So, they want the government to force the minimums up higher to "living wages," but they don't think everything else will just inflate along with it? Everyone's salaries go up, too! Yay! Wait, groceries and gas just went up too! BOO! Whoa, the dollar is now worth 2 pesos? QUICK, CASH IN YOUR MONIES FROM ACAPULCO! Dude, where's my retirement savings?
That's a good phrase. I've purchased perhaps a third of the music I own because I heard a song (or snippet of a song) in a video or just tripped across something I liked while surfing youtube. "This video has been muted due to an audio copyright claim by FuckMeI'mAnIdiot Publishing" would seem to be quite as self-defeating as normal folks claim.
You know what I've learned after all these years. I may not know "what works", but I sure do know what won't.
Gosh, you just said one of the things I dislike the most about the old timers. They tried something, they failed at it, and the conclusion they bring to the table is unpossible!
To be sure, by all means yes, I want to hear about what went wrong the last time around, but one failed attempt does not prove much.
As I remind them every time, the real lesson they bring is that, if we were to do exactly what you did, back at that moment in time, we would fail... likely.
Instead I refocus the meeting on whether it really is different this time around: has technology evolved? the market place matured? are we architecting the solution differently? better team? etc.
And you just made one of the rookie I'm-a-manager/architect-hear-me-roar ASSumptions that I detest as a rational individual: you put up your own strawmen any time you run across someone that sounds like that guy you disagreed with but weren't able to intelligently understand and work with to arrive at a common understanding and path forward.
We had a crotchety old bastard at my office a few years ago. People would dismiss him out of hand because he was gruff and unsympathetic to the care and feeding of the youths' fragile self-esteem; i.e. he would call a stupid idea a stupid idea. Turns out after a couple of failed efforts at a few things that he was exactly right on all counts. And the projects that he worked on that went well, went well because people trusted his knowledge enough to discuss his answers from a position of accept-then-attempt-to-disprove rather than your-presentation-sucks-we-aren't-listening-to-you-neener-neener.
So, yeah, I'll take a competent, gruff old asshole over an inexperienced and self-important noobie any day. Related: always strikes me as ironic how the Social Justice Warrior/Bleeding Heart type tends to be so dismissive of the Old Bastards in modern western societies, *in spite of the preponderance of evidence of their competency.*
I see where Oreskes says politically-driven science isn't inherently bad. I wholeheartedly agree. But. People tend to make the assumption (and you know where that leads) that politically-driven science is wholesome and rewarding, whereas financially-driven science isn't.
Thing is, if either fail the tests of actual, you know, science, then they don't deserve the appellation. Such tests being reproducibility, peer review, publishing the actual data for independent analysis, etc. If you're not willing to share how the data for a test is "manipulated" or "corrected" or "adjusted," then you guessed it -- your results are going to be suspect. Especially so when you have enough examples of "government science" getting the benefit of the doubt when it affects citizens, but "independent science" having to go through government approval before anything can come from it.
...most cheating on consoles has been eradicated...
lolwut? Whoever wrote that must not be playing any popular online console games.
It was not designed to be a welfare program for big companies.
You haven't been paying attention.
Don't be disingenuous. "Designed" in this context meaning "originally intended." You aren't perhaps an H1B candidate, are you?
I'll go ahead and name names: I used to work at cisco. I have said many times that I could walk down the hallway at any random cisco san jose building and for most of the day, not hear a single word spoken in english (in hallways or breakrooms).
if I go thru an interview and hear 'not a cultural match' one more time, I swear to zeus I'm going to go postal. I'm nearly at the end of my rope, here....
"Not a match for culture" from a group that has a similar cultural background to yourself is code for "We think you're an asshole."
Reading comprehension not your strong suit? Just sayin'...
Hulu has captions. Amazon Prime Video has captions. It's not like you're being completely denied the joys of interwebs TV.
How, pray tell, would a gas pump identify you as gay or Jewish or atheist and then refuse service? How also would a supermarket identify your beliefs?
I have a Samsung XP941 (the "proprietary" drive that you can easily buy) and a regular 840 Pro in my desktop. You can benchmark the difference easily, but I don't notice it, at all, in day to day operation, in my particular use-cases; yours might noticeably benefit from it depending on what you're doing with the system.
Fixed that for ya.
Depends on how that money is spent. In a more socialist setting it would most likely be spent on a social program to help take away some of the cost of living on the low income population thus freeing up the money to spend on the increased prices of the companies... Even someone with a rudimentary understanding of economics knows that government spending does help to spur the economy if spent on the right thing.
Now if they take that money and blow it on military invasions and other money sinks with low RFI for the population, then it does hurt overall. Bottom line turns into, which ass hole do you distrust less the businesses or the government?
There's a variable missing from your equations: Government Efficiency (or lack thereof). Self-motivated people are almost always going to be more efficient at figuring out how to do things than a government that's spending everyone else's money, at least for governments that don't have balanced-budget and/or term-limited constitutions. Add the additional variable of "Social Justice" into the metrics and it gets even more messy.
If a "rich" person spends 500x what a poor person spends at their shop, and giving them a deep discount still means you made 40x the profit you'd have made from 5 poor people, would you consider that injustice or another form of marketing success?
We don't need independent verification and reproducibility anymore. The science is settled because we have consensus.
Yes, I realize that's a bit of cherry-picking examples but all too often logical fallacies are used to justify when these things happen. I'd suggest it's an ethics crisis rather than a science crisis.
I guess by "people" (with quotation marks) you mean corporations.
Yes, let's not have any rules or oversight on "people" who were born in a lawyer's office, can potentially live forever, are motivated purely by greed, and will gladly break the law when it suits them. What could possibly go wrong?
Yes, let's put all of the authority into the hands of a few people who were born in a lawyer's office, bought their way into public office, can potentially live forever, are motivated purely by greed and power, and will gladly break the law when it suits them. What could possibly go wrong?
You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.