Exactly.

Although I never made it my job, I did have 2 years formal training in computer science. From the moment I started using OO language (java and C++), I never could get the point of it. As far as I understood (and understand to this day), it never felt any different from using well defined functions, sub-functions and libraries for any task that became even slightly complex. Discussing it with people around, I've never met anyone who could define it as something else than that, when we got down to it.

So yeah, there might be some people who can really take advantage of it for what it really is, but it seems those must be a tiny minority within everyone using OOP.

And yet, no physics law prohibits it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

As a matter of fact, the very same LIGO let us see two neutron stars doing that exactly back in 2017.

On the other hand, as far as I'm aware, there are no conclusive observation of black holes, which makes for a much more spectacular headline.

Damn, too quick on the draw....

overenthUsiastic

The article talks about detecting 'massive' black holes, and goes on to add them to be around 30x the mass of the Sun.

Why call upon black holes, then? As far as I remember, you can have stars significantly more massive than that before the collapse into a black hole becomes the only explanation to describe what was observed.

With only that presented as evidence, it sounds like someone was a bit overeager to justify the LIGO's budget with claims of an extraordinary observation.

That crap again.

The first time I saw it, I didn't really pay attention and shelved like so many facts we hear.

And then, I started to think about it. So, what are the numbers? I used the CIA World Factbook as a source

Do note that I'm talking about native speakers here, like on that propaganda website

So, first, English native speakers. In Europe, that means British, Irish and a handful in Malta. Total number is about 69 millions

Italian speakers are basically in Italy and Switzerland. All together, it means around 64 millions.

Then, French speakers. That's France, and the French speakers in Belgium (There are also a number of them in Switzerland, but that country isn't part of the EU). That adds up to a bit more than 70 millions.

So they're giving percentage numbers that are clearly worthless

First time I saw that (years ago), I decided to assume it was some mistake on the part of someone. Considering the mistake is still there, I can only conclude this is actually deliberate to make English seem more legitimate than it actually is.

'Modern economics'.

Too bad the planet won't take much more of it, but hey, you gotta mind the next quarter's results, that's what is really important...

That has nothing to do with the intrinsic quality of the higher education there, and everything with preconceived biases.

The program WAS presented as the ultimate fighter plane, able to excel and be superior to anything else despite being a multirole aircraft.

Ah yes, the "stealth capability". That's the last argument, supposed to redeem every other flaws (along with it comes the following : "it isn't a good dogfighter ? that's alright, with its stealth capability, it won't need to")

Except, of course, that the supposed stealth is incredibly vulnerable to the elements, phenomenally costly and already made obsolete by the new radar systems of all the nations against which it would be any use.

It's true. The opponent doesn't win because of the costs. It wins because each bomb, with the "collateral damage" (read innocent victims) it causes creates more people who want to fight back against Western Nations.

But hey, oil and an opportunity to sell more weapon systems and keep the show going even longer. After all, GDP counts wars as positives, so overall a win, right?

Too bad for the various (poor bastards) countries that took part (financially, in a very significant way) to a program that would eventually deliver a superior air fighter. As to the vaunted stealth capability some talk of in the comments, it is so fragile it could seen as a joke if it wasn't a bottomless money pit, and it has already been beaten by modern radar systems.

More like a reward for services to the private sector, working in public positions.

Or maybe (just maybe), many of the signers are people who voted "remain".

Just a thought.

Contrary to what you seem to believe (or want to convince someone of), a 4% difference is in no way a "narrow victory". To the contrary, it is always considered quite clear-cut.

You forgot one alternative (which is the one people were talking about 40-50 years ago and that was effectively swept under the carpet for the benefit of the 0.01%) : Diminishing the duration of legal work. Greatly. (as in, around 50%).

It is already becoming common knowledge that there is a large number of jobs that have simply no value for society at large. They exist to provide work (one of the greatest examples would be in Japan where you can see old guys standing at the exit of construction sites to stop cars when trucks get out/come in. The geezers often need the work because they have to wait a few years between the time they retire and the moment they get their retirement pension)

When I say "stay silent", I'm not talking about a kind of total interdiction of publishing about it. Simply, when comparing to the Nuremberg Trials, the very few actions taken against Japan as a whole and its war criminals in particular were more of a token actions than a real purge of the Japanese political system (then again, even in Germany many high level people, especially industrialists, escaped the trials even though it would have been quite easy to make a case against them).

One of the consequences is how little Japanese people know about what the imperial army was up to in the 1930's. Considering that, even today, Japan is essentially an US dominion, that was only possible because the American government allowed it.