VA, or Volt-Amps, is watts, depending on what a few factors. If it's just straight up DC, yes, it is purely watts. VA strictly means volts multiplied by amps...
If it's AC, it's still some form of wattage, but then you have to consider if it's in phase or out of phase, and if it's out of phase, you need factor in the power factor.
And I'm sure you can easily find all of this information with a simple google search.
How can you call giving a 1 in 6 (16.66666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666667%) failure rate "reasonable" when no other electronics manufacturer could get away with that?
1 in 6 is terrible. At most you'd want 3 in 100, or 3%. I doubt any other company that manufacture's any sort of electronics could get away with 1 in 6. So the question remains, why are you and countless others giving them a free pass for their shitty processes which leak this bullshit through?
Two wrongs don't make a right, and two unreasonables sure as FUCK don't make a reasonable. Yeah, sometimes the woman goes home with the prick who gets her drunk at a club instead of the nice guy who takes her out for a romantic dinner. Wow, people can exhibit irrational behavior, what a shock. If you think that makes "I bought you dinner so now you have to fuck me" reasonable, then you're off your fucking rocker.
Now you're just being fucking creepy. No wonder you're so fucking frustrated, you can't even get the girl who really is after the "nice guy" cus that sure as fuck ain't you, Capn Date Rape.
In your hurried douche bagged replied, you're missing a key point. People tend to exhibit irrational behavior all the time and use excuses to make up for it. Why are they allowed to have that pass all the time? If you set in a situation where you're always exhibiting irrational behavior, well, people are going to expect it.
You're also missing another point, when I mean sex, it doesn't actually have to be sex. Everyone requires some sort of return on their investment in a relationship. If the time, effort, and money invested into the relationship doesn't net you something, why bother?
It doesn't have to be sex, it doesn't have to be second base even. Yeah, sure if the person is outright creepy, you probably don't want to waste your whole evening with them, however once you do, if you can't muster some sort of physical gratitude, it sends a lot of mixed signals, and most of them are usually the wrong signals.
A lot of women are the type to string a guy along just because they're an easy source of free alcohol, meals, or whatever else. (And if you went out into the real world more often, you would see this.)
I have seen many good friends fall into these traps time and time again only to get very little out of it. Let's see you waste your hard earned money, your valuable time into trying to develop something with who you thought was a nice woman, only to turn out she was more interested in using you and giving very little in return.
The problem is that a large portion of the population doesn't know how to play the game very well. This is why they fall into these traps and get used. Once you learn how to play the game, you will have an easier time getting somewhere. You will learn who to and who not to waste your time on so you can get exactly whatever it is you're looking for.
You bring up a valid point, however people are still capable of making somewhat rational decisions when they are drunk. It comes down to whether or not they choose to.
No, it's not entirely unreasonable. How often have you heard, or known girls who go out, get drunk, fuck the first guy who talks to them after they're completely annihilated, yet won't have sex on the first date, even if the guy was nice enough to prepare a wonderful evening?
Men expect these things because we see women doing it in other avenues. The whole "not in the right state of mind" excuse is bullshit too. People are rather capable of saying "no" when they're that wasted. Instead they just choose not to. If a man is going to take his time to show actual effort and you agree to it, there should be some compensation. At the very least play the role of the cock tease and dry hump for a bit. Do something...
This is assuming that a.) he's the copyright holder or b.) as is usually the case with label musicians, they don't own the copyrights and so is instead an authorized agent.
I really hope they do this. It's the exec's jobs to look over reports, hell, sometimes even do their own reports, to figure out how to generate more income without harming themselves. If Warner is really full of that many stupid execs... well I hope their stockholders pull out. No sense in wasting your money on a company that obviously can't yank their head from their ass.
I don't know why record companies think they're entitled to be given money so that others can essentially advertise their music.
Oh, I completely agree. If you don't have the necessary tools for something, and someone else does, Occam's razor can be wielded more viably for the person who has those necessary tools.
I never said that. The point is that a lot of companies, for whatever reason, can sometimes have a lot of stuff loading at boot, and therefore it takes a really long time to get to a usable desktop. A faster PC can help alleviate that problem.
You must be thinking of something other than Ockham's razor. In the spirit of what "Ockham's razor" is, it's generally been simplified to, "The simplest explanation that covers all the facts is usually the best.", and a bunch of other similar variations.
That's one dysfunctional 'family' you've got there if you have to pick their brains by going on line.
Uh what? You're being overly cynical here. What's dysfunctional about using a method where it's easier to see who is who and what their qualifications are, based off of who you know? Instead of having your buddy rattle of a list of names and their qualifications, this is being done for you.
So, you'd recommend a friend for a position for $50. But not because you respect his/her professional reputation or you think it would be a benefit for your company.
Sure, I'd recommend a friend for a position for $50. Wouldn't you? It's easy money.
It's not always the case of having respect for you friends professional reputation or them being a benefit for the company. You may not necessarily know that they're hiring, or you know, but it may have never occurred to you until something jogged your brain.
Now I personally haven't used LinkedIn either, but I doubt it would be a stretch to assume that you just can't willy nilly add someone to your friends list and have it be a two way street automatically. All of the social networking schemes I've ever used have necessitated a need for both parties to agree. Why would LinkedIn be any different?
Time is money. You can either wait five to ten minutes for everything to load once you've hit the power button, or you could wait a couple of minutes. Imagine 50 people having to wait an extra five minutes. That's a total of 250 minutes per day, or a little over 4 man hours each day being lost.
Well, I'm outa there. The 'big happy family' meme is code for the bosses idiot nephew or doper son-in-law needs to be looked after. Sorry, but I owe an employer a professional relationship and that's all they owe me. Part of that is to treat people with respect and not to pick fights.
Uh, no. It can mean that, but it doesn't have to, nor is that usually the case. You'll find idiots in all type of positions they shouldn't be in, and they necessarily aren't relatives.
I take it you're either self employed or are unemployed. I say this because a lot of companies like that stance and you don't seem to realize it.
It's a lot easier to recruit people by going through people you already know. Offer a decent incentive ($50 or something). When it comes down to it, a lot of people will try to bring in someone they know they can trust because they know their reputation is on the line too. I like hanging out with my friends, but I know which ones would be worthless to have as a co-worker and which ones I could really trust.
I'm not sure what affirmative action has to do with this specifically, so I'll just ignore that part and let you explain it further.
However, this isn't necessarily a bad way to manage a company. It's just sometimes easier to recruit people based off of a recommendation of someone you already know. Keep in mind that the more important position, the less of a chance that someone will give you a bad recommendation. The recommendation also reflects on them. There's just some people I know that I would never recommend, and I'd hope they never try to do the same for me.
People should be able to work together, but blurring the lines between work and not work is really dangerous.
That thought is fragmented. I have no idea what you're trying to get at there.
People should be able to work together, but they necessarily can't always. There's some people I've worked with that I just simply can not stand to be around because of conflicting personalities. You run into that less if you have like minded individuals around you.
Just because your friend is working with you doesn't mean people are going to think it's "fun time". Very rarely will you run into a situation where you find goofing off because of this more than you'll find goofing off any other time.
When lay offs come or somebody needs to be let go. Chummy coworkers that are a bit too comfortable with each other. There are any number of ways in which that can blow up and damage the company's productivity.
Layoffs can backfire regardless of the situation, chummy coworkers or not.
Re:You can't win if you don't play
on
Linked In Or Out?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
And here comes the trolls screaming and yelling, "BUT HOW DO YOU KNOW IT WASNT A FAKE PROFILE DONE IN MALICE???????/!!!!11111aoneoneoneololoowerhowweor" And I'm sure you'll be respond with, "they seemed shady during the interview, I just wanted to do a further check." or something to that extent.
Re:Want a job? Get on LinkedIn
on
Linked In Or Out?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Your questions are really simple to answer.
A lot of the companies I've worked for think of themselves as one big family. Because of that, they will hire people other employees know so that there's less of a chance of in fighting and more of a chance of teamwork. It helps to keep the big happy family image.
They will even consider hiring the friends of their worst employees. Don't ask me why, but they do.
There is that off chance that who you know could hurt you, but that's probably small. Just don't keep friends or contacts who are total dick bags and it shouldn't bite you in the ass.
Slashdot Mirror
So here I am, whipping out my EE degree...
VA, or Volt-Amps, is watts, depending on what a few factors. If it's just straight up DC, yes, it is purely watts. VA strictly means volts multiplied by amps...
If it's AC, it's still some form of wattage, but then you have to consider if it's in phase or out of phase, and if it's out of phase, you need factor in the power factor.
And I'm sure you can easily find all of this information with a simple google search.
How can you call giving a 1 in 6 (16.66666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666667%) failure rate "reasonable" when no other electronics manufacturer could get away with that?
1 in 6 is terrible. At most you'd want 3 in 100, or 3%. I doubt any other company that manufacture's any sort of electronics could get away with 1 in 6. So the question remains, why are you and countless others giving them a free pass for their shitty processes which leak this bullshit through?
There's a Source mod instead: http://goldeneyesource.net/
Two wrongs don't make a right, and two unreasonables sure as FUCK don't make a reasonable. Yeah, sometimes the woman goes home with the prick who gets her drunk at a club instead of the nice guy who takes her out for a romantic dinner. Wow, people can exhibit irrational behavior, what a shock. If you think that makes "I bought you dinner so now you have to fuck me" reasonable, then you're off your fucking rocker.
Now you're just being fucking creepy. No wonder you're so fucking frustrated, you can't even get the girl who really is after the "nice guy" cus that sure as fuck ain't you, Capn Date Rape.
In your hurried douche bagged replied, you're missing a key point. People tend to exhibit irrational behavior all the time and use excuses to make up for it. Why are they allowed to have that pass all the time? If you set in a situation where you're always exhibiting irrational behavior, well, people are going to expect it.
You're also missing another point, when I mean sex, it doesn't actually have to be sex. Everyone requires some sort of return on their investment in a relationship. If the time, effort, and money invested into the relationship doesn't net you something, why bother?
It doesn't have to be sex, it doesn't have to be second base even. Yeah, sure if the person is outright creepy, you probably don't want to waste your whole evening with them, however once you do, if you can't muster some sort of physical gratitude, it sends a lot of mixed signals, and most of them are usually the wrong signals.
A lot of women are the type to string a guy along just because they're an easy source of free alcohol, meals, or whatever else. (And if you went out into the real world more often, you would see this.)
I have seen many good friends fall into these traps time and time again only to get very little out of it. Let's see you waste your hard earned money, your valuable time into trying to develop something with who you thought was a nice woman, only to turn out she was more interested in using you and giving very little in return.
The problem is that a large portion of the population doesn't know how to play the game very well. This is why they fall into these traps and get used. Once you learn how to play the game, you will have an easier time getting somewhere. You will learn who to and who not to waste your time on so you can get exactly whatever it is you're looking for.
Could name it the "Thunder Cougar Falcon Bird".
You bring up a valid point, however people are still capable of making somewhat rational decisions when they are drunk. It comes down to whether or not they choose to.
Apparently you don't get out much.
No, actually, this mindset allows you do to very well. You realize who to not waste your time with.
No, it's not entirely unreasonable. How often have you heard, or known girls who go out, get drunk, fuck the first guy who talks to them after they're completely annihilated, yet won't have sex on the first date, even if the guy was nice enough to prepare a wonderful evening?
Men expect these things because we see women doing it in other avenues. The whole "not in the right state of mind" excuse is bullshit too. People are rather capable of saying "no" when they're that wasted. Instead they just choose not to. If a man is going to take his time to show actual effort and you agree to it, there should be some compensation. At the very least play the role of the cock tease and dry hump for a bit. Do something...
This is assuming that a.) he's the copyright holder or b.) as is usually the case with label musicians, they don't own the copyrights and so is instead an authorized agent.
I really hope they do this. It's the exec's jobs to look over reports, hell, sometimes even do their own reports, to figure out how to generate more income without harming themselves. If Warner is really full of that many stupid execs... well I hope their stockholders pull out. No sense in wasting your money on a company that obviously can't yank their head from their ass.
I don't know why record companies think they're entitled to be given money so that others can essentially advertise their music.
Well, I'll give you a clue. GrahamCox is right.
So? The Wii came out at around the same time as the PS3. Time frame isn't necessarily important if you can market your product right.
I dunno, I'd think there'd be huge profits to be made from owning a planet and all of it's resources. I could be wrong.
Oh, I completely agree. If you don't have the necessary tools for something, and someone else does, Occam's razor can be wielded more viably for the person who has those necessary tools.
I never said that. The point is that a lot of companies, for whatever reason, can sometimes have a lot of stuff loading at boot, and therefore it takes a really long time to get to a usable desktop. A faster PC can help alleviate that problem.
Well, step 3 is obviously profit. Thanks for filling in step 2. I've always wondered what it was...
You must be thinking of something other than Ockham's razor. In the spirit of what "Ockham's razor" is, it's generally been simplified to, "The simplest explanation that covers all the facts is usually the best.", and a bunch of other similar variations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ockhams_razor
That's one dysfunctional 'family' you've got there if you have to pick their brains by going on line.
Uh what? You're being overly cynical here. What's dysfunctional about using a method where it's easier to see who is who and what their qualifications are, based off of who you know? Instead of having your buddy rattle of a list of names and their qualifications, this is being done for you.
So, you'd recommend a friend for a position for $50. But not because you respect his/her professional reputation or you think it would be a benefit for your company.
Sure, I'd recommend a friend for a position for $50. Wouldn't you? It's easy money.
It's not always the case of having respect for you friends professional reputation or them being a benefit for the company. You may not necessarily know that they're hiring, or you know, but it may have never occurred to you until something jogged your brain.
Now I personally haven't used LinkedIn either, but I doubt it would be a stretch to assume that you just can't willy nilly add someone to your friends list and have it be a two way street automatically. All of the social networking schemes I've ever used have necessitated a need for both parties to agree. Why would LinkedIn be any different?
Time is money. You can either wait five to ten minutes for everything to load once you've hit the power button, or you could wait a couple of minutes. Imagine 50 people having to wait an extra five minutes. That's a total of 250 minutes per day, or a little over 4 man hours each day being lost.
Well, I'm outa there. The 'big happy family' meme is code for the bosses idiot nephew or doper son-in-law needs to be looked after. Sorry, but I owe an employer a professional relationship and that's all they owe me. Part of that is to treat people with respect and not to pick fights.
Uh, no. It can mean that, but it doesn't have to, nor is that usually the case. You'll find idiots in all type of positions they shouldn't be in, and they necessarily aren't relatives.
I take it you're either self employed or are unemployed. I say this because a lot of companies like that stance and you don't seem to realize it.
It's a lot easier to recruit people by going through people you already know. Offer a decent incentive ($50 or something). When it comes down to it, a lot of people will try to bring in someone they know they can trust because they know their reputation is on the line too. I like hanging out with my friends, but I know which ones would be worthless to have as a co-worker and which ones I could really trust.
I'm not sure what affirmative action has to do with this specifically, so I'll just ignore that part and let you explain it further.
However, this isn't necessarily a bad way to manage a company. It's just sometimes easier to recruit people based off of a recommendation of someone you already know. Keep in mind that the more important position, the less of a chance that someone will give you a bad recommendation. The recommendation also reflects on them. There's just some people I know that I would never recommend, and I'd hope they never try to do the same for me.
People should be able to work together, but blurring the lines between work and not work is really dangerous.
That thought is fragmented. I have no idea what you're trying to get at there.
People should be able to work together, but they necessarily can't always. There's some people I've worked with that I just simply can not stand to be around because of conflicting personalities. You run into that less if you have like minded individuals around you.
Just because your friend is working with you doesn't mean people are going to think it's "fun time". Very rarely will you run into a situation where you find goofing off because of this more than you'll find goofing off any other time.
When lay offs come or somebody needs to be let go. Chummy coworkers that are a bit too comfortable with each other. There are any number of ways in which that can blow up and damage the company's productivity.
Layoffs can backfire regardless of the situation, chummy coworkers or not.
And here comes the trolls screaming and yelling, "BUT HOW DO YOU KNOW IT WASNT A FAKE PROFILE DONE IN MALICE???????/!!!!11111aoneoneoneololoowerhowweor" And I'm sure you'll be respond with, "they seemed shady during the interview, I just wanted to do a further check." or something to that extent.
Your questions are really simple to answer.
A lot of the companies I've worked for think of themselves as one big family. Because of that, they will hire people other employees know so that there's less of a chance of in fighting and more of a chance of teamwork. It helps to keep the big happy family image.
They will even consider hiring the friends of their worst employees. Don't ask me why, but they do.
There is that off chance that who you know could hurt you, but that's probably small. Just don't keep friends or contacts who are total dick bags and it shouldn't bite you in the ass.