10 years out it will be about not having a family, being able to relocate on your dime cheaply, and using what free time you have to have learned the latest Web x.0 technologies. If you want out of that rat race, you will have to acquire the $100k in income to get the college degree so you can land a mgmt position to support a more balanced lifestyle.

So perhaps you can save some on interest?

College isn't for everyone, but if I just change the title a little bit, does this seem like more of a bad idea?

Employers always love to get the least qualified individual with the least options and marketability to do the job, that is still able to do the job. That doesn't mean you should serve yourself up to them on a platter...

You haven't met my mother.

one bullet

Not sure I'd use 0's. I think i'd use random data with a CRC check, or at least known files that i could copy back and diff against hte originals.

I definitely think this should be more common in both games and movies. That plus the review aggregators showing 0 stars until the review embargo has been lifted and a statistically significant number of reviews show up.

Lies. They've deployed Gigapower advertising to a large number of service trucks! They've deployed a gigapower website, where you too can go to learn you also can't get Gigapower!

Uverse and cable are competitors to a product nobody really wants...

If Google announces fiber in a city that they don't own via a bunch of anti-competitive legal nonsense.

I did read it and read his explanation too so I know it's about all kinds of sex (even though it was obvious from the story). In spite of that, it managed to not be the kind of soft-porn HBO sometimes gets in to. I'm not sure I agree it's his best book, but he managed to do a lot of controversial things in that book that would probably have gotten the book banned if they were spelled right out. To me that's more important than the characters just screwing all over the place as say, Heinlein might have done it. You get too much in the screwing, and you lose sight of the message.

Asimov wasn't a prude, I don't want to insinuate that he was or that sex would cause him to spin in his grave. Having his better works reduced to porn though, might. The point of many of his books was not to cater to our prurient interests, it was to put them in context of something greater. I really like what HBO has done with quite a few series, but my concern is, thus far, they haven't managed to do anything like this. They know how to make a show that caters to the mass audience, they manage to keep it somewhat intelligent while doing it, but can they make a show that rises above?

When did they stop writing papers in LaTeX?

I'm willing to bet that anything the FCC does will be part of a brokered arranagement involving a bundle of entirely unrelated topics about H1B visas, oil pipelines, obamacare, and no doubt things I care even less about. I won't bet a dollar on how the deck is going to be split, only that it will be split.

The standoff can't continue: if the republicans keep doing nothing they're going to hurt in 2016. If Obama veto's everything the democrats will hurt in 2016. Something will happen in the next 2 years, I'm just afraid of what it will be.

Foundation was not really prudish, but Asimov really didn't include (any that I recall) blatant sex scenes or sexual themes in his books, at least directly. It was always between the lines, as a means to advance the plot. Similarly the language was pretty clean most of the time. I'm not sure how this fits HBO's M.O. I mean they added MORE sex to Game of Thrones, and the books I think covered almost every variety and perversion attainable without giving characters internet access.

Foundation to me was always more Star Trek style science fiction, geared towards dreamers and full of hope (even in spite of what psychohistory predicted, and why Foundation existed). In contrast, HBOs other series, though well done, tend to focus on our seedier side. HBO can make a good show, but I wonder if the end product will resemble the series it's based on. Sex won't ruin it, but done the way HBO does it, will certainly be distracting.

Yet by purchasing slaves you are increasing demand for slaves, which prompts the slave industry to acquire more. This doesn't strike me as morally pragmatic, it strikes me as wrong. The slaves did not volunteer for their duty, it was not their choice to leave their savagery, I see no way to argue that as being right. The best way to be the positive drop in the bucket is first and foremost to take the money out of the industry: don't buy slaves.

Moral pragmatism is coming in to possession of the slaves second hand (i.e. saving them from death), treating them well and releasing them and ideally giving them a paying job (given that released slaves in the US would likely have a rough go). Given the laws and social conditions, releasing them may actually have caused them greater harm, I can see having to make a less than ideal choice on this one for the greater good.

The harder choice is one more like what we face today (H1B) and more like what might be driving the cheating in India. These people choose their indentured servitude here, and you can't argue it's a step up, yet is entirely destructive and unfair. What we should be doing is giving them green cards. That will take the money out of the system and cut much of the cheating. The rest I would argue should be handled through testing that is more standardized and much harder to cheat on (with real legal penalties). Universities ultimately are not about qualifying people for a job, they're about education, it's on the student to use his time there productively. They should not also be the gatekeepers of qualification.