The radio telescope in the Stanford foothills, now generally regarded as a benign feature of the landscape, pretty at sunset, and occasionally used for research, was originally commissioned to study nuclear explosions in space.
I don't know very much about the history of the project, except that its true purpose was almost certainly kept secret. That was military S.O.P. for weapons research, and there had been massive protests against Stanford Research Institute, the owner of the dish, for its involvement in "evil" military research. Even today few people are uneasy about the origins of the dish, because few people know.
Re:GNAA Congratulates the Debian Project on the Re
on
FreeBSD 5.4 Review
·
· Score: -1, Redundant
If everyone who posted today took the time to read an Econ 101 textbook cover to cover, and to understand it (even if they disagreed with everything) we would be having a vastly different conversation about technology, wealth, and employment.
A lot of very intelligent people have devoted their lives to understanding the same issues that Mr. Oram took a (somewhat misguided) stab at in his article.
Studying up on this stuff is the only way you'll be able to distinguish sense from garbage.
Increasing the cost of labor decreases the demand for labor, just as increasing the cost of bananas decreases the demand for bananas.
Anyone can do "worthwhile" work at a living wage - the limiting factor is demand for labor. Making labor more expensive isn't going to create any jobs.
If universities around the world spent as much money researching operating systems and programming methods as a single big chipmaker spends on a new fab, we'd all be able to get a lot more power out of the chips we already own.
The catch is, it's a lot easier to make money selling silicon (or diamond, or DNA, or nanotubes, or whatever...)
That article should give anybody who's ever taken a college macroeconomics course a case of the screaming heebie-jeebies.
Trying to print enough money to give each citizen $25,000 would send the US economy straight into hyperinflation. We're talking about an amount of money equal to 75% of GDP - and countries have managed to trash their economies by printing a small fraction of that amount.
Even if we tried to do the responsible thing and financed the handouts with government debt, the sudden demand for loanable funds would drive up interest rates all around the world.
We'd have 7 trillion in new, high interest debt, which would double the federal debt load. Eventually, we'd need higher taxes to put that debt to bed
(either that, or the U.S. goes into default).
As things stand today, we're having trouble financing a tax cut that's orders of magnitude smaller.
Good luck...
Slashdot Mirror
The radio telescope in the Stanford foothills, now generally regarded as a benign feature of the landscape, pretty at sunset, and occasionally used for research, was originally commissioned to study nuclear explosions in space. I don't know very much about the history of the project, except that its true purpose was almost certainly kept secret. That was military S.O.P. for weapons research, and there had been massive protests against Stanford Research Institute, the owner of the dish, for its involvement in "evil" military research. Even today few people are uneasy about the origins of the dish, because few people know.
Would someone PLEASE moderate that last post?
A lot of very intelligent people have devoted their lives to understanding the same issues that Mr. Oram took a (somewhat misguided) stab at in his article.
Studying up on this stuff is the only way you'll be able to distinguish sense from garbage.
Because it makes both parties better off. Otherwise, they would have no reason to participate.
Technology isn't so bad. I like having electricity, indoor plumbing, and safe, plentiful food, don't you?
Anyone can do "worthwhile" work at a living wage - the limiting factor is demand for labor. Making labor more expensive isn't going to create any jobs.
The catch is, it's a lot easier to make money selling silicon (or diamond, or DNA, or nanotubes, or whatever...)
Trying to print enough money to give each citizen $25,000 would send the US economy straight into hyperinflation. We're talking about an amount of money equal to 75% of GDP - and countries have managed to trash their economies by printing a small fraction of that amount.
Even if we tried to do the responsible thing and financed the handouts with government debt, the sudden demand for loanable funds would drive up interest rates all around the world.
We'd have 7 trillion in new, high interest debt, which would double the federal debt load. Eventually, we'd need higher taxes to put that debt to bed (either that, or the U.S. goes into default).
As things stand today, we're having trouble financing a tax cut that's orders of magnitude smaller. Good luck...