The problem is that F1 sells the exclusive US rights to FOX/Speed and we get stuck with shitty coverage. Same for MotoGP/SBK. They of course do this because US broadcasters aren't willing to pay for rights unless they don't have to compete on merit with anyone else.
I get the British Eurosport broadcasts via torrents. Yes, I know, I'm violating copyright... but I'd happily NOT do so if I had the option to pay for it. I can not legally acquire these broadcasts in the US, period - they even prevent you from buying the streaming based on IP-Geo.
I can't buy the better product at any price. I'm not watching the local broadcast - something that is, for sake of argument, free provided I have basic cable or access to a local sports bar. Instead I am violating copyright. There's something very wrong with that.
How many repliers here actually interview and hire
on
Tech Sector Slow To Hire
·
· Score: 1, Troll
I'm asking because.. I do, and let me tell you, it sucks. We've had open reqs for months now that we haven't been able to fill, and that's not due to lack of trying.
I recently read a comment from a (now) friend who was my manager years ago; "If I need a Sr. Engineer, I advertise for an Architect. If I need an engineer, I advertise for a senior".
I'm finding this to be completely true. I've interviewed people recently for Senior positions who can't pass the FizzBang test, never mind anything more complicated (and we don't start with fizzbang, it's usually a last resort during the interview), I'm not quite sure if their resumes are simply complete works of fiction or if someone has actually been paying them for some reason.
I almost am willing to theorize that the dot-bomb fallout isn't over, and that there are still many, many "engineers" and "developers" who have been incredibly over-employed for many years who now find themselves out of work. If I were looking for Jr. developers, some of these people *might* make the cut.
Without getting into the argument of whether or not targeted advertising works better (IMHO, it does)... the answer is "Because that's the price they are putting on the use of their service"
You don't get to dictate the price of a service - the company/person providing it does. If you don't like behavioral tracking, you can avoid it by not using their "free" service. Google isn't forcing anyone to use gmail.
If someone says they'll clean your house for $50, you don't have the option of telling them to clean it for $30. Or telling them how to do their job, and that they don't really need to use a certain method of cleaning (Well, you do... they just will tell you to go stuff yourself, which what the original point of my post, though I was really just kinda going for sarcasm.)
Great idea. As long as people realize that it will also serve as the "I no longer get services such as email, social networking, and search for free" list.
"free" in the "my credit card isn't charged monthly" sense, obviously. And yes, that's ignoring the technical nightmare of trying to do such a thing in the first place.
You know what? My wife can use AppleTV. She loves it. She's not a techno geek, and doesn't even know what any of the things people here are going on about.
I use handbrake and convert everything of mine that I want to stream. It's not an arduous task. I have an XP VM running on my basement server for iTunes.
I'm going to buy one of the new AppleTVs for the bedroom TV. The addition of Netflix is going to make her day. I'll get bonus husband points.
The day geeks realize that consumer products are meant for the other 98% of the population is apparently the day I'm going to have to purchase a pig-sized flyswatter.
That's significantly lower than the 100% misdiagnose rate I was thinking of...
There's no profit to the pharma companies in kids just being kids. When was it that we decided a significant percentage of all children suddenly had a mental disorder?
The iPhone does everything I need it to do (and more), and does those things well. Hell, I just got around to upgrading from the first gen to the new one, and only because of a couple key features (streaming music over bluetooth and a better camera). If it didn't do what I wanted, I wouldn't buy one. If I bought one and didn't like it... I'd return it.
It astounds me the energy people put into disparaging a device they don't own and (supposedly) don't want.
I meant "non-essential" in the context of the consumer/home market. No one *needs* an iPad - they aren't going to die if they don't have one and there are other devices that are capable of performing the same tasks (without commenting on interface/usability/etc).
This is not to say they aren't useful, or actually very cool. I actually believe both are true and will probably pick one up at some point... I just haven't rationalized it to myself yet;)
And in your case, it fills a very nice niche perfectly (I recently did a contract gig at McKesson working on their Horizon Expert Orders system, so I know exactly how perfect the iPad is for that application)
You seem to mis-understand, When I say "non-essential" I meant in the broadest of terms and in the context of the consumer market. It isn't a judgment, just an opinion, I guess.
I've seriously considered buying one because I think they're very cool little devices. It's firmly in the "non-essential" category for me as well, but that doesn't mean I won't buy one at some point (Though I have sworn off buying techno gadgets for the most part).
My problem is buying motorcycles. I need a 12 step program for finicky, expensive Italian ones; I own 3 Ducatis at the moment. It's no better or worse than the techno gadget thing, really... but everyone knows people who buy Ducatis are elitist snobs;)
Seriously... it's a fairly pricey, non-essential gadget. The demographic they are describing is exactly the one that can afford such a thing and not think twice about it. They also buy many other non-essential shiny things.
You could say the same thing about Mercedes automobiles.
A number of the really, really bright people with whom I've been privileged to work who actually did go to college will be the first to tell you they really didn't learn anything they didn't already know or wouldn't have learned on their own, but went so they'd have the piece of paper.
Some people actually do need to go to college in order to learn things, and that's fine.
Also, In a down economy that piece of paper is a handy thing to have if you don't have experience and can't get by the HR drones otherwise.
Healthcare costs are jacked through the roof, in part, because the healthcare industry knows the insurance industry will pay for it. They effectively charge the most the insurance company will pay. No insurance? Unless you're dealing with a doctor/practice with some part of their soul left intact, you pretty much can't afford it.
My dentist, for example, offers a "cash discount". Translation: We can't hammer an insurance company so we'll just charge you what it should cost in the first place.
As far as I can tell, there's really only two classes of people in this country that think we have good healthcare - the rich, and the people who have never had to use it outside of a routine office visit (For which they are paying X thousand dollars per year in premiums, in addition to their copay). Oh, and Faux News.
Any legitimate online retailer (1800contacts, etc) requires a prescription, they won't break the law.
Now, considering you can fax them the prescription rather than providing them with your optometrist's contact info, a little work with a scanner and a graphics package would prob do the trick... but it's still not legal.
When I was running my own business and paying out of pocket I did exactly that, carried a $5k/year deductible.
My point, however, was that we're rapidly trending toward that as the norm even with group plans as our healthcare costs spiral out of control.
When you're billed $15k to fix a compound fracture and your insurance is 80/20 up to $X... you're right there. I believe the watered down "reform" even guarantees that, putting yearly out-of-pocket maxes right around that level in the "basic" package which sadly, most Americans will not be able to cover in the case of having a significant health problem / accident.
The new job I'm starting actually has good insurance at $125/mo for both of us. But that's somewhat of a rarity these days.
People don't go to the optometrist because they don't want to see better or think they don't need it, they don't go because without insurance they can't afford it.
Even while being in the class in the US that can afford insurance, the difference in what it costs and what it covers compared to 15 years ago is really quite staggering.
15 years ago I paid something like $20 a month (for just myself) and had almost no out of pocket expenses. I have a plate and 5 screws holding my radius together, and it cost me like $100.
Now? My wife and I pay close to $300 (pre-tax) but even a minor usage outside of the basic doctor-visit co-pay would end up being at least a grand out of our pocket - and that's considered "good" coverage these days. Break an arm? Yeah, that's going to cost you. Even people who *have* insurance struggle to pay their medical bills these days.
Unfortunately here in the US this would require a change to the law the healthcare industry bought that says you can't buy contacts or prescription glasses without a recent (within one year) prescription from an optometrist. Both contacts and prescription eyeglasses are classified as "medical devices".
I've had the *exact* same prescription for 15 years (I have the slightest astigmatism in my right eye, I only glasses for coding to avoid eye strain). If I lose or break my glasses, I can't just go get another pair - I have to go get an eye exam. Same thing with a contact (yup, I only need one).
I went recently because I wanted to try a contact again... The exam cost $100 out of pocket ($20 co-pay + $80 extra for contacts that insurance doesn't cover) then an additional $200 billed to my insurance. To tell me what I already knew. It's quite a racket.
I know reading the article and doing a couple google searches is challenging, but these are the same guys who built a working facsimile of the Dark Knight 'Bat Pod'.
This isn't their first rodeo. They also build custom "normal" motorcycles.
As for your assessment on what makes it road legal, laws vary by State and custom manufacture has different rules than mass-produced. For example, all states I've lived in have required a headlight and taillight on motorcycles, but not turn signals. VA has a bizarre law that says signals are not required, but if present they much be functional.
The point of the welded steering head at his school is that you can't turn the motorcycle without turning the front wheel. The only way it turns is if you decrease speed enough that it's basically trying to fall over.
As you lean, the position of the front wheel in relation to the frame is not constant - you're still counter-steering, but in a less efficient manor.
The reason he created the exercise was to show people that focusing on putting input into the handlebars is the way to turn a motorcycle - everything else takes more of your time, energy, and attention which at high speed, is limited.
His books are really about the physics of riding a motorcycle, and quite interesting to read. I took all four levels of his school when I first started racing in the '90s.
If you don't think you turn the handlebars, I encourage you to take Keith Code's superbike school and attempt to turn the motorcycle he created to disprove this notion (the steering head is welded in place).
You actually counter steer quite a bit, especially at full lean at high speed.
Slashdot Mirror
I can comment on the Singapore GP.
The problem is that F1 sells the exclusive US rights to FOX/Speed and we get stuck with shitty coverage. Same for MotoGP/SBK. They of course do this because US broadcasters aren't willing to pay for rights unless they don't have to compete on merit with anyone else.
I get the British Eurosport broadcasts via torrents. Yes, I know, I'm violating copyright ... but I'd happily NOT do so if I had the option to pay for it. I can not legally acquire these broadcasts in the US, period - they even prevent you from buying the streaming based on IP-Geo.
I can't buy the better product at any price. I'm not watching the local broadcast - something that is, for sake of argument, free provided I have basic cable or access to a local sports bar. Instead I am violating copyright. There's something very wrong with that.
I'm asking because .. I do, and let me tell you, it sucks. We've had open reqs for months now that we haven't been able to fill, and that's not due to lack of trying.
I recently read a comment from a (now) friend who was my manager years ago; "If I need a Sr. Engineer, I advertise for an Architect. If I need an engineer, I advertise for a senior".
I'm finding this to be completely true. I've interviewed people recently for Senior positions who can't pass the FizzBang test, never mind anything more complicated (and we don't start with fizzbang, it's usually a last resort during the interview), I'm not quite sure if their resumes are simply complete works of fiction or if someone has actually been paying them for some reason.
I almost am willing to theorize that the dot-bomb fallout isn't over, and that there are still many, many "engineers" and "developers" who have been incredibly over-employed for many years who now find themselves out of work. If I were looking for Jr. developers, some of these people *might* make the cut.
Without getting into the argument of whether or not targeted advertising works better (IMHO, it does) ... the answer is "Because that's the price they are putting on the use of their service"
You don't get to dictate the price of a service - the company/person providing it does. If you don't like behavioral tracking, you can avoid it by not using their "free" service. Google isn't forcing anyone to use gmail.
If someone says they'll clean your house for $50, you don't have the option of telling them to clean it for $30. Or telling them how to do their job, and that they don't really need to use a certain method of cleaning (Well, you do ... they just will tell you to go stuff yourself, which what the original point of my post, though I was really just kinda going for sarcasm.)
Great idea. As long as people realize that it will also serve as the "I no longer get services such as email, social networking, and search for free" list.
"free" in the "my credit card isn't charged monthly" sense, obviously. And yes, that's ignoring the technical nightmare of trying to do such a thing in the first place.
Exactly.
You know what? My wife can use AppleTV. She loves it. She's not a techno geek, and doesn't even know what any of the things people here are going on about.
I use handbrake and convert everything of mine that I want to stream. It's not an arduous task. I have an XP VM running on my basement server for iTunes.
I'm going to buy one of the new AppleTVs for the bedroom TV. The addition of Netflix is going to make her day. I'll get bonus husband points.
The day geeks realize that consumer products are meant for the other 98% of the population is apparently the day I'm going to have to purchase a pig-sized flyswatter.
Yes, A guy who actually has DONE it is probably far less informed than random people on the internet quoting numbers.
PS. Ever own a house? Sure, my double-pane windows rock ... the casings, on the other hand, leak like a sieve.
That's significantly lower than the 100% misdiagnose rate I was thinking of ...
There's no profit to the pharma companies in kids just being kids. When was it that we decided a significant percentage of all children suddenly had a mental disorder?
I don't have to wear a pair of headphones in the theater to listen to the movie.
I'd mod you up if I had points.
The iPhone does everything I need it to do (and more), and does those things well. Hell, I just got around to upgrading from the first gen to the new one, and only because of a couple key features (streaming music over bluetooth and a better camera). If it didn't do what I wanted, I wouldn't buy one. If I bought one and didn't like it ... I'd return it.
It astounds me the energy people put into disparaging a device they don't own and (supposedly) don't want.
I meant "non-essential" in the context of the consumer/home market. No one *needs* an iPad - they aren't going to die if they don't have one and there are other devices that are capable of performing the same tasks (without commenting on interface/usability/etc).
This is not to say they aren't useful, or actually very cool. I actually believe both are true and will probably pick one up at some point ... I just haven't rationalized it to myself yet ;)
And in your case, it fills a very nice niche perfectly (I recently did a contract gig at McKesson working on their Horizon Expert Orders system, so I know exactly how perfect the iPad is for that application)
You seem to mis-understand, When I say "non-essential" I meant in the broadest of terms and in the context of the consumer market. It isn't a judgment, just an opinion, I guess.
I've seriously considered buying one because I think they're very cool little devices. It's firmly in the "non-essential" category for me as well, but that doesn't mean I won't buy one at some point (Though I have sworn off buying techno gadgets for the most part).
My problem is buying motorcycles. I need a 12 step program for finicky, expensive Italian ones; I own 3 Ducatis at the moment. It's no better or worse than the techno gadget thing, really ... but everyone knows people who buy Ducatis are elitist snobs ;)
News at 11.
Seriously ... it's a fairly pricey, non-essential gadget. The demographic they are describing is exactly the one that can afford such a thing and not think twice about it. They also buy many other non-essential shiny things.
You could say the same thing about Mercedes automobiles.
Says the AC to the guy with a 5 digit ID ...
A number of the really, really bright people with whom I've been privileged to work who actually did go to college will be the first to tell you they really didn't learn anything they didn't already know or wouldn't have learned on their own, but went so they'd have the piece of paper.
Some people actually do need to go to college in order to learn things, and that's fine.
Also, In a down economy that piece of paper is a handy thing to have if you don't have experience and can't get by the HR drones otherwise.
No, No, and No.
I hope Steam is not working with Wine in any way, shape or form.
I do hope they are working on Native ports of games like with OSX.
Believe it or not, most people are fairly law abiding and follow directions.
Geeks, somewhat by nature, seem to be ok with "gaming" the system (and I'm not excluding myself).
It's even more vicious than that, however.
Healthcare costs are jacked through the roof, in part, because the healthcare industry knows the insurance industry will pay for it. They effectively charge the most the insurance company will pay. No insurance? Unless you're dealing with a doctor/practice with some part of their soul left intact, you pretty much can't afford it.
My dentist, for example, offers a "cash discount". Translation: We can't hammer an insurance company so we'll just charge you what it should cost in the first place.
As far as I can tell, there's really only two classes of people in this country that think we have good healthcare - the rich, and the people who have never had to use it outside of a routine office visit (For which they are paying X thousand dollars per year in premiums, in addition to their copay). Oh, and Faux News.
Any legitimate online retailer (1800contacts, etc) requires a prescription, they won't break the law.
Now, considering you can fax them the prescription rather than providing them with your optometrist's contact info, a little work with a scanner and a graphics package would prob do the trick ... but it's still not legal.
When I was running my own business and paying out of pocket I did exactly that, carried a $5k/year deductible.
My point, however, was that we're rapidly trending toward that as the norm even with group plans as our healthcare costs spiral out of control.
When you're billed $15k to fix a compound fracture and your insurance is 80/20 up to $X ... you're right there. I believe the watered down "reform" even guarantees that, putting yearly out-of-pocket maxes right around that level in the "basic" package which sadly, most Americans will not be able to cover in the case of having a significant health problem / accident.
The new job I'm starting actually has good insurance at $125/mo for both of us. But that's somewhat of a rarity these days.
Exactly.
People don't go to the optometrist because they don't want to see better or think they don't need it, they don't go because without insurance they can't afford it.
Even while being in the class in the US that can afford insurance, the difference in what it costs and what it covers compared to 15 years ago is really quite staggering.
15 years ago I paid something like $20 a month (for just myself) and had almost no out of pocket expenses. I have a plate and 5 screws holding my radius together, and it cost me like $100.
Now? My wife and I pay close to $300 (pre-tax) but even a minor usage outside of the basic doctor-visit co-pay would end up being at least a grand out of our pocket - and that's considered "good" coverage these days. Break an arm? Yeah, that's going to cost you. Even people who *have* insurance struggle to pay their medical bills these days.
The classification as "medical devices" by the FDA is what attaches the requirement of a prescription.
A quick google brought this up: http://medgadget.com/archives/2005/08/contact_lenses_1.html
So ... since 2005 this has been the case for contacts.
Unfortunately here in the US this would require a change to the law the healthcare industry bought that says you can't buy contacts or prescription glasses without a recent (within one year) prescription from an optometrist. Both contacts and prescription eyeglasses are classified as "medical devices".
I've had the *exact* same prescription for 15 years (I have the slightest astigmatism in my right eye, I only glasses for coding to avoid eye strain). If I lose or break my glasses, I can't just go get another pair - I have to go get an eye exam. Same thing with a contact (yup, I only need one).
I went recently because I wanted to try a contact again ... The exam cost $100 out of pocket ($20 co-pay + $80 extra for contacts that insurance doesn't cover) then an additional $200 billed to my insurance. To tell me what I already knew. It's quite a racket.
I know reading the article and doing a couple google searches is challenging, but these are the same guys who built a working facsimile of the Dark Knight 'Bat Pod'.
This isn't their first rodeo. They also build custom "normal" motorcycles.
As for your assessment on what makes it road legal, laws vary by State and custom manufacture has different rules than mass-produced. For example, all states I've lived in have required a headlight and taillight on motorcycles, but not turn signals. VA has a bizarre law that says signals are not required, but if present they much be functional.
But yes, feel free to believe what you want.
Only once, about 10 years ago ... I think it was a combined CCS and FUSA event.
We were based out of DE, so that was a long haul for us. I've raced just about everywhere else East of the Mississippi.
The point of the welded steering head at his school is that you can't turn the motorcycle without turning the front wheel. The only way it turns is if you decrease speed enough that it's basically trying to fall over.
As you lean, the position of the front wheel in relation to the frame is not constant - you're still counter-steering, but in a less efficient manor.
The reason he created the exercise was to show people that focusing on putting input into the handlebars is the way to turn a motorcycle - everything else takes more of your time, energy, and attention which at high speed, is limited.
His books are really about the physics of riding a motorcycle, and quite interesting to read. I took all four levels of his school when I first started racing in the '90s.
If you don't think you turn the handlebars, I encourage you to take Keith Code's superbike school and attempt to turn the motorcycle he created to disprove this notion (the steering head is welded in place).
You actually counter steer quite a bit, especially at full lean at high speed.