First, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This is a pretty extraordinary claim.
Second, what's the big deal about asking someone who claims to have invented a revolutionary new form of propulsion to... use it to propel something? Is that asking too much?
Third, if the evidence that this drive works is so conclusive, why isn't Elon Musk camping their doorsteps trying to hand them a billion dollars to buy it up?
You're terrified of living a long time and being relatively healthy and independent up to the end? Just what are you scared of? I'm scared of spending years just lying on a bed semi-comatose. That would be hell on earth.
And after they land rovers that last for years, orbit all of the planets, launch interstellar probes, and flyby Pluto, they'll be ready to finish catching up. In the meantime, NASA stands alone.
It sounds very, VERY theoretical. Particularly since they'd have to show that YOU had access to THEIR work. Not to mention why are they bothering to track the people whose work they are using in order to sue them? It's a bit like saying that every 60 million years a killer asteroid shows up, so we better spend our days looking up at the sky, just in case. There are more worthwhile things to worry about.
It doesn't have anything to do with skills. It's HP laying off older, higher salaried workers to make their bottom line temporarily look better, regardless of what it does to future productivity. Which is age discrimination, and illegal.
That's a company issue, not an age of employee issue. I've worked with young guys who couldn't figure it out and old guys who kept up with tech. It's the person, not the age.
Even 60 year olds aren't about to keel over. Once of the best software engineers I ever met is in his 70s, he's runner, and he's damned fast. Young engineers busy chugging soft drinks and vending machine food are more likely to die.
Welcome to New England, the land of that has about 10 different words for ice and snow. You're going to be resurfacing those roads, because water expands when it freezes.
I tested the most when I was on DSL and paying for 3mbs and getting 760kbs.
I'd like to see it substantiated that "people with fast connections test a lot and people with slow connections don't". Yes, there are some dick-wavers who need to see what their fiber connection is giving them, but if your connection is "fast enough" generally you aren't testing.
And what does your cable company tell you to do when you call them with a problem? In the past, comcast has told me to run a test using... Speedtest. And how quickly do most problems get fixed? Seems to take a LONG time with LOTS of testing ("switch off your router for half an hour, test, call us back and get a different customer service rep who will tell you to do the same thing all over again, etc").
I'm not saying that Speedtest is graven in stone as the absolute authority of speed, but it sure doesn't just represent the top end either.
I've generally found speedtest pretty reliable. Results are reproducible and correlate with what I'm paying for, and with back of the envelope calculations of actual download times.
They care about speed... but they might not be caring about high speed. Probably the most frequent use of speedtest is when you are having performance problems, so if anything it's probably under-reporting the speed.
Slashdot Mirror
First, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This is a pretty extraordinary claim.
Second, what's the big deal about asking someone who claims to have invented a revolutionary new form of propulsion to... use it to propel something? Is that asking too much?
Third, if the evidence that this drive works is so conclusive, why isn't Elon Musk camping their doorsteps trying to hand them a billion dollars to buy it up?
No injecting thought into this discussion!
If they were using anti-matter, we'd be missing Florida instead of just a rocket.
You're terrified of living a long time and being relatively healthy and independent up to the end? Just what are you scared of? I'm scared of spending years just lying on a bed semi-comatose. That would be hell on earth.
And after they land rovers that last for years, orbit all of the planets, launch interstellar probes, and flyby Pluto, they'll be ready to finish catching up. In the meantime, NASA stands alone.
It sounds very, VERY theoretical. Particularly since they'd have to show that YOU had access to THEIR work. Not to mention why are they bothering to track the people whose work they are using in order to sue them? It's a bit like saying that every 60 million years a killer asteroid shows up, so we better spend our days looking up at the sky, just in case. There are more worthwhile things to worry about.
How does that "sue you for it" work?
balanced out by not having a sense of responsibility, but hey, let's not keep score.
Yes. IF. Most people don't.
Nope. Not even close. Look at https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS.... Out of 100,000 men, about 10% will die in the 60s. Not remotely close to 60%.
That $300 gets me a speed that 's barely better than DSL, maybe a fifth of what I get thru Comcast. I'd have to be a moron to switch to that.
It doesn't have anything to do with skills. It's HP laying off older, higher salaried workers to make their bottom line temporarily look better, regardless of what it does to future productivity. Which is age discrimination, and illegal.
That's a company issue, not an age of employee issue. I've worked with young guys who couldn't figure it out and old guys who kept up with tech. It's the person, not the age.
Even 60 year olds aren't about to keel over. Once of the best software engineers I ever met is in his 70s, he's runner, and he's damned fast. Young engineers busy chugging soft drinks and vending machine food are more likely to die.
Seriously? He probably knows 20-30 languages if he's been developing that long.
I think you mean they know what they are doing... unlike the inexperienced people who replaced them.
Amazing how the Chinese are planning to do everything.
Just like if you believe in evillootion. It has "evil" right in the name!
Welcome to New England, the land of that has about 10 different words for ice and snow. You're going to be resurfacing those roads, because water expands when it freezes.
I tested the most when I was on DSL and paying for 3mbs and getting 760kbs.
I'd like to see it substantiated that "people with fast connections test a lot and people with slow connections don't". Yes, there are some dick-wavers who need to see what their fiber connection is giving them, but if your connection is "fast enough" generally you aren't testing.
And what does your cable company tell you to do when you call them with a problem? In the past, comcast has told me to run a test using ... Speedtest. And how quickly do most problems get fixed? Seems to take a LONG time with LOTS of testing ("switch off your router for half an hour, test, call us back and get a different customer service rep who will tell you to do the same thing all over again, etc").
I'm not saying that Speedtest is graven in stone as the absolute authority of speed, but it sure doesn't just represent the top end either.
Since most people are troubleshooting, odds are speedtest is under-reporting actual speeds, not over-reporting.
Yeah, and having to jam my cell phone into the acoustic coupler is a real pain.
I've generally found speedtest pretty reliable. Results are reproducible and correlate with what I'm paying for, and with back of the envelope calculations of actual download times.
They care about speed... but they might not be caring about high speed. Probably the most frequent use of speedtest is when you are having performance problems, so if anything it's probably under-reporting the speed.