Those hyper-intelligent pan-dimensional mice sure are good at getting humans to do all the work to cure mice of all disease and aging.
Sure, if you *cap* the population at 150 during transit, and don't allow multiple pairings within the same generation of course you're going to kill the genetic diversity.
However, if instead of a generational ship we were talking about hibernation until arrival, 150 is enough to begin a genetically viable colony. How do you avoid the risk of inbreeding? Simple: no cap on the number of children, but no full siblings allowed. Encourage as many different genetic pairings as possible.
I'll try this. Looks like an excellent option. Thank you.
I'll consider this but I'm an Open Source advocate and I would like to have the option of customizing the solution.
First the billions of taxpayer money spent on BS renewable energy companies then a failure to move nuclear power forward. Better to have hired a Finance expert.
Vendors had a long time to move production to devices with a touch interface and for the most pat they did nothing. A few crappy all-in-ones and overly expensive laptops. Even bigger touch pads with faster interfaces would have made a world of difference. Meanwhile the market is proving MS correct and sales of tablets and small devices is booming. I track deal websites all the rime and every time someone posts a sub $500 touch notebook they sell out in short order . external touch pad devices seen real popular too. Face it, but Win 8 Sucks on a traditional notebook or PC.
Ironically, my bank allows a more complex username than password. Having basically two passwords to access the account is pretty secure, even if they're somewhat simple passwords.
I recently pulled the census data and it's pretty much useless since any information you could use to look at results by city or region have been stripped out in the version available to the general public. Sucks.
You described a situation where you have people who understand the customer identifying requirements and planning. Makes a lot of sense since an outsider would take many years to understand customer needs. I think the real part is the second part of your statement "ex-military are extremely unlikely to buck the system and stand up to uniformed types" - the problem has nothing to do with uniform, prior service are LESS likely to be impressed with that, what you really have is the age-old problem of not wanting to say no to the customer.
I'm both a PMP certified and a ScrumMaster and it's really annoying when advocates of one system attack the other out of misunderstanding. Agile isn't "anti-management and anti-process" and PMP isn't uber rigid. PMP did evolve from a construction mindset but should be tailored for other areas like software dev. The real problem is people turning process into a religion. There aren't hard-and-fast laws. They are guidelines Use what makes sense and tailor the rest to work for you. You want repeat-ability in your work process for many of the same reasons you want repeat-ability in your code.
In particular, the GSA has contracted out a major revamp of all federal procurement websites under a new site called SAM.gov. This site is being rolled out in multiple stages, the first of which has been delayed until July. The first stage takes all the sites that list and certify government contractors (CCR, ORCA,etc) and rolls them into one service. Future phases will roll in sites for posting government proposal requests and contractor and subcontractor performance (FBO, FPDS,etc). On the one hand the GSA espouses the use of Open Source so that “code is published and made available to the public, enabling anyone to copy, modify and redistribute the code without paying royalties or fees” but then they manage projects and make it all but impossible for small companies to compete by:
1) Allowing only businesses under contract to the US Government to access the code, documentation and full test system.
2) Delaying the publishing of any meaningful architecture and interface information for third party developers to review. So far only poorly documented web service information and data samples has been provided. The contractor doing the development has answered a few questions publicly but certainly not to the degree needed for system that will supposedly be fielded next month.
3) Requiring all listed companies to register with Dun and Bradstreet (to the tune of $4 mil/year) so then then have to license this basic company data back and therefore restrict the use of all the SAM.gov data.
4) Requiring obscenely complicated and restrictive licensing/ agreements and requirements to use the system as a service provider. Additionally, these agreements seem change every week, confusing the matter.
I’m doubtful that th GAO or GSA will listen to these comments unless we make some noise. I have some recommendations to correct these misstatements and create a system to fix the problem in future government projects.
1) Put in place a system to allow businesses who have registered to become government contractors through CCR (soon SAM.gov) to be sponsored to have access to code and system information needed to create solutions for “open-source” government systems without needing to be specifically contracted to do so. This kind of system would increase the business opportunities, especially for small businesses, and provide more software solutions to the government and other government contractors.
2) Establish a TECHNICAL review of Open-Source/Open Government programs and projects to ensure funded programs, projects and contractors are meeting the stated requirements and agency objectives.
What do you think? How can we get our message heard?"
Link to Original Source
The US could have easily been the supplier to the world for small coastal patrol and research diesel-electric subs but the US government has blocked such efforts.