I couldn't possibly see a conflict of interest with a company funded study concluding that their higher priced items will give you a significant competitive edge in a competition.
Says the chair-bound idiot that has never loaded a couple of tons of rocks onto an SUV after a nice rockhounding trip.
Really? A couple of tons? I smell bullshit!
Cargo capacity of a model X is around 1900 lbs, that's people gear, and cargo. Most SUVs I searched are right around 2000, and again, that's people, gear, cargo, and fuel (where applicable). In order to get anywhere near "a couple of tons" capacity you need to get into a 3500 class pickup truck. Towing is a different story, but then we have to figure out how a couple of people hand loaded two tons of rocks onto a trailer. And if we somehow managed to convince a bunch of people how much "fun" that was, we have to figure out where we can go where we can remove two tons of rocks without getting arrested. (Hint, don't go to Arizona)
Ok, so actually on topic... Unless you are literally putting 250 pounds of material on your roof (which is well above what a standard roof rack is rated for) you're not going to affect the friction force.
I share your prediction. Good thing I'm handy with a soldering iron.
Honestly, I'd be shocked if there weren't already agreements between the TV manufacturers and companies like Comcast to let their TVs have unfettered access to the Xfinity WiFi that their modems are pumping out. My Vizio monitor is required to be connected to WiFi in order to control anything about the TV beyond basic on/off functions. I just relegated the damn thing to it's own "guest" network that doesn't get access to the internet. Fuck them and their spying bullshit.
The major downside is the support of the infrastructure to keep the system running
I think you've hit the nail on the head. The issue is that the equipment and expertise available to maintain a 1980s era network is dwindling. I used to work at a company who had the contract to maintain the local hospital's private pager network. I have no idea of the contract value, but they were the only game in town that had the knowledge to do it. There was literally no competition in the pager space around there. If they went tits up, the hospitals would have been screwed. I can see the desire to get away from a system like that.
So I've seen this same comment from you at least 3 times so far in this article... Do you have anything to share that actually supports your claims? I gave up looking after about 10 minutes, as every article I could find trying to prove it (well, disprove it) was authored by some anti-vax organization. All of them seemed to point to a single source, Dr.Russell Blaylock, a neurosurgeon. The only reasonably credible article I could find was from "The Hill", but again their only source was the same set of comments from Dr. Blaylock. Not to disparage the Dr, even though some question his views on artificial sweeteners, if I wanted advice on epidemiology I'm not going to ask a neurosurgeon I'd likely seek the opinion of an epidemiologist.
I just want to point out that this is an awesome discussion. I love sharing disagreements in a reasonable conversation!
I am not sure what really grounds any given belief other than depth and genuineness
Add into that "consideration of other's beliefs" and you have a complete basis for a good religion. Just because your teachings say one thing is bad doesn't mean someone else's teachings hold the same values. As long as the golden rule is followed religiously (see what I did there) you and I aren't that far off.
I'm an "N of 1", of course, but I would have slept around in college and later if I didn't feel like it would put me on bad terms with my God. So I didn't. Take it as you will.
Sample of 1 myself, but there have been times where my morals in that respect likely are not aligned with yours. But as long as the wishes and morals of the other parties involved are taken into account (and respected) what is the harm? I would think that a loving and understanding deity would want what they created to be enjoyed to the fullest.
What I don't understand is how fearing getting punched back is okay and fearing getting punished by God is not okay.
I have no issues with fearing retribution from your deity of choice, my issue is with people blindly using their religious teachings as their moral compass. In the history of the world that hasn't always tended to work out for the best. If people stopped at the "do unto others" part, I'd be fine with it.
It sounds like you're saying the later isn't necessary, but sometimes people do seem to throw punches and people wonder if they're going to get away with it.
Someone who has no fear of retribution from a real and provable threat aren't likely to be influenced by one that may or may not exist. I've seen plenty of people get away with doing bad things, that doesn't change my moral view of it.
Life lessons. I don't have to punch someone in the face to know that I'm going to get hit back if I do.
How did you find yourself seeing it that way?
I've watched someone punch someone in the face. They didn't get smote by some supreme being, they got their ass kicked by the big son of a bitch that didn't like getting hit in the mouth.
Have a moral quandary? No need to get a mythical being involved. Ask yourself "how would I feel if I got punched in the mouth?" and respond accordingly. I realize that's an extreme example, but you can scale it up and down to suit the current dilemma.
What's so bad about wanting a reward? Do you work for free?
Nothing wrong with working for a reward. But I'm with the GP on this one, if you need to fear judgement by your creator in order to not act like a dick, then you're probably doing it wrong. Now, looking to guidance from a supreme being (the "what would Jesus do" type of people) that's a different thing. Nothing wrong with taking a moment to stop and think "what would the most morally right person I can think of do" before doing something would probably go a long way to fix things wrong with this world.
I spent a couple of years at DeVry, where part of their schtick was that they employed "the best and brightest from industry". Which, to their credit, was accurate for the most part. Like any school, there were a few duds, but they were the minority. The problem, though, was the fact that being smart does not translate well into the ability to teach. My discreet elements professor had a great pedigree, but not a single student from his class could design a simple transistor amplifier by the end of the semester. Our linear circuits professor had to basically start from scratch the next semester.
You forgot car insurance and homeowners insurance, both adjusted by your "insurance score" which is essentially your credit score weighted differently.
Give people a basic income thats not dependent on whether they bother to look for work or not and... they don't bother!
Do you really want someone who is too lazy to get off their ass to find a job and is satisfied with $700/month to work for you? I don't. Do you think they are going to quit being lazy and suddenly develop goals just because the money is coming directly from a company instead of the gov't?
You're amused because you have a different definition of crime than they do and you don't understand what you're looking at.
It's the irony that amuses me. I see a bunch of idiots driving on a road built by the government claiming the government does not have authority over them.
"A crime with no victim" is a poor argument. By that logic it should be perfectly legal to shoot a rifle in the air indiscriminately in a populated area, as long as no one gets hit. You want to shoot a rifle indiscriminately, or speed in a car, do it on your own private property, not where my family is.
Most jurisdictions these workers are not employees of Instacart, they are independent contractors accepting an assignment. It is the contractors responsibility to ensure that their employee's are paid according to regulations.
Do they still have scheduled shifts and want workers to wait in parking lot in case an order comes in?
I've never used instacart, but how it's been described, it is like Uber. You request a shopper/pickup, if there is one in the are they are able to accept the assignment.
Most jurisdictions these workers are not employees of Instacart, they are independent contractors accepting an assignment. It is the contractors responsibility to ensure that their employee's are paid according to regulations.
Do they still have scheduled shifts and want workers to wait in parking lot in case an order comes in?
I've never used instacart, but how it's been described, it is like Uber. You request a shopper/pickup, if there is one in the are they are able to accept the assignment.
No victim, no crime.
Someone hits you, then you own their ass until repaid.
That and voluntarily insuring yourself will cover it.
If nothing else, you sovereign citizen lunatics give me something entertaining to watch on youtube. I love watching your dumb asses blather on about how you're "not driving, you're travelling, and you don't need a license for that!", then get your car window busted out and dragged out of a car while screaming "no victim, no crime." Not sure why, but that amuses me.
Actually on topic... sorry. "Someone hits you, then you own their ass until repaid." So when someone kills my wife/brother/mother/son because they were driving way too fast for conditions and caused an accident I "own them" until they provide me a replacement loved one? I'm not sure if you know, but that's not how things work. Do we incarcerate that person for the rest of their life? Do they owe me some number of millions of dollars? When should I consider myself "repaid"?
Seems to me that a mutual understanding that "this road was designed to handle traffic at 25mph", posting some sort of notice that indicates as such, and paying a couple people to make sure motorists drive within those established guidelines would make a bit more sense.
I don't mind ACs, sometimes they do add some intelligence to the conversation. It would be nice if the site required you to be logged in to post, even as AC. And it should affect the users Karma/etc. (Maybe it does that, idk. Very rarely post under AC)
Stupidity is inherent in politics based upon an overwhelming amount of evidence.
I don't think that lack of intellect is rampant in politics. I'm not saying there aren't dumb people, but it'd be pretty hard to get into the upper echelons if they were truly dumb. What I'd say there IS a ton of: elitism, posturing, manipulating, back stabbing, sociopathy, ignorance, etc. The majority of the politicians' only true goal is to get re-elected, the only way to do that is keep the people with the money happy. It seems like it would take a pretty intelligent person to be able to do that, while still finding ways to appear to be working for the people that vote.
The difference is that platforms which provide anonymity
Yup. That's the issue with social media, and the precursor forums/comment sections/chat rooms/etc, they remove the threat of getting punched in the mouth when you cock off to the wrong person.
Slashdot Mirror
I couldn't possibly see a conflict of interest with a company funded study concluding that their higher priced items will give you a significant competitive edge in a competition.
Says the chair-bound idiot that has never loaded a couple of tons of rocks onto an SUV after a nice rockhounding trip.
Really? A couple of tons? I smell bullshit!
Cargo capacity of a model X is around 1900 lbs, that's people gear, and cargo. Most SUVs I searched are right around 2000, and again, that's people, gear, cargo, and fuel (where applicable). In order to get anywhere near "a couple of tons" capacity you need to get into a 3500 class pickup truck. Towing is a different story, but then we have to figure out how a couple of people hand loaded two tons of rocks onto a trailer. And if we somehow managed to convince a bunch of people how much "fun" that was, we have to figure out where we can go where we can remove two tons of rocks without getting arrested. (Hint, don't go to Arizona)
Ok, so actually on topic... Unless you are literally putting 250 pounds of material on your roof (which is well above what a standard roof rack is rated for) you're not going to affect the friction force.
I share your prediction. Good thing I'm handy with a soldering iron.
Honestly, I'd be shocked if there weren't already agreements between the TV manufacturers and companies like Comcast to let their TVs have unfettered access to the Xfinity WiFi that their modems are pumping out. My Vizio monitor is required to be connected to WiFi in order to control anything about the TV beyond basic on/off functions. I just relegated the damn thing to it's own "guest" network that doesn't get access to the internet. Fuck them and their spying bullshit.
The major downside is the support of the infrastructure to keep the system running
I think you've hit the nail on the head. The issue is that the equipment and expertise available to maintain a 1980s era network is dwindling. I used to work at a company who had the contract to maintain the local hospital's private pager network. I have no idea of the contract value, but they were the only game in town that had the knowledge to do it. There was literally no competition in the pager space around there. If they went tits up, the hospitals would have been screwed. I can see the desire to get away from a system like that.
So I've seen this same comment from you at least 3 times so far in this article... Do you have anything to share that actually supports your claims? I gave up looking after about 10 minutes, as every article I could find trying to prove it (well, disprove it) was authored by some anti-vax organization. All of them seemed to point to a single source, Dr.Russell Blaylock, a neurosurgeon. The only reasonably credible article I could find was from "The Hill", but again their only source was the same set of comments from Dr. Blaylock. Not to disparage the Dr, even though some question his views on artificial sweeteners, if I wanted advice on epidemiology I'm not going to ask a neurosurgeon I'd likely seek the opinion of an epidemiologist.
the Liberal Agenda, the Billionaire Conservative agenda
So the only non-nutters are non-rich conservatives?
I am not sure what really grounds any given belief other than depth and genuineness
Add into that "consideration of other's beliefs" and you have a complete basis for a good religion. Just because your teachings say one thing is bad doesn't mean someone else's teachings hold the same values. As long as the golden rule is followed religiously (see what I did there) you and I aren't that far off.
I'm an "N of 1", of course, but I would have slept around in college and later if I didn't feel like it would put me on bad terms with my God. So I didn't. Take it as you will.
Sample of 1 myself, but there have been times where my morals in that respect likely are not aligned with yours. But as long as the wishes and morals of the other parties involved are taken into account (and respected) what is the harm? I would think that a loving and understanding deity would want what they created to be enjoyed to the fullest.
What I don't understand is how fearing getting punched back is okay and fearing getting punished by God is not okay.
I have no issues with fearing retribution from your deity of choice, my issue is with people blindly using their religious teachings as their moral compass. In the history of the world that hasn't always tended to work out for the best. If people stopped at the "do unto others" part, I'd be fine with it.
It sounds like you're saying the later isn't necessary, but sometimes people do seem to throw punches and people wonder if they're going to get away with it.
Someone who has no fear of retribution from a real and provable threat aren't likely to be influenced by one that may or may not exist. I've seen plenty of people get away with doing bad things, that doesn't change my moral view of it.
What convinces of you this?
Life lessons. I don't have to punch someone in the face to know that I'm going to get hit back if I do.
How did you find yourself seeing it that way?
I've watched someone punch someone in the face. They didn't get smote by some supreme being, they got their ass kicked by the big son of a bitch that didn't like getting hit in the mouth.
Have a moral quandary? No need to get a mythical being involved. Ask yourself "how would I feel if I got punched in the mouth?" and respond accordingly. I realize that's an extreme example, but you can scale it up and down to suit the current dilemma.
it depends. I've seen a few that believe all the other planets are spherical, we are the only disc.
Does God tell them directly?
Well, no, my religious leader told me. I think his leader told him. And there's this book.
How do they even know which version of God is the right one?
Well, obviously mine is. I have no reason to believe that all of the people that subscribe to my belief system could be wrong!
Why do people disagree about what God wants?
Well clearly they are just bending the truth to suit their needs!
What's so bad about wanting a reward? Do you work for free?
Nothing wrong with working for a reward. But I'm with the GP on this one, if you need to fear judgement by your creator in order to not act like a dick, then you're probably doing it wrong. Now, looking to guidance from a supreme being (the "what would Jesus do" type of people) that's a different thing. Nothing wrong with taking a moment to stop and think "what would the most morally right person I can think of do" before doing something would probably go a long way to fix things wrong with this world.
I spent a couple of years at DeVry, where part of their schtick was that they employed "the best and brightest from industry". Which, to their credit, was accurate for the most part. Like any school, there were a few duds, but they were the minority. The problem, though, was the fact that being smart does not translate well into the ability to teach. My discreet elements professor had a great pedigree, but not a single student from his class could design a simple transistor amplifier by the end of the semester. Our linear circuits professor had to basically start from scratch the next semester.
You forgot car insurance and homeowners insurance, both adjusted by your "insurance score" which is essentially your credit score weighted differently.
Doesn't productive activity have to be involved somewhere?
It's usually done by the people that aren't satisfied with taking home $600/month.
Give people a basic income thats not dependent on whether they bother to look for work or not and ... they don't bother!
Do you really want someone who is too lazy to get off their ass to find a job and is satisfied with $700/month to work for you? I don't. Do you think they are going to quit being lazy and suddenly develop goals just because the money is coming directly from a company instead of the gov't?
Motorola doesn't make anything.
Fixed that for you. Motorola of old is now just a name slapped on a Chinese box.
You're amused because you have a different definition of crime than they do and you don't understand what you're looking at.
It's the irony that amuses me. I see a bunch of idiots driving on a road built by the government claiming the government does not have authority over them.
"A crime with no victim" is a poor argument. By that logic it should be perfectly legal to shoot a rifle in the air indiscriminately in a populated area, as long as no one gets hit. You want to shoot a rifle indiscriminately, or speed in a car, do it on your own private property, not where my family is.
what about the full min wage + full IRS mileage??
Most jurisdictions these workers are not employees of Instacart, they are independent contractors accepting an assignment. It is the contractors responsibility to ensure that their employee's are paid according to regulations.
Do they still have scheduled shifts and want workers to wait in parking lot in case an order comes in?
I've never used instacart, but how it's been described, it is like Uber. You request a shopper/pickup, if there is one in the are they are able to accept the assignment.
what about the full min wage + full IRS mileage??
Most jurisdictions these workers are not employees of Instacart, they are independent contractors accepting an assignment. It is the contractors responsibility to ensure that their employee's are paid according to regulations.
Do they still have scheduled shifts and want workers to wait in parking lot in case an order comes in?
I've never used instacart, but how it's been described, it is like Uber. You request a shopper/pickup, if there is one in the are they are able to accept the assignment.
No victim, no crime.
Someone hits you, then you own their ass until repaid.
That and voluntarily insuring yourself will cover it.
If nothing else, you sovereign citizen lunatics give me something entertaining to watch on youtube. I love watching your dumb asses blather on about how you're "not driving, you're travelling, and you don't need a license for that!", then get your car window busted out and dragged out of a car while screaming "no victim, no crime." Not sure why, but that amuses me.
Actually on topic... sorry. "Someone hits you, then you own their ass until repaid." So when someone kills my wife/brother/mother/son because they were driving way too fast for conditions and caused an accident I "own them" until they provide me a replacement loved one? I'm not sure if you know, but that's not how things work. Do we incarcerate that person for the rest of their life? Do they owe me some number of millions of dollars? When should I consider myself "repaid"?
Seems to me that a mutual understanding that "this road was designed to handle traffic at 25mph", posting some sort of notice that indicates as such, and paying a couple people to make sure motorists drive within those established guidelines would make a bit more sense.
I don't mind ACs, sometimes they do add some intelligence to the conversation. It would be nice if the site required you to be logged in to post, even as AC. And it should affect the users Karma/etc. (Maybe it does that, idk. Very rarely post under AC)
Stupidity is inherent in politics based upon an overwhelming amount of evidence.
I don't think that lack of intellect is rampant in politics. I'm not saying there aren't dumb people, but it'd be pretty hard to get into the upper echelons if they were truly dumb. What I'd say there IS a ton of: elitism, posturing, manipulating, back stabbing, sociopathy, ignorance, etc. The majority of the politicians' only true goal is to get re-elected, the only way to do that is keep the people with the money happy. It seems like it would take a pretty intelligent person to be able to do that, while still finding ways to appear to be working for the people that vote.
The difference is that platforms which provide anonymity
Yup. That's the issue with social media, and the precursor forums/comment sections/chat rooms/etc, they remove the threat of getting punched in the mouth when you cock off to the wrong person.
Someone with a low uid would be smart enough to know that there is means of resetting a password that is lost/otherwise unavailable. Here you go