Branson is just the Bill Gates of a different industry.
You mean Branson is also technologically incompetent, earning his money only because he was in the right place at the right time, deserving none of his fame/fortune, while one of the world's largest and most powerful companies in the world made a huge mistake; allowing him to show the world he is one of the scummiest, cut-throat, marketing geniuses ever seen?
Wow...what are the chances of two of those flukes would happening in my life time.
Seriously - what goals do airport security checkpoins have?
It gets even worse. The TSA is actively working to ensure pilots are now screened before they can enter the tarmac/airplane or leave the tarmac/airplane to enter the a terminal area. It seems the TSA has decided the pilots who fly the planes are a higher threat on the ground where they can do less damage than a pilot in the air flying a jet full of fuel and passengers. Remember, in smaller airports, people (including pilots) still walk on the tarmac to board/deboard the plane.
This of course all ignores the fact TSA agents have been caught damaging critical pitot sensors on many commercial planes. Some of those planes continued to fly dozens of hours before the damage was detected. If in doubt how critical these sensors can be to the safety of a flight, here is a video of what happens when one becomes overly contaminated with moisture or is simply not calibrated properly - no physical damage required.
I didn't say there was nothing to back the opinion up with, I said that it wasn't provided.
So if people don't explain why cars move every time they talk about cars, they are irrational.
I think the humour went, "whooosh". Especially once you understand the use of "$" actually has its origin as a joke, rather than an insult.
If I rephrase what you're saying, people look foolish when they complain without saying why they are complaining even when it's obvious because anyone who doesn't live under a rock has the same shared life experience which in turn means no explanation is required yet it is still required else they look silly.
Like it or not, this is an informal forum. People vent. If this not enough of an explanation for you to understand, I'm at a loss, you "Doodoo Head".
And dang it, I'll have you know I fully planned to say that before you replied. Thanks for deflating my the humour value.:P;)
Expressing a negative opinion with no reasoning to back it up is not logical.
The fact you believe people have an opinion about Microsoft "with no reasoning to back it up" immediately causes heads to explode. Either that, or it is a very subtle joke.
Either you posted from a tree via carrier pigeon or you're ignorant as hell and have missed the last several decades. Either way, your statement and resulting position is ultimately undermined, as it is funny as hell.
Okay. Thank. I think I understand where you're coming form now.
Is it inappropriate to ask if your wife is UAW or auto-related?
She's not union and works in the telco industry. The thing is, another group of her peers, working for the same company, work in a different state. They are part of a union. The wage differential was maddening and once again I'll stress, my wife is very fairly compensated. The union guys on the other hand, are insanely overpaid to the same job. Since the non-union workers are cheaper, guess who gets to work weekends and holidays?
At any rate, the company can no longer afford to be competitive because their labor rates are too high on what is now thin margins. Union contracts prevent outsourcing of the union people directly. As a result, the fairly paid, non-union jobs are also being outsourced so as to satisfy union contracts. This in turn allows them to get ride of the way over priced union workers. My wife is a causality. This is often the case when it comes to union vs non-union workers.
The friend of mine that does work for UAW - aerospace, will tell you he's paid at least 300% more than the non-union wokers for his line of work - but he's going to ride it as long as he can. I can't say that I blame him. And keep in mind, that number doesn't include his world class benefits either.
My point was that $15/hour was that the parent had established this as the fair and correct wage
For some reason I'm not following what you're saying there. Please try again.
Where my sister worked, $25/hour painters were getting replaced by $15/hour newcomers.
According to the market, that job is worth $15/hr for new comers. This is the way a free market works. What else can I say. You basically consider the free market to be unfair. It is. Your opinion of fairness is not justification for higher wages.
Have you worked in an auto factory?
I have not. I have friends who have. I also have a friend who is in the UAW - albeit in the aerospace division. My wife also does a job where some of the coverage is provided by union workers in other states. My wife is fairly compensated for her work. She even agrees. The union counter parts are vulgarly compensated. They are are large part of why the company is now actively working to push those jobs overseas - to India and China.
Had it not been for the greedy union, it is possible those jobs would stay within US borders. As is, they managed to price themselves right out of the market. And thanks to union politics, my wife also feels the sting of losing her job too.
Unions need to do their job and stop fucking up the economy with greed. Fair pay for fair labor is just that - fair.
I'd like to know to know where you got the idea that parts are painted mindlessly.
Having watched it done before. It is mindless. The job is easily replaced by robots but the unions refuse to allow this. The result is a more expensive product with lower quality because of inconsistencies.
All factory work is drudgery.
Agreed. And much of it is rather mindless. There really isn't a lot of thought that goes into "pull trigger, wave arm, observe coverage, repeat." You want to call it, "drudgery", fine, but that's semantics.
And I close by criticizing your decision that a painter should get $15/hour.
Then you are not realistic in your expectations in the least. Go bother to look what paint shops charge per hour. Keep in mind a paint shop's hourly rate must cover insurance, the painter's time, all overhead, and even materials, etc. The end result in the painter is making something in the neighbourhood of $15.00/hr. AND, make sure you pay attention, these guys are actually skilled! These guys require far more training and skill than what is required to mindlessly paint a part coming down the assembly line, where is it easily rotated to suit one's needs. That rate will vary depending on the part of the country your in (making it as high as say $25/hr), but regardless, it's in the ballpark.
You really need to learn more about what you're talking about. To have missed reality so far off fairly well implies you are clueless as to the real world details. You need to get out into the real world and compare the pay rates between union jobs and non-union jobs for people doing the exact same work. The difference is often in the order of 2x-4x - and more, once you include the benefits. To say many of these people are extremely overpaid is an understatement.
I'm not addressing most of your post because, well, it's obvious why based on the above post. You've almost missed the fact that unions often qualify positions as skilled (often creating artificial barriers for entry to boot) for unskilled jobs so as to artificially increase pay rates. Union classification of a job is completely meaningless.
Aside from the usual mismanagement, unions are also one of the biggest reasons US car companies can not compete with foreign auto makers.
Unions do serve an important function in many industries but they are also destroying many of those same industries. In the end, we all pay much, much higher prices for US goods which prices many of them right out to extinction. Simply put, if unions ONLY did their job to ensuring a safe/healthy work environment with fair wages, then there would be nothing but goodness. Unfortunately, unions work as well as the government, which means they are self destructive and ineffective in the end. It is to the union's own benefit to destroy a company with over paid wages. After all, higher wages means far higher salaries, benefits, and perks for those running the unions.
Do you really believe a worker who wields a paint gun should be paid $50/hr? Sure, a nice respirator and air exchange unit makes sense, but since when should we pay a worker $50/hr, $75/hr for overtime, $100/hr for holiday pay, and $175/hr for holiday with overtime for an inferior job compared to what a robot can do, which costs far, far, less in the long run. And let's not forget the health and retirement benefits many of the workers also earn - which can add up to an extra $50/hr for each worker. Being generous of what some unions actually provide, that works out to be over ***$225/hr*** for what should be a $50-65/hr worker - including all benefits, overtime, and holiday pay. Many doctors and/or lawyers don't make that kind of money and those are highly skilled professions.
Frankly, $15/hr + benefits + respirator, air exchange unit, painter's suit, is more than fair given the type of unskilled labor involved. The price difference adds thousands and thousands of dollars per vehicle - often resulting in a lower quality product to boot.
Now consider someone who moves a paint gun. That person can be fired despite the fact not moving the paint gun caused an entire assembly line to shut down. How about a better example. Someone missteps causing a piece of pipe, which was leaned against a corner, to fall onto the assembly line. Now let's assume it's either a holiday or a weekend where plumbers are all off. The assembly line is now shutdown costing the company hundreds of thousands of dollars per hour. If anyone moves the pipe they can be terminated - so the pipe doesn't get moved. Someone now calls a plumber. The plumber lives an hour away. The plumber already maxed out his hours. The plumber shows up, moves the pipe, and goes home. For that simple feat, the plumber is paid a minimum of four hours. But wait, that's over time. And since it was a holiday, that's holiday pay plus overtime. That plumber is paid $60/hr. He drives home having "earned" $840.00 and cost the company hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Frankly, these days unions do far, more damage than they help. Who wants to pay a premium for an inferior product? That, by in large, is why US auto manufacturers are failing.
You think this is more probable than the facts that not all ships have the latest technology
And I forgot to mention some other facts which continue to make you sound like a complete whack job. There is nothing "latest" required. Both LORAN and CHAYKA has been available for decades. The technology dates back to WWII. Aviation/Naval quality receivers can be had for less than a hundred US dollars - in the US. I imagine they can be had far, far cheaper in poorer nations. Charts costs ten to twenty bucks in the US. We even have something called GPS which also has been available for decades. Once again, aviation/naval quality receivers can be had for several hundred dollars.
To believe some cutting edge, expensive technology is required to prevent such accidents is stupidity at best. Few ocean going cargo ships today will not have at least a LORAN receiver.
Every conjecture starts at some position. A starting position of, "US = bad guy" is not required in the least. Only a starting position of, "US spies on the world" is required. The US has even been caught in recent times spying on the UK. The UK is one of the US' closest allies. There is no country the US will not spy on. Frankly you sound ignorant of the world you live in.
I started at a sound position on equal footing with the publicly provided explanation - historical fact. Refusal to accept such a position is narrow minded and foolish to say the least.
Based on YOUR required belief system, based on known FACTS, the US as evil as evil can get. You need to seriously adjust your compass and actually bother to learn more about the world in which you naively live.
This boy can properly identify objects as small as a pencil; just not easily. He can ride his bike and roller skate, while avoiding children and objects simply by using echo location.
Not to mention, the military can fairly accurately identify threats (SAM, AA-tank, should launched AA, so on and so on - except specific models) simply by radar returns, against significant ground clutter. Expecting a robot to do so in a limited and known environment is trivial by today's DSP requirements.
Reread what I said. No talk of conspiracy. You sound loony. When someone mentions fact and then someone else jumps on to the conspiracy waggon (or denial of conspiracy waggon), you sound down right insane, crazy, wacko - or simply ignorant at best.
Feel free to do some research rather than create posts which make you sound like an ignorant, crazy, hick. No conspiracies required.
And, if you have any reading comprehension at all, you'll note I did not assert one over the other. I only pointed out which one was more improbable.Seriously, think about the series of of HUGE errors which would be required to make things happen as reported. Yes, it could happen, but that's not the point. The point is, implying the unreasonably, far fetched explanation trumps reasonable assumptions based on historically supported fact, it ignorance at best.
Of course, probability, in of it self, does not make it so. And you certainly are free to believe the public explanation - but at least you can do so based on a balanced view. I'm actually undecided. Regardless, speaking of conspiracies only makes you sound ignorant and uninformed. Why do you condemn someone making others aware of historical fact? Doing so only makes you sound ignorant and scared. And frankly, that's more pathetic than speaking of conspiracies; especially when a conspiracy isn't even required. Do you consider all adds of spying and/or intelligence gathering conspiracy? Even way, it doesn't speak well of you once you ponder the conversation.
Are you even aware that my post is based on well documented FACT?!?!? If not, rather than wasting time posting your ignorance, make an effort and educate your self in the same period of time. There has even been documentaries on this stuff. Several have even appeared on PBS and the History Channel. It's hardly secret knowledge.
Most of the alternative explantions were even more far-feteched
I bang my head when I read statements like that. The US already has an established history doing exactly this type stuff against the USSR and other countries. Simply put, calling those "alternative explanations", "far fetched", is nothing but ridiculous. In fact, that statement in of it self is "far fetched."
Now then, this does not mean it has to be anything other than what is publicly known, just the same, given the US' history of doing exactly these types of operations against the USSR and other countries, it is borderline idiocy to outright dismiss such arguments; especially given the odds of such things happening. You do know ships these days have very nice GPS/LORAN systems which tell them exactly where they shouldn't go and/or drop anchor? In other words, the chances of the publicly disclosed story being 100% true are actually pretty slim.
I find it funny so many people are so willing to dismiss a more likely explanation with one which is far, far more unlikely. If you think about it, it is actually pretty funny.
You could also credit Christianity with the paving the way for science with the idea of a lawful universe - particularly given the number of devout Christians who contributed to science: Mendel, Newton, etc.
Christianity does not get a free ride here. Christianity was a pox on humanity during the dark ages. It is safer to say, Christians made scientific advances in spite of being Christians. And it is worth noting, many Christians had no choice but to be Christians else they become outsiders, closed off from many of the day's libraries, academia, and research. Even De Vinci during the "enlightened" Renaissance period had to do much of his studies secretly, else he be persecuted, excommunicated, or worse. I'm sorry, but the church, up until recent times, has been the epic enemy of truth for mankind. Please do not rewrite history.
Who in Europe continued maintainning libraries and preserving knowledge through this period? The church, and monasteries in particular.
It was selectively maintained. Some research was held in secret or without consent of the greater church. Again, Christianity does not get a free ride. Christianity was also responsible for the destruction (directly and indirectly) of much material during these periods of time. In some cases, individual monks or even abbeys broke away from the church proper to maintain such stores of knowledge.
Yes, we are all aware there are exceptions, but by in large, historically, Christianity has been a pox on humanity. It has only been in the last century or so that Christianity has actually attempted to play an active role in science, rather than their "science". And I use quotes because historically, they only support "science" which furthered the cause of the church rather than truths for humanity.
I'm sorry, Christianity does not get a free ride. Maybe in a thousand years humanity can look at Christianity without contempt - the same contempt Christianity has looked at humanity or worse, humanity's truths over the past millennia.
Sorry to hear you're having trouble with your phone. I just got mine and have fallen in love. If you don't mind, I'll add some comments to yours.
the GPS somehow kept telling me I was in Maryland everytime I checked in when I was in San Francisco's Chinatown.
Really not sure what to make of this. It doesn't make sense. Either the GPS knows where you are at or it doesn't. It really is that simple. If the GPS isn't working and it had a data connection, it is possible for it to estimate your location (AGPS and a derived position based on cell tower in use). Regardless, the error may be high, say in the order of 10 miles or so, but it's doubtful it will be a state off, let alone a country's width inaccurate. Either your phone had a broken GPS or there is more to your story; which you may or may not know about.
While I've not played with the GPS much, the little testing I've done with mine shows it's easily accurate to within 60ft or less, even while in my house. Needless to say, I can assure you the GPS does work and work well. I plan to do some more testing this week to determine accuracy and precision.
I took a weeklong trip to CA and besides having to charge the phone 2-3 times a days (battery life sucks)
I do agree battery life sucks. Right now the GPS sucks significant battery life. Turning off your GPS will significantly enhance your walk-about time. Likewise, wifi also sucks a fair bit of power. An application called, "locale" is an absolute must and goes a long way to help you smartly conserve battery. It needs additional improvements, but it already is an excellent application. I'm sure additional features are coming. Regardless, if you find battery life unacceptable, turn off the GPS and wifi when not in use. Furthermore, Google is aware of the battery life issues and are actively working to improve battery life. Things will only get better. Several of the google developers I've chatted with have stressed battery life and reliability are their top priorities. Based on your post, it sounds like it's already paying off.
Lastly, let's not forget even the mighty iphone's battery royally sucks when the GPS is continuously left on. So if battery life is complaint enough to keep you away from a g1, then the iphone 3g is also eliminated from your purchasing options.
The phone also had a tendency to "drunk dial" people for me.
I don't know what firmware you had, but my phone automatically locks so drunk dialing is pretty much impossible. If this was an irritation to you, it has been resolved.
The keyboard is kinda clunky
This is seemingly personal opinion. Nothing wrong with that. I personally find the keyboard much more usable than the Blackberry Curve I've used. And the keyboard is far more usable than what the iphone provides. If this is a turn off, from a usability perspective, the iphone should be off your list altogether.
I wish it used the accelerometer to automatically switch to landscape without opening the keytray.
I couldn't agree more! I find this irritating too. Very likely this feature is coming in future releases. Do not take this as gospel but rumblings have been heard.
I also wish it had a virtual keypad for one-handed text entry (since with the tray open, you *NEED* two hands to hold and type).
I've read several others requesting this same feature. It can certainly be provided but I can't help but wonder what it is you need here? The only examples I can imagine this being a requirement fall well into the "moron alert" arena of users. Can you please tell me when you need to type with one hand?
As a side note, I tried one handed typing on an app that provides an on screen keyboard. It is clunky as hell. I can't imagine anyone wanting to seriously do that. Worse yet, it made me wonder what the hell anyone is doing where such awkward use is required. Once again, the only things which come to mind fall well into the "moron alert" zone. Can you please tell me when you need to typ
When I need to do a "NAT punch-thru", a simple port forwarding rule suffices.
The simple fact you believe this is a solution means you really don't understand at all. For many real applications, this is not possible without a complete redesign of their protocol which requires the application to embed logic which belongs at the stack level. And guess what, this has been needlessly forced on many applications. In other words, it breaks applications. NAT is a hack. Anyone who believes NAT is a long term solution immediately revels themselves to not understand the issue at all.
just that "the reports of IPv4's demise are greatly exaggerated".
Only in the minds of those that don't understand the issue in the first place. Your statement is of course true, only so long as you believe the internet should only work for clients and running servers and/or peer to peer applications is a privilege to which few are entitled. Your argument holds water only so long as you believe we should limit common security models (well, common before NAT broke things - via random port allocation) which is actually built into the IP stack.
Which brings us full circle. Either you can hide your head in the sand, encourage DOS attacks, diminish network security, encourage spam, break applications, force additional work on application coders (which belongs in the IP stack), and run out of IP addresses, or we can simply begin migration to IPv6 and make the networking world a better place.
In short, the fact that you don't understand where we are really at should underscore the reports of IPv4's state is woefully under represented and certainly not exaggerated.
Last time I checked Obama has voted for a massive bailout of the banking system and now will "probably" vote to bailout the auto industry
Wish people would call it what it is. It has a name. It's called a "loan." The auto industry is asking for large, low interest loans to allow them time to restructure. The banking system, on the other hand, is nothing but a hand out to the people who should be in jail. Yet, since these people are the uber wealthy of the US, these criminals will receive the largest transfer of wealth the planet has ever seen.
In addition, toss a rail line down the center of the interstates. Get a light rail connecting most large cities. Maybe even a 'ferry' service. Need to go to CA? Load your car up on a rail. Go sit in the comfortable seats and in a day. You're in CA.
Unlikely to ever work until politicians actually give a crap about you and me. Simple fact is, efforts like this have been proposed many times yet are almost always defeated because of airline lobbyists. Airlines don't want cheap, fast transport for the travelling public because that means they would be forced to compete. That means they could no longer afford to pay their unqualified executives 100x their fair salary and benefits. That in turn means less money in politician's pockets. The only people this helps is you and me. Do you really think this will happen? No likely in our lifetime.
True, but it creates the perception of loss; sometimes perception is more important than reality.
What are you talking about? Are you mentally deficient? How does a lifetime of free data entitle you to new hardware (or even new software features)? Only an idiot would think like that.
That's like reasoning, "I bought a lifetime subscription of OnStar and Chevy just came out with a new vet with more HP. Those fuckers didn't give me a new vet! I have a life time subscription to OnStar! Those cheap fuckers!" Are you fucking stupid?!?! Holy shit! When does the whining of self entitlement stop with you fuckers?!?! Idiot!
Prohibition was federal law. Now, states are free to make their own laws since it's not a federal mandate. Just the same, states who do not fall in line miss out on billions of "war on drugs" federal funds and are would likely to become the poster boy of those who are soft on crime.
As a politician which would you do? Bring millions/billions to your state, growing your economy with yet more federal prison funds and jobs, or become the five o'clock story as the only politician which is in bed with criminals, allowing millions/billions to flow to other states?
You may disagree but it doesn't change the truthfulness of the statement. If you want to reduce crime **80%** in the US, simply stop the war on drugs and legalize them. If you want to save the US tax payer **$600/second**, stop the war on drugs. If you want to save the US tax payers billions per year and growing, stop the war on drug. Incarceration of drug related convictions is the fastest growing and the largest government service industry in the US. Currently, one out of thirty adults in the US are on parole or in prison for drug related crimes.
We spend more imprisoning people of petty crimes than we spend feeding and housing our poor or elderly. I don't know for a fact but I fully expect we spend more to imprison people for petty crimes than we do as a nation to take care of our injured vets.
As a tax payer, if you don't support decriminalization of drugs, you are simply out of touch with the sad, disgusting facts. Made worse, as a nation we are missing out of a HUGE potential tax base which can actually earn money in the billions per year. Any tax payer who supports the war on drugs is simply irresponsible and paying money to murder people and destroy lives on a scale unimagined in a world before the war on drugs began. Simply put, the war on drugs destroys far more lives than a world where these drugs were legal.
Which is it you want? Do you want a world where we all pay to destroy innocent, and otherwise, lives and murder people or do want a world where drugs become a family/medical problem - as it should be?
Simply put, the war on drugs is one of the largest farces ever put on the US public. Well, up until the recent bailout of the uber wealthy. In short, the war on drugs is putting TONS of money in pockets on both sides of the fence as the expensive of the US tax payer. If you're not mad, well, you're crazy.
Slashdot Mirror
Branson is just the Bill Gates of a different industry.
You mean Branson is also technologically incompetent, earning his money only because he was in the right place at the right time, deserving none of his fame/fortune, while one of the world's largest and most powerful companies in the world made a huge mistake; allowing him to show the world he is one of the scummiest, cut-throat, marketing geniuses ever seen?
Wow...what are the chances of two of those flukes would happening in my life time.
Seriously - what goals do airport security checkpoins have?
It gets even worse. The TSA is actively working to ensure pilots are now screened before they can enter the tarmac/airplane or leave the tarmac/airplane to enter the a terminal area. It seems the TSA has decided the pilots who fly the planes are a higher threat on the ground where they can do less damage than a pilot in the air flying a jet full of fuel and passengers. Remember, in smaller airports, people (including pilots) still walk on the tarmac to board/deboard the plane.
This of course all ignores the fact TSA agents have been caught damaging critical pitot sensors on many commercial planes. Some of those planes continued to fly dozens of hours before the damage was detected. If in doubt how critical these sensors can be to the safety of a flight, here is a video of what happens when one becomes overly contaminated with moisture or is simply not calibrated properly - no physical damage required.
I didn't say there was nothing to back the opinion up with, I said that it wasn't provided.
So if people don't explain why cars move every time they talk about cars, they are irrational.
I think the humour went, "whooosh". Especially once you understand the use of "$" actually has its origin as a joke, rather than an insult.
If I rephrase what you're saying, people look foolish when they complain without saying why they are complaining even when it's obvious because anyone who doesn't live under a rock has the same shared life experience which in turn means no explanation is required yet it is still required else they look silly.
Like it or not, this is an informal forum. People vent. If this not enough of an explanation for you to understand, I'm at a loss, you "Doodoo Head".
And dang it, I'll have you know I fully planned to say that before you replied. Thanks for deflating my the humour value. :P ;)
There's a high signal to noise ratio on slashdot? I would have known earlier if only I could find a post with such valuable information.
Expressing a negative opinion with no reasoning to back it up is not logical.
The fact you believe people have an opinion about Microsoft "with no reasoning to back it up" immediately causes heads to explode. Either that, or it is a very subtle joke.
Either you posted from a tree via carrier pigeon or you're ignorant as hell and have missed the last several decades. Either way, your statement and resulting position is ultimately undermined, as it is funny as hell.
I'll try to reciprocate as clearly.
Okay. Thank. I think I understand where you're coming form now.
Is it inappropriate to ask if your wife is UAW or auto-related?
She's not union and works in the telco industry. The thing is, another group of her peers, working for the same company, work in a different state. They are part of a union. The wage differential was maddening and once again I'll stress, my wife is very fairly compensated. The union guys on the other hand, are insanely overpaid to the same job. Since the non-union workers are cheaper, guess who gets to work weekends and holidays?
At any rate, the company can no longer afford to be competitive because their labor rates are too high on what is now thin margins. Union contracts prevent outsourcing of the union people directly. As a result, the fairly paid, non-union jobs are also being outsourced so as to satisfy union contracts. This in turn allows them to get ride of the way over priced union workers. My wife is a causality. This is often the case when it comes to union vs non-union workers.
The friend of mine that does work for UAW - aerospace, will tell you he's paid at least 300% more than the non-union wokers for his line of work - but he's going to ride it as long as he can. I can't say that I blame him. And keep in mind, that number doesn't include his world class benefits either.
My point was that $15/hour was that the parent had established this as the fair and correct wage
For some reason I'm not following what you're saying there. Please try again.
Where my sister worked, $25/hour painters were getting replaced by $15/hour newcomers.
According to the market, that job is worth $15/hr for new comers. This is the way a free market works. What else can I say. You basically consider the free market to be unfair. It is. Your opinion of fairness is not justification for higher wages.
Have you worked in an auto factory?
I have not. I have friends who have. I also have a friend who is in the UAW - albeit in the aerospace division. My wife also does a job where some of the coverage is provided by union workers in other states. My wife is fairly compensated for her work. She even agrees. The union counter parts are vulgarly compensated. They are are large part of why the company is now actively working to push those jobs overseas - to India and China.
Had it not been for the greedy union, it is possible those jobs would stay within US borders. As is, they managed to price themselves right out of the market. And thanks to union politics, my wife also feels the sting of losing her job too.
Unions need to do their job and stop fucking up the economy with greed. Fair pay for fair labor is just that - fair.
I'd like to know to know where you got the idea that parts are painted mindlessly.
Having watched it done before. It is mindless. The job is easily replaced by robots but the unions refuse to allow this. The result is a more expensive product with lower quality because of inconsistencies.
All factory work is drudgery.
Agreed. And much of it is rather mindless. There really isn't a lot of thought that goes into "pull trigger, wave arm, observe coverage, repeat." You want to call it, "drudgery", fine, but that's semantics.
And I close by criticizing your decision that a painter should get $15/hour.
Then you are not realistic in your expectations in the least. Go bother to look what paint shops charge per hour. Keep in mind a paint shop's hourly rate must cover insurance, the painter's time, all overhead, and even materials, etc. The end result in the painter is making something in the neighbourhood of $15.00/hr. AND, make sure you pay attention, these guys are actually skilled! These guys require far more training and skill than what is required to mindlessly paint a part coming down the assembly line, where is it easily rotated to suit one's needs. That rate will vary depending on the part of the country your in (making it as high as say $25/hr), but regardless, it's in the ballpark.
You really need to learn more about what you're talking about. To have missed reality so far off fairly well implies you are clueless as to the real world details. You need to get out into the real world and compare the pay rates between union jobs and non-union jobs for people doing the exact same work. The difference is often in the order of 2x-4x - and more, once you include the benefits. To say many of these people are extremely overpaid is an understatement.
I'm not addressing most of your post because, well, it's obvious why based on the above post. You've almost missed the fact that unions often qualify positions as skilled (often creating artificial barriers for entry to boot) for unskilled jobs so as to artificially increase pay rates. Union classification of a job is completely meaningless.
Unions are great!
Aside from the usual mismanagement, unions are also one of the biggest reasons US car companies can not compete with foreign auto makers.
Unions do serve an important function in many industries but they are also destroying many of those same industries. In the end, we all pay much, much higher prices for US goods which prices many of them right out to extinction. Simply put, if unions ONLY did their job to ensuring a safe/healthy work environment with fair wages, then there would be nothing but goodness. Unfortunately, unions work as well as the government, which means they are self destructive and ineffective in the end. It is to the union's own benefit to destroy a company with over paid wages. After all, higher wages means far higher salaries, benefits, and perks for those running the unions.
Do you really believe a worker who wields a paint gun should be paid $50/hr? Sure, a nice respirator and air exchange unit makes sense, but since when should we pay a worker $50/hr, $75/hr for overtime, $100/hr for holiday pay, and $175/hr for holiday with overtime for an inferior job compared to what a robot can do, which costs far, far, less in the long run. And let's not forget the health and retirement benefits many of the workers also earn - which can add up to an extra $50/hr for each worker. Being generous of what some unions actually provide, that works out to be over ***$225/hr*** for what should be a $50-65/hr worker - including all benefits, overtime, and holiday pay. Many doctors and/or lawyers don't make that kind of money and those are highly skilled professions.
Frankly, $15/hr + benefits + respirator, air exchange unit, painter's suit, is more than fair given the type of unskilled labor involved. The price difference adds thousands and thousands of dollars per vehicle - often resulting in a lower quality product to boot.
Now consider someone who moves a paint gun. That person can be fired despite the fact not moving the paint gun caused an entire assembly line to shut down. How about a better example. Someone missteps causing a piece of pipe, which was leaned against a corner, to fall onto the assembly line. Now let's assume it's either a holiday or a weekend where plumbers are all off. The assembly line is now shutdown costing the company hundreds of thousands of dollars per hour. If anyone moves the pipe they can be terminated - so the pipe doesn't get moved. Someone now calls a plumber. The plumber lives an hour away. The plumber already maxed out his hours. The plumber shows up, moves the pipe, and goes home. For that simple feat, the plumber is paid a minimum of four hours. But wait, that's over time. And since it was a holiday, that's holiday pay plus overtime. That plumber is paid $60/hr. He drives home having "earned" $840.00 and cost the company hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Frankly, these days unions do far, more damage than they help. Who wants to pay a premium for an inferior product? That, by in large, is why US auto manufacturers are failing.
You think this is more probable than the facts that not all ships have the latest technology
And I forgot to mention some other facts which continue to make you sound like a complete whack job. There is nothing "latest" required. Both LORAN and CHAYKA has been available for decades. The technology dates back to WWII. Aviation/Naval quality receivers can be had for less than a hundred US dollars - in the US. I imagine they can be had far, far cheaper in poorer nations. Charts costs ten to twenty bucks in the US. We even have something called GPS which also has been available for decades. Once again, aviation/naval quality receivers can be had for several hundred dollars.
To believe some cutting edge, expensive technology is required to prevent such accidents is stupidity at best. Few ocean going cargo ships today will not have at least a LORAN receiver.
Every conjecture starts at some position. A starting position of, "US = bad guy" is not required in the least. Only a starting position of, "US spies on the world" is required. The US has even been caught in recent times spying on the UK. The UK is one of the US' closest allies. There is no country the US will not spy on. Frankly you sound ignorant of the world you live in.
I started at a sound position on equal footing with the publicly provided explanation - historical fact. Refusal to accept such a position is narrow minded and foolish to say the least.
Based on YOUR required belief system, based on known FACTS, the US as evil as evil can get. You need to seriously adjust your compass and actually bother to learn more about the world in which you naively live.
And children.
This boy can properly identify objects as small as a pencil; just not easily. He can ride his bike and roller skate, while avoiding children and objects simply by using echo location.
Not to mention, the military can fairly accurately identify threats (SAM, AA-tank, should launched AA, so on and so on - except specific models) simply by radar returns, against significant ground clutter. Expecting a robot to do so in a limited and known environment is trivial by today's DSP requirements.
Reread what I said. No talk of conspiracy. You sound loony. When someone mentions fact and then someone else jumps on to the conspiracy waggon (or denial of conspiracy waggon), you sound down right insane, crazy, wacko - or simply ignorant at best.
Feel free to do some research rather than create posts which make you sound like an ignorant, crazy, hick. No conspiracies required.
And, if you have any reading comprehension at all, you'll note I did not assert one over the other. I only pointed out which one was more improbable.Seriously, think about the series of of HUGE errors which would be required to make things happen as reported. Yes, it could happen, but that's not the point. The point is, implying the unreasonably, far fetched explanation trumps reasonable assumptions based on historically supported fact, it ignorance at best.
Of course, probability, in of it self, does not make it so. And you certainly are free to believe the public explanation - but at least you can do so based on a balanced view. I'm actually undecided. Regardless, speaking of conspiracies only makes you sound ignorant and uninformed. Why do you condemn someone making others aware of historical fact? Doing so only makes you sound ignorant and scared. And frankly, that's more pathetic than speaking of conspiracies; especially when a conspiracy isn't even required. Do you consider all adds of spying and/or intelligence gathering conspiracy? Even way, it doesn't speak well of you once you ponder the conversation.
Are you even aware that my post is based on well documented FACT?!?!? If not, rather than wasting time posting your ignorance, make an effort and educate your self in the same period of time. There has even been documentaries on this stuff. Several have even appeared on PBS and the History Channel. It's hardly secret knowledge.
Most of the alternative explantions were even more far-feteched
I bang my head when I read statements like that. The US already has an established history doing exactly this type stuff against the USSR and other countries. Simply put, calling those "alternative explanations", "far fetched", is nothing but ridiculous. In fact, that statement in of it self is "far fetched."
Now then, this does not mean it has to be anything other than what is publicly known, just the same, given the US' history of doing exactly these types of operations against the USSR and other countries, it is borderline idiocy to outright dismiss such arguments; especially given the odds of such things happening. You do know ships these days have very nice GPS/LORAN systems which tell them exactly where they shouldn't go and/or drop anchor? In other words, the chances of the publicly disclosed story being 100% true are actually pretty slim.
I find it funny so many people are so willing to dismiss a more likely explanation with one which is far, far more unlikely. If you think about it, it is actually pretty funny.
You could also credit Christianity with the paving the way for science with the idea of a lawful universe - particularly given the number of devout Christians who contributed to science: Mendel, Newton, etc.
Christianity does not get a free ride here. Christianity was a pox on humanity during the dark ages. It is safer to say, Christians made scientific advances in spite of being Christians. And it is worth noting, many Christians had no choice but to be Christians else they become outsiders, closed off from many of the day's libraries, academia, and research. Even De Vinci during the "enlightened" Renaissance period had to do much of his studies secretly, else he be persecuted, excommunicated, or worse. I'm sorry, but the church, up until recent times, has been the epic enemy of truth for mankind. Please do not rewrite history.
Who in Europe continued maintainning libraries and preserving knowledge through this period? The church, and monasteries in particular.
It was selectively maintained. Some research was held in secret or without consent of the greater church. Again, Christianity does not get a free ride. Christianity was also responsible for the destruction (directly and indirectly) of much material during these periods of time. In some cases, individual monks or even abbeys broke away from the church proper to maintain such stores of knowledge.
Yes, we are all aware there are exceptions, but by in large, historically, Christianity has been a pox on humanity. It has only been in the last century or so that Christianity has actually attempted to play an active role in science, rather than their "science". And I use quotes because historically, they only support "science" which furthered the cause of the church rather than truths for humanity.
I'm sorry, Christianity does not get a free ride. Maybe in a thousand years humanity can look at Christianity without contempt - the same contempt Christianity has looked at humanity or worse, humanity's truths over the past millennia.
Oh yeah, and it depends on form: You eat Sodium your mouth catches fire, you eat sodium chloride and you get hypertension.
And hypertension never tasted so good! ;)
Sorry to hear you're having trouble with your phone. I just got mine and have fallen in love. If you don't mind, I'll add some comments to yours.
the GPS somehow kept telling me I was in Maryland everytime I checked in when I was in San Francisco's Chinatown.
Really not sure what to make of this. It doesn't make sense. Either the GPS knows where you are at or it doesn't. It really is that simple. If the GPS isn't working and it had a data connection, it is possible for it to estimate your location (AGPS and a derived position based on cell tower in use). Regardless, the error may be high, say in the order of 10 miles or so, but it's doubtful it will be a state off, let alone a country's width inaccurate. Either your phone had a broken GPS or there is more to your story; which you may or may not know about.
While I've not played with the GPS much, the little testing I've done with mine shows it's easily accurate to within 60ft or less, even while in my house. Needless to say, I can assure you the GPS does work and work well. I plan to do some more testing this week to determine accuracy and precision.
I took a weeklong trip to CA and besides having to charge the phone 2-3 times a days (battery life sucks)
I do agree battery life sucks. Right now the GPS sucks significant battery life. Turning off your GPS will significantly enhance your walk-about time. Likewise, wifi also sucks a fair bit of power. An application called, "locale" is an absolute must and goes a long way to help you smartly conserve battery. It needs additional improvements, but it already is an excellent application. I'm sure additional features are coming. Regardless, if you find battery life unacceptable, turn off the GPS and wifi when not in use. Furthermore, Google is aware of the battery life issues and are actively working to improve battery life. Things will only get better. Several of the google developers I've chatted with have stressed battery life and reliability are their top priorities. Based on your post, it sounds like it's already paying off.
Lastly, let's not forget even the mighty iphone's battery royally sucks when the GPS is continuously left on. So if battery life is complaint enough to keep you away from a g1, then the iphone 3g is also eliminated from your purchasing options.
The phone also had a tendency to "drunk dial" people for me.
I don't know what firmware you had, but my phone automatically locks so drunk dialing is pretty much impossible. If this was an irritation to you, it has been resolved.
The keyboard is kinda clunky
This is seemingly personal opinion. Nothing wrong with that. I personally find the keyboard much more usable than the Blackberry Curve I've used. And the keyboard is far more usable than what the iphone provides. If this is a turn off, from a usability perspective, the iphone should be off your list altogether.
I wish it used the accelerometer to automatically switch to landscape without opening the keytray.
I couldn't agree more! I find this irritating too. Very likely this feature is coming in future releases. Do not take this as gospel but rumblings have been heard.
I also wish it had a virtual keypad for one-handed text entry (since with the tray open, you *NEED* two hands to hold and type).
I've read several others requesting this same feature. It can certainly be provided but I can't help but wonder what it is you need here? The only examples I can imagine this being a requirement fall well into the "moron alert" arena of users. Can you please tell me when you need to type with one hand?
As a side note, I tried one handed typing on an app that provides an on screen keyboard. It is clunky as hell. I can't imagine anyone wanting to seriously do that. Worse yet, it made me wonder what the hell anyone is doing where such awkward use is required. Once again, the only things which come to mind fall well into the "moron alert" zone. Can you please tell me when you need to typ
She was already informed that she had violated policy
Then she violated policy, not spammed professors. Those are two completely different issues.
When I need to do a "NAT punch-thru", a simple port forwarding rule suffices.
The simple fact you believe this is a solution means you really don't understand at all. For many real applications, this is not possible without a complete redesign of their protocol which requires the application to embed logic which belongs at the stack level. And guess what, this has been needlessly forced on many applications. In other words, it breaks applications. NAT is a hack. Anyone who believes NAT is a long term solution immediately revels themselves to not understand the issue at all.
just that "the reports of IPv4's demise are greatly exaggerated".
Only in the minds of those that don't understand the issue in the first place. Your statement is of course true, only so long as you believe the internet should only work for clients and running servers and/or peer to peer applications is a privilege to which few are entitled. Your argument holds water only so long as you believe we should limit common security models (well, common before NAT broke things - via random port allocation) which is actually built into the IP stack.
Which brings us full circle. Either you can hide your head in the sand, encourage DOS attacks, diminish network security, encourage spam, break applications, force additional work on application coders (which belongs in the IP stack), and run out of IP addresses, or we can simply begin migration to IPv6 and make the networking world a better place.
In short, the fact that you don't understand where we are really at should underscore the reports of IPv4's state is woefully under represented and certainly not exaggerated.
Last time I checked Obama has voted for a massive bailout of the banking system and now will "probably" vote to bailout the auto industry
Wish people would call it what it is. It has a name. It's called a "loan." The auto industry is asking for large, low interest loans to allow them time to restructure. The banking system, on the other hand, is nothing but a hand out to the people who should be in jail. Yet, since these people are the uber wealthy of the US, these criminals will receive the largest transfer of wealth the planet has ever seen.
In addition, toss a rail line down the center of the interstates. Get a light rail connecting most large cities. Maybe even a 'ferry' service. Need to go to CA? Load your car up on a rail. Go sit in the comfortable seats and in a day. You're in CA.
Unlikely to ever work until politicians actually give a crap about you and me. Simple fact is, efforts like this have been proposed many times yet are almost always defeated because of airline lobbyists. Airlines don't want cheap, fast transport for the travelling public because that means they would be forced to compete. That means they could no longer afford to pay their unqualified executives 100x their fair salary and benefits. That in turn means less money in politician's pockets. The only people this helps is you and me. Do you really think this will happen? No likely in our lifetime.
True, but it creates the perception of loss; sometimes perception is more important than reality.
What are you talking about? Are you mentally deficient? How does a lifetime of free data entitle you to new hardware (or even new software features)? Only an idiot would think like that.
That's like reasoning, "I bought a lifetime subscription of OnStar and Chevy just came out with a new vet with more HP. Those fuckers didn't give me a new vet! I have a life time subscription to OnStar! Those cheap fuckers!" Are you fucking stupid?!?! Holy shit! When does the whining of self entitlement stop with you fuckers?!?! Idiot!
Prohibition was federal law. Now, states are free to make their own laws since it's not a federal mandate. Just the same, states who do not fall in line miss out on billions of "war on drugs" federal funds and are would likely to become the poster boy of those who are soft on crime.
As a politician which would you do? Bring millions/billions to your state, growing your economy with yet more federal prison funds and jobs, or become the five o'clock story as the only politician which is in bed with criminals, allowing millions/billions to flow to other states?
You may disagree but it doesn't change the truthfulness of the statement. If you want to reduce crime **80%** in the US, simply stop the war on drugs and legalize them. If you want to save the US tax payer **$600/second**, stop the war on drugs. If you want to save the US tax payers billions per year and growing, stop the war on drug. Incarceration of drug related convictions is the fastest growing and the largest government service industry in the US. Currently, one out of thirty adults in the US are on parole or in prison for drug related crimes.
We spend more imprisoning people of petty crimes than we spend feeding and housing our poor or elderly. I don't know for a fact but I fully expect we spend more to imprison people for petty crimes than we do as a nation to take care of our injured vets.
As a tax payer, if you don't support decriminalization of drugs, you are simply out of touch with the sad, disgusting facts. Made worse, as a nation we are missing out of a HUGE potential tax base which can actually earn money in the billions per year. Any tax payer who supports the war on drugs is simply irresponsible and paying money to murder people and destroy lives on a scale unimagined in a world before the war on drugs began. Simply put, the war on drugs destroys far more lives than a world where these drugs were legal.
Which is it you want? Do you want a world where we all pay to destroy innocent, and otherwise, lives and murder people or do want a world where drugs become a family/medical problem - as it should be?
Simply put, the war on drugs is one of the largest farces ever put on the US public. Well, up until the recent bailout of the uber wealthy. In short, the war on drugs is putting TONS of money in pockets on both sides of the fence as the expensive of the US tax payer. If you're not mad, well, you're crazy.
You make this shit up as you go don't you. Clients can provide data to server.