People will tend to work on what interests them and seems like it will have some success. Have you ever been stuck working on a project that you knew was going nowhere and was doomed to get canceled? How much time and money was wasted while waiting for management to finally pull the plug?
On the flip side, I've worked on things that seemed to be doomed and futile at the start - but which turned out to be huge successes.
If people could abandon those projects and move to ones that look like they will be more successful you have a system setup to find and allocate resources to successful projects automatically.
No - because "things that look like they will be successful" is not the same as "things that are successful". What happens in the system you propose is a swarm/lemming effect where people abandon projects which might be long term wins in favor of those which appear to be short term wins. It also pressures people to abandon those short term wins when the road gets rocky for other short term wins. From the outside, the box appears rigged to produce wins - but if you could open it up and see inside... you'd see it conceals a deep dysfunction.
Another reason that itâ(TM)s hard to run a company this way is that it requires vigilance. Itâ(TM)s a one-way trip if the core values change, and maintaining them requires the full commitment of everyone
I seem to remember hearing Jim Jones and other cult leaders saying the same thing...
The idea of using gravity (the proper name is Gravity Tractor) to deflect incoming rocks has been around for some years now - and it wasn't Neil's idea.
. Additionally, it is easy to forget now, but when the iPad first came out it was widely criticized as being too similar to an iPod Touch.
I wouldn't go so far as to say "widely". I wouldn't even go so far as to say "noticeably at all". The iPod Touch is a PDA, something of an odball niche player, and nothing much at all like an iPad (despite the gross surface similarities).
It was only after quite a bit of time that it seemed to start to be taken more seriously despite having a screen with less than half the area of a "real computer".
Again, not so much... The iPad was wildly popular from very early on precisely *because* it half the area (and less the half the weight) of a "real [laptop] computer". Netbooks had already proven a demand existed at that size point, and in that price range.
what you describe here is not insurance but a payment scheme managed by 3rd party
Let me give you two numbers.
None of your handwaving changes the fact that the grandparent is correct - what you describe is not insurance.
Yes, there are a few people within this system that end up costing hundreds of times more than what they personally pay, but spread over the entire range of paying customers as a fixed cost of doing business their weight is at most cents for the other paying individuals. By removing them the above prices might go down a little, perhaps to $24.50 and $1490 respectively. Their tail in the bell curve represent such a minor part of the actuarial tables that arguing over this feels cheap to anyone but the executives and accountants that believe they should perfectly optimize those individuals away.
So you claim - but the vast spread between the two numbers you give tells a different story. The numbers says you're wrong - because otherwise there wouldn't be a need for the most expensive block to be paying sixty times a month more.
That's no guarantee that he doesn't understand the issue in mathematical detail.
Nor is it a guarantee that he does.
TL;DR: If you can't explain it to a 5-year-old (given sufficient time to phrase things in extended and relevant analogies, as you did), you don't really grok it yourself.
Anyone can "talk tech" at that (almost non-existent) "level of detail"*, all you need is cue cards and a ghost writer.,
* Seriously, "the valves were stuck, so we cycled them" is about as technical and detailed as "the car didn't start, so we turned the key again" - I.E. not very technical or detailed unless you're not very knowledgeable to start with.
There are a few journals - Nature and Science being the premier ones - which serve as filters, a word that I don't see mentioned in the OP.
And you can easily understand why when see this sentence in the OP: "I admitted to some friends that I didn't understand how this became a problem." Reading what follows, it becomes abundantly clear he didn't even bother to try and find out... He just invokes Saint Aaron, makes a few groundless assumptions (which you and others debunk), tosses around a few buzzwords - and *wham* he makes the front page of Slashdot.
That's what banks do, they give loans. If you're going after some venture capitalist, it's because your idea sucked and your company has no history.
Sure - if you have collateral. (That's why your company with sucky credit was able to finance the purchase of equipment.) But businesses in the growth phase need money for a whole host of things that can't be collateral... operating capital so you can move to bigger premises and hire more people, raw materials, medium and long term cash infusions to keep the paychecks from bouncing while you bring the product to market... etc... etc... Banks won't loan money in those instances because, well, they're in the loan business not the investment business. Two different sources of cash and capital for two very different reasons.
As long as you're not looking at your screen to check your facebook stream or w/e every 2 minutes your phone can acutally last a while.
So, the only way to extend battery life is to not use the battery? I can get 96+ idle hours on my iPhone if I really want to, but what's the point? An idle phone is nothing more than an expensive paperweight.
From a Canadian perspective the big advantages of going with the Super Hornet is backwards compatibility (even more-so than the lower price).
By that logic, you should still be flying Spitfires. Heck, you'd be arguing over why you abandoned the Sopwith Camel for those risky new fangled monoplanes.
And... that's exactly the reply I expected, putting words in my mouth in order to justify further fanboi drooling. I didn't say "don't give a shit". I said "this is a paper proposal, let's stop treating it as if it were already mission accomplished".
There's a difference between the two, plainly obvious once you remove your blinders and rose colored glasses.
. Dismissing the significance of this mission is like dismissing the significance of Apollo 8.
Since this mission hasn't happened yet - dismissing it's significance is like dismissing the significance of an extra speck of dust on my desk.
Get a grip people. The flight isn't even funded yet, let alone the hardware developed (a significant hurdle all on it's own), let alone actually flown. It's a long, rough, rocky road from here to there - enough with the reverent fanboi drooling already.
They're going to have to redesign the decks for the simple fact that the Titanic was not a cruise ship, it was a passage (aka passenger) ship.
It wasn't even a passenger ship - it was a passenger liner... designed to efficiently move as many people as possible on as tight a schedule as possible. (The term 'liner' refers to a line on a schedule.) The closest modern equivalent would be a high speed commuter train - shuttling back and forth along it's route on an infinite loop, and otherwise pretty much nothing like a modern cruise ship. Cruise ships tend to pack people into the berthing decks to make room for the bars, casinos, and shopping areas because that's where they make their money. (Deck plans of both modern cruise ships and of Titanic are widely available, comparing them is instructional.) A 'modern' Titanic has no room for those amenities without compromising the accuracy of the re-creation.
That said, drinking, eating, and sitting around doing nothing are the primary activities on a cruise (I'd imagine).
Close enough. Though other activities are available/possible depending on the cruise... on sea days on the Alaska cruise we took for our 20th anniversary, I spent many hours on deck with my camera. (My wife spent the time in the spa... I'd join her in the heated pool when I got chilled.) There was also a variety of classes and lectures each day. Most modern cruises are also built around port excursions, sprinting between ports overnight. (Again, these schedules are available on the web, and it's instructional to compare them to Titanic's itinerary.)
That's what (the generic) you said when he first floated (pardon the pun) this idea a year or so back... looney tunes or not, he's making progress on his plans. (Granted it's a long way to to completion.)
No, you've gone past 'conjecture' territory at warp 9 and are now deep in "batshit crazy hallucinogenic" territory.
There's no evidence the Japanese have the bomb or have even tried. (While they certainly have the capability, they have a deep cultural aversion to it.) There's no evidence the US knew of the Isreali, Pakistani, or Indian bombs in advance. Nor is there any evidence that the US knew of the South African bomb,
Other proof that you're batshit? With the exception of Japan, you only listed the countries in the news. You skipped the other known programs and other countries known to have capability to build nuclear weapons.
Scam? Care to elaborate on how this is a scam? They openly state that this is their plan and it's not even hidden in fine print.
It's not hidden in the fine print per se, since Kickstarter doesn't allow 'fine print' - but it's not in the title or in the project description or scope of work... it's way down at the bottom.
So, not really a scam - but decidedly misleading, intentionally so.
You are simply parroting the camera sites that are wildly incorrect.
Nope, I'm with the grandparent (even the same camera), buying a class 6 nowadays is just dumb. I replaced my day-to-day class 6 cards with class 10's last year and I've never regretted in performance improvement. You can use a class 6 for HD video - but that's right at the bottom end of the recommended range. Cards are cheap (watch for the price wars that pop up now and again), so there's no reason not to upgrade.
You think the IRS doesn't already have procedures for employees getting paid in foreign currencies, or scrip, or in kind, or other carriers of value or anything else not US dollars? (That's a rhetorical question, because they do have such procedures.)
Slashdot Mirror
On the flip side, I've worked on things that seemed to be doomed and futile at the start - but which turned out to be huge successes.
No - because "things that look like they will be successful" is not the same as "things that are successful". What happens in the system you propose is a swarm/lemming effect where people abandon projects which might be long term wins in favor of those which appear to be short term wins. It also pressures people to abandon those short term wins when the road gets rocky for other short term wins. From the outside, the box appears rigged to produce wins - but if you could open it up and see inside... you'd see it conceals a deep dysfunction.
I seem to remember hearing Jim Jones and other cult leaders saying the same thing...
The idea of using gravity (the proper name is Gravity Tractor) to deflect incoming rocks has been around for some years now - and it wasn't Neil's idea.
No. But jokes prove nothing, on the 'net they spread so rapidly and so widely as to be useless for evaluating attitudes.
I wouldn't go so far as to say "widely". I wouldn't even go so far as to say "noticeably at all". The iPod Touch is a PDA, something of an odball niche player, and nothing much at all like an iPad (despite the gross surface similarities).
Again, not so much... The iPad was wildly popular from very early on precisely *because* it half the area (and less the half the weight) of a "real [laptop] computer". Netbooks had already proven a demand existed at that size point, and in that price range.
None of your handwaving changes the fact that the grandparent is correct - what you describe is not insurance.
So you claim - but the vast spread between the two numbers you give tells a different story. The numbers says you're wrong - because otherwise there wouldn't be a need for the most expensive block to be paying sixty times a month more.
Nor is it a guarantee that he does.
You have to be truly deluded to believe that.
Anyone can "talk tech" at that (almost non-existent) "level of detail"*, all you need is cue cards and a ghost writer.,
* Seriously, "the valves were stuck, so we cycled them" is about as technical and detailed as "the car didn't start, so we turned the key again" - I.E. not very technical or detailed unless you're not very knowledgeable to start with.
And you can easily understand why when see this sentence in the OP: "I admitted to some friends that I didn't understand how this became a problem." Reading what follows, it becomes abundantly clear he didn't even bother to try and find out... He just invokes Saint Aaron, makes a few groundless assumptions (which you and others debunk), tosses around a few buzzwords - and *wham* he makes the front page of Slashdot.
Sure - if you have collateral. (That's why your company with sucky credit was able to finance the purchase of equipment.) But businesses in the growth phase need money for a whole host of things that can't be collateral... operating capital so you can move to bigger premises and hire more people, raw materials, medium and long term cash infusions to keep the paychecks from bouncing while you bring the product to market... etc... etc... Banks won't loan money in those instances because, well, they're in the loan business not the investment business. Two different sources of cash and capital for two very different reasons.
Nope, not a 'slippery slope' argument - just pointing out the basic ignorance of the original poster. A trait you share in spades.
So, the only way to extend battery life is to not use the battery? I can get 96+ idle hours on my iPhone if I really want to, but what's the point? An idle phone is nothing more than an expensive paperweight.
By that logic, you should still be flying Spitfires. Heck, you'd be arguing over why you abandoned the Sopwith Camel for those risky new fangled monoplanes.
And... that's exactly the reply I expected, putting words in my mouth in order to justify further fanboi drooling. I didn't say "don't give a shit". I said "this is a paper proposal, let's stop treating it as if it were already mission accomplished".
There's a difference between the two, plainly obvious once you remove your blinders and rose colored glasses.
That's an assumption (one of many in your post) not a fact (notably absent in your post) - there is a difference between the two.
Since this mission hasn't happened yet - dismissing it's significance is like dismissing the significance of an extra speck of dust on my desk.
Get a grip people. The flight isn't even funded yet, let alone the hardware developed (a significant hurdle all on it's own), let alone actually flown. It's a long, rough, rocky road from here to there - enough with the reverent fanboi drooling already.
Norwegian Cruise Lines, though they're found on many others as well.
It wasn't even a passenger ship - it was a passenger liner... designed to efficiently move as many people as possible on as tight a schedule as possible. (The term 'liner' refers to a line on a schedule.) The closest modern equivalent would be a high speed commuter train - shuttling back and forth along it's route on an infinite loop, and otherwise pretty much nothing like a modern cruise ship. Cruise ships tend to pack people into the berthing decks to make room for the bars, casinos, and shopping areas because that's where they make their money. (Deck plans of both modern cruise ships and of Titanic are widely available, comparing them is instructional.) A 'modern' Titanic has no room for those amenities without compromising the accuracy of the re-creation.
Close enough. Though other activities are available/possible depending on the cruise... on sea days on the Alaska cruise we took for our 20th anniversary, I spent many hours on deck with my camera. (My wife spent the time in the spa... I'd join her in the heated pool when I got chilled.) There was also a variety of classes and lectures each day. Most modern cruises are also built around port excursions, sprinting between ports overnight. (Again, these schedules are available on the web, and it's instructional to compare them to Titanic's itinerary.)
That's what (the generic) you said when he first floated (pardon the pun) this idea a year or so back... looney tunes or not, he's making progress on his plans. (Granted it's a long way to to completion.)
Indeed. It's pretty low to get all worked up about Watson & Crick's asshattery... and then not mention the individual involved.
And your expertise and credentials that back up such a bold statement are what? Oh, wait...
No, you've gone past 'conjecture' territory at warp 9 and are now deep in "batshit crazy hallucinogenic" territory.
There's no evidence the Japanese have the bomb or have even tried. (While they certainly have the capability, they have a deep cultural aversion to it.) There's no evidence the US knew of the Isreali, Pakistani, or Indian bombs in advance. Nor is there any evidence that the US knew of the South African bomb,
Other proof that you're batshit? With the exception of Japan, you only listed the countries in the news. You skipped the other known programs and other countries known to have capability to build nuclear weapons.
It's not hidden in the fine print per se, since Kickstarter doesn't allow 'fine print' - but it's not in the title or in the project description or scope of work... it's way down at the bottom.
So, not really a scam - but decidedly misleading, intentionally so.
Nope, I'm with the grandparent (even the same camera), buying a class 6 nowadays is just dumb. I replaced my day-to-day class 6 cards with class 10's last year and I've never regretted in performance improvement. You can use a class 6 for HD video - but that's right at the bottom end of the recommended range. Cards are cheap (watch for the price wars that pop up now and again), so there's no reason not to upgrade.
You think the IRS doesn't already have procedures for employees getting paid in foreign currencies, or scrip, or in kind, or other carriers of value or anything else not US dollars? (That's a rhetorical question, because they do have such procedures.)