So why exactly shouldn't employees, the ones actually doing the work that's generating the profit, be negotiating for a bigger piece of the profit?
The part you don't understand is that "actual work" really isn't worth much. Any physically capable person can do manual labor. Businesses pay for decisions, they pay for a brain. The more skilled your position, the more important decisions you make are, and if you make good decisions, the more an employer will be willing to compensate you to keep you around.
You don't seem to understand what a free market is. A free market is one free of collusion, among organizations AND among the work force. Each entity works independently towards their best interests. If an employer treats their employees badly, the employees all leave, and the employer either changes their ways or is unable to continue doing business. Labor unions are just another form of monopoly, but since it's not "evil business", people seem to think they're alright.
Actually, that's how capitalism works. If you don't find your current job sufficiently compensating for your skills, go find another job that will. If you can't find one, then maybe your skills just aren't worth that compensation, and you need to get some better ones to make yourself more marketable. If you can find one, then everyone with that skill set will similarly choose to find alternative employment, and the company will find themselves without workers, needing to raise their compensation to compete with other employers. Competition makes the world go round.
he faced hours of interrogation by uncommunicative officials from several different agencies
How do you get interrogated by someone refusing to communicate with you? Interrogation is to try to get information, which means asking questions, otherwise known as communication. Otherwise, it's just torture.
He took a simple concept, and used some simple tools to accomplish it. Call it what it is, a MacGuyverism, a hack. Applaud it for creativity, but not for being an invention.
The article actually mentions 40m/s, or 3% of muzzle energy, not muzzle velocity. Remember, energy increases with the square of velocity. That comes out to 750fps, which would indicate the builder fires bolts roughly 50% heavier than a typical.22LR round.
You can't fire a heavy bullet just as fast because you wouldn't be able to handle the recoil. Just watch someone trying to fire an M-16 fully automatic, versus someone trying to fire an AK-47. As for heavier, slower bullets doing more damage because high speed ones penetrate too far, armies are investing in body armor, which means penetration is a good thing, and modern rifle bullets are aerodynamically unstable, meaning as soon as impact with a target screws up that spin stabilization, they yaw violently and fragment, similar to a hollow point round, maximizing the energy that is transferred to the target.
Coils don't power up and down instantaneously. It takes (a small amount of) time to build up field strength, and when you turn it off, there is some lingering field retained in the materials. Beyond a certain point, you simply cannot accelerate it any faster. The only option is a longer barrel, or a railgun which sidesteps these issues by not being pulsed.
It's a function of energy density. A 9mm handgun has far more energy behind it, but is blunt. The nail was a flachette, basically an armor piercing projectile. It penetrated a whole lot deeper, but it didn't carry much energy in comparison to its penetrating capability.
Are you sure they built a railgun rather than a gauss gun? Railguns require the projectile to be conductive and slide along the rails to complete the circuit. You could only use nails in a railgun if you either snipped off their heads first, or wrapped the shaft in a sabot to stabilize it down the barrel.
Railguns and Coilguns operate in two completely different fashions. The only similarity they have with each other is that they both use electromagnetism.
Your brain is confused, as it is getting some cues telling it it is viewing a 3D volume, and other cues telling it it is viewing a 2D plane, so you get headaches.
Actually, a hologram captures and reproduces a light field, encoded in that interference pattern, so it reproduces the same exact light pattern emitted by a 3D object. It is "true" 3D, as true as you can get without a volumetric reproduction in free space.
Slashdot Mirror
So why exactly shouldn't employees, the ones actually doing the work that's generating the profit, be negotiating for a bigger piece of the profit?
The part you don't understand is that "actual work" really isn't worth much. Any physically capable person can do manual labor. Businesses pay for decisions, they pay for a brain. The more skilled your position, the more important decisions you make are, and if you make good decisions, the more an employer will be willing to compensate you to keep you around.
If I work my ass off and churn out 20% more units than the guy next to me, and don't see a dime more because of it, what's the point?
You don't seem to understand what a free market is. A free market is one free of collusion, among organizations AND among the work force. Each entity works independently towards their best interests. If an employer treats their employees badly, the employees all leave, and the employer either changes their ways or is unable to continue doing business. Labor unions are just another form of monopoly, but since it's not "evil business", people seem to think they're alright.
Actually, that's how capitalism works. If you don't find your current job sufficiently compensating for your skills, go find another job that will. If you can't find one, then maybe your skills just aren't worth that compensation, and you need to get some better ones to make yourself more marketable. If you can find one, then everyone with that skill set will similarly choose to find alternative employment, and the company will find themselves without workers, needing to raise their compensation to compete with other employers. Competition makes the world go round.
There was a post earlier I was replying to...
So why didn't you actually reply to that earlier post?
The scientist/engineer with a jet pack.
They couldn't have done a THX-1138 comic?
I think you underestimate the difficulty of dealing with pressure.
he faced hours of interrogation by uncommunicative officials from several different agencies
How do you get interrogated by someone refusing to communicate with you? Interrogation is to try to get information, which means asking questions, otherwise known as communication. Otherwise, it's just torture.
Never attribute to malice what can just as easily be explained by incompetence.
He took a simple concept, and used some simple tools to accomplish it. Call it what it is, a MacGuyverism, a hack. Applaud it for creativity, but not for being an invention.
Moser didn't come up with shit. He just built a modern iteration of technology that has been around for thousands of years.
Nope. Older than that. Even Cretans (from ancient Crete) used them.
What if he was ordered not to speak of the surveillance program that he refused to take part in?
Railguns are merely propelled by plasma instead of contained expanding gasses.
That really depends on how high you run your amperage, and is not an inherent requirement of a railgun.
Or, they will call themselves the Pentaverate, and conspire to rule the world from behind the scenes.
Sometimes those tiny TV screens had big Fresnel lenses to make them easier to read.
The article actually mentions 40m/s, or 3% of muzzle energy, not muzzle velocity. Remember, energy increases with the square of velocity. That comes out to 750fps, which would indicate the builder fires bolts roughly 50% heavier than a typical .22LR round.
You can't fire a heavy bullet just as fast because you wouldn't be able to handle the recoil. Just watch someone trying to fire an M-16 fully automatic, versus someone trying to fire an AK-47. As for heavier, slower bullets doing more damage because high speed ones penetrate too far, armies are investing in body armor, which means penetration is a good thing, and modern rifle bullets are aerodynamically unstable, meaning as soon as impact with a target screws up that spin stabilization, they yaw violently and fragment, similar to a hollow point round, maximizing the energy that is transferred to the target.
Coils don't power up and down instantaneously. It takes (a small amount of) time to build up field strength, and when you turn it off, there is some lingering field retained in the materials. Beyond a certain point, you simply cannot accelerate it any faster. The only option is a longer barrel, or a railgun which sidesteps these issues by not being pulsed.
It's a function of energy density. A 9mm handgun has far more energy behind it, but is blunt. The nail was a flachette, basically an armor piercing projectile. It penetrated a whole lot deeper, but it didn't carry much energy in comparison to its penetrating capability.
Are you sure they built a railgun rather than a gauss gun? Railguns require the projectile to be conductive and slide along the rails to complete the circuit. You could only use nails in a railgun if you either snipped off their heads first, or wrapped the shaft in a sabot to stabilize it down the barrel.
Railguns and Coilguns operate in two completely different fashions. The only similarity they have with each other is that they both use electromagnetism.
Your brain is confused, as it is getting some cues telling it it is viewing a 3D volume, and other cues telling it it is viewing a 2D plane, so you get headaches.
Actually, a hologram captures and reproduces a light field, encoded in that interference pattern, so it reproduces the same exact light pattern emitted by a 3D object. It is "true" 3D, as true as you can get without a volumetric reproduction in free space.
If you need special eye wear or need to stand in a certain position, it's not 3D, merely stereo.