I was thinking more along the lines of other things that mature which we really don't want either. Security is one aspect, but the trivial nature of IOT makes most of us try to ignore it.
I fully agree, and will re-emphasize what I said about company discretion. Learning new things on the company dime is not an issue, especially considering that it mainly helps the company. TFA explicitly states working on personal projects while making money for a company in any meaningful way. Self education, blowing off steam, or simply unplugging to let the brain relax before heading back to a complex issue.
Should an employee be fired for sitting and watching Baseball for a few hours on the company dime? How about watching the Flintstones? Playing Internet Poker? Those are all non-productive items as well, so why would you expect special treatment because you are doing something "techie" which does not help the business?
Companies should have discretion because they are _PAYING_ the person to be on the job earning money for the company.
If you disagree, go start up your own company on your own dime and allow people do work on whatever they want. Lets see how great your startup is before and after you are drained of capital.
Why do you think slimeball startups hide how they piss away money until it's too late for investors?
I'm sure this AC will be the first in line for all the seasonal fruit and vegetable picking jobs that would immediately open up. Or maybe AC would prefer the garment factory making sneakers, shirts, or yoga pants. But maybe that's too much of a commitment, construction site or landscaping day laborer gives so many more options.
And we'll have plenty of natural resources, and access to the components needed to make computers, iPhones, tablets, etc. I mean, once we have a chance to move the factories to the US from China, Singapore, and the other Asian countries where they are currently located.
With all this new economic growth, everyone should be able to afford the new $3500 iPhone and a $60k Ford Focus.
In addition to your irony, TFA ignores some pretty important facts. In the 1970s we had Math, Engineering, and Physics. There was no such thing as a CS degree. One learned to code because it helped your education, not because it was seen as a cash cow specialty. The successful coders may not have all completed a degree, but were all the brightest of the bunch in College. If they left without a degree it was by choice, not because they lacked aptitude to finish.
Let me use a Basketball analogy. Linked in believes that anyone can be Shawn Kemp, or another player that never played college ball and was not highly educated. In reality, the Shawn Kemp like people are extremely rare. About 1 in a billion.
Can linked in find people "good enough" to get a job done without? Probably, but I would rather have people better than "good enough" as a hiring manager.
Try Cambridge or something reputable instead of what ever you used to find the list of synonyms and rubbish.
[ C/U ] us
social studies - Unlimited authority or use of power, or a government which exercises such power without any control or limits
When a Government is described as a tyranny, the definitions for tyrant (singular) do not apply. Giving you the benefit of the doubt that English is not your first language.
You correctly arrived at one response, that nothing you do now will change the inevitable failure of coal.
My crystal ball does not work well enough to say that coal will die. Propagandists make the claim, I wait for what really happens. That is called reality.
You incorrectly think that market failures for growing new energy are unusual. The major thing that kept renewables down for so long was access to capital. When most nations and corporations started investing capital in renewables, costs dropped. It's how capitalism works.
I made no such claim, but your claim is a flat out lie. Subsidies have been poured into alternative energy, and this is still happening at massive scale. Take away the tax credits, incentives and subsidies and alternatives would not be able to compete with the exception of nuclear power. Wind requires massive amounts of land, and solar is still not cost effective for about a decade and panels don't last that long. We have certainly seen improvements, but the push to _use_ is not coming from the market but Government regulations and policies. Not Capitalism, but Tyranny (text book definition).
As to your own rates, that's probably because you haven't taken control of your own energy production, and built your own renewables, like a true capitalist would. You probably depend on Big Government for your energy supply for the most part.
Energy production in the US is run and regulated by Federal and State authorities. Capitalism is not at play here, though in certain areas you may be permitted to install Solar panels. This reduces some costs, but lacks storage which you would not be allowed to build due to regulation. As with above, this is not Capitalism but Tyranny.
Great, then the market will kill off coal and we don't need propagandists or Government regulation forcing behavior. Obama and Hillary said flat out that they were putting Coal out of business by regulation and taxes, which we know as tyranny.
I have no problem with the best solution winning, but I certainly have a problem with Government agencies full of unaccountable appointees deciding who wins and loses.
Did anyone get a check back from Obama after the Solyndra bail-out fiasco? Nope. As with all of these interventionist policies, the only people who made money off the tax payer were cronies who voted for them. The Government sucks at picking winners and losers among themselves, let alone a business.
As to TFA's claim, if cheap energy is here why have my rates gone considerably higher, triple in December/Jan/Feb as most Californian's saw? Come tell me what will and won't work when you get back to planet Earth.
They'll go where the money is.
You are correct. They went to the government, lobbied for subsidies to build out broadband networks they had no intention of completing. They also have local monopolies that lower competition levels and increase profits. That's how to profit with crony capitalism.
If the government did it, they would be putting the finishing touches on their plan to roll ISDN
I'm not a big government fan, but when it comes to services that have reached utility level (aka everyone needs them to function in society, like water, electricity, and now internet access) the profit driven "free market" approach only seems to create monopolies that drive up prices and lower the quality of service.
"Look! There! Evil!.. pure and simple, total evil from the Eighth Dimension!" -- Buckaroo Banzai