The article said $500 per WEEK. not per month.
The article said $500 per WEEK. not per month.
The city is responsible for ALL of the traffic, including the snarls that force people off the main roads into the side roads.
If they fail to fund the improvements for the main roads, it becomes their responsibility to pay for the increased maintance for the side roads.
No different than if you personally refuse to pay for a sidewalk and then get upset when you have to re-seed your front lawn after people walk on it to the point of creating a path.
In other words, yes, the greedy, short sighted city planners have to pay one way or the other.
And they should be yelling at the home owners to stop making things worse.
The following reasons.
1) 400 KM is still inside the atmosphere. It doesn't really become vacuum until you hit 500-600 km, which is the beginning of the exosphere. Which means if you want a good telescope, you have to launch it to MEO, rather than simply install it in the ISS
2) Because of the atmospheric drag, they have to keep adding energy to keep it in orbit This is not cheap.
3) 400 KM is well inside the Van Allen Belts (The nearer belt starts at 1000 KM) this means astronauts don't need as much radiation shielding from the sun, but it also means they can't use study radiation exposure above the Van Allen Belt. No study of the Solar Wind, Cosmic Rays, etc.
There are more, but that's the basics.
Because of the idiotic failure, the Space Shuttle, the ISS was put into orbit way too low to do real science. Usually it's less than 400 km, and rarely goes above 410 km. For comparison, the radius of the earth is over 6000 km. That is if the earth was 10% bigger, the ISS would be half as deep underground as it currently is above.
If they boosted it up from Low Earth Orbit to Medium Earth orbit (2,000 km -> 35,000 km) it would be far more useful.
We effectively have that, you just dislike their methodology. The Texas court in question handles so many patent cases, that it is the defacto dedicated court.
But they got that way by illegally intentionally favoring a specific point of view, favoring patent holders no matter how ridiculous the patent or complaint. One major factor is their strong belief in jury trials, which slows things down, and raises trial costs significantly, and increases the risk of a ridiculous over the top jury award. All of these factors encourage people to settle.
True. Also, the huge costs means the international market has become essential, meaning all stories have to work for all cultures. Can't piss off the Chinese, is just one example of the issue.
Netflix can make shows catering to small markets.
You have a point, but missed my point, which is also correct.
Netflix (etc.) does do some remakes/reboots/sequels. - more than 10%. Hollywood always did some remakes. But modern Hollywood is 95% remake/reboot/etc. Hollywood used to be more balanced. Now, Hollywood insists on massive budgets for productions (superhero for example.) For this reason, they insist on a 'proven' subject, hence the remakes.
The remakes, etc. are the SYMPTOM, not the cause of my subject Lack of originality has destroyed Hollywood.. I should also throw in "cowardly refusal to take risks, as it is another cause.
Go look at Hollywood movies and try to find one that is not:
1) a Remake
2) a Sequel
3) Based on a book/videogame or similar items.
And traditional TV isn't much better - Riverdale, Lethal Weapon, Supergirl, etc. etc.
Now check out Netflix's stuff.
Yes, Netflix is pumping money into it - because they are making more money than Hollywood because they are MAKING GOOD, ORIGINAL SHOWS.
Don't blame the winner for earning more money and reinvesting it. Blame the loser for losing their market share.
Look, they are selling closed software. Frankly it's shocking they recommend any open source. The numbers seem random to me, but then I did not read their so called report.
That will not work. You are misunderstanding the major issue - which is the same for low skilled workers as high skilled workers.
Employers do not want to pay the wage that americans demand for doing that work.
Their is a simple solution that WILL work. Create a new type of visa/ green card, called an A10 Visa (or whatever) The rules are simple for the A10.
1) The US will give out unlimited number of A10 visas to anyone that is legally allowed to visit the US. Anyone that wants one can get it
2) A10 Visas come with a number similar to a social security number, but starts with the letter A. When you get work with an A10 Visa, your employer is required to pay an additional 10% of your salary directly to the Federal government.
3) Any state may (or may not), pass a law adding a state tax equal to up to an additional 15% income tax on top of the Federal Tax.
4) Anyone, including foreign workers, can report someone hiring foreign workers but not paying the A10 taxes. Should the employer be found guilty, the reporting person (which can be the worker) gets a set fee of $10,000, and the employer goes to jail for a minimum of 2 years.
Note, currently H1 Visas tend to get paid about 10% less than Americans doing the same job.
End result - American workers do not need to worry about illegals costing the country money or stealing jobs - unless those jobs pay so little that an American won't agree to do them for 10% more than the foreign workers get.
If the state (I'm looking at you South West), thinks this isn't enough, they can up it to 25% - and suffer the resulting lack of foreign workers who head to California and other friendlier states.
What you describe is the rational for the "Audience" score part of Rotten Tomatoes. It is assumed that people that like Superhero movies are more likely to see a Superhero movie, particularly early enough to rate it.
Otherwise there is no little reason to accept random people's review of a movie when the critics review is available (with the exception that proves the rule of movie that targets critics, i.e. that piece of crap "Hail Caeser" which was entirely devoted to in jokes about 1950's movies, hence the movie obsessed critics thought it was hilllarious while the rest of us said eh).
Same answer as my last patent post.
If you want to maintain control over something while gaining money, you RENT it.
If you SELL it, you give up the right to tell people what to do with it.
Just because a movie sucked, doesn't mean the producer do not deserve massive amounts of money for it. They put a lot of work into it!
How dare those SOBS tell people what they thought about the movie. They have no right to freely talk about the movie - it's not like they are the President - not when BUSINESS is on the line.
Your entire statement proves your are wrong or outright evil. You claim resource problems are a myth then say that scarce resources cause poverty and that means population expansion ceases. First of all poverty IS a resource problem. Poverty = not enough money = not enough resources.
Population expansion is caused by more births than deaths. Poverty does not reduce the birth rate, it increases it. But it does increase the death rate more than the birth rate.
Population up with scarce resources = poverty = deaths caused by: famine, disease, drought, war, crime, etc. (all symptoms of resource scarcity).
It is true that recently (in the past two hundred years) birth control and capitalism combined with a larger enough population for scientific research has led to far better resource management and expansion. That is a recent phenomena and NOT related to resource scarcity. That is, science ameliorates the problem you describe, but it is NOT an automatic solution.
It is true that population does expand to fit our current resources, but it is not true that = constant scarcity.
"Why should we subsidize intellectual curiosity?" -Ronald Reagan