Somehow I just don't feel like her "crime time" antics are over yet.

There are plenty of jobs were it's legal to be a slimebag: politician, E-meter manufacturer, homeopathy, etc.

> Interfering with commerce is one of the worst crimes you can commit in this country.

Indeed, pirating a movie will get you more years than rape. Plutocrats bribe in the laws they want.

> It's a grocery store chain. If they improve their productivity, it does not imply their customers purchased more.

They can lower prices and take biz from other markets.

> In businesses, it is very common to let go of people to free cash flow for a major upgrade.

I said if productivity *is* improving, current tense. Betting that retooling will improve productivity is a business gamble that doesn't always pay off.

There will never be a shortage of people who use the wrong tool for the job, and/or just use the tool wrong. Thus, unless bots 100% take over, there will probably be a decent number of jobs in cleaning fucked up systems.

"All repairs tend to destroy the structure, to increase the entropy and disorder of the system. Less and less effort is spent on fixing the original design flaws; more and more is spent on fixing flaws introduced by earlier fixes."

Microsoft Windows in a nutshell (even before AI)

If productivity is improving then a company will typically make/sell more product, not cut staff.

the nuclear power industry "has a remarkably skilled but quickly shrinking workforce tasked with keeping old reactors online and possibly starting up new ones to meet surging demand for electricity,"

Maybe stop harassing scientists and experts so that they don't flee overseas.

Ballcoin will be a thing

> I suspect that's often true, but certainly not universal.

My observation is that it's quite often true. If our observations differ, so be it.

The Soviets appeared to concede at that point. They cancelled their manned lunar program.

Took Apollo technology to make that broom fly.

Slightly off topic, but people don't hire on merit. The merit claim is cockypot. Merit gets your foot in the interview door, but social factors are what decides after that. I've been on hiring committees. One of the questions posed to the committee was, "Which candidate would you feel most comfortable working with for 40+ hours a week?" Let that question sink in.

Of course the candidate with a similar socioeconomic profile as your own would be preferred: somebody who likes the same food, watches the same movies and sports, worships the same deity, etc. It's not direct discrimination, but has discrimination as an end result.

Prove the study is flawed or STFU. Gut guesses are a dime a dozen.

Prompt: "Hunt down and clean up Slashdot dupes before they coagulate and turn into human eating monsters. Low scorers have to watch goatse for 2 minutes before reactivating their account."