So your manager wants more project managers. Managing managers is his/her goal. There is status in that. Managing individual contributors is hard...lots of busy work.

So is that Capitalism going on in Iowa? Why does somebody getting unemployment piss Iowans off....but car dealerships being protected form new competition does not piss Iowans off. Maybe Fox News tells Iowans when to be pissed off and when not to be pissed off.

Dude...Google "germany" "tariff"

Not to mention NASA. The market and private enterprise could never have put a man on the moon in 10 years. Government set the strategy and arranged for private companies to make it happen.

Note that the space program (and military) drove the creation of technology to create commercial integrated circuits. How convenient to forget the help that government provides after the fact.

Of course without that arrogance - perhaps he would never have become the effective manager that he once was.

Call me when he can dance like the gay Tin-Man in Wizard of Oz. Oh and blow smoke out his head.

OLTP and traditional reporting are just reinventing the wheel- one can just slightly modify an open source program, change the UI and port to a new platform, and whammo, you've got your OLTP and traditional reporting.

whammo is the operative term here....jeeze

Transactions & triggers & a whole lot more....

Agreed about ID - mostly because I believe their motivation is to preserve the notion that the "The Bible" - whatever version or translation I guess - is historical, prophetic, Divinely inspired and hence unerring...assuming proper interpretation by them...(see Salem witch trials)

What's so sad is that I think there are interesting challenges to Big Bang that you can consider simply by looking at what science tells us about the nature of time itself.

At relative high speeds it acts strangely different than our normal experiences anticipate and same when you examine very small things and very small distances.

I suggest one motivation for the big bang is that we observe that time going forward moment by moment - so we assume it is the way we got here in the first place. I say assume because you only observe the moment. Not the past and not the future. With science we observe and record - connecting the moments.

But if we see the limits to our understanding about the nature of time as I suggest above, we should be more challenging about the big bang. Science once thought - and vigorously defended the fact that the world was flat.

As an alternative - for example - consider that "life is but a dream". Consider yourself dreaming that you are driving your car to work. If a passenger in your dream asks you how did we get here the dreaming driving you would say - big bang. If the passenger asked you how old the universe is you would say billions and billions...

OK now you wake up and I ask the "awakened" you - when did time begin for the dreaming you....and you would reply - last night. Who's right?

The basis for science is objectivity. We establish and drive to a shared consensus using the scientific method and our education system. We further believe that in a civilized society the shared consensus forms the basis of our interactions and how we deal fairly with each other. This is why ID is wrong push on others. It's not objective.

But since science is about observing and recording - we can see historically that our theories can be - no will be eventually spectacularly wrong.

Time could work in ways much differently than we intuitively think about now. It's strange behavior appearing at the margins of our perception should be an indicator that it's time to consider this.