No rail gun needed, just a few small strap on rockets to place it into the Earth-Moon orbit with the right perigee. Gravity does the rest.
Of course that way the rock takes a while to get to Earth so there could be time to negoiate a "settlement". We'll drop a rock on Washington unless we get the rights to Tycho Crater!!
Wasn't this the idea behins Jordi's visor in STNG? I recall an episode where someone else put on his visor and it looked like a thermal viewer to them since it was not attuned to their brain. This "thinking cap" when linked with a thermal viewer could in fact be the first primitive steps towards that. We already have items like the communicator, and the medical scanner (CAT or MRI scan). Maybe the tricorder is next! Warp drive is still several 100 years away.
If there was anyone allowed to watch I'd say China would be the biggest polluter. I'd venture to say Russia is right behind. Since the fall of Communism Russia hasn't done much to clean up the mess that the Soviets dumped everywhere. Or are you forgetting that Chernobyl was a HUGE pollutor ever far beyond Bhopal and the Exxon Valdez, on the par with the Kuwait oil fields Saddam set on fire (funny how no one damns Saddam as a pollutor but hammmer on GWB).
Not quite. We attacked the Iraqi ARMY not the civilains, in Iraq at that time the military pretty much ran and used everything and hid among the civilans which led to civilian deaths. I really don't beleive attacking terrorist supporting regimes makes one a terrorist as well.
No, I'm not. You refuse to see the subtle differences in position. I NEVER said LockMart and Boeing were pure, just they were good engineering companies that make pretty decent rockets. If you fail to see that engineering expertise and management techniques are radically different I think you should go back to school. You know enough to be dangerous. Typical liberal drivel.
And I really don't give a Tinkers Dam what YOU think. I know the game. Like I figured this is all about a liberal Bashing GWB's policy (invading Irag for Oil is a dead giveaway) in many areas, just thinly disguised. If you don't like the way things are in the USA..haul your ass outta here, we won't miss you.
IRA, Al-Queda, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Red Cell, those sort who attack and kill non-military targets purely to influence poltics or religion (or both) are my definition of terrorist.
In some areas the world IS black and white. Shades of grey in others. I've known that for a long time. I've been around the block many times, I'm not a youngster but not old enough to retire either.
You must live in FL or Houston. I heard nothing about the NASA funding as an election strategy here. Having worked at several NASA centers I know that the funding and how big a slice each center gets is big LOCAL news.
I used to work for "fat cat" NASA contractors. I left when their ethics got out of control and they began ripping NASA off not just making a fair profit. I'm OK with profit, just made by the rules.
Boeing and Lockheed are very very good engineering companies. Anyone will tell you they are world class. But they do make mistakes. And you have no idea of how hard they and NASA will go to cover them up in some situations.
I'm very happy for Rutan, but you DO realize he is in the profit arena too that's the emphasis with the Virgin deal! He would love to one day take the work of a Lockheed or Boeing (done HIS way of course). He used to work for Lockheed IIRC.
The Middle East..so Israel is a U.S. Proxy Army? LOL..tell that to Sharon. We have had military bases in the Middle East since the Cold War. They haven't been used to stage democratic coups. The folks in Omar and Qatar love the US presence (and $$$), not so much the Saudi's. I don't think the USA is going to be in Iraq for very long. I don't forsee the situation as after WWII in Europe at all. I don't think the public would support it long term.Invading Iran? Possible but a long way off, after all Saddam got 12 yrs;). I think doing something abotu N.Korea is a better bet but it would be a point strike or covert op. Plus we KNOW they are selling nuke technology and may have sold the weapons as well. Let's not forget India and Pakistan who have nukes and have certain population segments who might lean to supporting folks like Osaama.
I take back the troll comment...I think we see a lot alike yet a lot different.
If so, they you can say he is consistent. Which is totally unlike the prior President. Democratizing the Middle East is (I think) a valid idea. But it has to be done with a great deal of finess. And it won't be overnight. Just a military victory (which would be easy) is not enough. You have to win the hearts and minds of the masses, and with the radical Clerics preaching ?Hate-Islam" that is going to be a really big challenge.
Correct. They left once before and came back.
I think they will sell, but it might take a bit to get the right price or deal in place.
Track record is when Sam says he's going to sell, he sells.
A) The bill passed last week, not before the election. So what votes did that buy? It was DOA for the longest time and got revived why Bush said he would veto the Omnibus bill (funding many agencies) if it didn't have the NASA money. RTFA!!
B) There are NOT 1000s of NASA Centers, about 25 counted all the minor locations. Go to the NASA homepage and look it up.
1) That's a common Government theme regardless of who is at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Pork rules in DC!
2)More lunacy. SS is OFF-BUDGET. The occupation of the Middle East? Laughable, and not at all part of the "Bush Plan". Just an excuse of a liberal know nothing to bash Bush.
Rutan isn't interested in doing more than he is doing now. He doesn't have the funding or team to get to Mars.
Since when is making a profit BAD? Are you a socialist or communist? If anyone is screwing up Space it's the poor management at NASA that lets the contractors get away with things they shouldn't.
Go back to your bridge Troll..
Re:Outsourcing made simple
on
Offshoring IT
·
· Score: 1
Grad Level Simulations are quite mathematical. I have ran them and looked at the math underneath. We can argue all day over if they have any usefulness! Or if the highly mathematical models yield better results than the simple ones. Arguments can be made for both.
Classical Econ says price is the value someone is willing to give up for a good/service or on the supply side it is what the seller is willing to take. Each would like to take advantage of the other, but in a "Free Market" this is not possible. Equilibrium on price must occur for a transaction to take place. That was driven home in MBA level Econ class.
Now, if you want to argue if there exists sure a pure Free Market such that the Classical Model wil work in real life, thats a totally different argument (IMHO pure Free Markets Don't exist)
Don't let NASA manage it. Let industry manage and NASA invent. That will work best.
The DOD awarded the JSF and F-22 contracts to one company. It was said that would kill off the fighter plane industry in the USA. What happened was that the winner subcontracted the loser for major subsystems. I suspect this would happen in a Mars race too. We really only have two players, Lockheed and Boeing, just like on JSF and F-22.
Heavy-lift is coming, the Delta-IV Heavy is about ready. Granted it's not a Saturn V but it's got a good capacity. Plus there is always the Energia and Proton designs the Russians have. Perhaps that would be a good starting point if we needed something really heavy lift.
How about a joint US-Russian Mars Mission? Wait, wasn't that a recent sci-fi movie?;)
There are some things that should have a moral foundation to them, some really don't need one and shouldn't have one made up. Space is one of those that needs no moral underpinning. Freeing the Iraqi's and killing terrorists (which I fully support) has a moral value. But I don't think we need to justify Space exploration by saying Osama has moved to Mars or the Moon;)
IBM wants to GET RID OF IT'S PC BUSINESS. Why in the world do/.ers keeping coming up with IBM buying Apple or a Merger or a Joint Venture?? Did ya'll forget everything you read Friday about IBM over the weekend? IBM needs CHEAPER products not more expensive, and buying/mergering/venturing with Apple isn't going to get there. This is NOT a decision with ANY basis in technology it's purely costs driven.
I spent Sunday getting my girlfriends router back up, and a couple of days a few months ago rebuilding her adware infested Dell into a clean terminal for writing, communicating via email, and surfing. Why?...because she is really good in the bed? or kitchen? or cuz you are just a nice guy;)
Yep, or "Catch-22" as some would say. I think we have to prioritize and decide WHAT to solve, maybe there is one hard problem that if solved opens up other problems to easier solutions. Any suggestions as to the "core" problem to solve that makes all the others trivial?
Of course, poor management will make easy problems hard and hard problems almost impossible!
Re:Strategic offshoring
on
Offshoring IT
·
· Score: 1
Well, yes with an Army of HR types at $2 per hour I guess they could. I was thinking if great programmers are so easy to find in India why do you even need HR people? Just hang out a sign. I suspect my analogy about yanking them off the street is about right to get 100 a day that are qualifed. I just find it hard to think how much effort the poor PMs have bringing on such large numbers of new people onto software projects, getting them up to speed and getting them productive. It's NOT as easy as it sounds, cuz I been there, done that.
Actually the Gov't over the past roughly 60 yrs has been led by the Democrats. They had control over BOTH house of Congress and often the Presidency. Democrats are tax and spend. Republicans are anti-tax but seem to still spend.
One other thing to realize is that elected officials come and go but the Government workers stay forever, and THEY are the real power. If they don't want to help you out with your policy implementation, it's not going to get done. An example is that the Sec. of State is the defacto head of the State Dept, yet he/she cannot hire or fire anyone! And there was also the huge fuss with GWB wanting the TSA workers to be NON-UNION. Start messing with the "jobs programs" and your administration is in trouble.
Economic expansion due to lower taxes combined with fiscal discipline in Gov't spending is the solution. However, I don't want to hear YOU scream when they start cutting meat off your sacred Cash Cow.
Gee, where has the old American igenuity gone? We used to do the difficult before lunch and the impossible by 5PM. If we just turn our backs on hard problems, then I guess we have to take whatever solution someone else gives us. Hard problems are not cheap to solve, they WILL involve some failures and setbacks (learning experiences) but they often have great long term benefits.
I'm all for getting rid of the STS (Shuttle) and keeping ISS supplied via the Russians and spending the money on Mars hardware. There is NO benefit technology or otherwise to the Shuttle and very little to ISS even.
There is a "gotcha" in all of this "spin" which of course you don't hear. That issue is that the money to get started is nice BUT, Pres. Bush is only going to be around 4 yrs and the next President might come in and take the $$ away for some social program or what not. So, NASA can't count on future money for whatever ideas they come up with. And I see 2008 as the date they want to start testing prototypes. I can't predict where things will be in 7 yrs, can you?
Bottom line, this is all a lot of spin and very little substance, something NASA has gotten very good at. They can manage opinions pretty well, but can they actually manage such a complex project as going to Mars and coming back (safely I might add)? I have my doubts. I support the idea in theory but I think it's going to be a boondoggle with NASA running it.
Here is my Plan B: The Gov't offer a $100B prize to the first PRIVATE venture to take 3 humans to the Moon and back, and $250B if they can make it to Mars and back. The Gov't posts the money up front and it keeps earning interest each year until it is claimed. Whoever wins, they can claim the money, they own the technology and they corner the market. What would YOU give to send your most hated celebrity/movie star to Mars so you wouldnt hear from them or see them for 2 yrs?;) Or what would YOU pay for a trip to the Moon?
Re:Strategic offshoring
on
Offshoring IT
·
· Score: 1
I couldn't find 100 qualified programmers a DAY to hire in the USA (in my geography) even with all the "slack" in the market. I could see 100 a week maybe. I seriously doubt you can process that many people into a company in 1 day and get them ready to work. If the HR weenies can get 100 folks a day on a job then there must be a lot of them or processing takes no time. "Hey Joe, want a job..walk in this door here, give me your name and pull up a chair to that PC and start coding. We'll get back to you in a few weeks about the pay"
Re:Strategic offshoring
on
Offshoring IT
·
· Score: 1
Wow, 36,500 people a year, year after year? You must be working on some Monster sized projects to need a staff of programmers that size. The worlds largest IT consulting company is IBM Global Services and they only have about 60K employees Worldwide. Can you even FIND 100 qualified people a day to do IT consulting? Or are you talking staffing call centers ?
Re:Outsourcing made simple
on
Offshoring IT
·
· Score: 1
Trades is giving something of a certain perceived value in exchange for something of perceived equal value. Supply and demand curves sets the perceived value (i.e. price). Right now the supply of IT workers is very high the demand is low, thus price must go down. Anyone willing to accept the market price must be making a economic profit at that price else they should invest the resources elsewhere. Now, that which SETS the supply and demand curves are where all the fussing occurs. Things like monetary policy, trade policy, government regulations (OT, Environment, etc) all have a non-trivial impact. Study Macro-economics at the graduate level and you'll find out there are many competing models of thought on what should/could be done in each area to help/hinder supply/demand and the possible impact. The models used to support the arguments gets in to some serious mathematics. It's kind of a fun game, since you are not really playing with REAL money;)
if you take this literally then humans should be able to consume ANY matter vegetable or animal. We know darn well we can't. So how does that get explained? Or is it metaphor? Just saying you can't take the Bible 100% literally nor can it all be logical either.
Animals were raised for use in clothing and shelter as well as for sacrifices. I don't see it as God saying you can NOW eat meat, I think he was just saying the new clean earth was the dominion of Man to use with the direction of God.
Yes,they must be counting everyone in that number.
Getting TWO scientists to agree on what to do is hard. Just imagine getting 800 of them to work together. The Management team at Google must be *really* good, or the perks must be awesome maybe both.
Slashdot Mirror
No rail gun needed, just a few small strap on rockets to place it into the Earth-Moon orbit with the right perigee. Gravity does the rest. Of course that way the rock takes a while to get to Earth so there could be time to negoiate a "settlement". We'll drop a rock on Washington unless we get the rights to Tycho Crater!!
Wasn't this the idea behins Jordi's visor in STNG? I recall an episode where someone else put on his visor and it looked like a thermal viewer to them since it was not attuned to their brain. This "thinking cap" when linked with a thermal viewer could in fact be the first primitive steps towards that. We already have items like the communicator, and the medical scanner (CAT or MRI scan). Maybe the tricorder is next! Warp drive is still several 100 years away.
If there was anyone allowed to watch I'd say China would be the biggest polluter. I'd venture to say Russia is right behind. Since the fall of Communism Russia hasn't done much to clean up the mess that the Soviets dumped everywhere. Or are you forgetting that Chernobyl was a HUGE pollutor ever far beyond Bhopal and the Exxon Valdez, on the par with the Kuwait oil fields Saddam set on fire (funny how no one damns Saddam as a pollutor but hammmer on GWB).
Not quite. We attacked the Iraqi ARMY not the civilains, in Iraq at that time the military pretty much ran and used everything and hid among the civilans which led to civilian deaths. I really don't beleive attacking terrorist supporting regimes makes one a terrorist as well.
No, I'm not. You refuse to see the subtle differences in position. I NEVER said LockMart and Boeing were pure, just they were good engineering companies that make pretty decent rockets. If you fail to see that engineering expertise and management techniques are radically different I think you should go back to school. You know enough to be dangerous. Typical liberal drivel. And I really don't give a Tinkers Dam what YOU think. I know the game. Like I figured this is all about a liberal Bashing GWB's policy (invading Irag for Oil is a dead giveaway) in many areas, just thinly disguised. If you don't like the way things are in the USA..haul your ass outta here, we won't miss you.
IRA, Al-Queda, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Red Cell, those sort who attack and kill non-military targets purely to influence poltics or religion (or both) are my definition of terrorist. In some areas the world IS black and white. Shades of grey in others. I've known that for a long time. I've been around the block many times, I'm not a youngster but not old enough to retire either.
You must live in FL or Houston. I heard nothing about the NASA funding as an election strategy here. Having worked at several NASA centers I know that the funding and how big a slice each center gets is big LOCAL news. I used to work for "fat cat" NASA contractors. I left when their ethics got out of control and they began ripping NASA off not just making a fair profit. I'm OK with profit, just made by the rules. Boeing and Lockheed are very very good engineering companies. Anyone will tell you they are world class. But they do make mistakes. And you have no idea of how hard they and NASA will go to cover them up in some situations. I'm very happy for Rutan, but you DO realize he is in the profit arena too that's the emphasis with the Virgin deal! He would love to one day take the work of a Lockheed or Boeing (done HIS way of course). He used to work for Lockheed IIRC. The Middle East..so Israel is a U.S. Proxy Army? LOL..tell that to Sharon. We have had military bases in the Middle East since the Cold War. They haven't been used to stage democratic coups. The folks in Omar and Qatar love the US presence (and $$$), not so much the Saudi's. I don't think the USA is going to be in Iraq for very long. I don't forsee the situation as after WWII in Europe at all. I don't think the public would support it long term.Invading Iran? Possible but a long way off, after all Saddam got 12 yrs ;). I think doing something abotu N.Korea is a better bet but it would be a point strike or covert op. Plus we KNOW they are selling nuke technology and may have sold the weapons as well. Let's not forget India and Pakistan who have nukes and have certain population segments who might lean to supporting folks like Osaama.
I take back the troll comment...I think we see a lot alike yet a lot different.
If so, they you can say he is consistent. Which is totally unlike the prior President. Democratizing the Middle East is (I think) a valid idea. But it has to be done with a great deal of finess. And it won't be overnight. Just a military victory (which would be easy) is not enough. You have to win the hearts and minds of the masses, and with the radical Clerics preaching ?Hate-Islam" that is going to be a really big challenge.
Correct. They left once before and came back. I think they will sell, but it might take a bit to get the right price or deal in place. Track record is when Sam says he's going to sell, he sells.
A) The bill passed last week, not before the election. So what votes did that buy? It was DOA for the longest time and got revived why Bush said he would veto the Omnibus bill (funding many agencies) if it didn't have the NASA money. RTFA!! B) There are NOT 1000s of NASA Centers, about 25 counted all the minor locations. Go to the NASA homepage and look it up. 1) That's a common Government theme regardless of who is at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Pork rules in DC! 2)More lunacy. SS is OFF-BUDGET. The occupation of the Middle East? Laughable, and not at all part of the "Bush Plan". Just an excuse of a liberal know nothing to bash Bush. Rutan isn't interested in doing more than he is doing now. He doesn't have the funding or team to get to Mars. Since when is making a profit BAD? Are you a socialist or communist? If anyone is screwing up Space it's the poor management at NASA that lets the contractors get away with things they shouldn't. Go back to your bridge Troll..
Grad Level Simulations are quite mathematical. I have ran them and looked at the math underneath. We can argue all day over if they have any usefulness! Or if the highly mathematical models yield better results than the simple ones. Arguments can be made for both. Classical Econ says price is the value someone is willing to give up for a good/service or on the supply side it is what the seller is willing to take. Each would like to take advantage of the other, but in a "Free Market" this is not possible. Equilibrium on price must occur for a transaction to take place. That was driven home in MBA level Econ class. Now, if you want to argue if there exists sure a pure Free Market such that the Classical Model wil work in real life, thats a totally different argument (IMHO pure Free Markets Don't exist)
Don't let NASA manage it. Let industry manage and NASA invent. That will work best. The DOD awarded the JSF and F-22 contracts to one company. It was said that would kill off the fighter plane industry in the USA. What happened was that the winner subcontracted the loser for major subsystems. I suspect this would happen in a Mars race too. We really only have two players, Lockheed and Boeing, just like on JSF and F-22. Heavy-lift is coming, the Delta-IV Heavy is about ready. Granted it's not a Saturn V but it's got a good capacity. Plus there is always the Energia and Proton designs the Russians have. Perhaps that would be a good starting point if we needed something really heavy lift. How about a joint US-Russian Mars Mission? Wait, wasn't that a recent sci-fi movie? ;)
There are some things that should have a moral foundation to them, some really don't need one and shouldn't have one made up. Space is one of those that needs no moral underpinning. Freeing the Iraqi's and killing terrorists (which I fully support) has a moral value. But I don't think we need to justify Space exploration by saying Osama has moved to Mars or the Moon ;)
IBM wants to GET RID OF IT'S PC BUSINESS. Why in the world do /.ers keeping coming up with IBM buying Apple or a Merger or a Joint Venture?? Did ya'll forget everything you read Friday about IBM over the weekend? IBM needs CHEAPER products not more expensive, and buying/mergering/venturing with Apple isn't going to get there. This is NOT a decision with ANY basis in technology it's purely costs driven.
I spent Sunday getting my girlfriends router back up, and a couple of days a few months ago rebuilding her adware infested Dell into a clean terminal for writing, communicating via email, and surfing. Why? ...because she is really good in the bed? or kitchen? or cuz you are just a nice guy ;)
Yep, or "Catch-22" as some would say. I think we have to prioritize and decide WHAT to solve, maybe there is one hard problem that if solved opens up other problems to easier solutions. Any suggestions as to the "core" problem to solve that makes all the others trivial? Of course, poor management will make easy problems hard and hard problems almost impossible!
Well, yes with an Army of HR types at $2 per hour I guess they could. I was thinking if great programmers are so easy to find in India why do you even need HR people? Just hang out a sign. I suspect my analogy about yanking them off the street is about right to get 100 a day that are qualifed. I just find it hard to think how much effort the poor PMs have bringing on such large numbers of new people onto software projects, getting them up to speed and getting them productive. It's NOT as easy as it sounds, cuz I been there, done that.
Actually the Gov't over the past roughly 60 yrs has been led by the Democrats. They had control over BOTH house of Congress and often the Presidency. Democrats are tax and spend. Republicans are anti-tax but seem to still spend. One other thing to realize is that elected officials come and go but the Government workers stay forever, and THEY are the real power. If they don't want to help you out with your policy implementation, it's not going to get done. An example is that the Sec. of State is the defacto head of the State Dept, yet he/she cannot hire or fire anyone! And there was also the huge fuss with GWB wanting the TSA workers to be NON-UNION. Start messing with the "jobs programs" and your administration is in trouble. Economic expansion due to lower taxes combined with fiscal discipline in Gov't spending is the solution. However, I don't want to hear YOU scream when they start cutting meat off your sacred Cash Cow.
Gee, where has the old American igenuity gone? We used to do the difficult before lunch and the impossible by 5PM. If we just turn our backs on hard problems, then I guess we have to take whatever solution someone else gives us. Hard problems are not cheap to solve, they WILL involve some failures and setbacks (learning experiences) but they often have great long term benefits. I'm all for getting rid of the STS (Shuttle) and keeping ISS supplied via the Russians and spending the money on Mars hardware. There is NO benefit technology or otherwise to the Shuttle and very little to ISS even. There is a "gotcha" in all of this "spin" which of course you don't hear. That issue is that the money to get started is nice BUT, Pres. Bush is only going to be around 4 yrs and the next President might come in and take the $$ away for some social program or what not. So, NASA can't count on future money for whatever ideas they come up with. And I see 2008 as the date they want to start testing prototypes. I can't predict where things will be in 7 yrs, can you? Bottom line, this is all a lot of spin and very little substance, something NASA has gotten very good at. They can manage opinions pretty well, but can they actually manage such a complex project as going to Mars and coming back (safely I might add)? I have my doubts. I support the idea in theory but I think it's going to be a boondoggle with NASA running it. Here is my Plan B: The Gov't offer a $100B prize to the first PRIVATE venture to take 3 humans to the Moon and back, and $250B if they can make it to Mars and back. The Gov't posts the money up front and it keeps earning interest each year until it is claimed. Whoever wins, they can claim the money, they own the technology and they corner the market. What would YOU give to send your most hated celebrity/movie star to Mars so you wouldnt hear from them or see them for 2 yrs? ;) Or what would YOU pay for a trip to the Moon?
I couldn't find 100 qualified programmers a DAY to hire in the USA (in my geography) even with all the "slack" in the market. I could see 100 a week maybe. I seriously doubt you can process that many people into a company in 1 day and get them ready to work. If the HR weenies can get 100 folks a day on a job then there must be a lot of them or processing takes no time. "Hey Joe, want a job..walk in this door here, give me your name and pull up a chair to that PC and start coding. We'll get back to you in a few weeks about the pay"
Wow, 36,500 people a year, year after year? You must be working on some Monster sized projects to need a staff of programmers that size. The worlds largest IT consulting company is IBM Global Services and they only have about 60K employees Worldwide. Can you even FIND 100 qualified people a day to do IT consulting? Or are you talking staffing call centers ?
Trades is giving something of a certain perceived value in exchange for something of perceived equal value. Supply and demand curves sets the perceived value (i.e. price). Right now the supply of IT workers is very high the demand is low, thus price must go down. Anyone willing to accept the market price must be making a economic profit at that price else they should invest the resources elsewhere. Now, that which SETS the supply and demand curves are where all the fussing occurs. Things like monetary policy, trade policy, government regulations (OT, Environment, etc) all have a non-trivial impact. Study Macro-economics at the graduate level and you'll find out there are many competing models of thought on what should/could be done in each area to help/hinder supply/demand and the possible impact. The models used to support the arguments gets in to some serious mathematics. It's kind of a fun game, since you are not really playing with REAL money ;)
if you take this literally then humans should be able to consume ANY matter vegetable or animal. We know darn well we can't. So how does that get explained? Or is it metaphor? Just saying you can't take the Bible 100% literally nor can it all be logical either.
Animals were raised for use in clothing and shelter as well as for sacrifices. I don't see it as God saying you can NOW eat meat, I think he was just saying the new clean earth was the dominion of Man to use with the direction of God.
Yes,they must be counting everyone in that number. Getting TWO scientists to agree on what to do is hard. Just imagine getting 800 of them to work together. The Management team at Google must be *really* good, or the perks must be awesome maybe both.