Gee, you don't say?
Because I'm not. But, where does the 92 billion light year thing come from? I would think what, 28 billion across if it's 14 billion years old?
People who aren't USAsians who know that MM means 1000 * 1000 which is French for 1,000,000
If I put a supercap made of organic hemp into an oven at 105C for 5000 hours, what's left when I am finished? It is still a supercapacitor or is it a small metal can full of organic goo?
What is this "female body" of which you speak?
You missed my point entirely. I'm not saying people don't make mistakes. I'm saying I want the guy who does validation work and debugs his shit BEFORE handing it over to the customer, not AFTER.
Let me put it this way. When I hire an engineer, do I want to hire the guy who gets stuff right the first time, and thoroughly validates and identifies and fixes little issues before publishing results? Or, do I want to hire the guy that gets it done, hurries to publish results with tons of niggling little problems, and ultimately gets it right after several iterations of fixing minor problems?
Of course I want the first guy. Yes, lots of development has issues, but if the government is finding all of these little issues that can be fixed "within hours," you'd think SpaceX would have a good enough process in place to find and fix those trivial errors before releasing results or product.
"They are experts in their fields, often with master's and doctoral degrees. They earn at the top of federal pay scale, with the highest taking home $148,000 a year."
When I was a senior in college, the USPTO was at a career fair trying to snap up as many new grads as possible for patent examiner positions.
New grads are not experts in their fields. Period. No matter what degree they're walking away with.
That said, if I can make $148K working at home for USPTO, where the hell do I sign up?!?
My tablet is quite useful. It makes a great bathroom buddy.
It's not just intellect.
Remember when it was somehow racist to point out that the reason blacks are better at athletics was because they had a genetic makeup that produced stronger and longer muscles capable of higher power output?
That was racist because to say it was to imply they had an unfair advantage.
I think being a geneticist is a pretty impossible job. No matter what your data suggests or how you present it, you're going to be labeled a racist. You'll either be accusing a minority race that is good at something as having an unfair genetic advantage, or you'll be implying that a minority race that is not good at something is so because of genetics - and therefore their skin color.
This is how the PC establishment thinks. If there is a conceivable way to twist and distort what is said so that it can be labeled racist, they will do it.
This may be a stupid question, but why is the Austrian government calling up the Chinese embassy in Vienna to ask permission to print an Austrian citizen's image on a custom postage stamp?