Any initial estimate will go to hell quickly. The important thing is good communication between managers and developers to mitigate the effects of slip and to continually update the estimate.

If the developers know by the 2nd week that they're already behind because difficult things were glossed over initially, then they need to feel comfortable telling the managers rather then pretending that they'll catch back up. And the managers need to understand this type of communication is beneficial and not just get angry about schedule slip, disincentivizing further communication.

Correspondingly a good manager will aggressively probe intermediate milestones.

Manager: "Feature X should be be done now. "

Developer: "Yes."

Manager, "Show me."

Developer: "OK! But we first need to update the front end to reflect the new data model."

Manager: "So Feature X is not done."

Developer, "Well, no."

I think this particular logical fallacy needs a new name. The phrase is non-intuitive and confusing to me. While the common incorrect usage is quite intuitive.

"Hate" is sort of an emotional, melodramatic word, no? I think discussing the relative merits on educating people to self-select fewer children can be discussed without over-the-top, vitriolic terms. There are plenty of rational arguments before resorting to ad hominem. Oddly Greenpeace critics often seem more crazy and emotional the Greenpeace member themselves!

Whose greed? Who enriches through near-zero population growth? And why is it the "only answer?"

You should use quotes around text copy-and-pasted from an article to avoid the appearance of plagiarism. Also off-topic.

No, the Greenpeace model is to move towards distributed, "renewable" generation. E.g. solar/wind at each household or business. Makes some sense in many areas, and can be very efficient. Not a 100% solution, though.

And the Greenpeace model for population is to move towards zero population growth through educations, not to make the earth nearly devoid of human existence.

There's plenty of things to criticize Greenpeace about. You didn't find any of them.

Well you're not operating blind. So your certainty is in doubt. I find it bad. But it has some characteristics that don't seem entirely "random" to me. The word branch near the end seems to allude to the the "snag" of the title. The word "grow" suggests something plant-like, like a bristlecone pine. (though "diamond archiecture" seems totally incongruous).

But the larger uncertainty is its very difficult to backproject art into the "expression of feeling" that generated. Particularly *bad* art. Bad art can be described as a very poor transfer function. The artist may have genuine and deep feeling, but little skill to convey the thoughts.

This would be much more convincing if it was published in a respected poetry journal, not in one that appears to accept any original poem.

If you're right, that was a very, very bad lie. Proof of the lie would be extremely damanging to Anthem.

And if you're right, somewhere out there has the proof. Which is now worth a ton of money to the criminal.

I'm not sure what point we're trying to make? That all discussions of legal decisions are futile?

Should the Innocence Project shut down because the outcomes are "simply a matter of record."

Should all the lobbyists for leave DC because only the Supreme Court's decision matters?

I don't think anyone's questioning what the legal decision was. We're discussing whether we think the legal system applied justice appropriately. Any society worth anything constantly probes its legal system.

Not just closed "during" the hurricane. >20K flights were cancelled over 6 days. Not just because of the hurricane proper but because of major damage from severe storm sruge flooding. I can show you lots of airports that don't get storm surge flooding.

The DOT's assertion is that these events will become more likely. I don't know the validity of the assertion, but that's the assertion.

Can we talk now?

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/8395...

RFA. The report clearly is talking about flooding due to more severe weather. Which is a claimed product of global warming. With the case in point being both JDK and Newark Liberty having closed as a result of - wait for it - flooding during Sandy.

Just n=1, but I did this exact same thing in grad school (except it was engineering, not art). We contacted the City to ask permission. The City thanked us for asking, and actually allocated City resources to help us install the cameras. That was ~15 years ago, and the University-owned cameras are still in operation as an educational resource in studying traffic patterns.

They don't matter as far as the operations of the legal system are concerned.

But insightful, educated speech about important matters is, in my opinion, pretty important to society in general. So, to me, it matters.

The status of legal guilt is not open to opinion. The mechanisms by which that guilt was decided are certainly fodder for opinion. This isn't the Middle Ages.

Yet that's exactly what a lot of actual IEDs look like.

No, but it's a reasonable prerequisite for those who are expressing strong opinions about the outcome.

This entire idea is championed by one of the authors - James O'Keefe. He's made this his cause celebre'. I find his conclusions not well supported by the evidence. He makes jumps. And then the media takes it and runs with even more eye-catching headlines.