And subsidising the pick axe with taxpayer money.
And subsidising the pick axe with taxpayer money.
You're much more likely to *be killed* in a car accident to or from an airport, than from the crash of a commercial flight.
Hell, you're more likely to die on that flight from a heart attack or stroke, than from a crash.
I'm glad this is happening, and it's shame it took so long - or was ever introduced, really. Stuff like this hurts the public's perception of science. Everybody knew this was bullshit.
There are about 28,000 flights in Europe every day of the year and about 1.2 cell phones for every European. I doubt I've been on a plane in the past 5 years where every passenger over the age of 15 didn't have a phone. I like to think that I'm pretty good about turning my phone off (to airplane mode at least), but I've still managed to forget once during the ~30 flights I've been on in the past 4-5 years. Extrapolate that out, and it's obvious that if a phone could affect a flight, we'd be seeing cases every day. Terrorists would sneak phones onto planes to take them down.
Your average Joe sees "science" being used to support limits on cell phones, they know they're bullshit, so the next time they hear another "science-based" bit of info that goes against their comfort, they'll just ignore it too. Why would they bother, "science" is just BS anyway.
My Polish grandmother wouldn't go out to buy things, she'd go out to "take care" of them. Be it by trade, barter or straight out buying, it was all "taken care of".
There is literally one metric that counts with advertising, no matter what agencies, media houses or publishers tell you - sales. Everything else is BS. If your advertising does not increase sales (be it by increasing brand awareness, engagement, education, market segment creation, etc), you're just throwing money away.
Apple's falling out with Google over Maps was about GOOG wanting more data and Apple not wanting them to gather it.
I'd personally much rather have a single credit rating database, run by an accountable government body with clear rules and regulations concerning who has access to my data and how, along with a clear-cut procedures for updating and correcting the data, than the status quo: three private, opaque, for-profit organizations that are not accountable to any public entity.
It's 6C in Warsaw right now... and last year we'd had snow for two months by this time.
A handful of data points does not a trend make.
There should be a national sales tax. That's it, nothing else. You should not be charged for earning, saving or investing money.
Yeah, that's a great way to increase the tax burden on the poorest while offloading it off the richest AND enticing them to not spend money. Do you even think about the second or third layer effects of any of your decisions?
That reminds me of an encounter I had with some vegan drinking a soy latte while I was talking to a friend about a new burger place I went to that had great, locally sourced beef, pork and vegetables. She launched into some spiel about how beef is bad for the environment since on the same acre you can grow 10x more soya or whatever. I replied saying that may be true, but here in Europe we're not lacking in arable farm land, and it might be shocking to learn, but importing coffee from South America and soy from Asia isn't exactly ecologically neutral either, is it? We didn't get along after that.
Pollution laws? Money laundering laws? Driving laws? Building codes? Product liability laws? Noise ordinances?
All of these are examples of laws that outlaw irresponsible/hurtful behaviors, not entire segments of commerce to outlaw a specific behavior.
I don't understand why everybody assumes that there's some kind of sinister going-ons behind having users ID themselves when getting equipment. Facebook is a data-driven company, why wouldn't they want to have this kind of data? You can automate procurement, so you effectively never run out of equipment. You can see what kind of equipment your users prefer. And the realization that you're not completely anonymous keeps people honest - not just as far as theft goes (and I can assure you, it doesn't matter how much people make, they will steal the most trite, insignificant crap), but general absentmindedness or practical jokes.
So I have an employee whose time costs me $100/hour (100k salary + another 100k in overhead), and if his $15 keyboard breaks, he should spend half an hour to go buy a replacement?
For every Gates or Zuckerberg, there's thousands more who don't succeed, but no one thinks about them.
Exactly this. And what's odd is that these same people would completely tear into their contemporary if he said, "I'm going to play in the NBA". Statistically, that ball-playing kid has a better chance of making it in the NBA, then any of those geeks has a chance of becoming the next Jobs, Woz, Gates or Zuck.
The reality is that a programmer who isn't a genius, but is capable, on time, able to write clear code and come in punctually every day, while being sociable and capable of working well with others... they're the ones who are making bank and able to pick and choose between job offers.
What sub version is that?
"Don't tell me I'm burning the candle at both ends -- tell me where to get more wax!!"