No, the plan was to land in the sea, and to have helicopters near by. Only in the future do they plan to do very accurate landings.
Ah sorry, I simply misread then. I assumed that it was a simple typo for "hydroponics light" - as in, a light used for growing things using hydroponics. It didn't even occur to me that it could be misinterpreted.
They don't care if it's inefficient, they just tap into the neighbouring house's electricity meter, or tap into the line into the house directly.
If you can get there in 11 years, you would have to be travelling at 45 times the speed of light on average. Since you can't accelerate to, or above the speed of light, you're either assuming that you started above the speed of light, or your maths is really badly wrong.
You're missing the point. We all know our options for how and where to invest money. The point is that the root of this chat thread talks about "it's simple to save a million dollars, just stick $5000 into a typical savings account a year". That's why people are discussing savings accounts.
Because the grand parent specified a typical savings account explicitly.
No, we can do compound interest maths...
The sum, from i = 25 to 0, of 5000 * (1.138 ^ i) is just barely over a million. So for the maths to stack up, you need to be being paid 14% interest. That's not even close to reality.
Well, with your maths, it's not surprising that you think it's easy to become a millionaire. Unless you think your working life is 200 years long. That, or you think a typical savings account pays nearly 14% interest. Both of which are... Rather off the scale.
Poor white people are not nearly as violent as poor black people. Check the stats yourself. Blacks are about 13-14% of the population but they commit 50% of the murders alone (usually they murder other blacks).
As much as your racist mindset would like that to support your conclusion. It simply doesn't. Being 13-14% of the population does not imply being an even distribution within the demographics of the population. If all 75% of that 13-14% is poor (not unreasonable), but only 10% of the white people are poor (also not unreasonable), then that would give you pretty much the exact same number of poor people of either race. The result - an unsurprising 50/50 split in crime rates too.
Ever wonder why things never change?
No, because it's clear.
1) They do change. We've gone from blacks, women and gays (amongst many others) being ostracised, to many of them being productive members of society, and people like you being frowned upon. That's great!
2) The change is slow, exactly because of people like you, trying very very hard to make sure that these people get held back as much as you can. Thankfully idiots like you are getting rarer and rarer.
At one time it was not politically correct to advocate heliocentrism either. But it was still a fact.
That's an interesting comparison. You seem to be suggesting that we generally go from poor understanding of the situation, to more enlightened understanding of the situation. That our knowledge of the situation improves. One way that this has improved is that we've realised that the earth is not the centre of the universe, and then even realised that neither is the sun. Another way is that in the past, we thought that blacks, women and gays were somehow inferior, and not just normal human beings who happened to have a different pigmentation, sexual organ, or preference. Thankfully we've advanced past that point now.
Black men can start by seriously trying to parent their children instead of leaving them to be raised by single mothers in broken homes in bad neighbourhoods.
This is almost as laughable as "The poor just need to stop being poor, then they could afford health care."
Yes... and as I said, this is completely missing the point. Holes in language implementations can be fixed as they come up. Bugs that are caused because of bad language design, and lack of the language helping the developer hold all the necessary concepts in their head at once, those can not trivially be fixed like language implementation errors. Not only that, but they'll be several orders of magnitude more common.
An example. A language with a decent type system can completely eliminate SQL injection attacks, and invalid pointer dereferences. A language with a dependant type system can completely eliminate buffer overruns.
There are huge classes of security holes and bugs that can be prevented from happening entirely by the language.
That's a bit of a straw man.
The point is that not too long ago, property values were only around 4-4.5 times the value of a normal wage. Now, even on a very high engineer's wage (around 150-200k) in the bay area you're looking at about 6-8 times the value of your wage. On an more average wage, more like 10-15 times.
Prices really have got very out of control.
s/black/poor/ and you might have a point.
Unfortunately for you, creating ghettos for the benefit of the rich has had a history of being a pretty amazingly bad plan. SF needs to figure out how to deal with this properly and fast (generally, the answer is, build more houses, faster).
Not when they're in NYC they don't. And people doing the jobs listed above get paid far less than the salaries listed above when they're not in NYC.
Yes... That's my point. This is exactly what they should be testing for - does the language allow you to do dumb things, or does it moan at the first sign of something that could be insecure? This is what they should have tested. Not whether the implementations were any good.
php is not the worst because they measured completely the wrong thing. They measured how many bugs they found in the implementation of the language, not how many bugs a programmer using that language would introduce that the language would not catch for them.