In the absence of a contract the consultant will own the code. All paying for it give you is an implied license, which only includes source code if it is necessary for the normal use of the program (so basically scripting languages or programs where you hard coded enough that you need source code to use it.)
I am a millennial, although on the older side (early 30s) and I definitely see where you are coming from with that rant.
Many people in my age group seem to think the world owes them something. Their parents told them they were special, and they could do anything they want. When something goes wrong it could not possibly be their fault, and someone else should fix it for them. There are plenty of people like that in earlier generations too, but mine seems to be especially full of it.
I admit I was fortunate in many ways. I have parents who care (my mother especially cared enough to hit me or throw things when I annoyed her), I score very well on any test I care to take with very little effort compared to most, and I was born into a middle class US household which was not struggling.
I really think overly protective parents, schools which do not want to leave anyone behind, awards for everyone, college for everyone, etc. have caused a bit of a problem. The thing is that once you leave childhood and enter the real world, nobody really gives a shit about you except you. That is a nasty transition for someone who has been coddled their entire life, and not everyone makes it successfully.
As an adult it is your problem if your life is not going the way you want, and if you want to know who will fix it for you, you should go find a mirror.
People complain about crippling student loans, but they are the ones who signed the loan. They complain that they cannot get a job, but they lack the skills which would make them employable. They complain when they lose the jobs they do get, or are not promoted, but they are the ones on facebook instead of working. They complain that they are fat, but they sit on ass all day, eat mcdonalds, and drink coke. They complain that companies have all the power, but lack the motivation to go start their own. They complain about their huge cell phone bill, but for some reason though it was a good idea to sign up for a couple year loan so they can have an iphone.
I have made my way in the world without too much of an issue (the recession hit me just after forming a new company using my own money, which kind of sucked...but at this point that is over and done.)
I have a decent job because I have useful skills, and control over many aspects of work because I reliably show up and remain calm when things go wrong. I have no debt because I avoid it when I think it is not in my interest. I am not fat or diabetic because I eat well and run every morning.
That does not mean that everything has always worked out, despite what may many people think. I do get tired of people saying that I just lucked out, when what is really occurring is that I make changes in my life when I am not satisfied with the way things are going. These can sometimes be major and uncomfortable changes where I need to invest substantial effort and take some risk.
I see so many people saying that somebody needs to fix the problems with our society, but do not even consider that they should be that somebody.
In most fields your employer only really cares that you can do the job.
In the past a degree was an indication that you knew at least the basics of the field you were trying to enter. These days it seems colleges will pass nearly everyone in order to keep collecting tuition, and this has been going on long enough that in many cases industry is on to that scam and no longer wants to pay a premium for the degree.
The government has also been guaranteeing student loans, and preventing discharge in bankruptcy. This means even an indigent 18 year old is seen as good for whatever amount of money they care to borrow. It does not matter to the college, the government, or the loan company that there is no need for the number of people who are graduating in many fields, that some fields do not really produce the amount of income necessary to make good on the loan, or that the graduates coming out are not competent to enter the field they were supposedly trained in.
Despite all of that there are still plenty of jobs available, and if you want a job right now you can pretty much get one in most of the US. Some of these pay quite a bit of money as well: plumbing, electrical work, waste collection, and construction all pay a decent wage. Nursing is also a field which always needs more people.
The real fix is to stop guaranteeing student loans and allow them to be discharged in bankruptcy. If you needed to get approved by a private loan company who could lose the money they invest, it would sort this out in short order.
I hire programmers, and do not consider the degree at all for salary or hiring. I pay in line with demonstrated ability and work experience only. I have in fact noticed that for entry level positions applicants without a degree have a much better chance of actually being able to write a program, and as my time is limited I have begun to prefer that when doing the initial filter on applicants (it is shocking how many CS graduates cannot write even a trivial program, but those claiming to have learned on their own tend to only apply for a job after they know enough to at least do something useful.)
A quick search shows others having a similar problem. I do wish colleges would actually fail those they should, but I guess it is more profitable to take their money (at least it was short term... industry is catching on.)
Where did you go to school? My experience with recent grads is bad enough that I do not give a degree in CS any consideration at all, and you must demonstrate that you know how to program before I will pay a decent salary.
Most cannot write a simple program which prints all odd numbers between 0 and 100 (no internet access, but they get to choose any language.) Programmers do make some money, although I have found that most people graduating with a CS degree are not capable of programming.
It is also why Apple is basically non-existent in the business world, and is not seen as a suitable platform for anything important.
Third party applications are not always tested against new releases. When they are only the latest version will be tested, and at most software companies I have worked with this usually happens well after the release of the operating system.
That does not even consider companies which no longer exits, or company specific code where the programmer has long since left.
If they foolishly try to change culture to follow apple's disregard for backwards compatibility, it really will be the year of Linux on the desktop.
I am sure they will experiment with a few prototypes and come up with a model of how it works before they launch it.
You want an explanation as to why it either fits with our current understanding of physics or where our understanding was wrong, which is not required in order to make use of it. From an engineering perspective all we need to know is how much thrust it produces, if there are any side effects that could cause problems, and how to keep it functioning.
We can do all of that through trial and error and some basic modeling, without understanding exactly what is happening.
The results say this is generating orders of magnitude more thrust than could be explained by radiation pressure (which is what you are describing.) It may contribute a little bit, but cannot explain the results.
This isn't junk science. This is junk sensationalized journalism reporting about science. Rest assured that if any agency capable of orbital launches was actually confident in the merits of this device, it would be in orbit within the month.
Most of those are governments... Maybe you are hoping SpaceX will make this a priority as a non income generating research project? If not, I think there is an important life lesson about the speed at which government agencies and their contractors accomplish tasks in your future.
With five years is more likely, assuming a better explanation which makes it useless as propulsion is not found. Maybe within a year if it gets the attention of those who create the budget.
The fact that the anomalous readings are net thrust is pretty encouraging.
Launching things into space is expensive, devices intended for space are harder to design, and it makes the experiment harder to run and measure. Better to run some tests on the ground first, produce a model on which they can base a more efficient design, test that design in order to maximize the thrust they can easily get, then go design an actual test spacecraft (which will probably be tiny, and take some time to do.)
A series of promising results on the ground are a good sign, and are what make it worthy of the further work and expense necessary to test it in the intended environment. I am sure someone will get around to launching a test vehicle in due time if nobody comes up with a better explanation for the results than generation of thrust.
Their measured force is far greater than radiation pressure could explain (around 1 newton/kW now, expected to be 500-1000 newtons per kW with some refinement if their current theories are correct), and it was not tested in sunlight as far as I know.
It cannot be simple radiation pressure, of this NASA is certain.
There are now several experiments which confirm the production of thrust, many efforts to falsify the results, and a few efforts to come up with a theory which explains what we are seeing. There may be another test or two on the ground, but the first real space trial is likely coming soon. The only real way to be sure is to launch one and measure the dv.
I had the same thought they did initially, which is that convection of air was responsible for their thrust. That will not happen in vacuum, so that idea is right out.
This is a very promising experimental result, following several other very promising experimental results from different labs. I would say there is now serious evidence that this works, or at least that there is more to it than we can easily explain given our current understanding of physics.
Public opinion these days is that discrimination against a person based on attributes which cannot easily be changed is a problem.
A person may hate anybody they want, but as CEO he was the face of their business. If their CEO had spoken out on the wrong side during the civil rights movement he would also face some social issues. That is probably the closest analogy to what is currently happening with homosexuality. I expect the social consequences of speaking out in favor of discrimination to become increasingly negative.
The main difference between "defending traditional marriage" and supporting same sex marriage is that the former is attempting to restrict the actions of another person based on an attribute they cannot change. In this case it harms nobody to allow two consenting adults to marry each other, so it is difficult to come up with a valid reason to deny them access to the same government processes and protections which a heterosexual couple would be able to legally enjoy.
Separate but equal is also generally accepted to rarely be equal, so marriage it is.
I really do not care much either, as being a heterosexual white male most discrimination does not affect me. Despite that, I do see how unfair it is to deny this to somebody based upon who they love.
If he got his way and gay marriage was entirely banned, it would not affect him at all (presumably he would not consent to marry another man.) He is trying to restrict the freedom of others because he does not approve of who they are, and I do have serious objections to placing that kind of person in a position of power (even at a private organization.)
This is pretty much a textbook case of extortion, specifically blackmail.
He made a business out of continuing to publish embarrassing and socially damaging imagery until he was paid off. Publishing the images alone would have been a grey area at the time he did it, but the extortion site is definitely illegal.
If Google started a service where they dug up dirt on people then contacted them to get a payment in order to make the problem go away, their representatives would absolutely be hauled into court. Google knows better than to try of course.
They are much better at finding those who commit very serious crimes, and bringing a helicopter down over a city is extremely serious.
This is one of those situations where almost anybody who would be capable of committing the crime and having any real shot of getting away with it also has better options in life.
That ignores the not so minor point that if you take a helicopter down the response will be extreme.
That one helicopter is not the only thing the state can bring to bear against you, and they will be very pissed off. In short, it would need to be a case of much of the city revolting before that becomes the kind of thing you might get away with.
The thing is that audio is generally not entirely digital.
I have had computers where moving the mouse produced a specific sound through the headphones. Most are better these days, but shielding the analog components and wires, and generally reducing noise components make can have an impact.
If you are amplifying it this will also amplify your noise, which is an easy way to make it noticeable.
Slashdot Mirror
The article describes an employee, the post I was responding to was talking about consulting.
These are entirely different scenarios.
Consultants do not fall under work for hire.
If you have one client and they choose your schedule you are not a consultant.
In the absence of a contract the consultant will own the code. All paying for it give you is an implied license, which only includes source code if it is necessary for the normal use of the program (so basically scripting languages or programs where you hard coded enough that you need source code to use it.)
I am a millennial, although on the older side (early 30s) and I definitely see where you are coming from with that rant.
Many people in my age group seem to think the world owes them something. Their parents told them they were special, and they could do anything they want. When something goes wrong it could not possibly be their fault, and someone else should fix it for them. There are plenty of people like that in earlier generations too, but mine seems to be especially full of it.
I admit I was fortunate in many ways. I have parents who care (my mother especially cared enough to hit me or throw things when I annoyed her), I score very well on any test I care to take with very little effort compared to most, and I was born into a middle class US household which was not struggling.
I really think overly protective parents, schools which do not want to leave anyone behind, awards for everyone, college for everyone, etc. have caused a bit of a problem. The thing is that once you leave childhood and enter the real world, nobody really gives a shit about you except you. That is a nasty transition for someone who has been coddled their entire life, and not everyone makes it successfully.
As an adult it is your problem if your life is not going the way you want, and if you want to know who will fix it for you, you should go find a mirror.
People complain about crippling student loans, but they are the ones who signed the loan. They complain that they cannot get a job, but they lack the skills which would make them employable. They complain when they lose the jobs they do get, or are not promoted, but they are the ones on facebook instead of working. They complain that they are fat, but they sit on ass all day, eat mcdonalds, and drink coke. They complain that companies have all the power, but lack the motivation to go start their own. They complain about their huge cell phone bill, but for some reason though it was a good idea to sign up for a couple year loan so they can have an iphone.
I have made my way in the world without too much of an issue (the recession hit me just after forming a new company using my own money, which kind of sucked...but at this point that is over and done.)
I have a decent job because I have useful skills, and control over many aspects of work because I reliably show up and remain calm when things go wrong.
I have no debt because I avoid it when I think it is not in my interest.
I am not fat or diabetic because I eat well and run every morning.
That does not mean that everything has always worked out, despite what may many people think. I do get tired of people saying that I just lucked out, when what is really occurring is that I make changes in my life when I am not satisfied with the way things are going. These can sometimes be major and uncomfortable changes where I need to invest substantial effort and take some risk.
I see so many people saying that somebody needs to fix the problems with our society, but do not even consider that they should be that somebody.
In most fields your employer only really cares that you can do the job.
In the past a degree was an indication that you knew at least the basics of the field you were trying to enter. These days it seems colleges will pass nearly everyone in order to keep collecting tuition, and this has been going on long enough that in many cases industry is on to that scam and no longer wants to pay a premium for the degree.
The government has also been guaranteeing student loans, and preventing discharge in bankruptcy. This means even an indigent 18 year old is seen as good for whatever amount of money they care to borrow. It does not matter to the college, the government, or the loan company that there is no need for the number of people who are graduating in many fields, that some fields do not really produce the amount of income necessary to make good on the loan, or that the graduates coming out are not competent to enter the field they were supposedly trained in.
Despite all of that there are still plenty of jobs available, and if you want a job right now you can pretty much get one in most of the US. Some of these pay quite a bit of money as well: plumbing, electrical work, waste collection, and construction all pay a decent wage. Nursing is also a field which always needs more people.
The real fix is to stop guaranteeing student loans and allow them to be discharged in bankruptcy. If you needed to get approved by a private loan company who could lose the money they invest, it would sort this out in short order.
I hire programmers, and do not consider the degree at all for salary or hiring. I pay in line with demonstrated ability and work experience only. I have in fact noticed that for entry level positions applicants without a degree have a much better chance of actually being able to write a program, and as my time is limited I have begun to prefer that when doing the initial filter on applicants (it is shocking how many CS graduates cannot write even a trivial program, but those claiming to have learned on their own tend to only apply for a job after they know enough to at least do something useful.)
A quick search shows others having a similar problem. I do wish colleges would actually fail those they should, but I guess it is more profitable to take their money (at least it was short term... industry is catching on.)
http://blog.codinghorror.com/why-cant-programmers-program/
Where did you go to school? My experience with recent grads is bad enough that I do not give a degree in CS any consideration at all, and you must demonstrate that you know how to program before I will pay a decent salary.
Most cannot write a simple program which prints all odd numbers between 0 and 100 (no internet access, but they get to choose any language.) Programmers do make some money, although I have found that most people graduating with a CS degree are not capable of programming.
“The children now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise.”
Socrates
Might as well actually quote it.
It is also why Apple is basically non-existent in the business world, and is not seen as a suitable platform for anything important.
Third party applications are not always tested against new releases. When they are only the latest version will be tested, and at most software companies I have worked with this usually happens well after the release of the operating system.
That does not even consider companies which no longer exits, or company specific code where the programmer has long since left.
If they foolishly try to change culture to follow apple's disregard for backwards compatibility, it really will be the year of Linux on the desktop.
You can in fact deduct losses from income, there would be few investment firms if you could not.
A paycheck is definitely a lower risk way to earn income, but also usually has a fairly low maximum cap compared to risking your own money or time.
I am sure they will experiment with a few prototypes and come up with a model of how it works before they launch it.
You want an explanation as to why it either fits with our current understanding of physics or where our understanding was wrong, which is not required in order to make use of it. From an engineering perspective all we need to know is how much thrust it produces, if there are any side effects that could cause problems, and how to keep it functioning.
We can do all of that through trial and error and some basic modeling, without understanding exactly what is happening.
The results say this is generating orders of magnitude more thrust than could be explained by radiation pressure (which is what you are describing.) It may contribute a little bit, but cannot explain the results.
This isn't junk science. This is junk sensationalized journalism reporting about science. Rest assured that if any agency capable of orbital launches was actually confident in the merits of this device, it would be in orbit within the month.
Most of those are governments... Maybe you are hoping SpaceX will make this a priority as a non income generating research project? If not, I think there is an important life lesson about the speed at which government agencies and their contractors accomplish tasks in your future.
With five years is more likely, assuming a better explanation which makes it useless as propulsion is not found. Maybe within a year if it gets the attention of those who create the budget.
The fact that the anomalous readings are net thrust is pretty encouraging.
Launching things into space is expensive, devices intended for space are harder to design, and it makes the experiment harder to run and measure. Better to run some tests on the ground first, produce a model on which they can base a more efficient design, test that design in order to maximize the thrust they can easily get, then go design an actual test spacecraft (which will probably be tiny, and take some time to do.)
A series of promising results on the ground are a good sign, and are what make it worthy of the further work and expense necessary to test it in the intended environment. I am sure someone will get around to launching a test vehicle in due time if nobody comes up with a better explanation for the results than generation of thrust.
If I remember correctly they oriented the first one (in atmosphere) in several different directions during the test in order to rule this out.
Their measured force is far greater than radiation pressure could explain (around 1 newton /kW now, expected to be 500-1000 newtons per kW with some refinement if their current theories are correct), and it was not tested in sunlight as far as I know.
It cannot be simple radiation pressure, of this NASA is certain.
That is pretty close to what is going on.
There are now several experiments which confirm the production of thrust, many efforts to falsify the results, and a few efforts to come up with a theory which explains what we are seeing. There may be another test or two on the ground, but the first real space trial is likely coming soon. The only real way to be sure is to launch one and measure the dv.
I had the same thought they did initially, which is that convection of air was responsible for their thrust. That will not happen in vacuum, so that idea is right out.
This is a very promising experimental result, following several other very promising experimental results from different labs. I would say there is now serious evidence that this works, or at least that there is more to it than we can easily explain given our current understanding of physics.
Public opinion these days is that discrimination against a person based on attributes which cannot easily be changed is a problem.
A person may hate anybody they want, but as CEO he was the face of their business. If their CEO had spoken out on the wrong side during the civil rights movement he would also face some social issues. That is probably the closest analogy to what is currently happening with homosexuality. I expect the social consequences of speaking out in favor of discrimination to become increasingly negative.
The main difference between "defending traditional marriage" and supporting same sex marriage is that the former is attempting to restrict the actions of another person based on an attribute they cannot change. In this case it harms nobody to allow two consenting adults to marry each other, so it is difficult to come up with a valid reason to deny them access to the same government processes and protections which a heterosexual couple would be able to legally enjoy.
Separate but equal is also generally accepted to rarely be equal, so marriage it is.
I really do not care much either, as being a heterosexual white male most discrimination does not affect me. Despite that, I do see how unfair it is to deny this to somebody based upon who they love.
If he got his way and gay marriage was entirely banned, it would not affect him at all (presumably he would not consent to marry another man.) He is trying to restrict the freedom of others because he does not approve of who they are, and I do have serious objections to placing that kind of person in a position of power (even at a private organization.)
This is pretty much a textbook case of extortion, specifically blackmail.
He made a business out of continuing to publish embarrassing and socially damaging imagery until he was paid off. Publishing the images alone would have been a grey area at the time he did it, but the extortion site is definitely illegal.
If Google started a service where they dug up dirt on people then contacted them to get a payment in order to make the problem go away, their representatives would absolutely be hauled into court. Google knows better than to try of course.
It does not make less sense, you can still badly injure those around you.
It is very easy to decide commercial use: Did you derive any revenue (not necessarily profit) at all. If yes? Commercial use.
They are much better at finding those who commit very serious crimes, and bringing a helicopter down over a city is extremely serious.
This is one of those situations where almost anybody who would be capable of committing the crime and having any real shot of getting away with it also has better options in life.
That ignores the not so minor point that if you take a helicopter down the response will be extreme.
That one helicopter is not the only thing the state can bring to bear against you, and they will be very pissed off. In short, it would need to be a case of much of the city revolting before that becomes the kind of thing you might get away with.
We can already see the point we call the big bang, it is known as the Cosmic Microwave Background.
My gf and I looked at it on the same screen.
My answer was periwinkle and brown for the image, but I thought the real dress was probably blue and black. She says white and gold.
I had to spend a moment looking at the background to determine that it was probably blue and black.
The thing is that audio is generally not entirely digital.
I have had computers where moving the mouse produced a specific sound through the headphones. Most are better these days, but shielding the analog components and wires, and generally reducing noise components make can have an impact.
If you are amplifying it this will also amplify your noise, which is an easy way to make it noticeable.