Don't come from 'you're a fool, and you don't understand what I need". Come from "Yes, I know that this turns your experience and training on it's head. I'm trying to do something abnormal, and I'd like to use your experience to improve on my abnormal request".
Before writing the prescription he agreed with me. What makes him an absolute evil bastard was that he lied and gave me what he wanted versus what he said he was going to do. I don't object to a professional saying I think you're wrong and here's why and not giving in. I object to an faux-professional saying Yes, I see your point. We'll do it your way and then doing whatever the hell he wants.
Therefore, any professional opinions provided by the optometrist are going to be biased by the money involved.
This.
The second to the last optometrist that I went to insisted that I get trifocals. I insisted that I wanted a single focal point with the focal point set for the computer monitor. He huffed and puffed and finally gave me a single prescription -- with a focal point about 20 feet away. The bastard. He knew what I wanted and decided to screw me over so that I would have to come back. I didn't; I went elsewhere.
I must admit that I read his obituary with great glee.
Here's the thing: if one truly believes in a system of justice and the rule of law, then one must refuse to recognize the validity of any contract that is not of equitable nature (be it equally fair or equally unfair).
You have a false premise. There are lots of laws that I disagree with -- even the current length of copyright -- but I don't go around breaking every law I disagree with just because I disagree with it. If everyone did that, it would be anarchy, not to mention, why have laws in the first place (since you're going to do whatever you damn will want anyway).
Noah has it right. Work within the system to change the law. Boycott the products that benefit the opposition. But deciding that you're both the legislative and executive branch and breaking the law is not only not legal, it is not the right approach.
By the way, your seriously deluding yourself if you think we've ever had a system of justice. We have a system of laws (such as it is). Justice is a mythical creature that only exists in theory. One person's justice is another person's injustice.
I was under the impression that productivity was king at a startup.
The closest I've been to an open office was a four person cube with a round table in the center. All four were working on the same project and it was the most productive environment I've been in. If you had a question, you could roll your chair back to the table, have an impromptu meeting and get right back to work.
The only problem we had were the lookie-loos that decided they could just walk into our cube and start a conversation.
Laws actually effectively dictate they have to, as they have to run the business in such a way as to try to maximise the profits of their shareholders.
Actually, no. There is no law that a corporation needs to maximize profits for their shareholders. Take Tim Cook's statements regarding Apple trying to be green when a shareholder insisted that wouldn't maximize profit.
What's being "shoved down member states throats" are almost all laws that the national politicians wanted, but couldn't get through locally because of popular resistance and the media eating them alive. So they push it up to the EU, it comes back a few year later, thanks to short public memory they now claim they have no choice, it's an EU mandate, and they get the laws they wanted.
I'm confused. It seems like you're supporting his argument versus opposing it. It seems like you're saying the local politicians try something. People revolt. The locals politicians get the EU to shove it down the people's throats and all is good. Isn't the EU shoving it down the people's throats what the person was arguing?
I'm still trying to figure out what my comment about Joan -- white Joan -- had anything to do with Kelly. Yes, I walked on egg shells around Kelly from then on.
If you're so ill educated as to not know what "integration" means with regards to race, and so blitheringly stupid as to not be able to Google it... you should walk on egg shells around Kathy - so as not to be a future cause of problems.
You're right. I guess I wasn't enough of a racist to look at her skin and realize I need to treat black women differently from white people. Thanks for the education.
And she wonders why she feels like people walk on eggshells around her and why she feels like she makes people uncomfortable.
Our group brought a white woman (race only matters based on what comes later), let's call her Joan. Joan had a closed door office downstairs from the group. Once she joined the group, we had her move into cube-land with the rest of us.
Enter Joan's friend, let's call her Kelly. Kelly happens to be black. One day Joan, Kelly, and I were having lunch in the break room. Kelly asked Joan why she moved out of her nice, closed-door office into cube-land. Here's where I step in it. I replied "We wanted to integrate Joan into the group." Kelly goes absolutely berserk on me. "What do you mean integrate?!? I'm integrated!!"
I'm still trying to figure out what my comment about Joan -- white Joan -- had anything to do with Kelly. Yes, I walked on egg shells around Kelly from then on.
I feel like I've lost my entire cultural identity in effort to be part of the culture I've spent the majority of the last decade in.
Translation: I want to impose my culture on my team mates.
Frankly, I'm tired of hearing people bitch about diversity in the tech field and then blaming employers. Out of the 200 people in my freshman CS class, two were black. By my senior year, one of them was left in the program -- and his major semester project failed all tests (the test being automated were completely color blind).
Let's ignore race for a moment. What's the percentage of people in tech who came from a single parent home? Ditto for the population at large? How many people in tech had welfare crack whores for mothers? The population at large? What's the percentage of people in tech where education was a priority for the family? The population at large?
If you want to bring race into it, turn around and ask the same questions and throw racial demographics into it. Perhaps the problem isn't with the tech companies, nor institutions of higher learning,nor primary or secondary education. Perhaps the problem lies with the family dynamics.
In my opinion, healthcare.gov failed so miserably primarily because nobody at HHS was in charge of the project,....
How many lines of legalize was the Affordable Care Act? Just translating the ACA into requirements would take longer than the time allotted to getting the web site up and working --- and then you need at least one individual who completely understands the sometimes conflicting requirements.
This is controversial but it should be said. but the biggest problem, religion, cant be solved with technology because religious zealots dont operate logically.
History doesn't bear this out. During the black plague in Europe, the Jews fared much better than others because of a ritual of cleanliness. Islam also has numerous cleansing/washing rituals. At best, lumping all religions together is ignorant.
...mice and rats diverged somewhere between 12 and 24 million years ago.
...
What does this even mean?
Part of the problem is that we want clear and distinctive buckets (labels) to put things into: this a rat, this is a mouse,... Evolution, slow, gradual changes over time, doesn't work that neatly. 12 to 24 million years ago there was some animal with some its descendants became today's rats and some other of its descendants became mice. That animal could interbreed with others of its kind. At some point its descendants branch that eventually became rats and its descendants branch that eventually mice could no longer interbreed. But it wasn't a "Gee, we could interbreed last night but not this morning" kind of deal.
Do you think buddhism is some kind of diet? Or should that have been a period after buddhist?
Do you think vegetarians is some kind of diet? Do you think vegans is some kind of diet? I suppose if you're a cannibal it could be, but I highly doubt that what GP meant.
Also, as far as I am aware, you are not allowed to have security cameras on your property that film parts of other's properties. Those laws should suffice, or at least be amended to include "roaming" cameras.
Be sure to check with your local laws. IANAL and I understand the law slightly differently --- which might be because we're in different localities (or because IANAL).
We are not customers, however I would argue that we are service providers. We provide service to Google's business by consuming advertising. As a service provider I also do not want my emails ignored.
If you're the service provider to Google then according to this ruling it is you that is not allowed to ignore e-mail from Google.
My initial perception was the same as your experience: that the black and Latino populations were solid blocs
I never said they were solid blocks. That one day --- when violence was threatened --- then they formed one solid block. During normal times they weren't.
That said, they form pretty solid voting blocks. Blacks have consistently voted 90% for Democrats since Johnson's Great Society.
I'm just saying if we can embrace the positive parts of full transparency, that will be better than the fallacy of believing we can successfully safeguard our privacy.
You do realize that Roe v. Wade is based on privacy rights, don't you? If you get rid of privacy, including (or especially) medical privacy then you undermine the foundation of a woman's right to choose.
Slashdot Mirror
I also decided to ditch them for a bi-focal and a single focus for my computer monitors.
Pro tip: If you're getting two pairs of glasses with different prescriptions, get different frames.
Don't come from 'you're a fool, and you don't understand what I need". Come from "Yes, I know that this turns your experience and training on it's head. I'm trying to do something abnormal, and I'd like to use your experience to improve on my abnormal request".
Before writing the prescription he agreed with me. What makes him an absolute evil bastard was that he lied and gave me what he wanted versus what he said he was going to do. I don't object to a professional saying I think you're wrong and here's why and not giving in. I object to an faux-professional saying Yes, I see your point. We'll do it your way and then doing whatever the hell he wants.
I must admit that I read his obituary with great glee.
I trust it was in focus ?
I'm near sighted. I just had to take the glasses off to read it.
Therefore, any professional opinions provided by the optometrist are going to be biased by the money involved.
This.
The second to the last optometrist that I went to insisted that I get trifocals. I insisted that I wanted a single focal point with the focal point set for the computer monitor. He huffed and puffed and finally gave me a single prescription -- with a focal point about 20 feet away. The bastard. He knew what I wanted and decided to screw me over so that I would have to come back. I didn't; I went elsewhere.
I must admit that I read his obituary with great glee.
Here's the thing: if one truly believes in a system of justice and the rule of law, then one must refuse to recognize the validity of any contract that is not of equitable nature (be it equally fair or equally unfair).
You have a false premise. There are lots of laws that I disagree with -- even the current length of copyright -- but I don't go around breaking every law I disagree with just because I disagree with it. If everyone did that, it would be anarchy, not to mention, why have laws in the first place (since you're going to do whatever you damn will want anyway).
Noah has it right. Work within the system to change the law. Boycott the products that benefit the opposition. But deciding that you're both the legislative and executive branch and breaking the law is not only not legal, it is not the right approach.
By the way, your seriously deluding yourself if you think we've ever had a system of justice. We have a system of laws (such as it is). Justice is a mythical creature that only exists in theory. One person's justice is another person's injustice.
It has nothing to do with productivity.
I was under the impression that productivity was king at a startup.
The closest I've been to an open office was a four person cube with a round table in the center. All four were working on the same project and it was the most productive environment I've been in. If you had a question, you could roll your chair back to the table, have an impromptu meeting and get right back to work.
The only problem we had were the lookie-loos that decided they could just walk into our cube and start a conversation.
Laws actually effectively dictate they have to, as they have to run the business in such a way as to try to maximise the profits of their shareholders.
Actually, no. There is no law that a corporation needs to maximize profits for their shareholders. Take Tim Cook's statements regarding Apple trying to be green when a shareholder insisted that wouldn't maximize profit.
What's being "shoved down member states throats" are almost all laws that the national politicians wanted, but couldn't get through locally because of popular resistance and the media eating them alive. So they push it up to the EU, it comes back a few year later, thanks to short public memory they now claim they have no choice, it's an EU mandate, and they get the laws they wanted.
I'm confused. It seems like you're supporting his argument versus opposing it. It seems like you're saying the local politicians try something. People revolt. The locals politicians get the EU to shove it down the people's throats and all is good. Isn't the EU shoving it down the people's throats what the person was arguing?
If you're so ill educated as to not know what "integration" means with regards to race, and so blitheringly stupid as to not be able to Google it... you should walk on egg shells around Kathy - so as not to be a future cause of problems.
You're right. I guess I wasn't enough of a racist to look at her skin and realize I need to treat black women differently from white people. Thanks for the education.
It's hard work when your audience is hostile and will deliberately mis-interpret everything that isn't crystal clear and unequivocal.
Painful having the shoe on the other foot. Isn't it?
So is this how it works? I come up with an anecdote, unverifiable of course, about what a racist douchebag someone as a counter-argument?
I was responding to someone else having to walk on eggshells -- so it was still on topic.
Just because some (possibly ficticious) people are morons does not invalidate the argument.
So, someone writes a blog about some (possible ficiticious [sic]) people are morons and that's supposed to create a sound argument?
Dude. Your dog whistle is broken. Everyone can hear it.
My younger sister was a welfare crack whore. Perhaps it is you that needs to check your preconceived notions at the door...
And she wonders why she feels like people walk on eggshells around her and why she feels like she makes people uncomfortable.
Our group brought a white woman (race only matters based on what comes later), let's call her Joan. Joan had a closed door office downstairs from the group. Once she joined the group, we had her move into cube-land with the rest of us.
Enter Joan's friend, let's call her Kelly. Kelly happens to be black. One day Joan, Kelly, and I were having lunch in the break room. Kelly asked Joan why she moved out of her nice, closed-door office into cube-land. Here's where I step in it. I replied "We wanted to integrate Joan into the group." Kelly goes absolutely berserk on me. "What do you mean integrate?!? I'm integrated!!"
I'm still trying to figure out what my comment about Joan -- white Joan -- had anything to do with Kelly. Yes, I walked on egg shells around Kelly from then on.
I feel like I've lost my entire cultural identity in effort to be part of the culture I've spent the majority of the last decade in.
Translation: I want to impose my culture on my team mates.
Frankly, I'm tired of hearing people bitch about diversity in the tech field and then blaming employers. Out of the 200 people in my freshman CS class, two were black. By my senior year, one of them was left in the program -- and his major semester project failed all tests (the test being automated were completely color blind).
Let's ignore race for a moment. What's the percentage of people in tech who came from a single parent home? Ditto for the population at large? How many people in tech had welfare crack whores for mothers? The population at large? What's the percentage of people in tech where education was a priority for the family? The population at large?
If you want to bring race into it, turn around and ask the same questions and throw racial demographics into it. Perhaps the problem isn't with the tech companies, nor institutions of higher learning,nor primary or secondary education. Perhaps the problem lies with the family dynamics.
In my opinion, healthcare.gov failed so miserably primarily because nobody at HHS was in charge of the project, ....
How many lines of legalize was the Affordable Care Act? Just translating the ACA into requirements would take longer than the time allotted to getting the web site up and working --- and then you need at least one individual who completely understands the sometimes conflicting requirements.
No. The web site was doomed before it even began.
This is controversial but it should be said. but the biggest problem, religion, cant be solved with technology because religious zealots dont operate logically.
History doesn't bear this out. During the black plague in Europe, the Jews fared much better than others because of a ritual of cleanliness. Islam also has numerous cleansing/washing rituals. At best, lumping all religions together is ignorant.
...mice and rats diverged somewhere between 12 and 24 million years ago.
What does this even mean?
Part of the problem is that we want clear and distinctive buckets (labels) to put things into: this a rat, this is a mouse, ... Evolution, slow, gradual changes over time, doesn't work that neatly. 12 to 24 million years ago there was some animal with some its descendants became today's rats and some other of its descendants became mice. That animal could interbreed with others of its kind. At some point its descendants branch that eventually became rats and its descendants branch that eventually mice could no longer interbreed. But it wasn't a "Gee, we could interbreed last night but not this morning" kind of deal.
It's amazing I was wrong. Dammit! :)
It's amazing that someone admitted they were wrong. Consider +2 to your credibility.
...standard US foreign policy...
No, that level of insanity started with the Bushes.
I agree. We all hate the Bushes. But there's no reason to deny Viet Nam or Korea happened just because we hate the Bushes.
Anyone who defines chemical weapons as "WMDs" is doing it wrong. Very wrong.
Thank you. For a moment there I was afraid we wouldn't be able to say that Bush lied.
Most of them are buddhist, vegetarians or vegans.
Do you think buddhism is some kind of diet? Or should that have been a period after buddhist?
Do you think vegetarians is some kind of diet? Do you think vegans is some kind of diet? I suppose if you're a cannibal it could be, but I highly doubt that what GP meant.
Also, as far as I am aware, you are not allowed to have security cameras on your property that film parts of other's properties. Those laws should suffice, or at least be amended to include "roaming" cameras.
Be sure to check with your local laws. IANAL and I understand the law slightly differently --- which might be because we're in different localities (or because IANAL).
We are not customers, however I would argue that we are service providers. We provide service to Google's business by consuming advertising. As a service provider I also do not want my emails ignored.
If you're the service provider to Google then according to this ruling it is you that is not allowed to ignore e-mail from Google.
My initial perception was the same as your experience: that the black and Latino populations were solid blocs
I never said they were solid blocks. That one day --- when violence was threatened --- then they formed one solid block. During normal times they weren't.
That said, they form pretty solid voting blocks. Blacks have consistently voted 90% for Democrats since Johnson's Great Society.
I'm just saying if we can embrace the positive parts of full transparency, that will be better than the fallacy of believing we can successfully safeguard our privacy.
You do realize that Roe v. Wade is based on privacy rights, don't you? If you get rid of privacy, including (or especially) medical privacy then you undermine the foundation of a woman's right to choose.