... but kept dying from dysentery on the way
... but kept dying from dysentery on the way
... but if somebody did a scientific study, which has a conclusion, then I'm convinced I don't exist
they were paying people to retire at 50, and then promising them benefits for the rest of their lives. Add in massive corruption and a shadow economy and they had the worst of both crony capitalism and socialism
The answer might be "simple" (cut welfare benefits, root out corruption, make business friendly changes to the tax code that encourage "free market" capitalism) - but by no means easy.
The EU is collapsing, so Greece will default soon anyway
security wonk rule of thumb:
you need to control access to/the flow of "sensitive" information and therefore establish policies. Once policies are established they must be enforced. There isn't any allowance for "intent" - was the information "sensitive" were the policies violated. It isn't that complicated
My additional option is "it depends" - short and entertaining = "good", if you can convince Will Ferrell then maybe,
but, yeah - i don't come here for video
saw it this morning - wasn't expecting to be blown away and I wasn't, but also wasn't disappointed with the movie. I'll have to see it again (eventually) to decide whether it is a good movie or not (e.g. "Phantom Menace" gets worse every time I stumble upon it)
yes, there are massive plot holes. yes, it is predictable. No Jar Jar, no midi-chlorians, handles the whole "Star Wars universe" burden as well as can be expected - basically a good time
yes, revise the U.S. tax code - like politicians will ever do that
a less knee jerk/punish big corporations perspective in the WSJ:
The companies expect to achieve $2 billion in cost savings as well as significant tax benefits from the deal, under which Pfizer’s tax base would shift to Allergan’s home base in Ireland in a so-called inversion. As a result of the move, Pfizer expects to cut its tax rate to 17% or 18%, from its roughly 25% rate currently, because corporate taxes in Ireland are lower than in the U.S.
the owner "paid" for the increase in employee salaries by lowering his salary.
Also worth pointing out that people are making "at least" $70,000 - which implies that some (i.e. "more valuable") people are making more than $70,000. So this isn't some sort of "commune".
Under the "nothing new under the sun" category - Henry Ford did something similar during the early days of the assembly line (1914), introducing a $5 a day minimum wage (increasing from $2.34). The problem Ford had was people hated working on an assembly line. Employees would work a relatively short time then quit. The constant hiring and training was expensive - but more than doubling the daily wage was enough to increase employee retention and actually saved the company money
simplify the tax code, institute a flat tax, abolish the bloated corrupt bureaucracy that is the IRS
although I for one welcome our kinder gentler overlords at the IRS that I'm sure will come out of this obvious example of incompetence
You can have my encryption when you pry it from my cold dead hands.
You actually think terrorists will obey anti-encryption laws? You're a special kind of stupid, aren't you?
Thank you, I'll be here all month. Try the veal.
BerkleeX: BCM-MB110x Introduction to the Music Business - goes into great detail on the in's and out's of proving copyright infringement (taught by John P. Kellogg, Esq - you might be able to access the archived course)
Basically you need to satisfy three requirements 1. actually have a copyright (easy if you filed correctly), 2. prior access to the work (harder to prove), and 3. substantial similarity (one for the musicologists and then the jury).
most copyright infringement claims are settled out of court (e.g. "I Want a New Drug" vs "Ghostbusters"). A big factor in so many settlements is that you can be ordered to pay court costs if you lose and that juries are never a sure thing (but that is just my opinion)
I don't have an opinion on this specific case - but I will defend the concept of the copyright as crucial to the "creative" industry
in the "duck and run" category this case has my attention
full disclosure: I haven't had a good experience with "recruiters"
It is misleading to say that they want to "get you a job." Best case - their purpose is to match the "best fit" candidate with the right opening, Remember that "best fit" doesn't equal most experienced/skilled - it means the optimum combination of experience/skills/salary/personality for that company
Worst case: you get idiots reading from checklists, sending out spam about "seeing your resume online"
When asked for advice on "how to become a writer" - most professional writers will come back with some form of "write something, then write something else, then write some more." A big part of the writing process is figuring out when, where, and how you are able to write. i.e. The tools you use to write shouldn't get in the way of your writing (the second most popular tip is "when you aren't writing - read")
if Mark Zuckerberg were to come out and say that he is using a Commodore 64 or TRS-80 to work on Facebook - that would be unusual...
Mr. Martin's writing process has the benefit of being almost 100% secure (maybe Quentin Tarantino needs a downgrade)
I'm half way through "Flash Boys" (well written, entertaining). It is interesting the impact that technology has had on the stock market, but this isn't anything new (which is one of the points of "Flash Boys").
one for putting things in perspective: "Where are the Customers’ Yachts?" by Fred Schwed, Jr. (first edition 1940).
and under "they are trying to change the world": IEX Group
You know you've landed gear-up when it takes full power to taxi.