You still do not understand what I am saying. To do what you propose requires ego. If your will is destructed you cannot perform what you request. There is also enough scientific evidence that people under certain conditions are unable to fight. What you had in your past was someone helping you to develop an ego or you are a natural talent. This is similar to people from a "bad neighborhood" many of them end up being criminals and some of them are able to escape these conditions. However, you are obviously not able to put yourselves in the shoes of someone who lacks ego. Furthermore, you assume people behave logically. They do not. How else could I be so stubborn?
BTW: What has that to do with the left (what ever that is?).
That is exactly the ignorance I was talking about. You do not grow a backbone by getting up after you have been beaten down. Doing that already requires that you have the ego to do that. In case your ego is limited or non existent then you will not fight. All your examples of the brave people in the last century are rubbish, as they went there knowing they have to face evil otherwise there will be no USA anymore. However, even in those times people were pushed around and send to do things they did not want, but they did not see a way out of it.
Anyway, you are right in the assumption that it is not helpful to go through official channels claiming abuse. It seldom works for women and I am not aware that it worked for men. Therefore, there are only two main options fight or run. Whereas I would prefer to establish an exit strategy. Therefore, loosing is not an option.
In addition, usually people do not know that they be gaslightened (if that is the word). As other already stated this might be more a case of bullying where collecting evidence is not that relevant. And with bullies you often only need to punch their noses.
You mean when he was born a US citizen. I did not know there is a pre-birth opt-out option available. The US is a federal republic with a common federal government. In other federal countries, like Germany, the peoples votes are all equal, having the same value. However, they only vote for their parliament which subsequently votes for the government. Anyway, the parliament proportionally represents the pubic vote.
The electoral college is not fair, as it does not represent the popular vote. However, it was this way for a long time including Bush, Obama and now Trump.
Your point (3) is also false. The evidence does not show that it had no influence. The evidence shows that the Russians were involved in the hacking. The report did not evaluate whether this had an effect on the election or not. Therefore, your conclusion is also false. However, it is quite possible that fake news and the eroded trust in politics have resulted in Trumps election. Furthermore, Trump used a so-called disruptive strategy which worked well in such an eroded environment.
You do not understand the effects of gaslighting. The person subjected to it gets its "backbone" removed over time. To insist someone have to grow a backbone is a very ignorant position. Understandable, but ignorant. The two options are (a) get out of there and rebuild your ego outside. It might help to seek professional help. (b) log everything, try to build alliances and then present your case through official channels or directly to higher management. Unfortunately, this may also result in your dismissal. The second option is only worth it if the company is somewhat emotionally relevant to you.
It is also possible to seek professional help and try to improve your position with that help, before you quit or fight. In case you live in Europe you could also go to works council, as you do not trust the management. That is where to go.
It is stupid to believe that a country can be run like a company. In a country you have to understand macro economics and pursue the interest of all people, while as business person you only need to be concerned with your company (that is micro economics). In addition in politics the world is not about deals it is about treaties and common understanding. A deal is a singular event. It is often not necessary to consider all the side effects of selling a product or service. In a political context, it is not helpful to make a treaty your partner suffers from or third party suffer from, because there might be a time in future where you have to make another treaty with the suffering party. We do not live on Ferenginar and the US President is the Grand Nagus. Still in the TV series the Ferengi have a bad reputation which harm trade and commerce.
a) The article says that it can become the cheapest option (in some countries). b) Fossil fuels are highly subsidized (even if you ignore the ecological problems they cause). c) The power companies control grid and grid access (to some degree). Therefore, it is harder for renewables to get into the market. Also there might be consumer bias. d) It does not matter whether it may become cheaper or not. We have to get rid of fossil fuels, extensive methane production and oxides of nitrogen to prevent further damage through climate change. However, your upcoming government denies climate change and will, therefore, not take action. He even considered stopping initiatives pushing renewables.
However, it will not matter in US. At least for the next four years, the US has a government in denial. Furthermore, it is not sufficient to have a lot of electricity from solar or wind (which is essential also driven by solar power). We need storage facilities and present battery technology is too expensive and does not support enough cycles, as it is focused on light, easy to transport and small batteries. For large scale energy storage we need much more recharge cycles, but it is not that relevant how big the batteries are or how heavy. Anyway, nothing which will be happening in the US. China, the EU and India will compete in this area.
a)RTFA you still can use the old UI style b) if it is more clear and usable for newcomers this often implies that it IS actually more user friendly. Old users just have to relearn some parts. Yes learning is cumbersome, but if you embrace change you are better of afterwards. If you hate change you will become once a grumpy old person who hates the present.
Wikipedia runs on computers. Someone has to BUY them. Someone has to PAY for their electricity, Internet connection, repairs, housing etc. Someone has to WRITE and MAINTAIN the code of the Wiki software.
How is that interesting? It is totally dumb to believe you could change their course by owning some stocks. You have to have a majority of stocks with voting rights in your pocket. Furthermore, why should you invest money in a company where you disagree with their goals? It makes more sense in investing money in the future than try to help coal and oil industry to understand that their business model is phased out.
The best thing for Uber is, legally they are only an app and drivers are using the app or are contractors. However, in the UK they got one over the head, as they were classified by court as an employer.
You are right depending the fusion development, but in case of renewables, the oil companies could invest a lot and be the next big thing. But they don't, which indicates that they are not able to survive in future.
Big Oil is not investing in solar power, wind turbines or storage technology which will be the choice of alternative energy for now. Why should they invest in fusion?
This is totally fake bullshit. For starters there are not that many refugees in Paris. And they have houses in Paris. The largest sum in the EU is residing in Germany. And they have houses too. Most domestic fires are fireplaces which middle class families have for fun.
New automation methods will drastically increase productivity, while growth is not expected to go through the roof top. In essence you need less jobs.
Please do not compare this with the industrial revolution, as we had a labor shortage than. Also automation applied in the 1980s with robots cost jobs, but growth was bigger (at least in Germany) so more new jobs were created outside the factories. Now the situation is different, as all jobs in offices are targeted and in addition, drivers, nurses etc.
Everyone with an open mind and a basic understanding in economics will come to the same conclusion. New automation technology will increase productivity quickly and faster than economic growth. In consequence there will be less jobs.
True. But we are talking IT jobs. This means in many cases programming, designing, drawing etc. They will not steal your ideas. They will have them for you. In the end you loose knowledge. Presently the US has an edge in big data, data mining etc. but in case of massive outsourcing this can be lost to other countries and subsequently companies. Western countries already lost the knowledge for computer and electronics assembly to China and South Korea.
Offshoring is also complicated and you need management structures in a country you do not know. And US companies are really good in not understanding local culture. Therefore, immigration movesnthat obligation to the immigrant. However, when H1B visas are off, the off shoring option becomes more viable.
Even if he stops skilled immigrants. Tech work does not need to be in the US. It is portable. Anyway, the biggest fear is among the low end techworker in the US. And their jobs can easily be outsourced which is already happening.
People accept that Trump is the next president. They just do not like it. And that for good reasons. It is also time to discuss what will come and how fast so you can prepare for it.
Slashdot Mirror
You still do not understand what I am saying. To do what you propose requires ego. If your will is destructed you cannot perform what you request. There is also enough scientific evidence that people under certain conditions are unable to fight. What you had in your past was someone helping you to develop an ego or you are a natural talent. This is similar to people from a "bad neighborhood" many of them end up being criminals and some of them are able to escape these conditions. However, you are obviously not able to put yourselves in the shoes of someone who lacks ego. Furthermore, you assume people behave logically. They do not. How else could I be so stubborn?
BTW: What has that to do with the left (what ever that is?).
That is exactly the ignorance I was talking about. You do not grow a backbone by getting up after you have been beaten down. Doing that already requires that you have the ego to do that. In case your ego is limited or non existent then you will not fight. All your examples of the brave people in the last century are rubbish, as they went there knowing they have to face evil otherwise there will be no USA anymore. However, even in those times people were pushed around and send to do things they did not want, but they did not see a way out of it.
Anyway, you are right in the assumption that it is not helpful to go through official channels claiming abuse. It seldom works for women and I am not aware that it worked for men. Therefore, there are only two main options fight or run. Whereas I would prefer to establish an exit strategy. Therefore, loosing is not an option.
In addition, usually people do not know that they be gaslightened (if that is the word). As other already stated this might be more a case of bullying where collecting evidence is not that relevant. And with bullies you often only need to punch their noses.
TIOBE index ist not significant for the popularity (what ever that may be) of programming languages.
You mean when he was born a US citizen. I did not know there is a pre-birth opt-out option available. The US is a federal republic with a common federal government. In other federal countries, like Germany, the peoples votes are all equal, having the same value. However, they only vote for their parliament which subsequently votes for the government. Anyway, the parliament proportionally represents the pubic vote.
The electoral college is not fair, as it does not represent the popular vote. However, it was this way for a long time including Bush, Obama and now Trump.
Your point (3) is also false. The evidence does not show that it had no influence. The evidence shows that the Russians were involved in the hacking. The report did not evaluate whether this had an effect on the election or not. Therefore, your conclusion is also false. However, it is quite possible that fake news and the eroded trust in politics have resulted in Trumps election. Furthermore, Trump used a so-called disruptive strategy which worked well in such an eroded environment.
You do not understand the effects of gaslighting. The person subjected to it gets its "backbone" removed over time. To insist someone have to grow a backbone is a very ignorant position. Understandable, but ignorant. The two options are (a) get out of there and rebuild your ego outside. It might help to seek professional help. (b) log everything, try to build alliances and then present your case through official channels or directly to higher management. Unfortunately, this may also result in your dismissal. The second option is only worth it if the company is somewhat emotionally relevant to you.
It is also possible to seek professional help and try to improve your position with that help, before you quit or fight. In case you live in Europe you could also go to works council, as you do not trust the management. That is where to go.
As long as there is no law forcing them to make batteries easy to change and available for 10 years, they will not.
I hope you are right. I also hope that Mr Trump will leave office in 4 or 8 years. I have the bad feeling that is might not be the case.
It is stupid to believe that a country can be run like a company. In a country you have to understand macro economics and pursue the interest of all people, while as business person you only need to be concerned with your company (that is micro economics). In addition in politics the world is not about deals it is about treaties and common understanding. A deal is a singular event. It is often not necessary to consider all the side effects of selling a product or service. In a political context, it is not helpful to make a treaty your partner suffers from or third party suffer from, because there might be a time in future where you have to make another treaty with the suffering party. We do not live on Ferenginar and the US President is the Grand Nagus. Still in the TV series the Ferengi have a bad reputation which harm trade and commerce.
a) The article says that it can become the cheapest option (in some countries).
b) Fossil fuels are highly subsidized (even if you ignore the ecological problems they cause).
c) The power companies control grid and grid access (to some degree). Therefore, it is harder for renewables to get into the market. Also there might be consumer bias.
d) It does not matter whether it may become cheaper or not. We have to get rid of fossil fuels, extensive methane production and oxides of nitrogen to prevent further damage through climate change. However, your upcoming government denies climate change and will, therefore, not take action. He even considered stopping initiatives pushing renewables.
However, it will not matter in US. At least for the next four years, the US has a government in denial. Furthermore, it is not sufficient to have a lot of electricity from solar or wind (which is essential also driven by solar power). We need storage facilities and present battery technology is too expensive and does not support enough cycles, as it is focused on light, easy to transport and small batteries. For large scale energy storage we need much more recharge cycles, but it is not that relevant how big the batteries are or how heavy. Anyway, nothing which will be happening in the US. China, the EU and India will compete in this area.
a)RTFA you still can use the old UI style
b) if it is more clear and usable for newcomers this often implies that it IS actually more user friendly. Old users just have to relearn some parts. Yes learning is cumbersome, but if you embrace change you are better of afterwards. If you hate change you will become once a grumpy old person who hates the present.
Wikipedia runs on computers. Someone has to BUY them. Someone has to PAY for their electricity, Internet connection, repairs, housing etc. Someone has to WRITE and MAINTAIN the code of the Wiki software.
Oil companies have under performed compared to the market average, as oil prices are relatively low these days.
How is that interesting? It is totally dumb to believe you could change their course by owning some stocks. You have to have a majority of stocks with voting rights in your pocket. Furthermore, why should you invest money in a company where you disagree with their goals? It makes more sense in investing money in the future than try to help coal and oil industry to understand that their business model is phased out.
The best thing for Uber is, legally they are only an app and drivers are using the app or are contractors. However, in the UK they got one over the head, as they were classified by court as an employer.
You are right depending the fusion development, but in case of renewables, the oil companies could invest a lot and be the next big thing. But they don't, which indicates that they are not able to survive in future.
Big Oil is not investing in solar power, wind turbines or storage technology which will be the choice of alternative energy for now. Why should they invest in fusion?
This is totally fake bullshit. For starters there are not that many refugees in Paris. And they have houses in Paris. The largest sum in the EU is residing in Germany. And they have houses too. Most domestic fires are fireplaces which middle class families have for fun.
New automation methods will drastically increase productivity, while growth is not expected to go through the roof top. In essence you need less jobs.
Please do not compare this with the industrial revolution, as we had a labor shortage than. Also automation applied in the 1980s with robots cost jobs, but growth was bigger (at least in Germany) so more new jobs were created outside the factories. Now the situation is different, as all jobs in offices are targeted and in addition, drivers, nurses etc.
Everyone with an open mind and a basic understanding in economics will come to the same conclusion. New automation technology will increase productivity quickly and faster than economic growth. In consequence there will be less jobs.
True. But we are talking IT jobs. This means in many cases programming, designing, drawing etc. They will not steal your ideas. They will have them for you. In the end you loose knowledge. Presently the US has an edge in big data, data mining etc. but in case of massive outsourcing this can be lost to other countries and subsequently companies. Western countries already lost the knowledge for computer and electronics assembly to China and South Korea.
Offshoring is also complicated and you need management structures in a country you do not know. And US companies are really good in not understanding local culture. Therefore, immigration movesnthat obligation to the immigrant. However, when H1B visas are off, the off shoring option becomes more viable.
Even if he stops skilled immigrants. Tech work does not need to be in the US. It is portable. Anyway, the biggest fear is among the low end techworker in the US. And their jobs can easily be outsourced which is already happening.
People accept that Trump is the next president. They just do not like it. And that for good reasons. It is also time to discuss what will come and how fast so you can prepare for it.