Well when they get $100k why do they whine about H1B visas? It looks like they are still getting a lot of money. I earn at university €40k and I usually do not spend all of it.
I can assure you that we all think very highly of our university education in Germany and we do not pay a dime (directly). I would agree with the concept of "people value only when they pay for it" for goods and services. However, in university education it is also your doing which results in good grades and a chance for a job.
You largely misinterpret my words and you know that. Of course schools cost money. And so do universities. However, you can either have a system where money dictates if you can go to school or where all can go to school and we all, in an attempt to be altruistic, pay for it. In the end, if the university education pays off, you will pay enough money so someone else can go to school and university. It is like many concepts in modern states. For example, retirement. Some pay and the elderly people get the money. When the payers get old they will get money from the fund other people pay then. Such systems even survive big financial crises or even world wars. While the every looks after himself concept resulted in no retirement money.
Education is very similar. We invest in the education of the young people today. Therefore, there will be an economy when we are old. And they will invest then in the education of the young people then. You have to look at the subject from a macroeconomics view. As a state you have.
Why engage in a serious discussion when you can just blame someone else for the misery. For example, last time they could vote, they voted most likely Republican or Democrat (not that it matters that much) and they most likely did so before. And every time they do not like the outcome. But instead of changing their choice the next time in an election, they whine about the situation and elect the same jerks over and over again. They could vote for the Green party or even organize something new.
Neither Trump nor any other candidate will really stop H1B visas. It might be that they deport Mexicans to simulate action, but the truth is that this will be far too little to fight the influx of Mexicans. As long as you do not start shooting at them at the border 24/7 they will come. And if you do, they will find other ways to flee their dysfunctional country. Why do I talk about Mexicans? Because it is part of the same problem. People move around the globe in search for a better life. Some come by H1B visa, some are illegal. They are driven by the limited prospects in their own country, by wars, by hunger, by violence. and they will all come to Western states. Look at the influx of Syrians to the EU.
So if all these/. would really want to discuss the issue of H1B they must discuss migration and wealth distribution, but this is communist stuff. Real Americans don't use these words.
Really? Large numbers of H1B visas are no problem, is a neo liberal/neo conservative statement. Commies would try to protect the workforce from foreign competition.
A lot of people here in the forum fear those people with H1B visas, as they are used to lower wages and increase unemployment. Instead of whining about this obvious bad situation in the US, you could yourself look at relocating yourself to another country. For example you can get paid between 35-55 k€ a year in Germany as a coder or software engineer after leaving university. In US equivalent you have to add another 7% for healthcare and 5% for retirement plan which would be today $43.77k to $68.79k per year.
In the US, most suburban areas are dominated by houses surrounded by (potential) gardens. In such areas mass transit by tram or even by bus is not easy to realize because you need a specific amount of people to make the system work. However, when the population is denser which is in fact the case in poorer communities in the US and applies in (Western) Europe to most bigger cities.
It is also a chicken and the egg problem. The mass transit sucks because no one is using it. And no one is using it because it sucks so much.
In Europe, China and Japan mass transit is much faster when you need to get to a location in the city or metropolitan area, as they can go easily up to 80 km/h and have an average speed of 50 km/g while cars only have up to 17 km/h (in German cities that is).
However, he real solution is not in installing a system which is able to shuffle people around more quickly. As history shows that never resulted in less traffic. It would be better to relocalize businesses. For example, why must people working in an office drive all to the city center to sit in an office together with their neighbors. In most cases it is more helpful and even cheaper for the company to rent offices closer to the home. However, then most of those tall buildings are useless.
European cities were constructed during a time where people worked close(r) to home and had no cars. Therefore, the cities are dominated by 4-8 story high buildings and narrow roads. Shops where located in such structures on street level while the people were living above their shops. Traffic wise this is very clever.
Ah yes, and you asked about efficiency of mass transit vs. cars. In my previous post this efficiency comprises all resources used to transport the person. However, I left out time. While I know that this is an important factor for people, it depends highly on the area where you live how much faster you are at average and at the time when most people commute.
First, powering wireless while driving is extremely expensive, as large portions of the road must be equipped with coils. This approach is also very resource hungry and therefore not applicable. Second, installing such coils for parking or on traffic lights is also expensive and complicated, as they have to be switched on and off 100s of times every day. Third, cars are by concept very inefficient, as normals cars weight 1-2 t and are used to carry around 1.3 persons weighting 80-120 kg. 1:10 to 1:20 ratio. In addition, they require a lot of space. While this is not a problem in large areas of North America, it is a problem in densely populated areas, like Central and Western Europe, and even more in India, China, Japan, etc.
The solution to present day transportation issues in metropolitan areas, where most people live, are public transport. Well implemented, it is faster than cars in traffic, they require less space than cars, and they require less energy. In addition we should promote bicycles, as they are more flexible and a good short range people mover. They also come with the bonus of better health. The individual traffic (with cars) is dead, as there is no individuality in traffic jams and when thousands of people all drive in the same direction every morning and back in the evening.
In theory it is a good thing that everything you do online stays online forever. Including all the stupid posts, butt photos, kisses, etc. This, as some think also on/., will help you to "grow up faster", implying that learning how to behave in public has something to do with growing up (yes it is a small, but not insignificant part). As we all do and did a lot of stupid things in our life the remaining content will just illustrate the process of becoming an adult. And we all know that and therefore we do not insult anyone with their old imagery and postings. NOT.
The truth is that we are in total not that open, which means that we do insult people with their past. We are cruel, we try to trick each other, and we cheat. And the failures of other always account for more than our own failures. In the old offline world, we had therefore different kinds of public. We had friends and talked with them and the rubbish we said was more or less forgotten next morning. We have a different personality in a business context, on holidays, at home, and when visiting a theater. And these are often even disjunct. Online all these worlds can merge. My political me and my business me are visible to everyone or at least not only to those I told it. If you are on twitter it is public to all. If you do it on Facebook it might only be visible to your "friends" but in addition it is visible to Facebook and everyone they sell your data to.
So in the end it must be possible to restrain information so that only a few people might be able to see your data. And that must be guaranteed. It must further be enforced that now company can force you to open up the data. However, this is hard to realizes, as they always can ask you to give the data willingly and if you do not, they do not hire you. Officially, they will tell something else.
The idea of the UK is not sufficient and it does not address the real problem, as it only helps you to erase data you know of. Not all the data that might be out there.
The first link is mostly the poles complaining that the german power grid is very unpredictable and causes problems for people trying to load balance.
Correct. But you have to read between the lines. Wind power surplus is very well predictable due to the relatively good weather reports. one problem is the weak grid between Germany and Poland, but the second problem is that the old coal plant in Poland and Germany cannot be regulated that fast.
This is something US utilities have said as well with solar and wind. It jumps all over the place and it is very hard to load balance.
You need good prediction, but that is possible.
The second article talks about how increased demand for energy as well as pressure from the EU is making poland consider building two large nuclear power plants. That isn't showing a lack of profitability that is showing vigorous demand.
Yes, Poland needs more power. But certain groups do not want that energy come from only renewable energy.
And the third article says Poland is mostly running on coal and is increasing capacity with more coal power plants.
Please quote... in german if you like... where it says that Poland's export of power is not profitable?
In the last article, they say that all these projects are under pressure due to low market prices:
Da durch den sinkenden Energiepreis die Rentabilität neuer Investitionen nur schwer erreichbar erscheint, versuchen Energiekonzerne über Kooperationen mit Großabnehmern das Risiko aufzuteilen.
As of decreasing energy prices (see also the tennet link) the profitability of new investments appear to be hard to achieve, energy companies try to control the risks by cooperating with large consumers. So while all this projects are planned, it looks less and less profitable to companies while they have to (a) block German electricity (see first link) and (b) make contracts with some consumers.
???? you life in a strange country. I could have a sexual relationship with my boss and our secretary and that would not be a problem legally. Anyway, I am not gay so the first option is only theoretical, and the second option is, well I have a spouse and I am very happy with her.
Yes the two links are a little contradictory. The difference is, however, based on net transfers and imports/exports. The first article states, that the French think they import more from Germany, while Germany thinks the opposite.
From the article:
In all likelihood, the French are therefore counting actual sales, whereas the Germans are counting power flows irrespective of who ends up buying the electricity.
Therefore, Fraunhofer count transit as imports on one side and exports on the other side, which obfuscates transits and therefore the import export figures. In the end you only can see the general exports and imports of a country to see if it is a contributor or a consumer.
Presently, Germany has an over capacity, due to old coal plants this is one cause for the sometimes low electricity prices. Even though, electricity is send to Norway and stored there. Of course the prices for stored electricity are higher than the production price, but the net volume of exports is still bigger than the imports. And in future we have to invest in more storage in Germany to less alienate our polish neighbours.
The sources are in German. The first on is on the topic of effects of East German wind power and the effects for the polish network http://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/...
While they plan to build new plants, they also have a problem due to low prices on the European electricity exchange (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Energy_Exchange) and other trading places. Therefore, many projects might be be realized.
Tennet a large energy net company shows that electricity prices on the market have declined making coal less profitable: http://www.tennet.eu/nl/news/a... While coal prices may get lower due to Chinas reduced imports, running coal plant still cannot keep up with solar and wind power (onshore). http://www.theguardian.com/env... (sorry from last year).
DSL = domain-specific language. There is no sharp differentiation between general purpose languages (GPL) and DSLs. However, a DSL is a language with structures which cover specific domain concepts, e..g, communication. The two terms span a continuum where GPL is one extreme and DSL is the other. For example, SQL is a DSL for databases, Postscript for printing, HTML for webpages, while C is more or less a GPL.
Now an external DSL is a DSL which has its own grammer, interpreter or compiler. While an internal DSL is, for example a library with a specific set of operations/methods/functions which have a coherent meaning. For example, OpenGL with its C library interface is such an internal DSL, or XML frameworks. A classic are file operations. They can also be described as a language with rules for open, close, read, write, and seek. The language here can be defined as a regular expression, e.g., (open, (read|write|seek)*, close) or even (open[mode=read], (seek|read)*, close) || (open[mode=write], (seek|write)*, close).
Another typical case of internal DSL are, for instance, entity classes for the Java persistence API which are in fact Java classes with specific annotations.
Your language is somewhat in the middle between DSL and GPL.
Hope that helps. You might want to read "When and how to develop DSLs" by Mernik.
Well ask the Netherlands why they waste all that money on dike construction. It is because of the sea level rise. Of course the rise is minimal presently by 2-3 mm per year, but it will become an issue in 100 years, but our actions today are causing that.
There is not anti-science going on. Renewable are just better than nuclear. It is less risky and decentralized which makes it in the end even more reliable. What we need is more storage. Presently Germany and Denmark us Norway as storage for their surplus (and the Alps). However, in future we need more local battery storage. Especially close to solar panels in houses. In Germany in some areas home owners start installing batteries, but this will improve in future when the storage becomes cheaper and easier to recycle. Research and development provide promising results in that area to come in the next decade.
Most likely they will switch of Fessenheim, as it is close to the German border and not very popular in the region, but France will keep some nuclear capacity just to show that they are still in the game.
Beside occasional accidents and big one every 30 years. We cannot afford an accident like Chernobyl in Western Europe. Here, people are living everywhere. In addition we do not know how to get rid of the waste. And it is also expensive when you cut the subsidies. If nuclear plant owners required an insurance to cover for eventual hazards, they would be un-payable. Nuclear is not a solution. this includes the Thorium idea even though in theory it would be less risky in operation. The rest of the problem remains.
the truth is we will use renewable energy. Presently we have to increased energy storage and management, but we made a lot of progress. Germany, produces now more energy by wind and solar than by nuclear power. https://www.energy-charts.de/p...
And they are starting to switch off coal plants as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Well when they get $100k why do they whine about H1B visas? It looks like they are still getting a lot of money. I earn at university €40k and I usually do not spend all of it.
I can assure you that we all think very highly of our university education in Germany and we do not pay a dime (directly). I would agree with the concept of "people value only when they pay for it" for goods and services. However, in university education it is also your doing which results in good grades and a chance for a job.
You largely misinterpret my words and you know that. Of course schools cost money. And so do universities. However, you can either have a system where money dictates if you can go to school or where all can go to school and we all, in an attempt to be altruistic, pay for it. In the end, if the university education pays off, you will pay enough money so someone else can go to school and university. It is like many concepts in modern states. For example, retirement. Some pay and the elderly people get the money. When the payers get old they will get money from the fund other people pay then. Such systems even survive big financial crises or even world wars. While the every looks after himself concept resulted in no retirement money.
Education is very similar. We invest in the education of the young people today. Therefore, there will be an economy when we are old. And they will invest then in the education of the young people then. You have to look at the subject from a macroeconomics view. As a state you have.
Why engage in a serious discussion when you can just blame someone else for the misery. For example, last time they could vote, they voted most likely Republican or Democrat (not that it matters that much) and they most likely did so before. And every time they do not like the outcome. But instead of changing their choice the next time in an election, they whine about the situation and elect the same jerks over and over again. They could vote for the Green party or even organize something new.
Neither Trump nor any other candidate will really stop H1B visas. It might be that they deport Mexicans to simulate action, but the truth is that this will be far too little to fight the influx of Mexicans. As long as you do not start shooting at them at the border 24/7 they will come. And if you do, they will find other ways to flee their dysfunctional country. Why do I talk about Mexicans? Because it is part of the same problem. People move around the globe in search for a better life. Some come by H1B visa, some are illegal. They are driven by the limited prospects in their own country, by wars, by hunger, by violence. and they will all come to Western states. Look at the influx of Syrians to the EU.
So if all these /. would really want to discuss the issue of H1B they must discuss migration and wealth distribution, but this is communist stuff. Real Americans don't use these words.
Really? Large numbers of H1B visas are no problem, is a neo liberal/neo conservative statement. Commies would try to protect the workforce from foreign competition.
A lot of people here in the forum fear those people with H1B visas, as they are used to lower wages and increase unemployment. Instead of whining about this obvious bad situation in the US, you could yourself look at relocating yourself to another country. For example you can get paid between 35-55 k€ a year in Germany as a coder or software engineer after leaving university. In US equivalent you have to add another 7% for healthcare and 5% for retirement plan which would be today $43.77k to $68.79k per year.
University education should be free. And in some countries it is.
One of those matchbox cars. Or an old one.
In the US, most suburban areas are dominated by houses surrounded by (potential) gardens. In such areas mass transit by tram or even by bus is not easy to realize because you need a specific amount of people to make the system work. However, when the population is denser which is in fact the case in poorer communities in the US and applies in (Western) Europe to most bigger cities.
It is also a chicken and the egg problem. The mass transit sucks because no one is using it. And no one is using it because it sucks so much.
In Europe, China and Japan mass transit is much faster when you need to get to a location in the city or metropolitan area, as they can go easily up to 80 km/h and have an average speed of 50 km/g while cars only have up to 17 km/h (in German cities that is).
However, he real solution is not in installing a system which is able to shuffle people around more quickly. As history shows that never resulted in less traffic. It would be better to relocalize businesses. For example, why must people working in an office drive all to the city center to sit in an office together with their neighbors. In most cases it is more helpful and even cheaper for the company to rent offices closer to the home. However, then most of those tall buildings are useless.
European cities were constructed during a time where people worked close(r) to home and had no cars. Therefore, the cities are dominated by 4-8 story high buildings and narrow roads. Shops where located in such structures on street level while the people were living above their shops. Traffic wise this is very clever.
Ah yes, and you asked about efficiency of mass transit vs. cars. In my previous post this efficiency comprises all resources used to transport the person. However, I left out time. While I know that this is an important factor for people, it depends highly on the area where you live how much faster you are at average and at the time when most people commute.
First, powering wireless while driving is extremely expensive, as large portions of the road must be equipped with coils. This approach is also very resource hungry and therefore not applicable. Second, installing such coils for parking or on traffic lights is also expensive and complicated, as they have to be switched on and off 100s of times every day. Third, cars are by concept very inefficient, as normals cars weight 1-2 t and are used to carry around 1.3 persons weighting 80-120 kg. 1:10 to 1:20 ratio. In addition, they require a lot of space. While this is not a problem in large areas of North America, it is a problem in densely populated areas, like Central and Western Europe, and even more in India, China, Japan, etc.
The solution to present day transportation issues in metropolitan areas, where most people live, are public transport. Well implemented, it is faster than cars in traffic, they require less space than cars, and they require less energy. In addition we should promote bicycles, as they are more flexible and a good short range people mover. They also come with the bonus of better health. The individual traffic (with cars) is dead, as there is no individuality in traffic jams and when thousands of people all drive in the same direction every morning and back in the evening.
In theory it is a good thing that everything you do online stays online forever. Including all the stupid posts, butt photos, kisses, etc. This, as some think also on /., will help you to "grow up faster", implying that learning how to behave in public has something to do with growing up (yes it is a small, but not insignificant part). As we all do and did a lot of stupid things in our life the remaining content will just illustrate the process of becoming an adult. And we all know that and therefore we do not insult anyone with their old imagery and postings. NOT.
The truth is that we are in total not that open, which means that we do insult people with their past. We are cruel, we try to trick each other, and we cheat. And the failures of other always account for more than our own failures. In the old offline world, we had therefore different kinds of public. We had friends and talked with them and the rubbish we said was more or less forgotten next morning. We have a different personality in a business context, on holidays, at home, and when visiting a theater. And these are often even disjunct. Online all these worlds can merge. My political me and my business me are visible to everyone or at least not only to those I told it. If you are on twitter it is public to all. If you do it on Facebook it might only be visible to your "friends" but in addition it is visible to Facebook and everyone they sell your data to.
So in the end it must be possible to restrain information so that only a few people might be able to see your data. And that must be guaranteed. It must further be enforced that now company can force you to open up the data. However, this is hard to realizes, as they always can ask you to give the data willingly and if you do not, they do not hire you. Officially, they will tell something else.
The idea of the UK is not sufficient and it does not address the real problem, as it only helps you to erase data you know of. Not all the data that might be out there.
You get -60 points of FAIL if you can convince the rest of the world to use your new and shiny version control system.
He just forgot that.
You will not get a good answer here, because even if there would be one it will be hard to find between all the nonsense.
BTW your scenario is incomplete and therefore it is unlikely to give a good answer. It looks a little bit like you want /. to make your homework.
The first link is mostly the poles complaining that the german power grid is very unpredictable and causes problems for people trying to load balance.
Correct. But you have to read between the lines. Wind power surplus is very well predictable due to the relatively good weather reports. one problem is the weak grid between Germany and Poland, but the second problem is that the old coal plant in Poland and Germany cannot be regulated that fast.
This is something US utilities have said as well with solar and wind. It jumps all over the place and it is very hard to load balance.
You need good prediction, but that is possible.
The second article talks about how increased demand for energy as well as pressure from the EU is making poland consider building two large nuclear power plants. That isn't showing a lack of profitability that is showing vigorous demand.
Yes, Poland needs more power. But certain groups do not want that energy come from only renewable energy.
And the third article says Poland is mostly running on coal and is increasing capacity with more coal power plants.
Please quote... in german if you like... where it says that Poland's export of power is not profitable?
In the last article, they say that all these projects are under pressure due to low market prices:
Da durch den sinkenden Energiepreis die Rentabilität neuer Investitionen nur schwer erreichbar erscheint, versuchen Energiekonzerne über Kooperationen mit Großabnehmern das Risiko aufzuteilen.
As of decreasing energy prices (see also the tennet link) the profitability of new investments appear to be hard to achieve, energy companies try to control the risks by cooperating with large consumers. So while all this projects are planned, it looks less and less profitable to companies while they have to (a) block German electricity (see first link) and (b) make contracts with some consumers.
???? you life in a strange country. I could have a sexual relationship with my boss and our secretary and that would not be a problem legally. Anyway, I am not gay so the first option is only theoretical, and the second option is, well I have a spouse and I am very happy with her.
The energy-charts obfuscates energy transits, as stated here: http://www.renewablesinternati... have a look at the last paragraph.
Yes the two links are a little contradictory. The difference is, however, based on net transfers and imports/exports. The first article states, that the French think they import more from Germany, while Germany thinks the opposite.
From the article:
Therefore, Fraunhofer count transit as imports on one side and exports on the other side, which obfuscates transits and therefore the import export figures. In the end you only can see the general exports and imports of a country to see if it is a contributor or a consumer.
Presently, Germany has an over capacity, due to old coal plants this is one cause for the sometimes low electricity prices. Even though, electricity is send to Norway and stored there. Of course the prices for stored electricity are higher than the production price, but the net volume of exports is still bigger than the imports. And in future we have to invest in more storage in Germany to less alienate our polish neighbours.
The sources are in German. The first on is on the topic of effects of East German wind power and the effects for the polish network http://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/...
On the whole energy concept of Poland
http://www.welt.de/politik/aus...
And the projects in building new gas and coal plants:
http://www.gtai.de/GTAI/Naviga...
While they plan to build new plants, they also have a problem due to low prices on the European electricity exchange (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Energy_Exchange) and other trading places. Therefore, many projects might be be realized.
Tennet a large energy net company shows that electricity prices on the market have declined making coal less profitable: http://www.tennet.eu/nl/news/a...
While coal prices may get lower due to Chinas reduced imports, running coal plant still cannot keep up with solar and wind power (onshore). http://www.theguardian.com/env... (sorry from last year).
Hope that helps.
DSL = domain-specific language. There is no sharp differentiation between general purpose languages (GPL) and DSLs. However, a DSL is a language with structures which cover specific domain concepts, e..g, communication. The two terms span a continuum where GPL is one extreme and DSL is the other. For example, SQL is a DSL for databases, Postscript for printing, HTML for webpages, while C is more or less a GPL.
Now an external DSL is a DSL which has its own grammer, interpreter or compiler. While an internal DSL is, for example a library with a specific set of operations/methods/functions which have a coherent meaning. For example, OpenGL with its C library interface is such an internal DSL, or XML frameworks. A classic are file operations. They can also be described as a language with rules for open, close, read, write, and seek. The language here can be defined as a regular expression, e.g., (open, (read|write|seek)*, close) or even
(open[mode=read], (seek|read)*, close) || (open[mode=write], (seek|write)*, close).
Another typical case of internal DSL are, for instance, entity classes for the Java persistence API which are in fact Java classes with specific annotations.
Your language is somewhat in the middle between DSL and GPL.
Hope that helps. You might want to read "When and how to develop DSLs" by Mernik.
Well ask the Netherlands why they waste all that money on dike construction. It is because of the sea level rise. Of course the rise is minimal presently by 2-3 mm per year, but it will become an issue in 100 years, but our actions today are causing that.
There is not anti-science going on. Renewable are just better than nuclear. It is less risky and decentralized which makes it in the end even more reliable. What we need is more storage. Presently Germany and Denmark us Norway as storage for their surplus (and the Alps). However, in future we need more local battery storage. Especially close to solar panels in houses. In Germany in some areas home owners start installing batteries, but this will improve in future when the storage becomes cheaper and easier to recycle. Research and development provide promising results in that area to come in the next decade.
Most likely they will switch of Fessenheim, as it is close to the German border and not very popular in the region, but France will keep some nuclear capacity just to show that they are still in the game.
Beside occasional accidents and big one every 30 years. We cannot afford an accident like Chernobyl in Western Europe. Here, people are living everywhere. In addition we do not know how to get rid of the waste. And it is also expensive when you cut the subsidies. If nuclear plant owners required an insurance to cover for eventual hazards, they would be un-payable. Nuclear is not a solution. this includes the Thorium idea even though in theory it would be less risky in operation. The rest of the problem remains.
the truth is we will use renewable energy. Presently we have to increased energy storage and management, but we made a lot of progress. Germany, produces now more energy by wind and solar than by nuclear power. https://www.energy-charts.de/p...
And they are starting to switch off coal plants as well.