The article seems to be more of a whine at the rich and how they spend their money than at Space Tourism. A previous post pointed out that whilst the death of the test pilot was tragic,he was a professional who understood the risks and was getting paid to do so.
Not only that, he almost certainly loved doing it. Test pilot isn't one of those jobs you take just to put food on the table. There are precious few jobs flying experimental aircraft or spacecraft, and I'm sure the pilot was glad for the opportunity, whether or not the end result could have been anything more important than flying rich people to the edge of space.
They didn't invent the precautionary principle. It's been around for a while. The idea is that you have to prove something is safe before you do it. Sounds reasonable to the layperson, but of course it's an impossible burden to meet (see "proving a negative")
You know what would be MORE nice? Take some of that savings in construction and fuel costs which you'd get from the windowless plane, and give me a slightly more roomy seat with more legroom.
Haha, no. They'll give you the same tiny space they gave you before, and put it on the bottom line, while the other airlines rush to copy them.
The negative thinkers/pessimists get all the work done, then the positive thinkers say "See, there was nothing to worry about" and take all the credit.
Alternatively, if the reason is that the "culture" of technical workplaces is hostile to women, then that culture should be named and shamed until it changes because it is morally reprehensible to treat people badly, even if the current members of that culture don't think they're doing anything wrong.
What if it is "hostile to women" without treating them badly? For instance, perhaps it consists largely of unattractive men who enjoy making jokes about obscure subjects?
Maybe. I haven't cut open the device they're housed in to see it, and I doubt too many buyers of the final device have. Since the driver can't see the marking on the packaging either, it doesn't seem relevant. The makers of the device probably know the chips are fake no matter what they're marked.
What makes these chips "fake"? Internally they're very different, so the only thing "fake" about them seems to be that they have the same USB endpoints as the "genuine" chip.
No, that's nonsense; there was no "data entry" degree. A while back I checked to see if the gender disparity numbers for computer science were skewed due to a decline in "business programming" or any other computer related degrees; they weren't. The related fields followed the same pattern as computer science itself. And it was in the 1970s, not the 1980s, that the existence of a CS degree (rather than a specialization) become commonplace.
Note that the gender disparity graph for computer science is unique. If you look at NPRs graph (and don't listen to what they're saying, which doesn't match their own graph), you see that for a decade before the peak, the percentage of women in CS rose much faster than it did in other fields. Then you get that unique 1984 peak, a sharp decline, and a long slow decline followed by another sharp decline that was general.
The rise of the personal computer is certainly tempting to explain that peak. But it's a peak in degrees granted. IMO, it's a little bit too early if the problem was boys having early exposure to computers which was denied to girls; the personal computer barely started taking off in 1979, the year before 1984 graduates would have been entering college. But certainly there could be other reasons related to the personal computer.
In rural Illinois you'd pay $500/month mortgage on a reasonable 3 bedroom home in a safe middle class neighborhood, in Dallas you'd pay maybe $700, in Albuquerque you'd pay $800, in Miami you'd pay $1200. So, the biggest gap there is $700/mo. That's $8,400 a year.
In suburban NJ you'd pay $2000. Plus another $1000 in taxes. In Silicon Valley you can double or triple that mortgage payment. You just haven't included the highest-priced markets.
I was recently called a troll for claiming that a call for censorship was, in fact, a call for censorship. Now, as one who has perhaps occasionally indulged in a bit of trolling (search Slashdot for my insightful and informative mods, of course), I know trolling, and that ain't it.
For some reason, according to Wired, SJSU is a major feeder for Apple and feeds to Yahoo as well, but not so much to other tech companies. Not sure why, though my guess would be there's a "critical mass" of SJSU alums at Apple.
Nobody argues that the adhesives aren't up to the task of holding the machine together. Just that they make repair and/or upgrade difficult. Obviously Apple deems it worth saving the few cents it would take them to use a more convenient fastener even if it costs them in warranty repair time. Economically they're almost certainly correct, but it still seems like something of a dick move to those few of us who still repair our own machine.
Many of the older iMacs you open with a plunger and/or suction cups -- remove the glass with the suction cups, then unscrew the screen. This sounds worse than it is. This one (and I think the previous one) is held together with tape; you have to use a cutting wheel to cut the tape from the side, then pry it apart. To put it back together you need to remove the tape remnants and put new tape on.
This disease can spread from surface contact with contaminated fluids (which Ebola victims tend to leak profusely). Indoors, even dried fluids can remain infectious for hours. All it takes is to touch the fluids and then touch your eyes or mouth (which you do all the time) Something like the NYC subway provides very good conditions for spread, once the first sick people take a few trips
Right -- there is no controversy about women in gaming. Not about women playing games, and not even about women making games.
There's a controversy about women (mostly two particular women) criticizing games and gamers on feminist grounds, and there's a controversy about one woman game developer who was involved in some rather public relationship drama involving game journalists. And there's a controversy about all their journalist supporters conspiring against gamers -- which the damn fool journalists went and set afire by proving their opponents right (on that point at least) by launching a coordinated attack in their respective publications.
Without worse-is-better, you make sure the job is completely done before release. So, it takes years to make progress, you end up building an extremely complex system to cover every possibility. Because of that very complexity it is difficult to extend for new requirements, which become apparent after the system is specified and before it was built.
If you want to build a nuclear power plant control system or something equally as critical and unchanging, sure, go ahead and engineer everything out the wazoo. Otherwise, get things done, even if they are "worse".
Global climate is changing, but if we stopped emitting CO2 within the next couple decades there's still a chance that the change would be short-lived and once the excess carbon has been absorbed
But the survivors wouldn't really give a shit, and anyway after civilization collapsed they'd go right back to burning wood and coal.
Civilization runs on energy, and stopping all CO2-producing sources would result in the collapse of civilization.
Of course we're 100% rational. We just start from some really dumb axioms, like "the best partner is the one with the biggest boobs and smallest waist".
Slashdot Mirror
Not only that, he almost certainly loved doing it. Test pilot isn't one of those jobs you take just to put food on the table. There are precious few jobs flying experimental aircraft or spacecraft, and I'm sure the pilot was glad for the opportunity, whether or not the end result could have been anything more important than flying rich people to the edge of space.
They didn't invent the precautionary principle. It's been around for a while. The idea is that you have to prove something is safe before you do it. Sounds reasonable to the layperson, but of course it's an impossible burden to meet (see "proving a negative")
Haha, no. They'll give you the same tiny space they gave you before, and put it on the bottom line, while the other airlines rush to copy them.
The good news is the European nations just signed an economic suicide pact.
The bad news is there's no way they'll actually keep to it.
The negative thinkers/pessimists get all the work done, then the positive thinkers say "See, there was nothing to worry about" and take all the credit.
What if it is "hostile to women" without treating them badly? For instance, perhaps it consists largely of unattractive men who enjoy making jokes about obscure subjects?
Indeed; as I said on the earlier article, it appears it is not sufficient to encourage women; one must discourage men as well.
Maybe. I haven't cut open the device they're housed in to see it, and I doubt too many buyers of the final device have. Since the driver can't see the marking on the packaging either, it doesn't seem relevant. The makers of the device probably know the chips are fake no matter what they're marked.
What makes these chips "fake"? Internally they're very different, so the only thing "fake" about them seems to be that they have the same USB endpoints as the "genuine" chip.
No, that's nonsense; there was no "data entry" degree. A while back I checked to see if the gender disparity numbers for computer science were skewed due to a decline in "business programming" or any other computer related degrees; they weren't. The related fields followed the same pattern as computer science itself. And it was in the 1970s, not the 1980s, that the existence of a CS degree (rather than a specialization) become commonplace.
Note that the gender disparity graph for computer science is unique. If you look at NPRs graph (and don't listen to what they're saying, which doesn't match their own graph), you see that for a decade before the peak, the percentage of women in CS rose much faster than it did in other fields. Then you get that unique 1984 peak, a sharp decline, and a long slow decline followed by another sharp decline that was general.
The rise of the personal computer is certainly tempting to explain that peak. But it's a peak in degrees granted. IMO, it's a little bit too early if the problem was boys having early exposure to computers which was denied to girls; the personal computer barely started taking off in 1979, the year before 1984 graduates would have been entering college. But certainly there could be other reasons related to the personal computer.
In suburban NJ you'd pay $2000. Plus another $1000 in taxes. In Silicon Valley you can double or triple that mortgage payment. You just haven't included the highest-priced markets.
I was recently called a troll for claiming that a call for censorship was, in fact, a call for censorship. Now, as one who has perhaps occasionally indulged in a bit of trolling (search Slashdot for my insightful and informative mods, of course), I know trolling, and that ain't it.
For some reason, according to Wired, SJSU is a major feeder for Apple and feeds to Yahoo as well, but not so much to other tech companies. Not sure why, though my guess would be there's a "critical mass" of SJSU alums at Apple.
I was talking about my writing tool, damn you. "My small pen is...". Fucking incompetent copyeditors.
Nobody argues that the adhesives aren't up to the task of holding the machine together. Just that they make repair and/or upgrade difficult. Obviously Apple deems it worth saving the few cents it would take them to use a more convenient fastener even if it costs them in warranty repair time. Economically they're almost certainly correct, but it still seems like something of a dick move to those few of us who still repair our own machine.
Many of the older iMacs you open with a plunger and/or suction cups -- remove the glass with the suction cups, then unscrew the screen. This sounds worse than it is. This one (and I think the previous one) is held together with tape; you have to use a cutting wheel to cut the tape from the side, then pry it apart. To put it back together you need to remove the tape remnants and put new tape on.
The only real problem taking it apart is cutting the stupid tape, which you then have to replace.
I knew this was old news just from the URL.
This disease can spread from surface contact with contaminated fluids (which Ebola victims tend to leak profusely). Indoors, even dried fluids can remain infectious for hours. All it takes is to touch the fluids and then touch your eyes or mouth (which you do all the time) Something like the NYC subway provides very good conditions for spread, once the first sick people take a few trips
"I've received an anonymous death threat, therefore my opponents are scum" is pretty fallacious "reasoning".
Right -- there is no controversy about women in gaming. Not about women playing games, and not even about women making games.
There's a controversy about women (mostly two particular women) criticizing games and gamers on feminist grounds, and there's a controversy about one woman game developer who was involved in some rather public relationship drama involving game journalists. And there's a controversy about all their journalist supporters conspiring against gamers -- which the damn fool journalists went and set afire by proving their opponents right (on that point at least) by launching a coordinated attack in their respective publications.
Without worse-is-better, you make sure the job is completely done before release. So, it takes years to make progress, you end up building an extremely complex system to cover every possibility. Because of that very complexity it is difficult to extend for new requirements, which become apparent after the system is specified and before it was built.
If you want to build a nuclear power plant control system or something equally as critical and unchanging, sure, go ahead and engineer everything out the wazoo. Otherwise, get things done, even if they are "worse".
Dammit, beat me to it. Further, Haig is dead, which makes him immune to Ebola.
But the survivors wouldn't really give a shit, and anyway after civilization collapsed they'd go right back to burning wood and coal.
Civilization runs on energy, and stopping all CO2-producing sources would result in the collapse of civilization.
Of course we're 100% rational. We just start from some really dumb axioms, like "the best partner is the one with the biggest boobs and smallest waist".