Tax burdens have been moved down to lower incomes in the UK, and I believe this is also the case in the US. I think it may be the opposite in the US, more financial aid and such stuff for lower income people (ie: you can be poor, go to a top grade university and not spend 10 years paying it off).
Of course, now all you old fucks have no more need of public education and have fat wage packets to pay for private healthcare, you want such things scrapped so you don't have to pay for them. Interesting, in the US the push is for government sponsored health care and in K-12 for private (but government sponsored) schools. Granted the education system has always been a bloody mess here so it's not exactly a bad idea.
From what I heard older workers in the US simply get fired and then can't find a job because they'd need to be paid too much (cheaper to get a fresh college grad or two). As for getting paid more, welcome to how bloody reality works. The market changes and salaries change, adapt or die. If you don't like it then find a different profession or a niche that does pay well, that's how capitalism works.
even if it could, you'd still see what the pilots saw, which obviously didn't help them Why even bother having a black box at all, obviously none of the information it records helped the pilots in any way it can't be of much user to anyone else either?
Yeah, months of analysis by hundreds of people won't find anything more than do a couple of people with 10 seconds to think...
Consoles have lockout chips. Lockout chips mean less selection because the console makers, which act as gatekeepers, don't necessarily want to deal with smaller developers. Which is sort of irrelevant as most people couldn't care less about such things.
I disagree. If PCs weren't designed for that type of gameplay, then why would Microsoft put joystick support, including specific drivers for Xbox 360 gamepads, into Windows? Sure you can make a PC do almost anything however then you both need to require users to have said input option and you can't have the game really take advantage of any other input options.
So you can make a PC fps that uses a gamepad and allows multiple people to play at once. Almost no one will ever bother with the gamepad and most people won't even have gamepads. If friends come over then even if they play the game they won't be able to since they'd have been using keywords/mice.
The expected input option for most games is a keyword and mouse although some people prefer other options and some games do better with other options.
Is not always necessary. Does a game like Smash Bros. or Bomberman need to split the screen? Sure and then you need to design the game in such a way... which 99.99% of people won't ever bother to use.
If someone has half a brain they'll pick any position except help desk. You want someone who can think to pick a mind numbingly boring position (as you stated yourself) that makes most people horrendously unhappy to boot. Something tells me that the salary and other such things (like say promotion options) you offer for the position make people weep as well. Most likely the job description and candidate requirements are also far from what they should be.
Why bother? Once you get to that level of trouble it's easier, cheaper and better to just buy a console. For example I doubt many people keep their main computer near their TV so they'd either have to buy a new one or deal with 40 feet of extension cable (with the expected degradation in everything).
PCs simply aren't designed for that type of gameplay (ie: they have a mouse + keyboard) and most PC gamers probably don't play and never will play their games that way. Split-screen also likely involves more effort for developers and sacrifices in the gameplay to accommodate multiple players.
In fact, even straight citations of [[WP:N]] are considered poor !votes on [[WP:AfD [wikipedia.org]]]. Except that those happen quite often from what I see in less than mainstream topics, hell the whole bloody webcomics section seems (or seemed) to be an endless back and forth of AfDs based on notability (or lack there of) with un-deletions at times to fix the mess that can result. It's actually amusing when the pro-deletion votes are based on false information (or false interpretation of information) and still win out. Of course then the webcomics people came up with their own very-much-inconsistent-with-the-main-one notability criteria which of course resulted in amusing conflicts when they tried to argue using it.
Granted most of the webcomics section should be nuked under any sane notability criteria but then again so should a lot of other sections. Then again if the section is to be nuked then bloody nuke it and make that clearly the policy already and save everyone the trouble of having to deal with the AfDs.
In any event, the Inclusionist/Deletionist divide is really ancient history. Almost no one is purely one or the other these days, except the occasional troll who gets off on nominating dozens of articles on AfD. Well I wish the guidelines were at least consistent, consistently applied and sane. Wikipedia seems under the hood like a giant bureaucratic mess that no sane person would want to even touch without a 30 foot pole.
Ha ha ha ha. They only use facts if it supports what they want to think is true, that is human nature. Even science with all it's safety measures and massive number of scientists in any given field is far far from immune. Even then it only works because the group of experts cannot be restricted.
I once read that the richest people aren't the most intelligent, intelligent people simply don't find the risks needed to become so rich worth it. On average they'd come out worse off and they're intelligent enough that their normal average is still very well off.
I find it absurd that anyone really intelligent would depend on essentially a lottery for anything. It's absurd because 99% of the time you will simply be wasting your time and could make a lot more money by doing something else.
Logically the prizes would be pointless like they are now, a company is formed and it's engineers are paid by sponsors/rich people. It's essentially like venture capitalists, they take on the risk and get a decent large chunk of the payoff.
After all there is a penchant for the British police to get a cheek swab from every single person for absolutely any reason. Of course they do and they don't have to ever get rid of what they collect. If you're even suspected of a crime your DNA will be on file permanently even if you're found innocent or never even charged. The UK police have if I remember more DNA on file in raw numbers, not per capita, than the US despite having a fifth of the population.
Here is a funny quirk that pissed me off though...on the flight back to the US from HK, I couldn't take a bottle of water with me on the plane that I purchased after the security checkpoints...they confiscated larger bottles of liqid from everyone as we boarded (excluding medicines and baby formula). What's up with that? It's I guess theoretically possible for someone to smuggle in an explosive inside a regular bottle shipment or some other means then for an accomplice (who was actually flying) to pick up that bottle (or transfer the explosive to it).
Most such small locks can be popped off with a screwdriver, happened in my high school to idiots who used them for their lockers. Locks are probably more useful in preventing your luggage's contents from littering the runway after it gets snagged on something.
On a serious note, let me ask, to what end is this pursuit? Of what practical use is it? Oh, sure, you can do what ever you want in life, but the whole excel thing sounds like something to do when you are bored.
I'm in my 40s now, and time is so precious and I just see something like this as a sad waste. Here's a guy who is obviously intelligent but he devoted an amount of his finite time on planet earth doing something basically useless to himself and others. Were his energies properly "self-directed" think what he could have done for himself!! Think about the lost potential in the form of dedication, intelligence, and time!!! ...says the guy wasting his time posting on slashdot.
You don't know anything about the history of the Russian space program, do you? Oh, and this, which killed 48 people. It's hard to find stuff on it though, because it was at the height of the cold war, and the USSR kept it secret. I know the history and that was my point, if the soviets were flying the shuttle there'd be no left.
Making just a big giant Soyuz won't necessarily be safer by default. Of course it won't but why would you even do that, the shuttle is a abysmal attempt at a jack of all trades and that's my point.
Certainly we learned from the shuttle and it's far from perfect, but don't assume the Soyuz is a better design, because it's not designed for nearly the same purpose. No they are used for essentially the same main goal, to get humans into space. The original shuttle design was a lot smaller and it's only goal was to get people into space. The shuttle can do some other things as well and it's as a result worse at getting people into space and everything else as well. A Saturn V can get more mass into space than a shuttle. So a shuttle isn't even that great of a way of getting mass into space. A russian rocket can get satellites into space for a 5th the cost of the shuttle so the shuttle isn't inexpensive.
And guess what, the next vehicle NASA is building will be a lot closer to the Soyuz than it is to the shuttle.
Four major computer failures in the span of a few years - yeah, these are guys who pay attention to safety. That's my point, if the soviets were flying the shuttle there'd be no left. I mean the Soyuz once reentered the atmosphere upside down still attached to it's orbital module... and no one was killed in the end.
BS. Using misleading statistics to prove a point does not prove a point. The Soyuz has a lower fatality rate than the Shuttle and that's going back to the 60s. It has a flawless fatality record for longer than the shuttle has even existed. Unlike the shuttle failures for it (well launch.re-entry ones) are far from fatal and even then it has a lower failure rate if you don't count the pre-shuttle era I think.
Now consider that the Soyuz is likely flown/managed by people whose attention to safety would give NASA managers heart attacks and just how much of a fuck up the shuttle is become evident.
It's quite possible to be paid for being versatile but that requires you to actually have some concrete advantage of being that way. Likewise you actually need to be good (not just decent or passable) in at least some areas and have those areas be related (ie: see first sentence). Even in that case you should go into management in most likelihood because then you can do more good by "simply" telling other specialists what to do than by actually half-assing things yourself.
That said there are whole fields that are in essence the combination of existing ones such as molecular biology (biology, chemistry, physics, math), bio-mechanics (biology, medicine, mechanical engineering,electrical engineering), computational biology (biology, cs, math), bio-statistics (biology, statistics, math) and so on (I can go on for pages and pages just from the degrees and specializations offered at my school).
There are a fair number of scientists who know multiple subjects, most of them simply don't become well known. They may make some great new application of physics to biology but they probably won't make breathtaking discoveries in either. Likewise since it's easier to just study one subject and people generally seem to only be interested in one area you also get fewer people who can and do work across multiple fields.
Actually any good scientists nowadays probably knows more from across different fields than those "generalists" from centuries back. A molecular biologist may have to, for example, know advanced chemistry and advanced physics. So really it's hard to say someone is a specialist if we've simply redefine his "field" to cover what used to be 5 separate ones.
Genius is worthless alone if the field requires 100 textbooks worth of knowledge to even known the basics of. You have to understand those 100 textbooks or you can't make something that requires what those textbooks say as a basis. Otherwise you'll just spend all your time recreating what those textbooks say and never create anything new.
Let me repeat it once again for the idiots in the audience: google is not the only entity in the universe that has cameras and the ability to post images on the web. Actually nearly every person can do so now due to the glory of cameras in cell phones. If you think that before people weren't taking such images (and much worse images) and posting them online then you're a blind fool.
1. If google can see into your window from street level then so can anyone else. Amazingly google is not the only entity in the universe with cameras and I'm sure a lot of people make it a "hobby" to take picture through open windows. Hell the "looking into neighbors windows with telescope" thing has been around for how many decades now as a TV plot point. 2. If you sunbathe in public then see point 1 as well.
Slashdot Mirror
From what I heard older workers in the US simply get fired and then can't find a job because they'd need to be paid too much (cheaper to get a fresh college grad or two). As for getting paid more, welcome to how bloody reality works. The market changes and salaries change, adapt or die. If you don't like it then find a different profession or a niche that does pay well, that's how capitalism works.
Yeah, months of analysis by hundreds of people won't find anything more than do a couple of people with 10 seconds to think...
Remove both checks and have them both return "not modified." What part of modifying zonealarm to remove checks are you too incompetent to comprehend?
So you can make a PC fps that uses a gamepad and allows multiple people to play at once. Almost no one will ever bother with the gamepad and most people won't even have gamepads. If friends come over then even if they play the game they won't be able to since they'd have been using keywords/mice.
The expected input option for most games is a keyword and mouse although some people prefer other options and some games do better with other options. Is not always necessary. Does a game like Smash Bros. or Bomberman need to split the screen? Sure and then you need to design the game in such a way... which 99.99% of people won't ever bother to use.
If someone has half a brain they'll pick any position except help desk. You want someone who can think to pick a mind numbingly boring position (as you stated yourself) that makes most people horrendously unhappy to boot. Something tells me that the salary and other such things (like say promotion options) you offer for the position make people weep as well. Most likely the job description and candidate requirements are also far from what they should be.
Why bother? Once you get to that level of trouble it's easier, cheaper and better to just buy a console. For example I doubt many people keep their main computer near their TV so they'd either have to buy a new one or deal with 40 feet of extension cable (with the expected degradation in everything).
PCs simply aren't designed for that type of gameplay (ie: they have a mouse + keyboard) and most PC gamers probably don't play and never will play their games that way. Split-screen also likely involves more effort for developers and sacrifices in the gameplay to accommodate multiple players.
And 99% of PC games don't allow multiple players or split screen making your argument somewhat pointless.
Granted most of the webcomics section should be nuked under any sane notability criteria but then again so should a lot of other sections. Then again if the section is to be nuked then bloody nuke it and make that clearly the policy already and save everyone the trouble of having to deal with the AfDs. In any event, the Inclusionist/Deletionist divide is really ancient history. Almost no one is purely one or the other these days, except the occasional troll who gets off on nominating dozens of articles on AfD. Well I wish the guidelines were at least consistent, consistently applied and sane. Wikipedia seems under the hood like a giant bureaucratic mess that no sane person would want to even touch without a 30 foot pole.
Ha ha ha ha. They only use facts if it supports what they want to think is true, that is human nature. Even science with all it's safety measures and massive number of scientists in any given field is far far from immune. Even then it only works because the group of experts cannot be restricted.
I once read that the richest people aren't the most intelligent, intelligent people simply don't find the risks needed to become so rich worth it. On average they'd come out worse off and they're intelligent enough that their normal average is still very well off.
I find it absurd that anyone really intelligent would depend on essentially a lottery for anything. It's absurd because 99% of the time you will simply be wasting your time and could make a lot more money by doing something else.
Logically the prizes would be pointless like they are now, a company is formed and it's engineers are paid by sponsors/rich people. It's essentially like venture capitalists, they take on the risk and get a decent large chunk of the payoff.
Most such small locks can be popped off with a screwdriver, happened in my high school to idiots who used them for their lockers. Locks are probably more useful in preventing your luggage's contents from littering the runway after it gets snagged on something.
I'm in my 40s now, and time is so precious and I just see something like this as a sad waste. Here's a guy who is obviously intelligent but he devoted an amount of his finite time on planet earth doing something basically useless to himself and others. Were his energies properly "self-directed" think what he could have done for himself!! Think about the lost potential in the form of dedication, intelligence, and time!!! ...says the guy wasting his time posting on slashdot.
And guess what, the next vehicle NASA is building will be a lot closer to the Soyuz than it is to the shuttle.
BS. Using misleading statistics to prove a point does not prove a point. The Soyuz has a lower fatality rate than the Shuttle and that's going back to the 60s. It has a flawless fatality record for longer than the shuttle has even existed. Unlike the shuttle failures for it (well launch.re-entry ones) are far from fatal and even then it has a lower failure rate if you don't count the pre-shuttle era I think.
Now consider that the Soyuz is likely flown/managed by people whose attention to safety would give NASA managers heart attacks and just how much of a fuck up the shuttle is become evident.
So if you pay me to repair your car it's perfectly fine if I break into your house and steal some of your money?
It's quite possible to be paid for being versatile but that requires you to actually have some concrete advantage of being that way. Likewise you actually need to be good (not just decent or passable) in at least some areas and have those areas be related (ie: see first sentence). Even in that case you should go into management in most likelihood because then you can do more good by "simply" telling other specialists what to do than by actually half-assing things yourself.
,electrical engineering), computational biology (biology, cs, math), bio-statistics (biology, statistics, math) and so on (I can go on for pages and pages just from the degrees and specializations offered at my school).
That said there are whole fields that are in essence the combination of existing ones such as molecular biology (biology, chemistry, physics, math), bio-mechanics (biology, medicine, mechanical engineering
There are a fair number of scientists who know multiple subjects, most of them simply don't become well known. They may make some great new application of physics to biology but they probably won't make breathtaking discoveries in either. Likewise since it's easier to just study one subject and people generally seem to only be interested in one area you also get fewer people who can and do work across multiple fields.
Actually any good scientists nowadays probably knows more from across different fields than those "generalists" from centuries back. A molecular biologist may have to, for example, know advanced chemistry and advanced physics. So really it's hard to say someone is a specialist if we've simply redefine his "field" to cover what used to be 5 separate ones.
Genius is worthless alone if the field requires 100 textbooks worth of knowledge to even known the basics of. You have to understand those 100 textbooks or you can't make something that requires what those textbooks say as a basis. Otherwise you'll just spend all your time recreating what those textbooks say and never create anything new.
Let me repeat it once again for the idiots in the audience: google is not the only entity in the universe that has cameras and the ability to post images on the web. Actually nearly every person can do so now due to the glory of cameras in cell phones. If you think that before people weren't taking such images (and much worse images) and posting them online then you're a blind fool.
1. If google can see into your window from street level then so can anyone else. Amazingly google is not the only entity in the universe with cameras and I'm sure a lot of people make it a "hobby" to take picture through open windows. Hell the "looking into neighbors windows with telescope" thing has been around for how many decades now as a TV plot point.
2. If you sunbathe in public then see point 1 as well.
If they install apache then MS can't try to lock them into using windows for the server, duh.