He is likely talking about the maintenance program (never mind that the same funding probably could have been used to launch several of the damn things. And imagine, the later ones could be built to not require corrective optics).
My connection is too slow for video, so I have not looked at the thing, but I have seen your criticism raised elsewhere.
Other people have mentioned that the test does not show any load, I expect that, were it truly a breakthrough, they would go ahead and show it doing some ridiculous things (hey, why not?).
You could also frame it in terms of the populace being so easily manipulated that the other 98 Senators (or maybe 96...) can't just laugh the damned amendment off the floor.
Well, I do think that many things are wrong. I'm not sure the exact conclusion of the article makes sense, but I'm pretty sure that there is a massive amount of classroom time being wasted in K-12, and a great deal of it is also being wasted in colleges and universities.
I think a big part of it is that we (as a society) tend to conflate specialization and expertise (education being a very common component of expertise, anywhere we need a specialist, we seek to install an expert, and that means they need a great deal of education, because if they have education, they must be an expert).
But going back to your first post, if someone is both stupid and highly educated, it isn't all that likely that they are a true expert, and a smart person with a little interest (but comparatively little education) may make a much better specialist.
We may be running up against connotation, I tend to use competent to mean someone who can quickly deal with something in the correct fashion, but there is room for it to mean someone who is able to eventually complete the task.
The satellite tags are not unobtrusive little rfid tags.
Wildlife are tagged using rfid not because it enables constant tracking, but because the tag can be injected under the skin, where it is less likely to weather off.
And as I understand it, even the wildlife tags that do use satellite are not using the satellite for tracking, they are using it for data retrieval. For example:
Those tags ride along for a set amount of time, then fall off and broadcast their data up to the satellite. There is no active satellite tracking of the tag.
Your first two paragraphs are every bit the simple assertion that my post is.
You claim that, in fact, the market has worked, and the people getting paid enormous salaries are worth it. I claim this is not true.
We don't really have any decent facts (or rather, I don't, and you haven't presented any, perhaps you have them), and we can't really run an experiment. So there we are. Conveniently, I have stated my post in terms of the wishy-washy thoughts that it is based on. Unfortunately, you have stated your post in terms of absolutes.
Thanks though, for informing me about how it is, and about how I am, at the end there.
I almost drove a couple of hours to hear E.O. Wilson give a talk, I suppose that counts.
Of course, he is reviled by the far left (how dare he suggest that behavior is at all innate) and disliked on the right (for the same reasons, and for not being religiously conventional enough).
I'd also probably pay some attention if Tim Harford, Stephen Pastis or Stephen Colbert were supposed to be talking in the area.
Also, I meant to imply that said mocking would happen before any talk, in the hallway or something, disrupting the actual talk would be quite rude (you are free to believe this or not, I don't care).
I don't think there should be a law or anything (and they are paying plenty of taxes with today's rates). I just think the analysis that says "they're worth it" is poppycock. Look at the Detroit automakers. Sure, they were in dire straights 20 years ago, but the only CEO of any of those companies in the last 20 years that has been worth a damn has been Alan Mulally. That's a pretty bad success rate.
So the story is that they are really valuable, and they are adding value to companies, but the reality really doesn't seem to live up to the story.
If you want another angle, compare company founders that stay on as CEO to people that are brought in as business managers (An easy comparison would be Bill Gates to Carly Fiorina, but that's me cheating, Gates took advantage of a near singular opportunity, and Fiorina is probably one of the worst CEO choices in history (well, according to the market anyway, the market cap of HP went up by over $1 billion the day she resigned)).
The rhetoricians need to start treating 100 million dollar salaries as glaring signs of economic inefficiency.
It is very unlikely that each person earning 100 million in today's economy are actually producing that much more value than the next best candidate (or even, the minimally acceptable alternative candidate, if you want to go that far).
Maybe someday willingness to do a job will be as valuable as the perceived ability to do a job (currently, there are plenty of willing, so it isn't much of a distinguishing characteristic, except in highly dangerous fields, and even then, it is only worth so much, 'hazard pay' doesn't really match up to Wall St. bonus pay).
Stripping the whitespace saves about 20 kB over the output of jsbeautifier. Gzipping the expanded version saves more than 35 kB over the whitespace-free version (and loses 1 kB to the gzipped whitespace-free version).
So hopefully they are spending more time on the gzipping part.
Slashdot Mirror
Goldman Sachs did it just last year.
Zing!
Double entendre says hi.
He is likely talking about the maintenance program (never mind that the same funding probably could have been used to launch several of the damn things. And imagine, the later ones could be built to not require corrective optics).
My connection is too slow for video, so I have not looked at the thing, but I have seen your criticism raised elsewhere.
Other people have mentioned that the test does not show any load, I expect that, were it truly a breakthrough, they would go ahead and show it doing some ridiculous things (hey, why not?).
If NASA had never gone to the moon, no one would be able to say that they got some Tang in space.
You could also frame it in terms of the populace being so easily manipulated that the other 98 Senators (or maybe 96...) can't just laugh the damned amendment off the floor.
Well, I do think that many things are wrong. I'm not sure the exact conclusion of the article makes sense, but I'm pretty sure that there is a massive amount of classroom time being wasted in K-12, and a great deal of it is also being wasted in colleges and universities.
I think a big part of it is that we (as a society) tend to conflate specialization and expertise (education being a very common component of expertise, anywhere we need a specialist, we seek to install an expert, and that means they need a great deal of education, because if they have education, they must be an expert).
But going back to your first post, if someone is both stupid and highly educated, it isn't all that likely that they are a true expert, and a smart person with a little interest (but comparatively little education) may make a much better specialist.
We may be running up against connotation, I tend to use competent to mean someone who can quickly deal with something in the correct fashion, but there is room for it to mean someone who is able to eventually complete the task.
The standby time might be much less than normal if the phone is shouting out trying to find a tower to talk to.
The satellite tags are not unobtrusive little rfid tags.
Wildlife are tagged using rfid not because it enables constant tracking, but because the tag can be injected under the skin, where it is less likely to weather off.
And as I understand it, even the wildlife tags that do use satellite are not using the satellite for tracking, they are using it for data retrieval. For example:
http://www.tunaresearch.org/billfish/bluemarlin.html
Those tags ride along for a set amount of time, then fall off and broadcast their data up to the satellite. There is no active satellite tracking of the tag.
Here is a BBC article saying that the stock finished the day up 7%:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4250315.stm
The market cap was about 60 billion in 2005. So it probably increased by 3 or 4 billion dollars. It has gone on to almost double since then.
Your first two paragraphs are every bit the simple assertion that my post is.
You claim that, in fact, the market has worked, and the people getting paid enormous salaries are worth it. I claim this is not true.
We don't really have any decent facts (or rather, I don't, and you haven't presented any, perhaps you have them), and we can't really run an experiment. So there we are. Conveniently, I have stated my post in terms of the wishy-washy thoughts that it is based on. Unfortunately, you have stated your post in terms of absolutes.
Thanks though, for informing me about how it is, and about how I am, at the end there.
I probably don't have a favorite speaker.
I almost drove a couple of hours to hear E.O. Wilson give a talk, I suppose that counts.
Of course, he is reviled by the far left (how dare he suggest that behavior is at all innate) and disliked on the right (for the same reasons, and for not being religiously conventional enough).
I'd also probably pay some attention if Tim Harford, Stephen Pastis or Stephen Colbert were supposed to be talking in the area.
Also, I meant to imply that said mocking would happen before any talk, in the hallway or something, disrupting the actual talk would be quite rude (you are free to believe this or not, I don't care).
Sarcasm?
(I really can't tell)
I don't think there should be a law or anything (and they are paying plenty of taxes with today's rates). I just think the analysis that says "they're worth it" is poppycock. Look at the Detroit automakers. Sure, they were in dire straights 20 years ago, but the only CEO of any of those companies in the last 20 years that has been worth a damn has been Alan Mulally. That's a pretty bad success rate.
So the story is that they are really valuable, and they are adding value to companies, but the reality really doesn't seem to live up to the story.
If you want another angle, compare company founders that stay on as CEO to people that are brought in as business managers (An easy comparison would be Bill Gates to Carly Fiorina, but that's me cheating, Gates took advantage of a near singular opportunity, and Fiorina is probably one of the worst CEO choices in history (well, according to the market anyway, the market cap of HP went up by over $1 billion the day she resigned)).
I'm appalled that your motives for attending an institution of higher education were anything other than an egalitarian sense of self enlightenment.
How dare you introduce pragmatism and concern for your future into such a decision!
And to expect the same from the school? Scandalous.
Please, showing up and mocking the people who think Ann Coulter has something interesting to say is not censorship.
Can we call them "highly schooled", rather than "well educated"? The latter sort of implies competence.
The rhetoricians need to start treating 100 million dollar salaries as glaring signs of economic inefficiency.
It is very unlikely that each person earning 100 million in today's economy are actually producing that much more value than the next best candidate (or even, the minimally acceptable alternative candidate, if you want to go that far).
Maybe someday willingness to do a job will be as valuable as the perceived ability to do a job (currently, there are plenty of willing, so it isn't much of a distinguishing characteristic, except in highly dangerous fields, and even then, it is only worth so much, 'hazard pay' doesn't really match up to Wall St. bonus pay).
Stripping the whitespace saves about 20 kB over the output of jsbeautifier. Gzipping the expanded version saves more than 35 kB over the whitespace-free version (and loses 1 kB to the gzipped whitespace-free version).
So hopefully they are spending more time on the gzipping part.
(jsbeautifier: http://jsbeautifier.org/ )
If it is otherwise a good deal, you can just yank the antenna.
People are already playing with some parts of it:
http://www.bramstein.com/projects/typeset/
Presumably "making it available" includes more than posting the jammed up code to the demo site.
http://jsbeautifier.org/
Try not to get too hung up on deciding if the name is impossible, it works great.
Are the png's you are talking about somewhere in here:
http://0xfe.muthanna.com/jsnotation/vexnotation.js
Or are they somewhere else?
Do people often choose to defend the bible when referencing historical language use to point out that some modern use is not new?