Computer science needs a computer less than astronomy needs a telescope.

I personally hate computer science. I'm a broadcaster. I make solutions to get things on air. Part of that involves writing code, part of it involves wiring up cables, bust most of it involves understanding broadcast and understanding journalists.

Coding is a very useful tool, more specific than "writing a report", but certainly less specific, and certainly more useful, than knowing how to "use word".

Computer Science is a science, for people with frizzy grey hair, that live in ivory towers and have little practical knowhow. You lock them in a room and occasionally things emerge that you can see a practical application for. It's essential, and it's all way beyond me. they need to know how to code as much as I do, possibly less.

The majority of passengers aren't allowed to use the F counter(s). If you're somewhere like Heathrow (hardly a "very small airport"), the walk from the train to the security to the lounge takes about 10 minutes. Adding a minute to drop off your bag at one of the many empty counters you pass doesn't really add anything to the total time spent in the airport, especially when you have to queue up for a "visa check" anyway at heathrow.

I did once have a situation recently where I waited for 20 seconds for one person to finish up, rather than walk a little further to an empty counter.

Rose tinted? It's been a long time since I saw a queue at check in. For economy of course, even once for business, but not for F checkin. Perhaps this will appeal to the occasional flyer that doesn't make oneworld emerald, but more the majority of us check in isn't an issue. Immigration in the states (over 2 hours last time I flew to IAD)

Now the lack of decent fast track on boarding, or at security, is something where time can be saved. In fact my last flight there was no fast track at all!

Saving 2 minutes won't actually happen in reality, as I'll still have to queue up (all flights from heathrow requirie a visit to get a "visa check".

I usuallyplan my arrival at the airport to get there within a few minutes of bag drop closing so this isnt going to help.

At best it means 2 more minutes in a crappy airport lounge. I won't be able to arrive at the airport any later than I do now, and it won't help deliver my bag any quicker. In fact it may well cause my bag to get lost.

A more apt description would be Iraq, who had change the currency they used to trade oil, and got wiped back to the stone age in "Shock and Awe" tactics.

The idea is to further move the burden of travel on to the passenger.

I fly BA a bit, 56 flights with them this year. I check a bag on almost all of them. There's rarely a queue. The current baggage tags work wonders, there's a secondary sticker in case the main one gets ripped off, and it has your name on it which is handy when checking you've got the right one at the carrousel.

I arrive at the airport, walk to the desk, drop my bag off, shove my passport over and smile. They give me a nice boarding card (which is often for a seat some rows in front of where I'd selected), put a label on my bag and send it off into the depths of the airport, issue me with a lounge invite (at some airports), and it gives me an opportunity to ask where the lounge is, as many airports I only visit once every couple of years.

It's simple, quick and cheap. If my bag does for some reason arrive at Baku airport instead of Changi, I'm confident they'll be able to read the tag and return it whence it came.

No, they want to reduce the number of staff since their disastrous merger with Iberia.

Saving 2 minutes will make diddly squat when you've still got conformance at t-35, and close of bag drop at t-40.

So a bad idea to go against religious fanatics?

Those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it

If you have to wonder, you haven't been paying enough attention. :(

Something like a Peel P50?

Your vaunted piece of paper hasn't been relevant for years..Apart from the 3rd amendment, you don't have to give up your spare room to home a squaddie. However the way that Americans fawn over people in uniform makes me think the social pressure would be too much to resist anyway.

Was it driving?

Those demonstrations last until the next episode of American Idol.

In countries where the demonstrations resume, you get Syria. Or at best Egypt.

49% of America will be glad to see the army depose Obama. 49% would have been glad to see the army depose Bush.

What is the use of doing anything which will only be useful after you are dead? Humans are sentimental creatures. Most people like to believe that something of value will survive, even if everyone dies.

End-of-the-universe theories are a bit depressing currently, but at least they get regular revision. Even black holes leave ways of figuring out what was lost inside them, in theory.

So you're implying (although we all know its incorrect) that the rate of increase was less the two years prior to "Obama care"?

If you want to be accurate and not cherry pick numbers to support an obvious political bias, you should provide accurate numbers to provide contect:

What was the rate of increase the years prior to "Obamacare"?

What is your total payroll cost per employee?

If your average salary is $50k, then your all-up costs per employee are probably around $70k with payroll and unemployment taxes, cost for their work space, etc ... in which case your $3400 cost per employee for insurance is about 5% of your total all-up costs per employee.

So you either are feigning ignorance posting your 20% figure and complaining about a very small difference in cost for a huge improvement in your employees, or you're really ignorant about basic economics and math.

Negative. Having had one of those "Cadillac" plans for a few years, my single cost out of pocket was $0, but my employer was over $3k a month.

$10,000 per employee would be bottom-of-the-barrel coverage, unless the employer isn't covering much of the employee's cost.

This is probably the most true thing I've seen in this list, and the fact that you're the only person who posted it is a sign of just how bad of a problem it is.

Rounded to the nearest whole number, I think its absolutely safe to say 0% of programmers understand how to write multithreaded code properly.