>>> but my guess is that the majority of companies fall into the category where losing a person for a month is crippling.
I'm of the opinion that this is a reason to discourage the growth of small businesses. They are too small to absorb shocks like pregnancy or family emergency that contribute to the well-being of a society.
No, it should be part of HTML. A dimension or unit tag. It seems like a perfect continuation of semantic tags and the direction of XHTML 2 before the presentation-focused monstrosity that is HTML 5.
Units are harder than you might think. If I write 1 pint do I mean an imperial pint, a US liquid pint, or a US dry pint? The foot is equally tricky.
This requires that the person writing the page gets it right, whereas with plain text we can rely on context to make a good guess at the unit that was meant.
I don't think that's a major issue. It should be straighforward to disambiguate: make separate units for imperial pint, liquid pint, dry pint, etc. If this is cumbersome, provide an option to set aliases for these in a meta tag, for example. If the writer of the document is sophisticated enough to be using these tags, they should be sophisticated enough to look up what the proper name is for the unit they're using.
If I need to pay and the price is in 'Dollar' I assume the recipient can clearly indicate if it's a USD or a AUD that he wants to receive here. Francs and Swiss Francs shared the same name, but were different things (and had different abbreviations).
The same would be possible for the units you mentioned.
A lot of wikis do that (wikipedia for one). Eg {{m|1500}} is 1500m or whatever the user wants to see it as/the website wants to display it as. I find it extremely useful.
It's an application development framework for Gambit-C Scheme which compiles natively to a bunch of popular platforms. It comes with a few sample apps in the repository. glGUI seems to be used for the interfaces.
Is there a name for the logical fallacy where one knowingly misrepresents true statements to suggests things that aren't true? (ie that only unions used violence or had criminal ties).
Yes, 100 years ago factory owners sure did (Ford being a classic example). More recently they have not.
Low level violence is frequently applied by strike workers today. I once worked (white color job) for a shipping company and we had one strike every couple of years, sometimes more than one in a year (stevedore and sailors were both unionized so there would be two separate negotiations, each of which inevitably ended in a week or two week strike).
Try driving through a picket line of stevedores and see what happens to your car. Actually don't, you will regret it. If they think you are a scab, you will be punched.
If a hardcore unionist calls you a scab, be scared. Its the worst insult they know, and its backed by extreme hatred.
As far as organized crime violence goes, I have no experience with that. I always assumed that was Sopranos fiction.
Unionism has done good things, but I don't believe it has a place in a high tech industry. What Uber needs is solid competition so that drivers can simply defect to a competitor.
> Unionism has done good things, but I don't believe it has a place in a high tech industry.
Since when was driving a car a high tech industry? Every industry uses high tech, but that doesn't mean they should be subjected to Silicon Valley's poor labor practices.
Your position is privileged beyond belief. That you don't see that is both amusing and scary.
Uber is not in the tech industry, they're in the taxi industry, driving cars. This us/them elitism is the scourge of the tech industry. Just pray you don't become as expendable as the drivers are.
I teach the LSAT. This fallacy occurs all the time. It's "incomplete comparison". Giving information about only one half of a comparison, then stating or implying a conclusion based on that inadequate information.
> a single inconsistency in a formal logical system means you can prove anything. if both A and !A are true, then you can prove anything you wish via contradiction.
I believe this has been solved in intuitionistic logic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuitionistic_logic). If you don't except the law of the excluded middle and require constructive proofs you avoid many of these shenanigans.
Although intuitionistic logic does not have the axiom
------ (LEM)
A ∨ ¬A
that is, the law of the exluded middle (LEM) can not be derived "from nothing" for all propositions, it is still an inconsistency if you can prove A ∧ ¬A to be true, since
------ (Assumption)
A ∧ ¬A
------ (Assumption) ------ (∧E2)
A ∧ ¬A ¬A
------ (∧E1) ------ (Definition of ¬)
A A ⇒ ⊥
---------------------------- (⇒E)
⊥
--------------- (⇒I, discharge assumption)
A ∧ ¬A ⇒ ⊥
--------------- (Definition of ¬)
¬(A ∧ ¬A)
In other words, assuming A ∧ ¬A holds you can prove the false proposition ⊥ (from which you can prove anything).
(Note that the De Morgan's law ¬(A ∧ ¬A) ⇒ A ∨ ¬A does not hold without the LEM, so the above proof cannot be simplified in terms of it!)
The Open Graphics Project only did 3D and VGA, this one also does 2D which is probably more useful for embedded applications.
It was also a more complicated architecture than it needed to be IMHO due to splitting functions between two FPGAs, one for the graphics bit and the other for the bus interface.
> That mostly solves that problem, but leaves people like me that would like to handle retirement savings themselves a bit annoyed.
Ironic, because that's how I feel about speed limits: it's for the best overall but annoying to those that drive well... and you're from Germany where they have the Autobahn.
That said, my concern for my dim-witted but well meaning citizens makes me willing to bear this for the overall good.
