The problem is that there is a justified fear that if someone votes for a minor party, it will sap strength from the major party that kinda represents their interest and they will end up with the party that represents their interest in the least. People may be willing to take this chance when there isn't much at stake, but when there are contentious issues (like the war) at stake, 3rd parties don't even get considered.
Now if it were possible to vote in a way that says "I approve of candidates A _and_ C, but not B", you can freely vote for other parties without diminishing the strength of major party. Under this process, a 3rd (or 4th or 5th) party could build momentum over several elections rather than being a flash in the pan (like Nader & Perot).
It's not the electoral system, so much as the voting process. If you have only one vote and there are three candidates, you'll quickly decide that you need to vote for the person that most closely represents your ideals AND has the best chance of being elected.
This is why most people dismiss a 3rd party as a "wasted vote".
Now if it were possible to vote in a way that says "I approve of candidates A _and_ C, but not B", you can freely vote for other parties without diminishing the strength of major party. Under this process, a 3rd (or 4th or 5th) party could build momentum over several elections rather than being a flash in the pan (like Nader & Perot).
And yet he (and other people like him) constantly preach on "here's how to succeed"
No, the subject is "How to Do What You Like". He even discusses the luck factor in the essay. It doesn't matter how much you end up making, because there are sooo many factors that are beyond your control. The important part is to find out which things interest you before you get weighed down by responsibilities.
Your point is valid, but you should also point out that by putting first things first, you can usually get All of the Above. By tackling the important, but not urgent, issue (job you like) first, you can almost always make more money long term which makes it easy to accomplish the other goals.
It was longer than it needed to be and he admitted numerous times that the ideas weren't anything new. The book is helpful to a lot of people because it puts things in their proper perspective. If you gained nothing else from the book, you should ask yourself "Is this important or just urgent?" when weighing priorities. There are far too many people who subconciously spend the majority of their lives working on urgent issues and neglecting the important, yet not urgent issues.
Which is why it's important for young people to explore their options before trying to start a family. There's no doubt that once you take on such responsibilities, it's exponentially harder to take risks.
I can't stand seeing some of my friends doing unpaid overtime
Don't be so quick to judge. It all depends on the bottom lime. If (Salary + Benefits) / Hours = A Fair Wage, what's wrong with them doing it? If they agreed to the compensation with the understanding that overtime would be rare, it's probably not a fair wage. If, however, they knew it was part of the bargain, what's the problem?
It's true that working 60 hour weeks can significantly reduce the quality of your personal life, but once again, the pros/cons have to be weighed by the individual.
/I've been in both situations and currently only work 35 flexible hours
The summary is fairly misleading. (gasp!) All the article says is that geniuses who accomplish great things tend to work closely with other geniuses. The summary implies that you are only a genius if you accomplish great things. There are probably a fair number of geniuses in the world that spend too much time on the small stuff to do great things.
Probably because it takes time, which is money (even if automated somehow), makes it harder to price (just think of how many model numbers you'd need), and would eliminate the tolerances that allow them to offer decent warranties.
If you really want to attract attention to the article, you need a scoring system. Heck, it could probably be something as simple as "Comments per minute".
Popular articles may end up staying at the top too long, but all you'd have to do is raise the "minute" part to some appropriate exponent.
so that the search engine is not entitled to list anything without splitting a cut of the profits of that enterprise with the content creators.
All a content creator has to do is sign up for Adsense and they'll get their kickback from Google.
The only sites that would have a significant net expense to Google are the retailers which offer little, if any, new content. B&M Retailers typically spend a large chunk of their gross profit on advertising/marketing anyways, so how is this any different?
The problem with RAID, is your drives need to be of the same size
Not true. Most, if not all, controllers can handle multiple drive sizes; they just go with the lowest common denominator. Sure, it's inefficient, but it actually offers something of an upgrade path. I have a 4 drive RAID with 3 different drive sizes. It originally had 4 80GB drives, but I replaced two failed drives with whatever was most affordable at the time. When the last of the 80GB drives fails, I'll rebuild the array to the new lowest denominator.
Please explain what you mean by this. Are you talking about 3 disks constantly synchronized or is the 3rd disk some sort of hot spare? I was actually looking for a card that would give me a 3+ disk mirror awhile back. Unfortunately, I couldn't even find reference to such a thing, so I went with RAID 5 + hot spare.
I have mod points, but I feel it's more important to just correct you. He already has everything backed up and the LVM idea doesn't do anything to help his situation.
He does care about downtime. Downtime = time spent restoring. With a RAID level > 0, all he has to do is replace a drive and tell the raid to rebuild. He's done in 5 minutes. It would take that long just to queue up a restore job for the tape.
This would make the lights powered by the people who are using, rather than by people who are not using them.
This is an ideal worth pursuing, but in this case, the upfront cost and complexity of the solution is too high. Someone else estimated that it would take atleast 8, probably 16 years, to recoup the cost of the installation. So this really amounts to an additional, covert tax, rather than a fair, replacement tax.
I know what you mean. I got my RSI in both hands/wrists/arms from overall bad posture, but the mouse was certainly a contributing factor. I currently have a right handed trackball (I'd like to get a left handed one too, but I can't find one) and a wireless mouse that i usually use with my left hand. I just try to keep mixing it up throughout the week so that no single motion is used too frequently.
The only way to counter this effect is to have a larger base (i.e. at least more the 50%) of educated and critical thinking people in a society. And maybe for the first time in history we might have the chance to get closer to this goal.
This may very well be true, but they also need to be motivated. It doesn't matter how smart a voter is if he's apathetic to the whole process.
This is why I believe the USA needs to seriously consider alternative voting methods such as Approval Voting, Single Transferable Vote (STV), or The Borda Count. There are many others as well, and I haven't formed an opinion as to which is best, but almost all of them allow the voter to more accurately express his/her opinion, which is the holy grail of voting.
The current system of "Here are the candidates, pick one" forces the voter to make strategic choices like "I like candidate A best, but candidate B is the only one with a realistic chance of beating candidate C, so I guess I should vote for candidate B.".
Under the alternatives, the voter can express his or her interest in both A and B.
You can't infringe on the patent just because he says he wouldn't enforce it. It's too risky. Who's to say he'll even be the CEO next year? He would have to grant me a free and perpetual license before I would ever do anything that knowingly utilitizes his patented "technology".
That's exactly what copyright law does. He's under no obligation to charge for the book. He can stipulate that his readers are welcome to read and share the book, so long as they don't charge for it. However, without copyright law, publishers could easily market and profit from his efforts without compensating him in the least. They would most certainly remove the page that encourages donations to him. Hell, they'd remove all mention of his name.
Sounds nice and all, but you'd just end up with the lowest common denominator. We have only been able to reach the performance increases that we have (while reducing price at the same time) because of wholesale architecture platforms. If you insist that they maintain backwards compatibility, you'll only slow down the rate of progress. This may help a small set of people, but it would be detrimental overall.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that there is a justified fear that if someone votes for a minor party, it will sap strength from the major party that kinda represents their interest and they will end up with the party that represents their interest in the least. People may be willing to take this chance when there isn't much at stake, but when there are contentious issues (like the war) at stake, 3rd parties don't even get considered. Now if it were possible to vote in a way that says "I approve of candidates A _and_ C, but not B", you can freely vote for other parties without diminishing the strength of major party. Under this process, a 3rd (or 4th or 5th) party could build momentum over several elections rather than being a flash in the pan (like Nader & Perot).
It's not the electoral system, so much as the voting process. If you have only one vote and there are three candidates, you'll quickly decide that you need to vote for the person that most closely represents your ideals AND has the best chance of being elected.
This is why most people dismiss a 3rd party as a "wasted vote".
Now if it were possible to vote in a way that says "I approve of candidates A _and_ C, but not B", you can freely vote for other parties without diminishing the strength of major party. Under this process, a 3rd (or 4th or 5th) party could build momentum over several elections rather than being a flash in the pan (like Nader & Perot).
No, the subject is "How to Do What You Like". He even discusses the luck factor in the essay. It doesn't matter how much you end up making, because there are sooo many factors that are beyond your control. The important part is to find out which things interest you before you get weighed down by responsibilities.
Your point is valid, but you should also point out that by putting first things first, you can usually get All of the Above. By tackling the important, but not urgent, issue (job you like) first, you can almost always make more money long term which makes it easy to accomplish the other goals.
It was longer than it needed to be and he admitted numerous times that the ideas weren't anything new. The book is helpful to a lot of people because it puts things in their proper perspective. If you gained nothing else from the book, you should ask yourself "Is this important or just urgent?" when weighing priorities. There are far too many people who subconciously spend the majority of their lives working on urgent issues and neglecting the important, yet not urgent issues.
Which is why it's important for young people to explore their options before trying to start a family. There's no doubt that once you take on such responsibilities, it's exponentially harder to take risks.
Don't be so quick to judge. It all depends on the bottom lime. If (Salary + Benefits) / Hours = A Fair Wage, what's wrong with them doing it? If they agreed to the compensation with the understanding that overtime would be rare, it's probably not a fair wage. If, however, they knew it was part of the bargain, what's the problem?
It's true that working 60 hour weeks can significantly reduce the quality of your personal life, but once again, the pros/cons have to be weighed by the individual.
The summary is fairly misleading. (gasp!) All the article says is that geniuses who accomplish great things tend to work closely with other geniuses. The summary implies that you are only a genius if you accomplish great things. There are probably a fair number of geniuses in the world that spend too much time on the small stuff to do great things.
If you really want to attract attention to the article, you need a scoring system. Heck, it could probably be something as simple as "Comments per minute".
Popular articles may end up staying at the top too long, but all you'd have to do is raise the "minute" part to some appropriate exponent.
The only sites that would have a significant net expense to Google are the retailers which offer little, if any, new content. B&M Retailers typically spend a large chunk of their gross profit on advertising/marketing anyways, so how is this any different?
The problem with RAID, is your drives need to be of the same size Not true. Most, if not all, controllers can handle multiple drive sizes; they just go with the lowest common denominator. Sure, it's inefficient, but it actually offers something of an upgrade path. I have a 4 drive RAID with 3 different drive sizes. It originally had 4 80GB drives, but I replaced two failed drives with whatever was most affordable at the time. When the last of the 80GB drives fails, I'll rebuild the array to the new lowest denominator.
f you only keep one copy
For the second time, he already has a backup system in place and he said nothing about removing it. He wants to supplement it.
three disk RAID 1
Please explain what you mean by this. Are you talking about 3 disks constantly synchronized or is the 3rd disk some sort of hot spare? I was actually looking for a card that would give me a 3+ disk mirror awhile back. Unfortunately, I couldn't even find reference to such a thing, so I went with RAID 5 + hot spare.
I have mod points, but I feel it's more important to just correct you. He already has everything backed up and the LVM idea doesn't do anything to help his situation.
He does care about downtime. Downtime = time spent restoring. With a RAID level > 0, all he has to do is replace a drive and tell the raid to rebuild. He's done in 5 minutes. It would take that long just to queue up a restore job for the tape.
This would make the lights powered by the people who are using, rather than by people who are not using them.
This is an ideal worth pursuing, but in this case, the upfront cost and complexity of the solution is too high. Someone else estimated that it would take atleast 8, probably 16 years, to recoup the cost of the installation. So this really amounts to an additional, covert tax, rather than a fair, replacement tax.
I know what you mean. I got my RSI in both hands/wrists/arms from overall bad posture, but the mouse was certainly a contributing factor. I currently have a right handed trackball (I'd like to get a left handed one too, but I can't find one) and a wireless mouse that i usually use with my left hand. I just try to keep mixing it up throughout the week so that no single motion is used too frequently.
The only way to counter this effect is to have a larger base (i.e. at least more the 50%) of educated and critical thinking people in a society. And maybe for the first time in history we might have the chance to get closer to this goal.
This may very well be true, but they also need to be motivated. It doesn't matter how smart a voter is if he's apathetic to the whole process.
This is why I believe the USA needs to seriously consider alternative voting methods such as Approval Voting, Single Transferable Vote (STV), or The Borda Count. There are many others as well, and I haven't formed an opinion as to which is best, but almost all of them allow the voter to more accurately express his/her opinion, which is the holy grail of voting.
The current system of "Here are the candidates, pick one" forces the voter to make strategic choices like "I like candidate A best, but candidate B is the only one with a realistic chance of beating candidate C, so I guess I should vote for candidate B.".
Under the alternatives, the voter can express his or her interest in both A and B.
Microsoft's resources dwarf them for the moment.
I can't imagine that AOL is worth more than the available resources of either company.
I'm probably setting myself up for my first "troll" point, but I hope you're aware of how infantile the reasoning in your sig is.
You can't infringe on the patent just because he says he wouldn't enforce it. It's too risky. Who's to say he'll even be the CEO next year? He would have to grant me a free and perpetual license before I would ever do anything that knowingly utilitizes his patented "technology".
I'm sure it would be as useless and biased as all other "productivity" studies.
That's exactly what copyright law does. He's under no obligation to charge for the book. He can stipulate that his readers are welcome to read and share the book, so long as they don't charge for it. However, without copyright law, publishers could easily market and profit from his efforts without compensating him in the least. They would most certainly remove the page that encourages donations to him. Hell, they'd remove all mention of his name.
Sounds nice and all, but you'd just end up with the lowest common denominator. We have only been able to reach the performance increases that we have (while reducing price at the same time) because of wholesale architecture platforms. If you insist that they maintain backwards compatibility, you'll only slow down the rate of progress. This may help a small set of people, but it would be detrimental overall.