So in order to force the government to change their procurement processes, all we need them to do is change their procurement processes (to impose the grave consequences needed to drive companies not to bid on anything, so government will change their procurement processes). This would also mean that government procurement would grind to a halt for several years as they develop these new procurement procedures. (Hope their stocked up on pens and paper) There is a difference between advocating that everyone "keep doing everything the same thing" and pointing out the flaws in your simplistic idea to "fix" the problem. I don't think anyone denies that government procurement is a trainwreck,
Ahh, so your "solution" is either that no one should bid on a government contract, ever... or, deliver a car with square wheels and no steering wheel.. gotcha "Telling the customer" also doesn't work in government, because you arn't allowed to "talk to the customer". In order to ensure "fairness and transparency" you are only allowed to talk to a procurement officer who knows precicely zero about the project in question (They do however know everything about government procurement procedures and rules). You've also proposed a classic prisoners dillema situation. Sure, if no one bids on any government contract, then eventually someone might try to fix the god foresaken world of government procurement, however if just one person bids, they win the contract. So all we need is perfect collusion between all government contractors not to bid on anything
The transponder also substantially increases the size of the radar ping. Rather than relying on the reflection of the radar pulse off the aircraft structure, the transponder actively responds to the radar substantially strengthening the return
Obviously you've never been involved in a government contract. Often, one of the biggest reasons for cost overruns is because the government has no clue what they actually want and then change their mind on a daily basis. In some cases the government spends years (yes years) putting together the requirements for an RFP and after submitting several 1000's of pages of response material, interviews, shortlisting, etc, etc, etc. Some company is awarded a contract. Then the fun begins, because most of the requirements are out of date, were written by somone who had no idea what they were asking for, or are missing critical pieces of functionality or details. As a result the requirements gathering starts all over again, and then the costly change order process starts.Then you find out you need to integrate with a 35 year old Wang mainframe that runs some weird esoteric algorithm that no one alive understands. Then they decide your project has to comply with some new reporting requirement that adds hundreds of people years of effort to your project. Your "simple" solution, assuming anyone would ever bid on a contract that could resulting them in "forfeiting their company", would result in the delivery of a car with square wheels, no steering wheel and only capable of running on leaded gasoline, however fully complient with the "terms" of the contract
You should read up on the "Senate Launch System". Pork is alive and well at NASA, in fact it's pretty much destroying the organization. $40 billion for a rocket with nothing to launch and no where to go
Tom Kelly, Werner Von Braun, Sergei Korolev and Kelly Johnson.
Tesla sold 18,000 Model S's in the US in 2013, which is an incredible achievement, however Toyota sold more than 60,000 Prius's in California alone in 2013. The Civic sold 350,000 units accross the US in 2013 Either you read the article wrong, or CNBC is wrong.
Not sure what you're referring to as "West", but if we look at California, the Tesla is no where near the best selling car. Prius is number 1, followed by the Civic, Accord, and Camry. Also the Prius is not an electric vehicle, it's a hybrid that still requires gasoline. Regardless Tesla's or Prius's still need roads and parking so I'm not sure how to interpret your last statement .
Actually this would exacerbate the problem as the loss of Bitcoins will drive up the value of those remaining
The problem is that hiring someone to "test them on the job" is not free, in fact making a bad hiring decision can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars (onboarding, training, salaries/benefits, disruption to the team, cost of poor quality, severance and rehiring, etc). The outcome also often falls on the shoulders of the hiring manager, as a result most managers are generally very conservative when making hiring decisions. You wouldn't trust a contractor to do a $100k reno to your house without looking at their reputation
Yes, childs play to excavate a series of chambers 30-40 MILES in diameter. Again you have no concept of how much energy is involved in these eruptions. We're talking orders of magnitude more than all of humanity has generated and consumed since the beginning of time. It like building a container that could hold the simultaneous deatonation of the world's entire nuclear arsenal at the peak of the cold war.
Not 1 60kt nuke, 1 60kt nuke every day for a 1000 years. Plus again, once you drop the pressure of the magma chamber to the point where gasses come out of solution, the whole thing explodes anyways
Yes, it would dissipate about the same amount of energy as needed to turn 100km of oil pipeline into steel vapor
Lets say we try to dissipate it over 1000 years. Thats still the equivalent of deatonating a 60 kt nuke, every day, for a 1000 years. Of course you wont have a 1000 years since once you lower the pressure in the magma chamber to the point where dissolved gasses come out of solution, the thing will explode anyways. Secondly how exactly are you going to "channel" or "redirect" this kind of energy?
I don't think you realize the scale of the energy involved. When St. Helen's blew, it released ~24MT of energy and ~1 cubic km of ash. The last eruption of the Yellowstone caldaera (Lava Creek 640,000 years ago) released more than 1000 cubic km of ash. You're looking at having to dissapate 1000's of MT of energy somehow. Plus, one of the typical triggers to one of these eruptions is a smaller eruption or earthquake that drops the pressure of the magma chamber to the point where dissolved gases come out of solution, then it's like opening a bottle of soda that's been shaken.