I don't know about you, but I've been on many projects (Fortune 500 company here) where engineering told management that it would take X months to complete it, and management came back with a schedule of X/2. That's not evidence of misleading the public in any legal sense of the word. That's management telling engineering, to make it happen. Sometimes it works, sometimes it's bullshit. The question is, did Tesla come anywhere close to the publicly stated goals...I don't know for certain, but thought I'd read elsewhere that they had.
Had a good one pulled on me. Came back to my desk to find the wallpaper showing a (subordinate who sat in the next office) coworker with my teenage daughter. All in good fun, though I learned to lock my screen before walking away.
Hmmm... You can choose to believe theology, where there's zero evidence of a supreme being, or you can choose to believe science. But your claim isn't always true.
Inefficient? Yes, but somehow the world hasn't come up with a better way yet. We can't even get decent peer review in many cases because there's simply no money/glory in reviewing other people's work. The peer review system has mostly been broken for a long time because of that simple fact.
Except that you can't find a study that points to sugar rush actually being a thing. Even if what you said had actually occurred (and you have zero evidence that it did), other testing has occurred by scientists who were not funded by the candy industry.
There is no such thing as a sugar rush. There's plenty more evidence where this came from...
If corporations are people too (I don't agree with this, but devil's advocate here), how long would a person have been kept off the road after that Arizona accident? And yes, I know the person was crossing at night and not at a crosswalk, and not watching, but there were multiple factors to the "accident".
Humans have subverted evolution by protecting the weak and stupid and preventing Darwinism to take it's natural course of cleansing the low end of the gene pool.
I wasn't insinuating that you shouldn't attempt to avoid an accident because of a stupid mistake. However, if someone walks out in front of a car that's moving fast enough to kill them, should the driver of that car pay the price (with his/her life)?...I say NO. If it's a matter of just swerving and taking minor low speed damage, that's different, as I pointed out. I don't care how fast those scanners scan, or how fast computers are, they will never overcome the physics of a two ton vehicle moving and make it stop any faster. What they will do, is anticipate events much faster than humans, and react much faster. But, if it takes 100 feet to stop your vehicle, then that's just what it takes.
I think you and I are actually mostly in agreement, we're being a bit pedantic about various points though.
Pedestrians (adults) stepping out from behind trees is something that becomes a Darwin Awards issue in my opinion. At some point, you can't expect vehicles to account for stupidity. Small children I can understand don't know any better. But, this occurs in every neighborhood with vehicles parked on the side and small kids running out between them in 25 mph zones. Going 5 mph isn't a reasonable option or we'd all be walking to work. Vehicles will need to make that decision for us, and fortunately at under 25 mph, I think it's an easy one for the vehicle to take the hit since the passengers would probably go uninjured even if they had to run into a brick wall.
The speed wouldn't help if those people/animals had stepped out a little closer to my vehicle. You can kill someone at speeds below 20mph. So, my point is that this isn't a speed issue. It's a decision that needs to be coded to either hit the object, or swerve into a tree or possibly oncoming traffic. The argument many seem to be trying to make is that that won't ever happen, to which I call bullshit based upon personal observation and 45 years of driving.
I'm not disagreeing with your assessment of DJT. But, HRC wasn't far behind him in that category..."vast right wing conspiracy" my ass. Not to mention that everyone but her is to blame for her failure.
First of all, your original post is spoken like someone planting fake issues against the US. Maybe you're a Chinese government troll working to divert attention from the main issue presented.
Next, the issue you raise isn't an American issue at all with the minor exception of the fact that Khashoggi worked for the Washington Post. Sure the Saudis are scum for doing this, and you're blaming Trump for that? As if the previous administration wasn't in bed with them too? Get a grip.
Right, because the "scientific-industrial complex" just wants to spend ~$1B in a remote location to fuck up the view. This is on grounds that were set aside long ago for astronomy, which according to you has no value to humanity. Obviously, we don't need things like GPS, or cell phones. In fact, just go read this to find out what astronomy has done for humanity, then come back and apologize for your ignorance. Otherwise, we'll just know it was stupidity, which can't be fixed.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about you, but I've been on many projects (Fortune 500 company here) where engineering told management that it would take X months to complete it, and management came back with a schedule of X/2. That's not evidence of misleading the public in any legal sense of the word. That's management telling engineering, to make it happen. Sometimes it works, sometimes it's bullshit. The question is, did Tesla come anywhere close to the publicly stated goals...I don't know for certain, but thought I'd read elsewhere that they had.
Had a good one pulled on me. Came back to my desk to find the wallpaper showing a (subordinate who sat in the next office) coworker with my teenage daughter. All in good fun, though I learned to lock my screen before walking away.
There's nothing greedy about asking to be paid the rent you're due. Overdue in this case..
Hmmm... You can choose to believe theology, where there's zero evidence of a supreme being, or you can choose to believe science. But your claim isn't always true.
https://www.independent.co.uk/...
https://www.space.com/24054-ho...
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Inefficient? Yes, but somehow the world hasn't come up with a better way yet. We can't even get decent peer review in many cases because there's simply no money/glory in reviewing other people's work. The peer review system has mostly been broken for a long time because of that simple fact.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
https://www.wired.com/2014/12/...
https://wattsupwiththat.com/20...
Brian Wansink was recently stripped of his Cornell professorship when he and is lab were caught doing extensive "p-hacking"
But p-hacking is a thing in pretty much every field, and it needs to be stopped.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/fe...
Too often a field is trying to study something for which there is no practical method for real testing
Please, I'd like to hear a couple of examples of such fields.
It was likely correct back in the day. I knew a couple who did back in the 60s.
Except that you can't find a study that points to sugar rush actually being a thing. Even if what you said had actually occurred (and you have zero evidence that it did), other testing has occurred by scientists who were not funded by the candy industry.
There is no such thing as a sugar rush. There's plenty more evidence where this came from...
https://www.webmd.com/parentin...
http://www.yalescientific.org/...
https://blogs.unimelb.edu.au/s...
http://www.bbc.com/future/stor...
If corporations are people too (I don't agree with this, but devil's advocate here), how long would a person have been kept off the road after that Arizona accident? And yes, I know the person was crossing at night and not at a crosswalk, and not watching, but there were multiple factors to the "accident".
Humans have subverted evolution by protecting the weak and stupid and preventing Darwinism to take it's natural course of cleansing the low end of the gene pool.
You're sorry, but not in the way you think. Get some help.
I wasn't insinuating that you shouldn't attempt to avoid an accident because of a stupid mistake. However, if someone walks out in front of a car that's moving fast enough to kill them, should the driver of that car pay the price (with his/her life)?...I say NO. If it's a matter of just swerving and taking minor low speed damage, that's different, as I pointed out. I don't care how fast those scanners scan, or how fast computers are, they will never overcome the physics of a two ton vehicle moving and make it stop any faster. What they will do, is anticipate events much faster than humans, and react much faster. But, if it takes 100 feet to stop your vehicle, then that's just what it takes.
I think you and I are actually mostly in agreement, we're being a bit pedantic about various points though.
Pedestrians (adults) stepping out from behind trees is something that becomes a Darwin Awards issue in my opinion. At some point, you can't expect vehicles to account for stupidity. Small children I can understand don't know any better. But, this occurs in every neighborhood with vehicles parked on the side and small kids running out between them in 25 mph zones. Going 5 mph isn't a reasonable option or we'd all be walking to work. Vehicles will need to make that decision for us, and fortunately at under 25 mph, I think it's an easy one for the vehicle to take the hit since the passengers would probably go uninjured even if they had to run into a brick wall.
The speed wouldn't help if those people/animals had stepped out a little closer to my vehicle. You can kill someone at speeds below 20mph. So, my point is that this isn't a speed issue. It's a decision that needs to be coded to either hit the object, or swerve into a tree or possibly oncoming traffic. The argument many seem to be trying to make is that that won't ever happen, to which I call bullshit based upon personal observation and 45 years of driving.
Why do they need us? Ask yourself why do they need the $505B we sent to them in 2017. You think they don't care if the US funds were to dry up?
The percentage of the population is irrelevant. 5 million people is far from "a very few" that the GP stated.
I'm not disagreeing with your assessment of DJT. But, HRC wasn't far behind him in that category..."vast right wing conspiracy" my ass. Not to mention that everyone but her is to blame for her failure.
With trade imbalanced so heavily, China needs us much more than we need them. They won't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Funny, the Washington Post reported that ~5 million Americans hold security clearances. Were you unable to cut it?
First of all, your original post is spoken like someone planting fake issues against the US. Maybe you're a Chinese government troll working to divert attention from the main issue presented.
Next, the issue you raise isn't an American issue at all with the minor exception of the fact that Khashoggi worked for the Washington Post. Sure the Saudis are scum for doing this, and you're blaming Trump for that? As if the previous administration wasn't in bed with them too? Get a grip.
Right, because the "scientific-industrial complex" just wants to spend ~$1B in a remote location to fuck up the view. This is on grounds that were set aside long ago for astronomy, which according to you has no value to humanity. Obviously, we don't need things like GPS, or cell phones. In fact, just go read this to find out what astronomy has done for humanity, then come back and apologize for your ignorance. Otherwise, we'll just know it was stupidity, which can't be fixed.
https://www.iau.org/public/the...
Are those the anti-vax, anti-GMO, or gluten-free republicans? Oops, wrong anti-science party.
OMG, it wasn't a contractor? Seriously, this is typical government workforce in the US.
The starting point isn't the point, or don't you get the fucking point?