It really is just for reading though and I agree giving it the ability to be able to play audio while reading would be fantastic. I'd pay an extra $20 for that which should more than cover the additional hardware and MP3 license. The e-ink display, coupled with tweaking the font size and therefore the line width allows me to read much faster than a paper book.

I was in the Navy for eight years and you pretty much bring along what you want to entertain you. I brought along a Basic Stamp kit, a huge wallet of DVDs, we had a media computer for our songs, game consoles, etc.

This is the brainchild of some admiral or captain that wants to be promoted. And, only five? Makes me think that they are going to the ships library (yup we have those too) for use. If anything, the SNCO's will get it and no one else will and even with them the five is not enough.

Just a huge waste of money.

for the US Army there is PM CHESS and if you have a CAC you can access the purchase list. I have looked items up such as monitors, etc, and the price is not bad at all. Is it the lowest? No, but they are also paying for a guaranteed delivery date. That being said, the prices are competitive to big box stores askin to what we would pay as private citizens.

Same with typical IT/IS/telephoney services. The Government can look at the commercial sector and see the rates and they have a baseline. There is some additional cost to do work with the government so that is factored in, but, trust me its very slight.

So... what happens? What makes it cost soo much? I'll do my best to idenfity what I have found.

1) Unqualified people making poor decisions. I see this a whole lot. Someone will get a GS job due to prior military service (as an officer) and have no real PM experience in the technology they are actually dealing with. There is a difference between managing a military division and a product or service that is IT in nature. But, these people find their way in and make horrible decisions. Spend a lo of money on funding prototypes or owrking models amongst various companies. It can just spiral down from there.

2) PM's not famaliar with the technology or services required. I have seen GS's sign off on someone pulling 50 feet of 50 pair CAT3 cable for ISDN for $5k. No, really. This usually happens because the guy/company that did this knows that the GS guy has no clue and he has every economic incentive to "go for it". Even if they GS does find out, he/she will be more concerned about their career than reporting this mistake.

3) Poor requirements analysis as well as poor alternative sources of COTS equipment. This kinda related to unqualified people doing the job. It's difficult to work with the GSs like I do. I mean, there are a lot of times where we are stunned as the GS guy wipes the table off of all the hard work we did coming up with an agnostic specification for a particular product or service they want. We make it agnostic so that we can have as many companies bid on it for them. But, no. They'll wipe that clean and then arbitrarily choose something for whatever reason and then they get fleeced. Not only that, the month of work by a team of four people has still been paid for and that effort was entirely unrealized.

4) No concept of how the money is spent. This is like #3 above. Just wiping out a lot of work over something petty. I have seen high-level GS's summarily reject a deliverable and demand that it gets redone. What they don't realize is that without going through the official process of refusing delivery of a product (or whatever) they are still paying the same people to do the job again. This happens a lot more than it should.

5) Trusting the wrong people. Those GS's might be trusting the wrong GS (who is inept) or rely on the input from a matrix position contractor. I had an issue when I was in the Navy over air pressure sensors. The Navy price was $4k but I could find them for $10 in quantities of 100 from the manufacturer itself. As the port engineer worked for the same company as the manufacturer of the equipment that was to recieve the sensor it went no where. I tried to push it but I just got in trouble, why?

6) Afraid to admit to a mistake. No really, we are all human. We make the best decision with the information we have been provided with at the time, usually we try and do this. But, sometimes a factor was not accounted for or simply put a bad decision was made. They'll just keep going. There is such a desire to be the perfect boy scout that no one will admit it when they drop the ball. And, this can get really bad when they are all doing it. They all know it and silently acknowledge it but they just keep truckin' along because it's not "their" money.

If all companies would detail how they deal with LEA's then everyone would be the wiser. And, if it's as simple and direct as this, even better. This is about the same as a search warrant for a private container (which might be how a phone is seen in court). I really like this approach via Apple, they'll have LEA but only if there is a valid and legal reason. Not just witch hunting or easter egging.

Sounds like you are playing a video or board game. Any ways, so many other countries from the "eastern block" have joined or are on their way to be part of the EU. Russia doesn't want to as it has its own resources and its own oligarchy in place and those people don't want to impact their lifestyle. That whole country is an oligarchy of monopolies that permeates everything from food to infrastructure. They'd have to give that up to join the EU.

Man, you'd think history would not repeat itself so soon, but it has! I never agreed with that Netscape/MS lawsuit as it did nothing for the consumer, nothing. Don't understand how it's "wrong" that when using a a MS or Apple or Google product yields the default use of another bundled product from the same manufacturer. Just install your own software already and be done with it!

They can write, one even authors papers (whoo) but if they actually understood what they wrote about they'd realize what you had just said: no point in buying COTS when you are creating your own. You'll just waste money and time trying to get it to work. Just make it right the first time.

Direct flight from Dulles to Tokyo (and back), only flew coach. That was on US Government sponsored travel. They don't care, it's simply cheaper. The only time I have heard of people flying business or above was if that was in the contract, and the customer missed that part. It's rare to find that now a days unless the ROI is high enough. But, you really need to look at those ticket prices to see what I am talking about. There is a quantifiable difference between a coach and first-class ticket. You can seriously buy a decent car for a first-class ticket to a far destination.

I'm just asking you as you seem to know how the overall picture works. To me, it makes no sense. I'm just curious as to me it thinks you'd want that guy on ALL the time.

They took a look at the single guy, fresh out of college, who wails himself against a wall for that extra few percent and they are like: have it! They apparantly figured it out awhile ago that getting that last few percent relates to an exponential increase in effort and it's just not worth it. Why work 60+ hours a week (+50% increase in hours) for a +7% increase in pay?

As a real-world example, there are STEM and IT programs that offer a full-ride PLUS a stipend. The Information Assurance is one where they pay for your tution plus a $17k/year stipend. Your obligation is two years of government service. You also get internships and the GS service is a 7/9/11 path going up a level every 6.5 months. If you get a MS in IA then it is a $22k stipend and a 9/11/13 path. A good deal all-around for everyone. Also, if you drop out you have to pay it all back. So, the simplify, you can have two options: the one above or the "payback via tax". I like the first option as it also gets someone a job. Have a short grace period of 6 months and after which point they fall into option 1. If they land a job elsewhere they then pay via taxes. You will still have to qualify for the program like any other but you'd let the school and it's associated state handle that.

Ships only have two fuel holds: marine diesels and JP5. Also, those engines are leased by the navy, and possibly by the power plants, and considering maintenance costs it only makes sense to use the recommended fuel type. In a pinch you could use a lower grade fuel but if you do that for too long you get a crust that forms on the turbine blades which then results in dismantling the engine and replacing the blades. Considering that the engine is within the bowels of the ship and would require cutting holes through the deck plates to remove them, you use actual JP5 for an aircraft. It just doesn't make sense not too.

No, really. It's like with math. If you are serious about either the CS or other science field you go and take those classes at a community college. The HS program is built around the low-common denominator. The rationalization to spend money on programs that will have a low ROI is not there. You are going to need a school district with a lot of kids and with a lot of kids interested in sciences in order to promote the better science programs. This is how you get the magnet schools where they pool all these like minded kids together as it's more effective, money wise, to have these programs in one location. Spreading them out over an entire school district would be costly and would ultimately be under utiltized. So, if you are really good at math and computer science, etc, the best option for everyone is to go to a commuity college and take those courses. Not only will you learn more, the equipment will probably be better, and, you can actually transfer these credits into a four-year program. I think a solution would be for a HS to focus on being a HS and for kids that have the talent refer them to a better equipped facility, at no additional cost to the parents.

http://science.slashdot.org/story/14/01/13/1316209/experiment-shows-caffeine-boosts-long-term-memory

Just look up the funding appropriations for the DEA, it's literlaly in the billions. Look at the ridiculous money spent on that fence by Bush (that only covered 30 miles). There's just too much money for both sides for them allow the legalization drugs. If you make drugs legal, then, the profit margin drops for the cartels and the USG awarded contracts stops. It will never be legalized at the Federal level.