|
Chakan posted:There are no non-union welders. In order to learn to weld you have to get training which you can only get as part of a union This is not true. A bunch of my local community colleges have non-union welding certificates and tons of inmates learn to weld through prison vocational programs that are also no union run. Lots of people still join unions in the end but the unions certainly don't have a monopoly on training. There are loads of non-union welders out there.
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 05:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 16:48 |
|
|
Wouldn't the sticky coat become useless after like a week of driving due to road dust and other poo poo sticking to it?
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:You do if you want to keep your equity. Equity is if you have a profitable product, which is not a thing with unicorns. The goal is to get as much VC as possible until you get bought or fold.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:Many unicorns have profitable products, I'm fairly certain Airbnb does for example. The investment is usually used for customer acquisition, some types of which are more legit than others. Setting up sales/marketing in new markets = ok, Uber style unsustainable discounts on the core product is bubble behavior though. If they have sustainable profits, then they aren't necessarily unicorns. Just overvalued tech companies. Airbnb is likely just as unsustainable as Uber since it survives in a legal gray area that could get legislated to hell at any time.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
computer parts posted:It's objective fact that industrial farming uses fewer resources than organic methods, especially on a national scale. Like literally "economies of scale" science. You may as well be an anti-vaxxer if you deny this. How the gently caress do you get this? My family has a small organic farm with an orchard (~120 fruit trees) and a field of assorted veg. We use significantly less water, fertilizer, and zero pesticides and chemicals per plant/unit grown than a commercial operation. We don't use large gas operated vehicles for harvest or maintenance, either. We have a variety of crops that allows healthy use of the land without overstressing the soil (which is how we can get supermarket quality fruits and veg without dumping hundreds of tons of fertilizer on our plants). The only resource we have more of is people - we have 5 adults and 2 kids living and working our farm. An industrial operation using more natural and chemical resources could handle a much larger farm with one guy and his machines. Industrial farming not only rapes the land it is on, but it requires massive amounts of imported products (fertilizers, pesticides, fuel for vehicles including aircraft for spraying) that has a significant impact on land outside the farm. Industrial farms also have favorable water contracts and have little incentive to use that resource efficiently. Industrial farming is cheaper for the consumer, but I'd even question that with the amount of subsidies that industrial agriculture gets. It certainly is not less resource intensive than small organic family farms. The primary benefit of industrial agriculture is amount of food produced, which is a dumb argument since so much food is thrown away in the process - from farm to supermarket dumpster.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
ReidRansom posted:I'm sorry, but your personal anecdote here flies in the face of hundreds of years of agricultural science. Yes, industrial farming is not without problems, and yes, organic farming has its benefits, but in terms of yield/acre and total input cost per unit produced, etc., you cannot come close to matching a modern industrial farm. I went to and work at a leading agricultural school (although I am myself a geoscientist) and this place is lousy with phDs specializing in every aspect of making sure poo poo grows just so. Also, farmers, even large scale ones (especially large scale ones, really) are a loving miserly lot and waste far fewer resources than you might imagine. My argument is that input cost per unit is skewed on a national scale by subsidies and failure to factor in the environmental impact, and the benefits of yield/acre are irrelevant when we throw so much food away. We don't loving need those kinds of yields if we're wasting a massive amount of the produce either because it wasn't pretty enough or it didn't sell. Farmers count that as a unit sold, as do your statistics, but within the entire earth to belly agriculture system, those are wasted units and wasted resources. Yeah, my story is anecdotal, but it also reflects the experience of the small time family farms that surround ours. The impact of industrialized agriculture to the land absolutely requires more fertilizers, chemicals, and usually a lot more water per unit grown (and absolutely per unit consumed) than smaller operations. It also apparently requires leading schools that are lousy with scientists to support their methods. If industrial agriculture is so loving cost and resource efficient, why do they need so many subsidies?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
cheese posted:The problem with your point is that all of the agricultural inputs are, at the end of the day, converted into dollars, and industrial agriculture produces more pounds of food per dollar than organic farming. If it didn't, people wouldn't do it. There is no room full of evil business overlords going "Yes, yes, we could make just as much food with organic farming but I just LOVE spraying pesticides so much!". They use all that fuel and spray those pesticides and consume fertilizer by ton because it results in more food (and more profit) for every dollar they spend. You get that right? Yeah, and maybe using the dollar as the metric for measuring that is dumb. It doesn't factor in environmental damage or food waste. e: To clarify, yes, industrial farming is awesome for industrial farmers. It's not really much better for anyone else. Even as cheap as food is, poor people can barely afford it, even with tons of it ending up in dumpsters along the way. Industrial farming is inefficient use of resources but results in larger profits for agribusiness. Higher food prices would not destroy the average consumer - they would learn to waste less. Tuxedo Gin fucked around with this message at 16:42 on Jun 10, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Wouldn't doing what your family does on a society-wide scale necessitate huge amounts of people going back into agricultural labour since the yields are not as good per person? As in, reversing the trend of how less and less people are being farmers every year because agricultural work is pretty lovely? As has been pointed out already labor is a resource as well, alternatively if you are organic farming on the same scale (if not the same methods) as industrial farming then you are still going to be using as much fuel etc. to cover the area and get a lower yield at the end of it. To bring this derail back onto the tracks of the thread, with all our outsourcing, automation, and industry disruption, people are going to need to supplement their independent contractor incomes with something - might as well become a little more self sufficient. Since they can't afford to live in the city or suburbs, might as well leverage the land in the exurbs where they live to grow a bit of food. Industry in the US has a declining need for workers. Work is outsourced, automated, or workers are simply being expected to to the job of multiple people. Unemployment is high. Grow some loving vegetables.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
MickeyFinn posted:Wow, spurious correlations are a business model now. Spurious correlations are built into every single job application and rental application.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
Logical progression of a broken and oppressive system.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:That has to be a huge violation of the TOS for your social media accounts. I'm willing to bet the big hitters like Facebook will lobby to have this poo poo made illegal somehow. Either that, or they lose their users. No, the big hitters will just charge for access to the data since their entire existence is gathering and selling data about their users.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
Condiv posted:so what happens if i never use twitter or facebook? does my prospective landlord call bs on the accounts i gave him and refuse to rent to me? what about if i don't have a facebook or twitter account anymore? Yep. Same thing that happens if your credit check comes back with no credit. They won't rent to you. No credit is the same as bad credit. No "citizenship score" is the same as being a degenerate undesirable.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:Actually, people not having accounts suffering negative impact is why this idea (which keeps coming up in various forms) keeps getting dogpiled by lawsuits as soon as it goes live. And, yet, young people being 63% less likely to have a credit card isn't age discrimination? gently caress old people protectionism.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2016 16:24
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:renting an apartment and having bills in your name builds credit. Uh, the vast majority of landlords and utility/"bill" companies do not report unless your payments are delinquent. It would be pretty rare for either to actually help your credit. I've been renting at various places for 13 years and never had my rent show up on my credit report - same with utilities and other bills. 1/10 in America have NO credit. This is mostly young people <30. 15% of Black and hispanic Americans have no credit. So the no credit penalty for things like rental applications (and even some job applications) is absolutely discriminatory against young people, blacks, and hispanics (who are, interestingly enough, the demographics that most landlords would mentally penalize anyway).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
nachos posted:what's with all the loving mattress startups lately? matresses are loving expensive and nobody knows what makes a mattress good ripe for disruption
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2016 23:22
|
|
|
Yeah, which is more valuable, an IP that made $700m in toy sales alone in 2015... Or a third rate social networking platform that has never made a profit.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 06:04
|
|
|
I'm sure they'll find something to do with everyone's professional employment history.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 06:38
|
|
|
Peztopiary posted:Are you really angry about protecting the elderly? Why? I am really angry about protecting one class of people but not another who are equally if not more at risk of discrimination in certain situations. When you're 18-25, it can be very, very difficult to find safe, affordable housing. Hell, half the laws that enforce affording housing construction result in affordable 55+ communities. I'm not saying kill the old people, but they are not the only ones subject to unfair discriminatory practices, and are not the only ones who deserve protection.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 07:03
|
|
|
It's going to be loving awesome when it all goes belly up and there's a bunch of unemployed engineers who can't afford the lifestyle they were promised when they chose CS in college.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
I once found out I was making like 3% less than one of my direct reports, and requested a raise based on that. I got the raise, but got chewed out for "discussing salaries at work" and we all got a boring rear end HR lecture about how unprofessional it is to discuss the details of your compensation package.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2016 05:34
|
|
|
Senor Dog posted:How about duck duck go (the search engine), using a vpn, and in incognito mode? What catches you then? Lots of VPNs flip pretty fast in the face of subpoenas and give up customer records including payment info and access IPs. If you pick the right VPN it might be okay but by that point you might as well just use TOR. Non-idiotic people survive on the dark web using a combination of VPNs, TOR, and/or amnesic operating systems. Also encryption and steganography. If you really want to be effectively untraceable online (I say effectively because there is really no way to be completely untraceable), you need to practice pretty strict protocols and most of the major busts come from user error re: security rather than security holes in the technology.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2017 03:52
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:How can you use steganography on the Internet? I mean, it's obvious to everyone if characters have different encoding, so you'd have to do something time-sensitive or establish a pre-agreed code of which letters have actual meaning to read, in which case you're just pushing the problem of key exchange further back... Hidden volumes for large amount of data, though it isn't flawless. I once edited an academic paper from a CS professor and his team was hiding data in images by using some algorithm to slightly alter pixels along the border between elements in the photo and they claimed that the changes were not detectable without either the original image or the algorithm. I won't pretend to completely understand it but I learned that there is some very interesting things going on with digital stenography as governments and organizations continue to crack down or attempt to put back doors into encryption and other methods of computer security. EDIT: There's also the original internet steganography of communicating via codewords on obscure hobbyist message boards and such. Tuxedo Gin fucked around with this message at 09:13 on Oct 4, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2017 06:33
|
|
|
ima let u finish in me posted:Hiding info is steganography. Stenography is just shorthand. yeah my autocorrect kept loving it up and i didn't notice. chrome doesn't like the word steganography
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2017 09:12
|
|
|
It's a stupid estimate anyway since loads of tweets have images attached, sometimes multiple. Videos are common as well. There is no way the average tweet is only 200 bytes. Multiply by 1000 and you're probably closer to the real average, and even that may be lowballing it. Even so, labor IS usually the biggest expense most businesses have, especially a tech business. Between salaries, benefits, and all other associated costs, it adds up quick. Tuxedo Gin fucked around with this message at 14:01 on Oct 28, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2017 13:52
|
|
|
karthun posted:You don't have to sign a non-compete when you are quitting a job. My job doesn't have a non-compete but we do have non-solicit agreement. I had to sign and return it before I received the formal job offer. If I were heading out the door for a new job and my boss told me I had to sign a non-compete agreement I'd laugh in her face and tell her no. Non-competes are signed as part of the hiring process. Companies that use them will not hire you if you refuse to sign.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2017 00:03
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:They often make your last paycheck implicitly dependent on signing it That's highly illegal in many places, including California. In California, if you quit your employer has 72 hours to give you your final check with all owed pay. If you are fired they must give you your final check at the time of firing. Each day they are late with your all your owed pay, they owe you a full, average days pay, up to 30 days.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
Ponsonby Britt posted:Assuming your state labor board has enough funding to take on new, small-dollar cases, and that its members weren't appointed by a business-friendly governor, and that you can afford to wait for that check for the year or two it will take to go through the process... Depending on your state, you can take those cases to small claims where they will award the wages plus penalties.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2017 04:17
|
|
|
It's a pretty big sign of modern American culture. Most people agree that Uber is deplorable... but it is cheap and convenient so they use it anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
I don't think it will be as big a problem as you imagine. Anything but the most simplistic Photoshops in the most ideal conditions will usually fail forensic analysis. Video is far more complex. The only problem is really the masses that are morons and believe everything they see or hear, but you don't even need an elaborate ruse to sway popular opinion. Just saying something is so is enough to convince them - no evidence required.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
aware of dog posted:This answers the question but not for the reason I think you intended The real answer is that we can't even manage respect and fair treatment for the two "traditional" genders. Why would you expect the average person to suddenly be able to do it when you make the situation even more confusing for them?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2017 00:18
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:"We don't respect anybody now, so we're sure not going to respect anybody else more than that!" Yeah no poo poo. Tell that to ignorant boomers and hateful young conservatives.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2017 00:29
|
|
|
Weatherman posted:If someone wants to use male or female pronouns then sure that's fine, I'll respect their choice. This is a dumb take because I'm sure you use all sorts of modern invented language when it suits you. You are specifically choosing not to to accepting certain language out of protest. Anyway, English already has a gender neutral pronoun set. 'They' has been used as a singular gender neutral pronoun for around 700 years. Doesn't mean we can't have new ones, though. Language, like gender, is fluid.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2017 01:04
|
|
|
T-man posted:Amazing how other people are the problem after you get called out, huh? What exactly did I get called out for? He asked a question (why people won't do x) I answered a question (why people won't do x). Has nothing to do with my own beliefs. I gladly use whatever pronouns people prefer.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
the old ceremony posted:also goons behave like non-binary peeps are always incredibly hostile and abusive when defending their pronouns but i've never seen that happen? like not even once? in my experience pronoun reminders are always phrased in the most gentle non-confrontational "hey sorry to be a pest but i just wanted to mention" way possible (unless the person doing the misgendering is being incredibly, obviously deliberately rude and hostile) and it's usually the response to the correction that blows things out of control. It's the tumblr thing. Everyone thinks that the entire non-binary community are perfectly represented by the militant tumblr memes that have been floating around. It's extremely harmful but because there is so much infighting on the left (who is LGBT, who is oppressed, who doesn't count), these things never get corrected properly because half the left perpetuates it out of spite.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2017 01:53
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Don't regdate shame me. I think at this point not having been here 10+ years like the rest of us should be a badge of honor
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2017 00:13
|
|
|
eschaton posted:Not true, as we’ve seen time and again, companies like Twitter, Facebook, and Google are great at moderation when white men are being targeted by, say, people they have abused. They're also extremely good at protecting us from seeing a naked breast. Yes, please fill my feed with videos of animals (and sometimes humans) being brutally abused and killed, but don't you loving dare let me glimpse a nipple.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2017 08:19
|
|
|
The SoCal one is the old Boeing campus that has been sitting vacant for ages in Huntington Beach plus the C-17 facility in Long Beach in addition to some other office space and land in both cities. They really, really want someone to fill in the void that Boeing left when they pulled out of the area.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Havana Affair posted:I guess I failed to mention I live 20 minutes from the nearest one. I was just wondering how they make it sound so easy since the view I got from the thread is that it should be anything but. They've been running these things since 2014 so they must be getting some kind of use. I've no idea if they actually work or not and no way of testing it. Also not suggesting no one has thought of a bitcoin ATM before. Almost every single bitcoin ATM that exists in the wild is one way cash to bitcoin. They rarely go the other way, and when they do the limits are very low. So I guess if you really want to unload your bitcoin, you do it by setting up a bitcoin ATM that only goes cash to bitcoin.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
Doesn't one group control more than 50% of the bitcoin mining power? Meaning they can gently caress with the sanctity of the blockchain if they don't like how things are going for them?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2017 07:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 16:48 |
|
|
exploded mummy posted:brazilian_child_sex_assault_bitcoin.txt? it was a pretty memorable tale
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2017 21:51
|
|