It's not designed for commercial air travel. Satellites, astronauts have a slightly higher risk threshold that exponentially reduces the provability factor.
Short term may be. Long term companies like Google will be forced to expand where high skill talent is, so you loose jobs and slightly long term, you run the risk of loosing the entire silicon valley. Have you seen Detroit ? Imagine San Francisco like that.
That would be great, but companies would figure out ways around it. Company would pay 2X and ask employee to pay X to some random/affiliated company for training etc. They would even do this handoff in India to stay out of radar and tell you what many indians would take the deal.
The solution is "EXTREMELY" strict penalties including prison time for board of companies who indulge in it willingly.
Revcontent is world's fastest growing content recommendation network. We have a small team working out of Mumbai. You will work on cutting edge of Machine Learning and build things that instantly gets billions of pageviews in traffic.
Yes. A lot of things are fked up in India. That's not an argument to mess up one more. Internet is one thing we got right. Freedom of Speech, Online Censorship, Running an Internet Startup are no different than in US, even better. For starters, Our government doesn't spy. We don't get trolled for stupid patents. ETC
There are thousands of excellent Indian professionals, leading some of the top companies in the world. It's your loss if you make your opinion from the bad ones. We just have too many people.
Also, 2015 was the biggest ever in terms of VC deals 10+ Billion USD, Foreign Investments, etc.
I guess you have no idea what this is really about.
All we are asking our Govt. is to adopt same Net Neutrality standards that exist in US and other EU countries.
Companies like Uber/Amazon are already pumping huge money in India because they need us, not vice-versa. Just because we are open, unlike China, doesn't mean you can play unfair.
I take a coffee break and fire the addictive social game "Boom Beach".
My troops are ready and I am ready to attack the neighbors.
I buy a 5 USD tea + 3 USD water bottle (both I can get free at my office).
The attack doesn't go well. One little error. My break is about to end, but I want to try one more time. Just that, it will take 2 hours to train my troops.
Or Wait, 1.99 USD to speed that up. Hours of planning, that went for the attack and just 2 USD to find out if I was right or wrong. Is it worth it ? I look at my coffee and water, the time, the ending break, the distractions till this is resolved. It's worth it. And while I am putting in 2USD, might as well take the 10USD deal for next 20 battles. Better spent than "expensive-than-movie" popcorn. Ban that first.
Probably not, but it's a strong indicator that if you were good at what you were supposed to do, you will continue to be good at whatever new is thrown at you.
Am I the only one who find this flawed ? Why won't you take into account the deaths that would have occured both in short/long run if that money/time wasn't spent ? Note that this has kind of a butterfly effect. There is a possible argument for doing it more efficiently or differently, but this extreme comparison makes no sense.