So the takeaway is, Steve Jobs was a raging piece of s***. We already knew that. I'm glad that, despite him skating his way to the top of the transplant list due to his wealth and influence, he still died. F*** that a**hole.
Yeah, it's definitely a dick move. The company I work for has been growing at 20-50 percent per year for the last 5 years or so. And we are in a very mature industry (steam turbine repair). We try to treat both our customers, contractors, and vendors with respect and every deal like part of a long relationship. We do a lot of work for several of our direct competitors for this reason.
It's sad to see that the largest companies on the planet can't seem to function that way too.
Scale, son, scale matters. The EPA is charged with overseeing a lot of very different technologies, any one of which COULD be reverse engineered with enough time, money, and the right kind of people. To presume the EPA can do this across an entire industry much less over several industries is silly.
I was speaking about the other manufacturers.
1. VW makes a miraculous new engine. Other engine manufacturer's can understand how it burns so clean.
2. Other manufacturer's apparently didn't buy one and examine it to see how it works. Or they did, but failed to fully understand how it passed emissions
H1b employees also get displaced by TCS/Infosys. Their official policy is 85% offshore and 15% on shore employees. The onshore 15% exists mostly for co-ordination. An H1b employee's CTC is always higher by at least by 1.5x times to locals. Recently my friend who is on h1b was forced to look for another h1b sponsor because the company A signed a partnership agreement with TCS. TCS provided 3 sysadmins for his replacement but they were not upto the mark as expected by A because TCS's sysadmin's won't know scripting. This H1b guy was forced to train the TCS guys(10 of them) in perl scripting. He did that too but then they quit TCS for better salary and work hours. A new PM from TCS would come onshore every 1.5 to 2 years and he would question why they are employing a h1b guy for 2x the cost of an L1B. In the mean time the h1b guy's extension process etc. would be delayed. He used to be in lot of stress, they would still be search for an replacement and apply for the extension on the last week/day of original h1b expiry and then too they will provide 1 yr extension. Frustrated he quit for another company B. The same story has started to repeat at company B now. There is another category of visas called L1A and L1B(intra company transfer visa) where prevailing wages doesn't have to be shown and qualifications are not a factor. Almost 95% of the TCS onsite guys had either L1A or L1B and they were getting 60k for a 110k job position and their taxes found some loop hole and they were hardly paying any taxes, that is around 4k. The h1b guy was getting 85k and his vendor the rest. CTC was around 140k to the company. L1A visa is also eligible for immediate green card processing under "multinational manager"(eb1) category. The master degree H1b guys on an average wait for 10 years(talking Indian), the bachelor degree holders wait for 20 or more years. L1A guys just 3 to 6 months. For a foreign student he has to become a scientist(Phd + papers etc) to qualify for the equivalent category as "multinational manager". Some "multinational managers" are just 10+3(diploma) qualified. Last year there were around 500 eb1 gc applications(search 485 inventory on google). This year already 13000 eb1 applications have been received. H1b guys are under the Eb2 and Eb3 green card quotas. So companies have figured out the L1 loop hole and bringing in the 15% onsite workers as managers. That explains the huge jump in eb1 category. So the foreign scientists/Phds are unhappy too. The L1As get green cards in 6 months and then are not counted as foreign workers, qualifying the company as less than 30% dependent on foreign workers. Thus they import for L1As. So I would say, the anger is misdirected towards H1b instead of L1x visas.
Looks like an informative story but I couldn't get through it due to the lack of line breaks, excessive abbreviations, and poor formatting.
I'm not trying to be an asshole, but when you write like this, it's awful difficult for others to follow.
Say that to the auto industry that drove almost everything overseas. Right now, the IT industry is having it bad. Unionizing under the current paradigm would be WORSE!. It would be like "fuck it, ALL IT goes overseas, and the US as a nation is but a client purchasing all IT services overseas. There's nothing than can stop that happening now, but unionizing would definitely hasten that to occur.
I'm all about getting organized and having proper representation as a single unified voice to be heard, but unionizing as it's currently known as isn't the answer.
The main reason unions have a bad reputation is because most of them create piles of rules, obligations, exceptions, and sometimes oppose a meritocracy. Companies hate dealing with these things. A union with simplified and specific rules and works in the best interest of everyone would be a great thing. Whether or not that is possible to create such a union is left as an exercise to psychology majors.
Maybe they did - if they used similar testing conditions that the EPA uses, then the cheat mode would have kicked in for them as well.
Then their reverse engineers are lazy or don't have enough budget. I've done a lot of reverse engineering over the past 7 years (in a different industry). Sometimes this is for the purpose of manufacturing replacement parts, and sometimes it is to understand how the competitor's product works. In the latter case, the job isn't finished until I know the machine as well as, or better than, the original designer. I do calculations the designer probably didn't do, just to see how overbuilt or overspec'd a part is.
The most important thing is to keep going until I am 100% certain I understand fully how something was designed and is intended to work. I don't trust anything completely until I can prove it and document it myself. It seems like the researchers who found this problem follow the same philosophy. Other car manufacturers seem to have just believed the EPA and other environmental agencies. "Trust but verify" is not just a motto. It is good practice no matter the industry.
an embarrassing counter-example to American and western democracy's political claims against communism
I really can't argue anything else in your post, but I can't help but wonder how Cuba was supposed to be an embarrassment vis a vis political systems. Sure, it's easy to make the point that "America can't dislodge this thorn in their side that sits less than 200km from their own shore" but I'm hard pressed to come up with any positive connotations to "our dictatorship is better than your democracy."
There are many positive impacts of being in a society that is not focused on capitalism. I have not been to Cuba, but in a general sense:
1. Most communist countries have more public recreation space. Parks, squares, plazas, etc. are often more numerous and larger because the allocation of land is usually not based on "profit".
2. In communist countries, citizens only have 1 entity to worry about spying on them, collecting personal information, and controlling their life. Cubans worry about the government. Americans worry about the government, Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, etc etc.
3. Culture and the arts often have a higher importance and more public funding. In most capitalist countries, art and culture has to pay for itself, or have the potential to pay for itself, or it doesn't get made. Many communist countries dedicate funding to this. Is it often self-serving? Sure. But art and culture have important roles in society and is often overlooked in capitalist countries.
4. Stronger, smarter, and more comprehensive city planning (not sure if Cuba does this well or not). In capitalist countries, city planning seems to be a lot more organic and chaotic compared to communist ones. Companies and people build where they want to build, and are motivated by cost. This can have serious problems with regards to "tragedy of the commons" where everyone is looking out only for themselves and the entire population suffers as a result. Many communist countries do a better job managing this and make choices that are better for society as a whole. Cities are often more dense, inefficient suburbs are frowned upon, things are built where they are needed and not where it is cheapest to do so, etc. See also point #1.
There are probably a lot more but this is just a few I could think of.
I have both 7zip and winrar installed, and I gotta say I much prefer using winrar over 7zip. The UI is just a lot more elegant and intuitive, and the shell integration works better.
Me too. Winrar's interface is just better for me. It has tons of options for fine-tuning or customizing your work flow. I don't like change and they haven't really changed the interface much in a very long time. If it isn't broke, don't fix it.
The RAR file format itself seems to have more features, probably because the guy makes money off his software and can afford to devote more time to responding to customer suggestions and requests. Winrar is paying the bills, Mr. Roshal and his brother are highly motivated to keep their customers happy. I can easily imagine an open source developer ignoring the feature/bugfix requests of others to work on whatever they feel like.
They talk about choosing this corporate structure (in part) to prevent themselves from exploiting tax loopholes, yet they incorporated in Delaware (rather than the state their main office is actually in -- New York, apparently), which could be construed as exploiting loopholes (at least regulatory, if not directly tax-related) in and of itself. What gives?
Everybody incorporates in Delaware because it is easy and cheap to file the paperwork there. If you are selling things, or have employees, in almost any state, you have to register as a foreign corp/LLC in that state anyway, open worker's comp accounts, open tax accounts and pay income tax, etc. It really isn't cheating on tax, or a loophole, since you have to pay the corporate income tax in whatever state you made the income.
Containers are even less separate than jails, of course they're near the bottom of the barrel in terms of security. Why the Container fad when the overhead of proper virtualization is now so very low it's negligible on any modern server processor?
Containers are easy for weekend IT guys like me who run our own servers. I don't have time to bother with learning an entirely new IT paradigm and setting it all up myself. Home server software makes all of that unnecessary and Docker containers are handled almost like "apps" in some software (like Unraid). I have to set directories and manage the network port mapping but everything else is done for me. It does what I need it to do without requiring much new knowledge or skill.
It's not a technological problem. The real issues with this kind of technology is that it removes direction from the movie. Directors use different angles, aspect ratios, focal lenghts, etc to direct and control the viewer's attention. How do that do that if the viewer is in control of the camera.
They may partially try to do that and then you end up with the stupid situation like that scene in Avatar where the main character wakes from cryo. It was a classic change of focus from a water droplet to the main character, but in 3D it was distracting as heck as I was trying to focus on the water droplet but couldn't. This would not be helped if I could move the camera to not even look at the character in the first place.
Not just direction, but camerawork and editing skills also. In some movies, the camera is "handheld" (or at least edited later to have a "handheld" motion) and this motion is sometimes exploited to show different things in the scene. I noticed this in Blue is the Warmest Color, especially in many of the dialogue scenes. The camera will pan just a very small amount, seemingly randomly, as if it were handheld. But often there is something that was just out of view that is relevant to the current Dialogue.
For the sake of argument, this could have been done intentionally by writing it into the script, done impromptu by a skilled camera operator, requested by the director, or even added in editing. These small elements are the "polish" on a film and give it a unique character if done well. A format without a way to add these small elements is a big step backwards in storytelling.
The amount of fraud and incompetence in medical and psychological "studies" (along with the utter *fail* of peer review make me think that Medicine and Psychology drove off the rails into Snake Oil World many decades ago.
This reminds me of the joke "What do you call the medical student with a final GPA equivalent of D- ? Generally you have to call them 'doctor' ". More terrifying than funny, but half of all doctors are, by definition, below average.
Troll?? Really?? This is from the last link in the summary:
Results The efficacy of paroxetine and imipramine was not statistically or clinically significantly different from placebo for any prespecified primary or secondary efficacy outcome. HAM-D scores decreased by 10.7 (least squares mean) (95% confidence interval 9.1 to 12.3), 9.0 (7.4 to 10.5), and 9.1 (7.5 to 10.7) points, respectively, for the paroxetine, imipramine and placebo groups (P=0.20). There were clinically significant increases in harms, including suicidal ideation and behaviour and other serious adverse events in the paroxetine group and cardiovascular problems in the imipramine group.
Conclusions Neither paroxetine nor high dose imipramine showed efficacy for major depression in adolescents, and there was an increase in harms with both drugs. Access to primary data from trials has important implications for both clinical practice and research, including that published conclusions about efficacy and safety should not be read as authoritative. The reanalysis of Study 329 illustrates the necessity of making primary trial data and protocols available to increase the rigour of the evidence base.
Unless you work for GSK or are one of the original authors, my summary of the conclusions is pretty damned accurate: they fucking lied about badly done science.
This is exactly why I have completely given up on most prescription medications for managing my mental problems. This is not the only one which has been proven to be useless. Most are no better, or only very slightly better, than nothing.
I'm now on prescription Vyvanse (speed) and marijuana to manage my condition. These are real drugs with real effects. I don't need to wonder "do these drugs do anything at all?". They definitely do "something". The only questions left to answer then are "Is this effect helpful for me?" and "Is the effect big enough to justify the side effects". People shouldn't need to question whether a drug works or not. These drug company shenanigans have stalled mental health treatment for decades.
they price that into their product.
just think how much more sales they would have today if they had heeded their own research and put some profits into solar panels. The long term outlook for solar panels is better than the long term outlook for oil. Don't believe me? Ask the saudis, with all the oil in the world they are still investing heavily in solar. Watch the world bypass the USA as it adapts solar and leaves us in the dust.
Why should we buy heavily into solar now? By continuing to pump oil even though the price is very low, the Saudi's are once again giving us a period of very cheap oil. Every few years they do this to slap the competition around. In addition to attempting to make US and Canadian high-cost competition go out of business, they are also slapping down the competition from renewables. The economics for an electric car don't look so great at current car and fuel prices.
They are investing in renewables because they have big piles of money and would prefer to export oil rather than burn it in their inefficient oil-powered power plants. Nobody else in the world burns so much oil for electricity. Oil is an expensive way to make electricity and it is better to sell the oil and make electricity some other way.
If and when solar takes over, it will be cheaper than it is now. That's pretty much a given if you look at any graph of price over time. In addition, we will have the time value of money on our side if we wait to invest in Solar. Until the economics work out in solar's favor, waiting and "being left in the dust" is the smart play. It is exactly the same as buying a hard drive. Waiting as long as possible is the right move. The future buyer will be better off than a buyer today, in almost all cases.
This is the theory that Jack built. This is the flaw that lay in the theory that Jack built. This is the palpable verbal haze that hid the flaw that lay in...