Comment Re:Access (Score 1) 102
For 20 years, plus or minus, personal computers reversed that idea.
Comment Re:Sold his stock (Score 5, Informative) 98
I gave all my Apple wealth away because wealth and power are not what I live for. I have a lot of fun and happiness. I funded a lot of important museums and arts groups in San Jose, the city of my birth, and they named a street after me for being good. I now speak publicly and have risen to the top. I have no idea how much I have but after speaking for 20 years it might be $10M plus a couple of homes. I never look for any type of tax dodge. I earn money from my labor and pay something like 55% combined tax on it. I am the happiest person ever. Life to me was never about accomplishment, but about Happiness, which is Smiles minus Frowns. I developed these philosophies when I was 18-20 years old and I never sold out.
Comment Re:The point is to trap talent (Score 1) 122
After my first job, no one has ever asked about my degree. They ask me about my work.
Comment Re:Palantir to the rescue! (Score 1) 122
We have a society where everyone wants to be right; we need a society where everyone wants to be correct.
Comment Re:$5400 per month? (Score 1) 122
and plenty that don't.
Comment Re:Post-secondary should be free, as in beer (Score 1) 122
I think you will find that's a non issue. Since is solvable.
Comment Re: more jobs need the union apprenticeship system (Score 1) 122
I"m in a union, and I am a white collar employees. COMputer programmer and data analysis. Our organization also has a union for business analyst.
There have been teacher unions for decades.
A union is jsut a group of people with a contract around working right, policy, and wages. Can be any group.
Comment Re:What about all the other benefits of college? (Score 1) 122
There is no "liberal indoctrination", it jsut appears that way because conservative consider anything counter to their myopic view liberal.
Comment meritocracy is a myth. There is no such thing (Score 1) 122
In order to have a meritocracy, all people must have the same start. SOme oney, same education opportunities.
Of course, there is no real definition to meritocracy either.
Remember, the term 'meritocracy' was created as a pejoratively.
IT also relies on whos merit? Bezos is a billionaire, but it was from him, it was his workers. Should the people who created his site, the engineers the built it for him have the real merit?
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F...
Some people hear a word and then jsut assume it's good without actually reading up, and that needs to stop.
Comment Re:And Shortened Length of More Deadly Cold Waves (Score 1) 67
" Fewer people die of heat than die of cold. "
More people will die from the heat. See: dew Point.
"Longer growing season."
lol, excessive heat is bad for crops. And some areas of the earth are already losing farming capacity, not higher yields. major commodity crops like corn, rice, and oats are starting to experience reduced yields due to heat stress and changes in water availability.
" Bring on the CO2."
We produce more CO2 then the plants can handle. BTW, too much CO2 is bad for plants. Just like to much O2 is bad for people.
"We can handle the heat. We will be fine."
Why can't you people grasp the simple fact that as we keep producing more greenhouse gasses, the heat will keep going up? WHy are you so ignorant you think civilization can stand that level of heat growth?
Comment Re:Unreliable for Different Reason (Score 1) 67
You don't understand what accuracy mean from a science standpoint. But keep smugly posting ignorant post, since that seems the only way you can pretend you have any meaning and matter.
Comment Re:Toughts and Prayers (Re:Sure it has) (Score 1) 67
MSN is fine, and they are reporting what is happening, not an authority on the technology nor to they preport to be.
You literally have no idea how journalism works or what news is.
Comment Re:Toughts and Prayers (Re:Sure it has) (Score 1) 67
Corporations are doing it to power AI.
Nuclear is alway used to attack green energy.
I love that you have such faith in corporations dealing with nuclear waste, in spite of decades of improper stores and illegal waste dumping.
What CEO would cut corners that can lead to catastrophe a decade from now for a bonus today, amirite?
Comment Re:Sure it has (Score 1) 67
Carbon taxes have history of working, actually.
Submission + - Another large Black hole in "our" Galaxy (arxiv.org)
RockDoctor writes: A recent paper on ArXiv reports a novel idea about the central regions of "our" galaxy.
Remember the hoopla a few years ago about radio-astronomical observations producing an "image" of our central black hole — or rather, an image of the accretion disc around the black hole — long designated by astronomers as "Sagittarius A*" (or SGR-A*)? If you remember the image published then, one thing should be striking — it's not very symmetrical. If you think about viewing a spinning object, then you'd expect to see something with a "mirror" symmetry plane where we would see the rotation axis (if someone had marked it). If anything, that published image has three bright spots on a fainter ring. And the spots are not even approximately the same brightness.
This paper suggests that the image we see is the result of the light (radio waves) from SGR-A* being "lensed" by another black hole, near (but not quite on) the line of sight between SGR-A* and us. By various modelling approaches, they then refine this idea to a "best-fit" of a black hole with mass around 1000 times the Sun, orbiting between the distance of the closest-observed star to SGR-A* ("S2" — most imaginative name, ever!), and around 10 times that distance. That's far enough to make a strong interaction with "S2" unlikely within the lifetime of S2 before it's accretion onto SGR-A*.)
The region around SGR-A* is crowded. Within 25 parsecs (~80 light years, the distance to Regulus [in the constellation Leo] or Merak [in the Great Bear]) there is around 4 times more mass in several millions of "normal" stars than in the SGR-A* black hole. Finding a large (not "super massive") black hole in such a concentration of matter shouldn't surprise anyone.
This proposed black hole is larger than anything which has been detected by gravitational waves (yet) ; but not immensely larger — only a factor of 15 or so. (The authors also anticipate the "what about these big black holes spiralling together?" question : quote "and the amplitude of gravitational waves generated by the binary black holes is negligible.")
Being so close to SGR-A*, the proposed black hole is likely to be moving rapidly across our line of sight. At the distance of "S2" it's orbital period would be around 26 years (but the "new" black hole is probably further out than than that). Which might be an explanation for some of the variability and "flickering" reported for SGR-A* ever since it's discovery.
As always, more observations are needed. Which, for SGR-A* are frequently being taken, so improving (or ruling out) this explanation should happen fairly quickly. But it's a very interesting, and fun, idea.
Remember the hoopla a few years ago about radio-astronomical observations producing an "image" of our central black hole — or rather, an image of the accretion disc around the black hole — long designated by astronomers as "Sagittarius A*" (or SGR-A*)? If you remember the image published then, one thing should be striking — it's not very symmetrical. If you think about viewing a spinning object, then you'd expect to see something with a "mirror" symmetry plane where we would see the rotation axis (if someone had marked it). If anything, that published image has three bright spots on a fainter ring. And the spots are not even approximately the same brightness.
This paper suggests that the image we see is the result of the light (radio waves) from SGR-A* being "lensed" by another black hole, near (but not quite on) the line of sight between SGR-A* and us. By various modelling approaches, they then refine this idea to a "best-fit" of a black hole with mass around 1000 times the Sun, orbiting between the distance of the closest-observed star to SGR-A* ("S2" — most imaginative name, ever!), and around 10 times that distance. That's far enough to make a strong interaction with "S2" unlikely within the lifetime of S2 before it's accretion onto SGR-A*.)
The region around SGR-A* is crowded. Within 25 parsecs (~80 light years, the distance to Regulus [in the constellation Leo] or Merak [in the Great Bear]) there is around 4 times more mass in several millions of "normal" stars than in the SGR-A* black hole. Finding a large (not "super massive") black hole in such a concentration of matter shouldn't surprise anyone.
This proposed black hole is larger than anything which has been detected by gravitational waves (yet) ; but not immensely larger — only a factor of 15 or so. (The authors also anticipate the "what about these big black holes spiralling together?" question : quote "and the amplitude of gravitational waves generated by the binary black holes is negligible.")
Being so close to SGR-A*, the proposed black hole is likely to be moving rapidly across our line of sight. At the distance of "S2" it's orbital period would be around 26 years (but the "new" black hole is probably further out than than that). Which might be an explanation for some of the variability and "flickering" reported for SGR-A* ever since it's discovery.
As always, more observations are needed. Which, for SGR-A* are frequently being taken, so improving (or ruling out) this explanation should happen fairly quickly. But it's a very interesting, and fun, idea.
Slashdot Top Deals
Unix: Some say the learning curve is steep, but you only have to climb it once. -- Karl Lehenbauer
