Exactly, because we all know that it took martial law to break the backs of the mafia in post-prohibition America!
It's true that the cartels wouldn't disappear overnight, but they would eventually follow the same path as the mafia. The smart ones would diversify into legitimate businesses and eventually leave most of their more disreputable past behind. The dumb ones would either fail to diversify, or else attempt to apply their violent methods to legitimate business. Either way, they would present a problem that could be more easily handled by law enforcement given that there would be fewer of them, and they would be, by definition, dumber.
This is essentially what happened in post-prohibition America, which is the best model we have for what would happen should drugs be legalized.
Why should they then get the benefits of tax revenue generated from California citizens? North Dakota is one of the biggest beneficiary states when it comes to the ratio of Federal spending to taxes, while California is one of the biggest losers. The reason? It's the UNITED States of America. We're in it together.
Maybe, but I think that what they'd already done was sufficient. Dividing into separate plans was a good decision, it was just handled poorly from a PR perspective. Dividing into separate companies is simply a poor decision that compounds the previous PR blunder.
What happens now is that they have pissed off nearly everyone they didn't already piss off with the price increase. A lot of people who had decided to go ahead and keep both services despite the increase will now end up dropping one or both because they no longer consider it to be worth it with the separation of queues and inability to do a single search for availability.
They're throwing away a working synergy in exchange for what? Game rentals? They could have just added that to the available plans if they'd wanted to, and given the way things are going in the gaming industry, the physical copy of a video game could go away before the physical DVD does!
This move won't kill Netflix, but it certainly isn't going to help it.
My guess is you first saw this with the tagline "Dice Age — Indie Gaming Project vs. Hollywood", otherwise I doubt you'd have made the connection. I've been aware of this project for at least a couple of months, I even considered supporting it, yet I never once thought of the movie "Ice Age" in relation to it until I saw this story.
That's kind of a bad example given that WoW's subscription numbers continued to steadily rise after the release of Burning Crusade. If "nearly everyone" was upset with the changes made back then, it certainly wasn't affecting Blizzard's bottom line.
Having never owned a PS3, I was not personally affected by this breach, but I have friends who were. The offer by Sony to provide free credit protection is admirable, but the offer came too late for those I know who were affected. They signed up for their own credit protection plans as soon as they became aware of the problem, while Sony did not offer protection until some time after. They might be able to switch over now to Sony's free plan, but they should be compensated for the money they were already forced to spend on their own credit protection. Given the difficulty in determining who paid how much for what, a blanket $20 payment for everyone affected would not be unreasonable.
The difference is that McCain's birth was questioned, the question was resolved, and people moved on. Since then the only questioning of McCain's birth has been as a counter-example to the questioning of Obama's birth. On the other hand, Obama's birth was questioned, the question was resolved, and people continued to question anyway.
Simple disagreement with Obama is not racism, but continuing to question the circumstances of his birth long after any reasonable doubt on the issue has been removed (which happened long before the release of the long form birth certificate), indicates something far beyond simple disagreement.
Thanks for supporting my point that teachers aren't the problem.
I disagree that because parents are part of the problem that it lessens the responsibility of society/taxpayers/voters, but I'm at least glad that we can acknowledge that it isn't all the teachers' fault!
Even were I to admit that teachers teach half as much as they did 25 years ago (which I don't), it would only be to point out that it's because they have twice as many non-teaching responsibilities as they did back then. As budgets have been cut more and more non-teaching responsibilities have been put on the shoulders of teachers. Janitorial services in many districts have been cut, making teachers responsible for cleaning their own classrooms, and sometimes even common areas. Lower level administrative services in many districts have been cut, making teachers responsible for filling out paperwork that used to be handled by school secretaries. Special education programs have been cut, making regular teachers responsible for handling special discipline problems that were previously handled by specialists so that the regular teachers could get on with teaching the regular students.
Of course, class sizes have increased, making the amount of teaching per student go down significantly, but that's not the teachers' fault, and gives the teacher a bigger workload in terms of grading and the like, without any positive return for the students.
Stop blaming teachers for the failure of our educational system and start putting the blame on those responsible: politicians and voters that set policies and refuse to allocate adequate funding.
I was mistaken, there were indeed Citizens of German descent interred in WWII. It was simply not the mass internment that was done to citizens of Japanese descent.
Only if you count prisoners of war. No American citizens of German descent were interred during the war simply because they were of German descent. American citizens of Japanese descent were interred solely for being of Japanese descent.
I have an iPhone with the Kindle app installed, and I have a Kindle. I hope that Amazon tells Apple to shove it. I'd rather do without the app on the iPhone then have eBook prices be pushed up by this move on Apple's part.
Spoken like someone who's never worked outside of a state with more worker friendly laws. We live in a "right to work" state, and the conditions detailed above pretty much describe my wife's job. She gets extra pay on holidays, but she doesn't get off. She doesn't have sick leave. If she gets pregnant, not only won't she get maternity leave, but they'll simply fire her. She often works double shifts and works through breaks. There are health and safety regulations, but they mostly apply to protecting the customers not the employees. Laws in the US are, overall, incredibly employer friendly.
If ESPN wants to charge someone, then they should charge the consumer, not the ISP. That way the consumer actually has a choice as to whether or not they want to pay. By charging the ISP, if my ISP pays, then I pay regardless of whether or not I actually want their programming. It's another case of big corporations feeling entitled to my money whether or not I actually want their products.
The study says that the heaviest users of Facebook are either narcissists or people with low self-esteem. That seems generally true of most forms of communication from telephones to casual conversation: the heaviest users are either looking to spread the glory that is themselves, or are looking for validation.
What the study doesn't say is that the majority of Facebook users are narcissists or people with low self esteem, but that is the conclusion most people here seem to be jumping to.
Ah, the Kodak Land Camera. We had one of those. I remember my dad receiving a check as part of Kodak's settlement with it's customers following the loss of the suit with Polaroid. I also remember hoarding the film to the point that it went bad and the last few pictures we took with it didn't turn out well.
Yeah, pretty much. I lived through the 70s and 80s, and the disposable culture was already well established. Well, in the case of the 70s, that was probably the decade that it became established, but by 75 the change was well underway.
The average household in 1975 probably did just have one television, but that was one of the last years for which that was true, and households that were "early adopters" probably already had at least a second television in the master bedroom.
By the end of the decade I had a television in my bedroom, albeit a small black and white one at first, and that was as a child in a lower middle class household. My parents did not have one in their bedroom, but then they monopolized the main TV and were far from being "early adopters."
The popularity of instant cameras during this period shows that if a practical digital camera had been available, it probably would have achieved wide acceptance.
Point being that society would have been ready for a digital camera in 1975, if the state of technology had been ready to provide one. It wasn't.
It makes sense that it would be your first instinct to do so. Unfortunately, instincts don't always lead to the wisest course of action. Many, if not most, of the factors involved in whether or not a student learns are out of the teacher's control. Home life is probably the single biggest factor, but we aren't seeing a huge call for making parents more responsible for their children's education.
The problem is that student standardized test scores don't identify bad teachers, they only identify the presence of a problem. That's like evaluating a developer of financial software based on how well the end users of his software performed in the last quarter. Yeah, the problem may have been that the software sucked and prevented them from doing their jobs to the best of their ability, but there are a lot of other potential causes as well.
I am not a teacher, but I do know some, and they seem demoralized by this emphasis on student test scores because they know that many, if not most, of the factors involved in how well a student does on those tests are out of control. The result is quite likely to be the opposite of what is intended, with good teachers becoming apathetic because it doesn't matter how good they are if the metrics they are judged by are out of their control.
The fact that one class consistently does better than another is reason to look more deeply into the reasons why, but it's not reason enough to jump to the conclusion that one teacher is better than the other. There may vvery well be other factors. Maybe one classroom is closer to the street and has to deal with distracting noise? Maybe one is on the shaded side of the building and is more comfortable during the warmer months? Maybe one teacher truly is better than the other and it's worth studying what makes them better. It's a starting point, not an ending point, and to condemn the teacher of the lower performing class without exploring further why the class is lower performing is irresponsible.
In this case though, it really is stealing. Someone is paying for the increased bandwidth being used.
That cost may be less than $395, but it's also greater than $0, so real theft is involved because someone is out some money as a result of the action. Not theoretical "lost sale" money, but real money that someone will have to actually pay.
The last time I read playboy was about five years ago when I picked up a super cheap subscription for a year. The first issue I received had stories on Elvis. The next one featured Marilyn Monroe. Apparently Playboy doesn't realize that the baby boomers are no longer in their twenties and thirties.
Jokes about "reading the articles" aside, Playboy was once a great source for relevant articles, both fiction and non-fiction, but that ceased to be the case a couple of decades ago.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly, because we all know that it took martial law to break the backs of the mafia in post-prohibition America!
It's true that the cartels wouldn't disappear overnight, but they would eventually follow the same path as the mafia. The smart ones would diversify into legitimate businesses and eventually leave most of their more disreputable past behind. The dumb ones would either fail to diversify, or else attempt to apply their violent methods to legitimate business. Either way, they would present a problem that could be more easily handled by law enforcement given that there would be fewer of them, and they would be, by definition, dumber.
This is essentially what happened in post-prohibition America, which is the best model we have for what would happen should drugs be legalized.
Why should they then get the benefits of tax revenue generated from California citizens? North Dakota is one of the biggest beneficiary states when it comes to the ratio of Federal spending to taxes, while California is one of the biggest losers. The reason? It's the UNITED States of America. We're in it together.
Maybe, but I think that what they'd already done was sufficient. Dividing into separate plans was a good decision, it was just handled poorly from a PR perspective. Dividing into separate companies is simply a poor decision that compounds the previous PR blunder.
What happens now is that they have pissed off nearly everyone they didn't already piss off with the price increase. A lot of people who had decided to go ahead and keep both services despite the increase will now end up dropping one or both because they no longer consider it to be worth it with the separation of queues and inability to do a single search for availability.
They're throwing away a working synergy in exchange for what? Game rentals? They could have just added that to the available plans if they'd wanted to, and given the way things are going in the gaming industry, the physical copy of a video game could go away before the physical DVD does!
This move won't kill Netflix, but it certainly isn't going to help it.
My guess is you first saw this with the tagline "Dice Age — Indie Gaming Project vs. Hollywood", otherwise I doubt you'd have made the connection. I've been aware of this project for at least a couple of months, I even considered supporting it, yet I never once thought of the movie "Ice Age" in relation to it until I saw this story.
That's kind of a bad example given that WoW's subscription numbers continued to steadily rise after the release of Burning Crusade. If "nearly everyone" was upset with the changes made back then, it certainly wasn't affecting Blizzard's bottom line.
Having never owned a PS3, I was not personally affected by this breach, but I have friends who were. The offer by Sony to provide free credit protection is admirable, but the offer came too late for those I know who were affected. They signed up for their own credit protection plans as soon as they became aware of the problem, while Sony did not offer protection until some time after. They might be able to switch over now to Sony's free plan, but they should be compensated for the money they were already forced to spend on their own credit protection. Given the difficulty in determining who paid how much for what, a blanket $20 payment for everyone affected would not be unreasonable.
The difference is that McCain's birth was questioned, the question was resolved, and people moved on. Since then the only questioning of McCain's birth has been as a counter-example to the questioning of Obama's birth. On the other hand, Obama's birth was questioned, the question was resolved, and people continued to question anyway.
Simple disagreement with Obama is not racism, but continuing to question the circumstances of his birth long after any reasonable doubt on the issue has been removed (which happened long before the release of the long form birth certificate), indicates something far beyond simple disagreement.
Because it's a substantial price increase for an incremental upgrade in quality and often a downgrade in convenience.
Thanks for supporting my point that teachers aren't the problem.
I disagree that because parents are part of the problem that it lessens the responsibility of society/taxpayers/voters, but I'm at least glad that we can acknowledge that it isn't all the teachers' fault!
Even were I to admit that teachers teach half as much as they did 25 years ago (which I don't), it would only be to point out that it's because they have twice as many non-teaching responsibilities as they did back then. As budgets have been cut more and more non-teaching responsibilities have been put on the shoulders of teachers. Janitorial services in many districts have been cut, making teachers responsible for cleaning their own classrooms, and sometimes even common areas. Lower level administrative services in many districts have been cut, making teachers responsible for filling out paperwork that used to be handled by school secretaries. Special education programs have been cut, making regular teachers responsible for handling special discipline problems that were previously handled by specialists so that the regular teachers could get on with teaching the regular students.
Of course, class sizes have increased, making the amount of teaching per student go down significantly, but that's not the teachers' fault, and gives the teacher a bigger workload in terms of grading and the like, without any positive return for the students.
Stop blaming teachers for the failure of our educational system and start putting the blame on those responsible: politicians and voters that set policies and refuse to allocate adequate funding.
I was mistaken, there were indeed Citizens of German descent interred in WWII. It was simply not the mass internment that was done to citizens of Japanese descent.
I learn something new every day...
Only if you count prisoners of war. No American citizens of German descent were interred during the war simply because they were of German descent. American citizens of Japanese descent were interred solely for being of Japanese descent.
I have an iPhone with the Kindle app installed, and I have a Kindle. I hope that Amazon tells Apple to shove it. I'd rather do without the app on the iPhone then have eBook prices be pushed up by this move on Apple's part.
If only Apple had access to some sort of communication device to alert its users that there was a problem...
Seriously, a non-functioning alarm is a pretty serious problem, why no alert from AT&T?
You are correct, although they generally go together in states that have either.
Spoken like someone who's never worked in the US.
Spoken like someone who's never worked outside of a state with more worker friendly laws. We live in a "right to work" state, and the conditions detailed above pretty much describe my wife's job. She gets extra pay on holidays, but she doesn't get off. She doesn't have sick leave. If she gets pregnant, not only won't she get maternity leave, but they'll simply fire her. She often works double shifts and works through breaks. There are health and safety regulations, but they mostly apply to protecting the customers not the employees. Laws in the US are, overall, incredibly employer friendly.
If ESPN wants to charge someone, then they should charge the consumer, not the ISP. That way the consumer actually has a choice as to whether or not they want to pay. By charging the ISP, if my ISP pays, then I pay regardless of whether or not I actually want their programming. It's another case of big corporations feeling entitled to my money whether or not I actually want their products.
The study says that the heaviest users of Facebook are either narcissists or people with low self-esteem. That seems generally true of most forms of communication from telephones to casual conversation: the heaviest users are either looking to spread the glory that is themselves, or are looking for validation.
What the study doesn't say is that the majority of Facebook users are narcissists or people with low self esteem, but that is the conclusion most people here seem to be jumping to.
Ah, the Kodak Land Camera. We had one of those. I remember my dad receiving a check as part of Kodak's settlement with it's customers following the loss of the suit with Polaroid. I also remember hoarding the film to the point that it went bad and the last few pictures we took with it didn't turn out well.
Yeah, pretty much. I lived through the 70s and 80s, and the disposable culture was already well established. Well, in the case of the 70s, that was probably the decade that it became established, but by 75 the change was well underway.
The average household in 1975 probably did just have one television, but that was one of the last years for which that was true, and households that were "early adopters" probably already had at least a second television in the master bedroom.
By the end of the decade I had a television in my bedroom, albeit a small black and white one at first, and that was as a child in a lower middle class household. My parents did not have one in their bedroom, but then they monopolized the main TV and were far from being "early adopters."
The popularity of instant cameras during this period shows that if a practical digital camera had been available, it probably would have achieved wide acceptance.
Point being that society would have been ready for a digital camera in 1975, if the state of technology had been ready to provide one. It wasn't.
It makes sense that it would be your first instinct to do so. Unfortunately, instincts don't always lead to the wisest course of action. Many, if not most, of the factors involved in whether or not a student learns are out of the teacher's control. Home life is probably the single biggest factor, but we aren't seeing a huge call for making parents more responsible for their children's education.
The problem is that student standardized test scores don't identify bad teachers, they only identify the presence of a problem. That's like evaluating a developer of financial software based on how well the end users of his software performed in the last quarter. Yeah, the problem may have been that the software sucked and prevented them from doing their jobs to the best of their ability, but there are a lot of other potential causes as well.
I am not a teacher, but I do know some, and they seem demoralized by this emphasis on student test scores because they know that many, if not most, of the factors involved in how well a student does on those tests are out of control. The result is quite likely to be the opposite of what is intended, with good teachers becoming apathetic because it doesn't matter how good they are if the metrics they are judged by are out of their control.
The fact that one class consistently does better than another is reason to look more deeply into the reasons why, but it's not reason enough to jump to the conclusion that one teacher is better than the other. There may vvery well be other factors. Maybe one classroom is closer to the street and has to deal with distracting noise? Maybe one is on the shaded side of the building and is more comfortable during the warmer months? Maybe one teacher truly is better than the other and it's worth studying what makes them better. It's a starting point, not an ending point, and to condemn the teacher of the lower performing class without exploring further why the class is lower performing is irresponsible.
In this case though, it really is stealing. Someone is paying for the increased bandwidth being used.
That cost may be less than $395, but it's also greater than $0, so real theft is involved because someone is out some money as a result of the action. Not theoretical "lost sale" money, but real money that someone will have to actually pay.
The last time I read playboy was about five years ago when I picked up a super cheap subscription for a year. The first issue I received had stories on Elvis. The next one featured Marilyn Monroe. Apparently Playboy doesn't realize that the baby boomers are no longer in their twenties and thirties.
Jokes about "reading the articles" aside, Playboy was once a great source for relevant articles, both fiction and non-fiction, but that ceased to be the case a couple of decades ago.