If something is in short supply, prices tend to go up.
You may not have noticed, but every darn study there is points out that inflation-adjusted wages for nearly every lower and middle-class job has been flat or decreased for the last 30 years. There is no "supply and demand" response system in action. Heck, the place I work for increased their technical staff by over 30% in the very recent past -- a massive hiring effort -- but stuck obstinately to their target of paying 50th percentile wages. There may be choices of where to work, but there is little to no variation (other than geographical) in salary offerings.
Remember all those/. threads with massive rants about "a college degree is just a dumbass piece of paper and only real-world experience is what matters"? So why are we accepting (or why are employers so stupid as to accept) that only with a particular certification exam can someone be hired or retained? Aside from the absurdity of most or all of these cert. exams, and I'm including bar exams and medical board-recerts, there's really no excuse for an employer who doesn't just say, "Oh, gosh, the test site is borked. We'll hire you with the understanding that some time in the next [month,year] you'll take the exam."
My kit uses spring-steel to drive the gate positions. No rubber bands required... until I lost a couple of the springs and had to jury-rig w/ a couple rubber bands. No rubber bands in the original kit.
Leaving wild animals and their poops aside, there's plenty of human dwellings with a well at one end of their property and a septic tank& leaching field at the other. Anything that passes through the X feet of filtering soil is going to find its way into the groundwater. It would seem that, other than the "ick" factor, there's really nothing new here.
In fact, we can make this statement much stronger: There are about 1.2 billion Muslims in the world. There are estimated to be no more than about 10,000 Muslim terrorists in the world. So what you can actually say is that about 99.9% of Muslims do not in any way support terrorism (assuming that for every terrorist there about 1000 other people that support their actions).
Whether or not that's accurate, you're limiting "terrorist" to those who go off and blow things up. If you add in the Muslims who practice genital cutting and honor killing as a matter of course, the percentage of, if not terrorist, brutal abusive misogynist nutcases goes up rather dramatically. Like 100% of the Pashtun to begin with.
Ammonia is terribly useful in its own right. The amount of energy used making ammonia for fertilizer is huge, and is growing. You can stop right there, and have a very useful process -- even if it only runs on sunny days.
That word is obsolete. We now use "terrorist WMDs" instead.
I've been a physics student for a third of my life and I've come to the conclusion that I cannot live with other physicists for precisely this reason.
If I may offer a counter-example: during my time as a grad student in Physics at an anonymous Ivy League University whose name is a color, our department intramural softball team made it to the semi-finals, and I regularly played chamber music with other accomplished musicians within the department. (and, yeah, I played a lot of pinball too)
These people who were caught/shot were throwing yet more bombs at the authorities as they were being chased. They had a whole house full of them as well. Do you think they stock piled them just for fun?
You honestly believe that crap put out by the authorities? they were patsies set up as the fall guys
Oddly enough, I had exactly this idea for the Next Big Thriller Conspiracy Movie. Shady characters from some TLA (USA-based of course) set out to discredit [disliked foreign organization]. They start out by recruiting stupid young brothers into a fake anti-USA group and,err,.. set them up the bomb. Real life is working out perfectly here, since the younger brother is still (allegedly) alive, and can whisper secret clues about the setup to a voluptuous nurse whose boyfriend is ex-Special Forces and... you get the idea.
Re:and the mainframe never went away
on
The Eternal Mainframe
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Besides the cost, banks are also averse to risk, and change causes risk.
Wait a minute: did you somehow sleep through 2008? Banks love risk, so long as it's someone else's money they're churning.
Disclaimer: I am, and always have been, completely opposed to the existence of the TSA and their Security Theatre. However, I'm equally opposed to the concept that public input to what should be a scientific decision (assuming you include demographic studies and threat assessment as potentially scientific) is a good idea at all. You can't vote on reality, and the overwhelming majority of people are nto qualified to make an educated assessment of nearly any issue. It's like asking your neurosurgeon to attend a design review for your Saturn V rocket engine. The only thing a public comments collection can do is provide a 'vote' on whether people want to be bodyscanned (or TSA-ed at all). And if that's the intent, then why not just let people decide at the point of entry to the aircraft in the first place?
I don't understand, why would I want to hire somebody I can't fuck?
OK, explain how you *can't* fuck either sex. Oh, you meant "don't wanna fuck" ?:-) That would rule out rather a large fraction of candidates who are of your desired sex. Unless you're desperate.
This is a horrible situation, and we need to focus on what we can do to help rather than saying hateful things to each other.
I agree. Further, I fail to see why the deaths in this case should be viewed as any less (or more) tragic than the deaths in the Boston bombings. Both occurred due to a failure of some sort of safety system. Quite possibly both are essentially 3-sigma events which cannot ever be completely eliminated.
I do, you probably do. Clearly nobody posting comments on YahooNews does, so we're badly outnumbered. Come up with some alternative source-sifting method.
Also, you're claim that most of New England is a net contributor? Wrong also. New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Maryland, and Maine, are all net takers from the Fed. That's 5 out of 11 states, or nearly half.
You have a very interesting take on what constitutes "New England."
I don't think that most people would consider less than 1/2 of the speed of light to be "nearly the speed of light".
Respectfully disagree. Consider (and apologies for the nonmetricism here): The speed of sound is pretty fast compared to most of what goes on around us. Mach 1 is roughly 0.2 miles/second. The speed of light is 1.86E5 miles/second, or Mach 930000 . On that scale, do we really want to call 1/2, or even 1/100 the speed of light "slow" or "near to the speed of light" ?
Consider your IRA, 401k, etc. holdings. Unless your spouse or heirs know the passwords to all your Fidelity/Putnam/Vanguard/Hancock accounts, it'll be a major pain to get at your money. Heck, what with all-electronic statements and stuff, it may be really difficult just to find out your accounts exist (and their numbers).
Slashdot Mirror
Since there are no legal wage controls in play, if wages are flat it is simply because the demand has not exceeded the supply.
(emphasis mine).
That, in a nutshell, supports my position.
If something is in short supply, prices tend to go up.
You may not have noticed, but every darn study there is points out that inflation-adjusted wages for nearly every lower and middle-class job has been flat or decreased for the last 30 years. There is no "supply and demand" response system in action. Heck, the place I work for increased their technical staff by over 30% in the very recent past -- a massive hiring effort -- but stuck obstinately to their target of paying 50th percentile wages.
There may be choices of where to work, but there is little to no variation (other than geographical) in salary offerings.
Remember all those /. threads with massive rants about "a college degree is just a dumbass piece of paper and only real-world experience is what matters"? So why are we accepting (or why are employers so stupid as to accept) that only with a particular certification exam can someone be hired or retained?
Aside from the absurdity of most or all of these cert. exams, and I'm including bar exams and medical board-recerts, there's really no excuse for an employer who doesn't just say, "Oh, gosh, the test site is borked. We'll hire you with the understanding that some time in the next [month,year] you'll take the exam."
My kit uses spring-steel to drive the gate positions. No rubber bands required ... until I lost a couple of the springs and had to jury-rig w/ a couple rubber bands. No rubber bands in the original kit.
I still have mine- nice plastic and metal computer.
You can still get CARDIAC paper kits, BTW, somewhere online.
...but will it blend?
What the fuck is XBMC?
Not to be confused with SMBC.
Or XKCD.
Wait for it.
Leaving wild animals and their poops aside, there's plenty of human dwellings with a well at one end of their property and a septic tank& leaching field at the other. Anything that passes through the X feet of filtering soil is going to find its way into the groundwater. It would seem that, other than the "ick" factor, there's really nothing new here.
If you really think honor killings aren't terrorism, you need to talk to a couple females. If you can find any.
In fact, we can make this statement much stronger: There are about 1.2 billion Muslims in the world. There are estimated to be no more than about 10,000 Muslim terrorists in the world. So what you can actually say is that about 99.9% of Muslims do not in any way support terrorism (assuming that for every terrorist there about 1000 other people that support their actions).
Whether or not that's accurate, you're limiting "terrorist" to those who go off and blow things up. If you add in the Muslims who practice genital cutting and honor killing as a matter of course, the percentage of, if not terrorist, brutal abusive misogynist nutcases goes up rather dramatically. Like 100% of the Pashtun to begin with.
Ammonia is terribly useful in its own right. The amount of energy used making ammonia for fertilizer is huge, and is growing. You can stop right there, and have a very useful process -- even if it only runs on sunny days.
That word is obsolete. We now use "terrorist WMDs" instead.
We all saw Watson win at chess and Jeopardy, I donâ(TM)t think would do so well playing Texas holdâ(TM)em against some tournament champions.
Well, Watson will do better at poker after Number One explains the concept of bluffing to it/him.
I've been a physics student for a third of my life and I've come to the conclusion that I cannot live with other physicists for precisely this reason.
If I may offer a counter-example: during my time as a grad student in Physics at an anonymous Ivy League University whose name is a color, our department intramural softball team made it to the semi-finals, and I regularly played chamber music with other accomplished musicians within the department. (and, yeah, I played a lot of pinball too)
That's what they WANT you to think...
These people who were caught/shot were throwing yet more bombs at the authorities as they were being chased. They had a whole house full of them as well. Do you think they stock piled them just for fun?
You honestly believe that crap put out by the authorities? they were patsies set up as the fall guys
Oddly enough, I had exactly this idea for the Next Big Thriller Conspiracy Movie. Shady characters from some TLA (USA-based of course) set out to discredit [disliked foreign organization]. They start out by recruiting stupid young brothers into a fake anti-USA group and ,err,.. set them up the bomb. Real life is working out perfectly here, since the younger brother is still (allegedly) alive, and can whisper secret clues about the setup to a voluptuous nurse whose boyfriend is ex-Special Forces and ... you get the idea.
Besides the cost, banks are also averse to risk, and change causes risk.
Wait a minute: did you somehow sleep through 2008? Banks love risk, so long as it's someone else's money they're churning.
Disclaimer: I am, and always have been, completely opposed to the existence of the TSA and their Security Theatre.
However, I'm equally opposed to the concept that public input to what should be a scientific decision (assuming you include demographic studies and threat assessment as potentially scientific) is a good idea at all. You can't vote on reality, and the overwhelming majority of people are nto qualified to make an educated assessment of nearly any issue. It's like asking your neurosurgeon to attend a design review for your Saturn V rocket engine. The only thing a public comments collection can do is provide a 'vote' on whether people want to be bodyscanned (or TSA-ed at all). And if that's the intent, then why not just let people decide at the point of entry to the aircraft in the first place?
I don't understand, why would I want to hire somebody I can't fuck?
OK, explain how you *can't* fuck either sex. Oh, you meant "don't wanna fuck" ? :-) That would rule out rather a large fraction of candidates who are of your desired sex. Unless you're desperate.
They can stick their glass up their ass
Great idea: then they'll be transmitting livelink goatse 24/7. Thanks a lot!
This is a horrible situation, and we need to focus on what we can do to help rather than saying hateful things to each other.
I agree. Further, I fail to see why the deaths in this case should be viewed as any less (or more) tragic than the deaths in the Boston bombings. Both occurred due to a failure of some sort of safety system. Quite possibly both are essentially 3-sigma events which cannot ever be completely eliminated.
Are pressure cookers used in the production of ricin from castor beans? Because when pressure cookers are outlawed, only outlaws will pressure cook!
No need for that -- after the Boston Marathon incident, anyone even entering Acme Kitchen Supplies stores will go on the terrorist watch list.
We have that. It's called a brain.
I do, you probably do. Clearly nobody posting comments on YahooNews does, so we're badly outnumbered.
Come up with some alternative source-sifting method.
Also, you're claim that most of New England is a net contributor? Wrong also. New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Maryland, and Maine, are all net takers from the Fed. That's 5 out of 11 states, or nearly half.
You have a very interesting take on what constitutes "New England."
I don't think that most people would consider less than 1/2 of the speed of light to be "nearly the speed of light".
Respectfully disagree. Consider (and apologies for the nonmetricism here): The speed of sound is pretty fast compared to most of what goes on around us. Mach 1 is roughly 0.2 miles/second. The speed of light is 1.86E5 miles/second, or Mach 930000 . On that scale, do we really want to call 1/2, or even 1/100 the speed of light "slow" or "near to the speed of light" ?
Consider your IRA, 401k, etc. holdings. Unless your spouse or heirs know the passwords to all your Fidelity/Putnam/Vanguard/Hancock accounts, it'll be a major pain to get at your money. Heck, what with all-electronic statements and stuff, it may be really difficult just to find out your accounts exist (and their numbers).