True, there are ways, changing to a new position/title will also help but you still might make less than a new hire would in that same position because the company is all too aware of what they are already paying you. If the range for the new position is significantly higher than your current salary they know you'll be happy with the low end of that range no matter how qualified you are for the spot. A new company will make an offer based on how qualified they think you are.
"No it is an authority which is specifically given to various arms of law enforcement."
By who exactly? It still sounds like selective enforcement to me. A federal prosecutor signing off on the commission of a crime would be making themselves an accomplice subject to prosecution. Prosecutors can choose which crimes to prosecute based on the probability of successful prosecution but are not themselves immune to the law and have no authority which allows them to encourage or participate in crime. There is no such executive power, from the president on down.
True but in tech there is no advancement in position anyway, the only way you get a pay increase you'll notice is to get hired at the current market rates by another company. Within 2-3 years you'll pay will have advanced only joke 1-3% amounts while new hires will make as much or more than you.
I live in Dallas pokestops are only found at stores, parks, and trails. You can walk around a residential neighborhood all day and hit 0. One pokestop isn't enough to keep you full on pokeballs though. Even doing the trail at the park, you'll hit 2 pokestops looping the trail but you won't get enough balls that way, you'd still burn through about 50 an hour.
True, but I doubt even one legitimate player got anywhere near level 30. You can quickly play end game content because it's the same as start of game content. The problem is the same as all mmo's, instead of skill based play it is an acculation treadmill.
These games need to take out any and all forms of advantage accumulation over time. A 240 game hour character/account should have absolutely zero advantage over a 30 minute played game character/account. I don't just mean combat advantage, there should be no cooler stuff you get, not even cooler looking or wealth accumulation. There should be no goals to work toward other than playing well one encounter at a time. The goal is having fun while playing instead of accumulating things.
As for bots just publish an api to encourage people who enjoy coding and configuring bots to do so. Then you actually control the api and prevent the bots from having ultra-human advantages.
Breaking the cheat is the reason people are quitting.
The game is a massive tredmill. There is no way that someone with little time can be competative except for bots. Unless you live in NYC or someplace similar you can't get enough pokeballs to play without paying a fortune buying them from the store.
Configuring and tweaking bots was far more fun than the game.
"these people" are over 250,000 people twitter has silenced under the general heading "advocating terrorism" it is impossible to claim what they are advocating or to stand for or against it as we don't really know.
What constitutes a civilian is also ambiguous when you are talking about an internal struggle against your own government. Suddenly police go from civilian to uniformed and armed agents of government and a civilian resistence can not obey the usual rules of war, with dramatically inferior resources they have to do whatever produces results. Outside of police, whatever agents of government need to be removed to successfully eliminate existing structure and chance of it coming back into power are also fair game but a city bus driver who isn't presenting arms obviously is not.
Basically, our own criteria for selecting enemy combatants applied against our own domestic government by an armed civilian force engaged in civil war is in fact fair game. Bombing a bus just for the shock value is not.
Intel also played games with TDP while AMD gave max power consumption figures. Intel were/are still the more power efficient chips but not by nearly as wide a margin as the stated power figures lead one to believe.
Only if they are trying to be the highest performing chip on the block. Being the highest performing chip at a reasonable price point (the $200 mark is generally the sweet spot only the money is no object crowd wastes more on a cpu) is far more important.
AMD needs a more efficient core. If they have done it, bravo to them.
Staging fake rallies and being in bed with the media so that they play along and present it so it looks like a full rally DOES impact who I'd vote for.
Collin Powell did it first!!! Is neither a grown up argument nor a valid defense. That just means they are both guilty and should both be punished. Likely nobody is concerned about Collin Powell because he isn't flaunting his actions by running for President.
"The Sec. of State should NOT be an administrative position in charge of infrastructure and routine security inspections."
What? The only relevance infrastructure and routine security inspections have on this is that she deliberately dodged them and chastised anyone who did their job and pointed it out.
'If she had used the in-office server, classified stuff would still end up on the "wrong server".'
That is beside the point, as secretary of state all her communications are required to be on record and on the.gov network. Using a private server has only one possible use which is to illegally bypass this. Doing so at all should be the only evidence needed to convict her of the worst case contents of such a server.
"If she got fact X from person Y, is it her job to verify that fact X is not classified?"
She was the secretary of state. Of course it is her job, even where she delegates it is her responsibility to see to it those tasks are done correctly. She can't simply shift blame any more than you can shift your tax liability onto your task preparer.
"There may be situations where she "should have known", but nobody has supplied specifics such that we don't know how realistic it is for her to have known."
For example, Communications from foreign embassies, diplomats, and government officials are all classified upon creation.
My review of the logic and evidence supports this belief. As this remains true there is really only one political issue that matters and should unite us all no matter how much we may disagree on all the others.
"You need to spend more time looking at theoretical sciences to confirm that faith is a huge part of the equation."
There are definitely some very soft sciences out there. But I said by what I said, science is our best method for determining the most concrete answers possible given the proof available. There are some areas where the most concrete answers we can have with the evidence we have just aren't very concrete. They are still the best we can do.
"Furthermore, many scientists are held up as the priests of their religion."
This is certainly true. There is far too much plea to authority fallacy in the scientific world and I believe that is because plea to authority is such a core concept in the academic world.
The biggest problems I see really aren't with science itself but uninformed interpretation of science. Even when reporting isn't bad, Science is filled with subtle points, so filled that people start ignoring the qualifiers and hedges, those qualifiers are there because the person doing the science is trying to convey a complicated point accurately not because they are covering their ass.
"I would bet that the 6%-15% also represents the number of people who can be swayed by political advertising, television spots, op-ed columns or practically any political speech."
If you are talking about facebook spam then yes. If you are talking about reasoned posts from people you actually know in your facebook stream I'd be willing to bet you are reaching a larger audience. If you say something that is logical and makes a valid point I don't really care if it's political or not, I'm not going to reach conclusions solely from information in your post but only an idiot can't be swayed with new information and fresh perspectives. Refusing to be swayed by valid logic and evidence (with due consideration for bias) might well be the definition of an idiot.
"By the way, why is it expected H to know that a given fact sent to her in a given email was classified? I have not heard a clear argument for "she should have known"."
Because she was the secretary of state and such content was inevitable if she illegally used a private server for business. Also, because she was the secretary of state and her job was to know the rules for determining information is and is not classified. She was definitely guilty, but giving her any benefit of doubt comes at the expense of competence. So the question is how guilty she knew she was the more she realized the more guilty she becomes and the less the more incompetent.
Actually if either Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren entered the fray on an independent ticket it would give people someone to rally behind. They would be bombarded with media across the board trying to make them look ridiculous and telling everyone they had no chance regardless of the real numbers and have to win by such a landslide that vote shaving on diebold systems in the major districts wouldn't be enough to rig the elections but people are so stirred up it might just work.
Indeed. For myself, I'd say that it is no different than anything else I see or hear it depends on the content of the post. If there is an interesting or valid point I'll review it. That point may well change my opinion and then I will be swayed.
Slashdot Mirror
True, there are ways, changing to a new position/title will also help but you still might make less than a new hire would in that same position because the company is all too aware of what they are already paying you. If the range for the new position is significantly higher than your current salary they know you'll be happy with the low end of that range no matter how qualified you are for the spot. A new company will make an offer based on how qualified they think you are.
"No it is an authority which is specifically given to various arms of law enforcement."
By who exactly? It still sounds like selective enforcement to me. A federal prosecutor signing off on the commission of a crime would be making themselves an accomplice subject to prosecution. Prosecutors can choose which crimes to prosecute based on the probability of successful prosecution but are not themselves immune to the law and have no authority which allows them to encourage or participate in crime. There is no such executive power, from the president on down.
True but in tech there is no advancement in position anyway, the only way you get a pay increase you'll notice is to get hired at the current market rates by another company. Within 2-3 years you'll pay will have advanced only joke 1-3% amounts while new hires will make as much or more than you.
"SAN storage, where do I start. They recruit kids who got certifications, who use production as learning platform."
Yup, I knew some of those kids while I worked in Albuquerque. HP would poach some of our greenest and youngest people.
I live in Dallas pokestops are only found at stores, parks, and trails. You can walk around a residential neighborhood all day and hit 0. One pokestop isn't enough to keep you full on pokeballs though. Even doing the trail at the park, you'll hit 2 pokestops looping the trail but you won't get enough balls that way, you'd still burn through about 50 an hour.
"The game so far is too simple"
True
"and you can quickly play to endgame content"
True, but I doubt even one legitimate player got anywhere near level 30. You can quickly play end game content because it's the same as start of game content. The problem is the same as all mmo's, instead of skill based play it is an acculation treadmill.
These games need to take out any and all forms of advantage accumulation over time. A 240 game hour character/account should have absolutely zero advantage over a 30 minute played game character/account. I don't just mean combat advantage, there should be no cooler stuff you get, not even cooler looking or wealth accumulation. There should be no goals to work toward other than playing well one encounter at a time. The goal is having fun while playing instead of accumulating things.
As for bots just publish an api to encourage people who enjoy coding and configuring bots to do so. Then you actually control the api and prevent the bots from having ultra-human advantages.
"Just how it is and there's no real easy solution."
There is a very easy solution. Make the game skill based and hard rather than progressive achievement based and easy.
Breaking the cheat is the reason people are quitting.
The game is a massive tredmill. There is no way that someone with little time can be competative except for bots. Unless you live in NYC or someplace similar you can't get enough pokeballs to play without paying a fortune buying them from the store.
Configuring and tweaking bots was far more fun than the game.
Yes but intel started playing games with how they reported power consumption with the core 2's.
"these people" are over 250,000 people twitter has silenced under the general heading "advocating terrorism" it is impossible to claim what they are advocating or to stand for or against it as we don't really know.
What constitutes a civilian is also ambiguous when you are talking about an internal struggle against your own government. Suddenly police go from civilian to uniformed and armed agents of government and a civilian resistence can not obey the usual rules of war, with dramatically inferior resources they have to do whatever produces results. Outside of police, whatever agents of government need to be removed to successfully eliminate existing structure and chance of it coming back into power are also fair game but a city bus driver who isn't presenting arms obviously is not.
Basically, our own criteria for selecting enemy combatants applied against our own domestic government by an armed civilian force engaged in civil war is in fact fair game. Bombing a bus just for the shock value is not.
Some piss and some vomit. If your next move isn't picking your guts up off the ground you are actually ahead of the game.
Sometimes there is a peace that can only be found on the other side of war. And if that war must come then *I* will fight it!
That's the gist of this.
Intel also played games with TDP while AMD gave max power consumption figures. Intel were/are still the more power efficient chips but not by nearly as wide a margin as the stated power figures lead one to believe.
Only if they are trying to be the highest performing chip on the block. Being the highest performing chip at a reasonable price point (the $200 mark is generally the sweet spot only the money is no object crowd wastes more on a cpu) is far more important.
AMD needs a more efficient core. If they have done it, bravo to them.
Staging fake rallies and being in bed with the media so that they play along and present it so it looks like a full rally DOES impact who I'd vote for.
"C. Powell did the same thing"
Collin Powell did it first!!! Is neither a grown up argument nor a valid defense. That just means they are both guilty and should both be punished. Likely nobody is concerned about Collin Powell because he isn't flaunting his actions by running for President.
"The Sec. of State should NOT be an administrative position in charge of infrastructure and routine security inspections."
What? The only relevance infrastructure and routine security inspections have on this is that she deliberately dodged them and chastised anyone who did their job and pointed it out.
'If she had used the in-office server, classified stuff would still end up on the "wrong server".'
.gov network. Using a private server has only one possible use which is to illegally bypass this. Doing so at all should be the only evidence needed to convict her of the worst case contents of such a server.
That is beside the point, as secretary of state all her communications are required to be on record and on the
"If she got fact X from person Y, is it her job to verify that fact X is not classified?"
She was the secretary of state. Of course it is her job, even where she delegates it is her responsibility to see to it those tasks are done correctly. She can't simply shift blame any more than you can shift your tax liability onto your task preparer.
"There may be situations where she "should have known", but nobody has supplied specifics such that we don't know how realistic it is for her to have known."
For example, Communications from foreign embassies, diplomats, and government officials are all classified upon creation.
"I believe it is that way by design."
My review of the logic and evidence supports this belief. As this remains true there is really only one political issue that matters and should unite us all no matter how much we may disagree on all the others.
"You need to spend more time looking at theoretical sciences to confirm that faith is a huge part of the equation."
There are definitely some very soft sciences out there. But I said by what I said, science is our best method for determining the most concrete answers possible given the proof available. There are some areas where the most concrete answers we can have with the evidence we have just aren't very concrete. They are still the best we can do.
"Furthermore, many scientists are held up as the priests of their religion."
This is certainly true. There is far too much plea to authority fallacy in the scientific world and I believe that is because plea to authority is such a core concept in the academic world.
The biggest problems I see really aren't with science itself but uninformed interpretation of science. Even when reporting isn't bad, Science is filled with subtle points, so filled that people start ignoring the qualifiers and hedges, those qualifiers are there because the person doing the science is trying to convey a complicated point accurately not because they are covering their ass.
"I would bet that the 6%-15% also represents the number of people who can be swayed by political advertising, television spots, op-ed columns or practically any political speech."
If you are talking about facebook spam then yes. If you are talking about reasoned posts from people you actually know in your facebook stream I'd be willing to bet you are reaching a larger audience. If you say something that is logical and makes a valid point I don't really care if it's political or not, I'm not going to reach conclusions solely from information in your post but only an idiot can't be swayed with new information and fresh perspectives. Refusing to be swayed by valid logic and evidence (with due consideration for bias) might well be the definition of an idiot.
"By the way, why is it expected H to know that a given fact sent to her in a given email was classified? I have not heard a clear argument for "she should have known"."
Because she was the secretary of state and such content was inevitable if she illegally used a private server for business. Also, because she was the secretary of state and her job was to know the rules for determining information is and is not classified. She was definitely guilty, but giving her any benefit of doubt comes at the expense of competence. So the question is how guilty she knew she was the more she realized the more guilty she becomes and the less the more incompetent.
Actually if either Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren entered the fray on an independent ticket it would give people someone to rally behind. They would be bombarded with media across the board trying to make them look ridiculous and telling everyone they had no chance regardless of the real numbers and have to win by such a landslide that vote shaving on diebold systems in the major districts wouldn't be enough to rig the elections but people are so stirred up it might just work.
Indeed. For myself, I'd say that it is no different than anything else I see or hear it depends on the content of the post. If there is an interesting or valid point I'll review it. That point may well change my opinion and then I will be swayed.
Stubborn ignorance isn't a virtue.
That's why Hillary rallies were all of 20 people, just enough to provide the needed shots for the tv cameras and present the illusion of a rally.