It's also at least 15 thousand new employees they didn't need to hire (give or take an engineer or two)
But that's really not true. The robots don't eliminate the need for human employees.They just carry the pods (four-sided metal and fabric shelves) to the stowers and pickers, who are still people. So whereas these people used to have to traverse a giant warehouse of shelves to stow and pick merchandise, now they just stand in one spot and the shelves come to them. Which would you prefer, as an employee? I'd rather Amazon create fewer less shitty jobs using robots (and it's not a 1 for 1 reduction in jobs per robot, anyway) than more shitty jobs that make people walk miles every shift.
As an avid viewer of Deadliest Catch, I am troubled by the lack of female representation aboard Alaskan crab fishing vessels. Women should be encouraged to enter this lucrative filed where they are grossly underrepresented. Of course, that would involve risking their lives and destroying their bodies like men do, while being isolated from their families for months at a time, so I doubt the women's studies departments will be pushing for this.
I get the feeling that the people who are troubled by women's underrepresentation in STEM fields and C-suites somehow view this as women missing out on easy money, when that couldn't be further from the truth. These fields typically require huge sacrifices in terms of time and stress, not to mention isolation. Men seem more willing to accept these sacrifices because we're taught to do that from a very young age. We become providers (wallets) and sacrifice our time as nurturers within the family because it is expected of us. Women can't expect to take on these roles without the downsides that come with them, and the lack of women in certain fields is likely a reflection of women valuing family time over work time.
I used to think that the only reason someone would want their own e-mail server would be to try to erase a central record of sent e-mails should the need arise, but after reading this summary I see that there is merit in not entrusting a third party's low level tech support person with the ability to either read or reset your password.
In other news, Verizon knows its users' passwords? Let me guess -- they're stored in plaintext.
Your milk and egg cartons are transparent?
Actually, both of mine are, so it's not unheard of. My gallon of milk is in a plastic container you can see through and I buy eggs in a 30-pack that has a clear top and bottom plastic enclosure (which also makes it easier to to check for broken eggs at the store).
The author is "building" a PC the same way I "build" a pair of shoes because I have to lace them up myself.
You insensitive clod! Did you not read the part about the author's sausage fingers? How is he supposed to tie laces? The struggle is real.
Why do cops get trials where a judge decides?
Everyone gets this. The right to a jury trial is something a criminal defendant has and can waive. There are rare cases where an average citizen thinks he'll get a fairer shot at acquittal from a judge than a jury and waives the right to jury trial. Usually, this happens if the accused thinks that a jury will hold a particular prejudice against him for matters unrelated to the crime which the prosecutor has a way of putting in front of the jury. For them, it's about avoiding unreasonable jury bias. For cops, it's about seeking unreasonable bias in their favor from the judge.
The law itself specifies that no additional funds are authorized to comply with the new requirements, so we'll see how these changes will actually be implemented. The Washington Post article cited in the summary already notes "Federal agencies have often starved their FOIA departments for resources; the new law will not change that. Backlogs stretch for years."
So, yeah. In theory, it gives broader and easier access to records. In practice, expect to wait forever to have your records request processed, just as before.
"Our vision is to speed up time, eventually eliminating it." -- Alex Schure