The subtext, the one being ignored as people are totting up the ways Google made money on the deal, is that this is exactly the kind of behavior so often deplored when someone who isn't Google does it.
Their careers were sustained quite handsomely by the grants/salaries they were operating under.
Their *paychecks* were so sustained, assuming they had grants or salaries the whole time. (And living on grants is no picnic, there's almost always of limited duration, which means there's always the scramble for another.)
And the papers they may have submitted and the research they performed did nothing to hurt their career path either.
Yeah, "Notes on the performance of a proposed Lyman Alpha spectrometer", real Nobel Prize stuff there. Not.
If you don't fly an instrument, you pretty much don't *have* a career as a scientist, your research is trawling through old data in hopes of discovering something new, and if you do have a non engineering paper odds are it's a survey paper or something similarly career enhancing.
Or, to put it another way, you have no clue what you're talking about. Worse yet, such ignorance seems to be a deliberate choice on your part. I'm done here.
Yeah, working for NASA and JPL ten years on a 90 day mission has a lot of risk to their careers. Really? Nobody is "risking their careers" working on the single most prestigious off-world project in existence.
You should read some of the books written by the scientist's on the MER (Spirit/Opportunity) and Curiosity rovers - for some of them it was twenty or thirty years of working on instruments that never flew before they finally got an instrument on a flight. And then, after working for years on a flight instrument, there's the non trivial chance the flight will fail outright and never reach or function on the surface. Even if does reach the surface, there's the non zero risk of a failure ending the mission early (as nearly happened to Spirit). Even without a mission ending failure, there's also the chance of one that affects the instrument in one way or another. Etc... etc...
So maybe 'risk their career' wasn't quite the right way of expressing the coin they pay, but it's foolish to assume that even if the mission succeeds they've risked or spent nothing.
The (many years worth of images), it takes time for all of them to be transmitted. Other data may not so readily interpreted, but its not like it would be totally beyond other scientists to evaluate it.
Yes, it takes time for them to be transmitted, a day or two at worst. (You do realize that the latest data on that page is only about 48 hours old, right?)
As a sop to the scientists who, as the public's proxy, have spent years or decades working on the instrument that gathered the data. They took the risk to their careers, and as member of the public I have no problem with giving them first crack at reaping the rewards.
Yet you still stand by your unsupported hypothesis and refuse to produce facts. Twenty two years in the Chair Force doesn't magically change supposition into facts.
Don't bother to answer, as your replies tell the truth of the matter - you've been caught slinging bullshit and can't stand being called on it.
Um, prior to this decree they did so anyway. (And seemingly without repercussion - I haven't seen any tech CEO's or PAO's or General Counsel's hauled off the camps, have you?) If they hadn't done so, this decree wouldn't have come about in the first place.
Gyroscopic torque is a production of the RPM of the gyro, the mass of the gyro, and the angular displacement. They don't have to be sudden, they just have to be there.
Try actually reading what I wrote rather than cherry picking for karma. Then, with a little luck and presuming you have an IQ above room temperature, you might dimly grasp the difference between the current situation and a police state.
P.S. I hope none of the words I used were too big for you.
Instead of repealing the police state, they are normalizing it.
*yawn* overhype much?
If we lived in a police state - they wouldn't be allowed to talk about the requests at all. These things are despicable and incompatible with normal criminal procedure, but the hype and irrationality surround them helps no one.
*Sigh* but the 'net's tendency towards shrillness. overhype, and irrationality has already 'normalized' these things.
On the contrary, your post was a complete ass pull. Mine was factual, living in a military town I've seen first hand what's happened and why. Just because you're a clueless idiot, that doesn't mean everyone else is.
Certain air force bases had a garage with tools where airmen could bring their beater cars and fix them up. There was generally some volunteer car mechanic there from the motor pool pitching in to help.
Now I don't think they have this anymore, mostly due to liability.
You think they don't have them anyone... but even though you don't know whether they do or not, you're certain about the reason they don't. Typical.
If they don't, it's far more likely it's because of force and budget reductions than anything else. That and the maintainable by the shade tree mechanic beater car of yesteryear is all but gone. Beaters today come from the 90's, and there's darn little you can do with them without specialized tools and knowledge,
You get that "Jackass pedant of the day" award. "Frankenstein" has a well known cultural meaning as well, and the article's usage of the term is consistent with that.
Seriously, why are practically all the highly rated comments to this article nothing but pedantic nitpicks?
I knew about Johnny but couldn't remember the title, so I didn't want to go back past my own childhood.:)
But yeah, it's very interesting how the teachers are quick to claim the limelight when Johhny wins the Science Fair, and scurry like rats when he can't read.
The statistics are well known, you're biased and wrong.
Especially if you don't know the type of pilot assigned to the Aggressor/Red Flag (or whatever their current name is) squadrons. Take off your blinders and get out of your bubble.
If you think I believe in either one of those, you've managed demonstrate a even greater level of cluelessness that I have thought possible given the great depths of the same you've already demonstrated,
First of all, why is the Teacher's Union demonized here but the prison guards or border guards' union is not? Food for thought.
Food for thought? No, not at all. It just shows how deeply biased you are and how tightly your blinders fit that you can't see why. Seriously, pretty much everyone has at least one completely crappy teacher and one ancient past-their-prime marking-time-to-retirement teacher over the course of the travels from K-12. We demonize the teacher's union because they enable and tacitly condone such things.
Second of all, all you parents in the room, all this bitching about poor teachers is a pretty recent thing
No, it's not. It goes back at least as far as when I was a kid in the 70's - long before cell phones, widespread 'drugging up', or home video game systems.
Stop blaming the teachers and look in the fucking mirror.
While I agree the parents should shoulder their portion of the blame, you need to get out of your echo chamber and into the real world.
One (of many) reasons that the US military sucks up so much money is that our pilots train continuously. In the C17, pilots do not reach the Aircraft Commander level until 4 or 5 *years* after putting on wings. Obviously, fighters have a different training program, but clearly huge amounts of continuous training are involved. So, yes, in practical terms, the operational Air Force is made up of almost nothing but experienced pilots.
In practical terms, no, the operational Air Force is anything *but* made up of experienced pilots. You have a significant fraction that are relatively new (less than two or three years experience). You also have a significant fraction that have (within a year or so) just returned from non-flying duties.
Not to mention the "experienced" pilots in the OP are either pilots with notable air combat experience, or long (twelve to fifteen years plus) service experience.
And don't rule out older designs, the military used to train pilots in new planes by pitting them against experienced pilots in F4s and other older jets, and routinely the older jets would get kills against the new ones.
So long as your Air Force is made up of nothing but experienced pilots, you'll do fine then.
Jet fuel is to kerosene roughly as sirloin is to beef - I.E. one is a specific product with specific requirements, the other is a broad family. Only an uneducated fool would go "they're all meat but sirloin sounds cooler".
Kerosene is broad family of closely related products, and the stuff you're thinking of (for home heating, camping lanterns, etc...) is generally only refined/controlled within fairly broad limits. Jet fuel is refined to a specific standard, closely controlling the flash, smoke, and autoignition points, the energy available per liter, etc...
I sound like a cook in a restaurant who, among many other things, has been making peanut butter and jam sandwiches for twenty years, and someone starting a new restaurant is asking for a recipe for peanut butter and jam sandwiches.
Your self delusion and arrogance runs even deeper than you made it sound at first, not a trivial accomplishment.
You sound like a cook in a restaurant bitching about having to cook dinner for all your customers every single freakin' night, how are those ungrateful bastards hungry again?. Seriously, get over yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
The subtext, the one being ignored as people are totting up the ways Google made money on the deal, is that this is exactly the kind of behavior so often deplored when someone who isn't Google does it.
Their *paychecks* were so sustained, assuming they had grants or salaries the whole time. (And living on grants is no picnic, there's almost always of limited duration, which means there's always the scramble for another.)
Yeah, "Notes on the performance of a proposed Lyman Alpha spectrometer", real Nobel Prize stuff there. Not.
If you don't fly an instrument, you pretty much don't *have* a career as a scientist, your research is trawling through old data in hopes of discovering something new, and if you do have a non engineering paper odds are it's a survey paper or something similarly career enhancing.
Or, to put it another way, you have no clue what you're talking about. Worse yet, such ignorance seems to be a deliberate choice on your part. I'm done here.
You should read some of the books written by the scientist's on the MER (Spirit/Opportunity) and Curiosity rovers - for some of them it was twenty or thirty years of working on instruments that never flew before they finally got an instrument on a flight. And then, after working for years on a flight instrument, there's the non trivial chance the flight will fail outright and never reach or function on the surface. Even if does reach the surface, there's the non zero risk of a failure ending the mission early (as nearly happened to Spirit). Even without a mission ending failure, there's also the chance of one that affects the instrument in one way or another. Etc... etc...
So maybe 'risk their career' wasn't quite the right way of expressing the coin they pay, but it's foolish to assume that even if the mission succeeds they've risked or spent nothing.
Yes, it takes time for them to be transmitted, a day or two at worst. (You do realize that the latest data on that page is only about 48 hours old, right?)
As a sop to the scientists who, as the public's proxy, have spent years or decades working on the instrument that gathered the data. They took the risk to their careers, and as member of the public I have no problem with giving them first crack at reaping the rewards.
I've been saying for years that, other than pilots and co-pilots, NASA should stop recruiting pilots and aviators - and recruit submariners.
Yet you still stand by your unsupported hypothesis and refuse to produce facts. Twenty two years in the Chair Force doesn't magically change supposition into facts.
Don't bother to answer, as your replies tell the truth of the matter - you've been caught slinging bullshit and can't stand being called on it.
Um, prior to this decree they did so anyway. (And seemingly without repercussion - I haven't seen any tech CEO's or PAO's or General Counsel's hauled off the camps, have you?) If they hadn't done so, this decree wouldn't have come about in the first place.
Gyroscopic torque is a production of the RPM of the gyro, the mass of the gyro, and the angular displacement. They don't have to be sudden, they just have to be there.
Try actually reading what I wrote rather than cherry picking for karma. Then, with a little luck and presuming you have an IQ above room temperature, you might dimly grasp the difference between the current situation and a police state.
P.S. I hope none of the words I used were too big for you.
*yawn* overhype much?
If we lived in a police state - they wouldn't be allowed to talk about the requests at all. These things are despicable and incompatible with normal criminal procedure, but the hype and irrationality surround them helps no one.
*Sigh* but the 'net's tendency towards shrillness. overhype, and irrationality has already 'normalized' these things.
The PCjr had three strikes against it right out of the box...
Even without it's various technical and performance problems and unclear target market, it still would have had a tough time gaining traction.
On the contrary, your post was a complete ass pull. Mine was factual, living in a military town I've seen first hand what's happened and why. Just because you're a clueless idiot, that doesn't mean everyone else is.
Because of hills and banked curves.
You think they don't have them anyone... but even though you don't know whether they do or not, you're certain about the reason they don't. Typical.
If they don't, it's far more likely it's because of force and budget reductions than anything else. That and the maintainable by the shade tree mechanic beater car of yesteryear is all but gone. Beaters today come from the 90's, and there's darn little you can do with them without specialized tools and knowledge,
You get that "Jackass pedant of the day" award. "Frankenstein" has a well known cultural meaning as well, and the article's usage of the term is consistent with that.
Seriously, why are practically all the highly rated comments to this article nothing but pedantic nitpicks?
I knew about Johnny but couldn't remember the title, so I didn't want to go back past my own childhood. :)
But yeah, it's very interesting how the teachers are quick to claim the limelight when Johhny wins the Science Fair, and scurry like rats when he can't read.
The statistics are well known, you're biased and wrong.
Especially if you don't know the type of pilot assigned to the Aggressor/Red Flag (or whatever their current name is) squadrons. Take off your blinders and get out of your bubble.
If you think I believe in either one of those, you've managed demonstrate a even greater level of cluelessness that I have thought possible given the great depths of the same you've already demonstrated,
The astonishing thing is that you think it's acceptable for the union to protect bad teachers.
Food for thought? No, not at all. It just shows how deeply biased you are and how tightly your blinders fit that you can't see why. Seriously, pretty much everyone has at least one completely crappy teacher and one ancient past-their-prime marking-time-to-retirement teacher over the course of the travels from K-12. We demonize the teacher's union because they enable and tacitly condone such things.
No, it's not. It goes back at least as far as when I was a kid in the 70's - long before cell phones, widespread 'drugging up', or home video game systems.
While I agree the parents should shoulder their portion of the blame, you need to get out of your echo chamber and into the real world.
In practical terms, no, the operational Air Force is anything *but* made up of experienced pilots. You have a significant fraction that are relatively new (less than two or three years experience). You also have a significant fraction that have (within a year or so) just returned from non-flying duties.
Not to mention the "experienced" pilots in the OP are either pilots with notable air combat experience, or long (twelve to fifteen years plus) service experience.
So long as your Air Force is made up of nothing but experienced pilots, you'll do fine then.
We''l just recruit new pilots from Lake Wobegon.
Jet fuel is to kerosene roughly as sirloin is to beef - I.E. one is a specific product with specific requirements, the other is a broad family. Only an uneducated fool would go "they're all meat but sirloin sounds cooler".
Kerosene is broad family of closely related products, and the stuff you're thinking of (for home heating, camping lanterns, etc...) is generally only refined/controlled within fairly broad limits. Jet fuel is refined to a specific standard, closely controlling the flash, smoke, and autoignition points, the energy available per liter, etc...
Your self delusion and arrogance runs even deeper than you made it sound at first, not a trivial accomplishment.
You sound like a cook in a restaurant bitching about having to cook dinner for all your customers every single freakin' night, how are those ungrateful bastards hungry again?. Seriously, get over yourself.