Even simpler would have been Federal Gov. employee healthcare for all. It must be better, since they don't want to lose it and don't want any regular taxpayer to have it. But some are more equal than others.
yes, yes in theory sounds great, but in practice... say you are trying to parallel park on a busy street. The car is going to go IN REVERSE with traffic on-coming??? And in the case of this Ford with the smartphone app, you will GET OUT of the car as traffic whizzes by while you open your door into traffic and step out into traffic to go around the car (assuming left hand drive and no bench seat and no shotgun passenger to slide over)??? Sounds VERY dangerous. Bad enough to get out of the car when it is safely parked. And even staying in the car while the car parallel parks itself and perhaps does not need to reverse until it is at the curb takes time to get out of the traffic lane as cars come up from the rear can be time consuming and dangerous... human parking is slow enough, will car assisted parking be faster and less dangerous? Doubt it.
uh...Popular Science does not DO science, they communicate (popularize) science. Communication works best when it is two way. To prohibit comments eliminates some two way communication. I guess they don't want to fully fulfill their communication mission. So much for them. Maybe they won't be so popular. But making it about saving scientific research is ridiculous. They have delusions of grandeur. They write about science at a keyboard, not in a science lab. This is about their egos, nothing more.
Then there is the case where the "new guy" wants to replace the old system just because he thinks his solution is more elegant somehow even when the old system works almost perfectly. Or when the "new guy" just wants to use XML because it is newer even though it is completely unnecessary for the application (and actually will degrade its performance). To all the "new guys": maybe the old guys were not as stupid as you think.
Agreed.
And most of the time it is hard to get productive work done due to hyper restrictive security that is aimed at protecting against near mythical disgruntled employee INTERNAL threats while the more likely EXTERNAL threats are ignored. Really, if you have created an atmosphere where you cannot trust your own employees (and even trust them less than non-employees) you don't have much of a viable workplace anyway.
Yes, but you are a 'job hopper' with a 'contractor mentality' whatever that means (presumably it is a negative term of derision)... even if you worked for years as an employee as well. So what if you have gobs of experience at more job roles than anyone around? To recruiters it counts for nothing. What it really shows is that you are super adaptable, able to run a business and market yourself and train yourself and take care of your own travel logistics while pleasing a paying customer every single hour with the confidence that you can find future work in spite of having no job security and working under the reality that you can literally be let go on 5 minutes notice from a job thousands of miles away from home. Yet it counts for nothing to salaried people that don't have to produce each hour to doing the exact same job they've done for years.
Strange world.
Either all code is actually functional, or it isn't. If it all is, then only the order of execution is obfuscated. If it all is not, then the obfuscation also comes from having a lot of extra code or monkey-puzzle which seems like the appropriate Ted Sturgeon word that comes to mind. (But you don't have to execute these sentences in this order.)
Yeah, such BS. I went to my agent to get coverage for some jewelery that was stolen last month and they wouldn't write me a policy for stuff I didn't have. And then they said they wouldn't sell me a policy on my car that was junked last year or my house that burned down two years ago. How ridiculous that you can't buy insurance to pay for bad things that happened already. Such BS. What the heck is insurance for anyway if not to pay me for pre-existing conditions?
Wrong! States had a choice, take money/accept federal controls/create exchanges OR let the feds create exchanges. Both are valid, allowable choices. Hence no derailing, no stonewalling. The real irony is that many states had great health care plans for low income people, but had to close them down thanks to Obamacare. Too bad the Democrats wanted to create a bloated, byzantine, idiotic plan and pass it through chicanery and corrupt bribes on their own ("deeming" it passed, "corn husker kickback", etc.) instead of using Republican ideas.
I love it when people conveniently ignore the facts...
$100K a year (plus benefits, naturally) sounds good, but if that's too much then presumably he is paying $50/hr. or less to his contractors and they are supposed to assume all risks, provide their own benefits (health care, vacation/bench time) and cover all taxes (payroll/social security taxes) and unemployed time as well as their own marketing and educational expenses, etc. So the post really should have began, "I'm a cheapskate middleman leaching off the work of others..."
If the contractor(s) is(are) supposed to be collectively making the equivalent of $100k, then they should be paid at least $100/hr. especially since it is probably less than full time work with no long term assurance. It sounds nice in theory that all bugs should be eliminated at the contractor's expense (and honorable ones probably would fix them for free if they want future work), but often it is not possible to fully test outside of production if there is no good test bed or realistic data to test with. If such a test environment is not provided, then the contractor should not be held at fault since what they can test is limited. This depends on the type of software being developed. Perhaps we are talking about simple smart phone apps or something or he is employing off-shore foreigners.
Flat tax is so fair and sooo simple. Until you need to define what income is so you can take a percentage of that. Then suddenly the reality sinks in that it is NOT simple. Like avoiding sales tax, soon everyone is claiming to be a wholesaler, not a retailer. Soon everyone says their revenue is different and thus not income, etc. And the essential complexity of what will or won't be considered income leads to unfairness. Hate to burst the fantasy bubble of the flat taxers, but that is the reality. Just as people think, oh, let's just legalize drugs so there's no enforcement costs or extra crime on top of the underlying drug crime.... and we can even make money on tax revenue. So simple. So easy. Another fantasy. "Legalization" means regulation: where the product can be sold, how, when, checks for purity, insurance, worker's comp, safety requirements, disabled access, and of course taxes...which many will evade by, surprise!....crime. Why sell in a legal shop under expensive legal conditions and pay legal taxes when you can conduct illegal business as usual? Once again, "legalization" is not so simple and easy and does not remove the problem. So please stop the simplistic pontificating... "If only we had a flat tax." "If only..." Real life does not have easy solutions, unfortunately.
Slashdot Mirror
Even simpler would have been Federal Gov. employee healthcare for all. It must be better, since they don't want to lose it and don't want any regular taxpayer to have it. But some are more equal than others.
Of course Obama's was better... he had 4 years to do what Romney had to do in a few months. Big surprise.
Obama should have bought insurance that would insure the website against failure.
Better than using Diomedian scarlet moss to measure aging time?
yes, yes in theory sounds great, but in practice... say you are trying to parallel park on a busy street. The car is going to go IN REVERSE with traffic on-coming??? And in the case of this Ford with the smartphone app, you will GET OUT of the car as traffic whizzes by while you open your door into traffic and step out into traffic to go around the car (assuming left hand drive and no bench seat and no shotgun passenger to slide over)??? Sounds VERY dangerous. Bad enough to get out of the car when it is safely parked. And even staying in the car while the car parallel parks itself and perhaps does not need to reverse until it is at the curb takes time to get out of the traffic lane as cars come up from the rear can be time consuming and dangerous... human parking is slow enough, will car assisted parking be faster and less dangerous? Doubt it.
uh...Popular Science does not DO science, they communicate (popularize) science. Communication works best when it is two way. To prohibit comments eliminates some two way communication. I guess they don't want to fully fulfill their communication mission. So much for them. Maybe they won't be so popular. But making it about saving scientific research is ridiculous. They have delusions of grandeur. They write about science at a keyboard, not in a science lab. This is about their egos, nothing more.
Then there is the case where the "new guy" wants to replace the old system just because he thinks his solution is more elegant somehow even when the old system works almost perfectly. Or when the "new guy" just wants to use XML because it is newer even though it is completely unnecessary for the application (and actually will degrade its performance). To all the "new guys": maybe the old guys were not as stupid as you think.
What if they were driving through the airport in Gibraltar?
uh, Chicago is on Central time, so 2PM Washington (Eastern) time = 1PM Chicago time, so 2PM+2ms Central time = 3PM + 2ms Eastern time...
Agreed. And most of the time it is hard to get productive work done due to hyper restrictive security that is aimed at protecting against near mythical disgruntled employee INTERNAL threats while the more likely EXTERNAL threats are ignored. Really, if you have created an atmosphere where you cannot trust your own employees (and even trust them less than non-employees) you don't have much of a viable workplace anyway.
Does this look like the map of Middle Earth?
Yes, but you are a 'job hopper' with a 'contractor mentality' whatever that means (presumably it is a negative term of derision)... even if you worked for years as an employee as well. So what if you have gobs of experience at more job roles than anyone around? To recruiters it counts for nothing. What it really shows is that you are super adaptable, able to run a business and market yourself and train yourself and take care of your own travel logistics while pleasing a paying customer every single hour with the confidence that you can find future work in spite of having no job security and working under the reality that you can literally be let go on 5 minutes notice from a job thousands of miles away from home. Yet it counts for nothing to salaried people that don't have to produce each hour to doing the exact same job they've done for years. Strange world.
You can download the old issues: https://archive.org/search.php?query=collection%3Aomni-magazine&sort=-publicdate&page=1
Either all code is actually functional, or it isn't. If it all is, then only the order of execution is obfuscated. If it all is not, then the obfuscation also comes from having a lot of extra code or monkey-puzzle which seems like the appropriate Ted Sturgeon word that comes to mind. (But you don't have to execute these sentences in this order.)
Some kind of Moon is a Harsh Mistress reference is needed here.
Kickstarter gets 5% of the money if goals are met. So $165K in their pockets.
Microdots could store maybe 10 MB per printed page.
Yeah, such BS. I went to my agent to get coverage for some jewelery that was stolen last month and they wouldn't write me a policy for stuff I didn't have. And then they said they wouldn't sell me a policy on my car that was junked last year or my house that burned down two years ago. How ridiculous that you can't buy insurance to pay for bad things that happened already. Such BS. What the heck is insurance for anyway if not to pay me for pre-existing conditions?
and how is 'encryption' defined? Would an XOR qualify?
Wrong! States had a choice, take money/accept federal controls/create exchanges OR let the feds create exchanges. Both are valid, allowable choices. Hence no derailing, no stonewalling. The real irony is that many states had great health care plans for low income people, but had to close them down thanks to Obamacare. Too bad the Democrats wanted to create a bloated, byzantine, idiotic plan and pass it through chicanery and corrupt bribes on their own ("deeming" it passed, "corn husker kickback", etc.) instead of using Republican ideas. I love it when people conveniently ignore the facts...
They didn't want to enforce DOMA (formerly the law of the land), and Immigration laws either. It is called selective enforcement.
700 MB?? I think you can compress that to 4MB: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18996942
$100K a year (plus benefits, naturally) sounds good, but if that's too much then presumably he is paying $50/hr. or less to his contractors and they are supposed to assume all risks, provide their own benefits (health care, vacation/bench time) and cover all taxes (payroll/social security taxes) and unemployed time as well as their own marketing and educational expenses, etc. So the post really should have began, "I'm a cheapskate middleman leaching off the work of others..." If the contractor(s) is(are) supposed to be collectively making the equivalent of $100k, then they should be paid at least $100/hr. especially since it is probably less than full time work with no long term assurance. It sounds nice in theory that all bugs should be eliminated at the contractor's expense (and honorable ones probably would fix them for free if they want future work), but often it is not possible to fully test outside of production if there is no good test bed or realistic data to test with. If such a test environment is not provided, then the contractor should not be held at fault since what they can test is limited. This depends on the type of software being developed. Perhaps we are talking about simple smart phone apps or something or he is employing off-shore foreigners.
Flat tax is so fair and sooo simple. Until you need to define what income is so you can take a percentage of that. Then suddenly the reality sinks in that it is NOT simple. Like avoiding sales tax, soon everyone is claiming to be a wholesaler, not a retailer. Soon everyone says their revenue is different and thus not income, etc. And the essential complexity of what will or won't be considered income leads to unfairness. Hate to burst the fantasy bubble of the flat taxers, but that is the reality. Just as people think, oh, let's just legalize drugs so there's no enforcement costs or extra crime on top of the underlying drug crime.... and we can even make money on tax revenue. So simple. So easy. Another fantasy. "Legalization" means regulation: where the product can be sold, how, when, checks for purity, insurance, worker's comp, safety requirements, disabled access, and of course taxes...which many will evade by, surprise!....crime. Why sell in a legal shop under expensive legal conditions and pay legal taxes when you can conduct illegal business as usual? Once again, "legalization" is not so simple and easy and does not remove the problem. So please stop the simplistic pontificating... "If only we had a flat tax." "If only..." Real life does not have easy solutions, unfortunately.
So people who already wear glasses won't be wearing those glasses if they want corrective vision?