If Sergei Korolev hadn't died in 1966, they probably already would have. I think his death probably hurt the Russian space program more than scarcity of funding, or even the fall of the USSR, ever did.
Yeah, their space program is such a joke. All they did was put the first satellite in space, first orbit, first man and woman in space, first space station, first probes on Venus and Mars--in fact, pretty much every space "first" except man on the moon. And they're currently the only country in the world capable of even putting a man in orbit. Ha, ha, what a joke! Let's all laugh at them!
Looks like they've been learning from NASA. Just spout off some shit about going to Mars and the Moon, setting the date far enough into the future that you know neither you nor the current administration will never have to answer for it when it doesn't materialize. Rinse. Wash. Repeat.
File-sharing, chatting, email, video games, watching videos--all those are the domain of the depressed, apparently. So wtf do the non-depressed do online, just read the newspaper and post ads on Craigslist?
Actually, as an American, I wouldn't mind seeing the UK turned into a test platform for green energy (and some social engineering to push it). If it succeeds, they could show the rest of the English speaking world how to do it. And if it turns out to be a hippie pipe dream and fails--well, then we learn a valuable lesson without having to suffer for it in the U.S.
You're on point, Britain! Watch out for mines, and good luck.
Am I the only one who doesn't see this as a positive thing? Privatization will only provide an excuse to cut the NASA budget even more. And NASA is already outsourced to the gills as it is. And it could set the stage for the government bailing on space research and exploration altogether (and no private company is going to pick up the slack on projects with no profit behind them).
So it could be a "turning point" in the space age alright. It could be the end of it.
I remember reading a slashdot news story about another teen science fair winner with some awesome result, but someone pointed out that he essentially copied someone else's PhD
When I was in school, all the kids who won science fairs were the kids whose parents "helped" them the most. For the best projects if was obvious that the parents had basically done them entirely. This really pissed me off because I didn't have parents who could help me out. So basically, I would work my ass off and lose to some kid whose electrical engineer dad had built them a goddamned working robot.
I've been on the internet since the early 90's and I don't ever recall even once being forced to go to a porn site (though I have been tricked into watching Rick Astley a couple of times). Unless you get some kind of phishing virus, no one is going to *force* anything on you. And if you're so weak that you can't control yourself, you may want to avoid the internet altogether. Anyway, if you really want the porn, I'm pretty sure you'll just find a way to bypass the filtering software this guy is hawking. If all that's standing between you being devout and becoming a porn-crazed sinner is some software, maybe it's time for you to reevaluate your faith.
Just keep in mind that the second you start talking about fucking with MY internet or MY ability to access porn (or anything else), then we're going to have a problem. And that goes whether it's a bible you're thumping, or a Koran, or the Talmud, etc. It's not our job to protect you from yourself, Sparky.
Re:The 21st century formula for a successful compa
on
HP To Cut 30,000 Jobs
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
There is nothing quite as beautiful as seeing the plane in free-fall and on fire behind you, as you float to your new private island on a parachute stitched from gold thread and destroyed lives.
Re:The 21st century formula for a successful compa
on
HP To Cut 30,000 Jobs
·
· Score: 5, Informative
You may not be a native English speaker, so you may not be aware of the fact that we have no gender-neutral, third person, singular pronoun for a person. One must choose either "he" or "she" or the much more awkward "he/she." I supposed one could also go with "it" but most humans take offense to being called an "it" for some reason. Being as most CEO's are men, I chose "he" in this instance. I think that's a reasonable choice.
And as for Meg Whitman, well I'm sorry if I may have offended the woman who just threw 30,000 families into dire crisis. I suppose she'll just have to live with it.
The 21st century formula for a successful company
on
HP To Cut 30,000 Jobs
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
The modern CEO doesn't grow his company in the long-term. He doesn't build good products and increase sales, putting profits back into R&D, new products, and new hires. He doesn't pay shareholders modest dividends and tell them about his long-term strategy for slowly growing and maintaining a profitable company. That shit is old school!
The 21st century CEO boosts short term profits by cutting jobs and forcing existing workers to pick up the slack. He shows the shareholders that the next quarter's profits are great and they call him a visionary. He hides debt with a shell game, cuts workers to hide sales declines, and outsources everything he can to some sweatshop that produces crap product to lower prices. The 21st century CEO looks AMAZING on paper.
And in the long-term...well, who gives a shit about the long-term? By then the 21 century CEO has long since bailed out with his golden parachute. Let Uncle Sam bail them out.
But only because they were already artificially low, with China selling those things below cost just to gain market dominance. Hell, even with this, they'll STILL be artificially low, with the U.S. heavily subsidizing the whole industry. The fact is that solar power is just not that economical on its own (and IMHO is a pipe dream anyway, but that's another post). But seeing as the U.S. still subsidizes the wildly profitable coal and oil industries (and don't get me started on agricultural subsidies), I guess turnabout is fair play.
And before anyone jumps up to defend the free market here, you may want to keep in mind that a level playing field (with no protectionism) is great if you're a Chinese worker making $1 an hour--not so fucking great if you're an American or European worker getting paid many times that. You go ahead and compete in the "free market" with people willing to work for a fraction of your salary and just see what happens to your beloved first-world living standard.
It's unlabelled. Looks like Google is trying to avoid a controversy I didn't even know existed. Apparently some Arabs want it renamed the "Arabian Gulf."
Slashdot Mirror
"Stripes" was what made me decide to join the Army
Did you find out if the commies were, in fact, pussies?
Can Russia do it (again)?
If Sergei Korolev hadn't died in 1966, they probably already would have. I think his death probably hurt the Russian space program more than scarcity of funding, or even the fall of the USSR, ever did.
Can I still access World of Warcraft?
I want to ask the same questions of NASA.
In Russia, rival space program funds you.
Yeah, their space program is such a joke. All they did was put the first satellite in space, first orbit, first man and woman in space, first space station, first probes on Venus and Mars--in fact, pretty much every space "first" except man on the moon. And they're currently the only country in the world capable of even putting a man in orbit. Ha, ha, what a joke! Let's all laugh at them!
It's just pointless PR that means nothing.
Looks like they've been learning from NASA. Just spout off some shit about going to Mars and the Moon, setting the date far enough into the future that you know neither you nor the current administration will never have to answer for it when it doesn't materialize. Rinse. Wash. Repeat.
error prone
Their space program hasn't lost a single man since the early 70's. Can NASA say that?
Well, they're pretty good at launching NASA astronauts. In fact, they're the only ones who even CAN.
File-sharing, chatting, email, video games, watching videos--all those are the domain of the depressed, apparently. So wtf do the non-depressed do online, just read the newspaper and post ads on Craigslist?
If you think the telcos and ISP's in your country are the exception, you're kidding yourself.
Actually, as an American, I wouldn't mind seeing the UK turned into a test platform for green energy (and some social engineering to push it). If it succeeds, they could show the rest of the English speaking world how to do it. And if it turns out to be a hippie pipe dream and fails--well, then we learn a valuable lesson without having to suffer for it in the U.S.
You're on point, Britain! Watch out for mines, and good luck.
We're back, baby!
No offense, but we're not even back to 1969.
Am I the only one who doesn't see this as a positive thing? Privatization will only provide an excuse to cut the NASA budget even more. And NASA is already outsourced to the gills as it is. And it could set the stage for the government bailing on space research and exploration altogether (and no private company is going to pick up the slack on projects with no profit behind them).
So it could be a "turning point" in the space age alright. It could be the end of it.
I remember reading a slashdot news story about another teen science fair winner with some awesome result, but someone pointed out that he essentially copied someone else's PhD
When I was in school, all the kids who won science fairs were the kids whose parents "helped" them the most. For the best projects if was obvious that the parents had basically done them entirely. This really pissed me off because I didn't have parents who could help me out. So basically, I would work my ass off and lose to some kid whose electrical engineer dad had built them a goddamned working robot.
He fried Cats/Dogs/horses/cows and even an Elephant
Yeah, but only the asshole animals.
No, I understand them just fine. I just don't AGREE with them.
Kirk is obviously the superior one.
Only at getting his crewmembers killed.
I've been on the internet since the early 90's and I don't ever recall even once being forced to go to a porn site (though I have been tricked into watching Rick Astley a couple of times). Unless you get some kind of phishing virus, no one is going to *force* anything on you. And if you're so weak that you can't control yourself, you may want to avoid the internet altogether. Anyway, if you really want the porn, I'm pretty sure you'll just find a way to bypass the filtering software this guy is hawking. If all that's standing between you being devout and becoming a porn-crazed sinner is some software, maybe it's time for you to reevaluate your faith.
Just keep in mind that the second you start talking about fucking with MY internet or MY ability to access porn (or anything else), then we're going to have a problem. And that goes whether it's a bible you're thumping, or a Koran, or the Talmud, etc. It's not our job to protect you from yourself, Sparky.
There is nothing quite as beautiful as seeing the plane in free-fall and on fire behind you, as you float to your new private island on a parachute stitched from gold thread and destroyed lives.
You may not be a native English speaker, so you may not be aware of the fact that we have no gender-neutral, third person, singular pronoun for a person. One must choose either "he" or "she" or the much more awkward "he/she." I supposed one could also go with "it" but most humans take offense to being called an "it" for some reason. Being as most CEO's are men, I chose "he" in this instance. I think that's a reasonable choice.
And as for Meg Whitman, well I'm sorry if I may have offended the woman who just threw 30,000 families into dire crisis. I suppose she'll just have to live with it.
The modern CEO doesn't grow his company in the long-term. He doesn't build good products and increase sales, putting profits back into R&D, new products, and new hires. He doesn't pay shareholders modest dividends and tell them about his long-term strategy for slowly growing and maintaining a profitable company. That shit is old school!
The 21st century CEO boosts short term profits by cutting jobs and forcing existing workers to pick up the slack. He shows the shareholders that the next quarter's profits are great and they call him a visionary. He hides debt with a shell game, cuts workers to hide sales declines, and outsources everything he can to some sweatshop that produces crap product to lower prices. The 21st century CEO looks AMAZING on paper.
And in the long-term...well, who gives a shit about the long-term? By then the 21 century CEO has long since bailed out with his golden parachute. Let Uncle Sam bail them out.
But only because they were already artificially low, with China selling those things below cost just to gain market dominance. Hell, even with this, they'll STILL be artificially low, with the U.S. heavily subsidizing the whole industry. The fact is that solar power is just not that economical on its own (and IMHO is a pipe dream anyway, but that's another post). But seeing as the U.S. still subsidizes the wildly profitable coal and oil industries (and don't get me started on agricultural subsidies), I guess turnabout is fair play.
And before anyone jumps up to defend the free market here, you may want to keep in mind that a level playing field (with no protectionism) is great if you're a Chinese worker making $1 an hour--not so fucking great if you're an American or European worker getting paid many times that. You go ahead and compete in the "free market" with people willing to work for a fraction of your salary and just see what happens to your beloved first-world living standard.
It's unlabelled. Looks like Google is trying to avoid a controversy I didn't even know existed. Apparently some Arabs want it renamed the "Arabian Gulf."
It was the 9th Circuit that upheld the retroactive immunity, not SCOTUS.
Oh, I'm sorry, I was under the mistaken impression that SCOTUS was over the 9th Circuit and had the ability to review their cases. My bad.