We could make a list that they need to do: My three things 1) Make classic Maps available for those who want it 2) Make classic Images the standard (Including the porn filter. No need to babysit me) 3) Bring back the original Dejanews.
I have a shortcut that points to http://houghi.org/yt.php?houghi=URL_from_Youtube and turn it into what I want. I use vq=hd1080. You can change and add parameters to whatever you desire on your own website.
I am at a point where when the USofA is for it, I will be against it by default. And unfortunately it turned out to be more correct than I would like it to be.
I am sure that your idea of privacy is different than my idea of privacy. Where the US tendency is : If it isn't public, it is private, in Europe we think : If it isn't pribvate, it is public.
This means that I expect to have privacy even in public. This means e.g. that if you are suspected of a crime, your name should not be given out. If you work, no camera's can be pointed at you to observe you.
It means that in some countries you still have no Google Streetview (and I would prefer that)
So yes, even if I am on public land, I have an expectation of privacy. To me the individual should be protected and only if the rights to the individual become harmfull (not anoying, harmfull) should those rights be taken away or overruled.
To me that would mean e.g. default opt-out for search engines, not opt-in. It means that companies are restricted to do certain things, like selling your data without your consent.
Privacy is, to me, the most basic right. Without it, all the rest means nothing. I believe it was so obvious that it was not even included in the amendments in the USofA.
It is only hard if you make it hard. Paid cell phone: If you need it for work, it is a tool and not part of your salary. If it is not, you know the amount and add that as a salary. Vouchers are most likely salary or bonus. I get both (just like everybody else in the company) Bring your own device? Don't. If you need it, the company should pay for the device. Holiday and so on is legaly organised and transparant for all. e.g. extra days for extra years. Health and benefits are transparent. Stock options can be put into a value.
So no, it is not hard to monetize at all. It might be that you value things differently, but to compare them is not hard at all. Just take all the monies and calculate what it would be per week, month, hour,... and you compare. That way you can easily compare two people. One working fulltime and the other working 1.5 days per week.
Just as easy on how much free time each person has. Don't forget to calculate travel time to and from. Working 2 days 6 hours is better than 3 days 4 hours is travel is 1 hour to and from. You gain 1 hour.
What will be 'difficult' is to compare how much it is worth to you. And that is not difficult, that is just different per individual.
This. I have worked at several places where they had fixed salaries at every level throughout the co,pany and those were public; including the one for the CEO. This also means that when you get at the top of the range, you are not in the right position anymore as you are overpayed.
I know of one company where when they started it one department got a raise of 10% on avreage, because they were in the wrong group. And no, this was not enforced by union in any way, just a company willing to pay for quality, just like they did for other stuff they payed for.
When I go jobhunting, this is almost the first thing I bring up after I hear the jobdescription.
I will say "I am expecting to earn X amount." When they say that is a bit high, I will say that I can negotiate with them when I come over. When they say 'no problem' I will add extra things when I am ther. When they say 'no way' then I will thank them for their time.
So I do not ask them what they will pay, I tell them what I expect.
I also have been called back and got the job when they said "That is a bit high, I will call you back".
And I am aware that most job interviews will end in a no, so I am expecting that, so I am relaxed and see it as a training for the one that says yes.
And this is the reason why we can not have nice things, like "inocent untill proven guilty"
If they are in the way, by all means destroy them. If they are not in the way, please concentrate on doing your job, like saving lives.
Or should they arrest bystqnders as they might trying to hamper firefighters efforts and may even have criminal intent. We could even do that if there is NO fire.
You can even smash a cars window if it saves a live it is legally parked for all I care. However the reason to do the taking down of drones should be because it hinders saving lives; not because so,ebody,ight want to do somethging.
What you are after is a ban on drones and that has nothing to do with first responders.
I play the lotery for entertainment. I know I will loose. Yet I find it emotinally (not rationally) satisfying that I could win. Makes me dream.
It is expendave money. Rationally I know I will not win. I would encourage people NOT to play, unless they are aware that they arer trowing out their money.
I see it as a wishing well. Entertaining and you need to think about what you wish, nothing more.
Back to the rigging of the system. I am amazed that such a thing is possible. Where I live (Belgium) Lotto emplyees are allowed to play. This because they are sure it is not possible to mess with. I have no knowledge of a computersystem. They are all either scratching games, or lottery with balls.
To me this shows that if one person can rig the system, they can rig the system. Meaning that if they do not like that weeks winnings or winner, they can alter it. For all I know, the NSA uses it to pay out illegal operations.
The reason this is possible is most likely the same reason we still use computers for voting: Money over securoty and fuck the consequences.
Yes, it is hard. And it also depends on the manager and what he wants. We had one department that was very outgoing and one that was very introvert.
More than once did we ask if a candidate was interesting for them as the only thing that was against it was the personality. That personality would be much better in the other department.
That is also how we received some people.
There is no reason to place a person who likes quiet to be in a noisy enviroment and the other way around. Rightfully they will be miserable and move on, wasting both our and their time.
This is obviously only one aspect and someti,es you have two great candidates and you can only hire one, which means telling one candidate they did not made the pick, even though they would have if the other person would not have shown up.
I know of somebody who was first told no and a week later got a call, because the other person felt he had made a mistake by signing.
If anything, hiring people is not something that is easy as there are way to many aspects involved. And that canb change from day to day.
When I was on the other side, you often know if the talk went great, ok or lousy. I was hired in one job where the interview was lousy. It was a bad decision on my part to take the job. It was wrong for them to give me the jop. On paper all was well, it just did not work out.
Luckily they were able to give me a job in a different department. Much better now for everybody involved.
Yes, we are aware that these do not apply for each individual. However when you need to hire somebody, you want the least risk. The experience we have is that it costs us less with younger people.
Also that does not mean we are not looking at older people. Just in case there is a draw, we will hire the younger person. If the older person is better, we hire the best one.
This could also obvious be related to the money and the job we offer and thus the people who apply, so YMMV. Perhaps the combination of money and job does not attract suitable older generation people.
Where I worked, we were non-disciminating against age. In fact we did not want the ver young people. We would not mind older people. Even up to 60.
However the issue we had with older people was that they were so much harder to train. And someti,es right impossible.
Learning new things is much harder for older people as they are more often than not fixed in their ways.
That said, there mighr be other reasons why she was not hired. It is not always about knowledge. It can also be about teamspirit. We have refused people who looked great on paper and even in the interview and still decided against them.
This could be because somebody else was better or the person would most likely not fit in the team. That would be of a disadvantage for the team and thus the department and thus the company.
Seldom will you hire somebody and build a new team around them; trowing all other people out.
What I do not understand is why they asked her to come 4 times. Could they not do a search on the person on their internal documents and see if that person was already there.
What we have done is have people come back after 1 or two years between interviews after looking what the reason was for refusing them. If it si that we feel could have changed in the meantime, then we ask them in and adress that issue right away.
e.g. working hours or what not.
Back to the age thing: due to the negative experience with older people, if there was a choice between a 20 something and a 50 something, we would go for the 20 something due to previous experience.
The problem with competition is that is is not driven by the idea of what you can say. i.e. Reddit will start censorship for some reason. Probably money. They make more money and others will see that censorship means money. And they will follow as soon as they need the money.
Another is the other media. TV is basically self-sensored. A lot of bleeping if you say the wrong word.
So no, competition is not the anser to censorship either.
To me this means that it is unrealiable as it is unverifiable. As they are unable tp verify the details, we do not know if the reviews are true or not.
And this goes for both the good and the bad.
And just like with IMdB ratings, it is highly different per individual what you like or dislike.It can also vary on a day per day basis on how e.g. the revieuwer felt like that day or how the people he met where at that day.
When I look at the negative comments from e.g. Americans on bookings.com, I know that I have a complete different (not better or worse, different) expectation on what I want in a stay.
I go to work by train. When I go on holidays, I rent a car. When I need to do my weekly shopping, I use car sharing : Germany and Belgium
Last month I paid 20 EUR. This month will be around 25 and that will be the normal cost.
And this is without the public transport being free, just available.
With the car sharing, you do not have to give up on anything, yet still pay way less. It is said to be interesting if you run less than 10.000KM a year.
Calculation for me: Insurance : 900EUR Taxes:300 EUR So that is already 100EUR per month for a car standing outside. Fuel needs to be payed in both and is even included in the 25EUR. Next to that is the yearly maintanance That gets to around 50EUR per month and the devaluation of the car from 17.000 to 1.000 of 12 years. and that is another 160EUR.
So the car costs me say 250EUR per month. Not calculating fuel. So that is just standing there. I am sure that if I calculate more precise, I will be closer to 275 per month.
For that money I can easily pay the car sharing and on top of that public transport. Luckily the latter the company I work for does. Pretty standard in Belgium. At least 50% is paid, most (many?) companies pay the rest as well.
I do not need to drive a lot, so obviously YMMV, but certainly something to look into. I know several people who sold their second car and use Cambio as a second car.
They WANT to react that quick. If you are working in milliseconds, this is what will happen and it encourages it.
Obviously the stockmarket will defend its own interest and that is the trading of the stock. As long as that is happening; why would they change it?
The stock market is just that: a market where they rent out space so you can sell your goods. They are not intrested if it is crap you are selling or great products. It is about volume.
Slashdot Mirror
We could make a list that they need to do: My three things
1) Make classic Maps available for those who want it
2) Make classic Images the standard (Including the porn filter. No need to babysit me)
3) Bring back the original Dejanews.
I just open them in a frame. I do that with all Youtube videos.
e.g. http://houghi.org/yt.php?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
Code I have is availabe through a link in the top left. No age restriction when you use it this way.
I have a shortcut that points to http://houghi.org/yt.php?houghi=URL_from_Youtube and turn it into what I want. I use vq=hd1080. You can change and add parameters to whatever you desire on your own website.
Why do they not make the ISO file available?
It might be confusing. The species mutates, the individual bacteria don't. Instead of mutation, it would be better to use evolve.
However that could open a whole new can of worms in the USofA or at least in some states.
I am at a point where when the USofA is for it, I will be against it by default. And unfortunately it turned out to be more correct than I would like it to be.
It is not possible to take copies with a copy machine of money, because of restrictions in the machine, not because some magic in the money.
Take away that restriction and you will be able to copy money.
So if the program does not have this restriction, it will be able to do it. Gimp?
I am sure that your idea of privacy is different than my idea of privacy. Where the US tendency is : If it isn't public, it is private, in Europe we think : If it isn't pribvate, it is public.
This means that I expect to have privacy even in public. This means e.g. that if you are suspected of a crime, your name should not be given out. If you work, no camera's can be pointed at you to observe you.
It means that in some countries you still have no Google Streetview (and I would prefer that)
So yes, even if I am on public land, I have an expectation of privacy. To me the individual should be protected and only if the rights to the individual become harmfull (not anoying, harmfull) should those rights be taken away or overruled.
To me that would mean e.g. default opt-out for search engines, not opt-in. It means that companies are restricted to do certain things, like selling your data without your consent.
Privacy is, to me, the most basic right. Without it, all the rest means nothing. I believe it was so obvious that it was not even included in the amendments in the USofA.
The issue with the screen size I solved by connecting over network to it from my 24" 1920x1200 Linux machine. Put it on a different desktop and done.
It is only hard if you make it hard.
Paid cell phone: If you need it for work, it is a tool and not part of your salary. If it is not, you know the amount and add that as a salary.
Vouchers are most likely salary or bonus. I get both (just like everybody else in the company)
Bring your own device? Don't. If you need it, the company should pay for the device.
Holiday and so on is legaly organised and transparant for all. e.g. extra days for extra years.
Health and benefits are transparent. Stock options can be put into a value.
So no, it is not hard to monetize at all. It might be that you value things differently, but to compare them is not hard at all. Just take all the monies and calculate what it would be per week, month, hour, ... and you compare. That way you can easily compare two people. One working fulltime and the other working 1.5 days per week.
Just as easy on how much free time each person has. Don't forget to calculate travel time to and from. Working 2 days 6 hours is better than 3 days 4 hours is travel is 1 hour to and from. You gain 1 hour.
What will be 'difficult' is to compare how much it is worth to you. And that is not difficult, that is just different per individual.
This. I have worked at several places where they had fixed salaries at every level throughout the co,pany and those were public; including the one for the CEO. This also means that when you get at the top of the range, you are not in the right position anymore as you are overpayed.
I know of one company where when they started it one department got a raise of 10% on avreage, because they were in the wrong group. And no, this was not enforced by union in any way, just a company willing to pay for quality, just like they did for other stuff they payed for.
Because if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys.
When I go jobhunting, this is almost the first thing I bring up after I hear the jobdescription.
I will say "I am expecting to earn X amount." When they say that is a bit high, I will say that I can negotiate with them when I come over. When they say 'no problem' I will add extra things when I am ther. When they say 'no way' then I will thank them for their time.
So I do not ask them what they will pay, I tell them what I expect.
I also have been called back and got the job when they said "That is a bit high, I will call you back".
And I am aware that most job interviews will end in a no, so I am expecting that, so I am relaxed and see it as a training for the one that says yes.
And this is the reason why we can not have nice things, like "inocent untill proven guilty"
If they are in the way, by all means destroy them. If they are not in the way, please concentrate on doing your job, like saving lives.
Or should they arrest bystqnders as they might trying to hamper firefighters efforts and may even have criminal intent.
We could even do that if there is NO fire.
You can even smash a cars window if it saves a live it is legally parked for all I care. However the reason to do the taking down of drones should be because it hinders saving lives; not because so,ebody ,ight want to do somethging.
What you are after is a ban on drones and that has nothing to do with first responders.
Belgium is made up of states, so the Flermish Government is like the Government of Texas or any other US state or German Bundesland.
For the rest: do not try to figure out Belgian Politics. It is kind of a clusterfuck that kind of works.
I play the lotery for entertainment. I know I will loose. Yet I find it emotinally (not rationally) satisfying that I could win. Makes me dream.
It is expendave money. Rationally I know I will not win. I would encourage people NOT to play, unless they are aware that they arer trowing out their money.
I see it as a wishing well. Entertaining and you need to think about what you wish, nothing more.
Back to the rigging of the system. I am amazed that such a thing is possible. Where I live (Belgium) Lotto emplyees are allowed to play. This because they are sure it is not possible to mess with. I have no knowledge of a computersystem. They are all either scratching games, or lottery with balls.
To me this shows that if one person can rig the system, they can rig the system. Meaning that if they do not like that weeks winnings or winner, they can alter it. For all I know, the NSA uses it to pay out illegal operations.
The reason this is possible is most likely the same reason we still use computers for voting: Money over securoty and fuck the consequences.
Yes, it is hard. And it also depends on the manager and what he wants. We had one department that was very outgoing and one that was very introvert.
More than once did we ask if a candidate was interesting for them as the only thing that was against it was the personality. That personality would be much better in the other department.
That is also how we received some people.
There is no reason to place a person who likes quiet to be in a noisy enviroment and the other way around. Rightfully they will be miserable and move on, wasting both our and their time.
This is obviously only one aspect and someti,es you have two great candidates and you can only hire one, which means telling one candidate they did not made the pick, even though they would have if the other person would not have shown up.
I know of somebody who was first told no and a week later got a call, because the other person felt he had made a mistake by signing.
If anything, hiring people is not something that is easy as there are way to many aspects involved. And that canb change from day to day.
When I was on the other side, you often know if the talk went great, ok or lousy. I was hired in one job where the interview was lousy. It was a bad decision on my part to take the job. It was wrong for them to give me the jop. On paper all was well, it just did not work out.
Luckily they were able to give me a job in a different department. Much better now for everybody involved.
Yes, we are aware that these do not apply for each individual. However when you need to hire somebody, you want the least risk. The experience we have is that it costs us less with younger people.
Also that does not mean we are not looking at older people. Just in case there is a draw, we will hire the younger person. If the older person is better, we hire the best one.
This could also obvious be related to the money and the job we offer and thus the people who apply, so YMMV.
Perhaps the combination of money and job does not attract suitable older generation people.
Where I worked, we were non-disciminating against age. In fact we did not want the ver young people. We would not mind older people. Even up to 60.
However the issue we had with older people was that they were so much harder to train. And someti,es right impossible.
Learning new things is much harder for older people as they are more often than not fixed in their ways.
That said, there mighr be other reasons why she was not hired. It is not always about knowledge. It can also be about teamspirit. We have refused people who looked great on paper and even in the interview and still decided against them.
This could be because somebody else was better or the person would most likely not fit in the team. That would be of a disadvantage for the team and thus the department and thus the company.
Seldom will you hire somebody and build a new team around them; trowing all other people out.
What I do not understand is why they asked her to come 4 times. Could they not do a search on the person on their internal documents and see if that person was already there.
What we have done is have people come back after 1 or two years between interviews after looking what the reason was for refusing them. If it si that we feel could have changed in the meantime, then we ask them in and adress that issue right away.
e.g. working hours or what not.
Back to the age thing: due to the negative experience with older people, if there was a choice between a 20 something and a 50 something, we would go for the 20 something due to previous experience.
I can even f*cking do sensorship or I can fucking not if I don't want to.
The problem with competition is that is is not driven by the idea of what you can say. i.e. Reddit will start censorship for some reason. Probably money. They make more money and others will see that censorship means money. And they will follow as soon as they need the money.
Another is the other media. TV is basically self-sensored. A lot of bleeping if you say the wrong word.
So no, competition is not the anser to censorship either.
To me this means that it is unrealiable as it is unverifiable. As they are unable tp verify the details, we do not know if the reviews are true or not.
And this goes for both the good and the bad.
And just like with IMdB ratings, it is highly different per individual what you like or dislike.It can also vary on a day per day basis on how e.g. the revieuwer felt like that day or how the people he met where at that day.
When I look at the negative comments from e.g. Americans on bookings.com, I know that I have a complete different (not better or worse, different) expectation on what I want in a stay.
No need to go either/or. You can rent a car and where I live, you have car sharing. Works great as you only pay for when you actually use the car.
The serbice is Cambio and available in several cities in Belgium, Ireland and Germany. Others will exist in other cities.
I go to work by train. When I go on holidays, I rent a car. When I need to do my weekly shopping, I use car sharing : Germany and Belgium
Last month I paid 20 EUR. This month will be around 25 and that will be the normal cost.
And this is without the public transport being free, just available.
With the car sharing, you do not have to give up on anything, yet still pay way less. It is said to be interesting if you run less than 10.000KM a year.
Calculation for me: :300 EUR
Insurance : 900EUR
Taxes
So that is already 100EUR per month for a car standing outside. Fuel needs to be payed in both and is even included in the 25EUR.
Next to that is the yearly maintanance That gets to around 50EUR per month and the devaluation of the car from 17.000 to 1.000 of 12 years. and that is another 160EUR.
So the car costs me say 250EUR per month. Not calculating fuel. So that is just standing there. I am sure that if I calculate more precise, I will be closer to 275 per month.
For that money I can easily pay the car sharing and on top of that public transport. Luckily the latter the company I work for does. Pretty standard in Belgium. At least 50% is paid, most (many?) companies pay the rest as well.
I do not need to drive a lot, so obviously YMMV, but certainly something to look into. I know several people who sold their second car and use Cambio as a second car.
The USA claims that they singlehandedly won two world wars. They openly denounce allies that shed blood next to them in several wars. (Hello France.)
And now you are surprised they want to take all the credit for this one?
In Europe we remember the last time a country shouted so loud and had flags all over the place. Hence we tend to be less nationalistic.
They WANT to react that quick. If you are working in milliseconds, this is what will happen and it encourages it.
Obviously the stockmarket will defend its own interest and that is the trading of the stock. As long as that is happening; why would they change it?
The stock market is just that: a market where they rent out space so you can sell your goods. They are not intrested if it is crap you are selling or great products. It is about volume.
We already do that by being their product.