Re: How to kill the proposal...
I feel like maybe you missed ShadowSystems point.
1950 posts • joined 6 Feb 2015
Of course. I wasn't sure how much the RTG weighs. Probably far too much to be feasible with current tech and designs, but perhaps now they've shown stuff can fly on Mars, it might drive an effort to significantly reduce the mass. Efforts that would be useful for trundlebots as well. Less RTG mass = more science mass.
Legalise weed and cocaine. Put them on the same footing as alcohol. Regulate and tax. Cut the bottom out of the illegal market and it will 99% disappear.
Free up the massively limited police resources we do still have from the vast waste of time that is prosecuting people for minor possension, so they could focus on more useful things.
Driving high is already illegal, so don't change that. Turning up at work high would be the same as turning up drunk, and put your job at risk. No change needed there.
The entire country won't suddenly start taking drugs just because they're legal. It's not like they're difficult to get as it is. Most people that will take them are those already taking them. We just won't be criminalising a huge chunk of the population.
How does US law sit with failing to respond to a subpoena? If that's illegal, existence of non-coorperation clauses in an NDA are surely also illegal, and therefore unenforceable.
Contract terms cannot compel illegal acts. At least not in civilised jurisdictions. I guess the problem is fighting armies of lawyers to prove such terms are unenforceable.
Simples. It's called effective management.
Rate staff on the work they produce instead of where they are, or aren't, working. Output can be monitored without micromanaging. If the work consistently below par there are standard procedures to get them up to speed or get shot of them.
WFH hasn't changed any of this.
A million upvotes for this. Too much focus on community over content kills games dead for me e.g. Fallout 76. Too much community, weak quests and plot lines. Among it's other failings. Getting killed by some random idiot who wants your stuff just isn't fun.
Fibre-reinforced concrete is a thing. Steel or glass fibres, usually. Perhaps also carbon fibres. Not sure what effect steel fibres would have on the "print" head, but I'd imagine it has to be fairly resilient not to be damaged by the concreate aggregates.
Unsure how steel-fibre reinforced concrete performs compared to rebar-reinforced, but it could be a viable replacement in some cases.
Gonna volunteer yourself for this "solution"...? Or is it another one other those "too many others except me" things?
I'm gonna say absolute bollocks to this idea. What is needed is to rethink cities for 21st century working, living, argiculture, transport and leisure, instead of continuing with legacy cityscapes that no longer function effectively.
This just seems like remote desktop replacing your local desktop, instead of running inside a window on your local desktop.
We can already have multiple RDP sessions open at the same time on the local desktop. How is this any new benefit?
Ah... wait... it's not a user benefit. It's an MS benefit. Get people used to have a cloud desktop as their main desktop rather than just an RDP window, as a prelude to killing off local desktop completely and running the whole shitshow as a subscription service.
Desktop as a service? No fucking thanks.
From whose perspective are you asking?
This would only be a problem for Amazon. Not its workers. And it's only a problem if Amazon continues trying to make it a problem, instead of accepting US employment law and fixing the problems causing workers to unionise in the first place.
If Amazon didn't treat its workers like such utter shit, the vast majority of workers wouldn't feel the need to unionise. Simple as that.
Or the bug database is upgraded following a corporate mandate, say moving from TFS to Azure DevOps.
Over our product's lifetime we've changed database 3 times. Even though the previous DB contents were migrated, all comments referencing old bug reports are now meaningless.
Some low hanging fruit here would be to pause the charging of their electric vehicle whilst they shower. Or use the EV battery to run the heat pump. Or shower using water that has been used as a thermal store. Maybe a warmer house will help people spend less time under the hot shower, that they develop a lather then rinse routine.
Great. Let's all make our lives less convenient and relinquish choice of what we can do and when, because power companies and governments are too lazy and obsessed with shareholder value to fix the underlying problems, which are:
1) Woefully insufficient reliable baseload generating capacity for this wonderful green revolution, and...
2) A power distribution network that cannot handle required loads at national, regional or local levels, such that people cannot simply use the power they need, when they need to use it.
I can't speak for everyone, but personally I prefer a future that doesn't involve utility companies deciding when I can take a shower, charge my car, wash my clothes or cook my meals.
Landloard negotiates manageable rent with tennant. Tennant stays in business. Landlord gets rent. Tennant's customers continue to receive their service.
Obvious result: Tennant wins. Tennants customers win. Landlord loses a little bit.
Landlord refuses to renegotiate rent. Tennant goes under. Landlord gets no rent. Landlord will struggle to find new tennant willing to pay rent at old rate, so landlord will have to negotiate lower rent anyway. Site remains unoccupied while landlord struggles to find new tennant.
Obvious result: Tennant loses everything. Tennant's customers lose. Landlord loses a lot more.
Either way, landlord loses. How much is up to them, and they seem to have gone all out to maximise it. Idiots.
Of course management welcomed it - in public. Any other response pretty much guarantees some quality time at a comfy re-education centre, where one can enjoy reaffirming one's loyalty to the CCP and its glorious vision.
Latency might not be as high as you think.
These are LEO satellites, so often the signal isn't crossing thousands of km of space. And if there's inter-satellite transmission, the speed of light through the atmosphere and vacuum of space, even in LEO which is a tad less vacuumy than higher orbits, is signficantly faster then through fibre optics.
Swings and roundabouts though. At some point sat-to-sat relaying will start to add more latency than fibre-exchange-fibre routes.
Unless the goal is to see how potential candidate handles being asked embarassingly stupid questions, then, no, it doesn't have a "right" anwer.
Any answer would be entirely subjective, making it pretty much useless for evaluation. It's a stupid, pointless question that has no place in a job interview.
I don't see Sammy forcing anyone to buy their latest toys.
Products evolve. Buy them if you want, ignore them if you prefer.
Sell your old phone or bin it. Again, no one forces you into a particular choice. There are plenty of 2nd hand outfits that will buy your used phone, refurb it if necessary and put it back into circulation.
Should manufacturers recycle used phones? Absolutely.
Should more pressure be put on them to facilitate recycling? Again, yes.
Should they be blamed for consumers' poor environmental choices? No.
Plenty of private firms working on their own fusion concepts. Most are not tokamak-based, and many appear to be closer to commericalisation than any ITER follow-up. They may still fail in the long run, but they are far more focussed on producing commerically viable fusion power than ITER, STEPS etc.
Trouble is hardly any are British, so UK government will ignore them in favour of something home grown, which will go at least 50x over budget and be 30 years late.
We're already damn good at reducing peoples wellbeing. Don't need Fugitsu or anyone elses' help for that.
[Yeah, yeah, I know that's not the spirit of the statement. But the interpretation is open to ambiguity. No one seems to critically evaluate their own work now. Mutter... in my day... mumble... mumble...]
Use AI as an initial filter, but any "no" generated in cases with any legal or financial implications must be reviewed by a competent human. Not a bottom-of-the-ladder wage slave. Someone proven qualified to understand and evaluate all the issues at hand.
With personal liabilities for anyone giving a fraudulent, biased, or inexplainable "no" following the review. It's too easy to fuck someone's life up with no comeback for a bad decision.
You assume a slightly smaller corporation wants to acquire them. That's by no means a given.
And slightly smaller corporation may be eyeing other targets, and if close to your blanket ban threshold they would have to pick a target. In your solution, you artificially limit which small biz can win.
Without a threshold, slightly smaller corporation would be able to acquire all potential targets, which seems more beneficial to all the small biz involved.
Blanket assumptions can never work, simply because it's the nuanced detail that is important when evaluating potential for market abuse. Your approach just seems arbitrary, too broad, and cannot account for details, so would be doomed to fail and simply create a whole other set of problems.
The issue is regulators don't have the necesary tools to determine where some digital businesses get their income and where the market touch points are, thus it's impossible to properly determine potential damage from a merger.
Blanket acquisition bans based on arbitrary value threshold don't help.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022