> The Lessee shall not assign nor underlet any part of the whole of the leased premises, nor shall permit the leased premises to be occupied for a period longer than a temporary visit by anyone except the individuals specifically named in the first paragraph of this lease.
Part of the problem is "rent-stabilized" housing is additional tenants who are not on the lease, using parking and utilities, and sometimes creating hazards for other residents.
There are too many security launches with classified payloads to pretend that the USA and Russia have not been launching at least anti-satellite weapons systems. Too many peaceful but energetic projects are also potentially weapons to be unwilling to acknowledge their danger. Solar mirrors can be aimed at space targets or ground targets, as can the "flying crowbar" project known as Project Pluto. The LEO cleanup tools, still on the drawing board, could take down accidental or obsolete debris in low Earth orbit. They could also destroy satellites.
Try actually doing this before you recommend it. Many shared screen tools are based on a network connection, not a video cable plugged into the laptop.
The energy is squeezed from the other, higher energy photons or from the parallel particle beams being set up. There is no "zero point energy" or "vacuum energy" being harvested here. It is the _lack_ of Cerenkov radiation from "particles" like photons that early on led to quantum physics.
> making a skinsuit has turned out to a Very Hard Task
But what, precisely, makes it a "Very Hard Task"? The Wikipedia article on the MIT "BioSuit" is interesting and describes some of the progress. It doesn't indicate what the researchers think are the most difficult remaining issues, or if there are any that have really never been addressed. I, for one, would like to know.
There are precedents that specifically protect online services from responsibility from such ads, where the publisher has been deemed to be the advertiser. See this article from 2008.
Physical protection is important. But how much is used, or needed, even on a normal construction site? Safety glasses, helmet, gloves and boots would be needed, though gloves are a trade-off between protection and dexterity. Incidental rips are a risk, but are they more avoidable if the suit is flexible and helps the astronaut be more agile and complete their task more quickly? These are fascinating questions.
> How, precisely, are their genitals relevant to the job?
Toilet facilities for space suits are more awkward for women than for men. Men wear what is basically a condom with a tube leading to a bag. I'm personally curious if the women wore catheters, or diapers. The hormonal differences of women from men especially concerning menstruation, and the need for hand and arm strength in spacewalks all seem interesting factors. If spacewalks always include at least one man, as they have so far, then women have had backup available for tasks of manual strength. And the lengths they'd have had to go for both women to spacewalk at the same time is a reminder of how limited the reserve of equipment is for our astronauts. Rather than launching in spacesuits, they only have a few suits on the station.
The "assumption" is that women in space are still unusual, and that they are more present now as a matter of course. That's an interesting historical shift.
That's the basic design, yes. Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle referred to them as "skintights" in their fiction. Their asteroid miners typically wore the suits 24x7 in their very small space craft. The idea was researched at as far back as the 1950's, shortly after the invention of the modern wet suit, and tested for the Mercury program, and has some verifiable research from the 1970's as well. The ideas are not new: materials and manufacture with those new materials have improved.
Space suit design and the difficulty of fitting them is a fundamental tech issue. Two women doing a space walk together is history. On reflection, wouldn't you agree that it is news for nerds?
There was a strong political desire to have two women do a spacewalk together. I'd be concerned that such political desires do not encourage NASA to take unnecessary risks. I was very suspicious, when Challenger failed at lunch time in poor weather, that they'd been under strong political pressure to launch as scheduled to meet political demands for the flight of the "civilian", the teacher Christa McAuliffe. That's a disaster NASA is wise to avoid, and refitting either space suit is time and work and risk that aren't strictly needed.
Long ago, there was a proposal for "skinsuits", very tightly fitted suits much like wetsuits that were completely form fitting and much lighter. The suits were also not airtight. Air (or oxygen) was fed in through the helmet, which was quite rigid, and leaked into the suit and leaked out for cooling. They relied on the strength of the fabric, and of the skin of the astronaut, to provide the mechanical support to keep the astronaut intact in vacuum. The design was much lighter than NASA and Soviet designs, and much less expensive. The operational difference was like that between a scuba diver and a the old dry suits with brass helmets and hoses. The design was lighter, took less space, and was much easier to maintain.
I do not know what has held up development for this kind of suit. The difference in weight of the suit, alone, should have saved enough fuel costs at launch time to justify research. I don't understand why the astronauts themselves have not demanded it, to improve mobility.
> First of all the source code comes from a source code control system,
Not necessarily. I've met many Java developers who publish their content from their personal laptops, and whom I've educated in using source control and build environments. There is no requirement for the use of any source control in any of of ant, maven, or gradle. I'm afraid that what you've described is a source control based workflow exerted from outside the build tools. It's a very helpful approach for many reasons, but it's missing from many public and especially private jar file repositories.
> *jar files are *zip files.
And zip files are binaries. I would agree that they are not _executables_ or libraries per se. But being binaries, and being a module in which other binaries are embedded, makes reviewing or comparing their contents much more awkward. They also tend to be full of other binaries, such as ".class" files. Being a zip file does not help the underlying source control or build environment problem.
Many public jar file repositories have undefined, or ill-defined links to a source control system or a build system that make the code nearly impossible to reliably rebuild. I've run into this repeatedly.
I'd list all of the public and semi-public repositories that publish modules for automatic installation and update. These include pip, ant, maven, gradle, CPAN, and gems. The Java repositories used by ant, maven, and gradle tend to have unknown binaries and unknown provenance, with no reliable way to evactly recreate the published jar files. Ruby gems have a similar issue. CPAN and pip rely on upstream source code for local deployment or compilation but are also very vulnerable to their default download of the most recent version of any module, which may or may not interact badly with other obsolete or updated modules. It's why many operating systems publish packaged binaries, and it's why the "compile as needed" operating systems cannot be stable and _cannot_ be thoroughly secured.
"Seeing the deadwood around you get flushed" often has little to do with layoffs. The best people, the ones who accomplish the most, often upset management and have their best projects set aside in a layoff. I've personally volunteered to be laid off because I'd trained my crew, they could handle the maintenance mode the projects turned into after the layoffs, and I had better freedom to move or switch to a new role elsewhere.
> Jumping ship just because there was a layoff doesn't make sense anyway,
Abandoning a sinking ship often makes excellent sense, especially if when it's run aground due to technological obsolescence, market changes, or failures against its own bad management or overwhelming competition.
HURD also tried _not_ to rely on commercial drivers. The kernel never worked well.
Later projects, which have produced some amazing tools, included the "One Laptop Per Child" project which foreshadowed the "netbook" market, and whose physical design was brilliant. The LinuxBIOS project was also extremely effective in technology, though it became hampered by some very strange gender politics by one of its developers. BIOS design requires more hardware than many modern software projects.
It's gotten easier. You might try again. Laptops are notorious for switching hardware, unannounced, to components that were only tested under Linux and which Linux or UNIX operating systems have not yet published drivers for.
I would not be so certain of this. Richard's consistent advocacy, and his very correct insights about how companies would abuse software licenses and patents, helped set the stage for the open source world. Critical components like gcc paved the way for Linux, and are critical to free software and open source computing today. The BSD licenses wwere crippled by each being subtly distinct and being impossible to follow them all.
I''ll disagree with this. The "good people" taking off is always a risk when money at a company is tight and the economy is not tumbling. It can make sense to cut entire teams and projects. The _remaining_ good people are now, all of them, flight risks, because they know that they will be treated poorly and their teams discarded abruptly.
It's fascinating law. I believe that the latest version is available at recent amendments to it are recorded at https://www.congress.gov/bill/.... As best I can understand it, the law includes voicemail and text messages. I believe that it was deliberately crafted after Richard Nixon's impeachment.
Indian recruiters. My profile is up in several places so that job candidates can look me me up. Any text change on the profile triggers a wave of non-technical people from India, pretending that they are from the USA, with technology jobs from around the world.
"If they can pay less" also translates to a lerger head count. That's crucial for managers seeking more pay or a better resume for their next role, in ways unrelated to the success of the project.
Slashdot Mirror
This is from a typical lease agreement:
> The Lessee shall not assign nor underlet any part of the whole of the leased premises, nor shall permit the leased premises
to be occupied for a period longer than a temporary visit by anyone except the individuals specifically named in the first
paragraph of this lease.
Part of the problem is "rent-stabilized" housing is additional tenants who are not on the lease, using parking and utilities, and sometimes creating hazards for other residents.
There are too many security launches with classified payloads to pretend that the USA and Russia have not been launching at least anti-satellite weapons systems. Too many peaceful but energetic projects are also potentially weapons to be unwilling to acknowledge their danger. Solar mirrors can be aimed at space targets or ground targets, as can the "flying crowbar" project known as Project Pluto. The LEO cleanup tools, still on the drawing board, could take down accidental or obsolete debris in low Earth orbit. They could also destroy satellites.
That setup would not include telecommuters. Many people use tools like Webex for just such presentations.
Try actually doing this before you recommend it. Many shared screen tools are based on a network connection, not a video cable plugged into the laptop.
The energy is squeezed from the other, higher energy photons or from the parallel particle beams being set up. There is no "zero point energy" or "vacuum energy" being harvested here. It is the _lack_ of Cerenkov radiation from "particles" like photons that early on led to quantum physics.
> making a skinsuit has turned out to a Very Hard Task
But what, precisely, makes it a "Very Hard Task"? The Wikipedia article on the MIT "BioSuit" is interesting and describes some of the progress. It doesn't indicate what the researchers think are the most difficult remaining issues, or if there are any that have really never been addressed. I, for one, would like to know.
There are precedents that specifically protect online services from responsibility from such ads, where the publisher has been deemed to be the advertiser. See this article from 2008.
https://www.reuters.com/articl...
This will be very interesting to see play out in court.
Physical protection is important. But how much is used, or needed, even on a normal construction site? Safety glasses, helmet, gloves and boots would be needed, though gloves are a trade-off between protection and dexterity. Incidental rips are a risk, but are they more avoidable if the suit is flexible and helps the astronaut be more agile and complete their task more quickly? These are fascinating questions.
> How, precisely, are their genitals relevant to the job?
Toilet facilities for space suits are more awkward for women than for men. Men wear what is basically a condom with a tube leading to a bag. I'm personally curious if the women wore catheters, or diapers. The hormonal differences of women from men especially concerning menstruation, and the need for hand and arm strength in spacewalks all seem interesting factors. If spacewalks always include at least one man, as they have so far, then women have had backup available for tasks of manual strength. And the lengths they'd have had to go for both women to spacewalk at the same time is a reminder of how limited the reserve of equipment is for our astronauts. Rather than launching in spacesuits, they only have a few suits on the station.
The "assumption" is that women in space are still unusual, and that they are more present now as a matter of course. That's an interesting historical shift.
That's the basic design, yes. Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle referred to them as "skintights" in their fiction. Their asteroid miners typically wore the suits 24x7 in their very small space craft. The idea was researched at as far back as the 1950's, shortly after the invention of the modern wet suit, and tested for the Mercury program, and has some verifiable research from the 1970's as well. The ideas are not new: materials and manufacture with those new materials have improved.
Space suit design and the difficulty of fitting them is a fundamental tech issue. Two women doing a space walk together is history. On reflection, wouldn't you agree that it is news for nerds?
There was a strong political desire to have two women do a spacewalk together. I'd be concerned that such political desires do not encourage NASA to take unnecessary risks. I was very suspicious, when Challenger failed at lunch time in poor weather, that they'd been under strong political pressure to launch as scheduled to meet political demands for the flight of the "civilian", the teacher Christa McAuliffe. That's a disaster NASA is wise to avoid, and refitting either space suit is time and work and risk that aren't strictly needed.
Long ago, there was a proposal for "skinsuits", very tightly fitted suits much like wetsuits that were completely form fitting and much lighter. The suits were also not airtight. Air (or oxygen) was fed in through the helmet, which was quite rigid, and leaked into the suit and leaked out for cooling. They relied on the strength of the fabric, and of the skin of the astronaut, to provide the mechanical support to keep the astronaut intact in vacuum. The design was much lighter than NASA and Soviet designs, and much less expensive. The operational difference was like that between a scuba diver and a the old dry suits with brass helmets and hoses. The design was lighter, took less space, and was much easier to maintain.
I do not know what has held up development for this kind of suit. The difference in weight of the suit, alone, should have saved enough fuel costs at launch time to justify research. I don't understand why the astronauts themselves have not demanded it, to improve mobility.
> First of all the source code comes from a source code control system,
Not necessarily. I've met many Java developers who publish their content from their personal laptops, and whom I've educated in using source control and build environments. There is no requirement for the use of any source control in any of of ant, maven, or gradle. I'm afraid that what you've described is a source control based workflow exerted from outside the build tools. It's a very helpful approach for many reasons, but it's missing from many public and especially private jar file repositories.
> *jar files are *zip files.
And zip files are binaries. I would agree that they are not _executables_ or libraries per se. But being binaries, and being a module in which other binaries are embedded, makes reviewing or comparing their contents much more awkward. They also tend to be full of other binaries, such as ".class" files. Being a zip file does not help the underlying source control or build environment problem.
Jar files are binaries.
Many public jar file repositories have undefined, or ill-defined links to a source control system or a build system that make the code nearly impossible to reliably rebuild. I've run into this repeatedly.
Wouldn't that merely break new deployments of those modules? I'd not expect it to break already deployed systems.
I'd list all of the public and semi-public repositories that publish modules for automatic installation and update. These include pip, ant, maven, gradle, CPAN, and gems. The Java repositories used by ant, maven, and gradle tend to have unknown binaries and unknown provenance, with no reliable way to evactly recreate the published jar files. Ruby gems have a similar issue. CPAN and pip rely on upstream source code for local deployment or compilation but are also very vulnerable to their default download of the most recent version of any module, which may or may not interact badly with other obsolete or updated modules. It's why many operating systems publish packaged binaries, and it's why the "compile as needed" operating systems cannot be stable and _cannot_ be thoroughly secured.
"Seeing the deadwood around you get flushed" often has little to do with layoffs. The best people, the ones who accomplish the most, often upset management and have their best projects set aside in a layoff. I've personally volunteered to be laid off because I'd trained my crew, they could handle the maintenance mode the projects turned into after the layoffs, and I had better freedom to move or switch to a new role elsewhere.
> Jumping ship just because there was a layoff doesn't make sense anyway,
Abandoning a sinking ship often makes excellent sense, especially if when it's run aground due to technological obsolescence, market changes, or failures against its own bad management or overwhelming competition.
HURD also tried _not_ to rely on commercial drivers. The kernel never worked well.
Later projects, which have produced some amazing tools, included the "One Laptop Per Child" project which foreshadowed the "netbook" market, and whose physical design was brilliant. The LinuxBIOS project was also extremely effective in technology, though it became hampered by some very strange gender politics by one of its developers. BIOS design requires more hardware than many modern software projects.
It's gotten easier. You might try again. Laptops are notorious for switching hardware, unannounced, to components that were only tested under Linux and which Linux or UNIX operating systems have not yet published drivers for.
I would not be so certain of this. Richard's consistent advocacy, and his very correct insights about how companies would abuse software licenses and patents, helped set the stage for the open source world. Critical components like gcc paved the way for Linux, and are critical to free software and open source computing today. The BSD licenses wwere crippled by each being subtly distinct and being impossible to follow them all.
I''ll disagree with this. The "good people" taking off is always a risk when money at a company is tight and the economy is not tumbling. It can make sense to cut entire teams and projects. The _remaining_ good people are now, all of them, flight risks, because they know that they will be treated poorly and their teams discarded abruptly.
It's fascinating law. I believe that the latest version is available at recent amendments to it are recorded at https://www.congress.gov/bill/.... As best I can understand it, the law includes voicemail and text messages. I believe that it was deliberately crafted after Richard Nixon's impeachment.
Indian recruiters. My profile is up in several places so that job candidates can look me me up. Any text change on the profile triggers a wave of non-technical people from India, pretending that they are from the USA, with technology jobs from around the world.
"If they can pay less" also translates to a lerger head count. That's crucial for managers seeking more pay or a better resume for their next role, in ways unrelated to the success of the project.