They didn't write the standard. They invented much of the error correction necessary for wifi to work.
Artificial fertilizers, irrigation and modern farming methods have massively increased the productivity of farming over the natural state. Essentially turning energy (Coal, Oil, nuclear etc.) into higher yields.
That doesn't mean Coca cola can solve those problems.
Actually they can. See http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/25/coke-applies-supply-chain-expertise-to-deliver-aids-drugs-in-africa.html
Basically coke success has been built on it's supply chain. It can deliver coke to nearly anywhere in the world. That supply chain expertise is being tapped to deliver various other medical essentials to remote places as well.
You don't happen to be based in SE england? Got a CV I can look at?
Your experience is useful. The PhD put into the right context (this is where CV writing skills come in) show a complex problem solving skillset that is more useful in the more interesting dynamic environments more than the lock and key set of on trend skills.
Where your job search is actually failing is the wall of stupid HR and recruitment agency keyword searching techniques. To get around the flood of CV's non-technical people are used to screen CV's before they hit the manager actually hiring. They use key word searchs to find the skillsets, the hiring manager gets to choose from a small selection of people that can write in the right languages and use the right technologies without training.
What you have to find is a way around that barrier. Which is harder than it seems.
The point is, this issue is statistically obvious and the guys that do this stuff are endemic and everywhere. The point is not to blame every man, but to squeeze those wankers out. And that should be a good thing! Just get with the idea, when this crap happens back the woman and not the man.
So your argument is we will run out of fossil fuels after a massive rise in cost (essentially peak oil). Therefore the max amount of CO2 in the atmosphere will be lower than predicted.
If that is the case to protect the economy in the future there should be short term efforts (high carbon taxes, subsidies move to renewable and non-fossil fuel energy sources) to move the economies infrastructure off fossil fuels so there are no nasty economic shocks in the future.
Either way the solutions the same.
For climate change skeptics are always attacking the science and the scientists. But they never deal with the known facts.
1. CO2 concentration is measurably increasing year on year and accelerating. If you want a running tally have a look here: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/
This is one of a number of different high quality analytical chemistry studies that all tell the same story. CO2 concentration is increasing significantly.
2. We know this is because of release of fossil fuel sequestered CO2. By careful investigation of the change in carbon isotopic ratios, and by simply accounting for the CO2 released. Human release of CO2 more than enough accounts for the CO2 increase in the atmosphere, and actually shows that a significant proportion is actually getting absorbed into the ocean and other carbon sinks. But clearly no where near all of it.
3. CO2 in the atmosphere traps heat due to the wavelengths of light it does and does not absorb.
This is all hard chemistry measurement, and are known with a high degree of confidence. These are not up for debate!
The only debatable point is what do these facts mean for the climate and the environment going forward. And here we get into prediction and modelling. The best models and predictions shows that the climate will increase in temperature, and that will have significant and mostly detriment effect on most of the worlds environments and sustainability of human populations going forward.
If you are a climate change skeptic scientist, what you have to come up with is a model that sensibly and scientifically shows why this increase in CO2 won't have any significant detrimental effects. Then put it up for publication in peer reviewed journals. And if your scientific argument has any legs it will change the scientific consensus. All the other stuff being thrown around is political motivated bull shit, with no scientific basis and should be simply ignored.
As a Common international business traveller,, I know very well the issues with hotel wifi.
First of, there is the dodgy reception interference issue. What compounds this is as soon as the wifi is flaky in a hotel, everybody gets the 3/4g wifi hotspots out compounding the problem. My solution is a high power (600mw) usb wifi adapter and high gain antenna in my suitcase. Cuts through all the crap. This one was a boon in a hotel in Lawrence Kansas, and whenever I get stuck in THAT room with sucking wifi reception.
Second is the throttling issue, where each device is throttle. Once I found In a nice hotel in Orange county had wifi hard throttle to 1mbps, I also found I could use the external USB adapter, the laptops internal adapter, and the rooms wired ethernet, and carefully created routing table, to get 3x 1 mbps streams....
I've once had the whole wifi in a hilton hotel come down, after the main login server got a virus, (short hills NJ). On the other hand the best wifi I've ever had at a hotel was at a hilton group hotel (doubletree in chesterfield MO).
The concept is to identify cancer and genetic disease patients within the NHS. Sequence their genomes and their close relatives to identify the specific gene sequences involved.
In the case of cancer the Genome of both the healthy cells and the cancer cell will be sequenced to identify the mutations that triggered the cancer, and also identify inherited genes that predispose people to certain cancers.
Their is assurances that all identifying information about a patient will be removed from the medical diagnosis to protect privacy."
Amazon is all about market share and building infrastructure to support that market share. So actually the main driver of amazon isn't it's store front/web presence. They sell stuff online, so do thousands of other people out of there garages. What they are driving for in the warehouse/delivery infrastructure to deliver anything, anywhere fast and at the lowest cost. By doing that they can simply offer the same things, faster and cheaper than anyone else.
But that involves building warehouses in strategic locations, and forming deals with delivery companies that lower costs and streamline the process the whole way. At the moment, this extends to delivering to local delivery company and post office depots directly and relying on those delivery services for the last mile delivery.
They have taken that same physical strategic warehouse, tied closely to key last mile delivery infrastructure model into cloud computing. Which is essentially large warehouse of servers, strategically placed for maximum efficiency of running costs and internet connectivity to large markets.
What it means is that they spend all their money that they actually make on razor thing margins, building more infrastructure, to service more customers that they have gotten by out competing everyone on price and delivery speed. All Amazon has to do to turn a profit is to pull back a bit on the growth plans.
The latest foray is into grocerys in some large west coast markets. This is traditionally a direct from store/warehouse last mile delivery service, and offered by a large number of supermarkets etc theses days. What Amazon hope to do isn't to make a lot of money on it, but develop and support a last mile delivery service. Thus completing the vertical integration within amazon of the whole order, pick, pack, ship and delivery process.
There were a number UK, canadian and Australians killed. Which would mean those countries will get all relevant signals intelligence from the US at least under the United Kingdom – United States of America Agreement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement.
Also when have the CIA ever kept there nose out of anything?
"So what about those of us who refuse a smartphone for various reasons? I wouldn't mind having one but I'm not going to shell out another $20/month for internet on a device that I mainly use in a place where I already pay for the internet."
Simple, you will have access to only higher rate credit cards. The higher rate justified by the higher risk of fraud.
The replacement date for cell phones is upfront and written into most contracts. It is a fundamental part of cell-phone contract marketing these days. So nobody is thinking 20 years unless they are deluded, and the phone companies are definitely not promoting that at all. The 2 year upgrade cycle is transparent, and well understood between customers and vendors. So what is your point?
The UK conservative government has an election next year. They are under a lot of pressure from the UKIP, a party that is for the UK being independent from the EU, so very anti EU. And it is about an issue that they can twist into being about them protecting children from the internet, which plays well in the tabloids. Of course they were going to do this no matter how good or bad the EU legislation actually is.
The article mentions this, and solves your problem. Move out of Silicon Valley to a lower cost of living place. Some good sized mid-western city will be optimal. This only works if you have an established product and good procedures. Now if your start-up and need funding from VC etc then yes base yourself in SF, NYC, Boston or Chicago....