I think it's unrealistic to assign success to a single cog of a large production, but I do think there is truth behind the power of intrinsic motivation over extrinsic motivation.
Since I have seen much of the advice in this article help me live a happier life the conclusion I draw is that the author, and likely many of the CEOs running these companies are likely unhappy and un-fullfilled and that they are missing any wisdom in this piece as much as their employees may be.
It is also possible that indulging your instincts by seeking more partners could have a detrimental on the psychological/emotional well being of yourself or your partner.
The number of arguments for 'sexual liberation' in western society has increased over the years, but my limited life experience has shown me that this only encourages a mindset that leads to behaviors that lead to emotional anguish because people begin chasing their next sexual dopamine rush instead of spending time establishing means to care for their longer term needs.
A monogamous long term partner offers benefits that cannot be achieved any other way, and a lot of it revolves around the physiological validation of value that comes with intercourse. Sex, in a manner of speaking, is the acceptance of a person by another that they are viewed as successful enough to contribute in passing on DNA. You could say it is the pinnacle of biological success. This is where most arguments stop with the conclusion that: Sex = Good so More Sex = Better. By doing so they are failing to see the whole picture.
The above conclusion works for many animals; humans are psychologically far more complex than animals.
Humanity has to balance many other concerns including:
- The well being of other people (primarily their mate)
- their desires to progress a career
- social standing among peers
- emotional distress caused by 'loneliness'
- the rearing of children and fulfillment of personal instinct to see them succeed
- etc
All of these are areas that benefit from a monogamous relationship because the physiological and psychological needs for co-validation can be met which then frees up mental energy to focus on other things that bring more lasting value to life than the intense yet fleeting moments of an orgasm.
I opened this on my iPad expecting to find an app store link at their m.trykeep.com. I did not find one, instead I found a web page that kept asking me to touch and interact with it, but that barely wanted to react. I had to tap and hold 7 times to get the first "example" to work, and then closed it and gave up after 5 attempts on the second.
I could not find it in the app store either, so is this a browser based solution? If so, I highly recommend getting the touch sensitivity worked out on chrome on the browser.
I do realize this may be load based from your servers getting hit and so if I remember I will try again later.
Also, I get the impression this might require requires server connectivity, if it does then you're excluding so many people without data plans.
I like the idea, just couldn't get the execution to actually work for me in a way I'd consider using it.
I agree that HTML5 is much more available. I wouldn't recommend a silver light app for any consumer based product.
But I would have for enterprise applications if it was going to continue to be supported.
The lack of support killed off the language, not the language itself, IMO.
I have years of experience with WPF & Silverlight and agree that it has high learning curve, but once you know it there really isn't much of anything you can't to simpler, faster, and more elegantly than in HTML5, if you have a back end you need to interact with.
I worked for a company that required CJIS(Criminal Justice Information Systems) certification to work on their products. The software dealt with law enforcement so we occasionally had access to live criminal records.
Every year we had to re-certify and one of the major points they emphasized and re-emphasized was that it was a felony to search for anything for a friend or even out of curiosity. You only had a legal right to access and view information if you had a specific reason dealing with a current case.
So, if they let her access any of those databases it was most definitely a felony. But as others have said it could have been public record databases and not something protected under CJIS.
Strategy refers to overarching objectives that will direct the larger part of your moves throughout the game.
IE - Knowing your opponent is aggressive with their queen and having plans in place to quickly neutralize her,
or being good at manipulating your opponents pieces util it gets to a point where you can gain a strong advantage by castling.
All these objectives form the basis of what you're trying to accomplish with the ideal being that successfully executing your major objectives will gain you victory.
Tactics refers to how well one reacts to and overcomes changes on the board.
IE - Based on the current board layout you notice that a certain move(s) will heavily fortify a section of the board that you previously were not focused on, or seeing your opponent set up for a particular pattern of play you feint a reaction only to hit them somewhere else.
As a tactical player he focuses more on evolving his strategy(larger objectives) to fit the board rather than trying to manipulate the board to fit his strategy more so than the average chess player.
This reply should be downvoted into gray. It includes a direct insult, and strong claims with no proof behind them. There is no logic in this post, only pure bitter emotion.
I believe in the principles involved in austerity, but would argue that those using that word in government are "doing it wrong".
- Do you believe the government is inefficient with its money? ( public school system)
- Do you believe that the government has its hands in too many pies and should be doing less? (NSA)
- Do you approve of the cost of the ACA website? What about the value we're getting for our money?
- How about Mr Presidents Million dollar golf trips while he shuts down the White House?
- How much good could be done with the $420 billion in interest payment we paid last year alone on our debt [1]?
There are many reasons to try to be more efficient/austere with our money. I personally strive to be debt free and self sufficient, and I would like my country to be the same. I don't think the power our foreign lenders have over us is a good thing.
In my opinion the major reasons for longer console cycles are development cycle time frames and hardware compatibility issues.
Graphics improved over the life of the last console generation until they plateaued. To do that many game developers and game engines have to get down and write code at the hardware level to optimize as much as they can. Add on the 1-5 year development time frame of many games and you're in a scenario where updating hardware regularly actually becomes a big middle finger to many of your game developers.
Things that could change this:
- Newer Super Powerful hardware allows consoles can stay in the sub $500 price range and is strong enough to allow hardware level optimization to be done away with so that a 3-5 year game can work on multiple console versions (past or future).
- Revolutionary game development software that some how magically lets super AAA titles be made in months instead of years while also drastically dropping the price of a new release from $60 into the phone "app" range.
- Instead of hardware becoming substantially more powerful it becomes substantially cheaper and smaller. If you could buy next gen consoles for under $200 it would be a hassle, but possible to own multiple generations so that you can play your 3 year old games as well as your new ones.
TLDR: Hardware is not the reason for long console release cycles, the games are.
You don't need an extension to have fun with this stuff.
Try (http://www.gizoogle.net/) the next time you go to read any political article. Not only is it more entertaining, it's also more accurate in many cases.
I agree 100%. I mentioned "Both sides" in my post.
I am equally frustrated by the republicans and the Democrats.
When the Republican leader of the house refuses to bring bills to the floor AND the Democratic leader of the Senate refuses to bring bills to the floor they're both playing politics.
I'm not arguing that democrats are to blame. I'm arguing that BOTH sides are involved in these games, and BOTH sides should have been willing to bring more to the table.
I'm disappointed in how quickly HN is heading towards Reddit in its down voting. You can't even try to keep the conversation factual and mention the issues on both sides. Either you jump in with the current media story of how it's all republicans fault or you get down voted.
Boenher's refusal to bring the bill to the floor has been frustrating.
Equally frustrating has been Harry Reid's refusal to bring bills to the Senate floor.
Both sides were standing firm by their "ideals". Neither side made any sincere efforts to find an actual solution.
In the Article:
"The previous year, 45 percent had essentially failed the math section, and 31 percent had failed Spanish. This time only 7 percent failed math and 3.5 percent failed Spanish. And while none had posted an Excellent score before, 63 percent were now in that category in math.
The language scores were very high. Even the lowest was well above the national average. Then he noticed the math scores. The top score in Juárez Correa’s class was 921. Zavala Hernandez looked over at the top score in the state: It was 921. When he saw the next box over, the hairs on his arms stood up. The top score in the entire country was also 921."
Granted, it's a fairly limited sample, but it's a sample that shows incredible results as well. Based on this classroom of children, that came from circumstances as far away from privilege as possible, the scores shifted from:
45% Math failure -> 7% Math Failure
31% Spanish failure -> 3.5% Spanish Failure
I don't think you're giving the majority of children/humans enough credit for their potential.
To counter argue myself, there clearly wasn't a 0% failure rate. And while 7% is somewhat low, there is a high probability that some of the children in the class were close to failing with others a little better than that and so on.
Why can't we have an education system that does both? Why not have open ended classrooms that let kids learn at their own pace with personal tutor's to help kids that aren't thriving in that situation.
He also doesn't have to share stake in a company with a detached investor who literally got paid to get the equity.
If you think about it it's kind of insulting to his time where his only payback for being on the show is payback from deals he makes.
Where as Finnmax gets paid to produce the show, then takes a cut of every company, and likely does little to help the company advance. This would be extra telling for multi-million dollar valuations where the sharks end up getting single digit shares themselves and are expected to bring many contacts and continue to work with and mentor the investors.
If you're sincerely interested in solar panels you should look into doing it yourself. It's not as complicated as many of the solar retailers want to make it out to be.
Step 1) Buy panels direct with mounts
Step 2) Mount the panels yourself. They aren't super heavy, just fragile. The tricky part here is measuring and drilling the holes you need to get them secured to your roof properly. Or buying a slanted frame if you have a flat roof.
Step 3) Hire a licensed electrician to wire them up.
That's pretty much it. Total cost for a 9kw system will run about 13-15k after the electrician. You'll get 30% (almost 4k) back in rebates bringing your total cost out somewhere around 10k. That's a 5-7 year payback for your average american home.
There are a number of online solar panel distributors that are reliable and have been in business for quite some time.
I don't think I misused the word theory. I meant it as "not 100% fact". Even a scientific theory is not a fact.
"If only one fossil was to be found in the strata where it did not belong it would automatically disprove evolution theory--there would be no saving it. If a dog was found in the Cambrian period or a bird anytime before reptiles it would disprove the theory."[1]
Since we do not yet have the technology to map all layers of the earths strata to the point where we could find all existing fossils it still remains in the realm of possibility that a fossil is found in the wrong strata and the whole theory falls down. There are other falsifiable points to the Scientific Theory as well. If there wasn't then it wouldn't be a scientific theory it would just be a belief based theory.
So far it has not been falsified, but it still falsifiable.
Maybe my word use was a little off, but I believe my intent remains intact. Anyone who says evolution is a fact is doing so on faith and doesn't understand or accept that their are still falsifiable points left that could happen. Yes, it's well past theory and into Scientific theory, but it's still a theory.