You're precisely the kind of person I wouldn't want to hire. Why?

In my experience, the people who stay at a job (at least, an IT job) for more than 3 to 4 years start to languish pretty severely. Their skills get dull, their vision grows narrow, and they become a 'specialist' - usually a specialist of a very small subset of technology, and they lose much of their utility or ability to do things like troubleshoot or think outside the box.

Stability is great, as long as it doesn't lead to stasis. Every organization does need the "long stays", but arguably someone who "gets comfortable" in a position lacks the drive to self-improve.

(It's another story if the employer encourages internal advancement/improvement and that is expected from both sides when the position is taken...)

So if "going rate" is 60k and I offer someone 50k, that's discriminatory? That happens All. The. Time. Except it happens with "locals" - it's called negotiating from a position of power. Employers think they've got a position of power (ie something the interviewee wants) and use it. How is this any different?

Why would I ever offer an Indian a job, then? What I understand here is that this is a big mess because the fucking H1B worker didn't get preferential treatment?!

That's idiotic.

I hate Oracle on numerous grounds, but I'm on their side on this one.

Probably SusE, its the best choice.

http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:SPARC

I can't speak for oracle Solaris but all the opensolaris community forks that are based on illumos are pretty much exclusively amd64 now.

Solaris is dead. Long live Solaris!

(Illumos/illumian/Nexenta/SmartOS, that is...)

So, if this research has been done and it's been shown to be tenable, where are the apps so we can do so ourselves?

Presumably they did this on various Android phones and maybe an iPhone or two? I don't see anything in Play.

The quality of the newer bulbs is not sufficient to switch on their own. The lifecycle cost does not justify their use in most places (they don't last as long as advertised, ever, and when energy is cheap, it makes no sense...)

I've personally gone back through my place with incans and replaced all the dead CCFL bulbs I've bought, such as in the basement. The incans last much longer on average I've found, even the stupidly cheap $0.25 ones. My power bill is no different (not enough to notice) and I've got a fairly high use (due to having kids who don't know how to turn off a light, yet *grumble*).

How do household burglaries, assault, and other violent crime rates track against those firearm restrictions?

I'd bet they've gone up, if demographic information from other firearm restrictions are to be of any guide.

Sorry, I'll accept a higher likelihood of being shot if I've got the ability to shoot back, along with the decreased likelihood that violent crime will be perpetrated against me in the first place.

Your rationale justifies fire bombing urban ghettos more so than it justifies banning guns, if you're going to look at actual correlative causation instead of just pure statistics, by the way.

It's slim to nil, once you eliminate the criminal element.

And for the deaths that do occur from lawful use of firearms in self defense, they're usually from the demographic which is more likely to cause criminal firearm deaths.

If you've got people coming into your house to take you and your family away, do you think a couple guns in the bedstand leading to a shootout with the jackboots might be preferable to dying of starvation in a deathcamp?

Or maybe they'd like to be able to help rescue their fellow ideologues before they themselves are brought to the camps. You forget that German disarmament occurred long before the Jews and other undesirables were collected. They didn't have the option, they could only keep their heads down.

Some people would like that option. And you can be assured that collection of undesirables would be much less likely to be the 'right thing to do' when the soldiers doing the collecting are concerned about getting shot while doing so.

What percentage of the UK population is stepped in ghetto thug culture?

Because that correlates pretty tightly in the US with gun grime rates.

Correlation is not causation. Germany has (and always has) a much different culture than the US. Germans are known (over here) for their stoicism. This may have something to do with the lack of firearm fatalities - you may be surprised to find out that other culture-related crime statistics are also likely different.

What is absolutely hilarious is the dissonance on this topic. They fear something, don't understand something - so they want to ban it. It's a typical knee-jerk response (for pretty much anyone, for any agenda, but it's particularly bad in this case).

How can a person, with a straight face, say "prohibition will work" in one case (banning guns, or any variation thereof), while at the same time getting on the soapbox about pot legalization (or similar) is laughable.

Look, we've tried that. Prohibition has failed. And then it failed again, and again, and again: Prohibition, War on Drugs, etc. Arguably, the illegality of prostitution and long-standing abortion illegality are also related to increased crime rates, violence, and organized crime.

Prohibition not only directly causes crime by making previously peaceful, legal things illegal but creates a black market, which further increases violence and organized crime.

If you want to stop gun related crime, stop making everything illegal. Don't make gun-free zones. Don't ban peaceable citizens from owning things they can use for their own self-reliance which are easily acquired by the criminal element through black markets. Start addressing the socioeconomic situations in urban ghettos which are the vast majority of firearm related crime. Do things to get people off welfare, get people jobs, and get their lives drug-free.

And what of that number once you adjust it for suicides?

You're left with a number lower than the number of people who drown in a bathtub every year. This makes your statement really kind of silly-stupid:

"Its just a hobby, you folk don't have the right to cause 50,000 deaths a year for your hobby."

While we're at it, we might as well make it illegal to sleep on your back and to not wear untied shoes.

Firearms are just a scrapegoat for a political agenda which wants to ignore the real social issues surrounding violent crime.They're cultural and largely relate to the misconceived War on Drugs.