So, this article says ten feet, and on the same day, The Register claims it's four feet. Was there something in the actual study pointing to one or the other? While neither is good, having reports that vary by 2.5 times isn't good, and likely leads to more people claiming that nobody really knows WTF they're talking about.
You can understand the confusion caused by the media (see link below). The only news we had back then was the daily paper, and a few TV channels. Who even knew what a climatologist was back then?
With discounts, I can rent a whole car for $10 a day. Why the fuck would I spend this much for additional internet? Hell, I can already utilize my smart phone or iPad (3g) from the vehicle.
By anecdotal evidence, I can verify at least one person can do basic math in her sleep...
When I was a teen, my mom would frequently fall asleep on the couch. She would also talk in her sleep. I was able to get her to respond to simple questions, and even do basic math, but nothing more than multiplication. I suspect that since those answers were already memorized, it would be different when asking for an answer that required more than a canned reply.
I'll wager that you'll lose that bet. Coal production isn't projected to decline between now and 2040 by the US govt. Now it may not be a growth industry, but energy consumption isn't likely to decline either. Hopefully, other sources of energy will continue to maintain or more than cover the growth rate. Otherwise, you'll see increases in prices. I suspect you would you argue that oil isn't a growth industry, and I'd agree. But, it hasn't stopped them from recording record profits.
While the decline is obvious, the claiming that the initiatives are the cause would require more than this. People choose to quit for a lot of reasons...these may or may not have played a role.
As a side note, I'd have to question the accuracy of the the data CA is claiming with a 4.4% decline in one year, followed by a 1.3% increase.
Coal production in the US isn't expected to decline for more than 25 years according to http://www.eia.gov/coal/ The only likely change to that would be if the government takes some legal action to end it. You argue that it's an astute move, but your cart is way before the horse. And, while the stock market operates on a forward looking basis, it rarely projects beyond the next year. By the same rational you used, it would have been smart to get out of oil, and yet the oil companies continue to show record profits.
Oh, cry us a frickin' river. Just because something could be read into it doesn't mean that it was meant to be that way. And those who take offense when it wasn't intended need to put on some big boy pants and get over it.
So, are you implying that we were on the "dark side" during the revolutionary, WWI, and WWII, and Korean wars? If that's the case, I'm happy to be on that side. I don't agree with all the wars we've participated (or started) in. But the comment made by the GP is simply asinine.
Your statement "All rich people think this way." is simply full of shit. You think you know "All rich people"? No, you're simply an ignorant jealous troll.
Care to show us publicly run schools that do better? I'm seriously in favor of govt. oversight of the corporate flavor, but lack of competition has degraded our public system into a nearly useless shithole.
NASA doesn't have to compete, or show a ROI. NASA doesn't have to be accountable to anyone (except congress...ha, ha, ha!). NASA doesn't have to hire the brightest minds.
So, I've also read more resumes, and interviewed more people than I can count. When you see a poorly written resume, but it contains all of the qualifications you require, what do you do? In our case, it depends on what we're looking for. If it's heavy design work, we'll want someone who's a good communicator, and I might not give the resume a second look. But, we do have a place for the occasional geeky savant, who doesn't play well with others. As long as they can meet the milestones they're given, without annoying anyone else, I'm for giving them a place too.
Yup, and why was that? The company I work for even hired housewives as part time coders back in the 70s-80s. One went on the be an engineering director. Was that the ideal path? No. And if there had been enough CS majors around back then, she probably would never have had the opportunity. I'm all for a well rounded education (as in, everyone should get one), but there's precious little that's going to be directly applicable to the job you do later.
So, you're arguing for diversity, and I'm not talking about how the word is flung around these days (meaning racial diversity), but about a diversity of ideas. And, while I'm in favor of some of that, there's a time and place to brainstorm, and then there's often much more time when you go about the business of doing what your work using "best practices". I'd argue that the time for diversity is a relatively small portion of that time, and that you also wouldn't hire equal numbers of CS grads and others to get a mix. You'd more likely look for some out-of-the-box thinker, and then as time went on, look to see what kind of ROI you got on that investment.
With the police out in force on Easter Sunday, I'm sure their purpose was to make us all safer. I saw no less than six vehicles pulled over in under an hour. Now, I'd be fine with this if they were pulling over those who were drifting aimlessly as they chatted, texted, read the paper, etc., or those who tailgated. But, it's way too easy to obtain their quotas by nabbing the people who break the "nine your fine, ten your mine" rule.
Slashdot Mirror
Too many idiots posting these days to tell if you're being silly, or one of them.
So, this article says ten feet, and on the same day, The Register claims it's four feet. Was there something in the actual study pointing to one or the other? While neither is good, having reports that vary by 2.5 times isn't good, and likely leads to more people claiming that nobody really knows WTF they're talking about.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
You can understand the confusion caused by the media (see link below). The only news we had back then was the daily paper, and a few TV channels. Who even knew what a climatologist was back then?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
With discounts, I can rent a whole car for $10 a day. Why the fuck would I spend this much for additional internet? Hell, I can already utilize my smart phone or iPad (3g) from the vehicle.
Appeal to who? According to this, the court making this decision is the highest in Europe:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...
By anecdotal evidence, I can verify at least one person can do basic math in her sleep...
When I was a teen, my mom would frequently fall asleep on the couch. She would also talk in her sleep. I was able to get her to respond to simple questions, and even do basic math, but nothing more than multiplication. I suspect that since those answers were already memorized, it would be different when asking for an answer that required more than a canned reply.
I'd argue that you're off by 25+ years. It'll happen, but as I've pointed out above, coal production isn't projected to decline over that period.
I'll wager that you'll lose that bet. Coal production isn't projected to decline between now and 2040 by the US govt. Now it may not be a growth industry, but energy consumption isn't likely to decline either. Hopefully, other sources of energy will continue to maintain or more than cover the growth rate. Otherwise, you'll see increases in prices. I suspect you would you argue that oil isn't a growth industry, and I'd agree. But, it hasn't stopped them from recording record profits.
While the decline is obvious, the claiming that the initiatives are the cause would require more than this. People choose to quit for a lot of reasons...these may or may not have played a role.
As a side note, I'd have to question the accuracy of the the data CA is claiming with a 4.4% decline in one year, followed by a 1.3% increase.
Coal production in the US isn't expected to decline for more than 25 years according to http://www.eia.gov/coal/ The only likely change to that would be if the government takes some legal action to end it. You argue that it's an astute move, but your cart is way before the horse. And, while the stock market operates on a forward looking basis, it rarely projects beyond the next year. By the same rational you used, it would have been smart to get out of oil, and yet the oil companies continue to show record profits.
Oh, cry us a frickin' river. Just because something could be read into it doesn't mean that it was meant to be that way. And those who take offense when it wasn't intended need to put on some big boy pants and get over it.
Seriously? Someone Flamebait modded this? Get a sense of humor, or GTFO.
So, are you implying that we were on the "dark side" during the revolutionary, WWI, and WWII, and Korean wars? If that's the case, I'm happy to be on that side. I don't agree with all the wars we've participated (or started) in. But the comment made by the GP is simply asinine.
Your statement "All rich people think this way." is simply full of shit. You think you know "All rich people"? No, you're simply an ignorant jealous troll.
Care to show us publicly run schools that do better? I'm seriously in favor of govt. oversight of the corporate flavor, but lack of competition has degraded our public system into a nearly useless shithole.
Based on what exactly?
You're right, I can't find any in my plan that can do a better blow job.
NASA doesn't have to compete, or show a ROI. NASA doesn't have to be accountable to anyone (except congress...ha, ha, ha!). NASA doesn't have to hire the brightest minds.
So, I've also read more resumes, and interviewed more people than I can count. When you see a poorly written resume, but it contains all of the qualifications you require, what do you do? In our case, it depends on what we're looking for. If it's heavy design work, we'll want someone who's a good communicator, and I might not give the resume a second look. But, we do have a place for the occasional geeky savant, who doesn't play well with others. As long as they can meet the milestones they're given, without annoying anyone else, I'm for giving them a place too.
Yup, and why was that? The company I work for even hired housewives as part time coders back in the 70s-80s. One went on the be an engineering director. Was that the ideal path? No. And if there had been enough CS majors around back then, she probably would never have had the opportunity. I'm all for a well rounded education (as in, everyone should get one), but there's precious little that's going to be directly applicable to the job you do later.
So, you're arguing for diversity, and I'm not talking about how the word is flung around these days (meaning racial diversity), but about a diversity of ideas. And, while I'm in favor of some of that, there's a time and place to brainstorm, and then there's often much more time when you go about the business of doing what your work using "best practices". I'd argue that the time for diversity is a relatively small portion of that time, and that you also wouldn't hire equal numbers of CS grads and others to get a mix. You'd more likely look for some out-of-the-box thinker, and then as time went on, look to see what kind of ROI you got on that investment.
With the police out in force on Easter Sunday, I'm sure their purpose was to make us all safer. I saw no less than six vehicles pulled over in under an hour. Now, I'd be fine with this if they were pulling over those who were drifting aimlessly as they chatted, texted, read the paper, etc., or those who tailgated. But, it's way too easy to obtain their quotas by nabbing the people who break the "nine your fine, ten your mine" rule.
Not sure where you went to school, but I accidentally (forgot it was there) carried a pocket knife into back in the 60s, and was booted.
So, every time someone dies, the estate should check with the IRS? Get a grip.
Yes, it's a vast right (and left) wing conspiracy. *cough* *cough* *BULLSHIT* *cough*
Disclaimer: I don't like corporate money or lobbying in politics, and the concept that companies are people is pure BS as well.