Companies shouldshould try to pay as little as possible. That's the system: it depends on human greed at every exchange. Any system that doesn't is purest foolishness.
ANY system which represents humans as a single datapoint is frankly idiotic and doomed to failure.
Europe is made up of countries that are far to different in culture and economic prospects to ever fly under the same flag effectively.
And America isn't? As far as I can tell the states with strong economies continually dump money into the poor states with non existent economies via the federal tax and redistribution system. New Mexico for example. It has butt-all industry. Well, it's pretty much limited to the growing, processing and eating green Chile which never makes it out of the state, making low-riders which also never make it out of the state and growing pistacho nuts, which do. It has some tourism. Oh and gambling. Does that count as an export industry?
It has no natural resources, little useful land, hardly any industry and a nice big collection of national labs, which bring in a lot of money and a bunch of roads which also bring in money.
As for culture, sure, the US is somewhat uniform now, but it wasn't when the states were formed or joined. Almost everyone was from everywhere else as it were and brought with whatever bits of culture they carried.
NM, for example was simply Mexico before. Mexico gave it up and the US didn't even bother to pick it up after that for about 100 years or so (the land is worth that little). There were also the local tribes---who fared somewhat well compared to others because again their land wasn't worth stealing.
Of course even though the influences of Mexico and the tribal cultures are strong, it still feels like America. It wouldn't have done when it first joined though.
It's not a big deal to call a male co-worker a stupid dick head when he makes a mistake,
I've never worked anywhere where that was acceptable behaviour, and I've generally worked with mostly men.
Besides, that even supports my point. Apparently you can deal just fine some women aren't some great unknowable.
Noooo... only when it benefits the parasites.
I can't help but wonder what happened to you to make you so bitter at the world.
If you spent the energy on self improvement that you spend on hating women you will see your life improve dramatically. For a start you'll spend less time stewing in bile and more time doing something actually enjoyable.
OK so slashdot has now eaten two attempts to reply to you!
GAH!!!!! I'm really annoyed now, but not with you.
The 12F675 has more than 64 bytes of code: it has has 1KiWord of 14 bit memory for the program. It's very much a Harvard architecture, so there's a lot more than 64 bytes of code.
Pretty much all uCs run code straight out of NOR flash.
I'm using a TI CC2541, which has the usual slew of integrated peripherals, a 2.4GHz radio, 8k RAM, 128k ROM (optionally 256K, and room for external flash) and is a 32MHz single cycle 8051 core. It's quite capable and able to run an entire bluetooth stack on board. You could easily fit a TCP/IP stack in there if you wanted genuine internet access, too.
It's more than capable of operating a dimmable lamp for example (smart lamps are a classic IoT example). My device has a dimmable status LED as a minor feature, and the uC also operates some other hardware and does some DSP on board. 8k/128k is more than capable of an awful lot of control and logging functionality.
The BLE113 (a module using this chip) dev board operates a whole slew of hardware including buttons, a two line alphanumeric display, accelerometers, an altimeter and some other bits and bobs, and operates this while doing two way comms with another bluetooth device (either as the client or server).
By comparison the 32MB memory device is huge. I can't think of many IoT uses for such a device which don't involve driving a reasonably high definition screen with full colour graphics. Quake II ran happily on a P133 with 16MB of RAM, so I imagine the device for this OS is very much more than capable of such graphics.
I disagree: you've failed to establish that homosexual marriage is more complex than heterosexual marriage. You gave a number of examples, but all of those happen with heterosexual marriage too.
OK, so for gender independent group marriage how would legalise it such that it is fair? From what little I know of the existing cultures, it doesn' begin to remotely cover the actual cases involved.
For example if one partner essentially looks after the other/house/kids while the other earns money, it's generally considered that this is a work sharing partnership so if a divorce happens the wealth earned after marriage is pretty much split evenly.
How on earth do you propose it would work when a partner joins part way through and one is divorced? It gets fearsomely complex.
While the inventors paradox exists, so does http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
But I'm all ears. If you can sketch a way to make it work which covers much of the spirit of the current system, I'd be interested and willing to change my opinion.
Yes comrade, we must. For the people and the people's party.
If by "truth" you mean reaving nuttiness that you made up, then sure.
But seriously, I think you need to seek a professional therapist. You're anger at the world is certainly doing you harm.
Yes comrade, we should send them to political reeducation so they learn to think right!
The greatest unsolved mystery to Man is Woman.
No, not really. Or at least not to anyone with even half of a shred of a clue. The thing to bear in mind is that women are first and foremost people and female comes in at a distant second place.
Most people who "don't undestand" women insist on some sort of dichotomy and "otherness" about women that's almost entirely manufactured. They also conveniently forget about the many women they interact with every day who don't do anything strange. A co-worker, a bus driver, someone in front of you in a queue, fellow drivers on the road, a boss, a chasier and so on and so forth who behave in a pefectly sensible manner and do nothing surprising.
[snip bullshit evopsych]
So today is "two wrongs make a right" day?
Having equal but opposite crappyness doesn't offset the original crappiness, it just makes the world twice as bad.
Oh.
I've been giggling over your posts all morning. I thought it was some of the best performance art trolling I've seen in years.
Are you saying you're actually for real and this isn't a comedy act?
Not sure if troll or serious...
Given that you've responded a lot in this thread, I'm going to assume you're actually a raving nutjob rather than a troll and you actually believe what you're saying.
So, women can function in those fields. They just contradict their inherently parasitic nature.
Women are inherently parasitic?
Know how I know you're a raving nutjob?
Was Arnold Schwarznegger one of the volunteers?
Friction is a drag.
