I trust Google more than I trust FTC. At least Google has competition. FTC will sway whichever way the bought and paid for regulators will sway. What if we get another one like Michael Power as FTC chair? He famously said that he doesn't need to hire engineers because he can ask a CEO of any tech company what he needs to know.
Why should a water bill be controlled by the government? Are we still believing in the myth of natural monopolies? Remember how well that held up in the case phone companies. I am neither blind nor sleeping. I ASSURE you that I am fiercely intelligent and EXTREMELY well educated. You don't have to take my word for it, but it won't change just because you don't believe it. And I would much rather see government stick to its functions than try to be a good neighbor that micromanages everything. No, I am NOT blind. I am NOT sleeping. I know all the alternatives available. And the alternative you are advocating sucks. Corporations wouldn't need to bribe politicians if politicians' power wasn't arbitrary. If it was narrow and well-defined, corporations would stick to their main business. But when you give the government the power to decide winners and losers, then bribing the government is just good business. Take away that power and you'll take away the bribes.
You are still avoiding the main question. Regardless of what kind of repackaging of capital they are doing, is that service valuable to someone? Is someone willing to pay for it? If this is a service that other companies pay for, then why do you insist that it is not useful? Do you think those who pay for their services throw that money out the window because they don't like having money? Or do they spend that money because they can't get the same service otherwise? If the banks provide a service that is useful to some entities, then how can you claim that it is useless? They don't work for you. They work for the people who pay them. All businesses do. So I am not sure what to do with the "look where that got us" comment. "It" didn't get us anywhere. In a weak market there is always consolidation. They are just the guys who processed it. You logic is a bit akin to blaming divorces on divorces lawyers. They do profit from divorces, sure. But divorces happen with or without them.
If banks didn't produce any useful services, why would everyone use their services? I think you should rethink your definition of the word "contribute." Would economy continue to function if all banks disappeared? What if half of them disappeared? They don't move the money around. They help everyone else move their money around. In fact, that's roughly what a bank is. It's an institution which helps others move their money around. Are you saying that has no value?
You do realize that student loans subside academic research rather than college education, do you not? Most tenor professors have to dedicate no more than 20 hour to teaching. The rest of their time goes into research. And we at a tipping point where there is almost as many administrators in universities as there are educators. If, as a society, we value research, then we can give out more grants for research. But why should we sponsor it through loans taken by students? 40 years ago Summer job was enough to pay most of Ivy League eduction. Why is it that doesn't barely pays for room and board in a state school today? Because prices go up with money that is available. And students loans don't help anyone. Students are still not able to pay for school just with the loans. All they do is increase the baseline cost of the education. Except now you leave school with a huge debt burden. And you don't get a better education. You get a WORSE eduction now than you did 40 years ago because most of your professors can now be paid NOT to teach (but to do the research).
The title should have been "contributing most to the global economy." Corporations don't control anything. purchasing their products is a choice their customers make. They keep buying from these corporations because they what these corporations have to offer is more useful (in some way -- not necessarily in the quality of the product) than the competition. If most of the global economy runs on these corporations' products, then they are contributing to the working of the global economy. This whole notion that those who produce useful things are your masters is completely upside down.
What free markets? Banking is one of the most regulated industries we have. Ever wonder why there is "checking" and "savings" accounts? There is all kinds of types of banking accounts in countries where banks are less regulated. All this safety and homogenization comes at a price. Any time a regulatory wind blows the wrong way, it creates a disaster (because it effects everyone).
I would be much more impressed with someone making a pledge to never peer review any article which doesn't include (at least in the appendix) the experimental data on which the article is based. Most current publications do not have the requirement to publish the data. Which makes all publications nothing but inherently unreliable claims.
On the other hand, may be it's not astounding. Maybe you have simply bought into the leftist belief that the leftists are the smart ones and you can't let go of it regardless of the evidence.
How are you missing the point that just because a facility doesn't exist (to be bought) does not imply that it cannot be built. The fact that stimulus money is spent on it is a direct indication that they have to be willing to pay EXTRA in order to go out of their way to keep this work in the US. They don't have the luxury of shopping for the cheapest solution if that means going out of the country AND taking taxpayers money to keep these jobs here. Your audacity of throwing slurs around, given how you miss a point of simple logic, is absolutely astounding.
I left the game, but I would imagine that a dk tank with t12 and the ICC buff would pretty much not need any healing due to the fact that self heals scale with dk's health pool.
I was talking about the fact that you can't overgear the fight at level 85 because this specific fight has a mechanic which scales with gear and health. Just like the enfeeble on Prince (which still takes you to 1 hp) and makes gear irrelevant.
Once again, why do you argue with logic if you don't understand logic? The fact that no one gets fired in Newark is an issue that stands on its own apart from Newark graduation rates. Unless you somehow believe that Newark teacher are sooo vastly superior to teachers everywhere else that almost none of them ever deserve to get fired, than you have to admit that the system is biased toward keeping bad teachers. Of course, you only have to admit that if you know what logic means. YOU, ryanov, however don't suffer from such an affliction. You, once again, think that you are perfectly within your rights to substitute your rage for a deductive process. Do it somewhere else, moron.
Isn't one the mechanics on HLK based on health %? That wouldn't change regardless of the level or gear. WoW has a few mechanics like that which don't change with the level (enfeeble is another one I can think of).
You've got to be kidding. Tax payer stimulus was spent on a production line oversees because they "couldn't find a facility" at home. The excuse presented is that "it was only for the initial production stage". And you think it takes someone with an ignorant hick accent to ask the question why is it that half a billion dollars is not enough to built a PROTOTYPE production line at home? That's your argument? The the opposition simply MUST have a hick accent? And you have the audacity to call someone else "uninformed"? That's
Koch brothers will be demonized because they sponsored anti-union efforts. And while this is perfectly honorable (all the data clearly shows that unions hinder progress and job creation), they'll be demonized because demonization is how the mob works. The mob doesn't have an argument. It doesn't try to pretend to have an argument. All it has is the mob.
coming up next: the researchers have been cleared of the accusation of using wrong fonts in their publications. The recipe is simple: clear them of the accusations which haven't been made and hope that the legitimate accusations which have been made get lost in the noise. Given how much "the skeptics should just shut up now because they are just dumb republicans" tripe you see even on slashdot, the recipe is working.
Great. Clearly you have no idea how scientific papers are actually published. Most scientific papers are published without the data. Even if the science is produced with grant money. This isn't specific only to weather research. This is true of all scientific publications. They treat experimental data as their property because they don't want someone doing analytics on their data. Getting the data is where most of the time and expense is spent. So they feel very proprietary about it. I've argued for quite a while that this has a potential to cause all kind of ethical and consistency problems. In general, the response is that since the experiments are "peer-reviewed", they can be reproduced by the peers. Except that some of the data is one-time data and it is not reproducible.
now they assert that it's (some sort of a) a natural phenomena
Some sort? Were ice ages also man-made? Climate is always changing. And not just from season to season. What kind of a nut job would claim that a change in baseline must necessarily be a result of man-made activity. Men-made effects are by definition local. The fact that they have global conglomerative effect is quite a tall order to prove for anyone with even a basic scientific education. If all you do is substitute your rage for any kind of thought process, then why do you do it on Slashdot? It is news for nerds. Wouldn't you be more comfortable in some political forum? Why bother the thoughtful folk?
Deeming you not to be worth the effort is the Occum's razor's path of least resistance, you idiot. You see: I am even giving you the benefit of the doubt. You are an idiot. You are not smart enough or sophisticated enough to be a candidate for being considered a crook.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, Michael Powel was a chair of FCC. But the gist doesn't change.
I trust Google more than I trust FTC. At least Google has competition. FTC will sway whichever way the bought and paid for regulators will sway. What if we get another one like Michael Power as FTC chair? He famously said that he doesn't need to hire engineers because he can ask a CEO of any tech company what he needs to know.
Why should a water bill be controlled by the government? Are we still believing in the myth of natural monopolies? Remember how well that held up in the case phone companies. I am neither blind nor sleeping. I ASSURE you that I am fiercely intelligent and EXTREMELY well educated. You don't have to take my word for it, but it won't change just because you don't believe it. And I would much rather see government stick to its functions than try to be a good neighbor that micromanages everything. No, I am NOT blind. I am NOT sleeping. I know all the alternatives available. And the alternative you are advocating sucks. Corporations wouldn't need to bribe politicians if politicians' power wasn't arbitrary. If it was narrow and well-defined, corporations would stick to their main business. But when you give the government the power to decide winners and losers, then bribing the government is just good business. Take away that power and you'll take away the bribes.
You are still avoiding the main question. Regardless of what kind of repackaging of capital they are doing, is that service valuable to someone? Is someone willing to pay for it? If this is a service that other companies pay for, then why do you insist that it is not useful? Do you think those who pay for their services throw that money out the window because they don't like having money? Or do they spend that money because they can't get the same service otherwise? If the banks provide a service that is useful to some entities, then how can you claim that it is useless? They don't work for you. They work for the people who pay them. All businesses do. So I am not sure what to do with the "look where that got us" comment. "It" didn't get us anywhere. In a weak market there is always consolidation. They are just the guys who processed it. You logic is a bit akin to blaming divorces on divorces lawyers. They do profit from divorces, sure. But divorces happen with or without them.
If banks didn't produce any useful services, why would everyone use their services? I think you should rethink your definition of the word "contribute." Would economy continue to function if all banks disappeared? What if half of them disappeared? They don't move the money around. They help everyone else move their money around. In fact, that's roughly what a bank is. It's an institution which helps others move their money around. Are you saying that has no value?
You do realize that student loans subside academic research rather than college education, do you not? Most tenor professors have to dedicate no more than 20 hour to teaching. The rest of their time goes into research. And we at a tipping point where there is almost as many administrators in universities as there are educators. If, as a society, we value research, then we can give out more grants for research. But why should we sponsor it through loans taken by students? 40 years ago Summer job was enough to pay most of Ivy League eduction. Why is it that doesn't barely pays for room and board in a state school today? Because prices go up with money that is available. And students loans don't help anyone. Students are still not able to pay for school just with the loans. All they do is increase the baseline cost of the education. Except now you leave school with a huge debt burden. And you don't get a better education. You get a WORSE eduction now than you did 40 years ago because most of your professors can now be paid NOT to teach (but to do the research).
The title should have been "contributing most to the global economy." Corporations don't control anything. purchasing their products is a choice their customers make. They keep buying from these corporations because they what these corporations have to offer is more useful (in some way -- not necessarily in the quality of the product) than the competition. If most of the global economy runs on these corporations' products, then they are contributing to the working of the global economy. This whole notion that those who produce useful things are your masters is completely upside down.
What free markets? Banking is one of the most regulated industries we have. Ever wonder why there is "checking" and "savings" accounts? There is all kinds of types of banking accounts in countries where banks are less regulated. All this safety and homogenization comes at a price. Any time a regulatory wind blows the wrong way, it creates a disaster (because it effects everyone).
I would be much more impressed with someone making a pledge to never peer review any article which doesn't include (at least in the appendix) the experimental data on which the article is based. Most current publications do not have the requirement to publish the data. Which makes all publications nothing but inherently unreliable claims.
On the other hand, may be it's not astounding. Maybe you have simply bought into the leftist belief that the leftists are the smart ones and you can't let go of it regardless of the evidence.
How are you missing the point that just because a facility doesn't exist (to be bought) does not imply that it cannot be built. The fact that stimulus money is spent on it is a direct indication that they have to be willing to pay EXTRA in order to go out of their way to keep this work in the US. They don't have the luxury of shopping for the cheapest solution if that means going out of the country AND taking taxpayers money to keep these jobs here. Your audacity of throwing slurs around, given how you miss a point of simple logic, is absolutely astounding.
I left the game, but I would imagine that a dk tank with t12 and the ICC buff would pretty much not need any healing due to the fact that self heals scale with dk's health pool.
I was talking about the fact that you can't overgear the fight at level 85 because this specific fight has a mechanic which scales with gear and health. Just like the enfeeble on Prince (which still takes you to 1 hp) and makes gear irrelevant.
I wouldn't bet on anything at this point. It's still in the concept stage. Remember the path of the titans system?
Once again, why do you argue with logic if you don't understand logic? The fact that no one gets fired in Newark is an issue that stands on its own apart from Newark graduation rates. Unless you somehow believe that Newark teacher are sooo vastly superior to teachers everywhere else that almost none of them ever deserve to get fired, than you have to admit that the system is biased toward keeping bad teachers. Of course, you only have to admit that if you know what logic means. YOU, ryanov, however don't suffer from such an affliction. You, once again, think that you are perfectly within your rights to substitute your rage for a deductive process. Do it somewhere else, moron.
LK brought a new dps/tank class. This will bring a new dps/healer class.
Isn't one the mechanics on HLK based on health %? That wouldn't change regardless of the level or gear. WoW has a few mechanics like that which don't change with the level (enfeeble is another one I can think of).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chutzpah
You've got to be kidding. Tax payer stimulus was spent on a production line oversees because they "couldn't find a facility" at home. The excuse presented is that "it was only for the initial production stage". And you think it takes someone with an ignorant hick accent to ask the question why is it that half a billion dollars is not enough to built a PROTOTYPE production line at home? That's your argument? The the opposition simply MUST have a hick accent? And you have the audacity to call someone else "uninformed"? That's
They couldn't find a facility? Wasn't the whole point of these programs to build new facilities?
Koch brothers will be demonized because they sponsored anti-union efforts. And while this is perfectly honorable (all the data clearly shows that unions hinder progress and job creation), they'll be demonized because demonization is how the mob works. The mob doesn't have an argument. It doesn't try to pretend to have an argument. All it has is the mob.
coming up next: the researchers have been cleared of the accusation of using wrong fonts in their publications. The recipe is simple: clear them of the accusations which haven't been made and hope that the legitimate accusations which have been made get lost in the noise. Given how much "the skeptics should just shut up now because they are just dumb republicans" tripe you see even on slashdot, the recipe is working.
Published papers are, well, published.
Great. Clearly you have no idea how scientific papers are actually published. Most scientific papers are published without the data. Even if the science is produced with grant money. This isn't specific only to weather research. This is true of all scientific publications. They treat experimental data as their property because they don't want someone doing analytics on their data. Getting the data is where most of the time and expense is spent. So they feel very proprietary about it. I've argued for quite a while that this has a potential to cause all kind of ethical and consistency problems. In general, the response is that since the experiments are "peer-reviewed", they can be reproduced by the peers. Except that some of the data is one-time data and it is not reproducible.
now they assert that it's (some sort of a) a natural phenomena
Some sort? Were ice ages also man-made? Climate is always changing. And not just from season to season. What kind of a nut job would claim that a change in baseline must necessarily be a result of man-made activity. Men-made effects are by definition local. The fact that they have global conglomerative effect is quite a tall order to prove for anyone with even a basic scientific education. If all you do is substitute your rage for any kind of thought process, then why do you do it on Slashdot? It is news for nerds. Wouldn't you be more comfortable in some political forum? Why bother the thoughtful folk?
Occam's razor
Deeming you not to be worth the effort is the Occum's razor's path of least resistance, you idiot. You see: I am even giving you the benefit of the doubt. You are an idiot. You are not smart enough or sophisticated enough to be a candidate for being considered a crook.