They're pulling it directly out of a pool of molten silicon. Even the crucible melts into the mixture during the process (which is actually a good thing - the Wikipedia entry explains why, incidentally.)
They likely use the same wire-saws to carve 'em out that I saw in the solar industry - the biggest worry there is kerfing along the face of the wafer, making it harder to surface properly. Once you start getting too thin, it ain't warping you have to worry about, as much as you have to worry about the damned thing shattering.
Now, if the original AC poster had, instead of using the insult directly, had linked to videos where friends, family or witnesses had described the events while referring to the cops as pigs, would you (or Nocturnal Deviant) think they were less deserving of empathy?
It's not a question of empathy, really. Nocturnal Deviant was only pointing out that maybe AC would've gotten the point across better if it wasn't inflammatory to the point of stupidity. If we were to exaggerate only a smidge, it would be like reading a post about Mideast peace talks while seeing the word "kikes" tossed around every other sentence or so in reference to Israelis. The original complaints and any salient points get drowned.
Hell, I perfectly agree that any abuse of power is incredibly wrong, and deserving of the harshest punishment in any society. But that really wasn't the point.
1) Huge accusations, but no cites. Considering the accusations, some credible and substantiated citations would have been damned useful, at least before you demand that someone form an opinion one way or the other (and no, "Google it" doesn't cut it, given that most of the links that are likely to come up will be slanted one way or the other).
2) GGP running around calling cops "pigs" at every other breath? It labels him quicker and more effectively than it labels the cops. He just doesn't understand that, and apparently neither do you.
I figured that someone with a low UID would be old enough by default to understand such simple things...
Intel recently built up (still building? can't recall) a new fab here in Oregon. It'll cost them $1bn or so, all said and done. Dropping that many ducats at a time gets expensive after awhile, even for a beast as big as Intel. Meanwhile, they still have a fab going that was originally built in the 1980's (the Aloha facility, if you're curious), and after they're done running whatever iteration they have passing through it now, it'll be useless as a fab (the walls are basically swiss cheese by now with all the holes punched and patched through them to accommodate new processes, new chip types, new machinery, etc).
Personally, I'm kind of curious how a 450mm wafer is going to do them much good.
Having worked in the solar industry (growing crystal is the same process as semiconductors for mono PV wafers), the CZ process used to grow monocrystal wafers eats a lot of time, and you can only get so much weight hanging off the "seed" (starter crystal) before it breaks. There's also the fact that as diameter increases, the need for more precise control over rotational speed during the grow increases (the thing spins at a precise speed, slowly pulling the cylindrical crystal out of a molten vat). I guess what I'm getting at is, sure they can have something at 450mm with enough precision and effort, but the resulting crystal would also have to be shorter overall, if only to keep the weight from snapping the seed crystal (causing the thing to splash back into the vat, tearing the crucible up, making a mess, and oh yeah - ruining the multi-hour run).
Long story short, they can likely (with a lot of effort, not to mention newer/bigger machinery) get bigger-diameter crystals, but because the seed can only be so big, the wafer yield will likely drop significantly.
1) Rand wasn't a Christian, she was atheist if I recall correctly.
2) The main complaint in Atlas Shrugged wasn't against charity as a concept, but against government-enforced charity (that is, forcing a collective morality, whether you wanted to participate or not). Didn't say anything that I can remember about voluntary charity being bad - just the enforced version of charity in the form of taxation. (hadn't read the book in well over two decades, so...)
Not an adherent by any stretch, but I do admit that I would much rather be the charitable voluntarily, than have the government force me to be as charitable as they see fit. Much like I wouldn't want the government enforcing church attendance or even conceiving of any law which would require certain thoughts or require a certain moral outlook.
It is cool as frig to see that someone went the distance on it. More often than not, I just said 'screw it' and restarted the game after I reached the main goal and won, or after it was apparent that I was toast. I only went long-term once, and that was only for a month (same schedule, off and on as time permitted). Got way too bored with it at that point, nuked the remaining cities, and restarted the game (or sometimes I'd just go all Anasazi on it and begin to dismantle all my cities to see what happened.)
I usually won it by being the American team up-front, since the game engineered that particular role to be even more aggressive than the real USA could ever hope to be.
Best bet though was to find and identify the aggressive mofos up-front, wipe them out post-haste, and then quickly surround the weaker nations with your stuff so that they didn't expand. Eventually, you could leave them with one city apiece, and you own the rest.
My next job paid about 80K/y. This is with all 2 years of experience. I live in SF.
What is up with all these people with real skills working for 40K? I don't get it. Maybe they should migrate to where the jobs are.
You forgot cost-of-living.
I can live like a deity in rural Mississippi or Arkansas on $40k/yr. OTOH, $90k/yr is pretty damned low for San Francisco (unless you really, really, really like commuting).
Seriously, I've turned down job offers out of SanFran for up to $125-$150k, if only because I couldn't afford to rent anything bigger than a broom closet in that county on the pay being offered (not to mention the somewhat brutal taxation you get subjected to just by living there...)
I completely agree on bargaining, if only to see how far you can get.
OTOH, if it's a foot in the door to bigger things, why not take the chance? In the long run, it will increase your salary, even if that increase comes after you leave.
Agreed with sibling, but I have a different reason:
Sure you can get someone desperate in the door, but they damned sure won't hang around too long.
I usually sit in on hiring decisions, and honestly? We immediately write off those who are obviously overqualified, specifically because they will only hang around long enough to find something better, and will then bail out the very moment they do.
As far as GP? I'd say take the offer as it stands, get the experience and the resume entry, then jump ship the moment something better opens up.
I would think there is one other thing that matters - gaining experience.
Sure, submitter is very likely getting screwed over on pay, and is likely expected to do more than the job description requires, but after a couple of years doing it? He can start sniffing around and if he's good at it, stands a good chance of getting some kick-ass offers. He can in turn take a copy of that back to his current employer, and drop it off right next to his resignation letter.
It's a foot in the managerial door (if that's where he wants his career to go), which IMHO is pretty tough to get in the tech field these days. While management is the suck (also IMHO), it's a good way to stay in the field and get promotions as one gets older, especially in the upper 40's.
Poor folk have fewer diversions and escapes from daily life (and more reason to desire them). I've seen poorer folk do "reburns" ('recycling' leftover tobacco from others' cigarette butts), "rollies" (buying loose tobacco then rolling it in papers, as loose tobacco usually costs less per ounce), and buying "loosies" (illegal, but it happens a lot anyway, especially as the price goes up.)
Also, your argument that higher taxes will cause smokers to quit is a lot like the argument that making narcotic drugs illegal was supposed to cause drug use to go down. The latter has obviously not happened, and has in fact increased... especially among the poor.
So because rising taxes don't stop all smokers the tax is specious?
I think your argument against it is either misguided or foolish. No one thinks it will stop all smokers. All it needs to do is pay for their treatment and it is already a huge win. If it also gets some people to quit, that is just gravy.
It also happens to be a handy way to tax the shit out of the poor without specifically saying that it's a tax (as rich folk generally don't smoke).
As someone who does smoke, I have an request, given the whole 'tax smokes to pay for treatment' rationale : when can I expect the Social Security Administration to give me my share of the retirement take as a lump sum, as statistically I'm expected to die way before all you non-smoking folks (in spite of having scores of relatives who have lived into their 90's, and done so minus the need for this supposed excessive health care, etc)?
Agreed, but only for as long as it takes enterprises to start dumping their BES servers and start looking for alternatives with the same level of reliability, lock-down ability, and security.
True, though the only thing which got all the CxO attention was the one thing Blackberries excelled in - push email. Blackberries were essentially glorified email clients you could carry around with you. Everything else at the time was considered to be neat accessories, but nothing justified the purchase order like push email.
Nobody else really had anything like it (at least at the same fully-reliable caliber) for a long time.
You miss the point and the similarities: RIM started with a superior product, gained a dominate position, cruised on auto pilot while competitors passed them and finally began a last ditch scramble to return to relevance just as their resources and market share evaporate. Oops, too late.
Agreed, save for two points:
1) RIM didn't have a superior product, per se... they had the only workable product at the time in the small form-factor, at least as far as the US market was concerned. This leads me to...
2) Symbian dominated the global markets, and did for a very long time.
Otherwise, yeah, Palm sat on their asses too long. There was also that stupid idea of becoming a WinCE-derivative licensee. Yuck.
If that story is fully true, then Mercer is the main source of blame, coupled with the completely dick move by Verizon (promising a huge marketing campaign and massive purchases at a critical juncture, then quickly shifting to Droid and pretending Palm didn't exist).
OTOH, Verizon is a known quantity/quality - they're dicks, and everyone inside and outside of the industry knows that. That leaves Mercer - a classic example of being too much in love with his initial ideas to have seen something better coming, which in turn borked the one good shot Palm had at long-term survival.
Not exactly a Palm fan here, but I do like the idea and the (albeit half-assed due to time constraint) implementation they had with making the UI HTML-based.
I wonder what could be done with that now, considering HTML 5 is complete enough to be useful...
Serious question: Are you, or have you ever been, married or in a long-term intimate relationship?
Once you do reach that stage, you'll understand with perfect clarity why emotion (and all interactions surrounding it) require belief and leaps of faith... anything less and you either go mad or die alone.
I accept as fact Darwin's theorems concerning evolution based on observation and proven fact. As a Christian, this does not conflict with my beliefs.
I accept on fact that climate change as a constant thing that has happened before mankind and will likely continue afterwards. The only question that remains unsettled (in spite of shouting from either side) is how strongly mankind can and does alter climate, and what, if anything, we could *safely* do to reduce mankind's influences if indeed they are strong enough to provide adverse reactions to the system as a whole.
I limit my beliefs to matters of spiritual faith and of human emotion. Everything else requires hard evidence.
They aren't quite built yet, and won't be ready for launch for another 8 years at least. Not sure how much of it is funded, or will be funded by anyone outside of NASA after the handoff.
I'm thinking it's an old (and likely over-budget) black program that didn't live up to its promises, that the USAF didn't feel like funding anymore, and so they wanted to find a graceful way to dump it.
IMHO though? Over the years, politics and politicians have shoved NASA's mission around back-and-forth enough to give it a permanent case of ADD. This only shoves it around more. I doubt that NASA really has much of a coherent mission outside of a few programs that have remained (thankfully!) largely untouched by politics.
I may be wrong about this, but seriously - if you were A VP, in a business that was founded sought out round widgets... only to have a succession of CEOs who pushed you towards finding square ones, then polyhedral ones, then only trapezoidal ones, and then square ones plus any green triangular ones you stumble across, but then someone gives you a detector specifically built for round ones?
Yeah... I wouldn't invest too awful much into any given new project either.
Almost be better off giving the dosh and gear to a more focused private industry/academia/whatever at this point.:/
Is there any way you can mod the submission itself as "Funny"?
Seriously - for an alleged lawyer, not knowing what the DMCA is, how to use it, and doing so in a manner that simply boils over the ol' cauldron full of dumbass?
Umm, yeah. At this point, forget counter-suing. If I were the guy who inadvertently opened this particular can of crazy, I'd start loudly and openly asking the Texas State Bar to consider distancing themselves from Ms Schwager as quickly as possible, and with unabashed prejudice.
Slashdot Mirror
One word: heat.
They're pulling it directly out of a pool of molten silicon. Even the crucible melts into the mixture during the process (which is actually a good thing - the Wikipedia entry explains why, incidentally.)
Sorta.
They likely use the same wire-saws to carve 'em out that I saw in the solar industry - the biggest worry there is kerfing along the face of the wafer, making it harder to surface properly. Once you start getting too thin, it ain't warping you have to worry about, as much as you have to worry about the damned thing shattering.
Now, if the original AC poster had, instead of using the insult directly, had linked to videos where friends, family or witnesses had described the events while referring to the cops as pigs, would you (or Nocturnal Deviant) think they were less deserving of empathy?
It's not a question of empathy, really. Nocturnal Deviant was only pointing out that maybe AC would've gotten the point across better if it wasn't inflammatory to the point of stupidity. If we were to exaggerate only a smidge, it would be like reading a post about Mideast peace talks while seeing the word "kikes" tossed around every other sentence or so in reference to Israelis. The original complaints and any salient points get drowned.
Hell, I perfectly agree that any abuse of power is incredibly wrong, and deserving of the harshest punishment in any society. But that really wasn't the point.
Couple o' things I can think of offhand:
1) Huge accusations, but no cites. Considering the accusations, some credible and substantiated citations would have been damned useful, at least before you demand that someone form an opinion one way or the other (and no, "Google it" doesn't cut it, given that most of the links that are likely to come up will be slanted one way or the other).
2) GGP running around calling cops "pigs" at every other breath? It labels him quicker and more effectively than it labels the cops. He just doesn't understand that, and apparently neither do you.
I figured that someone with a low UID would be old enough by default to understand such simple things...
Small prob with that...
Intel recently built up (still building? can't recall) a new fab here in Oregon. It'll cost them $1bn or so, all said and done. Dropping that many ducats at a time gets expensive after awhile, even for a beast as big as Intel. Meanwhile, they still have a fab going that was originally built in the 1980's (the Aloha facility, if you're curious), and after they're done running whatever iteration they have passing through it now, it'll be useless as a fab (the walls are basically swiss cheese by now with all the holes punched and patched through them to accommodate new processes, new chip types, new machinery, etc).
Personally, I'm kind of curious how a 450mm wafer is going to do them much good.
Having worked in the solar industry (growing crystal is the same process as semiconductors for mono PV wafers), the CZ process used to grow monocrystal wafers eats a lot of time, and you can only get so much weight hanging off the "seed" (starter crystal) before it breaks. There's also the fact that as diameter increases, the need for more precise control over rotational speed during the grow increases (the thing spins at a precise speed, slowly pulling the cylindrical crystal out of a molten vat). I guess what I'm getting at is, sure they can have something at 450mm with enough precision and effort, but the resulting crystal would also have to be shorter overall, if only to keep the weight from snapping the seed crystal (causing the thing to splash back into the vat, tearing the crucible up, making a mess, and oh yeah - ruining the multi-hour run).
Long story short, they can likely (with a lot of effort, not to mention newer/bigger machinery) get bigger-diameter crystals, but because the seed can only be so big, the wafer yield will likely drop significantly.
Two bits:
1) Rand wasn't a Christian, she was atheist if I recall correctly.
2) The main complaint in Atlas Shrugged wasn't against charity as a concept, but against government-enforced charity (that is, forcing a collective morality, whether you wanted to participate or not). Didn't say anything that I can remember about voluntary charity being bad - just the enforced version of charity in the form of taxation. (hadn't read the book in well over two decades, so...)
Not an adherent by any stretch, but I do admit that I would much rather be the charitable voluntarily, than have the government force me to be as charitable as they see fit. Much like I wouldn't want the government enforcing church attendance or even conceiving of any law which would require certain thoughts or require a certain moral outlook.
The "S" in NSDAP stood for "sozialistische" as well.
How's that for strange, considering how the NSDAP and the USSR got on?
(Yes it's offtopic. No, I don't care.)
It is cool as frig to see that someone went the distance on it. More often than not, I just said 'screw it' and restarted the game after I reached the main goal and won, or after it was apparent that I was toast. I only went long-term once, and that was only for a month (same schedule, off and on as time permitted). Got way too bored with it at that point, nuked the remaining cities, and restarted the game (or sometimes I'd just go all Anasazi on it and begin to dismantle all my cities to see what happened.)
I usually won it by being the American team up-front, since the game engineered that particular role to be even more aggressive than the real USA could ever hope to be.
Best bet though was to find and identify the aggressive mofos up-front, wipe them out post-haste, and then quickly surround the weaker nations with your stuff so that they didn't expand. Eventually, you could leave them with one city apiece, and you own the rest.
My next job paid about 80K/y. This is with all 2 years of experience. I live in SF.
What is up with all these people with real skills working for 40K? I don't get it. Maybe they should migrate to where the jobs are.
You forgot cost-of-living.
I can live like a deity in rural Mississippi or Arkansas on $40k/yr. OTOH, $90k/yr is pretty damned low for San Francisco (unless you really, really, really like commuting).
Seriously, I've turned down job offers out of SanFran for up to $125-$150k, if only because I couldn't afford to rent anything bigger than a broom closet in that county on the pay being offered (not to mention the somewhat brutal taxation you get subjected to just by living there...)
I completely agree on bargaining, if only to see how far you can get.
OTOH, if it's a foot in the door to bigger things, why not take the chance? In the long run, it will increase your salary, even if that increase comes after you leave.
Agreed with sibling, but I have a different reason:
Sure you can get someone desperate in the door, but they damned sure won't hang around too long.
I usually sit in on hiring decisions, and honestly? We immediately write off those who are obviously overqualified, specifically because they will only hang around long enough to find something better, and will then bail out the very moment they do.
As far as GP? I'd say take the offer as it stands, get the experience and the resume entry, then jump ship the moment something better opens up.
I would think there is one other thing that matters - gaining experience.
Sure, submitter is very likely getting screwed over on pay, and is likely expected to do more than the job description requires, but after a couple of years doing it? He can start sniffing around and if he's good at it, stands a good chance of getting some kick-ass offers. He can in turn take a copy of that back to his current employer, and drop it off right next to his resignation letter.
It's a foot in the managerial door (if that's where he wants his career to go), which IMHO is pretty tough to get in the tech field these days. While management is the suck (also IMHO), it's a good way to stay in the field and get promotions as one gets older, especially in the upper 40's.
The same exact point: governmental intervention into personal activity usually ends in failure. ;)
Well, not exactly.
Poor folk have fewer diversions and escapes from daily life (and more reason to desire them). I've seen poorer folk do "reburns" ('recycling' leftover tobacco from others' cigarette butts), "rollies" (buying loose tobacco then rolling it in papers, as loose tobacco usually costs less per ounce), and buying "loosies" (illegal, but it happens a lot anyway, especially as the price goes up.)
Also, your argument that higher taxes will cause smokers to quit is a lot like the argument that making narcotic drugs illegal was supposed to cause drug use to go down. The latter has obviously not happened, and has in fact increased... especially among the poor.
Here you go:
"Conclusions: Smoking was associated with structural, material as well as perceived dimensions of socioeconomic disadvantage. "
http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/content/15/3/262.full
And before you say it, here's one focused on the US instead of the EU:
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/american-smokers-and-income-charted/
If its your business then pay for your own healthcare.
This is rapidly becoming an extinct option. Mr. Obama and his friends in Congress are seeing to that.
So because rising taxes don't stop all smokers the tax is specious?
I think your argument against it is either misguided or foolish. No one thinks it will stop all smokers. All it needs to do is pay for their treatment and it is already a huge win. If it also gets some people to quit, that is just gravy.
It also happens to be a handy way to tax the shit out of the poor without specifically saying that it's a tax (as rich folk generally don't smoke).
As someone who does smoke, I have an request, given the whole 'tax smokes to pay for treatment' rationale : when can I expect the Social Security Administration to give me my share of the retirement take as a lump sum, as statistically I'm expected to die way before all you non-smoking folks (in spite of having scores of relatives who have lived into their 90's, and done so minus the need for this supposed excessive health care, etc)?
Agreed, but only for as long as it takes enterprises to start dumping their BES servers and start looking for alternatives with the same level of reliability, lock-down ability, and security.
True, though the only thing which got all the CxO attention was the one thing Blackberries excelled in - push email. Blackberries were essentially glorified email clients you could carry around with you. Everything else at the time was considered to be neat accessories, but nothing justified the purchase order like push email.
Nobody else really had anything like it (at least at the same fully-reliable caliber) for a long time.
You miss the point and the similarities: RIM started with a superior product, gained a dominate position, cruised on auto pilot while competitors passed them and finally began a last ditch scramble to return to relevance just as their resources and market share evaporate. Oops, too late.
Agreed, save for two points:
1) RIM didn't have a superior product, per se... they had the only workable product at the time in the small form-factor, at least as far as the US market was concerned. This leads me to...
2) Symbian dominated the global markets, and did for a very long time.
Otherwise, yeah, Palm sat on their asses too long. There was also that stupid idea of becoming a WinCE-derivative licensee. Yuck.
It wasn't just Apple doing the cutting-off.
If that story is fully true, then Mercer is the main source of blame, coupled with the completely dick move by Verizon (promising a huge marketing campaign and massive purchases at a critical juncture, then quickly shifting to Droid and pretending Palm didn't exist).
OTOH, Verizon is a known quantity/quality - they're dicks, and everyone inside and outside of the industry knows that. That leaves Mercer - a classic example of being too much in love with his initial ideas to have seen something better coming, which in turn borked the one good shot Palm had at long-term survival.
Not exactly a Palm fan here, but I do like the idea and the (albeit half-assed due to time constraint) implementation they had with making the UI HTML-based.
I wonder what could be done with that now, considering HTML 5 is complete enough to be useful...
Serious question: Are you, or have you ever been, married or in a long-term intimate relationship?
Once you do reach that stage, you'll understand with perfect clarity why emotion (and all interactions surrounding it) require belief and leaps of faith... anything less and you either go mad or die alone.
I don't "believe" in either one.
I accept as fact Darwin's theorems concerning evolution based on observation and proven fact. As a Christian, this does not conflict with my beliefs.
I accept on fact that climate change as a constant thing that has happened before mankind and will likely continue afterwards. The only question that remains unsettled (in spite of shouting from either side) is how strongly mankind can and does alter climate, and what, if anything, we could *safely* do to reduce mankind's influences if indeed they are strong enough to provide adverse reactions to the system as a whole.
I limit my beliefs to matters of spiritual faith and of human emotion. Everything else requires hard evidence.
Judging from TFA (I know, I know...)
They aren't quite built yet, and won't be ready for launch for another 8 years at least. Not sure how much of it is funded, or will be funded by anyone outside of NASA after the handoff.
I'm thinking it's an old (and likely over-budget) black program that didn't live up to its promises, that the USAF didn't feel like funding anymore, and so they wanted to find a graceful way to dump it.
IMHO though? Over the years, politics and politicians have shoved NASA's mission around back-and-forth enough to give it a permanent case of ADD. This only shoves it around more. I doubt that NASA really has much of a coherent mission outside of a few programs that have remained (thankfully!) largely untouched by politics.
I may be wrong about this, but seriously - if you were A VP, in a business that was founded sought out round widgets... only to have a succession of CEOs who pushed you towards finding square ones, then polyhedral ones, then only trapezoidal ones, and then square ones plus any green triangular ones you stumble across, but then someone gives you a detector specifically built for round ones?
Yeah... I wouldn't invest too awful much into any given new project either.
Almost be better off giving the dosh and gear to a more focused private industry/academia/whatever at this point. :/
Is there any way you can mod the submission itself as "Funny"?
Seriously - for an alleged lawyer, not knowing what the DMCA is, how to use it, and doing so in a manner that simply boils over the ol' cauldron full of dumbass?
Umm, yeah. At this point, forget counter-suing. If I were the guy who inadvertently opened this particular can of crazy, I'd start loudly and openly asking the Texas State Bar to consider distancing themselves from Ms Schwager as quickly as possible, and with unabashed prejudice.