It is funny how so many people are oblivious to what happens to 'Company Towns' when the company decides to shut down, as well as all of the horrible things that they bring to a community when they are still running. The suggestion that people should just live next to their work is advocacy for employment monopolies. It is bad enough when your TV is controlled by a monopoly, it is disastrous when your employment is.
One of the big problems for our education system is that since EVERY level is screwing it up, no matter who you blame, you will be right.
The problem lies with parents who have abdicated their parental responsibility to the state, but still want the parental benifits. They are like the divorced parent who wants to pick their kid up on their birthday and have a good old time being loved and admired because they are fun, but don't want to get involved when it is time to make sure the kid brushes his teeth.
The problem lies with the teachers who whine and complain about how poor they are when they are in the top half of earners in the state, with vactions that are unprecedented in most other industries.
The problem lies with school administrators that funnel money to places that don't need it, and starve out places that do.
The problem lies with school boards that make absurd policies that make administering schools and teaching in them to be unnecessarily difficult, as well as funneling money to entertainment programs instead of education.
The problem lies with state legislatures who are more interested in getting votes by looking like they are 'doing something' than they are in actually doing something, so they end up making laws that appeal to voters instead of considering the education of the students.
The problem lies with federal politicians for the same reasons.
Teachers are in the top half of earners in virtually every state of the union. That is without taking into account the huge amounts of vacation time, and very nice benefits. The myth of the "poor" teacher needs to stop. No one is claiming that they are making millions, but when you are in the top half of earners for your state, claiming destitution just makes you lose credibility.
Well, this kind of report can do a lot to bring awareness to the masses about what is going. Most people don't know what their speed really is, and thus don't care. They take the marketing terms 'fastest' and 'unlimited' and assume that they are getting the best that is available. People do care about their TV though. If they find out that their ISP is breaking their TV, they are going to be outraged. This is particularly true if it a cable provider that is breaking their TV.
Do you have 'residential' or 'business' Comcast? Anyone can get 'business' Comcast. It is only ~$10 above the regular residential rate, which is what it looks like your paying. The service is dramatically better, and they don't do the filtering and port blocking that they do on the residential accounts since it is a service intended to be use by businesses.
Not really. There are many ways to prevent the people from having a voice. It's not like I could be president here in the US, no matter how good I was, without the backing of certain players. The voice of the commoners may exist here, but it is vastly over stated and large parts of our government are appointed.
On the other hand there is nothing that inherently prevents a monarch from listening to the voice of his subjects.
I cannot speak to the state of Qatar, but claiming that having some semi elected officials means the people actually have a voice, and that having a monarch means they don't, is simply wrong.
Sorry, not 'liable'. Libel. As in making public false statements about people in writing. They could use the "we thought it was true" line, but if it could be shown that they knew there would be false positives, it would seem that they knew they would be making public false statements about people.
A business posting that a person is a cheater as a fact, is in a different ballpark than cutting off someones access to the service. Calling someone a cheater in a private conversation is also a different ballpark than posting it for the world to see. How likely people are to believe it is also a huge factor. So, if you call me a cheater on Slashdot, it would not carry the same kind of legal weight as if MS calls one of it's users a cheater on their publicly accessible site.
What I am wondering, does MS put the actual label "Cheater" on just the accused persons screen, or does it broadcast it publicly to everyone on the service?
Do they actually put the words "Cheater" in a publicly visible place? If so, I really have to wonder about judgment of whoever signed off on that. I seems like a series of liable lawsuit just waiting to happen.
If most people are tipping you 10%, you are doing a monumentally bad job. $37K is probably about right though for a generic family style restaurant for an average quality waiter. As you say, the restaurant will have busy and slow times. It should also be noted that wait staff don't pay taxes like the rest of us. They pay taxes on the premise that they were tipped an average of 8%. This means that an average waiter is only claiming about 50% of their income.
That is correct, except that many of the TVs coming out now refresh at 120Hz, or even 240Hz. As technology marched forward, the cost of upping the refresh rate plummeted.
You are wrong. A Blu-Ray disc is specced to hold 9 hours of HD content, or 23 hours of SD. With the 50% additional space to go to 3D, you can put a 6 hour movie in HD and 3D on a Blu-Ray disk.
There is no reason that 3D would require extra disks. Yes, the movie will be twice as large, but modern disks can easily handle that. There is no reason that you would need to sit directly in front of the TV to use shutter glasses. They work by showing each eye a separate 2d picture. Why would you need to be directly in front of the screen?
5.1 and 3D TV are worthless to most people, but the cost of including them is so minimal, they will continue to be included on the media anyway.
Funny, for everyone unanimously agreeing about how great 5.1 is most people are still using stereo. That's right. 5.1 setups are still unusual. Yes, they are out there, but just as wearing the glasses are not worth it to most people, neither is setting up a 5.1 system, and having to sit in the 'sweet spot' to get the proper effect.
I'm not sold on 3D any more than I am on 5.1 audio, but just like 5.1 audio, the cost of including it is so small that the manufacturers might as well include it for those that want it. Don't expect 3D TV to go away. The will already run at a frequency that supports it, and including the electronics to transmit a signal to glasses every other frame is trivial. There is no compelling reason for TV manufacturers to leave it out. Add to that the fact that pretty much all video games, and an good many of the computer generated movies are created in 3D and down sampled to 2D, so 3D versions are basically free, 3D is likely here to stay.
The plus side, is that just like using stereo instead of 5.1, playing media in 2D instead of 3D will be completely available.
That makes no sense. You are going to vote for a candidate you don't like because candidate you do want won't win? Either way you get a candidate you don't want. On the other hand, every vote for a third party can make a difference in how the winner behaves. You think Pero didn't play a major role in how Clinton ran his presidency? Even more so, third party and undecided voters are the only voters that it makes any sense for the candidates to play to. Why would a republican candidate care what the republican voters think if they will vote for him no matter what he does? Same for the Democrate side.
I'm actually wondering about the opposite of most of the energy being released as heat. When you depressurize a small can of compressed air, it will freeze the can, as well as the object you are pointing it at. How much heat could a 14 gallon tank suck up if were to depressurize rapidly?
What is this belief that advertising requires tracking? It doesn't. It never has. Do advertisers like traking? Sure. Do the require it? No. If all user tracking were stopped today, there would still be advertisers paying to put ads on Slashdot. They would determine what ads to put up the same way they do on TV and in magazines. They would put ads that would be most likely to appeal to the consumers of the product being offered. In fact, Google might make MORE money if tracking were stopped. They would still be selling the ad space, but their customers would no longer have an expectation of getting detailed info on the end users. Thus, same revenue, and less work for Google. Less work means more profit.
Yes, it is a myth. While advertisers are willing to pay more when they get analysis of who saw their ad, if that analysis becomes unavailable, it does not mean that advertsing cannot be done on the internet. No doubt advertisers would pay more for similar analysis of who saw their billboard along the freeway.
While the 'Do Not Call List' has not been 100% effective, it had turned the tide dramatically. The number of telemarketing calls I get went from 2-3 every day before the list was implemented to 2-3 per month after. That's not bad. Of course, that is not counting the political spam that got a free pass on the 'Do Not Call List'.
As much as people here on Slashdot like to complain that this flag would do no good, and point to the 'evil bit' proposal as a joke, they seem to forget the robots.txt that seems to have been pretty darn effective. Specifically telling sites that you do not agree to be tracked sets a non-legal boundary to start a discussion. Illegal is not the same as evil. It is perfectly acceptable to avoid businesses because of evil behavior. Right now, you can't really get a consensus on tracking being evil. Most people would be able to agree that tracking someone when they explicitly requested not to be tracked is evil. While being directly and demonstrably linked to a specific evil act might not matter to the small website, bigger sites might find it less appealing. If, and this is a big 'if', ad revenue drops more from bad publicity for tracking than it does from using non-tracking advertising, larger sites might choose to use the non-tracking version.
There seems to be a weird myth on the internet that one must track to advertise, even though TV, magazines, billboards, etc, etc... have been advertising for generations without tracking. Somehow, even people that should know better have fallen for the "it's totally different because it's ON A COMPUTER" when it comes to ads.
Slashdot Mirror
It is funny how so many people are oblivious to what happens to 'Company Towns' when the company decides to shut down, as well as all of the horrible things that they bring to a community when they are still running. The suggestion that people should just live next to their work is advocacy for employment monopolies. It is bad enough when your TV is controlled by a monopoly, it is disastrous when your employment is.
One of the big problems for our education system is that since EVERY level is screwing it up, no matter who you blame, you will be right.
The problem lies with parents who have abdicated their parental responsibility to the state, but still want the parental benifits. They are like the divorced parent who wants to pick their kid up on their birthday and have a good old time being loved and admired because they are fun, but don't want to get involved when it is time to make sure the kid brushes his teeth.
The problem lies with the teachers who whine and complain about how poor they are when they are in the top half of earners in the state, with vactions that are unprecedented in most other industries.
The problem lies with school administrators that funnel money to places that don't need it, and starve out places that do.
The problem lies with school boards that make absurd policies that make administering schools and teaching in them to be unnecessarily difficult, as well as funneling money to entertainment programs instead of education.
The problem lies with state legislatures who are more interested in getting votes by looking like they are 'doing something' than they are in actually doing something, so they end up making laws that appeal to voters instead of considering the education of the students.
The problem lies with federal politicians for the same reasons.
Teachers are in the top half of earners in virtually every state of the union. That is without taking into account the huge amounts of vacation time, and very nice benefits. The myth of the "poor" teacher needs to stop. No one is claiming that they are making millions, but when you are in the top half of earners for your state, claiming destitution just makes you lose credibility.
Well, this kind of report can do a lot to bring awareness to the masses about what is going. Most people don't know what their speed really is, and thus don't care. They take the marketing terms 'fastest' and 'unlimited' and assume that they are getting the best that is available. People do care about their TV though. If they find out that their ISP is breaking their TV, they are going to be outraged. This is particularly true if it a cable provider that is breaking their TV.
Do you have 'residential' or 'business' Comcast? Anyone can get 'business' Comcast. It is only ~$10 above the regular residential rate, which is what it looks like your paying. The service is dramatically better, and they don't do the filtering and port blocking that they do on the residential accounts since it is a service intended to be use by businesses.
It's not over yet.
No doubt we also of laws that imprison people because our population considers it 'immoral' that would not be illegal Qatar.
Not really. There are many ways to prevent the people from having a voice. It's not like I could be president here in the US, no matter how good I was, without the backing of certain players. The voice of the commoners may exist here, but it is vastly over stated and large parts of our government are appointed.
On the other hand there is nothing that inherently prevents a monarch from listening to the voice of his subjects.
I cannot speak to the state of Qatar, but claiming that having some semi elected officials means the people actually have a voice, and that having a monarch means they don't, is simply wrong.
Seems like a libel suit just waiting to happen.
Sorry, not 'liable'. Libel. As in making public false statements about people in writing. They could use the "we thought it was true" line, but if it could be shown that they knew there would be false positives, it would seem that they knew they would be making public false statements about people.
A business posting that a person is a cheater as a fact, is in a different ballpark than cutting off someones access to the service. Calling someone a cheater in a private conversation is also a different ballpark than posting it for the world to see. How likely people are to believe it is also a huge factor. So, if you call me a cheater on Slashdot, it would not carry the same kind of legal weight as if MS calls one of it's users a cheater on their publicly accessible site.
What I am wondering, does MS put the actual label "Cheater" on just the accused persons screen, or does it broadcast it publicly to everyone on the service?
Do they actually put the words "Cheater" in a publicly visible place? If so, I really have to wonder about judgment of whoever signed off on that. I seems like a series of liable lawsuit just waiting to happen.
It is likely more for the puropose of verify that people are not putting in fake data. Let your 'friends' identify you for Facebook.
If most people are tipping you 10%, you are doing a monumentally bad job. $37K is probably about right though for a generic family style restaurant for an average quality waiter. As you say, the restaurant will have busy and slow times. It should also be noted that wait staff don't pay taxes like the rest of us. They pay taxes on the premise that they were tipped an average of 8%. This means that an average waiter is only claiming about 50% of their income.
That is correct, except that many of the TVs coming out now refresh at 120Hz, or even 240Hz. As technology marched forward, the cost of upping the refresh rate plummeted.
While it may be an issue in theaters, and 3D is just as benign in the home. You press a button, and it is is 2D.
You are wrong. A Blu-Ray disc is specced to hold 9 hours of HD content, or 23 hours of SD. With the 50% additional space to go to 3D, you can put a 6 hour movie in HD and 3D on a Blu-Ray disk.
Source: http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_developers
There is no reason that 3D would require extra disks. Yes, the movie will be twice as large, but modern disks can easily handle that. There is no reason that you would need to sit directly in front of the TV to use shutter glasses. They work by showing each eye a separate 2d picture. Why would you need to be directly in front of the screen?
5.1 and 3D TV are worthless to most people, but the cost of including them is so minimal, they will continue to be included on the media anyway.
Funny, for everyone unanimously agreeing about how great 5.1 is most people are still using stereo. That's right. 5.1 setups are still unusual. Yes, they are out there, but just as wearing the glasses are not worth it to most people, neither is setting up a 5.1 system, and having to sit in the 'sweet spot' to get the proper effect.
I'm not sold on 3D any more than I am on 5.1 audio, but just like 5.1 audio, the cost of including it is so small that the manufacturers might as well include it for those that want it. Don't expect 3D TV to go away. The will already run at a frequency that supports it, and including the electronics to transmit a signal to glasses every other frame is trivial. There is no compelling reason for TV manufacturers to leave it out. Add to that the fact that pretty much all video games, and an good many of the computer generated movies are created in 3D and down sampled to 2D, so 3D versions are basically free, 3D is likely here to stay.
The plus side, is that just like using stereo instead of 5.1, playing media in 2D instead of 3D will be completely available.
That makes no sense. You are going to vote for a candidate you don't like because candidate you do want won't win? Either way you get a candidate you don't want. On the other hand, every vote for a third party can make a difference in how the winner behaves. You think Pero didn't play a major role in how Clinton ran his presidency? Even more so, third party and undecided voters are the only voters that it makes any sense for the candidates to play to. Why would a republican candidate care what the republican voters think if they will vote for him no matter what he does? Same for the Democrate side.
I'm actually wondering about the opposite of most of the energy being released as heat. When you depressurize a small can of compressed air, it will freeze the can, as well as the object you are pointing it at. How much heat could a 14 gallon tank suck up if were to depressurize rapidly?
What is this belief that advertising requires tracking? It doesn't. It never has. Do advertisers like traking? Sure. Do the require it? No. If all user tracking were stopped today, there would still be advertisers paying to put ads on Slashdot. They would determine what ads to put up the same way they do on TV and in magazines. They would put ads that would be most likely to appeal to the consumers of the product being offered. In fact, Google might make MORE money if tracking were stopped. They would still be selling the ad space, but their customers would no longer have an expectation of getting detailed info on the end users. Thus, same revenue, and less work for Google. Less work means more profit.
Yes, it is a myth. While advertisers are willing to pay more when they get analysis of who saw their ad, if that analysis becomes unavailable, it does not mean that advertsing cannot be done on the internet. No doubt advertisers would pay more for similar analysis of who saw their billboard along the freeway.
While the 'Do Not Call List' has not been 100% effective, it had turned the tide dramatically. The number of telemarketing calls I get went from 2-3 every day before the list was implemented to 2-3 per month after. That's not bad. Of course, that is not counting the political spam that got a free pass on the 'Do Not Call List'.
As much as people here on Slashdot like to complain that this flag would do no good, and point to the 'evil bit' proposal as a joke, they seem to forget the robots.txt that seems to have been pretty darn effective. Specifically telling sites that you do not agree to be tracked sets a non-legal boundary to start a discussion. Illegal is not the same as evil. It is perfectly acceptable to avoid businesses because of evil behavior. Right now, you can't really get a consensus on tracking being evil. Most people would be able to agree that tracking someone when they explicitly requested not to be tracked is evil. While being directly and demonstrably linked to a specific evil act might not matter to the small website, bigger sites might find it less appealing. If, and this is a big 'if', ad revenue drops more from bad publicity for tracking than it does from using non-tracking advertising, larger sites might choose to use the non-tracking version.
There seems to be a weird myth on the internet that one must track to advertise, even though TV, magazines, billboards, etc, etc... have been advertising for generations without tracking. Somehow, even people that should know better have fallen for the "it's totally different because it's ON A COMPUTER" when it comes to ads.
That is one of the reasons we read Slashdot. Are you really going to go look for information of moose and wolf attacks?