After much debate over copious drinks at the bar, we finally decided to settle the argument with darts.
0 are all crossed.
1's are written as l
7's are all crossed.
And 9's... Well we got kicked out and it was never settled. How was I supposed to know the nickname Nicky sounds like the French word "Niquer" and somebody (Nicolas) got all bent out of shape over it. "Hey Nicky it's your turn!" apparently was not well received by a drunk frenchman.
Some way to identify the person who wrote it is also helpful. Different cultures write numbers differently.
The French person reads the top one as 1 , 2, 3.
The American reads it as 7, 2, 3.
Listened to a few songs then gave up She really needs to stop trying to mimic Chester and just be herself. When she lets herself sing it's decent. She has a good range but nowhere near the power that Chester had. It's just not there and never will be.
I'd rather hear her make the songs her own in her most comfortable range.
Sometimes they are like that.
Sometimes they are a closet with a dirty diaper can that isn't emptied frequently. Delightful.
The issue with wine is quality control is dependent many factors, weather, fertilizer management, water management, disease pressure, pest pressure, harvest conditions, unpredictable fermentations and the skill of the winemaker. The more variable the conditions the more unpredictable the finished wine product is.
A good bottle is really tough to make. A mediocre bottle is difficult to make. A poor bottle is what is usually made. I've never had an excellent bottle of wine and I think it is a myth. Pricing is mostly unrelated to the quality of the product as well.
When you usually put out a poor product people tend to avoid it unless there is a cultural expectation of low performance. What's changing is the cultural acceptance of drinking horrible tasting stuff.
The wine industry in needs to adapt and put out a better product or else they will go under.
For many religious groups it's common for teens and even young adults to not have a clue where babies come from. The biological urge to have sex is still there. So teens experiment around and figure it out but often don't understand the consequences.
Teens are going to have sex whether you teach them anything about or not. Comprehensive sex ed reduces teen birthrates and STD transmission. It also delays the age when they initiate sex.
No - you missed my direction.
The paragraph is an overly polite way of writing to avoid any semblance of disparaging the other person. As mine was clearly written as a personal anecdote there is no need to qualify your remarks as non-derogatory.
Generally I see people develop those types of phrasing habits when they have negative experiences with misunderstanding in the past. Very common with many PhD's communicating with MBA's, sales or production teams. A little overly verbose but carefullly respectful to avoid conflict. It's a very good habit to have professionally but quite funny when out of context.
First paragraph had me laughing. Somebody has spent a lot of time in private industry and has gotten burned a few times.
As for #2 it depends on the age of the industry. Here is the life cycle of research driven industries as I see it.
Historically in research driven industries the foundations have been started in academia. Private companies start up relying on the universities research.
Money flows into the university systems from private companies and they start producing a lot PhD's in the field.
Next the private companies decide they can make more money doing the research in-house. They offer large sums of money to the established professors and get fresh grads at bargain prices.
Pretty soon most of the best and brightest are drained to private industry. The funding from private industry slows to a trickle and all that is left in academia is those with more social connections than ability.
For the next 30 years, private industry has great talent. Then the first first wave of PhD's retire. The new PhD's grads are trained by the social connections crowd.
That's when you start to see fun job descriptions posted like:
PhD + 2 years of experience, Masters + 5 years experience, Bachelor's + 8 years experience.
I spent most of a decade in industry doing what is generally thought of as a PhD's job. In order to fill in some gaps, I took a ton of graduate classes on the companies dime and looked at doing a fully funded PhD. I didn't end up doing it.
Why?
The industry paid better than academia. So the brain drain was real. The informal training I had from PhD's in the company was vastly superior to the graduate level training at the university. Anyone who was any good at the applied side was not in academia. The ones left in academia were a very odd group with zero applied knowledge.
Most PhD hires failed miserably in the field. 9 out of 10 of them could not make the transition to the practical application of knowledge.
I saw a trend where smaller companies where hiring mostly industry experienced people for the positions (like I was).
So for me the time and investment was not worth it.
One of my friends made it halfway through his PhD. He then got sick of the politics and drama and noped out.
I am of the opinion that most "supply" issues are due to investors. Except in certain geographic areas we do not have a shortage of actual physical housing. What we have is a shortage of available housing at a mixed pricepoints for purchase.
All housing that investors purchase for rentals removes it from the supply.
Traditionally investors have sought out entry level housing for rent. They invest in building rental complexes. They make all cash purchases and then rent it out to people who otherwise would have been first-time homebuyers. Investors used to be the low end offer. Blatant price fixing has increased rent outrageously. Now investors are the high end offer and removing supply constantly.
With AirB&B, the middle and even upper range market that traditionally has had less investor competition is now a major target. This has led to price wars for investment purposes on previously safe segments.
The first solution to the housing supply is simple: taxing income from rent so that selling the property is financially more lucrative. It will have to include a prohibition against rental increases to cover the taxes as well.
The second is to mandate zoning and new construction to match the market needs not the needs of the investors.
Last would be to create a program where builders who focus on entry level housing receive incentives from governments (also include hefty penalty for substandard construction).
Large corporations rarely innovate and try new things. Most innovation comes from smaller players with limited market share taking risks.
Large companies buy out smaller ones who create cash cows from taking large risks. The large company then milks the cash cows until they are completely dead.
The consolidation of studios to a few megacorporations has led to this inevitable end. The solution is simple: break them up. If we have 30 or so similar sized studios competing, we will get better movies/TV again.