If you had an account you could get achievements. It was an old Slashdot April Fools joke, but they just left it on. I'm assuming it would work for new accounts as well.
A fine enough idea in theory, but how many businesses receive tax subsidies or make use of federal funding in some way? How many can say they've never done this at all in the company's history.
Hardly fair to refuse me service when I can't refuse to pay the taxes your business dips into. Get rid of any and all compulsory taxpayer funded government support and then we can talk about freedom of association for businesses.
Would you be completely unproductive with your extra free time though? If you worked on some open source hobby project instead it's not like the world is worse off. Yes I realize that's not the most efficient use of capital, and yes there are some who won't be productive with their time, but if it means some criminals will also be less productive with their time it means society probably sees some cost savings on the other end.
The U.S. already spends huge sums of money on myriad social programs. Simplify the government side and do away with the bureaucracy for additional savings. Even if you don't think a basic income is a good idea for moral or philosophical reasons, it's probably the idea with the least cost so long as you don't let those wholly on the dole vote themselves more bread and circuses.
Tessa must have some pretty damning evidence against her to fire her for this, because it does open up a legal case against them for retaliation, which their HR department and legal team are no doubt well aware. They'd have to have solid proof that she made it all up or so flagrantly lied about parts of it to be able to fire her over it without legal repercussion.
Why pass people who don't deserve it though? They aren't magically smarter for getting a piece a paper. Worse yet they might think they're capable of higher learning and waste money on university when they're doomed to fail or have to keep cheating, which can only go on so long unless they're well connected in which case they can just buy the degree and skip the cheating entirely.
I think the U.S. has this problem where high school lets anyone through to the point it became useless and so everyone wanted a college degree, but now that's getting watered down so for a lot of fields (not really CS or engineering) you really almost need an MS to have a shot at a good job.
The average people are probably about what they are today. Conquering foreign nations and rules come and go, but the common people tend to remain fairly fixed. There might be some influxes of other groups from time to time across history, but not on a massive population level where it's going to radically change the genetics of such a large ethnic group. It was just too prohibitively expensive to move large groups of people around and to do so in a timely fashion. Moses allegedly led the Jews out of Egypt and spent 40 years just getting to Israel. So unless your nomadic tribe outright kills a bunch of the other people living in the area and replaces them, there isn't going to be much of a change.
Do you have any links to those studies? I've only read productivity studies for time worked on an individual day. It makes a certain amount of sense that the same reasoning would apply to longer periods of time, but there's an alternative explanation that less productive people are aware of their capabilities relative to others and will try to compensate for this by spending more time at work in order to increase their perceived value or have a better position from which to bargain for a raise.
I think this is more related to certain fields like engineer, software development, etc. where work productivity can differ by an order of magnitude. Compare this with a factory job, where it's probably difficult for any one work to be much more than twice as productive than any other worker.
I'm interested in looking into this more. Coincidentally, I have a bit of vacation coming up and could use something to read while traveling.
It's far too well armoured for honeybees to hurt it, so instead what they do is swarm it and beat their wings like crazy, creating heat. Because their maximum survivable body temperature happens to be just a couple degrees hotter than the hornet's maximum temperature, so they basically cook it to death;)
Also, how many of them are getting a $4 coffee here, buying a new $50 video game every month, and plenty of other small regular expenses that add up to a significant amount over the course of a year. You don't even need to buy luxury items to piss away a lot of money. I think that this ties into the notion of not budgeting properly, because if you sit down and do this, you realize just how much you can save.
And it's not like saving money means you have to give up everything. I buy beans in bulk and make me own coffee every morning, buy games or movies when they go on sale and have a co-worker who just borrow movies from the library since they stock more than books now.
Don't be obtuse. The reason this is a problem is because the EU member countries have a much larger gap in per capita PPP than U.S. states. If you remove geofencing, no sane person is going to pay anything but the bottom rates that the service has to be sold for in poorer countries, which means lost revenue for the services offering content. Since they won't settle for that, it means less content gets offered or that the prices in those poorer countries get increased and fewer people can afford the services. About the only other alternative is adjusting prices based on language and not offering a full range of subtitles or dubs without paying more.
I'd argue that using a Stingray inside the U.S. at all is a violation of the U.S. Constitution. Whether or not a person agrees with the outcome shouldn't matter at all.
If they know where he's working, just scoop him up after he gets off of work. If ICE is getting that lazy, maybe they should hire some Mexicans. I've heard they're pretty hard working.
I wouldn't be surprised if this is because the volume of the passengers has increased by at least 11% over the same time period. Perhaps we might be better off forgetting about cars and building some bicycles instead.
Are they certain it's a casual relationship? If one were to look at a many Facebook and Twitter comments one could just as well conclude that the platforms attract people who already have mental health problems.
Indeed. I think this is one clear area where the government could (and should) step in and revoke Elsevier's copyrights. I don't think the current administration would actually do such a thing, but then again if Clinton had won she probably wouldn't either.
To get you first job, the piece of paper is important than your actual ability. After that, it hardly matters at all.
You can still get by in IT fine without a degree, but you'll probably need to start at a small place that doesn't really care about a degree (or perhaps even know such a thing exists) and have some good references, but after a while the degree doesn't matter as in the IT world after 10 or 20 years anything they would have taught you in college is probably useless anyway.
That a full third of British IT professionals don't have a college degree in IT shows exactly how much good that piece of a paper is really worth. If you're 18 and already have any kind of IT job and the motivation to self-learn, you probably don't need to go to college. Work experience will be more valuable to your career and they pay you for it on top of it.
I think that an independent Kurdistan would make a great western ally in the Middle East as they tend to be far more progressive, probably because many of them put more stock in their Kurdish heritage than their religion, and as ethnic group they're quite diverse religiously. However, I don't think Kurdistan would happen because Turkey would be heavily opposed since it would mean massive instability for a large part of their country and probably an eventual war.
We'd pretty much have to kick them out of Nato and give Russia carte blanche to fight Turkey, which Russia would probably do in order to secure control of the Bosphorus if they knew that the west wouldn't get involved. After the shit Erdogan has pulled, I wouldn't even feel bad about throwing them under the bus like that, and it would probably be better for the country in the long term to have him deposed and the country broken up.
Actually globalism and this offshoring of labor has lead to drastic increases in the middle class for both China and India. Eventually machines will replace a lot of that cheap foreign labor, but it won't really matter since it means that it's even less expensive to produce the different goods and services that people want or need. Cutting costs and driving down the cost of goods and services is the only real way to eradicate poverty.
What he's saying is that there's no basis for the statement that using a preferred learning style is any more effective than using some alternative or non-preferred. I didn't believe this myself at first (but was told this by a research psychologist who does research in that area) but read some of the literature and as of at least two years ago there was no study that was conducted in a way to allow a person to make that claim. Most of it came down to lack of proper control groups or only examining whether or not students preferred to use a particular learning method (which most people tend to do) over some others.
So there is not evidence to suggest that a learning style works better than others, only that people tend to prefer some over others. There were some researchers who were worried that focusing only on a preferred learning style might ultimately be detrimental, though this was an open question and not something that had been studied. Learning styles are just marketing fluff used by the text book and educational material companies to justify selling yet another set of new books, etc. It's basically a buzzword with no scientific basis. It seems to be another one of those myths that somehow turned into common knowledge and has become an oft repeated lie.
I don't know either, but I recall that a few years ago fizz buzz was a popular interview question used for new graduates. I know that not every company has good hiring practices, but one would assume they wouldn't bother with such a question if it didn't screen out at least some candidates.
Is there even anything in the leaks worth leaking. Maybe I'm not hearing about any damning information or juicy emails because I'm not French, but on the other hand there may be nothing terribly interesting. Not that it will stop a few crazies from thinking pizza is a reference to pedophilia or something like that, but is there anything salacious that could actually change the election?
That's why I said "sort of" when I was making the point. The same holds true for DVDs as well though, you don't own the movie, you're just leasing a plastic disc. If you break your DVD you would have to buy a new one and laws at the time made it illegal (or tried to at least) to circumvent the copy-protection mechanisms included on the DVD to create a digital backup of the contents.
Not really. Steam is like buying DVDs off of Amazon. You own (sort of) the product and you don't have to keep paying a subscription fee to maintain access.
This sounds like a model where you pay a subscription fee and can just play whatever games are available through the service. If you quit paying, you lose access, but otherwise you can play whatever game you want through the service. There have already been a few different services that have tried this in the past, and some more recent ones as well (I recall NVidia having some service where you could "rent" one of their high-end graphics cards and play through the cloud) so it's hardly a new idea or something that doesn't exist. I just think that most people prefer to buy the games outright rather than having a subscription model.
While that's all well and good I don't think millennials would be broadly characterized as being personally responsible. That's not to say that they're all irresponsible idiots, but in many ways the rapid scientific and technological process made in the decades prior to their existence have made life much, much easier in the United States and other Western democracies. Life didn't present as much of a demand to be responsible and society didn't go out of its way to realize that we needed to instill those virtues artificially due to their growing absence, so we can hardly be surprised.
I expect that we'll eventually see the pendulum swing the other way. Eventually this is going to start catching up to people and when enough of them start screaming bloody murder we'll collectively figure out what we should have been doing decades ago and start working towards it. Humanity tends not to make smart decisions at the highest levels, and looking back at history we only tend to do things better after having our previous and catastrophic actions blow up in our face so to speak. For example, the way we treated the Axis powers after WWII was markedly different from how Germany was treated after WWI, only because we came to realize that it was a terrible idea and would lead to future war. Now Germany and Japan are economic powerhouses that contribute greatly to the world economy because humanity realized that its better to build the defeated enemies back up instead of leaving hatred to fester.
Healthcare is always going to be tricky though just because at the end of your life (assuming it doesn't abruptly end in such a way that makes medical intervention impossible) everyone is going to wind up ill, run-down, or broken in a way that requires a lot of resources to fix. Historically, people were just okay with that, but modern technology has made it a lot easier to prolong the life of people with conditions that would have left them dead before age 2 in any other time period, and so there's a societal demand to keep on living. Maybe science will figure out a way to make that so cheap that it's no longer a problem to provide it so freely, but right now it's not an easy problem.
In the U.S. it's a particularly large one because as a country we've decided we want a huge military, whereas if we scaled that back we could provide better health coverage, even as unhealthy as we are as a population. But that ties back into the problem of responsibility and we have a society that doesn't view their health as their own concern, but rather someone else's responsibility to fix when it invariably fails. I'm sure a government system could be created to incentivize people to take better care of their own health, but I'm not sure the people would collectively vote for it. Humanity hasn't quite hit the necessary rock bottom in terms of what modernization does to health yet in order for us to go down the right path.
Slashdot Mirror
If you had an account you could get achievements. It was an old Slashdot April Fools joke, but they just left it on. I'm assuming it would work for new accounts as well.
A fine enough idea in theory, but how many businesses receive tax subsidies or make use of federal funding in some way? How many can say they've never done this at all in the company's history.
Hardly fair to refuse me service when I can't refuse to pay the taxes your business dips into. Get rid of any and all compulsory taxpayer funded government support and then we can talk about freedom of association for businesses.
Would you be completely unproductive with your extra free time though? If you worked on some open source hobby project instead it's not like the world is worse off. Yes I realize that's not the most efficient use of capital, and yes there are some who won't be productive with their time, but if it means some criminals will also be less productive with their time it means society probably sees some cost savings on the other end.
The U.S. already spends huge sums of money on myriad social programs. Simplify the government side and do away with the bureaucracy for additional savings. Even if you don't think a basic income is a good idea for moral or philosophical reasons, it's probably the idea with the least cost so long as you don't let those wholly on the dole vote themselves more bread and circuses.
Tessa must have some pretty damning evidence against her to fire her for this, because it does open up a legal case against them for retaliation, which their HR department and legal team are no doubt well aware. They'd have to have solid proof that she made it all up or so flagrantly lied about parts of it to be able to fire her over it without legal repercussion.
Why pass people who don't deserve it though? They aren't magically smarter for getting a piece a paper. Worse yet they might think they're capable of higher learning and waste money on university when they're doomed to fail or have to keep cheating, which can only go on so long unless they're well connected in which case they can just buy the degree and skip the cheating entirely. I think the U.S. has this problem where high school lets anyone through to the point it became useless and so everyone wanted a college degree, but now that's getting watered down so for a lot of fields (not really CS or engineering) you really almost need an MS to have a shot at a good job.
The average people are probably about what they are today. Conquering foreign nations and rules come and go, but the common people tend to remain fairly fixed. There might be some influxes of other groups from time to time across history, but not on a massive population level where it's going to radically change the genetics of such a large ethnic group. It was just too prohibitively expensive to move large groups of people around and to do so in a timely fashion. Moses allegedly led the Jews out of Egypt and spent 40 years just getting to Israel. So unless your nomadic tribe outright kills a bunch of the other people living in the area and replaces them, there isn't going to be much of a change.
Do you have any links to those studies? I've only read productivity studies for time worked on an individual day. It makes a certain amount of sense that the same reasoning would apply to longer periods of time, but there's an alternative explanation that less productive people are aware of their capabilities relative to others and will try to compensate for this by spending more time at work in order to increase their perceived value or have a better position from which to bargain for a raise.
I think this is more related to certain fields like engineer, software development, etc. where work productivity can differ by an order of magnitude. Compare this with a factory job, where it's probably difficult for any one work to be much more than twice as productive than any other worker.
I'm interested in looking into this more. Coincidentally, I have a bit of vacation coming up and could use something to read while traveling.
It's far too well armoured for honeybees to hurt it, so instead what they do is swarm it and beat their wings like crazy, creating heat. Because their maximum survivable body temperature happens to be just a couple degrees hotter than the hornet's maximum temperature, so they basically cook it to death ;)
Nature is pretty fucking metal sometimes.
Did you assume there are only two genders? That's a very grave sin, my child.
That'll be 10 "Our Mothers" and 20 "Hail Dworkins" as penance.
Also, how many of them are getting a $4 coffee here, buying a new $50 video game every month, and plenty of other small regular expenses that add up to a significant amount over the course of a year. You don't even need to buy luxury items to piss away a lot of money. I think that this ties into the notion of not budgeting properly, because if you sit down and do this, you realize just how much you can save.
And it's not like saving money means you have to give up everything. I buy beans in bulk and make me own coffee every morning, buy games or movies when they go on sale and have a co-worker who just borrow movies from the library since they stock more than books now.
Don't be obtuse. The reason this is a problem is because the EU member countries have a much larger gap in per capita PPP than U.S. states. If you remove geofencing, no sane person is going to pay anything but the bottom rates that the service has to be sold for in poorer countries, which means lost revenue for the services offering content. Since they won't settle for that, it means less content gets offered or that the prices in those poorer countries get increased and fewer people can afford the services. About the only other alternative is adjusting prices based on language and not offering a full range of subtitles or dubs without paying more.
I'd argue that using a Stingray inside the U.S. at all is a violation of the U.S. Constitution. Whether or not a person agrees with the outcome shouldn't matter at all.
If they know where he's working, just scoop him up after he gets off of work. If ICE is getting that lazy, maybe they should hire some Mexicans. I've heard they're pretty hard working.
Fuck me. Causal relationship.
/. posts mixed up with my craigslist posts.
Must have been getting my
I wouldn't be surprised if this is because the volume of the passengers has increased by at least 11% over the same time period. Perhaps we might be better off forgetting about cars and building some bicycles instead.
Are they certain it's a casual relationship? If one were to look at a many Facebook and Twitter comments one could just as well conclude that the platforms attract people who already have mental health problems.
Indeed. I think this is one clear area where the government could (and should) step in and revoke Elsevier's copyrights. I don't think the current administration would actually do such a thing, but then again if Clinton had won she probably wouldn't either.
To get you first job, the piece of paper is important than your actual ability. After that, it hardly matters at all.
You can still get by in IT fine without a degree, but you'll probably need to start at a small place that doesn't really care about a degree (or perhaps even know such a thing exists) and have some good references, but after a while the degree doesn't matter as in the IT world after 10 or 20 years anything they would have taught you in college is probably useless anyway.
That a full third of British IT professionals don't have a college degree in IT shows exactly how much good that piece of a paper is really worth. If you're 18 and already have any kind of IT job and the motivation to self-learn, you probably don't need to go to college. Work experience will be more valuable to your career and they pay you for it on top of it.
I think that an independent Kurdistan would make a great western ally in the Middle East as they tend to be far more progressive, probably because many of them put more stock in their Kurdish heritage than their religion, and as ethnic group they're quite diverse religiously. However, I don't think Kurdistan would happen because Turkey would be heavily opposed since it would mean massive instability for a large part of their country and probably an eventual war.
We'd pretty much have to kick them out of Nato and give Russia carte blanche to fight Turkey, which Russia would probably do in order to secure control of the Bosphorus if they knew that the west wouldn't get involved. After the shit Erdogan has pulled, I wouldn't even feel bad about throwing them under the bus like that, and it would probably be better for the country in the long term to have him deposed and the country broken up.
Actually globalism and this offshoring of labor has lead to drastic increases in the middle class for both China and India. Eventually machines will replace a lot of that cheap foreign labor, but it won't really matter since it means that it's even less expensive to produce the different goods and services that people want or need. Cutting costs and driving down the cost of goods and services is the only real way to eradicate poverty.
What he's saying is that there's no basis for the statement that using a preferred learning style is any more effective than using some alternative or non-preferred. I didn't believe this myself at first (but was told this by a research psychologist who does research in that area) but read some of the literature and as of at least two years ago there was no study that was conducted in a way to allow a person to make that claim. Most of it came down to lack of proper control groups or only examining whether or not students preferred to use a particular learning method (which most people tend to do) over some others.
So there is not evidence to suggest that a learning style works better than others, only that people tend to prefer some over others. There were some researchers who were worried that focusing only on a preferred learning style might ultimately be detrimental, though this was an open question and not something that had been studied. Learning styles are just marketing fluff used by the text book and educational material companies to justify selling yet another set of new books, etc. It's basically a buzzword with no scientific basis. It seems to be another one of those myths that somehow turned into common knowledge and has become an oft repeated lie.
Here's one particular publication on the topic that outlines it nicely: http://ocw.metu.edu.tr/pluginfile.php/3298/course/section/1174/Do%20Learners%20Really%20Know%20Best.pdf (PDF warning)
I don't know either, but I recall that a few years ago fizz buzz was a popular interview question used for new graduates. I know that not every company has good hiring practices, but one would assume they wouldn't bother with such a question if it didn't screen out at least some candidates.
Is there even anything in the leaks worth leaking. Maybe I'm not hearing about any damning information or juicy emails because I'm not French, but on the other hand there may be nothing terribly interesting. Not that it will stop a few crazies from thinking pizza is a reference to pedophilia or something like that, but is there anything salacious that could actually change the election?
That's why I said "sort of" when I was making the point. The same holds true for DVDs as well though, you don't own the movie, you're just leasing a plastic disc. If you break your DVD you would have to buy a new one and laws at the time made it illegal (or tried to at least) to circumvent the copy-protection mechanisms included on the DVD to create a digital backup of the contents.
Not really. Steam is like buying DVDs off of Amazon. You own (sort of) the product and you don't have to keep paying a subscription fee to maintain access.
This sounds like a model where you pay a subscription fee and can just play whatever games are available through the service. If you quit paying, you lose access, but otherwise you can play whatever game you want through the service. There have already been a few different services that have tried this in the past, and some more recent ones as well (I recall NVidia having some service where you could "rent" one of their high-end graphics cards and play through the cloud) so it's hardly a new idea or something that doesn't exist. I just think that most people prefer to buy the games outright rather than having a subscription model.
While that's all well and good I don't think millennials would be broadly characterized as being personally responsible. That's not to say that they're all irresponsible idiots, but in many ways the rapid scientific and technological process made in the decades prior to their existence have made life much, much easier in the United States and other Western democracies. Life didn't present as much of a demand to be responsible and society didn't go out of its way to realize that we needed to instill those virtues artificially due to their growing absence, so we can hardly be surprised.
I expect that we'll eventually see the pendulum swing the other way. Eventually this is going to start catching up to people and when enough of them start screaming bloody murder we'll collectively figure out what we should have been doing decades ago and start working towards it. Humanity tends not to make smart decisions at the highest levels, and looking back at history we only tend to do things better after having our previous and catastrophic actions blow up in our face so to speak. For example, the way we treated the Axis powers after WWII was markedly different from how Germany was treated after WWI, only because we came to realize that it was a terrible idea and would lead to future war. Now Germany and Japan are economic powerhouses that contribute greatly to the world economy because humanity realized that its better to build the defeated enemies back up instead of leaving hatred to fester.
Healthcare is always going to be tricky though just because at the end of your life (assuming it doesn't abruptly end in such a way that makes medical intervention impossible) everyone is going to wind up ill, run-down, or broken in a way that requires a lot of resources to fix. Historically, people were just okay with that, but modern technology has made it a lot easier to prolong the life of people with conditions that would have left them dead before age 2 in any other time period, and so there's a societal demand to keep on living. Maybe science will figure out a way to make that so cheap that it's no longer a problem to provide it so freely, but right now it's not an easy problem.
In the U.S. it's a particularly large one because as a country we've decided we want a huge military, whereas if we scaled that back we could provide better health coverage, even as unhealthy as we are as a population. But that ties back into the problem of responsibility and we have a society that doesn't view their health as their own concern, but rather someone else's responsibility to fix when it invariably fails. I'm sure a government system could be created to incentivize people to take better care of their own health, but I'm not sure the people would collectively vote for it. Humanity hasn't quite hit the necessary rock bottom in terms of what modernization does to health yet in order for us to go down the right path.