You can change the screensaver?
what's next? being able to change the font size?
Metro for Mint.
And you know this how?
On a serious note, I'm not even a particularly religious person, but there's not a single human society in existence (or even historically documented) that didn't develop religion of some sort. To me that would suggest that there's some long-term survival advantage.
Further, there are still boundaries to what science knows and always will be. The WHY questions, as opposed to the HOWs. As a mechanism of cultural psychology, I don't see a problem with religion attempting to give people a method to approach those questions.
Of course, as a postmodern western American, I find that religion that becomes pre- and proscriptive is oppressive and frankly obnoxious. But to throw out the baby with the bathwater by flat-out criticizing faith is overstepping pretty far.
Did I hurt your precious snowflake feelings?
- try to learn whatever they're willing to teach
- if it "seems" dumb, tedious, or backwards: don't immediately assume you know better. Instead, assume that you don't have all the information (because likely you DON'T: someone else has very likely tried whatever you're going to suggest many, many times).
- At the end of the day, this is a simple transaction: they are PAYING YOU MONEY to DO something. Odds are, that "something" isn't "check your instagram account" or play "words with friends". Just fix it in your head that you have nothing better to do elsewhere at all, and try to internalize (or pretend) that you really give a shit about how well your task is done.
- you're not a precious snowflake.
Don't be anything like in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... (Millenials in the Workplace)
Seriously, if someone is running around breaking windows (pun intended) in your neighborhood, they're outed in the local crime report.
If they did it to 1.5 million homes, I'd bloody well expect that yes, they should be identified.
I personally wouldn't object to having them branded, either.
Or, if you're more Adam Smithy, just suspend their ability to file civil lawsuits allowing people to do whatever they want to them that doesn't actually rise to criminal activity.
That was kind of my point as "examples of stupid pop-media MISunderstandings of things that aren't that hard"
You don't have to worry your pretty little head about that. It's already been taken care of.
Yes, movies are now called properties, and people who watch them are inventory for the demand-side (advertisers). Welcome to dystopia.
I don't go to movies any more, Since they're almost all sequels or reboots - I've seen them all already.
Really? Seriously? That's just a dumbass comment.
FB is a tool.
Knowing what I know about Facebook, My company would not ever do business with a company that relies on Facbook to communicate with their Customers. Facebook is not secure in the least. Not even a little tiny bit. There are much better, more secure, and intelligent ways to communicate with customers.
Call that dumbass if you like, Your business model is plain stupid and dangerous.
I have to agree with this decision, since the trailer they did release looked amazingly bad and amateurish. They leads don't seem to be good actors, have no charisma and no chemistry, what little dialog seemed uninteresting and full of cliches, and the scenes seemed badly done.
I watched this with a friend, and at the end she went "Wait, that was a real trailer? I thought it was some sort of ad!"
If that was what the film was going to be like, then best it's dead.
Most of the other clean tax subsidies are given to the clients (e.g. SolarCity, Tesla) not to Musk's companies directly.
On the contrary - SolarCity retains the tax breaks and the subsidies. They even counsel against the "buy it outright" option because "you'll need an accountant specializing in energy credits and taxes". (Read "our business model is based on being an unregulated utility and utterly depends on monthly cashflow from leases".)
They forgot the benefit that it gets us out of the Middle East. That sandtrap is a massive waste of resources that I hate is being subsidized.
If only the Middle East were our main source of oil... it isn't.* And even with the shift to electric vehicles and solar power, petrochemicals are still vitally important industrial feedstocks, and thus a stable Middle East is still of prime economic interest to the West.
A police bullpen or typing pool may be fine in a big open area. The same goes for sales and marketing types. However, if you're talking about any work which requires stretches of concentrated effort then it's just a Bad Idea. Engineers? No. Programmers? No. Accountants? No. Any kind of researcher? No.
Have you ever seen a picture of an engineering/drafting office from say... anywhere between the late 1800's and the mid/late 1980's (when draftsmen started to be replaced by computers and the size of said offices began to shrink dramatically)? Big ass open plan offices - sometimes thousands of square feet of big ass open plan offices. The same goes for accounting departments. One of Frank Lloyd Wright's most celebrated designs (from 1936) had a big ass open plan office as it's centerpiece.
We went to the bloody moon in vehicles designed in big ass open plan offices.
Somewhere in my book collection, I have a book intended for professional engineers and engineering managers from the 1950's... which devotes three whole chapters to the knotty problem of laying out (invariably open plan) engineering offices and drafting rooms - mapping a 3d object onto a 2d arrangement of desks and drafting tables.
This is the only real reason they're pushing this model. It's a clear terminus of the erosion that's led us from offices, to cubicles, to the little half walls, to just acres of desks.
I don't know where this idea came from that "everyone had a private office until Evil Management latched onto the open plan" comes from, but it's complete bull. Private offices have long been the exception, proof that one was senior enough to rate one and to have Made It, not the rule.