If some one can't understand the 4 basic thing, I don't want them programming computers, thank you very much. And if you can't easily explain them, I don't want you teaching anyone computer programming.
Thanks that wasn't helpful at all. Since Oaxaca is in mexico, I'm still, trying to figure out what the issue is. Heaven forbid I don't know the intricacy of a completely different country. If there is a problem you would think they would call themselves Mexican on their website.
and Chiapa is a federal entity of Mexico, so again, I'm not sure what the issue is.
You seem to be implying the the term Mexican is derogatory. Do you think that's how I mean it? becasue I don't.
the Chiapa are Mexican the same way California are American. I look forward to getting down their, and if my experience holds true, the people their will be far more nicer and forgiving of any ignorant fopaux I do then some jerk wad on the internet.
Noun[edit] amerikaner c (singular definite amerikaneren, plural indefinite amerikanere) a person from USA (rare) a person from the Americas ice cream cone with a chocolate-coated marshmallow treat and jam
You miss the point. The trade companies would have done squat without the government infrastructure that was in place to support it. Protection, courts, contract enforcement common acceptance of notes.
Even the black market relied on it.
There would have been no Dutch East India trading company.
"I can prove him wrong with two words: commercial satellites." you actually just proved him right. The government blazed the trail. Private companies then got involved once the majority of risk was identifiable and they could put numbers on it.
and it needs to be cheaper then 100 dollars a kilo, a lot cheaper
yeah. I can start a space company. big deal. How many would spend 50 billion to go to mars for no immediate return?
Granted, it could happen. If some one had the money an was forward thinking enough to wait 20+ year before the technology they developed got spun into something for the consumer. OTOH, they would want to do it all in house and not share, so that timeline might be more like 40 years.
I can't decide which is worse: either you are too stupid to understand an analogy for what it is. Or so frustrated with being simple you had to twist the example outside its contextual bounds. Here let me use soething clearer:
"I flip a coin 5 times and get "heads" every time (no "tails"). Is it a "heads only" coin? (...having a "head" printed on both sides.) Well, say I flip it 500 times and get "heads" every time. Now I'm pretty convinced that it is "heads only."" http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AbsenceOfEvidenceIsNotEvidenceOfAbsence
"That's not even mentioning that you haven't got my crude and untasteful[sic*] joke in the upper comment correctly. Better luck next time!" actually I did. May it doesn't mean what you think it means?
Who do you think created the infrastructure that allowed ho to apply the principles of mass production.? Who do you think paid for telegraph lines and that infrastructure? Edison owes his start to the quadraplex telegraph. the technology he used, and improved upon was developed by Julius Wilhelm Gintl. Who was paid fro the government of Australia to do research.
Once again, government funding supplied the ground work and infrastructure. Private industry ran with it once it found a way to make money.
"What does this look like: "Opening new frontiers and basic research is not."" it looks like opening new frontiers an basic research.
" Who did make it possible to lay those phone lines?" The government.
"Yes, I totally understand business profit motive, I've managed multi-million dollar budgets at work" Those thing don't necessarily go together. Based on you post I don't think you truly understand business profit motive. No doubt you think you do. If you can't think of any examples from classes that don't end in 101, then you do not.
" Private industry will do research on their own (we do)" yes. But nothing you do is a completely new frontier with no infrastructure and little history.
"The question is will there be enough ROI for Musk and whoever joins him to proceed." and we know the answer., and it's no. There is plenty of ROI to build the things NASA will need to get their.
get back to me in 6 months after you have done a comparative between budget, presidential parties and control in congress. Since the parties stance on things have reversed, you should note those.
"There seemed to be two minutes of chat with an expert, followed by 5 minutes of adverts for the entire length of the show. that's the show format. Tyson has no control over that.
"Tyson has a side-kick who's only purpose is to be a smart arse and constantly wise-crack while the expert is talking. " I have never seen Tyson with a sidekick. Are you sure it just wasn't another radio 'personality'?
"The show was horrific' which has nothing to do with Tyson.
Government bureaucracies grown and shrink based on a number of things.
BTW, mankind invented bureaucracies so we can do complex things well. Which isn't to say that can't have problem, but they do server some very good purposes.
well you are A or B. You say you aren't B that means..... go on, you can puzzle through it.
"Absence of proof != proof of absence." depends. If I say a nuclear bomb went of in LA, and there wasn't any mention of it in the news, then Absence of proof would be proof of absence. If I said someone fired a gun, but it wasn't mention in the news, then you would be correct.
I'm really tired of people trotting out propositional logic they clearly don't actually understand.
Slashdot Mirror
Well if you don't have a use for one, then clearly they are useless~
" Too many semantic subtleties that have nothing to do with elemental programming tasks."
That doesn't mean he isn't the hero.
Maybe the problem is you are too stupid to understand complex things?
" Too many semantic subtleties that have nothing to do with elemental programming tasks.
Apparently I am right.
OMG Computer science is Hard. woews meeee!!!
If some one can't understand the 4 basic thing, I don't want them programming computers, thank you very much.
And if you can't easily explain them, I don't want you teaching anyone computer programming.
Thanks that wasn't helpful at all. Since Oaxaca is in mexico, I'm still, trying to figure out what the issue is.
Heaven forbid I don't know the intricacy of a completely different country. If there is a problem you would think they would call themselves Mexican on their website.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Oaxaca&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=0x85c0d84f3a0e5c51:0x44c60c433dd90bc9,Oaxaca,+Mexico&gl=us&ei=eBAhUtbiKsXHigKai4DoBQ&ved=0CKkBELYD
and Chiapa is a federal entity of Mexico, so again, I'm not sure what the issue is.
You seem to be implying the the term Mexican is derogatory. Do you think that's how I mean it? becasue I don't.
the Chiapa are Mexican the same way California are American.
I look forward to getting down their, and if my experience holds true, the people their will be far more nicer and forgiving of any ignorant fopaux I do then some jerk wad on the internet.
However it should be since we pay for it.
Not true, at all.
There from Mexico, so I'm not sure what the issue with calling them Mexican.
Noun[edit]
amerikaner c (singular definite amerikaneren, plural indefinite amerikanere)
a person from USA
(rare) a person from the Americas
ice cream cone with a chocolate-coated marshmallow treat and jam
You miss the point. The trade companies would have done squat without the government infrastructure that was in place to support it. Protection, courts, contract enforcement common acceptance of notes.
Even the black market relied on it.
There would have been no Dutch East India trading company.
Sending robots will mean continued diminishing interest.
We just send people... AND robots.
"I can prove him wrong with two words: commercial satellites."
you actually just proved him right. The government blazed the trail. Private companies then got involved once the majority of risk was identifiable and they could put numbers on it.
and it needs to be cheaper then 100 dollars a kilo, a lot cheaper
yeah. I can start a space company. big deal.
How many would spend 50 billion to go to mars for no immediate return?
Granted, it could happen. If some one had the money an was forward thinking enough to wait 20+ year before the technology they developed got spun into something for the consumer. OTOH, they would want to do it all in house and not share, so that timeline might be more like 40 years.
Yes, and it's awesome. Not exactly cutting edge frontier.
I'm sure it was. I just suspect it was the shows host and producer and not Tyson that made it horrbiel.
OTOH I haven't heard it, so I may be wrong.
Not to the investors.*
Did I really need to point that out?
*unless the investers are a major car company! ZING
I can't decide which is worse:
either you are too stupid to understand an analogy for what it is.
Or so frustrated with being simple you had to twist the example outside its contextual bounds. Here let me use soething clearer:
"I flip a coin 5 times and get "heads" every time (no "tails"). Is it a "heads only" coin? (...having a "head" printed on both sides.) Well, say I flip it 500 times and get "heads" every time. Now I'm pretty convinced that it is "heads only.""
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AbsenceOfEvidenceIsNotEvidenceOfAbsence
http://www.skepticink.com/tippling/2012/11/18/absence-of-evidence-is-evidence-of-absence-in-many-cases/
"That's not even mentioning that you haven't got my crude and untasteful[sic*] joke in the upper comment correctly. Better luck next time!"
actually I did. May it doesn't mean what you think it means?
*I assume you mean 'distasteful'
The also say 'literally' means to opposite things, literally.
Who do you think created the infrastructure that allowed ho to apply the principles of mass production.?
Who do you think paid for telegraph lines and that infrastructure?
Edison owes his start to the quadraplex telegraph. the technology he used, and improved upon was developed by Julius Wilhelm Gintl. Who was paid fro the government of Australia to do research.
Once again, government funding supplied the ground work and infrastructure. Private industry ran with it once it found a way to make money.
"What does this look like: "Opening new frontiers and basic research is not.""
it looks like opening new frontiers an basic research.
" Who did make it possible to lay those phone lines?"
The government.
"Yes, I totally understand business profit motive, I've managed multi-million dollar budgets at work"
Those thing don't necessarily go together. Based on you post I don't think you truly understand business profit motive. No doubt you think you do. If you can't think of any examples from classes that don't end in 101, then you do not.
" Private industry will do research on their own (we do)"
yes. But nothing you do is a completely new frontier with no infrastructure and little history.
"The question is will there be enough ROI for Musk and whoever joins him to proceed."
and we know the answer., and it's no.
There is plenty of ROI to build the things NASA will need to get their.
"Spare me the childish guffaw,"
HAHAHAHAHA...no.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Education
The Department's budget increased by $14B between 2002 and 2004, from $46B to $60B.[16]
was quicker to find then writing a post.
For the second point, start here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/historicals
get back to me in 6 months after you have done a comparative between budget, presidential parties and control in congress.
Since the parties stance on things have reversed, you should note those.
"There seemed to be two minutes of chat with an expert, followed by 5 minutes of adverts for the entire length of the show.
that's the show format. Tyson has no control over that.
"Tyson has a side-kick who's only purpose is to be a smart arse and constantly wise-crack while the expert is talking. "
I have never seen Tyson with a sidekick. Are you sure it just wasn't another radio 'personality'?
"The show was horrific'
which has nothing to do with Tyson.
DO you have more information on the show?
Government bureaucracies grown and shrink based on a number of things.
BTW, mankind invented bureaucracies so we can do complex things well.
Which isn't to say that can't have problem, but they do server some very good purposes.
His ultra rich business didn't get there bu throwing most their money at something that has no return.
Maybe a robotic mission, which could be cool, not a manned mission.
well you are A or B. You say you aren't B that means.....
go on, you can puzzle through it.
"Absence of proof != proof of absence."
depends. If I say a nuclear bomb went of in LA, and there wasn't any mention of it in the news, then Absence of proof would be proof of absence.
If I said someone fired a gun, but it wasn't mention in the news, then you would be correct.
I'm really tired of people trotting out propositional logic they clearly don't actually understand.
No we haven't. We have a set of people using the sue argument to blame someone else for their fear of risk.