If they only published detailed designs that they were actually proposing to produce, and set up a process of the public "voting up" recommended changes, you would be amazed at what could be done.
Part of a the beauty of a good design comes from inspiration. Problem is, inspiration doesn't work from 9 to 5. Even the most uncreative can have a moment of total brilliance that will change the direction of a large project. The hard part is separating the wheat from the chaff, and testing is damnably expensive. Crowd sourcing the task of vetting designs and proposed changes would give NASA the biggest bang for the buck. A 1000 shade-tree engineers could work on new bracket designs independently, each hoping for the honor of having designed a part that rode into space.
I've nearly completed a homebuilt airplane. I can tell you without a doubt that there is a constant backdrop of intellectual competition among a subset of homebuilders who are trying to invent better/stronger/faster/cheaper/easier/simpler/safer parts/design/techniques. With the right attitude, NASA could have this working for them for almost free.
Civil lawyers are not the ones empowered to meter out punitive actions. That is why we have various agencies regulating trade. If the companies are so evil, why are there no criminal actions being taken against them.
You don't "enter" a class action. You are "put" in it, unless you take proactive steps to get out of it.
And as to the other argument being put forth in this thread, it is not the civil lawyer's job to "punish" a poorly acting company. We have state and federal entities for that which we have already paid for. Again, we're paying exhorbitant taxes for government, and not getting what we've paid for.
You obviously don't live in the US. Our Supreme Court has said that not only does some unspecified "signal" from a dog constitute legal "suspicion", but that the police have a right to search your person and effects if they stop you while travelling. If you demand a search warrant, you will sit on the side of the road for hours while someone gets around to fetching one from a magistrate who is part of the police infrastructure. The policeman doesn't mind waiting, he's on the clock and can be relieved by his buddies for a potty break, but you're not allowed to leave or access your own property.
You can already get a better tablet for less. I carry a LePan that I got from Wal-Mart. Not a big name, but it is solid as a rock, with a 10" display, GPS, accelerometer, bluetooth and SD slot.
It would be funny, except that it was a US Supreme Court decision passed down LAST MONTH!!
In this case, the EPA said a couple could not build on their own land. The people asked for the evidence the EPA used to make that ruling. The EPA said, "No, you can't see the evidence. We said you can't, so suck it."
No. "The freemarket is great as long as the government's beneath it".
The government doesn't backup the market, it is the foundation for it. Without a strong government, the market will fall as surely as a house built on sand.
As a libertarian, I do wish people would stop talking about free markets in infrastructure. It's stupid.
People, the key part of infrastructure is INFRA. It is those constructs that allow people to interact and is the FOUNDATION of a free market. How the hell can you have a free market, if the farmer is not able to get produce to the market because there is no road? A previous poster had it 100% correct. The construction of roads and communication networks is a proper and necessary role of government. In fact, owning and operating ANY infrastructure that requires the power of eminent domain to construct is a proper role of government. "We had to take your land for the public good." Well, if it is some important to the public, the public needs to maintain control of it.
Call me socialist if you want, but the friggin' Founding Fathers (take that Glen Beck) recognized the importance of government own infrastructure. The Constitution (of the US) give the responsibility of maintaining interstate roads to the federal government. And it just makes sense, because anything else leads to an unmitigated cluster fuck, like what passes for a rail system in the US.
To my Libertarian friends, please stop trying to define what the government should not be doing. You will always overreach and end up looking silly. Approach the problem from the direction of what SHOULD a government be responsible for and why. If we can politicians to do that, they will be way to busy to engage in most of the distractions that they currently do. (For example, why are you wasting time on hearings about professional athletes taking steroids instead of REGULATING A BROKEN RAIL SYSTEM!!!).
-And concrete is hard on tires, causing them to wear out faster. -And concrete is EXPENSIVE to lay
-Asphalt is EXPENSIVE to maintain, especially in large traffic areas. -most asphalt is as non-permeable as concrete. Most local ordinances don't differentiate between the two when calculating water runoff from parking lots.
the clay and gravel does several jobs. It provides a "flexible" foundation so the road above can flex a bit instead of breaking. It provides for drainage while remaining stable. This job cannot be understated, as the ground moving from under the asphalt often does move damage than the traffic on top of it.
My company needs to raise some money, so the board decides to issue some stock. Mr. Wall M. Street give me $100/share for it. After that, it enters the machine, and these guy's programs tell each other that it ranges from $80 to $120/share, and they pass imaginary money back and forth while doing it. Meanwhile, my company is using the money it collected to build a new data center. The E level company officers might care, because their bonuses are based on what the imaginary price is today, but why should I?
It's a CHOCOLATE store. How much are people willing to pay for chocolate that they can get in the grocery store? If he were forced to pay $10/hr, he'd probably just close up shop.
Look, there are some jobs that are "menial labor". They don't pay much, because they're not worth enough to anybody to pay much. If I have to pay more that $20, I'll mow my own lawn. I'm sure you're the greatest lawnmower pusher ever born, but it ain't worth more than $20 to me to walk behind one for an hour or so. Come to my house willing to do it for a 20, and you've got a job. Demand more, and you can hit the bricks. Whine all you wanna about how much your rent is, I'll just whine back about how much it cost to get someone to mow a lawn.
With a wife and two kids, I got one of those jobs that promise to pay for education as a benefit. I had to fight tooth and nail to actually use it. Manager didn't want to approve it lot of the time, and it is a bitch to work a 12hour shift and still have to show up for class.
It took me six years, but I got a grand total of $250 is aid from the school, for being a non-black kid at a historically black college (most racist place I've ever been in my life, but that's a different story).
I just find it hard to have sympathy for these people that make such an illogical move as to pay the equivalent of a mortgage for a useless "education". All I can say, is that he got an education, all right, but it wasn't in theater management. Now, did he learn anything from it?
I tried to hire someone for the software company I started. The tax paperwork was enough to bulldoze anyone who was already busy trying to actually make something that someone wanted to buy. The EOE regulations were a nightmare. And this was just for a part-time guy to do testing from his own home. I ended up paying a contracting company to pay him for me. I knew someone that cut me a deal, so that I was only paying a 15% premium.
A friend ran a small printing shop out of their family home. Business was pretty good and they wanted to hire on a part-time person. The regulators came in and would have them install a second bathroom, handicap ramps, and a host of other useless additions to their house. They chose to scale back their business.
Try to open an airport sometime, you worthless barnacle. The government will bury you in paperwork. The owner of the airpark where I'm renting an hangar won't allow training operations, because of what all the regulations will cost him. No one is ashamed of anything. You're just asking us how do we know that blood is red, or what do we know about recent history. The scope of the question is so hard, it is hard to see a single tree for the forest. Try doing something useful someday, and you'll understand.
Instead of a ban on softdrinks, enforce a regulation requiring publishing of the amount of sugar in a drink. I loved eating out in Washington, DC, and yes the nutrition information in the menu did have an impact on what I ordered. But, do you see the difference? Instead of making decisions for me, the government enforces regulations that allow me to make informed decisions.
Instead of the FDA regulating what drugs can be sold or who can claim to be a doctor, enforce a system of credentials. Like a business won't buy a microwave that doesn't have an UL stamp, most people won't give money to shills.
we need a strong central government and strongly regulated markets in order for them to be truly free.
Yes. This. People are greedy and corruptable, so we need to centralize the power to make it easy for greedy and corruptable to get control of it. You, sir, are a genius.
Slashdot Mirror
Fear of my neighbors? WTF, dude, they're the ones I would look to for rescue...which I wouldn't be able to do if they weren't allowed to own guns.
If they only published detailed designs that they were actually proposing to produce, and set up a process of the public "voting up" recommended changes, you would be amazed at what could be done.
Part of a the beauty of a good design comes from inspiration. Problem is, inspiration doesn't work from 9 to 5. Even the most uncreative can have a moment of total brilliance that will change the direction of a large project. The hard part is separating the wheat from the chaff, and testing is damnably expensive. Crowd sourcing the task of vetting designs and proposed changes would give NASA the biggest bang for the buck. A 1000 shade-tree engineers could work on new bracket designs independently, each hoping for the honor of having designed a part that rode into space.
I've nearly completed a homebuilt airplane. I can tell you without a doubt that there is a constant backdrop of intellectual competition among a subset of homebuilders who are trying to invent better/stronger/faster/cheaper/easier/simpler/safer parts/design/techniques. With the right attitude, NASA could have this working for them for almost free.
Bombs are a form of diplomacy.
"My large friend here says that we should have a discussion. Would you like to sit down and talk?"
Civil lawyers are not the ones empowered to meter out punitive actions. That is why we have various agencies regulating trade. If the companies are so evil, why are there no criminal actions being taken against them.
You don't "enter" a class action. You are "put" in it, unless you take proactive steps to get out of it.
And as to the other argument being put forth in this thread, it is not the civil lawyer's job to "punish" a poorly acting company. We have state and federal entities for that which we have already paid for. Again, we're paying exhorbitant taxes for government, and not getting what we've paid for.
You obviously don't live in the US. Our Supreme Court has said that not only does some unspecified "signal" from a dog constitute legal "suspicion", but that the police have a right to search your person and effects if they stop you while travelling. If you demand a search warrant, you will sit on the side of the road for hours while someone gets around to fetching one from a magistrate who is part of the police infrastructure. The policeman doesn't mind waiting, he's on the clock and can be relieved by his buddies for a potty break, but you're not allowed to leave or access your own property.
Welcome to the land of the free.
What if you're eating lunch at Hooter's?
You can already get a better tablet for less. I carry a LePan that I got from Wal-Mart. Not a big name, but it is solid as a rock, with a 10" display, GPS, accelerometer, bluetooth and SD slot.
The EPA? When was the last time any individual found themselves being bullied and intimidated by the EPA? Seriously?
Damn. Really? No one has responded, so I guess I'm going to have to blow a bunch of moderation to help you get a clue.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CE4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.supremecourt.gov%2Fopinions%2F11pdf%2F10-1062.pdf&ei=Div_T5_QBYbJqgGE75yLCQ&usg=AFQjCNFMHpH6WBivW4LSGWRZvwmx87Bk5w&sig2=TqpGGUq0wCrnglA5qxxNrg
It would be funny, except that it was a US Supreme Court decision passed down LAST MONTH!!
In this case, the EPA said a couple could not build on their own land. The people asked for the evidence the EPA used to make that ruling. The EPA said, "No, you can't see the evidence. We said you can't, so suck it."
Sounds like bullying to me.
No. "The freemarket is great as long as the government's beneath it".
The government doesn't backup the market, it is the foundation for it. Without a strong government, the market will fall as surely as a house built on sand.
As a libertarian, I do wish people would stop talking about free markets in infrastructure. It's stupid.
People, the key part of infrastructure is INFRA. It is those constructs that allow people to interact and is the FOUNDATION of a free market. How the hell can you have a free market, if the farmer is not able to get produce to the market because there is no road? A previous poster had it 100% correct. The construction of roads and communication networks is a proper and necessary role of government. In fact, owning and operating ANY infrastructure that requires the power of eminent domain to construct is a proper role of government. "We had to take your land for the public good." Well, if it is some important to the public, the public needs to maintain control of it.
Call me socialist if you want, but the friggin' Founding Fathers (take that Glen Beck) recognized the importance of government own infrastructure. The Constitution (of the US) give the responsibility of maintaining interstate roads to the federal government. And it just makes sense, because anything else leads to an unmitigated cluster fuck, like what passes for a rail system in the US.
To my Libertarian friends, please stop trying to define what the government should not be doing. You will always overreach and end up looking silly. Approach the problem from the direction of what SHOULD a government be responsible for and why. If we can politicians to do that, they will be way to busy to engage in most of the distractions that they currently do. (For example, why are you wasting time on hearings about professional athletes taking steroids instead of REGULATING A BROKEN RAIL SYSTEM!!!).
-And concrete is hard on tires, causing them to wear out faster.
-And concrete is EXPENSIVE to lay
-Asphalt is EXPENSIVE to maintain, especially in large traffic areas.
-most asphalt is as non-permeable as concrete. Most local ordinances don't differentiate between the two when calculating water runoff from parking lots.
the clay and gravel does several jobs. It provides a "flexible" foundation so the road above can flex a bit instead of breaking. It provides for drainage while remaining stable. This job cannot be understated, as the ground moving from under the asphalt often does move damage than the traffic on top of it.
And what was the lasting result? Who lost any actual money? Would it be the casual trader that paniced and sold all their stock while it was down?
Maybe the HFT are performing the necessary role of separating from money people who are to foolish to handle it properly?
The point I don't understand is, "Who cares?"
My company needs to raise some money, so the board decides to issue some stock. Mr. Wall M. Street give me $100/share for it. After that, it enters the machine, and these guy's programs tell each other that it ranges from $80 to $120/share, and they pass imaginary money back and forth while doing it. Meanwhile, my company is using the money it collected to build a new data center. The E level company officers might care, because their bonuses are based on what the imaginary price is today, but why should I?
They'd text, actually. What are you? A luddite? 8*)
But...all my fans get a layer of dust on each fan blade. What are they doing differently that will stop this?
"So what is a high school graduate who wants to work as a programmer to do?"
Seek professional counseling. You know not of that which you think you desire.
8*)
It's a CHOCOLATE store. How much are people willing to pay for chocolate that they can get in the grocery store? If he were forced to pay $10/hr, he'd probably just close up shop.
Look, there are some jobs that are "menial labor". They don't pay much, because they're not worth enough to anybody to pay much. If I have to pay more that $20, I'll mow my own lawn. I'm sure you're the greatest lawnmower pusher ever born, but it ain't worth more than $20 to me to walk behind one for an hour or so. Come to my house willing to do it for a 20, and you've got a job. Demand more, and you can hit the bricks. Whine all you wanna about how much your rent is, I'll just whine back about how much it cost to get someone to mow a lawn.
He didn't think.
With a wife and two kids, I got one of those jobs that promise to pay for education as a benefit. I had to fight tooth and nail to actually use it. Manager didn't want to approve it lot of the time, and it is a bitch to work a 12hour shift and still have to show up for class.
It took me six years, but I got a grand total of $250 is aid from the school, for being a non-black kid at a historically black college (most racist place I've ever been in my life, but that's a different story).
I just find it hard to have sympathy for these people that make such an illogical move as to pay the equivalent of a mortgage for a useless "education". All I can say, is that he got an education, all right, but it wasn't in theater management. Now, did he learn anything from it?
So you think the fact that their customary meeting place is the legislature is irrelevant?
No more shit than you're spouting.
I tried to hire someone for the software company I started. The tax paperwork was enough to bulldoze anyone who was already busy trying to actually make something that someone wanted to buy. The EOE regulations were a nightmare. And this was just for a part-time guy to do testing from his own home. I ended up paying a contracting company to pay him for me. I knew someone that cut me a deal, so that I was only paying a 15% premium.
A friend ran a small printing shop out of their family home. Business was pretty good and they wanted to hire on a part-time person. The regulators came in and would have them install a second bathroom, handicap ramps, and a host of other useless additions to their house. They chose to scale back their business.
Try to open an airport sometime, you worthless barnacle. The government will bury you in paperwork. The owner of the airpark where I'm renting an hangar won't allow training operations, because of what all the regulations will cost him. No one is ashamed of anything. You're just asking us how do we know that blood is red, or what do we know about recent history. The scope of the question is so hard, it is hard to see a single tree for the forest. Try doing something useful someday, and you'll understand.
Do you mean a central government like Syria, Libya and Egypt have/had?
Instead of a ban on softdrinks, enforce a regulation requiring publishing of the amount of sugar in a drink. I loved eating out in Washington, DC, and yes the nutrition information in the menu did have an impact on what I ordered. But, do you see the difference? Instead of making decisions for me, the government enforces regulations that allow me to make informed decisions.
Instead of the FDA regulating what drugs can be sold or who can claim to be a doctor, enforce a system of credentials. Like a business won't buy a microwave that doesn't have an UL stamp, most people won't give money to shills.
we need a strong central government and strongly regulated markets in order for them to be truly free.
Yes. This. People are greedy and corruptable, so we need to centralize the power to make it easy for greedy and corruptable to get control of it. You, sir, are a genius.