Companies do not exist to lose money either. Now, their market cap is $20B, they lose $750M per year, and have 4,100 employees. They have about $2B cash less debt. While their CFO did make an obscene amount last year ($72M), and likely should be fired as he doesn't seem to be doing much for the company, that won't solve all their problems.
This type of situation has the dot-bomb written all over it. Trimming things back at least gives the company a chance to survive.
Not really; most standby diesel generators run less than 50 hours in a given year; in their lifetime it is uncommon for them to have over 1,500 hours, and most 30-year old gensets I see have less than 1,000. Compare that to a typical passenger vehicle, school bus, or even fire truck, and the money is best spent elsewhere.
Moreover, diesel fuel is easy and safe to store. LNG or CNG not so much. Piped utilities are unreliable in earthquakes, and not 100% in hurricanes and many other natural disasters.
Mind you, if an on-site generator is going to run even 200 hours per year we see many people wanting dual-fuel options, where it can operate at reduced capacity with a mix of diesel and natural gas.
The standby generator market which I am very familiar with half jokingly refers to the next round of emission standards as "diesel air cleaners"-- the standby generators will be required to have cleaner air out of the exhaust pipe than what comes in.
Emission standards have become very strict; while the objectives are good, they are pushing the realm of what is viable.
For standby generators, continuous monitoring is practical, but when it takes 20-30 minutes to come up to full temperature and the normal run time is less than an hour, actual emissions are going to be much worse than the idealized continuous running state. We actually need to add artificial load to make the emissions control systems work properly-- increasing CO2 and NOx, and DPM t(o some level) in absolute terms, but reducing them relative to the engine size. I imagine cars are in a similar condition; "real world" is an ambiguous design condition.
My office is on the green line, and several employees that park and ride from Norwalk do complain that it gets sketchy if they leave the office at 7. In my book, it is still worth saving the time you would spend on the 105 otherwise.
It depends... Is it for love of learning or as babysitting? As much as I want to believe everyone has potential to be great, I do know that not everyone has the drive to be great *right now*.
I would expect a gifted program to have bias to children whose parents read to them, instill a priority on learning in school, and are available to stimulate curiosity. That is biased in directions that favors certain demographics, and requires truly exceptional outliers... whom may or may not be naturally "gifted."
The only one I take issue with is premises argument; they are working in a region of service so I don't think that is applicable. Arguably, the equipment issue is more effect than cause, but I would take it as a sign of a contractor as well. Some of the financing deals that Uber made could cause issues though.
If DSLE didn't take your claim, you likely don't have a case. From an employer perspective you are guilty until proven innocent, which is quite difficult to prove.
Technically the companies are looking for a scalable workforce. Train staff for peak demand, and only pay them when demand exists, making them bid for a "market" pay.
We used to call it moonlighting. Difference being it was a supplement to a full time job, not a substitute. Moonlighters were usually better than temps because they were trained, but when you hit a certain threshold temps (via an agency) made more sense.
Gigs help compensate for underemployment rather than unemployment.
Keep in mind cyclists have to remove one hand from the handlebar to signal a turn. While I do signal 80%+, braking and balancing for a turn can be hard with only one hand. Stops are even harder...
I have also been hit three times. One was a driver making an oncoming left turn into me, one passing right turn, and one with me stopped and a driver somehow managed to crush by rear wheel. Walked away from all three, I think the only one I had a helmet on was the last one. Last incident was 1998. I had another 5 years riding largely with the same risks (but with a helmet), but the last 10 years I have been much more conservative.
Everything we do has risks, some which can be controlled and some that can't. Avoiding road rage neighborhoods is important for safety (as is calling the cops when you experience road rage in these neighborhoods). Avoiding a peleton with inexperienced cyclists is another biggie. One of my theories though is that the weight-reduction strategies has made bike components more prone to failure when not properly maintained.
Depending on where you live, cyclists have rights to a full lane, and cars need to maintain a minimum 6' clear space when passing; this is the rule in California.
But, I am starting to think that the arrogant fsck's like yourself here that are anti-bicycle are a major part of the problem.
The other major factors are likely an increase in lower income riders in the recession, increased penetration of road vs mountain bikes, and cyclists that don't know how to ride in traffic. Personally, I think that people that ride on sidewalks are also a high risk group.
It is an issue with clipless pedals and not just fixed gear bikes. Putting the foot down kills balance and requires substantially more starting torque.
That is equally a problem with human drivers not understanding that cyclists often cannot see their gestures behind the glare or tint of a windshield/windows.
Wind works best at very large scale; for residential PV is almost always better. Even at mountain-top radio sites, the wind turbines are generally only provided for source diversity purposes anymore.
Not entirely true; there were plenty of domestic and euorpean manufacturers. The Chinese did scale up faster, in part by dumping capacity, which likely is part of the equation.
I don't think Solar could have gotten the critical mass without the incentives. Even with incentives, it took several decades to be a meaningful contributor. Quite honestly, the R&D incentive money is best spent on the challenge that follows, not the first-mover challenge: energy storage. By subsidizing the PV panels up front, you get the industry moving which will create its own R&D investment. By increasing non-dispatchable generation on the grid, you need to have improved energy storage and demand control solutions.
From the small view I have on where money was being spent, 6-12 years ago a tremendous amount of investment was being placed into these areas for technologies that are viable now.
Granted, not all $$ are spent with the same efficacy. That is the nature of R&D though.
I think that is another accuracy be precision issue. The storm clips are likely in place, because they are usually a specific inspection item. Being cheap means using all the lumber on the truck, and not rejecting the wavy boards. Building square, straight, and plumb buildings with dimensional lumber is hard. It is much easier to do with TJIs and Glulam, but tolerances are typically over 1/8" in framing.
Slashdot Mirror
Companies do not exist to lose money either. Now, their market cap is $20B, they lose $750M per year, and have 4,100 employees. They have about $2B cash less debt. While their CFO did make an obscene amount last year ($72M), and likely should be fired as he doesn't seem to be doing much for the company, that won't solve all their problems.
This type of situation has the dot-bomb written all over it. Trimming things back at least gives the company a chance to survive.
Not really; most standby diesel generators run less than 50 hours in a given year; in their lifetime it is uncommon for them to have over 1,500 hours, and most 30-year old gensets I see have less than 1,000. Compare that to a typical passenger vehicle, school bus, or even fire truck, and the money is best spent elsewhere.
Moreover, diesel fuel is easy and safe to store. LNG or CNG not so much. Piped utilities are unreliable in earthquakes, and not 100% in hurricanes and many other natural disasters.
Mind you, if an on-site generator is going to run even 200 hours per year we see many people wanting dual-fuel options, where it can operate at reduced capacity with a mix of diesel and natural gas.
The standby generator market which I am very familiar with half jokingly refers to the next round of emission standards as "diesel air cleaners"-- the standby generators will be required to have cleaner air out of the exhaust pipe than what comes in.
Emission standards have become very strict; while the objectives are good, they are pushing the realm of what is viable.
For standby generators, continuous monitoring is practical, but when it takes 20-30 minutes to come up to full temperature and the normal run time is less than an hour, actual emissions are going to be much worse than the idealized continuous running state. We actually need to add artificial load to make the emissions control systems work properly-- increasing CO2 and NOx, and DPM t(o some level) in absolute terms, but reducing them relative to the engine size. I imagine cars are in a similar condition; "real world" is an ambiguous design condition.
My office is on the green line, and several employees that park and ride from Norwalk do complain that it gets sketchy if they leave the office at 7. In my book, it is still worth saving the time you would spend on the 105 otherwise.
Also need to change your MAC address each reload...
It depends... Is it for love of learning or as babysitting? As much as I want to believe everyone has potential to be great, I do know that not everyone has the drive to be great *right now*.
I would expect a gifted program to have bias to children whose parents read to them, instill a priority on learning in school, and are available to stimulate curiosity. That is biased in directions that favors certain demographics, and requires truly exceptional outliers... whom may or may not be naturally "gifted."
Common mode rejection yes, but not direct mode.
The only one I take issue with is premises argument; they are working in a region of service so I don't think that is applicable. Arguably, the equipment issue is more effect than cause, but I would take it as a sign of a contractor as well. Some of the financing deals that Uber made could cause issues though.
If DSLE didn't take your claim, you likely don't have a case. From an employer perspective you are guilty until proven innocent, which is quite difficult to prove.
Technically the companies are looking for a scalable workforce. Train staff for peak demand, and only pay them when demand exists, making them bid for a "market" pay.
We used to call it moonlighting. Difference being it was a supplement to a full time job, not a substitute. Moonlighters were usually better than temps because they were trained, but when you hit a certain threshold temps (via an agency) made more sense.
Gigs help compensate for underemployment rather than unemployment.
With those scams, you are independent because you are responsible for finding the customer.
No salt?
Keep in mind cyclists have to remove one hand from the handlebar to signal a turn. While I do signal 80%+, braking and balancing for a turn can be hard with only one hand. Stops are even harder...
...and you didn't even tally drivers texting!! My 3-mile daily commute on back roads has at least a dozen.
I have also been hit three times. One was a driver making an oncoming left turn into me, one passing right turn, and one with me stopped and a driver somehow managed to crush by rear wheel. Walked away from all three, I think the only one I had a helmet on was the last one. Last incident was 1998. I had another 5 years riding largely with the same risks (but with a helmet), but the last 10 years I have been much more conservative.
Everything we do has risks, some which can be controlled and some that can't. Avoiding road rage neighborhoods is important for safety (as is calling the cops when you experience road rage in these neighborhoods). Avoiding a peleton with inexperienced cyclists is another biggie. One of my theories though is that the weight-reduction strategies has made bike components more prone to failure when not properly maintained.
Daily commuter, but not a MAMiL.
Depending on where you live, cyclists have rights to a full lane, and cars need to maintain a minimum 6' clear space when passing; this is the rule in California.
But, I am starting to think that the arrogant fsck's like yourself here that are anti-bicycle are a major part of the problem.
The other major factors are likely an increase in lower income riders in the recession, increased penetration of road vs mountain bikes, and cyclists that don't know how to ride in traffic. Personally, I think that people that ride on sidewalks are also a high risk group.
It would seem that to offer 10Gb at a reasonable contention rate $300/month is pretty the minimum to pay for your upstream bandwidth.
It is an issue with clipless pedals and not just fixed gear bikes. Putting the foot down kills balance and requires substantially more starting torque.
That is equally a problem with human drivers not understanding that cyclists often cannot see their gestures behind the glare or tint of a windshield/windows.
I agree, but isn't that a better case of why you go with a switch/router plus a wifi access point?
That is just Greenland and does not cover Antarctica.
Wind works best at very large scale; for residential PV is almost always better. Even at mountain-top radio sites, the wind turbines are generally only provided for source diversity purposes anymore.
Not entirely true; there were plenty of domestic and euorpean manufacturers. The Chinese did scale up faster, in part by dumping capacity, which likely is part of the equation.
I don't think Solar could have gotten the critical mass without the incentives. Even with incentives, it took several decades to be a meaningful contributor. Quite honestly, the R&D incentive money is best spent on the challenge that follows, not the first-mover challenge: energy storage. By subsidizing the PV panels up front, you get the industry moving which will create its own R&D investment. By increasing non-dispatchable generation on the grid, you need to have improved energy storage and demand control solutions.
From the small view I have on where money was being spent, 6-12 years ago a tremendous amount of investment was being placed into these areas for technologies that are viable now.
Granted, not all $$ are spent with the same efficacy. That is the nature of R&D though.
I think that is another accuracy be precision issue. The storm clips are likely in place, because they are usually a specific inspection item. Being cheap means using all the lumber on the truck, and not rejecting the wavy boards. Building square, straight, and plumb buildings with dimensional lumber is hard. It is much easier to do with TJIs and Glulam, but tolerances are typically over 1/8" in framing.