I can tell you it's not government but incompetence.
For private companies, bankruptcy puts a ceiling on the amount of incompetence that can be tolerated. For government, there is no limit.
One thing that dark energy can't be is *all* fundamental constants, plus position, velocity, etc scaling up evenly. Because if such was the case then there would be no perceptible change.
If youe saying that for example what is ground state would change too then it seems like you're arguing that things at the quantum level *aren't* moving into higher energy states. But things at the macroscopic level absolutely are moving into a higher energy state. So are you arguing that dark energy doesn't act on the quantum scale? I find that difficult to accept if so.
Could you elaborate on what you mean by "alter orbital structure and energy levels"? Are you saying that the energy level of, say, ground state would increase with time? If so that sounds... weird. And sounds like *that* should have detectable consequences too, if so.
Half the juriors were WOMEN.
You should not assume that women are more pro-woman. Many female managers will tell you they have a lot more problems with female subordinates than with males. This is especially true if there is a significant age difference: if a talented young woman is put in charge of a team that includes older women, you will often have a lot of friction.
Ellen Pao comes from a culture of lying for victimhood and money.
Well, she is a lawyer, so that is stating the obvious.
Willingly is an interesting term. In Rome some people sold themselves into slavery to feed their families. Did they do so willingly? They certainly ended up being slaves.
That the thing about dark matter... it has a perfectly reasonable explanation (WIMPs). It's not that weird of a "thing".
Dark energy on the other hand, that's just WEIRD
I don't think being able to read the code matters.
Then you're talking about the quality of the API, not the quality of the code. If for some reason you became a maintainer, then you would care quite a bit about being able to read the code.
That's exactly what a non-compete contract is: a threat.
Not in any legal sense. Just because you imagine it to be a threat because of rabid foam-at-the-mouth manufactured outrage, doesn't mean it really is. If a clause in a contract is unenforceable, it is not illegal to put it in the contract, it just can't be enforced. Amazon has made NO effort to enforce this clause against any warehouse workers, so there is no actionable tort against them.
There are real problems in the world to get outraged about. You should refocus on something less ridiculous.
If there is a vacuum in space, would their need to be a corresponding antivacuum?
No. Because of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, there can never be a complete vacuum. Even if there was, you couldn't measure it without destroying it.
Isn't this what one would expect if dark matter is WIMPs?
Indeed. I don't think that any of this is new. The reason dark matter was hypothesized in the first place was because of the behavior of colliding galaxies, such as the Bullet Cluster. The missing mass couldn't be stars, because it didn't emit light, it couldn't be gas or dust, because it didn't experience drag, so it must be either WIMPS or MACHOs. Further observations ruled out the MACHOs. So what is new about this observation?
Isn't this what one would expect if dark matter is WIMPs?
Sure there is: add this to the CPDLC standard and make all of the hardware modifications needed to support it:
----
Message type: Revert flight plan and lock
Message arguments: TIME: the time of the flight plan to use
Message description: Revert to the flight plan that was active at TIME that had been approved by both ground control and the pilot; engage autopilot; and disable all pilot / copilot access to all systems. If there is no approved flight plan then the flight plan is to return to the nearest suitable airport in the most direct route possible.
----
Additional modifications: Make sure that the pilot can never disable datalink communications with ground by any means that ground wouldn't have time to respond to.
Result: Nobody is ever "remote controlling" the plane from the ground. A murderous / terrorist ground controller can't crash the plane, only make it autopilot itself on a previously approved or otherwise reasonable flight plan. A pilot behaving suspiciously can't crash the plane, as ground control will just engage the autopilot and lock them out. To abuse the system both ground and the pilot would have to agree on a suicidal flight plan.
If I was reviewing code which described what CRC32 was, I would remove the comments.
Well, you are Doctor Evil.
Recent investments will yield a slight profit.
