6 years at two different universities. Never once did I experience anything like indoctrination. Not even a gentle nudge.

I think the right sees a liberal bias among students and incorrectly concludes the colleges and universities must be to blame. I think it's more likely though that kids at that age and going through that process are full of hope. The act of getting a degree is driven by hope for a new and better future, and hope is the foundation of the left so kids will naturally gravitate toward a liberal bias.

Fear is the foundation of the right. As people age, elements that stir or instill fear become more of a concern. This is likely because we have offspring to care for and protect, and we have ever-less time to achieve our goals.

Came to say the same! Here's the scene: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3F...

This year is their 40th: End Year - Start Year + 1

You may not be counting the initial occurrence.

Wouldn't the direction of spin depend upon which side of the galaxy you are looking from? How do you establish which side is the galaxy is the "correct" side to view it from in order to ascertain clockwise or counter-clockwise? As we have seen for decades, galaxies are oriented in all possible ways as viewed from a stationary point.

Despite what Fox News, Trump, and his Swallowers are telling you, DEI is not affirmative action. Your personal experience may be different, but very few companies are using box-ticking when making hiring decisions. When a company puts DEI verbiage into its HR documentation, it's just a way of stating that they do not discriminate against minorities that are not explicitly defined as a protected by the government. That's it. It's basically virtue signaling and nothing to get outraged over. Companies that do box-ticking hiring don't last and that problem will fix itself.

This is just another right-wing strawman like child-indoctrinating drag shows, cat-eating Haitians, post-birth abortions, and lib's coming for your guns. It's all boogeyman BS used to scare people into action.

Hmm. I'm not sure we're on the same page. My statement was meant to indicate that bringing people back into the office will often reduce the efficiency of those people within the organization. Personal efficiency wasn't something I was considering, or ever consider, when discussing WFH/RTO. Generally speaking, an employee's comfort or happiness is not typically a consideration for most companies in the US, so those are not considerations I place any weight on.

Of course, not all jobs are the same and perhaps two different people will be able to maximize their efficiency in the same career in different locations. I can only speak from my experience. As an app-dev, I am FAR more efficient working from home than at the office. It's not even close. I probably get 15-25% more accomplished when working from home. The office has far too many distractions and time wasting as a culture. This has been true for my last two employers and true for everyone on my teams. You don't have to walk five minutes and up a flight of stairs to go to the conference room. It's not a 3-minute walk to the bathroom. I don't have to put on my coat walk out to my car and drive somewhere just to get lunch. I'm not surrounded by five different people participating in five different conference calls distracting me from my own call since a few thin layers of cardboard in a the cubicle farm aren't going to stop sound waves from propagating. I don't have water cooler drive-bys asking me if I've seen the latest streaming show or the latest insert-tech-or-car.

This has all been well-studied and is well-understood at this point even by Dimon. RTO is mostly a push-back from middle managers who do not know how to provide utility to their employer when the office is empty...and they fear their days are numbered; rightly so I'm sorry to say. It's also, of course, a way to quietly reduce labor without spooking investors.

I'm not an authority on whether this qualifies as double-talk, but stating the workforce needs to be more efficient while simultaneously making many of them less efficient has to come close. It's at least double-talk adjacent.

To truly protect backers, KS would have to change their business model from a place where vendors can pop up a tent and sell their wares, to more of a business planning partner of some kind. One where creators would have to provide documentation/quotes for maximum production, shipping, and fulfillment costs from the involved vendors. And then KS would have to hold that money in escrow from the campaign so that those obligations could be met. There would almost certainly still be projects that would fall through the cracks, but the number would be greatly reduced.

Creators are very, very often, overly optimistic about the turnout they can expect for their project. They will count on 5000 backers when 1500 is the more likely outcome. This means their cost/unit is way higher than anticipated. Shipping and fulfillment are also often deeply miscalculated, and/or could change dramatically between campaign end and fulfillment to the customer.

Successfully delivering on a campaign isn't difficult, but it's really not for people who lack experience or understanding it what it takes to run a business. It's a lot of very careful planning and knowing how to set reasonable minimal expectations. It's about knowing what can go wrong and how much that will cost when it does...because it will. Projects are often run by the creative types who are very good at coming up with a brilliant idea, but awful at running a business.

The most difficult part though, is building your audience before you even think about launch a project on KS. If you want a successful KS campaign, start a YouTube channel 3-4 years beforehand. If nobody sub's to your channel, no one is backing your project.

I sincerely hope that someone buys whatever assets they can from Canoo and builds a real company.

I really liked what they were doing with the pickup truck, but they appeared to be deeply mismanaged and not terribly sure what kind of company they wanted to be. At first it was a subscription model for fleet sales. Then it was selling delivery vans without a sub...something they got a lot of orders for. Then they also introduced the pickup truck...then another one...then announced they weren't planning on selling them despite all the time, effort, and money spent on designing, developing, and marketing them. All the while, the company is paying for CEO Tony Aquila's private jet.

I mean...WTAF? Talk about a top-down failure of leadership! That guy isn't fit to run a lemonade stand.

Someone buy this company, do the fleet sales of delivery vans and after a few years of success, start looking to make those pickups. And fly commercial in coach if you have to fly at all, but better PR would be to road trip with the van.

Steve Jobs originally thought all apps would be web apps. But app stores can and do function as an advertiser and marketplace. People often search their app store for the app instead of searching the internet. It's the same reason why people crowdfund on Kickstarter or Indiegogo instead of just putting up a web site and asking for funding.

Also web sites often employ advertising through networks, so it's not like a web app is a bastion of privacy. Users might even be safer using mobile apps than web apps, but I do not know enough to say for sure.

Without external financial pressures, I don't see Toyota or Honda changing anything any time soon. A drop in EV adoption only strengthens that.

Perhaps some Japanese slashdotters can chime-in on regarding any cultural distaste, but I feel it's probably only a matter of time (50 years) before China dominates that market. BYD already has a presence in Japan and the current and upcoming battery tech from BYD and CATL, including range, safety, weight, and cost, are starting to make the move to their EVs a no-brainer.

An EV transition obviously means moving energy storage and distribution from petrol stations to the grid, and that's a generational task. Japan's small land mass makes it difficult to dedicate thousands of acres to solar power. They probably have good prospects for wind and wave energy though, as well as adding to existing nuclear power if they wanted to create the additionally-needed energy production in-house.

Why yes, yes we would all benefit from secure telecommunications. However...

FBI Calls Apple's Expansion of End-To-End Encryption 'Deeply Concerning'
FBI Chief Calls Unbreakable Encryption 'Urgent Public Safety Issue'
Top FBI Attorney Worried About WhatsApp Encryption

And that was just within the first minute of searching. See also the entire /. database of articles where "FBI" and "encryption" are both mentioned.

The story I heard 3-4 years ago was if you asked a physicist working on quantum computing what is actually happening when you turn on the system, you'd get one of two answers:

1) Each time we turn it on, for every qubit in the system, an entire universe identical to ours is created with its own quantum computer working on the problem. Once one of the computers in this "network" of universes comes up with the answer, it disseminates that answer to the other computers in the other universes.

2) I don't want to talk about it.

As far as quantum computers go, I could just as readily believe that every time you turn one on, the whole of reality is paused for 1 femtosecond while the system spends 10^25 years working the problem in its own reference frame and then un-pauses reality once it has the answer. Or perhaps a quantum computer essentially DMs the Flying Spaghetti Monster who instantly provides the answer. These are no less fantastical to me anyway.

But as a non-physicist sitting on the sideline writing comments on /., perhaps it's just because I don't understand the problem being posed to the system and do not have any context. For example, suppose a grain of sand could be randomly oriented in 3d space in 20 different ways. Then you asked a quantum computer what is the orientation for every grain of sand on the planet. The answer comes back in less than 1 second, and upon checking 1 million random grains of sand, they all matched the predictions of the QC.

In that situation, yeah, I'd be wondering how the F QC did that and start looking at explanations that are closer to magic than known science.

I am O/C about these things and I loved accounting. A place for everything and everything in its place. I very nearly switched majors from CIS to accounting for that reason. I stayed with CIS for lots of reasons, but programming had its own beauty and organization in my eyes. I eventually became a B2B interface engineer which really tapped into that part of me. It's also why I love games like Satisfactory.

If you want to get more people into accounting, use marketing that plays into the desire that some of us have to put everything in neat little boxes, and put each box in its own special place. Those kids will likely excel in that field, and be grateful to have found their niche.

I am not a scientist, but I love science and the pursuit of knowledge.

I want to be sickened and angered by a scientist cutting corners to get published, but I can see a scenario where after decades of work, the future of someone's scientific pursuits start to look bleak. The private and public money wells are drying up and the university is telling you they need to see results or they will allocate your funding to more promising endeavors. You're feeling that the progress people want to see won't be realized in your lifetime, and you don't want your work to become a "hobby" while you pay the mortgage by running a cash register (no disrespect to those that do). So maybe you cut a few corners just to show something, and the notion you are undermining trust in science is too far a view for you to see.

When I think about it like that, and I have no idea of that was the reality of Dias' situation, I'm not angry...I feel sorry for that person and for the field. Scientific work isn't free and I would guess it's very difficult to researchers to keep going back to those wells with no progress to show.

But I can also picture someone who just writes up research projects with no chance of success, and that's how they choose to live their life. If they exist, those people do make me angry.