Why Or Why Not Service Oriented Architecture

[[abstract]]Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) is a new computation technology in these years. Though this architecture, business application can be wrapped as loosely-coupled component. Base on business needs, connecting different component into necessary services of real process, enterprise can utilize existing applications repeatedly, then integrate the independent applications into new services. This paper focused on the issues on which enterprise needs to consider before implementation of SOA. We have a further discussion on advantages and disadvantages for adopting SOA. Once SOA is implemented what we need to care about? It is helpful on your long term success if you can thoroughly understand the key points of this paper, then the enterprise can well evaluate if its information system needs to adopt SOA.[[conferencetype]]國際[[conferencelocation]]Zhangjiajie, Chin

But, Why Not?

I am the lucky one. That’s how I’ve felt growing up in backwater Pennsyltucky, yet somehow managing to be openly queer. I came out to my friends and family as bi/pan-sexual in the 8th grade. None of my coming-out experiences resulted in horror stories. At that point most people had already guessed and accepted the fact that I was most definitely a queer kid. Even the most conservatively religious members of my friend group seemed perfectly okay with the fact that my sexuality didn’t fit with their ideas of morality. I was who I was, and to all outward appearances that was just peachy. [excerpt

Why not euroisation?.

This item has no abstract

Why (inner) bars are important but not sufficient

I briefly report on the work conducted to probe the gravitational potential of active and non-active disk galaxies using two-dimensional gas and stellar kinematics, first emphasizing the need to make a distinction between ''fuelling the nucleus'' and ''building a gas reservoir''.Comment: 4 pages. to appear in "The Interplay among Black Holes, Stars and ISM in Galactic Nuclei" Proc. IAU 222 (Gramado, Brazil), eds. T. Storchi Bergmann, L.C. Ho, H.R. Schmit

Harmonizing unemployment and sickness insurance: Why (not)?

The paper discusses harmonization of unemployment insurance (UI) and sickness insurance (SI). The focus is on the difference between the benefit ceilings in the two insurance systems that has been shown to affect the behavior among unemployed SI recipients. The four conclusions are: (i) It is difficult to argue that the design with different benefit ceilings of UI and SI would be optimal. (ii) During the study period 1998–2001, unemployed were overrepresented among SI recipients. (iii) Some of the overrepresentation is due to the different benefit ceilings. Thus, harmonization of the systems is motivated; (iv) In a complex system as the Swedish social insurance system, reducing moral hazard in one group probably also implies various indirect effects. When designing a reform, all insurances should be considered simultaneously.Government policies; moral hazard; sickness insurance; unemployment insurance

Why not euroisation?

The debate about unilateral euroisation (i.e. the unilateral adoption of the euro as legal tender) that emerged in CEECs at the end of the 1990s has finally ebbed in 2000 following the very negative reaction of the EU officials. We argue, however, that we may potentially see a renewal of the debate in the future if the institutional path set by EU to introduce the euro is not modified. Indeed, both the political and the economic context are now radically different from the ones existing in 2000. In this paper, two main lines of argument are developed. First, the credibility of (implicit) sanctions in the event of unilateral euroisation is currently very low, even nil, because acceding countries are now de facto economically and politically integrated into the EU. Second, the recent economic slowdown and a recovery that has not been as strong and fast as expected, have resulted in a halt to the nominal convergence process that may delay their entry in EMU. Given the risk of unilateral euroisation, we argue that either consensual euroisation or, at least, a relaxation of nominal convergence criteria would be a better option from the viewpoint of both current and future members of EU

Do Spouses Cooperate? And If Not: Why?

Models of household economics require an understanding of economic interactions in families. Social ties, repetition and reduced strategic uncertainty make social dilemmas in couples a very special case that needs to be empirically studied. In this paper we present results from a large economic experiment with 100 maritally living couples. Participants made decisions in a social dilemma with their partner and with a stranger. We predict behavior in this task with individual and couples' socio-demographic variables, efficiency preferences and couples' marital satisfaction. As opposed to models explaining behavior amongst strangers, the regressions on couples’ decisions highlight clear patterns concerning cooperation behavior which could inspire future household decision-making models.Noncooperative Games; Laboratory, Individual Behavior; Household Production and Intra-household Allocation

Statistics and deterministic simulation models: Why not?

Statistical Methods;mathematische statistiek