If it had been left to the private sector, we'd wouldn't have got to the moon, mars, the heliosheath. And despite the fact that earth orbit is profitable, probably no private sector project would have made the investment or taken the risk to go to space at all.
Space X can only do what it's doing now because it's standing on the shoulders of previous public sector projects. And heck this very project is being paid for by the public sector.
What *is* different is the accounting. Instead of a bevy of cost-plus contracts there is now a single-point fixed-cost provider which, surprise surprise, seems to be able to deliver at a much lower cost/kg.
Than what? Apollo? The Space Shuttle? Soyuz?2010s technology is more efficient than 1960s and 1970s technology. Who da thunk it?
Yes..those have to do with if the death was premeditated, or accidental.
Indeed, so it's not just as simple as "a death is a death". There are some variables in there to do with intent. And "racially motivated" is just one of those.
Society views it as more serious if I decide to kill you yesterday and do it today (1st degree), then if I just do it immediately as an impulsive reaction. (2nd degree).
Society also views it as more serious if I decide to kill someone of your race, and you end up getting killed, than it I decide to kill you.
Your views might be out of alignment with society on the second of those, possibly because you have no experience of being a victim of racism, or no empathy for it. But laws don't need the approval of everyone. They only need for society as a whole to find them reasonable.
There is no "post-PC." Tablets are an expansion of consumer tech, not a replacement.
Post-PC doesn't mean there will be no PCs. Just as post-modernism doesn't mean that there is no more modernism, and post-feminism doesn't mean there are no more feminists.
It simply means the computing devices that have or will come to the fore after the period when the PC is the primary computing platform.
You can't say it won't happen because it already has. Smartphone shipments already outnumber PC shipments.
It's only a matter of time before tablets also outnumber PCs.
And when TVs become fully fledged computing devices able to run applications, they'll outnumber PCs too.
And these things mean an inevitable change in how we interact with computers, most of the time. Different input devices and differently sized screens demand different UIs.
The same table shows that as a married couple you can choose to file separately. In which case you'll pay exactly the same as two singles. So again, married couples aren't being screwed compared to singles.
I think the main driver for marriage is tradition and pressure by family to conform to social norms.
For men.
For women, they've mostly been dreaming about their wedding day and married bliss since they were children. It's the fairy tale dream come true. And that's why they consider no expense is too much for the wedding day.
Sorry, no, you can't credit Labour with the good years and then pass off that bad years as a worldwide phenomenon, when both were happening worldwide! My faulty thinking?
Yes, your faulty thinking for a second time. I didn't do that. Only you made that mistake. (in reverse.)
You'd have to be a cretin of enormous proportions to not see that the specifics of the British economy as it now stands are entirely the fault of the retards on the red side of the house.
The massive debt was run up by an incompetent Labour government who ran up a massive deficit and sold off all our gold reserve for pennies.
It's amazing how Tory supporters manage to trot that one out without remembering that their own party sold off council houses, British Gas, Rolls Royce, Ferranti, National Express, Sealink, Cable & Wireless and many more "for pennies". Tories sold off far more of the public wealth at stupidly low prices than Labour did.
The coalition inherited a complete mess just as the financial world was sliding into a global recession.
Absolutely they did. It's not their fault that we are in recession. They aren't able to control the economy. So why are they trying to? Austerity can't create growth. It just makes stagnation more unpleasant.
they had over a decade of the best economic conditions I've seen in my lifetime, and still managed to screw up the economy.
This is common faulty thinking. When it's the party that you don't support: 1) If the economy goes well, it just happened and the party were lucky to be in power at that time. 2) If the economy goes badly, then it's that party's fault.
The extent to which it is obvious you can see right now. The fucked up economy of the end of the Labour term and through the Tory term is worldwide. You have to be a cretin of enormous proportions to say a UK party screwed the economy.
Never say never. It used to seem like a two party system of the Tories and the Whigs. The Labour party was only formed in 1900. And by 1924 they were the ruling party.
And big media's power is waning. Newspaper circulation has been shrinking for decade. People watch less TV than they used to. People get much more of their information from the internet. And that's far more democratised. Anybody can have their own blog or site.
Now more than ever in my lifetime, there seems to be change in the air.
I'm afraid you're just showing your ignorance of the Green Party. They're not single issue. They have a full range of policies across the board.
If rather than accuracy you just want to ignorantly stereotype, you could say that Tories and Labour are single-issue puppets. Their issues being: money and unions. That's how stupid your perception of the Green party is.
Unfortunately the truth is worse than that. I did much to explain to my friends and family why AV is a better system. They still almost all voted to keep FPTP. And the reason that they were uninformed didn't apply.
The trouble is this. The vast majority of people are conservative with a small c. Even the ones that are liberal or left. They think things like "better the devil you know", and "we don't want to be out of the frying pan, into the fire". They take on board all the possible things that might be negatives about AV, and think that AV is therefore bad. What they don't do is set those negatives against the existing negatives of FPTP.
They also fear having small parties get any more power. For the same reason. They fear the unknown. They'd rather have two parties that they know are shit, rather than some small party that might be shit.
Most people are not rational enough to know what's good for them.
Apple isn't what it is because of accountants and MBAs. Apple is where it is because it brought the liberal arts in to product design. And unlike most companies didn't allow accountants and MBAs to penny pinch.
Having a datacentre powered with renewables fits perfectly with Apple's business model.
And Microsoft are not changing for cosmetic reasons, but because the environment for computers is changing. We're entering the post PC period. Metro is there because they need a UI that work well with touch. And windows (small w) don't. (e.g. People already think that the resizing border on Aero is big at 4 pixels. To be a size to hit reliably with touch, it'd have to be 40+ pixels.)
Having created a new UI, they are then have the problem that the old monolithic apps don't work with it, and so they need to have the old windows UI still available to support all those 1st and 3rd party apps. Trouble is the visual jarring between the two UIs is terrible. So they need to wind down the visual effects on the old UI to make it less of a clash with Metro.
The reasons are solid, and they're not frivolous.
(And I say this as someone who doesn't like Microsoft. I switched to Mac 10 years ago.)
It's not more difficult at all. There are real practical changes, real usability changes, and cosmetic changes whether you are talking about the evolution of OSs or cars.
Slashdot Mirror
But the quality has dropped. It's news for hire now.
If it had been left to the private sector, we'd wouldn't have got to the moon, mars, the heliosheath. And despite the fact that earth orbit is profitable, probably no private sector project would have made the investment or taken the risk to go to space at all.
Space X can only do what it's doing now because it's standing on the shoulders of previous public sector projects. And heck this very project is being paid for by the public sector.
Trouble is it was too dark to see the milk-bottle they launched it from.
What *is* different is the accounting. Instead of a bevy of cost-plus contracts there is now a single-point fixed-cost provider which, surprise surprise, seems to be able to deliver at a much lower cost/kg.
Than what? Apollo? The Space Shuttle? Soyuz?2010s technology is more efficient than 1960s and 1970s technology. Who da thunk it?
Yes..those have to do with if the death was premeditated, or accidental.
Indeed, so it's not just as simple as "a death is a death". There are some variables in there to do with intent. And "racially motivated" is just one of those.
Society views it as more serious if I decide to kill you yesterday and do it today (1st degree), then if I just do it immediately as an impulsive reaction. (2nd degree).
Society also views it as more serious if I decide to kill someone of your race, and you end up getting killed, than it I decide to kill you.
Your views might be out of alignment with society on the second of those, possibly because you have no experience of being a victim of racism, or no empathy for it. But laws don't need the approval of everyone. They only need for society as a whole to find them reasonable.
WFT? A death is a death....? At least...it used to be?
No it didn't. There are long standing distinctions between different degrees of murder and manslaughter.
There is no "post-PC." Tablets are an expansion of consumer tech, not a replacement.
Post-PC doesn't mean there will be no PCs. Just as post-modernism doesn't mean that there is no more modernism, and post-feminism doesn't mean there are no more feminists.
It simply means the computing devices that have or will come to the fore after the period when the PC is the primary computing platform.
You can't say it won't happen because it already has. Smartphone shipments already outnumber PC shipments.
It's only a matter of time before tablets also outnumber PCs.
And when TVs become fully fledged computing devices able to run applications, they'll outnumber PCs too.
And these things mean an inevitable change in how we interact with computers, most of the time. Different input devices and differently sized screens demand different UIs.
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
The same table shows that as a married couple you can choose to file separately. In which case you'll pay exactly the same as two singles. So again, married couples aren't being screwed compared to singles.
And the animals with the "perceived need to have kids"? And the ones that mate for life?
It's far more instinct than tradition.
It is a relief he got married. A nerd with a girlfriend was an unsettling phenomenon.
I'd be surprised if you were paying more tax than if you were both single. No matter where you are in the world.
So it's hard to see how you're being screwed on taxes.
I think the main driver for marriage is tradition and pressure by family to conform to social norms.
For men.
For women, they've mostly been dreaming about their wedding day and married bliss since they were children. It's the fairy tale dream come true. And that's why they consider no expense is too much for the wedding day.
Yes, I generalise. That's what men do.
Sorry, no, you can't credit Labour with the good years and then pass off that bad years as a worldwide phenomenon, when both were happening worldwide! My faulty thinking?
Yes, your faulty thinking for a second time. I didn't do that. Only you made that mistake. (in reverse.)
You'd have to be a cretin of enormous proportions to not see that the specifics of the British economy as it now stands are entirely the fault of the retards on the red side of the house.
And there you are, you're still doing it. Cretin.
You're getting stupider by the minute.
The massive debt was run up by an incompetent Labour government who ran up a massive deficit and sold off all our gold reserve for pennies.
It's amazing how Tory supporters manage to trot that one out without remembering that their own party sold off council houses, British Gas, Rolls Royce, Ferranti, National Express, Sealink, Cable & Wireless and many more "for pennies". Tories sold off far more of the public wealth at stupidly low prices than Labour did.
The coalition inherited a complete mess just as the financial world was sliding into a global recession.
Absolutely they did. It's not their fault that we are in recession. They aren't able to control the economy. So why are they trying to? Austerity can't create growth. It just makes stagnation more unpleasant.
they had over a decade of the best economic conditions I've seen in my lifetime, and still managed to screw up the economy.
This is common faulty thinking. When it's the party that you don't support:
1) If the economy goes well, it just happened and the party were lucky to be in power at that time.
2) If the economy goes badly, then it's that party's fault.
The extent to which it is obvious you can see right now. The fucked up economy of the end of the Labour term and through the Tory term is worldwide. You have to be a cretin of enormous proportions to say a UK party screwed the economy.
Never say never. It used to seem like a two party system of the Tories and the Whigs. The Labour party was only formed in 1900. And by 1924 they were the ruling party.
And big media's power is waning. Newspaper circulation has been shrinking for decade. People watch less TV than they used to. People get much more of their information from the internet. And that's far more democratised. Anybody can have their own blog or site.
Now more than ever in my lifetime, there seems to be change in the air.
I'm afraid you're just showing your ignorance of the Green Party. They're not single issue. They have a full range of policies across the board.
If rather than accuracy you just want to ignorantly stereotype, you could say that Tories and Labour are single-issue puppets. Their issues being: money and unions. That's how stupid your perception of the Green party is.
Unfortunately the truth is worse than that. I did much to explain to my friends and family why AV is a better system. They still almost all voted to keep FPTP. And the reason that they were uninformed didn't apply.
The trouble is this. The vast majority of people are conservative with a small c. Even the ones that are liberal or left. They think things like "better the devil you know", and "we don't want to be out of the frying pan, into the fire". They take on board all the possible things that might be negatives about AV, and think that AV is therefore bad. What they don't do is set those negatives against the existing negatives of FPTP.
They also fear having small parties get any more power. For the same reason. They fear the unknown. They'd rather have two parties that they know are shit, rather than some small party that might be shit.
Most people are not rational enough to know what's good for them.
Apple isn't what it is because of accountants and MBAs. Apple is where it is because it brought the liberal arts in to product design. And unlike most companies didn't allow accountants and MBAs to penny pinch.
Having a datacentre powered with renewables fits perfectly with Apple's business model.
No, that isn't what i said. If you are capable, re-read my post and you will see i said something far different
... and stupider.
And Microsoft are not changing for cosmetic reasons, but because the environment for computers is changing. We're entering the post PC period. Metro is there because they need a UI that work well with touch. And windows (small w) don't. (e.g. People already think that the resizing border on Aero is big at 4 pixels. To be a size to hit reliably with touch, it'd have to be 40+ pixels.)
Having created a new UI, they are then have the problem that the old monolithic apps don't work with it, and so they need to have the old windows UI still available to support all those 1st and 3rd party apps. Trouble is the visual jarring between the two UIs is terrible. So they need to wind down the visual effects on the old UI to make it less of a clash with Metro.
The reasons are solid, and they're not frivolous.
(And I say this as someone who doesn't like Microsoft. I switched to Mac 10 years ago.)
You can. There are plenty of choices. What's stopping you?
It's not more difficult at all. There are real practical changes, real usability changes, and cosmetic changes whether you are talking about the evolution of OSs or cars.