vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Like you said, it *is* a reflection of what you have to offer to the world, in a sense that your skills are not uncommon. However, is this everything? The world *needs* unskilled labor to run. Is there something wrong with being a cashier? A doorman? A guy who unpacks the trucks that carry the things we all use? No, the world *needs* these people...should people who are needed have jobs that don't allow for them to meet basic living standards? 3. Expectation: The only reason why most people won't work for less than 8 or 9 dollars/hr, expect reasonable flexibility to balance work and personal life, don't expect to be forced to work more than 8-9 hours per day, have weekends off, and those working 40 hrs/week demand holiday pay/sick days/access to insurance/vacation time, is because that's what people expect out of a job in this day and age. None of these things are law (i think). People used to be treated considerably worse by their employers, and likely there will be a time when people will think that the people of our day were stupid for settling for less. The labor movement has done much in this regard. &gt; Maybe, instead of bitching that you are paid shit wages, you should ask why you ever expected to earn more after failing to acquire any skill a teenager couldn't master in a week. 4. Everyone's solution?: Let's say everyone learns to do a skilled job, who will be left to do the unskilled jobs? Someone will have to do them. Some countries have hordes of college educated workers working unskilled jobs, because of the high % that go to college. Ok, so then leave it to merit. Does merit always work though? What about nepotism? Personality, when it doesn't matter for the job? Age, Race, Sex, Ethnicity...think these play any part in the hiring process? If all else fails, not everyone can be expected to be a successful entrepreneur. 5. Life: Life can throw you some curveballs, and people make mistakes.
"A much better one is where they pay for peering with comcast and the average quality jumps up from ""comically low"" to  ""about the same as cablevision"": http://img.qz.com/2014/08/screen-shot-2014-08-27-at-11-35_optimized.png?w=826  The most damning evidence isn't in the charts though; it's the story of how three different transit providers (IIRC Level3, Cogent and Tata) all reported that from the moment they inked deals with Netflix, Comcast ceased to increase edge capacity as they had done previously."
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://medium.com/fast-company/a-universal-basic-income-would-do-wonders-for-the-u-s-economy-ddb0eb739c18) reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; Economic growth is going disproportionately to higher earners who are more likely to save than lower earners, who tend to spend more of whatever they have left.  &gt; Steinbaum is not a fan of the automation argument for UBI. But he does think UBI could help workers to win better wages when they work.  &gt; Some see UBI as an investment that allows people to leave behind tedious, repetitive work in favor of more fulfilling, creative activities.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/76nmgm/a_universal_basic_income_would_do_wonders_for_the/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~229067 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **UBI**^#1 **spend**^#2 **more**^#3 **work**^#4 **pay**^#5"
For corporate finance you probably don't need it. You say you want to have a year of job experience after you get your degree but instead I would recommend getting an internship next summer before your senior year, that would be a lot more helpful and if you do a good job it is likely whatever company you intern for will offer you a full time job after graduation.   The CFA is more for people who want to work on wallstreet and such. If you still want to take it, my recommendation would be to try and take the first level test in college and try to find scholarships and help for it. I had a friend who had the test and all the study material paid for by the university (of arizona).
Yep you could do this if you lived in a certain area (small town, midwest, etc) and had a decent job. You couldn't pull this off in any of the major employing cities that everyone moves to like Seattle, D.C; L.A; etc.
while not stated, if you have any debt at all, use the $3000 to pay it off. That's the best investment in the short term. No risk and guaranteed reward. College can invite all sorts of unexpected expenses and opportunities, so stay liquid, protect working capital.
Turn again to http://www.city-data.com/ to get this information Better weather is more expensive than not so good weather. In the article you linked, notice the ratio of homes in California. Yes, I know of people who sold off their family ranches in Vancouver and Seattle to buy homes in Orange Country. In short, there is a lot of information you would have to gather from multiple sources, and even then never be sure that you did your best! This also includes arbitrage, as you would like to ""come out ahead"" and while you are doing your research (and paying your rent), you want to invest your ""savings"" in instruments where you earn more than what you would have saved in a mortgage, etc. I would very much like to be refuted on every point and my answer be edited and ""made better"" as I need the same answers as you do :-D Feel free to comment, edit your question etc and I will act on feedback and help both of us (and future readers) out!"
"&gt; A better solution would be in invest in education and training so that you reduce the number of unskilled, low wage workers  When everybody's ""skilled"", the bar for skilled workers go up.  Used to be if you have a college degree you're set for a good job after graduation.  Now everybody and their grandma has college degrees and they're just starting to find out that a large portion of those are essentially worthless when it comes to getting them well-paying jobs."
You know what? I'd love it if I could work a part-time job, but make the same salary (scaled down to the number of hours, obviously).  I spend entirely too much time away from the things I'd rather be doing (family, hobbies, relaxing) in my 40 hour hell-hole. I'd much rather take a reasonable cut and work less.  Basically, I don't need to get rich, but if I can live off of a reduced salary *and* work fewer hours I'd be a very happy man.  Now... working part time and not earning enough to survive- that's not acceptable at all. I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of part-time jobs are this way.
"For a 10€ trip on uber, it will cost you 11€ on cabify, man. By choosing uber and paying 1€ less, you're basically accepting to give money to a company with not only worse cars, but one with what worse work environment that pays really bad to their drivers usually and that has been reported as sexist towards women in both the US and several other countries. For that 1€ more - as far as I know, so far - you could support a fairer company, better-paying for their drivers, with better cars and overall better service in my opinion. Next time you go on a ride with cabify, ask them about this thing with uber and most have worked there and will gladly talk about it.  Besides, in busy times Uber turns on dynamic pricing and in those times I've used cabify and paid 13€ when uber quoted me 19€-23€... Every time you give someone a piece of your money, it's a ""vote"" you make on which companies you prefer on the market. Something to reflect on."
We're talking about American workers here, not workers from third world countries.   In America, everyone gets a free public education and has access to numerous social safety nets. The people that really want to make it happen here can make it happen.  One of my very best friends took the bus 3 hours each way to get to jr. college so he could go to film school. He moved out to Hollywood and was living with me for a few months after he had gotten a job out here. He got laid off and had to go home. When he got home his parents drug tested him and kicked him out because he had smoked weed 1 time right before he left. With no money and no job he moved in with his brother in a one bedroom apartment. His brother proceeded to get fired and neither of them had anything. He was pestering the hiring people at several editing places out in L.A. all the while looking for coins in the parking lot of fast food restaurants so he could get something to eat. Finally he got a job back out in L.A. making a little over $10 an hour. He moved back here, busted his ass and now makes around $90k a year.   O, and all this (excluding film school) has happened since May of 2011.   3rd world countries are entirely different than the issues that Wal-Mart workers in America face. It's not an apples to apples comparison. Americans that are working in a Wal-Mart shipping center that want more pay need to go out and better themselves and provide a service that society values.   Just showing up for your 8 hours a day and stacking boxes in trucks is not of high value here. And they should be paid as such.
Pulling out of your way to get to the gas station does not take 0 seconds, and playing on your phone is likely not what you were going to do anyway.  When you're on your way to work and you need to get there in a certain amount of time and decide you need gas, you need to leave earlier to get there on time.  Or when you're on your way home and all you want to do is get home after a long day, you're sitting in your car at a gross gas station instead of being at home.  You know this is the case, but you're trying to make up glib rationalizations for your complacency.  And you're speaking out of ignorance since you haven't experienced both ownership cases, whereas those who have experienced both ownership cases will say that EV charging is by large margin a more pleasurable experience.  But by all means, keep cutting off your nose to spite your face.  Spend more time filling up, more money, send that money to terrorists, give yourself poorer health, do all of those things, just so you don't have to admit to someone on the internet that maybe they've exposed you to a new way of thinking about transportation.  That'll teach 'em.
Amazon is great for items with little manufacturing variances. For items with large manufacturing variances such as clothing, produces, etc, its logistic system doesnt work well.    Yes, w/ a grocery chain acquisition it will solve a lot of the problem. No, Amazon Go store is still very conceptual and doesnt work for grocery shoppers behaviorally. It wont change even for kids once they start learning how to pick the right fruits, vaggies, etc.  p.s., you could pick up shipment from Amazon Lockers which is pretty abundant around areas w/ a Whole Foods store.
I love working for a CU.  Our CRO revels in articles like this.   He will post them and tell us this is why we do what we do.  We would rather be financial physicians.   Our job is heal financial worries and get people on the right path.  I have seen our lenders convince folks to not take a loan best that is truly in their best interest.  I have seen our investment group tell folks that their investment goals and personal goal don't line up and honestly they should wait. We also do crazy stuff like identifying folks who live in the flood zones and offer them 90 day loan deferment with no fees.  That and a care loan for repairs.  It's an insanely low interest loan (2%)  to help folks get their repairs done.    We also lowered our credit requirements for that to where just about every who needs it qualifies.    It's also hard to get fired.  If you don't hit your sales goal it's ok.  You will not lose your job.  Yes we are encouraged to meet our goals with incentives but we pretty much get paid something no matter what you do.    Pretty much the only way to get fired is to pull a Wells Fargo.  If you do something like that your ass is not only fired, the CRO will personally come down and will kick you out the door.  Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if if he then tied you to his car and dragged you down the street.    And you know what, it's working.  We are repeatedly breaking every record we set for ourselves.  Record loans, record deposits, record account openings.  And you better believe that is heavily audit internally and externally.   We actually hire auditors to make sure this crap doesn't even start.    TLDR; Wells Fargo is the devil.   Credit Unions Rule!!!!!
"There's enough places that directly accept BitCoin today that, call it whatever you want, it looks, walks, and quacks like a duck.  And for transfers between two people that use different native currencies, it works a hell of a lot *better* and cheaper than most existing solutions.  As for ""growing faster"", in eight years Bitcoin has gone from nonexistent to the 266th biggest ""company"" (in terms of market cap) in the *world*.  Though still technically smaller than them, it makes the likes of Microsoft, Apple, and Google all look like sloths by comparison.  To address ""trust"" - You're conflating ""trust of the issuer"" with ""trust of the bag-man"".  With USD, you need to trust the good faith of the US Treasury; while that is certainly a pretty good bet, with Bitcoin, you don't need to trust **anyone**, because there *is* no issuing authority (no, not even the core devs could magically create more bitcoins out of thin air).  That's different than, for example, trusting an online wallet or exchange with it, because then you have a third party holding your assets that *can* vanish to the Caymans overnight... But that wouldn't be any less true if you trusted USD to a random guy online.  All that said, I'm **still** not invested in it because, although I love me some high return high volatility, I *don't* like the high risk of governments making my assets illegal overnight (China and Russia have already done so, though *for now* it seems more a statement of official policy than a real crime they go after people for).  But as a medium of exchange - You *bet* I keep a small amount in my offline wallet for convenience!"
Yes, almost everything was custom, and was mostly\* well built.  It would almost\*\* work fine as a hydraulic press for industrial applications.  \*  There are things like the really impressive tapered roller baring on the wrong side.  Probably because the engineering firm wanted to show them off.  \*\*  Things like not being able to unlock the door when the power is cut is **NOT OK**.  As in, major injuries and massive laswuit not ok.  We're talking, it doesn't matter if the company is bankrupt, this is bad enough to go after the designers personally not ok.
What are your alternatives? If you have something else lined up that is better than this internship, then yes, you should jump ship. Remember, you are your first priority. Don't worry about getting burned, and don't necessarily trust someone's promises. Many people in your life will overpromise and underdeliver.  With that said, if you don't have something to fall back on (that can provide relevant experience that you're looking for), then stick it out. Selling (including cold-calling) is an extremely important skill to have; there will be many times in the future where you will have to sell something, whether it's yourself, or an idea, or some other product. Use this internship as an opportunity to improve your sales skills, your English, and overcome your shyness. Take time to learn as much as you can - whether it's about running a business, your boss's previous experience, or anything else that may come in handy in the future.  Good luck!
Thank you ! Yes that is the thing, thats is the way I want to go, I will not care playing nights working on a thing I love, but I just do not know what my real passion is. I will try to be a lot more self aware.
&gt; No, because I assert that it's not only about these lucky events. It still takes some degree of intelligence, or insight, and hard work  That is just as, if not more, superstitious as believing in luck as a measurable force.  Without prescience, it's impossible to predict which way hard work will pay off.  'luck' (or coincidence, if you prefer) can cut you out of the successful herd in a single morning of stock market flunctuations.    You're talking about good choices, when the case in point we just read showed that lewis make blind, dumb choices twice that paid off - and shouldn't have.   &gt; with the ability and drive to maximize the opportunity  Again, what you are talking about involves predicting how a presented advantage will pan out.  Choosing nearly-identical employer A instead of B will only be obviously a good choice in hindsight.  Getting it right is 'luck'.
Microsoft (kinda) already does this. If you can get a job at Microsoft, you can take pretty much get as much training as you want in-house and move your career towards any other job at Microsoft.   http://careers.microsoft.com/careers/en/us/careerdevelopment.aspx  Personally I think this is a much better systems than the carrot/stick approach.
Actually, with at least 95% confidence, they did not overlook any better qualified person for this job.  Because they did not even look for a qualified person.   She got the job because someone knows her or she knows someone.  Worse: any qualified Security person who worked for her would be demoralized by her lack of talent. So my guess is that the whole Security department at Equifax is full of people with little talent. She probably will get rid of anyone in the department who challenged her... like any real boss.
"Hard to measure the overall effect.  Women could only go into the workforce because of the increased mechanization of house work, birth control, etc.  In addition, housework was never recorded as a part of GDP.  McDonalds making food is ""better"" for GDP than me cooking food, which is fairly dubious."
"They work within the system you guys created. Your desire for heavily regulated everything leads to some really fucked up incentives. These guys have no need to please the consumer, they only have to please the government. They don't have to worry about competition because the barriers to entry are so incredibly high that a good alternative has nearly zero chance of entering the market to compete with better service. Then you guys come along and go see I told you the market doesn't work lets regulate it some more. In response to that, these massive corporations (that I assure you I hate just as much), respond by merging to fight off the threat's. The Threats being both the ""customer"" and the ""government"". But only one of those can actually put them out of business. The guys who ""regulate"" them. Because they have made the rest of us a captive audience through regulatory control. All these regulations have accomplished is to put the smaller businesses who support the majority of real people and jobs out of business. Leaving ""government"" jobs like the military or positions that extract money from the populace like police organizations have become. They are so focused on making money and siezing property now that they are killing citizens left right and center. While avoiding real police work because it doesn't pay the bills so to speak. But maybe more of the same will be the solution to the problem. But I highly doubt it. You should actually listen to those video's I suggested and you likely ignored. I want the same things I just want far more options, without having to become a drone. I own myself. I can not support a system which allows others to dominate me for ""the good of all"". This utopian dream where people think they ""run"" the government and that the government is accountable to the people is honestly a ""fairy tale"" at best. Everytime power is concentrated it will be corrupted. It is inevitable and dangerous to think differently. If you can honestly look at your government and feel like you control it. Then you have far more ""faith"" than I do and many others do.
Bernanke &amp; Obama likely will. The problem is that, just like the last 2 failed stimulus plans, it is unlikely the next one will work out any better.  Will it be better than the alternative? I don't know. I'm not an economist.
Why are you reverting to this nonsense? &gt; it relies on the population being informed in and believing in the system enough to make a conscious effort to not buy the cheaper goods at the store with the bad business practices, or potentially drive further to a different store if it's the store doing the bad practice! No, it does not. This is a straw man. A voluntary society doesn't preclude the possibility of people buying bad food or something like that. It doesn't even preclude the possibility of third-party assurances to prevent bad food. It just doesn't have a built-in monopoly on assurance services that you have to use in order to buy/sell. &gt; So you're saying there can never be a truly free market then? No. People buy and sell freely all of the time. Ever bought something from Craigslist? Ebay? Silk Road? I'd say those are pretty much free markets. &gt; You had little kids getting their arms ripped off by textile looms for fucks sake, people working 14 hour days. But it made more money than working in the fields, so #worth, right? You're conveniently leaving out how kids worked, people toiled all day and still starved to death as the alternative up until industrialization allowed a better quality of life. It's not like they could have just passed a fucking law and mandated a 40 hour week and instantly had prosperity. It was because they did grind their way through the Industrial Revolution that we're able to live lives of leisure and prosperity. If you think that government action can get people out of poverty by decree then tell it to the third world countries that are still developing. I'm sure they'd be all ears. &gt; Because the pooling of vast resources for disaster relief is something that states do? That they do it doesn't mean that it couldn't happen without the state on a voluntary basis. The funding for all of these programs combined is easily less than, what, a quarter of the government's budget? If the people who made this same objection put their money where their mouth is, there would be no shortage of funding.
It's quite possible that everyone should only work 3 days a week according to this study.  I managed to track down the actual study, which you can read [here](http://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/downloads/working-paper-series/wp2016n07.pdf).  One point most people are unaware of is that this study did *not* compare people over age 40 with those under age 40. It only studied those age 40 or over. [See Table II](https://i.imgur.com/KObJ29z.png).  So... 3 days a week for everyone...?
You can literally get better food from the freezer section at the grocery store.  That's fine, and people will still go to places serving that food if there's other redeeming qualities, but I didn't see any such qualities the couple times I've been to one of these places.  I don't get what the appeal is.