On the other hand... have you ever had a wallet full of bills? Dollar bills, like pennies, can really add up. Add a couple fives, tens and twenties and your wallet will be about to burst, not wanting to close properly.
Right now I have $98 in currency in my wallet (mix of 20s, 10s and 1s), and my wallet is showing no signs of distress. Personally, I'd rather have eight 1-dollar bills in my wallet than a small pile of heavy coins in my pocket, all mixed in with my thumb drives, keys, and pocket knife. I also prefer not to make jingle-jangle noises when I walk, but I suppose some people like that sound.
Then the next time you pull your wallet out, you have to deal with the nightmare of wading through tens of loose pieces of paper, all folded and bent and deformed in any way imaginable, to get to the bills you need.
First world problem. If your currency is "all folded and bent and deformed in any way imaginable", you're not doing it right. Are you one of those people who keep their currency all wadded up in a ball? Anyway, if you think straightening out a pile of money is a nightmare, you should count yourself lucky in life.
What will happen when eventually, inevitably, the oil and gas of the UAE starts to dwindle, the economy correspondingly does the same, and the energy supply to keep the whole thing cool becomes prohibitively expensive?
Here's some information for you. Oil and gas are a minor (and decreasing) part of the economy. Not sure about pizza and beer, though.
No one I know uses anything but Windows on the desktop (and a few OSX).
Allow me to introduce myself. I've been using Linux on the desktop since 1997. Also Windows from time to time, and for the last 7 years, frequently OS X. Maybe I've been at war with myself, but casualties have been very light.
As to the parent AC's reference to "desktop wars" being rendered irrelevant, it's probably with respect to those whose computer requirements are sufficiently trivial that they are satisfied by a smartphone and/or tablet. I have an Android phone and an Android tablet, and I enjoy using both of them for casual content consumption; but, they aren't anywhere near adequate to do most of what I use a desktop or laptop computer for, either at home or at work.
However, getting a STEM Ph.D. closes nearly all doors except becoming a researcher or teacher in your field.
I guess it depends on the field. I have a lowly BSEE earned many years ago, but where I work (small aerospace company), you can't walk from your office to the coffee room without tripping over a couple of PhDs. They're not here to teach or to do research.
Something a lot of people forget is that with a 2-income home, we get a 2-income lifestyle. You could probably still do what they did in the 50s, but you would have to give up a lot of what we value more.
My wife quit working 12 years ago. Financially, we're doing better than we did while she was working -- spending less on commuting, clothing, food (dining out is a treat, not something you have to do because no one has time to cook), laundry (they actually sell these machines that enable you to do it yourself instead of paying someone else to do it; all it takes is time) and not having to hire a house cleaning service, and avoiding the "marriage income tax penalty" imposed on the second income, we actually have more disposable income than we did when she had a paying job. We don't have small kids at home, but if we did we'd be saving even more, on child care.
Then there are the emotional benefits. A lot of people need a career to feel fulfilled. My wife liked her job, but she truly despised getting up in the morning and going to work. She likes taking care of the household, and she's a lot happier when I come home in the evening than she used to be. The saying, "Happy Wife; Happy Life" has a lot of truth to it.
I'm not suggesting that this is a successful strategy for everyone. As I said, some people need a career to feel fulfilled. Some couples won't save any money on some of the items I listed above, because even with two incomes they can't afford to eat out often or pay for laundry and house cleaning services. But it's worth sitting down and running the budget numbers to see if it can work.
On a re-purposed Win NT 4.0 box running OpenCaldera 1.0. That was when I first dipped my toes into the Linux pool, and I've been swimming happily ever since.
High School is completely different than college. If you show up to class in Highschool it is the teacher's job to make sure you pass, and courses do not cost you money either way, so almost no one drops courses
I guess things have changed quite a bit since I was in high school back in the stone age. Difficult elective classes had a significant drop rate, with the droppers usually opting to transfer into one of the "manual arts" (e.g., auto shop or wood shop) classes.
From TFS: This 'cooling-off period,' during which a refund can be requested without being required to give a reason for the cancellation,...
In other words, "I changed my mind and I want my money back; never mind that the product is exactly as desribed and functions perfectly." This new law is specifically to cover buyer's remorse, not cases of defective product or packing/description.
Deprivation is a miserable weight loss strategy and almost always fails after a short struggle.
Cutting caloric intake to a reasonable level below the amount you burn doesn't have to be "deprivation", at least the way most reasonable people understand the meaning of the word. I've been losing 1-1/2 pounds per week since the end of February. I just stopped snacking between meals and started having salads for most lunches instead of big sandwiches, pizza or burritos; also started taking a walk around the building at work 4 to 5 times a day to get away from my computer monitor for a bit. I'm not feeling any urges to binge, and I don't feel deprived at all, but I sure feel a lot better than I did 3 months ago.
Starvation diets aimed at losing a lot of weight very quickly, though -- that's a whole different story. That has a high likelihood of putting your body in the "holy crap; I better start storing all the fat I can to survive this famine!" mode.
Your post, if accurate, is quite an indictment of the public education system. However, it certainly isn't clear why a tenure system that starts with only two years of experience (in Callifornia; mileage may vary in other states) is needed to protect highly experienced teachers from being laid off in favor of new teachers making only half the salary.
As to termination for cause, that is very difficult in the state of California, short of the cause being a felony conviction. The process is very complex, resembles a legal proceeding, and can take two to three years to complete and cost several million dollars. During the 2011-2012 school year, LA Unified School District initiated termination procedures against 758 teachers, and it made the news because it was an order of magnitude increase compared to historical averages. Of course, that only represents 2.5% of the LAUSD teacher population, and only 56 of them were tenured. I wasn't able to find a source citing how many of those 758 dismissals were appealed, but I can tell you that the state panel that hears appeals has historically sided with the teachers. By contrast, in the past year the company I work for laid off nearly 25% of their Engineering workforce; by the way, the overwhelming majority of those who lost their jobs were not older, higher paid people. The difficulty in terminating "bad" teachers may be the primary reason they end up being transferred to "bad" schools.
Tenure in elementary and secondary schools makes good sense. Otherwise, the school administration. ever eager to save a buck, would lay off the older, higher-paid teachers, and hire new ones at lower wages.
There is scant evidence to support the contention that in California, school administrations are particularly eager to "save a buck."
For layoffs, which means no fault of the teacher at all, just that some of them chosen at random should be terminated, then seniority makes perfect sense
Why would you ever terminate an employee "chosen at random"? The whole point of a reduction in force (laying off redundant employees) should be to get rid of the less productive|skilled|useful people, or to "rebalance" the pool of employees so the available skills meet the current needs. The teachers unions like selection by seniority, but the school district should want to use a merit system, assuming they want to end up with the best teachers.
But for firing, which is where a teacher is laid off for cause, then seniority should not be used.
I don't see how seniority would ever be a factor in termination for cause. People get terminated for cause because they get caught breaking the established rules. The problem for California has been that it is nearly impossible to terminate a tenured public school teacher for anything less than a felony conviction.
Well, if you're precisely at the South Pole, any direction is north. Fortunately, all of Antarctica is not precisely at the pole. Western Antarctica is the part of the continent that is in the western hemisphere. There, that wasn't so hard, was it?
What I can't figure out is, what happened to NBA (and sports franchises in general) over the last 33 years to have out-paced inflation by so much?
Last season, the 30 NBA teams averaged $200,000,000 each in media revenue. If the Clippers can meet that average, it's a 10% ROI just from that particular revenue stream.
It would appear that reading really is fundamental.
Not only reading, but understanding. Usage matters. As a verb, "effect" is not used in the same way as the verb "affect". E.g.:
You can effect a beneficial change to your understanding by thinking about what you read. [proper usage]
Thinking about what you read can affect your understanding in a beneficial way. [proper usage]
You can affect a beneficial change to your understanding by thinking about what you read. [improper usage]
Thinking about what you read can effect your understanding in a beneficial way. [improper usage]
affect: to act on; produce an effect or change
effect: to produce as an effect; bring about; accomplish; make happen
It looks as if you're trying to say that "affect" and "effect" mean the same thing. If you had bothered to read the definitions you referenced before posting the links, you would have realized that as defined, the first is a verb; the second, a noun.
"Affect" and "effect" are not interchangeable. Or fungible, for that matter.
The day you become CIC, you get the 'book of secrets' (that is probably not an actual book, or one particular piece of information).
You finally have 'all' of the pieces (all that can most likely be had) and now you've got the JOB to take the course that will, for lack of better words fark up the nation in the least.
All the pieces that can most likely be had? Are you kidding? The CIA coined the phrase "plausible deniability" back in the 1960's for a reason, you know.
2. Access to top secret data that still hasn't been released showing a compelling need for this information gathering?
If that were the case, he would only need to release some of that information to justify those actions.
I think you missed the part about the information being classified "top secret". Most classified information becomes declassified after 10 years; 25 years is fairly rare, and 50 years is almost unheard of. But the President can't just declassify top secret information because he wants it released.
Slashdot Mirror
On the other hand... have you ever had a wallet full of bills? Dollar bills, like pennies, can really add up. Add a couple fives, tens and twenties and your wallet will be about to burst, not wanting to close properly.
Right now I have $98 in currency in my wallet (mix of 20s, 10s and 1s), and my wallet is showing no signs of distress. Personally, I'd rather have eight 1-dollar bills in my wallet than a small pile of heavy coins in my pocket, all mixed in with my thumb drives, keys, and pocket knife. I also prefer not to make jingle-jangle noises when I walk, but I suppose some people like that sound.
Then the next time you pull your wallet out, you have to deal with the nightmare of wading through tens of loose pieces of paper, all folded and bent and deformed in any way imaginable, to get to the bills you need.
First world problem. If your currency is "all folded and bent and deformed in any way imaginable", you're not doing it right. Are you one of those people who keep their currency all wadded up in a ball? Anyway, if you think straightening out a pile of money is a nightmare, you should count yourself lucky in life.
What will happen when eventually, inevitably, the oil and gas of the UAE starts to dwindle, the economy correspondingly does the same, and the energy supply to keep the whole thing cool becomes prohibitively expensive?
Here's some information for you. Oil and gas are a minor (and decreasing) part of the economy. Not sure about pizza and beer, though.
Yes, it isgoing to work, actually. A proof of concept vehicle has already been flown in a chamber at Martian atmospheric pressure.
No one I know uses anything but Windows on the desktop (and a few OSX).
Allow me to introduce myself. I've been using Linux on the desktop since 1997. Also Windows from time to time, and for the last 7 years, frequently OS X. Maybe I've been at war with myself, but casualties have been very light.
As to the parent AC's reference to "desktop wars" being rendered irrelevant, it's probably with respect to those whose computer requirements are sufficiently trivial that they are satisfied by a smartphone and/or tablet. I have an Android phone and an Android tablet, and I enjoy using both of them for casual content consumption; but, they aren't anywhere near adequate to do most of what I use a desktop or laptop computer for, either at home or at work.
However, getting a STEM Ph.D. closes nearly all doors except becoming a researcher or teacher in your field.
I guess it depends on the field. I have a lowly BSEE earned many years ago, but where I work (small aerospace company), you can't walk from your office to the coffee room without tripping over a couple of PhDs. They're not here to teach or to do research.
Something a lot of people forget is that with a 2-income home, we get a 2-income lifestyle. You could probably still do what they did in the 50s, but you would have to give up a lot of what we value more.
My wife quit working 12 years ago. Financially, we're doing better than we did while she was working -- spending less on commuting, clothing, food (dining out is a treat, not something you have to do because no one has time to cook), laundry (they actually sell these machines that enable you to do it yourself instead of paying someone else to do it; all it takes is time) and not having to hire a house cleaning service, and avoiding the "marriage income tax penalty" imposed on the second income, we actually have more disposable income than we did when she had a paying job. We don't have small kids at home, but if we did we'd be saving even more, on child care.
Then there are the emotional benefits. A lot of people need a career to feel fulfilled. My wife liked her job, but she truly despised getting up in the morning and going to work. She likes taking care of the household, and she's a lot happier when I come home in the evening than she used to be. The saying, "Happy Wife; Happy Life" has a lot of truth to it.
I'm not suggesting that this is a successful strategy for everyone. As I said, some people need a career to feel fulfilled. Some couples won't save any money on some of the items I listed above, because even with two incomes they can't afford to eat out often or pay for laundry and house cleaning services. But it's worth sitting down and running the budget numbers to see if it can work.
my IQ is 30% higher than the average person
I look down at my phone [while driving] to see what the heck happened
If you're as bright as you say you are, you'll realize that those two statements are mutually exclusive.
if they're privately owned parking spots then this should be allowed
From TFS: "People are free to rent out their own private driveways and garage spaces should they choose to do so."
You've never met someone with an IQ less than 100? That must be nice....
Apparently, he's never had to respond to a jury service summons.
On a re-purposed Win NT 4.0 box running OpenCaldera 1.0. That was when I first dipped my toes into the Linux pool, and I've been swimming happily ever since.
High School is completely different than college. If you show up to class in Highschool it is the teacher's job to make sure you pass, and courses do not cost you money either way, so almost no one drops courses
I guess things have changed quite a bit since I was in high school back in the stone age. Difficult elective classes had a significant drop rate, with the droppers usually opting to transfer into one of the "manual arts" (e.g., auto shop or wood shop) classes.
From TFS: This 'cooling-off period,' during which a refund can be requested without being required to give a reason for the cancellation, ...
In other words, "I changed my mind and I want my money back; never mind that the product is exactly as desribed and functions perfectly." This new law is specifically to cover buyer's remorse, not cases of defective product or packing/description.
Deprivation is a miserable weight loss strategy and almost always fails after a short struggle.
Cutting caloric intake to a reasonable level below the amount you burn doesn't have to be "deprivation", at least the way most reasonable people understand the meaning of the word. I've been losing 1-1/2 pounds per week since the end of February. I just stopped snacking between meals and started having salads for most lunches instead of big sandwiches, pizza or burritos; also started taking a walk around the building at work 4 to 5 times a day to get away from my computer monitor for a bit. I'm not feeling any urges to binge, and I don't feel deprived at all, but I sure feel a lot better than I did 3 months ago.
Starvation diets aimed at losing a lot of weight very quickly, though -- that's a whole different story. That has a high likelihood of putting your body in the "holy crap; I better start storing all the fat I can to survive this famine!" mode.
Your post, if accurate, is quite an indictment of the public education system. However, it certainly isn't clear why a tenure system that starts with only two years of experience (in Callifornia; mileage may vary in other states) is needed to protect highly experienced teachers from being laid off in favor of new teachers making only half the salary.
As to termination for cause, that is very difficult in the state of California, short of the cause being a felony conviction. The process is very complex, resembles a legal proceeding, and can take two to three years to complete and cost several million dollars. During the 2011-2012 school year, LA Unified School District initiated termination procedures against 758 teachers, and it made the news because it was an order of magnitude increase compared to historical averages. Of course, that only represents 2.5% of the LAUSD teacher population, and only 56 of them were tenured. I wasn't able to find a source citing how many of those 758 dismissals were appealed, but I can tell you that the state panel that hears appeals has historically sided with the teachers. By contrast, in the past year the company I work for laid off nearly 25% of their Engineering workforce; by the way, the overwhelming majority of those who lost their jobs were not older, higher paid people. The difficulty in terminating "bad" teachers may be the primary reason they end up being transferred to "bad" schools.
Baby Boomers are retiring and their parents are often living into their 90s. Of course labor participation is falling.
The Economic Populist, Forbes, and the US Census Bureau disagree with you.
Tenure in elementary and secondary schools makes good sense. Otherwise, the school administration. ever eager to save a buck, would lay off the older, higher-paid teachers, and hire new ones at lower wages.
There is scant evidence to support the contention that in California, school administrations are particularly eager to "save a buck."
For layoffs, which means no fault of the teacher at all, just that some of them chosen at random should be terminated, then seniority makes perfect sense
Why would you ever terminate an employee "chosen at random"? The whole point of a reduction in force (laying off redundant employees) should be to get rid of the less productive|skilled|useful people, or to "rebalance" the pool of employees so the available skills meet the current needs. The teachers unions like selection by seniority, but the school district should want to use a merit system, assuming they want to end up with the best teachers.
But for firing, which is where a teacher is laid off for cause, then seniority should not be used.
I don't see how seniority would ever be a factor in termination for cause. People get terminated for cause because they get caught breaking the established rules. The problem for California has been that it is nearly impossible to terminate a tenured public school teacher for anything less than a felony conviction.
Well, if you're precisely at the South Pole, any direction is north. Fortunately, all of Antarctica is not precisely at the pole. Western Antarctica is the part of the continent that is in the western hemisphere. There, that wasn't so hard, was it?
What I can't figure out is, what happened to NBA (and sports franchises in general) over the last 33 years to have out-paced inflation by so much?
Last season, the 30 NBA teams averaged $200,000,000 each in media revenue. If the Clippers can meet that average, it's a 10% ROI just from that particular revenue stream.
It would appear that reading really is fundamental.
Not only reading, but understanding. Usage matters. As a verb, "effect" is not used in the same way as the verb "affect". E.g.:
You can effect a beneficial change to your understanding by thinking about what you read. [proper usage]
Thinking about what you read can affect your understanding in a beneficial way. [proper usage]
You can affect a beneficial change to your understanding by thinking about what you read. [improper usage]
Thinking about what you read can effect your understanding in a beneficial way. [improper usage]
They aren't interchangeable.
affect: to act on; produce an effect or change
effect: to produce as an effect; bring about; accomplish; make happen
It looks as if you're trying to say that "affect" and "effect" mean the same thing. If you had bothered to read the definitions you referenced before posting the links, you would have realized that as defined, the first is a verb; the second, a noun.
"Affect" and "effect" are not interchangeable. Or fungible, for that matter.
The day you become CIC, you get the 'book of secrets' (that is probably not an actual book, or one particular piece of information).
You finally have 'all' of the pieces (all that can most likely be had) and now you've got the JOB to take the course that will, for lack of better words fark up the nation in the least.
All the pieces that can most likely be had? Are you kidding? The CIA coined the phrase "plausible deniability" back in the 1960's for a reason, you know.
If that were the case, he would only need to release some of that information to justify those actions.
I think you missed the part about the information being classified "top secret". Most classified information becomes declassified after 10 years; 25 years is fairly rare, and 50 years is almost unheard of. But the President can't just declassify top secret information because he wants it released.
This is a choice?????
Well, no. But lots of people hoped it would be.
Even if the sensors and software are perfect, a mechanical failure could still result in a crash. When that happens, who is liable?
Probably the same entity that is liable when a human-driven car is involved in an accident as a result of mechanical failure.