It's more of "evil eye" punishment. If you flake, then other countries can point to that if they flake on something else when called on it, or embarrass you a bit. It's not binding, but one can lose some UN credibility. Some nations are bothered by that more than others. Some nations want more international respect and recognition, while some care little.
[gov't] is AFRAID of losing their power and being REPLACED by actual effective legitimate non-corrupt totally open entities that serve ONLY the people, NOT THEMSELVES
Uh, replaced by who again? I'd like to meet this entity, rather than just reference the John Lennon LSD version. Or, do I need LSD first?
As long as humans are involved, it will have some degree of corruption. I'd wager a lot on that. The only way to rid all corruption would be extreme inspections by informed citizens, which is time consuming and unrealistic. The cost of inspections grows greater than the cost of corruption. It's like an immune system so large it turns its owner into a slow useless blob.
That's one of the things that bothers me about agile: one ends up reinventing lessons that an experienced analyst has learned the hard way. It can work, but it takes longer and more resources.
Projects overall don't fail because experienced analysts are no good, but because of organizational bullshit. If you can train everybody on agile, you can also train them on avoiding org bullshit. If the second can fail, so can the first.
But are the bright parts (arms) merely more star formation, or a denser collection of general stars, or a combo? The second implies stars slow down and speed up, which doesn't make a lot of sense because that takes a lot of energy.
The denseness of the arms may have enough gravitational pull to change the velocity of stars a bit, but they'd overshoot the arm because they'd gain velocity on the arm encounter. Or is this overshooting the very thing causing the movement of the wave?
Based on the plot, it looks like the type of planet/orbit detected is closely tied to the detection method. That implies we are not getting a full sample of actual planets.
So is the USA. I suspect the Internet and cable TV have allowed people to filter their news to be what they want it to be, and this gives more extremists, turning the political systems into a battle of extremists.
hypothetical scenario...make a strong nuclear force on a universal scale, you would need a large mass (i.e the size of the earth) of [just] protons...That scenario would result in a frighteningly large force
Sounds like a great idea for an evil weapon. Any sci-fi try to leverage it?
Then again, the huge energy to build & contain such could probably be leveraged to make other kinds of nasty weapons also.
Amdahl worked mostly on IBM mainframe clones, and focused on business applications. More emphasis on reliability, and processing currency, integers (counts), and business logic. Example: payroll for a big corporation.
Cray's machines were mostly used for scientific, engineering, research, and military applications. More emphasis on floating point number processing. Example: climate simulations.
But what entity/company/person/planet builds large, complicated, cutting-edge contraptions without delay and drama? It's not just gov't and military contractors that have problems.
It does sometimes happen, but it's usually a lucky accident that cannot be repeated on command. The winners of this lottery brag and say they are geniuses, and the losers quietly slither off to a new project. We look at the winners and naively say, "see, it can be done!", not understanding the Vegas-ness of it all.
The Russians have had decent successes by incrementally and patiently improving designs rather than start from scratch each time. It's one of the reasons they have working transportation to the Space Station and we don't.
It seems like US's strategy is throwing multiple different pie-in-sky projects on the wall and see what sticks: trial and error on a big scale. It does work at times, but is both expensive and unpredictable.
It perhaps makes our gizmos better than Russia's 2/3 of the time, as we keep the good experiments, and the US will live with that ratio because if we copied their technique, it would be closer to 1/2. We are fortunate our economy can (kind-of) support the trial-and-error experimental approach. But it may also bite us at times where good experiments are in a drought, such as what happened with astronaut transport.
Trying to build an aircraft that is all things to all of the services was a really bad idea, but having common parts and support equipment will be a big advantage eventually...It's not a horrible platform for any of it's intended roles, in fact it really is acceptable in all of them.
But being "good enough" at any specific task could backfire if our military enemies play their cards right. Russia and China could, for example, agree to optimize their planes for specific types of roles and buy from each other.
Say Russia makes a plane optimized for maneuverability and China one for speed, and they cross-sell. They could then use one plane when maneuverability is most needed and the other where speed is most needed. The F-35 would not have an advantage in either and we'd get near a 1-to-1 whack ratio.
I still say Ted Cruz is actually Al Lewis from The Munsters.
And John Kerry is Herman Munster. Illuminati at work?
Newt's "ice queen" wife doesn't directly match any of the characters, but she's gotta be a relative. (And Newt talks like a muppet, something's going on.)
Take away cheap labor, jobs will simply move offshore...
That's only a theory; everybody has theories. I'm willing to test by limiting work visas to real and verifiable needs for a while. If you are right, we switch back to the old way.
And it will cost jillions to correct the problems.
Military and "security" projects are the only "big gov't jobs programs" supported by Republicans. (Except they still benefit mostly the 1%.) Both parties are socialists, but disguise it differently.
here is a solution: Don't pay the contractor a penny until they produce a working production sample.
But they have an army of lawyers who know how to blame it on post-contract customer changes, which probably has some truth to it, at least enough to tie it up in court long enough for short-term-focused politicians to forget about it and dump it on the next generation. Rinse, repeat...
Slashdot Mirror
Knot a typo? Quilty untill prooven innosent
It's more of "evil eye" punishment. If you flake, then other countries can point to that if they flake on something else when called on it, or embarrass you a bit. It's not binding, but one can lose some UN credibility. Some nations are bothered by that more than others. Some nations want more international respect and recognition, while some care little.
Uh, replaced by who again? I'd like to meet this entity, rather than just reference the John Lennon LSD version. Or, do I need LSD first?
As long as humans are involved, it will have some degree of corruption. I'd wager a lot on that. The only way to rid all corruption would be extreme inspections by informed citizens, which is time consuming and unrealistic. The cost of inspections grows greater than the cost of corruption. It's like an immune system so large it turns its owner into a slow useless blob.
Okay, but what exactly is compressing and why?
Defacebook
That's one of the things that bothers me about agile: one ends up reinventing lessons that an experienced analyst has learned the hard way. It can work, but it takes longer and more resources.
Projects overall don't fail because experienced analysts are no good, but because of organizational bullshit. If you can train everybody on agile, you can also train them on avoiding org bullshit. If the second can fail, so can the first.
But you usually had to pay more to get those
But are the bright parts (arms) merely more star formation, or a denser collection of general stars, or a combo? The second implies stars slow down and speed up, which doesn't make a lot of sense because that takes a lot of energy.
The denseness of the arms may have enough gravitational pull to change the velocity of stars a bit, but they'd overshoot the arm because they'd gain velocity on the arm encounter. Or is this overshooting the very thing causing the movement of the wave?
Abbey Road is a Long and Winding Road? Let it be.
Based on the plot, it looks like the type of planet/orbit detected is closely tied to the detection method. That implies we are not getting a full sample of actual planets.
So is the USA. I suspect the Internet and cable TV have allowed people to filter their news to be what they want it to be, and this gives more extremists, turning the political systems into a battle of extremists.
Sounds like a great idea for an evil weapon. Any sci-fi try to leverage it?
Then again, the huge energy to build & contain such could probably be leveraged to make other kinds of nasty weapons also.
Because it was raised as a sissy.
That can apply to anatomy also.
Amdahl worked mostly on IBM mainframe clones, and focused on business applications. More emphasis on reliability, and processing currency, integers (counts), and business logic. Example: payroll for a big corporation.
Cray's machines were mostly used for scientific, engineering, research, and military applications. More emphasis on floating point number processing. Example: climate simulations.
But what entity/company/person/planet builds large, complicated, cutting-edge contraptions without delay and drama? It's not just gov't and military contractors that have problems.
It does sometimes happen, but it's usually a lucky accident that cannot be repeated on command. The winners of this lottery brag and say they are geniuses, and the losers quietly slither off to a new project. We look at the winners and naively say, "see, it can be done!", not understanding the Vegas-ness of it all.
The Russians have had decent successes by incrementally and patiently improving designs rather than start from scratch each time. It's one of the reasons they have working transportation to the Space Station and we don't.
It seems like US's strategy is throwing multiple different pie-in-sky projects on the wall and see what sticks: trial and error on a big scale. It does work at times, but is both expensive and unpredictable.
It perhaps makes our gizmos better than Russia's 2/3 of the time, as we keep the good experiments, and the US will live with that ratio because if we copied their technique, it would be closer to 1/2. We are fortunate our economy can (kind-of) support the trial-and-error experimental approach. But it may also bite us at times where good experiments are in a drought, such as what happened with astronaut transport.
I always knew it: WW3's outcome will be determined by Emacs......or vi.
But being "good enough" at any specific task could backfire if our military enemies play their cards right. Russia and China could, for example, agree to optimize their planes for specific types of roles and buy from each other.
Say Russia makes a plane optimized for maneuverability and China one for speed, and they cross-sell. They could then use one plane when maneuverability is most needed and the other where speed is most needed. The F-35 would not have an advantage in either and we'd get near a 1-to-1 whack ratio.
And John Kerry is Herman Munster. Illuminati at work?
Newt's "ice queen" wife doesn't directly match any of the characters, but she's gotta be a relative. (And Newt talks like a muppet, something's going on.)
That's only a theory; everybody has theories. I'm willing to test by limiting work visas to real and verifiable needs for a while. If you are right, we switch back to the old way.
Empiricism is good.
Republicans the ones being the most rational & informed on an issue?
If this keeps up, Trump will get a real haircut.
And it will cost jillions to correct the problems.
Military and "security" projects are the only "big gov't jobs programs" supported by Republicans. (Except they still benefit mostly the 1%.) Both parties are socialists, but disguise it differently.
But they have an army of lawyers who know how to blame it on post-contract customer changes, which probably has some truth to it, at least enough to tie it up in court long enough for short-term-focused politicians to forget about it and dump it on the next generation. Rinse, repeat...
Didn't Lockheed-Martin also make the F-35, another dud? They must be Too Big To Fail or something.