"Exact and reproducible" are somewhat sad proxies for "accurate and precise." I once had a mathematician working for me who produced very precise standard deviations, the only problem was that the numbers were sometimes negative.

Really. Used well, it can kill a room full of anodyne PR words. Can only be cast by level 5+ geeks.

+1. This is the obvious answer.

The optics are great (veterans, help, non-profit.)

First, fix your website so that it is obvious what you are offering and how you deliver it ("we are off-line now" does not cut it.)

Second, send a mail to TeamViewer's CEO or PR explaining what you do, what you need, and how you can help them in the PR space (you put thanks on your site, they can point to you as a good deed, you are available for journalists.)

Better than a shot, it should be a slam-dunk if you do it right.

It's not that easy. "appropriate State Party to the Treaty" refers to the non-governmental entity doing the launch, not the location of the launch. So you don't get lob stuff into space on a whim because you are outside of territorial waters on a ship, on a private island, etc.

This was hashed out at length on the various rocketry boards when the CATS prize and XPrize were announced.

Remote X11 never really worked properly anyway; It doesn't survive interruptions, and it's basically unusable over high-latency connections (you end up needing to use things like VNC). Network transparency is a nice feature, but X11 embedded it into the wrong layer, and it doesn't really work very well today anyway. Building a VNC server (or maybe something more rich based on streaming video) should be a lot easier under Wayland than it ever was under X11.

Based on playing around with Weston for a weekend, I think it'll get there sooner than you might think. Wayland's developers are familiar with Xorg, so they're not wasting a lot of time with NIH-syndrome rewrites of stuff that works (for instance, Weston uses the same low-level video drivers as Xorg, and xwayland is just a special build of Xorg). The protocol is specifically designed to take "frames" into account (so, no more tearing, ever), so even if it's somewhat slower (which I don't expect), it'll *feel* more responsive.

Flash in Chromium/X11 under xwayland already renders video more smoothly on my machine than it does on native Xorg (well, when rendering doesn't hang or crash xwayland). If you cut out some of the middlemen, I expect it'll only get better.

"I have a nude pic of you; show me more or I'll release it" That's blackmail: he understood the mental state of his victim. There is no "no idea what was happening" defense.

Doctors and lawyers are unique in that they have a pass/fail exam for you to become a member of the club. Usually with required schooling to boot. And they effectively set the total count of people allowed to work.

You really propose that for IT? A legally required license to work for senior people (and a host of nurse/para-legal type vocational roles for most developers, sysadmins, and web masters?)

ACM? IEEE?

Being disintegrated makes me very angry.

Very angry indeed.

Wow. That was the most common sense thing I've read in a while. Want a job in NYC?

Oh noes! To think my boomer generation said "mumbles" instead of actually mumbling.

And my born-in-1935 engineer father said stuff like "there were N people already in line."

Ah, grasshopper, as you gain respect and seniority, you will find the success of your project becomes more and more dependent on other people.

If you want to continue to succeed, you need to understand these peoples' strengths.

1. No skill, no talent: avoid these people, have them write doc or something.
2. Skill, no talent: give them designs or procedures. They will execute well if they understand what you want.
3. No skill, talent. Mentor them and watch them closely. You will get a Scala engine running 20 lines of code in the middle of your Java app if you don't pay attention.
4. Skill & Talent. Just chat will them about what you need. You'll get what you need in no time.

No, it was a totally solid study. From the article:

paragraph 1: "A landmark federal study"
paragraph 2: "After a year of monitoring"
paragraph 3: "Although the results are preliminary"
paragraph 4: "Drilling fluids tagged with unique markers were injected more than 8,000 feet below the surface"
paragraph 8: "The study marked the first time that a drilling company let government scientists inject special tracers into the fracking fluid"

See, fracking is totally safe. A single "landmark" study proves it. When the fracking was 1.5 miles deep, after one year, no bad effects were observed. Also, this was the one study allowed by any drilling company.

Sheesh, what are you people concerned about?