Watch Steve Job's come back key note : MS supported Apple because they saw them as an important eco-system player. This is what they are doing with Nokia now. Without a successful Nokia MS is looking at Apple and Google/Motorola carving up the market. They are not prepared to allow that.
The issue here is that Google's technology depends on patterns of use; in the past on patterns of linking, but subsequent to the internet becoming an eco-system on patterns of click through.
Intranets do not fit to this model. Intranets are about finding specific information rather than popular information. It's a different information retrieval problem and one that Google has never majored on.
You have an asset - which is your time and skill, so use it in two ways.
Start a company which is really your way of making contacts who will give you a job, offer a b2b service - for example faqs or self help services and do it really, really slickly. Make it clear that you do contracts on the side to "get cash flow for the company".
Why do you expect this : have you done phage tests? Do you have information on the stability of the reduced material with respect to physical disruption?
Ahh ha! You have failed to understand that all radiation is not equal, and also mechanisms of exposure are not equal.
If someone made a bet with me that I should swallow a pellet of plutonium in a plastic case or something bad would happen to a loved one, I would swallow the plutonium and trust to my digestion and the container. If I had to breath in the plutonium in a dust instead I would still do it (for love) but I think it would be the death of me.
So - looking at the radiation released in total : has there been a massive increase in deaths due to atmospheric testing. Of course, we can't say so because there is no control and there are many confounding factors. But I offer the following for consideration.
1. Atmospheric testing was a massive propaganda tool and an excellent way of developing weapons. It is now banned and never done even by lunatics like the North Koreans. Why?
2. Cancer rates have increased substantially in the period - this is not evidence of causality, but if they had not then we could say that it would be evidence of absence of causality.
3. There is not much mention of this ever in the media.
It's at the bottom of page 3. The risk is life time cancer mortality.
The folks at Argonne are often thought of as competent, I note that you happily use nCi in the rest of your post.
The thing is that radiation comes in different flavours. Some radiation (the stuff that plutonium majors in) can be stopped by a barrier like a bit of paper. We call this "alpha" radiation. If one breaths in a source for this radiation (for example a particle of plutonium) you are in trouble because your lungs don't have an inner paper coating. If you receive it from a decay in the atmosphere you are not in trouble because nature and evolution have equipped you with a layer of dead cells we call skin.
The trouble with the plutonium particle is that not only does it produce one decay - it sits in your lung repeatedly producing alpha particles which go on to do all sorts of mischief.
This is a document published by Argonne National Laboratory, in a form that they call "a fact sheet".
You can see that there a thing called a radiation co-efficient chart. This provides the risk of death that can be expected by exposure to 1pCi. If you don't like reading things then you can find the table at the bottom (right hand) of page 3.
If someone was exposed to 9000^12 pCi via inhalation I think that they would die in about 3 minutes - due to suffocation. Afterall - we are talking about some kilos of material.
None of this is comic.
The extrapolation lies in the likelihood of exposure to individuals, and the error I made is that in fact we are talking about 18000 * 10^12 pCi, not 9000. At the top end we are talking 200 million human deaths from cancer due to that accident. I think it would have required a very deliberate regime to do that much killing with that much plutonium, but you get the significance of the event from that (remote) possibility.
Indeed NASA (in the 1995 Cassini FEIS)[35] indicated that the SNAP-9a plutonium release was nearly double the 9000Ci added by all the atmospheric weapons tests to that date.[40][41]
1 pCi exposure typically will kill in 10^-8 of cases, but there were 9000^12 pCi dispersed by SNAP9. You can take any view you like about how many of them have actually been exposed to humans.
Very few people working in software today are actually programmers. Most people are software developers, some are architects. Both of those groups do some significant programming very occasionally.
Most work is maintenance - adding features and interfaces to working systems; the skill is the utilization of the components to hand. After that, configuration and customization; taking the wrappers off something and making it work in our environment and process. The next biggest activity is development - bringing a set of components together and getting them to do something new. Finally architecture - thinking at a high level about how the infrastructure will work.
Some places have a need for programmers - people who implement sophisticated algorithms over complex data structures day in and day out. Not that many though.
Because, just like in every big company in the world, in teaching it's all down to an individual heroically battling the odds to make a success.
Reward that hero, beat those who stand in the way, throw them to the dogs or the dole queue.
What is most important is that those that do what they are told, and tell you how good things are, are rewarded. And you will retire (in 18mths with $40m in the bank) sure in the knowledge that all will be well forever, or at least until the next fucking lunatic with a year of business school shows up to mess with everything.
And now they have jumped over the cage bars and into schools. Great.
And as for patents, they have a purpose of guaranteeing publication of . If you abolish them altogether get ready for more black boxes and permanent monopolies on ideas via trade secrets.
How would writers (novelists for example) make a living without copyright? Isn't society enriched by their work? My mind is enriched by their work - isn't it fair that they are compensated for the work and value that they create?
1. If they don't match and give you compensation for the commute then it's a sure sign that they would get rid of you without a moments thought if they needed to.
2. If they do match then it's a good bet that they will hang on to you in hard times.
Well - you know; the industrial revolution thing; the development of aircraft thing (as in jet engines); the development of computing thing (colossus); anti-biotics and a few other bits and bobs.
People can't match the iPad for price and performance because Apple are pulling money from the whole value chain - the complete user experience. They are not sharing margin with anyone with iTunes, iOS and the iPad.
Google wants the same end to end play and has the internet position and software to pull it off... if it can get the right hardware made. This is all about getting the right hardware made, and getting it made in quickly.
I don't buy this; to finance a group to do the calculations "properly" would take... $3m, give them 3 years to do it. I would bet that any of the big uni's would have a group who could do it, but perhaps we could spend $6m and get it done twice to check?
On the other hand we could spend $1000'sM and do what we are doing with satellites and detectors to look for dark matter over a period of 20 years.
OK it's because of "vested interests"... well, the Chinese, or the Belgians or the South Africans could (would, gleefully) do those sums too (did you know, many people from South Africa and China went to MIT? more shockingly quite a few Belgians did too). Now, if they did their national academies would gain prestige, the investigators would win medals and fame.. So why has that not happened?
In China is is 17%. The nanny state in China is very small; very little state provision of Education, Health, services.
In Germany it is 20% higher. That money is spent on infrastructure and services. The economy there works well - Mercedes, BMW and a host of other businesses are testament to that.
I don't think that either model is right for the USA - it is up to the people of the USA what model they want. Both work, something inbetween would work, the current model doesn't.
The problem is that you guys are failing to make the sensible choices that will return you to comfortable prosperity. The longer you don't make those choices the worse off you will be unnecessarily in the future.
Look, the USA is spending more on defense than the next 10 nations combined. Cutting back to where you are spending 3 times what China is spending would save over $300Bn per year.
This does not cover the entire problem for the USA. but it does go a long way toward doing it.
The rest could be done with VAT. In Europe the going rate is 17.5% -> 20% that would be a huge overkill for the USA because of state tax, but 5% would do the job. Alternatively income tax for the top 20% could be raised by a small amount (8% or so) and there you go.
Problem solved, unlikely to happen*, but problem solved.
* at some point the working class in the USA will realize that they will never be part of the top 20% and at this point they will start to vote en-mass for politicians with this kind of agenda.
I myself like to "write" letters by cutting out words and letters from the bible and gluing them onto paper to form messages such as "He is watching over you" and "Behold the glory of the lord is upon you" which I then send to people I find in the phone book.
Slashdot Mirror
Watch Steve Job's come back key note : MS supported Apple because they saw them as an important eco-system player. This is what they are doing with Nokia now. Without a successful Nokia MS is looking at Apple and Google/Motorola carving up the market. They are not prepared to allow that.
The issue here is that Google's technology depends on patterns of use; in the past on patterns of linking, but subsequent to the internet becoming an eco-system on patterns of click through.
Intranets do not fit to this model. Intranets are about finding specific information rather than popular information. It's a different information retrieval problem and one that Google has never majored on.
Ha ha 22 lightyears, or 208,131,625,000,000 kilometers
You have an asset - which is your time and skill, so use it in two ways.
Start a company which is really your way of making contacts who will give you a job, offer a b2b service - for example faqs or self help services and do it really, really slickly. Make it clear that you do contracts on the side to "get cash flow for the company".
Really inappropriate word. This shit is really hard.
Why do you expect this : have you done phage tests? Do you have information on the stability of the reduced material with respect to physical disruption?
Ahh ha! You have failed to understand that all radiation is not equal, and also mechanisms of exposure are not equal.
If someone made a bet with me that I should swallow a pellet of plutonium in a plastic case or something bad would happen to a loved one, I would swallow the plutonium and trust to my digestion and the container. If I had to breath in the plutonium in a dust instead I would still do it (for love) but I think it would be the death of me.
So - looking at the radiation released in total : has there been a massive increase in deaths due to atmospheric testing. Of course, we can't say so because there is no control and there are many confounding factors. But I offer the following for consideration.
1. Atmospheric testing was a massive propaganda tool and an excellent way of developing weapons. It is now banned and never done even by lunatics like the North Koreans. Why?
2. Cancer rates have increased substantially in the period - this is not evidence of causality, but if they had not then we could say that it would be evidence of absence of causality.
3. There is not much mention of this ever in the media.
4. There is not much to be done about it now.
http://www.ead.anl.gov/pub/doc/plutonium.pdf
It's at the bottom of page 3. The risk is life time cancer mortality.
The folks at Argonne are often thought of as competent, I note that you happily use nCi in the rest of your post.
The thing is that radiation comes in different flavours. Some radiation (the stuff that plutonium majors in) can be stopped by a barrier like a bit of paper. We call this "alpha" radiation. If one breaths in a source for this radiation (for example a particle of plutonium) you are in trouble because your lungs don't have an inner paper coating. If you receive it from a decay in the atmosphere you are not in trouble because nature and evolution have equipped you with a layer of dead cells we call skin.
The trouble with the plutonium particle is that not only does it produce one decay - it sits in your lung repeatedly producing alpha particles which go on to do all sorts of mischief.
I can't think how you got that from what I wrote, however here is where I got my figures from.
http://www.ead.anl.gov/pub/doc/plutonium.pdf
This is a document published by Argonne National Laboratory, in a form that they call "a fact sheet".
You can see that there a thing called a radiation co-efficient chart. This provides the risk of death that can be expected by exposure to 1pCi. If you don't like reading things then you can find the table at the bottom (right hand) of page 3.
If someone was exposed to 9000^12 pCi via inhalation I think that they would die in about 3 minutes - due to suffocation. Afterall - we are talking about some kilos of material.
None of this is comic.
The extrapolation lies in the likelihood of exposure to individuals, and the error I made is that in fact we are talking about 18000 * 10^12 pCi, not 9000. At the top end we are talking 200 million human deaths from cancer due to that accident. I think it would have required a very deliberate regime to do that much killing with that much plutonium, but you get the significance of the event from that (remote) possibility.
The snap-9a accident was not a small leak.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_nuclear_accidents
Indeed NASA (in the 1995 Cassini FEIS)[35] indicated that the SNAP-9a plutonium release was nearly double the 9000Ci added by all the atmospheric weapons tests to that date.[40][41]
1 pCi exposure typically will kill in 10^-8 of cases, but there were 9000^12 pCi dispersed by SNAP9. You can take any view you like about how many of them have actually been exposed to humans.
Very few people working in software today are actually programmers. Most people are software developers, some are architects. Both of those groups do some significant programming very occasionally.
Most work is maintenance - adding features and interfaces to working systems; the skill is the utilization of the components to hand. After that, configuration and customization; taking the wrappers off something and making it work in our environment and process. The next biggest activity is development - bringing a set of components together and getting them to do something new. Finally architecture - thinking at a high level about how the infrastructure will work.
Some places have a need for programmers - people who implement sophisticated algorithms over complex data structures day in and day out. Not that many though.
Because, just like in every big company in the world, in teaching it's all down to an individual heroically battling the odds to make a success.
Reward that hero, beat those who stand in the way, throw them to the dogs or the dole queue.
What is most important is that those that do what they are told, and tell you how good things are, are rewarded. And you will retire (in 18mths with $40m in the bank) sure in the knowledge that all will be well forever, or at least until the next fucking lunatic with a year of business school shows up to mess with everything.
And now they have jumped over the cage bars and into schools. Great.
And as for patents, they have a purpose of guaranteeing publication of . If you abolish them altogether get ready for more black boxes and permanent monopolies on ideas via trade secrets.
How would writers (novelists for example) make a living without copyright? Isn't society enriched by their work? My mind is enriched by their work - isn't it fair that they are compensated for the work and value that they create?
Every developer I know wants to use Linux or a Mac to produce code. I think catering for CIO's is why Windows is the most widespread OS.
Worth saying that :
1. If they don't match and give you compensation for the commute then it's a sure sign that they would get rid of you without a moments thought if they needed to.
2. If they do match then it's a good bet that they will hang on to you in hard times.
Well - you know; the industrial revolution thing; the development of aircraft thing (as in jet engines); the development of computing thing (colossus); anti-biotics and a few other bits and bobs.
I honestly just don't get the anti-java thing in the developer community.
It's fantastic. It's amazing.
Eclipse, testng, guice, java, hibernate : bloody marvelous.
If I was doing this I would use an in memory database. I would talk to that database using Java.
I developed in C++ for 5 years, I have thanked Jesus and his angels every day since Java came to save me.
People can't match the iPad for price and performance because Apple are pulling money from the whole value chain - the complete user experience. They are not sharing margin with anyone with iTunes, iOS and the iPad.
Google wants the same end to end play and has the internet position and software to pull it off ... if it can get the right hardware made. This is all about getting the right hardware made, and getting it made in quickly.
This is a brilliant acquisition for them
I don't buy this; to finance a group to do the calculations "properly" would take... $3m, give them 3 years to do it. I would bet that any of the big uni's would have a group who could do it, but perhaps we could spend $6m and get it done twice to check?
On the other hand we could spend $1000'sM and do what we are doing with satellites and detectors to look for dark matter over a period of 20 years.
OK it's because of "vested interests"... well, the Chinese, or the Belgians or the South Africans could (would, gleefully) do those sums too (did you know, many people from South Africa and China went to MIT? more shockingly quite a few Belgians did too). Now, if they did their national academies would gain prestige, the investigators would win medals and fame.. So why has that not happened?
The maths here call bull on you.
$300bn a year is substantial, the USA could cut that and remain the dominant military power in the world.
Currently the tax take in the USA is 26.9% in the UK (AAA - not for long) 34%, Sweden (AAA - rock solid 46%), Germany (AAA - rock solid, booming 37%) [numbers from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP%5D
In China is is 17%. The nanny state in China is very small; very little state provision of Education, Health, services.
In Germany it is 20% higher. That money is spent on infrastructure and services. The economy there works well - Mercedes, BMW and a host of other businesses are testament to that.
I don't think that either model is right for the USA - it is up to the people of the USA what model they want. Both work, something inbetween would work, the current model doesn't.
The problem is that you guys are failing to make the sensible choices that will return you to comfortable prosperity. The longer you don't make those choices the worse off you will be unnecessarily in the future.
Look, the USA is spending more on defense than the next 10 nations combined. Cutting back to where you are spending 3 times what China is spending would save over $300Bn per year.
This does not cover the entire problem for the USA. but it does go a long way toward doing it.
The rest could be done with VAT. In Europe the going rate is 17.5% -> 20% that would be a huge overkill for the USA because of state tax, but 5% would do the job. Alternatively income tax for the top 20% could be raised by a small amount (8% or so) and there you go.
Problem solved, unlikely to happen*, but problem solved.
* at some point the working class in the USA will realize that they will never be part of the top 20% and at this point they will start to vote en-mass for politicians with this kind of agenda.
An author rang his publisher in a state of high excitement: I've just written a book that's 100,000 words long... So how much is that worth?
Well (say's the publisher) it depends on two things.
What (say's the author)
Well - which words and in what order.
I myself like to "write" letters by cutting out words and letters from the bible and gluing them onto paper to form messages such as "He is watching over you" and "Behold the glory of the lord is upon you" which I then send to people I find in the phone book.
I don't use a wax seal though.