WingForward

In the documentation, I didn't see where I can give control of the screen. That's a difference. But it's a good feature to have.

And you should take a sample of living bees and see what the insecticide concentration is in those guys. That alone would prove or disprove a link, but would give clues for further investigation.

TTY users are declining. I don't know the statistics, but 80% of my interaction with the Deaf is by Videophone (VP) (aka video relay service (VRS)).

Training staff on how a VRS or TTY relay call works is pretty simple. A few general rules are: 1) Talk as if you are addressing the Deaf person directly (don't say, "tell her hello", say "hello"). 2) Speak in discrete chunks of meaning with pauses in between to give the interpreter a chance to catch up. 3) Expect everything you say to be interpreted.

If it was immaterial, why quibble with me on the facts?

It's not though. The whole article presents her as unemployed because of the NCA. That's inaccurate. She can and did work in her field.

Oh, you know how to program? Ok, great, that's the minimum you need to get a job. I hope you can read too.

But what do you know about the clients? Who at Company B needs to be handled with kid gloves? Who likes it when you're pushy? How much can you negotiate with Company C on the timeline? What are the strengths of the other developers both in house and at other firms?

That's the stuff you can only learn by working in the industry. That's what makes an employee valuable. That's the real skills, the stuff you won't learn in school.

"Angela worked at Bullhorn for about three years. She left the company on her own terms in October 2010 to work as a software trainer at a Boston-area hospital, but after seven months decided "it wasn't what I wanted to do." So she took a job as a business analyst with another company that sells software to recruiters."

She chose to quit two jobs before running into trouble at her third.

And "sic" is used to imply that the original quote was grammatically incorrect. Your usage implies I misused the word "chose" when you should have rephrased your sentence to make the tense correct.

No, she's on the dole by choice. She was 25 years old, making $60K a year and quit for another job. Then she chose to quit that job too.

I have little sympathy for Angela.

In this story, you had a 21 year-old work for a company for three years. That company invested time in a green worker. After three months, maybe after two years, she actually started producing for the company.

After she is trained and producing for her company, she quits and gets another job in the same field (but not a direct competitor).

She quits that and tried to work for a competitor of her original employer and is let go.

She is collecting unemployment (possibly at the combined expense of employers 1, 2, & 3 and the people of Massachusetts).

I don't see what the inequity here is.

Outlawing non-competes would make employers less likely to hire because they're not just about trade secrets.

They're about encouraging employers to make the investment in a new employee, knowing the time and effort put into that person isn't going to be easily transferred to a competitor.

That said, you can negotiate a non-compete, either doing away with it completely, or changing the terms.

Non-competes generally have at least three limiting features: industry, time, and region.

You can negotiate on the industry side: from "same industry" to "company's direct competitors".

You can negotiate on the region:"the Northeast" to "New England" to "metro Boston".

And you can negotiate on the time: twelve months, to six, to three.

I've just thought of this, but I think it would be fair it limit the non-competes based on the time worked in a position in a company. Less than one month and more than five years in a position, the non-compete clause goes away. Or the terms change.

iHate?

"Let me say that again: Attacking a market incumbent on an area of it's core strength - It's hardest in technology companies."

What is the point of the asterisk at the end of the request?

Oh, and something about the page with the circle on it prevents my browser from reloading.

Do you know how long it takes for your donation to have the impact you expect it should?

Does a day make a difference? A week? A month?

I don't know the answer to that, but I'd like to, but not enough to do the research myself.

This article makes illogical conclusions.

Here is the primary source: http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2011/1/W...

The chart in the original post has in its title "Web-based e-mail". That chart represents the amount of time spent using web-based e-mail. Not the number of e-mails sent or received on web clients. Not e-mail app usage. And not mobile usage.

Mobile e-mail usage amongst teens has gone up 40%. Isn't that a more likely reason for the decline in web-based e-mail that an unquantified Facebook influence?

Sure, but does it save money by discouraging others from ripping of the public?

#1 is a huge open field. You can live almost anywhere and not pay a lot in education and accomplish #1. Not that it's easy. It takes a lot of work and some talent and some luck, but there isn't the educational entry costs of #3 and #4.

Actually, people in the time of Columbus knew the the Earth was round. That's been in European cultural knowledge for about two thousand years. It was Columbus who was mistaken. He thought the earth was much smaller than everyone else did. That he could sail west to Asia in a few weeks. He was completely wrong. A fool who was funded by a fool.

But you're right, in that they had as much evidence as you have about Mars. As in, with a some hours of observation, you too could establish that the Earth is round and that Mars is a planet and know as much as a 15th century nobleman. All from first principles. You just need to view the evidence.

That's different than religion and "faith". Those don't require evidence. In fact, faith require the absence of evidence.

You can try to equate evidence-based beliefs and non evidence-based beliefs, but they are not the same.

You haven't seen Mars? Really? It's often visible in the sky at night.

I wouldn't call it"chauffeured" when it's her brother driving and her sister-in-law in the front seat.

"myusername has listed no skills" sounds better to my ear.

"Why do you hate our military?" "Why do you hate our seniors?" "You like spending other people's money!"

Those are the talk radio/cable news responses to your proposals...

This web tool is cool, but there should be a way to incorporate the political realities of these actions, like cutting defense spending.

If I owned a company, now is exactly when I'd take on debt.

Now, "stuff" (advertising, equipment, factories, employees) is cheap.

Now, borrowing is cheap.

Now is the time for a business to spend.

The US government is more like a business than an individual. Both are interested in generating wealth rather than consuming it.

But in the case of "my friend"...if he were looking to borrow in order to generate wealth, say buy a house for rental income, I would completely support him.

But the bus driver didn't appreciate that she should intervene in the bullying months earlier.

I wonder what the contribution to the bet has been from Xbox.

Connecting the Internet to the television is one of its great accomplishments.

They're really not that good. While his personal beliefs are way way more conservative than his novels, he does keep a pretty good separation.

He really hasn't written anything that good since the late 90s.

The Red v Blue wars in America? Weird. The latter Enderverse novels could have been cranked out by current AI. Treasure Box? Enchantment? Snoozers.

Just wondering, I've been able to down vote for a few months, but recently, my karma hasn't gone down, but I can no longer down vote comments.

Why would that be?

It means its okay to go into debt for a few years, as long as we pay it back when the going gets good.

A business cycle doesn't have a defined length, which is one of the problems of the approach. I think 3-7 years is a decent range.

1) Getting answers to collide when there's only two choices, Agree or Disagree, is simple, absurdly simple.

50% represents maximum dissension.

How many other questions were there? How did they coincide with the presented questions? What is the expected distribution if answers were assigned randomly?

2) A question that deals with global or national finance often can't be accurately stated in a single sentence. I look at, say, the minimum wage, or the sports franchise question, and I think, "It depends."

3) There's an assumption in the questions that contain "should". That assumption is that economists all share the same goals. They don't. The ones who do may agree about the methods to achieve it.

A few days into it and I've decided Eric Butler made a mistake in releasing Firesheep.

Security is about battling a combination of Time + Talents/Tools + Determination + Opportunity.

Firesheep greatly increases the Tools someone has to hack an account. Eric has made browsing much less secure.

The intended result is to bring the security issue to people's awareness, which he has done. But the result should have been to increase security. That will only happen if the the change in required Tools is balanced by a decrease in Opportunity (free wifi becoming simple password wifi at a minimum).

I doubt that will happen. Releasing Firesheep was a mistake.

This is a good place to post and critique these sorts of ideas: http://www.halfbakery.com/