Let's head this off . . . read the article. The event was not caused by the mega-tsunamis from the impact itself (which would have taken hours to arrive at the site from the proto-Gulf of Mexico) but by "seiche," which are localized earthquakes caused by the impact which arrived at the site of the find within minutes. This is why the tektites were inhaled by the still-living fish and also found impacted at the site -- the tektites were still raining down when this happened.
Just finding amber-preserved tektites is a huge deal (meaning their chemical signature would be basically the same as it was during the event -- something never before encountered). If there actually are non-reworked dinosaur bones in close proximity to / at the K-T boundary, it would unequivocally prove that the dinosaurs survived all the way up to the asteroid impact, which has been the subject of some debate. DePalma is taking a lot of flak for doing some Barnum-type hyping of the find, and for maintaining extreme secrecy about the location of the site -- as well as for letting journalists release some details that are apparently not included in the peer-reviewed paper (e.g., the existence of said dino bones). But if even part of what is says he has found is true, then it is a truly historic find which will represent a quantum leap in our understanding of the bolide impact at the end of the Cretaceous Period, and even shed a lot of light for what to expect about similar impacts in the future. Personally, I think that (in addition to his showmanship and relative lack of transparency so far) a lot of the blowback is coming from folks at bigger institutions who are a bit miffed that this find was produced not by their ranks but by a younger, non-Ph.D. paleontologist playing somewhat by his own rules. But big scientific claims require lots of scrutiny, and eventually proof. Let's hope now that the word is out, he eventually puts it all out there for the scientific community to assess.
Not really. Bombardier mostly makes regional jets whereas Boeing doesn't build any of them. However, they do make one line that directly competes with Boeing -- the CSeries, which competes directly with the Boeing 737 and Airbus 320. In October 2017 Airbus bought 50.01% of the C series production and the airplane is now being built in Alabama to avoid paying US tariffs. The deal was under-reported by the press for obvious reasons but the outcome is *exactly* why the 21% tariff was proposed in the first place. The airplane is still being built (only now in the US by US labor) and Boeing still has to compete with it.
. . . settling became the cheapest path going forward, so that's what they did. As usual though, forced contrition never means they are sorry about what they did, nor does it mean they'll change their behavior. They'll still gladly sell their own mothers' info to the highest bidder -- that is literally what they exist to do.
I would assume they want to try to hold management to a 40 hour work week for the employees -- that's likely one of the biggest complaints you'll hear from tech and one which a union *might* be able to do something about. I'm not a labor law attorney so I'm not sure how this will work out in practice.
But yeah, why would tech workers actually *want* to join a union? They typically already make much more than people in other industries, so I'm not too sure that collective bargaining for salary and benefits is going to be very interesting to most people there. And a lot of the political participation that unions do is going to piss off about half the people working at that company -- and now they will get to pay for it against their will.
Some of the other stuff -- "inclusivity," for example -- the union will be powerless to affect. How would they force a company to hired qualified non-white / non-Asian / non-males if such people aren't already available to be hired from the pool in large numbers? Etc.
Unionization in tech sounds like a solution looking for problems to justify its existence.
Indeed. Inclusively in tech is almost exclusively a demand-side issue. If activists want to see more minorities in IT, they need to focus on increasing the size of the pool of qualified applicants (preferably beginning at a very early age!) instead of badgering and harassing companies into compliance. The problem is that organic solutions like that take awhile to work, and that flies in the face of the instant-gratification crowd doing all the screaming.
Starbucks always has a stack of CDs right next to the register. They have demographically determined that their customers are likely to enjoy the stuff they hear when they are standing in line (the same music used to torture the baristas) so it's another way to extract more dollars per customer. Genius if you think about it.
The erosion of US manufacturing power started many decades before this. After WWII, we rebuilt Europe and Japan under the Marshall Plan with, for example, better steel making technology than we had domestically available in the US. We literally paid for our former enemies to be able to manufacture things better and cheaper than we could, and domestic manufacturers couldn't compete. Over the next few decades, combined with abuses by unions, unfavorable tax laws, new environmental regulations that other countries didn't have, and yes, greed on the part of the mill owners, US steel production faded into the rear view mirror. US Steel and iron production peaked in 1973, decades before GHWB and well before Reagan, and precipitously declined during the recession that began in the late 1970s under Carter.
Seriously, quit making things partisan issues when there's tons of history that proves otherwise.
They're just going to buy most of their power from foreign nations -- namely oil from the Russians and nuclear power from the French. It's just feel-good bullshit that moves the externalities elsewhere but costs the German people a whole lot of money and does nothing to solve the underlying issues.
Being that Aquaman was aggressively marketed towards women, it's more likely to be some psycho chick with an ax to grind. After all, you know, equality.
Also check out the Internet Archives headquarters in San Francisco, set up in an old Christian Scientist church. Another interesting (if a little weird -- each current and former IAer gets their own personalized, terracotta warrior-style figurine) unused religious building re-purposed as a data center (and tech headquarters in this case).
Whatever dude. I called out the projections and conclusions in that CNBC report you posted as shit, being based on nothing but fairy dust and unicorn farts. Their "math" is based on future-projecting a rate of continual efficiencies which is absolutely impossible to calculate, let alone estimate with any amount of accuracy. They're throwing darts at a board and guessing (maybe), and coming up with the answers they want. It's just the anti-Macron brigade trying to stop a moving train and join the nuclear-free ranks of Germany etc. -- absolutely nothing more. There is NO WAY any trends with that much missing data that go out 20+ years are meaningful. You have no response for their "conclusion" about economic non-viability due to excess capacity -- again, that's the most important part of the entire piece, and it's pure, unprovable fantasy. Come on. Do you REALLY think the French are just going to turn off the massive investment in nuclear power they they've made over the last 50 years and switch to windmills and solar? Did you see the Yellow Jacket riots just because they tried to get people to pay a bit more for fuel? That whole country would be on fucking fire if they tried doing anything with a fraction of the disruption that you are proposing.
Now, the eia.gov link you just posted is for per-capita US household electricity sales only -- hardly a metric for total, worldwide energy consumption by the entire human race (and did you forget that cheap natural gas has flooded the US market since 2010, driving down all domestic energy pricing?). Can we true this up with per-capita energy consumption in the third world during the same time? How about India and China? So yeah, I'm still sure that total human energy consumption has never decreased, ever. And those pebble bed reactors etc. never had a fighting chance for real deployment because the crazy Greenepeace crew got otherwise rational, science-friendly folks conditioned to treat *all* nuclear energy as if it were the devil himself, which is exactly why we've been stuck with dangerous 1960s era nuclear technology longer than I've been around.
The anti-nuke folks are as bad as the climate change deniers and anti-vaxers when it comes to irrationally ignoring science, and sadly, even though they don't realize it, they are doing their share to enable the former.
You mean the town with the reactor of ancient design (again, thanks to people like you) that was built in a fucking quake zone with emergency generators at sea level "protected" by walls that were easily topped by the tsunami caused by said quake? The accident that was completely preventable, that was flagged years before it happened, but yet people did nothing? But yeah, "nuclear bad."
Slashdot Mirror
. . . it could happen.
. . . for time-traveling assassins, a la Predestination. Talk about improving the world for the better!
Correct -- I'm not talking about birds, and their existence across the K-T boundary thru today is quite easy to prove.
Let's head this off . . . read the article. The event was not caused by the mega-tsunamis from the impact itself (which would have taken hours to arrive at the site from the proto-Gulf of Mexico) but by "seiche," which are localized earthquakes caused by the impact which arrived at the site of the find within minutes. This is why the tektites were inhaled by the still-living fish and also found impacted at the site -- the tektites were still raining down when this happened.
Just finding amber-preserved tektites is a huge deal (meaning their chemical signature would be basically the same as it was during the event -- something never before encountered). If there actually are non-reworked dinosaur bones in close proximity to / at the K-T boundary, it would unequivocally prove that the dinosaurs survived all the way up to the asteroid impact, which has been the subject of some debate. DePalma is taking a lot of flak for doing some Barnum-type hyping of the find, and for maintaining extreme secrecy about the location of the site -- as well as for letting journalists release some details that are apparently not included in the peer-reviewed paper (e.g., the existence of said dino bones). But if even part of what is says he has found is true, then it is a truly historic find which will represent a quantum leap in our understanding of the bolide impact at the end of the Cretaceous Period, and even shed a lot of light for what to expect about similar impacts in the future. Personally, I think that (in addition to his showmanship and relative lack of transparency so far) a lot of the blowback is coming from folks at bigger institutions who are a bit miffed that this find was produced not by their ranks but by a younger, non-Ph.D. paleontologist playing somewhat by his own rules. But big scientific claims require lots of scrutiny, and eventually proof. Let's hope now that the word is out, he eventually puts it all out there for the scientific community to assess.
Good to hear you are still around, Heisenberg. :-)
How exactly does that work? They move too slow to generate a lot of kinetic energy, and burning them is a challenge . . .
Instead of all that crap, how about this one simple trick:
1) Connect VPN
2) Go to any pirate site
3) See a movie for free
Not really. Bombardier mostly makes regional jets whereas Boeing doesn't build any of them. However, they do make one line that directly competes with Boeing -- the CSeries, which competes directly with the Boeing 737 and Airbus 320. In October 2017 Airbus bought 50.01% of the C series production and the airplane is now being built in Alabama to avoid paying US tariffs. The deal was under-reported by the press for obvious reasons but the outcome is *exactly* why the 21% tariff was proposed in the first place. The airplane is still being built (only now in the US by US labor) and Boeing still has to compete with it.
. . . settling became the cheapest path going forward, so that's what they did. As usual though, forced contrition never means they are sorry about what they did, nor does it mean they'll change their behavior. They'll still gladly sell their own mothers' info to the highest bidder -- that is literally what they exist to do.
I would assume they want to try to hold management to a 40 hour work week for the employees -- that's likely one of the biggest complaints you'll hear from tech and one which a union *might* be able to do something about. I'm not a labor law attorney so I'm not sure how this will work out in practice.
But yeah, why would tech workers actually *want* to join a union? They typically already make much more than people in other industries, so I'm not too sure that collective bargaining for salary and benefits is going to be very interesting to most people there. And a lot of the political participation that unions do is going to piss off about half the people working at that company -- and now they will get to pay for it against their will.
Some of the other stuff -- "inclusivity," for example -- the union will be powerless to affect. How would they force a company to hired qualified non-white / non-Asian / non-males if such people aren't already available to be hired from the pool in large numbers? Etc.
Unionization in tech sounds like a solution looking for problems to justify its existence.
This is Slashdot. The proper title is "Sanitation Engineer." :-)
Indeed. Inclusively in tech is almost exclusively a demand-side issue. If activists want to see more minorities in IT, they need to focus on increasing the size of the pool of qualified applicants (preferably beginning at a very early age!) instead of badgering and harassing companies into compliance. The problem is that organic solutions like that take awhile to work, and that flies in the face of the instant-gratification crowd doing all the screaming.
Who the fuck would actually spend their time watching this shit? Apparently there are more idiots than we thought.
Anyone with a brain taped over their camera a long time ago.
Starbucks always has a stack of CDs right next to the register. They have demographically determined that their customers are likely to enjoy the stuff they hear when they are standing in line (the same music used to torture the baristas) so it's another way to extract more dollars per customer. Genius if you think about it.
Let me know when Tesla enables God Mode.
That's not altogether fair. Andrew Carnegie built a sizable portion of the free public libraries in the United States. I certainly wouldn't consider this "sabotaging education" -- quite the opposite, actually.
Most of this was done in the George H.W. Bush era
The erosion of US manufacturing power started many decades before this. After WWII, we rebuilt Europe and Japan under the Marshall Plan with, for example, better steel making technology than we had domestically available in the US. We literally paid for our former enemies to be able to manufacture things better and cheaper than we could, and domestic manufacturers couldn't compete. Over the next few decades, combined with abuses by unions, unfavorable tax laws, new environmental regulations that other countries didn't have, and yes, greed on the part of the mill owners, US steel production faded into the rear view mirror. US Steel and iron production peaked in 1973, decades before GHWB and well before Reagan, and precipitously declined during the recession that began in the late 1970s under Carter. Seriously, quit making things partisan issues when there's tons of history that proves otherwise.
They're just going to buy most of their power from foreign nations -- namely oil from the Russians and nuclear power from the French. It's just feel-good bullshit that moves the externalities elsewhere but costs the German people a whole lot of money and does nothing to solve the underlying issues.
Being that Aquaman was aggressively marketed towards women, it's more likely to be some psycho chick with an ax to grind. After all, you know, equality.
Waze waze waze. Why use anything else?
Also check out the Internet Archives headquarters in San Francisco, set up in an old Christian Scientist church. Another interesting (if a little weird -- each current and former IAer gets their own personalized, terracotta warrior-style figurine) unused religious building re-purposed as a data center (and tech headquarters in this case).
Whatever dude. I called out the projections and conclusions in that CNBC report you posted as shit, being based on nothing but fairy dust and unicorn farts. Their "math" is based on future-projecting a rate of continual efficiencies which is absolutely impossible to calculate, let alone estimate with any amount of accuracy. They're throwing darts at a board and guessing (maybe), and coming up with the answers they want. It's just the anti-Macron brigade trying to stop a moving train and join the nuclear-free ranks of Germany etc. -- absolutely nothing more. There is NO WAY any trends with that much missing data that go out 20+ years are meaningful. You have no response for their "conclusion" about economic non-viability due to excess capacity -- again, that's the most important part of the entire piece, and it's pure, unprovable fantasy. Come on. Do you REALLY think the French are just going to turn off the massive investment in nuclear power they they've made over the last 50 years and switch to windmills and solar? Did you see the Yellow Jacket riots just because they tried to get people to pay a bit more for fuel? That whole country would be on fucking fire if they tried doing anything with a fraction of the disruption that you are proposing.
Now, the eia.gov link you just posted is for per-capita US household electricity sales only -- hardly a metric for total, worldwide energy consumption by the entire human race (and did you forget that cheap natural gas has flooded the US market since 2010, driving down all domestic energy pricing?). Can we true this up with per-capita energy consumption in the third world during the same time? How about India and China? So yeah, I'm still sure that total human energy consumption has never decreased, ever. And those pebble bed reactors etc. never had a fighting chance for real deployment because the crazy Greenepeace crew got otherwise rational, science-friendly folks conditioned to treat *all* nuclear energy as if it were the devil himself, which is exactly why we've been stuck with dangerous 1960s era nuclear technology longer than I've been around.
The anti-nuke folks are as bad as the climate change deniers and anti-vaxers when it comes to irrationally ignoring science, and sadly, even though they don't realize it, they are doing their share to enable the former.
You mean the town with the reactor of ancient design (again, thanks to people like you) that was built in a fucking quake zone with emergency generators at sea level "protected" by walls that were easily topped by the tsunami caused by said quake? The accident that was completely preventable, that was flagged years before it happened, but yet people did nothing? But yeah, "nuclear bad."