When you train and educate for current technology and current needs of business, they will be unqualified when things change.
This can be true if your expectations of people is that they only know what they've been trained to know. I have a somewhat higher evaluation of individuals, perhaps this insight is something we do not share.
"Rules of Engagement" would seem to be a relevant term.
"He punched me in the face and went down that alley!" Instruction: Do not follow.
Yes, maneuverability was a Thud weakness.
The Soviets gave inferior stuff to their intentionally-failed drone states. In a 5-to-1 fight, the US and allies would have won easily, but it would have been a war whose outcome nobody would want due to likely escalation and UN shoe-banging.
Soviet clients wanted cool-looking, impressive stuff. Just enough to scare their own population.
Russian technology is not something to be dismissed, however. Remember the T-34 and current rockets?
Sorry if I have to talk to you like you're babies...
The "science" is obvious and settled to you, so you want to treat anyone that has doubts as babies. Golf clap for you, drooling-dog. Have you met Kenji?
I don't care to hear from a chair-bound, brilliant scientist telling me what to do. Chances are, his views of "what is right for the planet" are just as kooky as any other environmentalist.
Slashdot Mirror
There, I said it. Lets all now have a rational, civilized discussion.
Please explain more about this Lysenko fellow. Was he some kind of amazing Russian scientist or something?
And, as we all know, tree rings are a great substitute for actual data, and trees can be made into hockey sticks.
Your comment was possibly interesting and insightful. I lost interest after 'booby prizes', however, and then trundled off to youporn. Sorry.
As you can tell from my sig, I'm a flat-earther. What is this magical spherical world you speak of?
Two words: Bond. James Bond.
Manky scots git!
Did they also have extra apostrophe's?
I can see how that could drive a megalomaniac mad enough to invade Europe.
Yeah, "socialism" was part of the name, but Mr Silly Stache's goal was all-or-nothing. "He" lost, but Germany won.
Germany is now an economic superpower (albeit helped along by the US).
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053084/
The occupy people had to go somewhere.
When you train and educate for current technology and current needs of business, they will be unqualified when things change.
This can be true if your expectations of people is that they only know what they've been trained to know. I have a somewhat higher evaluation of individuals, perhaps this insight is something we do not share.
You are forgetting the ace-up-the-sleeve that the US has. Alien technology.
"Rules of Engagement" would seem to be a relevant term. "He punched me in the face and went down that alley!" Instruction: Do not follow. Yes, maneuverability was a Thud weakness.
The Soviets gave inferior stuff to their intentionally-failed drone states. In a 5-to-1 fight, the US and allies would have won easily, but it would have been a war whose outcome nobody would want due to likely escalation and UN shoe-banging. Soviet clients wanted cool-looking, impressive stuff. Just enough to scare their own population. Russian technology is not something to be dismissed, however. Remember the T-34 and current rockets?
First there was nothing. Then it exploded.
Read chapter two of 'To Engineer is Human'.
His previous book is 'To Forgive Design'.
Wonderful progression of titles by Petroski and excellent books.
Paul
We're working on it: opti-grab.ca/images/ocean_drain.jpg
"He is one of only 15 high school students in the world to successfully achieve fusion."
Really? Wow.
I predict many job offers for this individual.
Does this mean I shouldn't invest in sock puppets?
That's a bit more sophisticated than the old co-ax machinegun to test for range and accuracy.
It fits into the new religion. Same old story.
Sorry if I have to talk to you like you're babies...
The "science" is obvious and settled to you, so you want to treat anyone that has doubts as babies. Golf clap for you, drooling-dog. Have you met Kenji?
"Real" engineering or software? For some, there's no difference.
I don't care to hear from a chair-bound, brilliant scientist telling me what to do. Chances are, his views of "what is right for the planet" are just as kooky as any other environmentalist.
Somehow I don't think the concentration of CO2 in air makes this very efficient...
we'll either need to figure out how to create gas from atmospheric CO2
Huh?