Well, we're about to elect Hillary Clinton. She's not stupid. She thinks everyone else is stupid, and she's got enough supporters who don't care whether or why she's being feloniously coy about things like her email use (her lawyer just this evening explained that Clinton has destroyed all of her email that wasn't printed out to lamely respond to demands for her records from her tenure at State).

When she's president, don't ask why we elected a stupid person. As why we stupidly elected her. We'll have eight years to think it through. Yay.

What ARE you talking about? The problem you describe is the state being required to be more thorough in investigating matters like the case in question (the lady with the car, Twitter, etc). The solution to that isn't lowering the threshold by which we describe airlines pilots as too unstable to do that particularly stressful, demanding, and highly responsible (for other people's lives) work.

1/3 of people aren't airline pilots.

And more to the point, 1/3 of people don't take out their depression on a hundred or so other families by slaughtering a plane load of people.

Everybody goes through "rough patches," but very few of them kill themselves over it, let alone decide to kill a hundred other people just to add some more drama to it. The whole point here is that you can't have someone in a position of responsibility like that, and have them be one of those much more fragile people who become suicidal/murderous over a "rough patch."

If it takes something bad happening in their life to make it clear they can't keep a level head and maintain their professionalism, then they are not in the right line of work.

"Many people" are not commercial airline pilots.

Dark energy is just the latest name for the Cosmological Constant - I guess it's a better name if it's not actually constant, but the cosmologists I've seen talking about it don't like the new name either (not that anyone has a better suggestion, really). The key thing about it is that the energy density of it is insanely low - I suspect that on the quantum scale it actually "rounds to 0" the way things can in QM, where no measurement is possible at that scale. I think even at the scale of our galaxy it's a very tiny effect. It's a testament to how sparse matter really is in the universe that dark matter is the dominant effect overall.

Funny, in my world, classes called "XManager" are expected to have the "single responsibility" of X, but in a way that needs it's own thread or something to do it right - more separation than the usual class boundary. If X is too broad, expect complaints in code review.

Some of us are doomed even if most women don't know this secret.

No, he's saying it should be illegal to keep things like mental instability and dangerous suicidal mindsets secret from the state when the state is what licenses you to be entrusted, day-in, day-out, with the lives of hundreds of people. If you've got mental problems, don't look for a job where that is by definition a disqualifier. It appears this German guy knew that, and was hiding his problems from his employer and the regulatory agencies that license his operation of giant passenger aircraft.

(I am copying a prior post of mine, but I think it bears repeating)

A flight officer should be able to engage a "defer to ground" mode from anywhere on the plane, at any time. Once "defer to ground" mode is engaged the autopilot cannot be disabled without the approval of an air traffic controller, or the consent of more than one (or more than two) flight officer(s). The air traffic controllers can then issue instructions to the autopilot or remotely control the plane or disable the "defer to ground" autopilot.

If the plane is out of range of air traffic control, the autopilot would (in addition to attempting to stabilize any descent) change trajectory to either a.) the closest known safe ground relay or b.) the closest known safe landing site.

In the ordinary course the pilots are in control, with "defer to ground" off by default, and can only be enabled by flight officers on the plane, so the plane cannot be compromised by malicious ATC.

Yeah, thought so.

Unless you are in 15% of jobs- you'll be forced to retire.

Good thing is, worst case you'll get about 85% of your social security benefits. This could be fixed if they raised the limit to 500k salary and raised the tax by 1%. Pretty small change so the problem is partially theatrics.

Bad thing is, those will only cover about 70% of your needs so you will need something to fill that gap. Medicare looks in trouble. It could be fixed if the U.S. offered to pay for medical school in return for lower cost service as germany does to doctors. And if we broke the medical school cartel and ramped up the number of doctors like we did during world war 2.

Save hard- as in 50%. I did and was able to retire at 51- not on social security for another 16 to 19 years.

Another stock market decline is coming soon (probably in calendar 2015). Hopefully 20-30%- but it could be another 50% hit. When the 100dma crosses back above the 300dma again after the bottom- that's when you put the money in and let it rise for years without having to do anything. That will multiply your savings.

So California Pacific lays off 500 existing IT workers to replace them with H1B workers who will be paid 2/3 the cost, forces the existing workers to train their H1B Infosys replacements if the u.s. workers want their severance- and forces them to sign NDA's if they want their full severance.

http://www.computerworld.com/a...

And people wonder why millenials are doing poorly in this kind of environment. California Pacific's layoff seems blatantly illegal (how can you say you need H1B's because you can't find american workers with the skill set when you are LAYING OFF EXISTING WORKERS to replace them with H1B's????) but many other companies are doing the same thing by eliminating jobs at site "A" and immediately starting up the jobs at site "B".

Look- if the companies were foreign companies- we might protect workers or at least get lower prices. But as it is we are expected to pay full prices for the product here while the company uses discount labor.

Here is a blatant obvious case-- will someone do something about this? At least the conservative talk radio is finally mad about the issue. In the past it was only the democrats. How many jobs have to go before something is done?

Why enter a field when you are directly competing with people who can go home and live well on $15k a year?

Aye... sort of irritating that the article on California Pacific laying off workers to replace them with H1B's from Infosys doesn't get approved for anyone submitting it and this gets approved twice. Laying off u.s. workers to replace them with H1B's. That sounds directly illegal and could be a tipping point in the struggle against H1B's since conservative talk radio is riled up over it too for a change.