This story had me go out and check what it would cost for me. 2100 sq ft house, I live alone so my energy usage is lower than a family. I average under 300kWh/month. I live in Michigan, and various sites recommend a system between 3600W and 4700W. Total cost, before labor is between $10,000 and $13,000 for the components. I can install myself. That cost is before subsidies from federal, state, and my local utility. I'm looking at a 5-7 year break even, then it's "free" energy. This system will be over sized for my current use, but my utility will buy back the excess, and it should offset some of my natural gas costs. Five years ROIs don't come around too often, but, as always, YMMV.
You're assuming there is market capacity for that product. It doesn't appear there is. Which is why companies are sitting on loads of cash right now and they aren't hiring. It's also why making excuses like "cutting taxes for business owners will help the economy grow" are a load of bunk. Businesses have tons of cash, they don't have meaningful areas to put that cash because they can't sell the product they are producing as it is.
Perhaps you recall the media making a big deal of global cooling, but the scientific community was not. The story isn't changing nearly so much as people say it is. Popular media is doing a hell of a job of making it sound like this is a controversy. It isn't. There is a great graphic here. Source
Climate skeptics have played the media and the general populace like a fiddle. They point to the relatively small number of scientists who speculated on global cooling, and then say, "they can't make up their minds". They pick the.02% of papers speculating that global warming doesn't exist and call it a "controversy".
Right until one of the big multi-national corporations decides to get into your niche. At which point there is no way in hell you can compete on cost. And lets be honest, most people buy on cost.
Your bifocals magnify everything, including your hand, etc. So you get a general proportionality, and your brain figures out roughly how big that Oreo is. I suspect that if the goggles only magnified the oreo, your brain wouldn't make the same adjustment, because it isn't an across the board magnification.
Be careful with the beer, it's every bit as bad as pepsi if consumed in similar quantities. Otherwise, you're right, people forget the liquid calories are still real. 2-3 cans of coke is 500-600ish calories, beer is similar. That's an extra 1lb per week of weight gain.
a) Just because they aren't Americans doesn't make it right to hold them without trial.
b) It has turned out that several weren't actually hostile enemies attacking anyone.
c) If there is a threat, then it should be easily shown in a trial.
Not here. I was fingerprinted to run it against the FBI database to make sure I didn't have a previous record. I couldn't get employment without that background check. The FBI put my fingerprints in their system, and now, will have them as a reference. Of course, I shouldn't have anything to worry about, since I don't plan on doing anything wrong. Fortunately, no one was ever put in prison on circumstantial evidence...
Isn't the VC craze most an irrational exuberance? I think a lot of VCs were investing in companies that had no hope of ever making money where the VCs were counting on an Apple, Google, or Microsoft to buy the startup to be their return on investment. Now that Apple, Google, and MS aren't shoveling their money to VCs, maybe they actually have to fund companies with business plans? Those startups seem to be a lot more rare.
Fitbit and Fuelband to essentially the same thing. FuelBand doesn't do GPS either. If you wear your FitBit in bed, or had it on when you went to the girlfriends house at 1am and then share that data with your wife, you too can be caught in exactly the same way the FuelBand guy was. I too have a FitBit and I do wear it to bed (it's supposed to track the quality of your sleep).
Seriously? The Republican party is trying to get it put into text books in Texas, you know, that large state that is the Republican response to California?
Many hospitals don't have them that old, a lot of hospitals were on paper until the last 5-7 years. Those that are on electronic records are having destruction conversations. Diagnostic images are very large, and there is relatively little value to the hospital for keeping them. A bigger issue is that it costs a lot of money to continue to upgrade and convert the data. The diagnostic imaging software changed? Do you convert all your old images at considerable expense? Or bin them because they are beyond retention? About to upgrade to a new SAN, do you migrate the data that's out of it's retention period?
Large numbers of conservative pundits predicting a landslide for Romney. They also predict that the Earth is 6,000 years old, evolution isn't true, and illegitimate rape can't result in pregnancy. Let's call it wishful thinking instead of a prediction.
It does tend to over-represent smaller states. This was somewhat intended, but as one analyst on Tuesday put it, "Should an electoral vote in Wyoming, that represents 130,000 people be equal to an electoral vote in California that represents over 600,000 people."
David Brooks gave an interesting response, he said that the electoral system forces the candidates to make an effort to play somewhat to the middle. Without the electoral system, Barack Obama would have campaigned heavily in California to get the liberal count up there. Mitt Romney would have campaigned heavily in Texas to instigate the conservative vote. The result was that they needed to go to places that weren't exactly on their side and try to convince them. They were forced to answer questions that both sides wanted to hear an answer to, rather than just their base. (I dare say most people haven't been pushing for real answers, but that's another issue altogether)
I agree that we need to have some more personal responsibility. Comparisons to Jarts isn't fair. Those are meant to be thrown into the air in a yard, with people in it. Not doing the action the Jart was designed for properly could cause serious harm. i.e. A mistake or poor form in the intended execution of a Jart throw could seriously injure someone. This isn't the same. I think making sure kids weren't buying them would probably be sufficient.
Those disclaimers aside, if you have rare earths at home, please keep them away from young children. It's not something that's silly and passes in a few days. Many children have had severe damage to their stomachs and intestines as a result of eating these.
No, the map I put up shows that the rural folks tend to receive proportionally higher federal assistance and funds than do people in denser, more highly populated areas.
You're right, it's not required, but storage isn't free, it's not even cheap. A lot of people have these records on paper, and when you multiply one patient record by the number of patients you've seen, the numbers can get pretty big pretty fast. As a rule, most healthcare organizations don't keep records longer than they are required because of the cost.
In Michigan, for people under 18, I believe we have to keep their records until they are 18 + 5 or 7 years. I think California may require 10 years retention as well. So, it's not unreasonable that they had those records on file. We often keep demographic information if it was ever electronic (it's relatively small), but records, images, etc take up a good bit more space.
What are the record retention requirements in the UK? These records are from 2004. They'd have been destroyed at this point in Michigan (5 years last I looked). That said, if its within the record retention rules, you'd be a fool not to have them in some accessible format.
I've seen a few maps that show that there are considerably higher number of government aid recipients in areas that tend to lean red.
Further, I take offense to the idea that these people would rather "do it themselves". It sounds a lot more like "I got mine, so don't tax me to get yours". Those people got public education. Many went to colleges that received up to 70-80% of their operating funds from the state (most now receive closer to 15%). Public infrastructure was built in a very short time. Many of these individuals are receiving social security and medicare, something "they paid into and deserve" but they don't want to take any cuts or pay any higher taxes to make sure these programs remain solvent for the next generation who are also paying into it. They got to take advantage of the fact that hospitals would treat them even if they couldn't afford the bill, something the state picks up the cost for.
I understand trying to make sure these programs are run efficiently. But, the debate in the last 1-2 years has been a lot more about cutting than reforming. And a lot more about making sure our historically low taxes are never raised to pay for the things the baby boomers have already taken advantage of.
I think there are a lot of sides at fault for this. There are guys, like you (presumably) who are highly competent and very good at their job. I imagine that you are probably worth the higher rate an employer has to pay you because of your experience.
There are, unfortunately, a number of other programmers who have been in the industry for years and haven't increased their skills, and are mediocre programmers. They still expect to make the same wage you do. You, in many cases get painted with that same brush that they do. I hope you do a fine job demonstrating those skills, and I know there are employers looking for those skills and rewarding people for them.
I am however sick of people saying they deserve X wage because they've worked for X many years. Who don't increase their marketability and skillset and then expect to pull in grossly higher wages based on their time-in-service when they have to compete with people who will acquire those skills. There are definitely employers who can't make that distinction. There are also those employers who will. I hope the folks here who give that effort can find those employers.
Slashdot Mirror
Similarly, there are many documented cases of air bags killing people. We still use them though, because they save way more people than they kill.
This story had me go out and check what it would cost for me. 2100 sq ft house, I live alone so my energy usage is lower than a family. I average under 300kWh/month. I live in Michigan, and various sites recommend a system between 3600W and 4700W. Total cost, before labor is between $10,000 and $13,000 for the components. I can install myself. That cost is before subsidies from federal, state, and my local utility. I'm looking at a 5-7 year break even, then it's "free" energy. This system will be over sized for my current use, but my utility will buy back the excess, and it should offset some of my natural gas costs. Five years ROIs don't come around too often, but, as always, YMMV.
You're assuming there is market capacity for that product. It doesn't appear there is. Which is why companies are sitting on loads of cash right now and they aren't hiring. It's also why making excuses like "cutting taxes for business owners will help the economy grow" are a load of bunk. Businesses have tons of cash, they don't have meaningful areas to put that cash because they can't sell the product they are producing as it is.
Perhaps you recall the media making a big deal of global cooling, but the scientific community was not. The story isn't changing nearly so much as people say it is. Popular media is doing a hell of a job of making it sound like this is a controversy. It isn't. There is a great graphic here. Source
.02% of papers speculating that global warming doesn't exist and call it a "controversy".
Climate skeptics have played the media and the general populace like a fiddle. They point to the relatively small number of scientists who speculated on global cooling, and then say, "they can't make up their minds". They pick the
Or they have thin margins and are risk averse in a down economy ...
Right until one of the big multi-national corporations decides to get into your niche. At which point there is no way in hell you can compete on cost. And lets be honest, most people buy on cost.
Your bifocals magnify everything, including your hand, etc. So you get a general proportionality, and your brain figures out roughly how big that Oreo is. I suspect that if the goggles only magnified the oreo, your brain wouldn't make the same adjustment, because it isn't an across the board magnification.
Be careful with the beer, it's every bit as bad as pepsi if consumed in similar quantities. Otherwise, you're right, people forget the liquid calories are still real. 2-3 cans of coke is 500-600ish calories, beer is similar. That's an extra 1lb per week of weight gain.
a) Just because they aren't Americans doesn't make it right to hold them without trial.
b) It has turned out that several weren't actually hostile enemies attacking anyone.
c) If there is a threat, then it should be easily shown in a trial.
Here is a quick list of people who were held and determined not to be enemy combatants:
Sadik Ahmad Turkistani
Adel Abdulhehim
Sami Abdul Aziz Salim Allaithy
Not here. I was fingerprinted to run it against the FBI database to make sure I didn't have a previous record. I couldn't get employment without that background check. The FBI put my fingerprints in their system, and now, will have them as a reference. Of course, I shouldn't have anything to worry about, since I don't plan on doing anything wrong. Fortunately, no one was ever put in prison on circumstantial evidence ...
Of course, the FBI isn't interested in making a DNA database of people not convicted of a crime.
Shhhhh, don't point out facts, that might ruin his poor little worldview that he's so highly taxed.
Isn't the VC craze most an irrational exuberance? I think a lot of VCs were investing in companies that had no hope of ever making money where the VCs were counting on an Apple, Google, or Microsoft to buy the startup to be their return on investment. Now that Apple, Google, and MS aren't shoveling their money to VCs, maybe they actually have to fund companies with business plans? Those startups seem to be a lot more rare.
Fitbit and Fuelband to essentially the same thing. FuelBand doesn't do GPS either. If you wear your FitBit in bed, or had it on when you went to the girlfriends house at 1am and then share that data with your wife, you too can be caught in exactly the same way the FuelBand guy was. I too have a FitBit and I do wear it to bed (it's supposed to track the quality of your sleep).
Seriously? The Republican party is trying to get it put into text books in Texas, you know, that large state that is the Republican response to California?
You can select different government programs. It doesn't change much.
Many hospitals don't have them that old, a lot of hospitals were on paper until the last 5-7 years. Those that are on electronic records are having destruction conversations. Diagnostic images are very large, and there is relatively little value to the hospital for keeping them. A bigger issue is that it costs a lot of money to continue to upgrade and convert the data. The diagnostic imaging software changed? Do you convert all your old images at considerable expense? Or bin them because they are beyond retention? About to upgrade to a new SAN, do you migrate the data that's out of it's retention period?
Large numbers of conservative pundits predicting a landslide for Romney. They also predict that the Earth is 6,000 years old, evolution isn't true, and illegitimate rape can't result in pregnancy. Let's call it wishful thinking instead of a prediction.
It does tend to over-represent smaller states. This was somewhat intended, but as one analyst on Tuesday put it, "Should an electoral vote in Wyoming, that represents 130,000 people be equal to an electoral vote in California that represents over 600,000 people."
David Brooks gave an interesting response, he said that the electoral system forces the candidates to make an effort to play somewhat to the middle. Without the electoral system, Barack Obama would have campaigned heavily in California to get the liberal count up there. Mitt Romney would have campaigned heavily in Texas to instigate the conservative vote. The result was that they needed to go to places that weren't exactly on their side and try to convince them. They were forced to answer questions that both sides wanted to hear an answer to, rather than just their base. (I dare say most people haven't been pushing for real answers, but that's another issue altogether)
I agree that we need to have some more personal responsibility. Comparisons to Jarts isn't fair. Those are meant to be thrown into the air in a yard, with people in it. Not doing the action the Jart was designed for properly could cause serious harm. i.e. A mistake or poor form in the intended execution of a Jart throw could seriously injure someone. This isn't the same. I think making sure kids weren't buying them would probably be sufficient.
Those disclaimers aside, if you have rare earths at home, please keep them away from young children. It's not something that's silly and passes in a few days. Many children have had severe damage to their stomachs and intestines as a result of eating these.
No, the map I put up shows that the rural folks tend to receive proportionally higher federal assistance and funds than do people in denser, more highly populated areas.
You're right, it's not required, but storage isn't free, it's not even cheap. A lot of people have these records on paper, and when you multiply one patient record by the number of patients you've seen, the numbers can get pretty big pretty fast. As a rule, most healthcare organizations don't keep records longer than they are required because of the cost.
In Michigan, for people under 18, I believe we have to keep their records until they are 18 + 5 or 7 years. I think California may require 10 years retention as well. So, it's not unreasonable that they had those records on file. We often keep demographic information if it was ever electronic (it's relatively small), but records, images, etc take up a good bit more space.
What are the record retention requirements in the UK? These records are from 2004. They'd have been destroyed at this point in Michigan (5 years last I looked). That said, if its within the record retention rules, you'd be a fool not to have them in some accessible format.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/02/12/us/entitlement-map.html?ref=us
I've seen a few maps that show that there are considerably higher number of government aid recipients in areas that tend to lean red.
Further, I take offense to the idea that these people would rather "do it themselves". It sounds a lot more like "I got mine, so don't tax me to get yours". Those people got public education. Many went to colleges that received up to 70-80% of their operating funds from the state (most now receive closer to 15%). Public infrastructure was built in a very short time. Many of these individuals are receiving social security and medicare, something "they paid into and deserve" but they don't want to take any cuts or pay any higher taxes to make sure these programs remain solvent for the next generation who are also paying into it. They got to take advantage of the fact that hospitals would treat them even if they couldn't afford the bill, something the state picks up the cost for.
I understand trying to make sure these programs are run efficiently. But, the debate in the last 1-2 years has been a lot more about cutting than reforming. And a lot more about making sure our historically low taxes are never raised to pay for the things the baby boomers have already taken advantage of.
I think there are a lot of sides at fault for this. There are guys, like you (presumably) who are highly competent and very good at their job. I imagine that you are probably worth the higher rate an employer has to pay you because of your experience.
There are, unfortunately, a number of other programmers who have been in the industry for years and haven't increased their skills, and are mediocre programmers. They still expect to make the same wage you do. You, in many cases get painted with that same brush that they do. I hope you do a fine job demonstrating those skills, and I know there are employers looking for those skills and rewarding people for them.
I am however sick of people saying they deserve X wage because they've worked for X many years. Who don't increase their marketability and skillset and then expect to pull in grossly higher wages based on their time-in-service when they have to compete with people who will acquire those skills. There are definitely employers who can't make that distinction. There are also those employers who will. I hope the folks here who give that effort can find those employers.