Pretty sure they were shooting for 'milado', i.e. mixed race, most often black/white, but not exclusive. Where I grew up it was not at all disparaging. No idea where it is on the PC scale these days.
That was a fascinating glimpse in and between the lines of your local market. Being in a major metro US market, about 70% of the issues you cite are beyond consciousness for me.
I have weird feet, too. Super wide, insanely high arch, one foot cocked due to falling off a bridge in childhood. A hard time for me to get the footwear I often need is visiting two local stores, or ordering online if they are out of stock in my size. When my boots need to be fixed, the wait is about a week at another local store.
Manufacturing requires an ecosystem of other manufacturers for mutual support. A single widget machine is not technology; the manufacturing capacity and knowledge along with perpetuation of same _is_ technology.
Back in the day when off shoring started, the argument was the grunt labor is going overseas, but all the knowledge work is staying here. Obviously stupid on the face, but people fell for it. Manufacturing problems are solved on the plant floor as they occur. Nobody waits for the 'knowledge' to show up from 12 time zones away.
Heck, even the anecdote in the summary made the natural assumption that the place to get the screw was China, not Pennsylvania, or some other not Texas based US source--because that is where the mature ecosystem now thrives.
Congratulations, America, you got what you paid for.
Apple, you have the chance to among the first 'on-shorers' to stick with it to reap long term benefits, like your predecessors did 200 some odd quarters ago when they went the other way.
Then how does the delivery person get in?:) The opportunist thief may act on a whim for a visible package. However, the determined ones follow the trucks at a distance.
Amazon pays pretty well. However, there are a slew of other companies who work (some exclusively) for amazon that employ legions of replaceable drones--sorry--people. Some of those poorly paid masses have the temerity to procreate and desire to provide for their offspring, but need a little help from the gubmint to do so.
I would like to see the stats because my anecdotal belief is that the Walmarts and Targets of the world built, named, and live in the owner's suite on that boat.
Instead of a tax, maybe a higher minimum wage on employers of more than 500 people would be more appropriate. As long as we're going to mettle with economics, we might as well give the money to actual people who will invariably put the money back into circulation. Kind of a get the people off the program approach instead of paying the gubmint more to perpetuate it type of thing.
A government always has an ulterior motive: to grow. Three universal laws are not to be messed with: speed of light, gravity, and self interest.
Private people giving money away adds to the economy. Government money by definition sucks from the economy. A private person managing their wealth does not need any 'accountability'. The point of accountability is to REIGN IN excess, waste, graft, name your moral failing.
We are facing a shortage of doctors, but training more doctors is unlikely to be the best answer to the problem. We need to offload work currently done by doctors to other staff who don't need as much training. I doubt it takes 6 years of post-bachelor training to diagnose a toddler's ear infection. It won't be easy to make such a transition in our medical industry, but it may be less painful than medical costs increasing 5%+ higher than inflation every year.
You are paying the doctor to diagnose. Non-invasive treatment is almost always handed off to more appropriately skilled staff.
The diagnostic expertise is what takes years to hone. Nine people in ten can spot the zebra in the horse corral, but they can't find the lame horse with similar success (or substitute a car analogy, I'm lazy today).
I don't disagree with you. Turning out Nurse Practitioners by the dozen is not a panacea, however. The medical industry recognizes the shortages and action is happening in fits and starts in different areas.
A large part of physician training is already subsidized, though not always visible. The high tuition and limited seats are a product of the profession fighting to retain the prestige and compensation built up over time. This is obviously a simplification, but good enough to seed the argument on/.
Here's a clearer summary of what Google have been up to as reported by The Guardian.
EU Competition commissioner Margrethe Vestager says:
Google required manufacturers to pre-install the Google search and browser apps on Android phones, otherwise they wouldn't be allowed to use Google Play (its app service).
We need the browser and search engine for guaranteed compatibility with the app store; it is the only way to give the user a consistent experience.
Google paid manufacturers and network operators to make sure that only the Google search app was installed on devices.
Giving marketing dollars for co-branded advertising is an old and well accepted practice across the world. Just look at Intel!
Google has restricted the development of competing mobile phone operating systems, which could have provided a platform for rival search engines.
Restricted? Positive steps to better compete in a crowded marketplace is now illegal?
Google has used Android as a vehicle to cement its dominance as a search engine.
We provide users with a consistent predictable experience on devices issued by HUNDREDS of different providers. Tight integration is a simple necessity to make that happen.
These practices have denied rivals a chance to innovate and to compete on the merits.
Providers have simply recognized the benefit to their customers by using our services. They are completely free to contract with whomever they please.
They have denied European consumers the benefit of effective competition in the very important mobile sphere.
You have a very narrow definition of 'competition' when you choose to ignore a company with one of the highest market caps in the world!
And this is illegal under EU antitrust rules.
We clearly disagree with your interpretation and look forward to vindication on appeal
Todayâ(TM)s ruling states:
Google has prevented device manufacturers from using any alternative version of Android that was not approved by Google (Android forks).
By definition, the operating system would no longer be Android. We must be able to assure consumers that our products can provide a consistent experience. We can't simply allow any hack with a compiler to claim compatibility with our carefully built up brand.
In order to be able to pre-install on their devices Googleâ(TM)s proprietary apps, including the Play Store and Google Search, manufacturers had to commit not to develop or sell even a single device running on an Android fork.
Again, they would not be selling Android. We can't simply surrender one of our core competencies to a competitor because reasons.
The Commission found that this conduct was abusive as of 2011, which is the date Google became dominant in the market for app stores for the Android mobile operating system.
Consumer demand made us the dominant app store provider with the encouragement of governments across the globe.
Just pointing out that there are many different ways to frame a position.
Sure and the right never does that. Tell you what, go ahead and tell a conservative christian that you are gay and that jesus is a lie and see what happens to you.
You get blessed and a promise of prayer for your eternal soul? Oh the horror.;)
So decency and civility are restricted to specific laws? Really?
Fat people are not protected by civil rights legislation, so we can hound them out of a restaurant 'for their own good', or whatever stupid opinion one may have.
People under 5'10" are not protected, so kick those short bass turds out on their arse! I'm 6'3", so I can say that. Hopefully the preceding reads as patently absurd.
The purpose of reductio ad absurdum in a subjective argument is show that there needs to be a line _somewhere_.
Granted, people in the public eye have a reduced expectation of civility, but do we really want to make it OK to start hounding people out of establishments we all need to frequent? I vote no, and am doing so in part by this post.
Slashdot Mirror
This has been the case since 1215.
Typical American response: since lunch?
Pretty sure they were shooting for 'milado', i.e. mixed race, most often black/white, but not exclusive. Where I grew up it was not at all disparaging. No idea where it is on the PC scale these days.
Yea, sure, but the footprints are behind you! Besides, everyone walks through the EULA without treading.
That was a fascinating glimpse in and between the lines of your local market. Being in a major metro US market, about 70% of the issues you cite are beyond consciousness for me.
I have weird feet, too. Super wide, insanely high arch, one foot cocked due to falling off a bridge in childhood. A hard time for me to get the footwear I often need is visiting two local stores, or ordering online if they are out of stock in my size. When my boots need to be fixed, the wait is about a week at another local store.
I will never complain about footwear again.
You missed the clause between 15a and red balloon:
Don't piss us off by exploiting a purposefully broken system.
Manufacturing requires an ecosystem of other manufacturers for mutual support. A single widget machine is not technology; the manufacturing capacity and knowledge along with perpetuation of same _is_ technology.
Back in the day when off shoring started, the argument was the grunt labor is going overseas, but all the knowledge work is staying here. Obviously stupid on the face, but people fell for it. Manufacturing problems are solved on the plant floor as they occur. Nobody waits for the 'knowledge' to show up from 12 time zones away.
Heck, even the anecdote in the summary made the natural assumption that the place to get the screw was China, not Pennsylvania, or some other not Texas based US source--because that is where the mature ecosystem now thrives.
Congratulations, America, you got what you paid for.
Apple, you have the chance to among the first 'on-shorers' to stick with it to reap long term benefits, like your predecessors did 200 some odd quarters ago when they went the other way.
Then how does the delivery person get in? :) The opportunist thief may act on a whim for a visible package. However, the determined ones follow the trucks at a distance.
You have just discovered why the person on the puffy table is a 'patient', not a 'customer'.
My Nexus 5 works fine; I suppose I should thank Google for compelling me to stick with it.
Idiot fashionistas accepting micro increments in features for huge price hikes...
Totally asking for myself. Where do you get the Scooby Doo disguise? :)
meddle. Dunno how I missed that on preview.
Amazon pays pretty well. However, there are a slew of other companies who work (some exclusively) for amazon that employ legions of replaceable drones--sorry--people. Some of those poorly paid masses have the temerity to procreate and desire to provide for their offspring, but need a little help from the gubmint to do so.
I would like to see the stats because my anecdotal belief is that the Walmarts and Targets of the world built, named, and live in the owner's suite on that boat.
Instead of a tax, maybe a higher minimum wage on employers of more than 500 people would be more appropriate. As long as we're going to mettle with economics, we might as well give the money to actual people who will invariably put the money back into circulation. Kind of a get the people off the program approach instead of paying the gubmint more to perpetuate it type of thing.
Bentonwho?
A government always has an ulterior motive: to grow. Three universal laws are not to be messed with: speed of light, gravity, and self interest.
Private people giving money away adds to the economy. Government money by definition sucks from the economy. A private person managing their wealth does not need any 'accountability'. The point of accountability is to REIGN IN excess, waste, graft, name your moral failing.
We already have free k-12 education nationwide. How is that working out for us?
We are facing a shortage of doctors, but training more doctors is unlikely to be the best answer to the problem. We need to offload work currently done by doctors to other staff who don't need as much training. I doubt it takes 6 years of post-bachelor training to diagnose a toddler's ear infection. It won't be easy to make such a transition in our medical industry, but it may be less painful than medical costs increasing 5%+ higher than inflation every year.
You are paying the doctor to diagnose. Non-invasive treatment is almost always handed off to more appropriately skilled staff.
The diagnostic expertise is what takes years to hone. Nine people in ten can spot the zebra in the horse corral, but they can't find the lame horse with similar success (or substitute a car analogy, I'm lazy today).
I don't disagree with you. Turning out Nurse Practitioners by the dozen is not a panacea, however. The medical industry recognizes the shortages and action is happening in fits and starts in different areas.
A large part of physician training is already subsidized, though not always visible. The high tuition and limited seats are a product of the profession fighting to retain the prestige and compensation built up over time. This is obviously a simplification, but good enough to seed the argument on /.
In New York, the Supreme Court is the bottom--the actual trial court. Sounds impressive and looks it on a business card, I suppose.
Oh, to have mod points. MPU!
Google TV is mostly what you are looking for.
Here's a clearer summary of what Google have been up to as reported by The Guardian.
EU Competition commissioner Margrethe Vestager says:
Google required manufacturers to pre-install the Google search and browser apps on Android phones, otherwise they wouldn't be allowed to use Google Play (its app service).
We need the browser and search engine for guaranteed compatibility with the app store; it is the only way to give the user a consistent experience.
Google paid manufacturers and network operators to make sure that only the Google search app was installed on devices.
Giving marketing dollars for co-branded advertising is an old and well accepted practice across the world. Just look at Intel!
Google has restricted the development of competing mobile phone operating systems, which could have provided a platform for rival search engines.
Restricted? Positive steps to better compete in a crowded marketplace is now illegal?
Google has used Android as a vehicle to cement its dominance as a search engine.
We provide users with a consistent predictable experience on devices issued by HUNDREDS of different providers. Tight integration is a simple necessity to make that happen.
These practices have denied rivals a chance to innovate and to compete on the merits.
Providers have simply recognized the benefit to their customers by using our services. They are completely free to contract with whomever they please.
They have denied European consumers the benefit of effective competition in the very important mobile sphere.
You have a very narrow definition of 'competition' when you choose to ignore a company with one of the highest market caps in the world!
And this is illegal under EU antitrust rules.
We clearly disagree with your interpretation and look forward to vindication on appeal
Todayâ(TM)s ruling states:
Google has prevented device manufacturers from using any alternative version of Android that was not approved by Google (Android forks).
By definition, the operating system would no longer be Android. We must be able to assure consumers that our products can provide a consistent experience. We can't simply allow any hack with a compiler to claim compatibility with our carefully built up brand.
In order to be able to pre-install on their devices Googleâ(TM)s proprietary apps, including the Play Store and Google Search, manufacturers had to commit not to develop or sell even a single device running on an Android fork.
Again, they would not be selling Android. We can't simply surrender one of our core competencies to a competitor because reasons.
The Commission found that this conduct was abusive as of 2011, which is the date Google became dominant in the market for app stores for the Android mobile operating system.
Consumer demand made us the dominant app store provider with the encouragement of governments across the globe.
Just pointing out that there are many different ways to frame a position.
Sure and the right never does that. Tell you what, go ahead and tell a conservative christian that you are gay and that jesus is a lie and see what happens to you.
You get blessed and a promise of prayer for your eternal soul? Oh the horror. ;)
So decency and civility are restricted to specific laws? Really?
Fat people are not protected by civil rights legislation, so we can hound them out of a restaurant 'for their own good', or whatever stupid opinion one may have.
People under 5'10" are not protected, so kick those short bass turds out on their arse! I'm 6'3", so I can say that. Hopefully the preceding reads as patently absurd.
The purpose of reductio ad absurdum in a subjective argument is show that there needs to be a line _somewhere_.
Granted, people in the public eye have a reduced expectation of civility, but do we really want to make it OK to start hounding people out of establishments we all need to frequent? I vote no, and am doing so in part by this post.
I'm not sure how to take that comment--even shills don't believe satellite internet is viable.
The enemy gate is down!
Mod parent up, and give a cookie.