I don't understand why they divide the appraised value by three, then compute 1.5% property tax from it and say they can't raise it any higher. Where I live, our property tax rate is higher even with a homestead exemption AND we don't divide by three. Simply removing the division would fix the revenue problem according to the article's math.
More specifically, right now I just checked and I pay 1.6% of my home's appraised market value each year as property tax. Galesburg pays 0.5%. So there's an easy fix.
What's frustrating about these academia threads, is that Ph.D. experiences are so diverse and different, depending on the discipline, subfield, university, advisor. Yet so many commenters oversimplify their one experience or what they think it's like from knowing a couple of grad students.
I know Ph.D. students who made almost six figures by doing highly paid research internships. Some advisors only care about demos, while others care about startups, and yet others care about how the work is presented to funding agencies. I know Ph.D. students who did most of their Ph.D. in a completely different city than their degree-granting institution. I know Ph.D. students who were highly pressured to publish, and Ph.D. students who had no pressure to publish. I know Ph.D. students who basically had no advisor, and Ph.D. students with 3 world-expert advisors. Some Ph.D. students are funded by the university, others are funded by large collaborative grants, or by their own fellowships, and yet others are funded by small industry grants their advisor got.
It's like if threads about being a software developer had comments like "at tech companies, you only get rewarded for closing tickets."
That last sentence, do you mean internal employees are paid less than new hires due to rising starting salaries? Or that new hires are paid little compared to long time employees?
Absolutely, the point of listing a university is to show status and expertise. No one is going to listen to a bunch of people whose main accomplishment is getting accepted into Cornell and San Diego State. The prestige of those institutions come from the professors, doctors, scientists, researchers, who are pushing the state of the art, not the students doing homework.
Wow, basically this Ian guy asked thousands of musicians to be their publisher through his wife's secret llc in exchange for massive promotion, acting like it was a small project with a lot of corporate interest. He and his wife took almost all the money those musicians made, and did no promotion.
This is honestly one of the first time I'm convinced in a technical sense to consider Firefox over Chrome. uBlock Origin feels as core to me to web browsing as Saved Passwords and Incognito Mode. That uBlock Origin can work better is like the browser itself being better.
I think it's not a useful exercise to come up with a better phrasing of the advice, as that's not really the point here. When you're in the moment reacting to peoples' questions and giving advice on the spot, you don't have time to wordcraft your speech like this. You'd still mess up once in a while.
Look at how often people tweak, clarify, and edit their comments even here on hacker news. So you'll probably just end up with "stifled" advice (using the terminology from the article), as you can see with all these suggestions in this thread.
If the situation was reversed, where poorer employees were living with their parents, people would be upset with the inequality too. Even more so if the ones who were not living with their parents got stabilized rent after 5 years, or bought property and saw their equity rise in value.
Ah fair enough. It's been a little while. I'm surprised the Office buildings (16-18) turned hybrid, since weren't the buildings themselves architected to basically only have window offices? It was shaped like a snake to optimize for that.
Don't nearly all Microsoft employees have offices? Every building I've been to (I can probably name off about 30 of them) had employees with offices. Can you name the buildings where employees don't have offices?
Exactly, the main complaint with using the wrong cable is the charging is only at regular usb speeds, or the data transfers at usb 2.0 rates. That's way better than nothing, and usually doesn't matter too much.
Just to clarify, are you talking about a usb-c to usb-a cable, or a usb-c to usb-c cable? I think the usb-c to usb-a cables are just temporary while we get to usb-c everything, and so are not implemented that well. With usb-c to usb-c cables, I've never had a problem with power or charging.
This article misses the biggest issue with usb-c cables, which a lot of people don't even realize. A lot of cheaper devices can only be charged with a usb-c to usb-a cable, and not a regular usb-c to usb-c cable (C2C). Basically, they don't support C2C but people don't test or check this until they travel and realize the cable they brought doesn't work on these devices.
The cause is that the devices themselves are incorrectly implemented. This ranges from toothbrushes, to flashlights (where 99% of usb-c flashlights can't do C2C), to shavers, and small electronics/appliances. The problem is there isn't a standard way to know about this (or a name for this problem), so it's hard to tell what supports it or not. Generally, devices made by well known brands support C2C, but not cheaper Chinese-made devices, but there are exceptions in both cases.
That's strange, I've never encountered a usb-c cable that did not support data at all. My understanding (and the article suggests) that charging and data are fine in general, but just not as fast as the device can support. Basically they will charge or transfer data at regular usb or micro-usb speeds.