Slight revision on that: Find a startup with an engineer in charge (or co-in-charge). When that engineer leaves, then the organization will fracture and you should leave.
This is a great story and thanks for posting it. The best companies are where the engineers are founders, in charge, or co-in-charge (as in your story). When the founding engineers leave, basically, engineers will never again control the direction of the company and it becomes more or less zombie-fied thereafter.
I have a lot of friends who have indie businesses like artists, musicians, one-person fashion design shops, etc. One thing that becomes highly evident is that you have to be a great and dedicated artists, yes, but then you also have to double your effort by spending an equivalent time on the business side (bookkeeping, billing, promotions, sales, etc.) It's hard. But it's kind of telling that most of the posters in this thread are bellyaching about how helpless they are in the face of businesspeople, without talking about the "find or found an engineer-driven company", which is the real solution. To the extent that someone wants to put their head in the sand and avoid business issues (as I did when I was younger), then you're handing over just this power to people whose personality tends towards taking advantage of the vulnerable.
Or engineers could unionize, but we all know they're not willing to fight for themselves in that way.
So you're saying you lied and didn't actually get a notice the first time?
I have/had certain acquaintances who would fall for almost every conspiracy theory and faux-news story that came down the pipe on FB. The first thing I thought about this feature is, "Oh god, now D--- will start railing about the Facebook conspiracy to de-legitimize these critical alternative news stories."
"The Yarkovsky–O'Keefe–Radzievskii–Paddack effect, or YORP effect for short, is a second-order variation on the Yarkovsky effect that changes the rotation rate of a small body (such as an asteroid)."
Your assumption/belief that I or others care about your political views is incorrect and not helping any discussion.
"It exists. It's called 'unemployed and on unemployment'."
For all of 26 weeks, woo-ha.
So you agree that the only true scientific debate here is on the debunk-the-book side. But you're irritated that 100 researchers are motivated to agree with that. And you're also defending Time Cube guy? If someone spent time debunking that, you'd be morally offended? Your point is so murky I seriously can't tell what it is. You must have some convoluted tangle of beliefs that I can't even begin to visualize.
"...most science is now funded by governments with an intense need to have AGW true so they can enact policies they really, really want to implement."
Ludicrously insane. Explicate these supposed policies and why they'd supposedly want to implement them sans global warming. Contrast with the political will on the side of energy companies and big oil with enormous wealth, massive lobbying, and an incentive to prevent any type of reform -- the real analog to tobacco company interests. Consider: What policies have been implemented to fight global warming? Ah, that's right: none whatsoever.
If you can't bother, then I'll take your lead and not bother either. Defaulting to disbelieving you.
Users vote and the higher votes get visibility. Slashdot. Reddit. StackExchange. Usable sites, it's a solved problem.
Flying cars are right in the same bin as:
(1) Colonization/living on other planets
(2) Uploading brains from bodies to computers
(3) War via robots resulting to no human deaths
(4) Technology giving the masses a life of leisure
Classic geek myths.
Why don't you cite data like GP did? It's like you're going out of your way for people to disbelieve you.
"(See 'Fireball in 10x10 room')"
Edition dependent: Yes in 1-2E. No in 0E, BX, 3-4-5E.
Thank you for taking the time to post this.