It landed just a degree or two short of the RCS thruster being able to right it. It wouldn't have been perfect, but it would have been a landing and recovery.
Yes, there's fuel cross feeds, but with lower engine power the ship sticks less close to the optimal acceleration curve, and hence needs a longer burn.
No, DuckDuckGo is not a meta search engine. The entire point of it's service is that the details of what you searched for do not go to bing/yahoo/google/..., and do not get used for tracking you. Being a meta engine would defeat the entire point.
You should have prepended that sentence with the qualifier "American" In Europe, anti-trust philosophy and regulation is most definitely focused around consumer welfare.
Effectively the two are one and the same thing. A non-free non-market is bad for consumer welfare.
Just so you know, your myth of mythiness is a myth. The guy writing this blog post fails at reading comprehension.
His one sole piece of "evidence" for this being a myth is an academic paper saying [IF] you set out to design a slow keyboard layout, you would probably design qwerty.
That's not the same thing as the person designing qwerty set out to make a slow layout. It's in fact well documented that his goal was to reduce jamming, and in fact he filed a patent for the design (US 79868), stating that explicitly as his goal.
The fact that reducing jamming meant that the letters were laid out in a pretty weird way just happened to slow down typing on a non-jamming-keyboard as a coincidence.
It was designed so that the hammers for successive key presses came from different areas of the typewriter, and hence reduce jamming (speeding up typing).
It happens that this is slower than the optimal layout if you ignore jamming, but much faster if you don't.
The result is that several layouts are better now for keyboards (which don't jam), but the design intention was not to slow typists down. It was to reduce jamming, and in doing so speed them up.
Your all-cause mortality rate for overweight, and grade-1 obese are roughly 0.95 times that for "normal" weight. However, being grade-2 obese or more is associated with a sudden, very rapid increase in mortality rate.
Basically, being slightly overweight isn't bad, and may even be pretty good. Being more-than-slightly overweight is really really really bad though.
Yep, way too much focus is put on living a long time, and no where near enough on actually having some quality of life. Dying with dementia (or living with it) is honestly my worst fear.
Not necessarily, a company can make more money by replacing high-salary people with lower-salaried workers. In fact, that's what many companies have done. You're committing a false un-equivalency; you're saying that companies that make money are successful, when there are companies that make money that can be unsuccessful. The word you may be looking for is "profitable", but "profitable" is very different from "successful".
Ah I see, so what you're arguing is that the US should be a country that drifts by with a bunch of people doing unsuccessful but barely profitable half assed things?
Fair enough then. I think we've found where we disagree about how the US should be.
Your hypothetical does not actually address the correct situation.
Lets say that ford is able to hire the best of the best (no matter what country they're from), and in doing so, is able to design a better car than Volkswagen is able to, at a cheaper price. The result of doing that is that people who were considering buying a Volkswagen will now consider buying a Ford instead. Ford will do better, and as a result have the cash flow to be able to hire more people. Ford's management will figure out what to do with that cash flow, and invest it in some new project (lets say, self driving cars), and as a result, will employ more people.
No, it assumes that companies that make money will start more projects and require more people for those projects than companies that are not being successful.
And no, no one is talking about the number of people being proportionate to the quality. They're saying that having higher quality engineers results in higher quality products. By allowing skilled workers in, you allow people to choose the best quality engineers, and produce something better.
The result is that more money is made, more other projects are started, and more people are hired.
Labor, like many things, is a market commodity and its price is determined by the market forces of supply and demand. By artificially inflating the supply of labor, the "prevailing wage" across the board gets suppressed. Which is bullshit, because (as others have already pointed out), we are currently graduating more Americans with STEM degrees than the number of domestic STEM positions we need to fill every year.
People do love to point out that H1B visa holders inflate the labor supply. But they also conveniently ignore that they increase labor demand too. Companies that can hire enough people to produce high quality products on time are more successful than those that are understaffed. Those successful companies can then work on more projects, and hire more people to get them working too.
This is the entire reason why any western nation allows skilled migrants in - skilled migrants increase the value of the economy by more than the amount that they take away from the native citizens.
Your logic is flawed. You assume that an H1B has no effect on labor demand. This is false.
A company that is able to hire skilled workers will produce more, higher quality products than a company that can't hire enough people. As a result, that company will make more money, and be able to work on more projects and pay more people to do those more things.
The whole point of the H1B scheme is that a skilled worker increases the value of the economy by more than they take away from american citizens.
But why would you go to so much effort to always insert the right character, when you could just configure your editor to insert spaces to the next tab stop when you push tab, and be done?
Alternatively, just configure your editor to insert spaces to the next tab stop when you push tab, and you're done.
Having a mixture of tabs and spaces always leads to people fucking up the formatting, because it's impossible to see when they've made a mistake until it lands on someone else's machine.
Each tab indents X spaces - it's just a multiplier. You talk about using a "mixture" causing problems, and I would agree - so why not stick with tabs which are more flexible, configurable etc?
It's not "just" a multiplier. It's a different multiplier on different systems, and therefore results in a different layout on different people's systems.
That's great if you stick only to tabs. However, in practice, you can't stick only to tabs, because fine layout control eventually requires you to use a couple of spaces.
As soon as you're at that point, you're screwed because the layout gets really messed up as soon as the tab width changes.
Which is basically a long winded way of saying "if you're lazy, it's really fast to not bother understanding things, and just copy/paste a chunk of sample code from SO"
Wait, you're suggesting that if I want to submit a one line patch to your code, I should convert it wholesale to spaces, and then submit the patch? That doesn't sound like a great way to do source control to me;)
Meanwhile, if we both just use spaces all along, neither of us sees any fucked up layout, and both of us can edit and work on the code without having to submit ridiculous patches that convert all the white space in the file to something else.
Because tabs are not enough to lay out code well (you always end up with a couple of spaces to align things correctly). Then once you introduce a mixture, you end up in a situation where a change in tab-width causes layout fuckup (i.e. you get fuck ups on a different user's system).
Meanwhile, if you use spaces for everything, code remains well laid out everywhere. If you have even a half-decent editor, it will allow you to edit spaces as if they were tabs, so using spaces has exactly 0 drawback.
You realise that the way you (intelligently) make buildings survive large earthquakes is not to build ridiculously strong foundations (those actually make your problems worse). Instead, it's to design the building to move and sway with the earthquake. Hence why any large office building built today in the bay area is likely to be sat on big rollers, and/or have a weight system on the roof to damp the building.
Well, you're getting too excited about something that is evolutionary step backward and such hasty statements are a proof of this. I myself have some opengl experience and I can tell you getting to lower level is NOT what I would want. Yet I don't want to be locked into using an engine either with their often suspect design decisions. I consider opengl to be in sweet spot in this regard, though shaders are kinda pushing it.
So what you're saying is basically "I want I high level API for drawing graphics reasonably fast". That's fine, you should go grab an engine. There are plenty of very high quality ones out there, many of which are free (at least until you start making money). There are also plenty of mid-level ones that will not cause you to have significant lock in.
However, the person writing said engine for a AAA game, or an app that involves 3D rendering and that has to conserve battery life as much as possible while still hitting 60fps doesn't have the same set of constraints as you. People in that situation need to get as much performance as they possibly can, and for them, having OpenGL using up 20% of the CPU (on a desktop), or 50% of the CPU (on a mobile device) is completely unacceptable. The guy writing the AAA game could be using that CPU power to make the AI smarter, or simply to push more render items. Similarly, the guy writing the mobile app could get double the battery life if they didn't have OpenGL sat in the way.
For reference, the numbers above are reasonably accurate. Go try to push 200-300 draw calls on a reasonably high end Android or iOS device - you'll discover that an entire CPU core is used up by the OpenGL driver. When you compare that to Metal, where you can get more like 3000-4000 draw calls. That really makes the difference between a game that looks like a mobile game and a game that looks like a PS3 game.
Slashdot Mirror
It landed just a degree or two short of the RCS thruster being able to right it. It wouldn't have been perfect, but it would have been a landing and recovery.
Yes, there's fuel cross feeds, but with lower engine power the ship sticks less close to the optimal acceleration curve, and hence needs a longer burn.
Do they not? Who says? I've seen plenty of documentaries that contain reenactments of certain things that happened.
The summary is using the term "film" loosely - the BBC show is a documentary, not a movie.
No, DuckDuckGo is not a meta search engine. The entire point of it's service is that the details of what you searched for do not go to bing/yahoo/google/..., and do not get used for tracking you. Being a meta engine would defeat the entire point.
You should have prepended that sentence with the qualifier "American"
In Europe, anti-trust philosophy and regulation is most definitely focused around consumer welfare.
Effectively the two are one and the same thing. A non-free non-market is bad for consumer welfare.
Just so you know, your myth of mythiness is a myth. The guy writing this blog post fails at reading comprehension.
His one sole piece of "evidence" for this being a myth is an academic paper saying [IF] you set out to design a slow keyboard layout, you would probably design qwerty.
That's not the same thing as the person designing qwerty set out to make a slow layout. It's in fact well documented that his goal was to reduce jamming, and in fact he filed a patent for the design (US 79868), stating that explicitly as his goal.
The fact that reducing jamming meant that the letters were laid out in a pretty weird way just happened to slow down typing on a non-jamming-keyboard as a coincidence.
No, no it wasn't.
It was designed so that the hammers for successive key presses came from different areas of the typewriter, and hence reduce jamming (speeding up typing).
It happens that this is slower than the optimal layout if you ignore jamming, but much faster if you don't.
The result is that several layouts are better now for keyboards (which don't jam), but the design intention was not to slow typists down. It was to reduce jamming, and in doing so speed them up.
Actually, studies tend to show that being slightly over weight reduces all-cause mortality compared to "normal".
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu...
Your all-cause mortality rate for overweight, and grade-1 obese are roughly 0.95 times that for "normal" weight. However, being grade-2 obese or more is associated with a sudden, very rapid increase in mortality rate.
Basically, being slightly overweight isn't bad, and may even be pretty good. Being more-than-slightly overweight is really really really bad though.
Yep, way too much focus is put on living a long time, and no where near enough on actually having some quality of life. Dying with dementia (or living with it) is honestly my worst fear.
Why would they render it no-longer-applicable?
All they do is change the fitness function.
Not necessarily, a company can make more money by replacing high-salary people with lower-salaried workers. In fact, that's what many companies have done. You're committing a false un-equivalency; you're saying that companies that make money are successful, when there are companies that make money that can be unsuccessful. The word you may be looking for is "profitable", but "profitable" is very different from "successful".
Ah I see, so what you're arguing is that the US should be a country that drifts by with a bunch of people doing unsuccessful but barely profitable half assed things?
Fair enough then. I think we've found where we disagree about how the US should be.
Your hypothetical does not actually address the correct situation.
Lets say that ford is able to hire the best of the best (no matter what country they're from), and in doing so, is able to design a better car than Volkswagen is able to, at a cheaper price. The result of doing that is that people who were considering buying a Volkswagen will now consider buying a Ford instead. Ford will do better, and as a result have the cash flow to be able to hire more people. Ford's management will figure out what to do with that cash flow, and invest it in some new project (lets say, self driving cars), and as a result, will employ more people.
No, it assumes that companies that make money will start more projects and require more people for those projects than companies that are not being successful.
And no, no one is talking about the number of people being proportionate to the quality. They're saying that having higher quality engineers results in higher quality products. By allowing skilled workers in, you allow people to choose the best quality engineers, and produce something better.
The result is that more money is made, more other projects are started, and more people are hired.
Labor, like many things, is a market commodity and its price is determined by the market forces of supply and demand. By artificially inflating the supply of labor, the "prevailing wage" across the board gets suppressed. Which is bullshit, because (as others have already pointed out), we are currently graduating more Americans with STEM degrees than the number of domestic STEM positions we need to fill every year.
People do love to point out that H1B visa holders inflate the labor supply. But they also conveniently ignore that they increase labor demand too. Companies that can hire enough people to produce high quality products on time are more successful than those that are understaffed. Those successful companies can then work on more projects, and hire more people to get them working too.
This is the entire reason why any western nation allows skilled migrants in - skilled migrants increase the value of the economy by more than the amount that they take away from the native citizens.
Your logic is flawed. You assume that an H1B has no effect on labor demand. This is false.
A company that is able to hire skilled workers will produce more, higher quality products than a company that can't hire enough people. As a result, that company will make more money, and be able to work on more projects and pay more people to do those more things.
The whole point of the H1B scheme is that a skilled worker increases the value of the economy by more than they take away from american citizens.
But why would you go to so much effort to always insert the right character, when you could just configure your editor to insert spaces to the next tab stop when you push tab, and be done?
Alternatively, just configure your editor to insert spaces to the next tab stop when you push tab, and you're done.
Having a mixture of tabs and spaces always leads to people fucking up the formatting, because it's impossible to see when they've made a mistake until it lands on someone else's machine.
Each tab indents X spaces - it's just a multiplier. You talk about using a "mixture" causing problems, and I would agree - so why not stick with tabs which are more flexible, configurable etc?
It's not "just" a multiplier. It's a different multiplier on different systems, and therefore results in a different layout on different people's systems.
That's great if you stick only to tabs. However, in practice, you can't stick only to tabs, because fine layout control eventually requires you to use a couple of spaces.
As soon as you're at that point, you're screwed because the layout gets really messed up as soon as the tab width changes.
Which is basically a long winded way of saying "if you're lazy, it's really fast to not bother understanding things, and just copy/paste a chunk of sample code from SO"
So... basically exactly what I originally said.
Simple, people who don't spend their life copy-pasting don't google problems much.
They look up the documentation for the API directly and figure out the right way to solve the problem themselves.
Wait, you're suggesting that if I want to submit a one line patch to your code, I should convert it wholesale to spaces, and then submit the patch? That doesn't sound like a great way to do source control to me ;)
Meanwhile, if we both just use spaces all along, neither of us sees any fucked up layout, and both of us can edit and work on the code without having to submit ridiculous patches that convert all the white space in the file to something else.
Because tabs are not enough to lay out code well (you always end up with a couple of spaces to align things correctly). Then once you introduce a mixture, you end up in a situation where a change in tab-width causes layout fuckup (i.e. you get fuck ups on a different user's system).
Meanwhile, if you use spaces for everything, code remains well laid out everywhere. If you have even a half-decent editor, it will allow you to edit spaces as if they were tabs, so using spaces has exactly 0 drawback.
You realise that the way you (intelligently) make buildings survive large earthquakes is not to build ridiculously strong foundations (those actually make your problems worse). Instead, it's to design the building to move and sway with the earthquake. Hence why any large office building built today in the bay area is likely to be sat on big rollers, and/or have a weight system on the roof to damp the building.
Well, you're getting too excited about something that is evolutionary step backward and such hasty statements are a proof of this. I myself have some opengl experience and I can tell you getting to lower level is NOT what I would want. Yet I don't want to be locked into using an engine either with their often suspect design decisions. I consider opengl to be in sweet spot in this regard, though shaders are kinda pushing it.
So what you're saying is basically "I want I high level API for drawing graphics reasonably fast". That's fine, you should go grab an engine. There are plenty of very high quality ones out there, many of which are free (at least until you start making money). There are also plenty of mid-level ones that will not cause you to have significant lock in.
However, the person writing said engine for a AAA game, or an app that involves 3D rendering and that has to conserve battery life as much as possible while still hitting 60fps doesn't have the same set of constraints as you. People in that situation need to get as much performance as they possibly can, and for them, having OpenGL using up 20% of the CPU (on a desktop), or 50% of the CPU (on a mobile device) is completely unacceptable. The guy writing the AAA game could be using that CPU power to make the AI smarter, or simply to push more render items. Similarly, the guy writing the mobile app could get double the battery life if they didn't have OpenGL sat in the way.
For reference, the numbers above are reasonably accurate. Go try to push 200-300 draw calls on a reasonably high end Android or iOS device - you'll discover that an entire CPU core is used up by the OpenGL driver. When you compare that to Metal, where you can get more like 3000-4000 draw calls. That really makes the difference between a game that looks like a mobile game and a game that looks like a PS3 game.