff on earth, we want to make sure everyone knows that we have nukes in space to blow up stuff on earth. You're not going to convince your enemy that you have the ability to hit them first and that their first strike would be completely ineffective if your enemy doesn't know you have the nukes in space....
So if no one knows they are there and that they are there to blow up stuff on earth if necessary, what's the point?
Actually, for Presidential candidates, you would want to use the 'Throws Crap' button. Crap that just sits there and doesn't do anything would be an improvement.
... succession plan.
Presidents have Vice Presidents for a reason. What Apple - indeed ANY company - should have is a succession plan in place to deal with the loss of the CEO (be it medical, accident, insanity, stock option back-dating conviction....)
Far more important to me as an investor than the CEO's medical records would be the corporate succession plan.
Trying to use nukes to deflect the asteroid seems like the more difficult solution to me. The asteroid will be far away and moving fast. Earth is close and (relative to us) not moving at all!
Clearly the more practical way to avoid a collision is to use the nukes to deflect Earth out of the path of the asteroid.
He missed Voodoo.
Er, no wait, he did say Marketing.
I patented the business practice of whoring Karma by posting about patenting the patent trolling business model.
...it always bothers me when characters that have been portrayed as smart suddenly become especially stupid for the sake of plot.
The Joker has threatened all means of transport other than ferries - that must mean the ferries are safe!
Either the guy did or didn't know Bruce is Batman.
If he does know, then it works perfectly.
And if he doesn't know, then Lucius needs to tell him so he doesn't try blackmail. If he thinks Batman is someone else, then there's no reason not to blackmail Wayne enterprises.
The problem is, none of those technologies are superior to mice.
Look at your desktop. Look at where your monitor is. Look at where your mouse is.
Now, what is easier - reaching up to your monitor every time you want to move the cursor, or reaching over to the mouse?
Mice are more precise than fingers. Mice are less strain than pointing devices.
These analysts are idiots. Technology doesn't get replaced with new technology that doesn't work as well as the existing technology. And mice are better at what mice are used for than any other input device available in the desktop/laptop environment.
Actually, that's not, by itself, necessarily bad logic.
If you assume that the chances of a child dying of SIDS is random, then there would, indeed, only be a 1 in 72 million chance that a person with 2 children would have both of them die from SIDS.
But the next part of that analysis is, how many mothers have two children in a row that die of SIDS?
If there are 72 million such mothers, and only one of them has two infants die, then that one is innocent. But if there are 72 million such mothers, and 1,000 had 2 infants die, then 999 of them are guilty and 1 is innocent. Is 1/1000 less than reasonable doubt?
Of course, this ignores the problem that SIDS deaths are not random - like most medical things, if you ahve one baby die of SIDS, you are probably more likely to have a 2nd one die of SIDS, either because of some hidden defect, or you like to sleep with your baby in bed with you, or your a psycho baby killer.
"Never as a question you don't already know the answer to."
You're missing the part about the adversarial system. If the prosecutor presents 'evidence' that is false, that's why there's also a defense attorney and defense witnesses.
Prosecutors are primarily interested in convictions, but defense attorneys are primarily interested in acquittal. No one wants to present something that is definitively false because then the other party will show that what you/your expert says was definitively false, and discredit your expert and you case, hurting your chances of success.
What we're seeing is a consequence of basic math.
1/113 billion chance a particular person has the same DNA profile as me. 6 million records. So I have a 6 million / 113 billion chance of matching someone else in the database. Drop some zeros and thats 6/113,000. Of course, each of the 6 million people in the database has a the same chance of matching someone - so that's 6/113,000*6,000,000 - which means there should be 318 people who match someone else in CODIS, or 159 'matches'.
# of people matching = size of group * size of group * chance of match
Anytime you have something that has a small chance of matching, but a fairly large sampling group, your chances of matching are high, because your chances of a match existing within the group is the SQUARE of the group size.
So it would be surprising if there were NOT people who matched in CODIS. The question is, are there more or less that 318 of them, and how much more or less?
Depends what the use profile is. If they're setting these things up with sofas, they may be designed for more than one person, in which case 37" would be helpful for collaboration, since they probably are not going to also have conference room pods.
A tired grunt gets himself and maybe his buddies killed.
A tired general gets hundreds or thousands of grunts killed.
You're also missing another aspect.
Your general is going to be making mission-critical decisions on-arrival, or maybe even on the plane. The people 'actually doing the job' have buffer time between when they arrive and when they are in mission-critical environments.
Or put another way, when the 'people doing the job' get off the plane, they get a chance to get a night's sleep before they're involved in battle. That's not a luxury available to your military brass.
Is it the monitor you object to? You realize it's going on a plane, right, where space and weight are at a premium? Who buys monitors that are NOT flat-screen?
As for 37", this is the military. I'd imagine that if you're a military general, you can probably make pretty good use of a large HD monitor. Don't you watch the movies? They normally use entire walls of mini-arena sized control centers!
And who cares if they spend $20 on a full-length mirror?
It's about productive.
There are generals. Presumably, they're generals because they have important shit to do.
If you are flying your general around, do you want him able to work, or do you want him twiddling his thumbs in an airplane seat?
The idea behind the capsules is that you can fly generals around WITHOUT it having to take them 'out of action'. They can be on the plane and doing all the things they could do if they were not on the plane.
Hell, we spend hundreds of millions of dollars making sure the President can be productive on his 747. A few hundred thousand for the next level down in the command chain doesn't seem unreasonable.