Not really - the environments are simply too different, and thus there is virtually nothing common in the equipment. Exploration training can be conducted much more cheaply on Earth, and logistics and planning training much more cheaply in LEO.
As a former employee, this article really changed my view of the NY Times.
Well, to offset your anecdata - here's mine. I know three people who worked for Amazon (as programmers, analysts, and managers, not line warehouse workers), all three shared the article on their Facebook pages and praised it.
I feel like a dope
And you should, you've made the classic error of generalizing from your experience.
But while "open source makes all bugs shallow" is demonstrably a fallacy, at least you CAN see the source if you need to. (Good luck understanding it, though - says this pretty good C developer who just about shit when he had to look at OpenSSL/SSH code...)
And understanding it is more than being a programmer - it's also understanding the problem domain.
If you want to cultivate a positive image for science, you'll want to cultivate fans.
The problem isn't fans - the problem is fans that repeat whatever celebrities say with no more real understanding of what they've said than than possessed by the coffee cup at my elbow. The problem isn't fans - the problem is fans who'll accept whatever the celebrities say and defend it unquestioningly.
And that's the crossroads we stand at - a weird intersection of cargo cultists and cults of personality. They'll take whatever Randall, or Neil, or Jaime, or Bill says - and share, and like, and +1, and retweet it unquestioningly as if it were the Word Of $DIETY. Ask them to explain what they just quoted means, and you'll just get the words of the $CELEBRITY quoted back at you. Try and hold an actual discussion, and anything that even remotely smacks of not accepting The Word gets you labeled a "hater" or "denier" (or worse).
Though the True Believers think otherwise, these "fans" aren't really any better for society than the thumpers, or the followers of the celebrity of the moment, or the defenders of the local sportsball team.
I agree with Maddox about how annoying fans are versus real science; but only someone blind cannot see the advantage of having popular (and populist) opinion in your corner.
Equally, only the truly blind, only the True Believer, would fail to see the dangers of popular (and populist) opinions replacing knowledge and facts for making decisions on public policy.
Sorry are you saying they lack social skills completely?
It may seem that way if you're judging them out of context, yes.
I'm not that much older than Zuck and I can tell you right now that I would not consider it acceptable to ask for someone to resign or to fire them by email.
I hate to break it to you, but you're one person - and trying to draw a curve through a point comprised of a single piece of anecdata is abysmally stupid. Millennials and digital natives have (as a group) somewhat different social expectations and mores than the cohorts the preceded them, this is well known and widely established.
Actually yes. The case officer is responsible for classifying and labelling any document they write before it's distributed.
Precisely this. The grandparent has it completely wrong, responsibility for classification lies with the originator (and can be identified by text, a stamp is not required) not with the recipient or reader.
Hillary Clinton is many things, but being at fault for handling a document according to it's markings rather than according to how they should have been marked isn't clearly one of them.
Profit. Their basic business model depends on an endless supply of drivers that will work cheap and who can be replaced at will, local exceptions don't change that.
If they enjoy Uber then perhaps theyd really enjoy a taxi service. Taxis, offer all the benefits of Uber with the convenience of government controls like licensing, inspection, background checks, and safety standards for vehicles as well as passengers.
From TFA; Before Uber came to the countryâ"it currently operates in Jeddah and Dammam, in addition to Riyadhâ"women relied on private drivers (if they could afford them) or the limo companies that Uber now works with (for regulatory reasons, Uber in Saudi Arabia does not work with contracted drivers using their own carsâ"all Uber rides go through existing companies).
So that's exactly what they are getting - existing taxi services, only with Uber acting as a middleman and skimming of their cut.
Then I'm afraid you don't know what infrastructure means.
Yes, I do know what infrastructure means.
Infrastructure is exactly what the supercharger network is.
The supercharger network fits neither definition. It's not a basic underlying framework or feature of Tesla - it could vanish tomorrow and their business would continue without a bobble. Nor does it fit the second definition - which refers to public services and utilities, not private businesses.
It's a loss leader, a service that Tesla pays for and provides to their customers for free in order to attract business.
(Seriously, what motivates you to mangle the language so, rather than admitting you're wrong and recognizing the truth?)
If employees are initiating wire transfers on the basis of simple emails - the problem is less one of them being scammed than it is lack of basic accounting controls. It's a large scale version of the "toner cartridge" scam, and works on the same principle.
"Trust, but verify [the paperwork]" should be the order of the day. Preventing (or at least raising the difficulty of) this kind of scam is why purchase orders, invoices, etc... were invented in the first place.
Amazon's lack of profitability was/is in some ways artificial - they spent (are spending) a goodly chunk of cash on infrastructure.
Infrastructure. You mean like building a free supercharger network across the country and internationally?
No, I mean things like warehouses and distribution centers and data centers - things that turn around and generate cash flow. I mean the normal meaning of the word infrastructure.
Tesla's solution to running short on cash is, and has always been, to sell equity.
They've sold plenty of debt alongside that equity. It's a viable strategy, but imposes burdens that equity doesn't. If you don't have a healthy cash flow, equity doesn't come back to bite you in that ass - debt does.
The people who decided that any video labeled pixels belongs to them and is to be removed from the internet. Thats who.
That doesn't answer my question - it just places you in the same (clueless) camp as the grandparent, waving banners and mouthing slogans but never actually thinking about the meaning of either.
The entire intellectual property debate is backwards.
The debate only exists in the twisted imagination of fools like yourself - who believe that they, somehow, should have umlimited rights to the creations of others.
Gaining market share in an entrenched industry by turning convention on its head may not be extremely profitable at first. Despite that, it still works sometimes: are Jeff Bezos' ear's ringing?
Amazon's lack of profitability was/is in some ways artificial - they spent (are spending) a goodly chunk of cash on infrastructure. And even when they weren't (technically) profitable, they still had a healthy cash flow (which Tesla doesn't have).
With their debt load, an unhealthy cash flow is a real problem. Without cash flow, you're limited in your ability to re-finance or to pay interest while pushing the repayment of principal into the future. (Which isn't the best strategy overall, though it can work if the stars align.)
When are we collectively going to stand up and say that the real pirates are the ones who steal our culture from us piece by piece?
Who exactly is stealing the culture here? It's not like we created it and somehow the megacorps are making off with it - they created it in the first place. Seriously, you're pissed because you can't do what you will with bland corporate pablum?
And put the roads underground in the cities too. The price of the real estate you free up for better use makes this worth the money.
Even if excavation and construction was cheap (it isn't) - the cost of moving all the infrastructure located beneath the streets would make this scheme cost prohibitive. And the real estate thus freed up would be pretty much useless because you wouldn't be able to build anything significant on top of it.
That is the difference between the average and the great IMHO.
Or the lucky.
Spot on. One of the reasons the Merlin engine is so small (relatively speaking) and Falcon 9 has nine of them - is that Musk and SpaceX screwed up, badly. They bought into the article of faith in alt.space that there is a huge and untapped market demand for small payload launch services and that was a logical place for rebel startups to position themselves. (Resulting in the Falcon I.) They got lucky and managed to get a new design (using those undersized engines) aimed at the major market (medium lift) out the door before they ran out of money, and got lucky again that NASA's COTS effort was finally reaching fruition just as they needed a steady revenue stream.
Of course, Musk spins it differently... that it's all worked out According To Plan, and that's the version repeated by the hero worshipers.
Items listed as having Prime often do not arrive for 5-6 business days. This is typical for larger items. It annoys me that Amazon lists tham as prime (to me this means item will arrive 2-3 business days)
Nowhere in the definition of Prime is a shipping speed guaranteed. Don't blame Amazon for asinine assumptions you've made on your own hook.
Slashdot Mirror
When the charge you lay against it is "it's just not cool enough"... Why should anyone provide a serious defense to such a ludicrous notion?
Not really - the environments are simply too different, and thus there is virtually nothing common in the equipment. Exploration training can be conducted much more cheaply on Earth, and logistics and planning training much more cheaply in LEO.
For the same reason you don't practice for an expedition to Antarctica in the Sahara desert.
Well, to offset your anecdata - here's mine. I know three people who worked for Amazon (as programmers, analysts, and managers, not line warehouse workers), all three shared the article on their Facebook pages and praised it.
And you should, you've made the classic error of generalizing from your experience.
And understanding it is more than being a programmer - it's also understanding the problem domain.
Just because the story is in the public domain, that doesn't mean you have the ability to use the trademarks.
The problem isn't fans - the problem is fans that repeat whatever celebrities say with no more real understanding of what they've said than than possessed by the coffee cup at my elbow. The problem isn't fans - the problem is fans who'll accept whatever the celebrities say and defend it unquestioningly.
And that's the crossroads we stand at - a weird intersection of cargo cultists and cults of personality. They'll take whatever Randall, or Neil, or Jaime, or Bill says - and share, and like, and +1, and retweet it unquestioningly as if it were the Word Of $DIETY. Ask them to explain what they just quoted means, and you'll just get the words of the $CELEBRITY quoted back at you. Try and hold an actual discussion, and anything that even remotely smacks of not accepting The Word gets you labeled a "hater" or "denier" (or worse).
Though the True Believers think otherwise, these "fans" aren't really any better for society than the thumpers, or the followers of the celebrity of the moment, or the defenders of the local sportsball team.
Equally, only the truly blind, only the True Believer, would fail to see the dangers of popular (and populist) opinions replacing knowledge and facts for making decisions on public policy.
It may seem that way if you're judging them out of context, yes.
I hate to break it to you, but you're one person - and trying to draw a curve through a point comprised of a single piece of anecdata is abysmally stupid. Millennials and digital natives have (as a group) somewhat different social expectations and mores than the cohorts the preceded them, this is well known and widely established.
Both Mark Zuckerberg and Tim Campos are millenials - their standards for such things are very different from anyone over 40.
Precisely this. The grandparent has it completely wrong, responsibility for classification lies with the originator (and can be identified by text, a stamp is not required) not with the recipient or reader.
Hillary Clinton is many things, but being at fault for handling a document according to it's markings rather than according to how they should have been marked isn't clearly one of them.
Why should reporters be held to a higher standard than the average Slashdotter?
Profit. Their basic business model depends on an endless supply of drivers that will work cheap and who can be replaced at will, local exceptions don't change that.
From TFA; Before Uber came to the countryâ"it currently operates in Jeddah and Dammam, in addition to Riyadhâ"women relied on private drivers (if they could afford them) or the limo companies that Uber now works with (for regulatory reasons, Uber in Saudi Arabia does not work with contracted drivers using their own carsâ"all Uber rides go through existing companies).
So that's exactly what they are getting - existing taxi services, only with Uber acting as a middleman and skimming of their cut.
Yes, I do know what infrastructure means.
The supercharger network fits neither definition. It's not a basic underlying framework or feature of Tesla - it could vanish tomorrow and their business would continue without a bobble. Nor does it fit the second definition - which refers to public services and utilities, not private businesses.
It's a loss leader, a service that Tesla pays for and provides to their customers for free in order to attract business.
(Seriously, what motivates you to mangle the language so, rather than admitting you're wrong and recognizing the truth?)
If employees are initiating wire transfers on the basis of simple emails - the problem is less one of them being scammed than it is lack of basic accounting controls. It's a large scale version of the "toner cartridge" scam, and works on the same principle.
"Trust, but verify [the paperwork]" should be the order of the day. Preventing (or at least raising the difficulty of) this kind of scam is why purchase orders, invoices, etc... were invented in the first place.
No, I mean things like warehouses and distribution centers and data centers - things that turn around and generate cash flow. I mean the normal meaning of the word infrastructure.
The word you're looking for is loss leader.
They've sold plenty of debt alongside that equity. It's a viable strategy, but imposes burdens that equity doesn't. If you don't have a healthy cash flow, equity doesn't come back to bite you in that ass - debt does.
That doesn't answer my question - it just places you in the same (clueless) camp as the grandparent, waving banners and mouthing slogans but never actually thinking about the meaning of either.
The debate only exists in the twisted imagination of fools like yourself - who believe that they, somehow, should have umlimited rights to the creations of others.
Amazon's lack of profitability was/is in some ways artificial - they spent (are spending) a goodly chunk of cash on infrastructure. And even when they weren't (technically) profitable, they still had a healthy cash flow (which Tesla doesn't have).
With their debt load, an unhealthy cash flow is a real problem. Without cash flow, you're limited in your ability to re-finance or to pay interest while pushing the repayment of principal into the future. (Which isn't the best strategy overall, though it can work if the stars align.)
Who exactly is stealing the culture here? It's not like we created it and somehow the megacorps are making off with it - they created it in the first place. Seriously, you're pissed because you can't do what you will with bland corporate pablum?
Slashdot has been quicker to get the news out of late...
Translation: It's a biased and bigoted subreddit where mental midgets 'justify' their racism.
Even if excavation and construction was cheap (it isn't) - the cost of moving all the infrastructure located beneath the streets would make this scheme cost prohibitive. And the real estate thus freed up would be pretty much useless because you wouldn't be able to build anything significant on top of it.
Spot on. One of the reasons the Merlin engine is so small (relatively speaking) and Falcon 9 has nine of them - is that Musk and SpaceX screwed up, badly. They bought into the article of faith in alt.space that there is a huge and untapped market demand for small payload launch services and that was a logical place for rebel startups to position themselves. (Resulting in the Falcon I.) They got lucky and managed to get a new design (using those undersized engines) aimed at the major market (medium lift) out the door before they ran out of money, and got lucky again that NASA's COTS effort was finally reaching fruition just as they needed a steady revenue stream.
Of course, Musk spins it differently... that it's all worked out According To Plan, and that's the version repeated by the hero worshipers.
Nowhere in the definition of Prime is a shipping speed guaranteed. Don't blame Amazon for asinine assumptions you've made on your own hook.