The problem is the top
The problem is the top
Remember 13 years ago when we all posted links to our American representatives and with their phones and email exploding the DRM trusted PC requirements went away from a potential bill.
Can you all afford 3 minutes of your life
Ok most senators and congressman are too stupid to know what net neutrality is. They gain their information from experts
So here is the link for your congressman. Here is the link to your senator. The people who read these are called scriptwriters and if they get thousands of angry emails I can guarantee you it will at least get your politicians attention.
When I linked this in 2003 or 2004 here Slashdot posted a story a few days later stating congress was confused, dumbfounded, and shocked. The bill died
If you have a Republican write professionally that you do not want big brother government to trample innovation and stop jobs. Explain your I.T. position and career and explain your employer and startups already pay extra for bandwidth and this amounts to a bribe. End it off with if the United States won't allow us to be a leader in technology another cheaper country like China or India will who do not have these problems with Net Neutrality and can operate simply on bandwidth uses without double and triple dipping.
If your senator and or congressman is a democrat explain politely that this is a terrible bill that will hurt lower income internet users and new startups. Explain your I.T. position and career and explain your employer and startups already pay extra for bandwidth and this amounts to double dipping which will hurt America's competitive advantage. Also mention the top 5 technology companies are active Democratic donors to your party including Facebook, Google, and Microsoft and that if America fails to take initiative for regulating tax payer infrastructure then another country with more freedoms like India or China will take the jobs instead and this will help lower income consumers by keeping prices lower.
Uh, did you post the long link?
The treaty is about 'not putting weapons of mass destruction' into space.
How is that a marxist leninist paradise?
One may master without being an expert, but master do tend to be experts.
Actually most masters are generalists.
They can look over the fence and think out of the box.
In Germany it is a piece of paper that tells everyone you are good in passing the required tests to get the paper
Well, it is not that bad, but the typical best degrees diplomas are people who actually in fact only can pass tests and have no clue what so ever about the topic. The rest, even if they only get a D, are often very good programmers/software engineers.
Actually nearly everything is easier to learn by doing instead of learning or a combination. Or lets say it this way: 80% doing 20% learning.
However a CS degree, e.g. in Germany, is 95% learning and only 5% doing
You can fully expect a CS graduate to have no clue about programming at all.
Same, actually I don't know a single person that can.
In my field of work, no none is doing it. I avoid Excel like the plague.
And: in case you have not realized it in your decades of carrier in IT: Excel macros don't run on Bash command lines, as Services in a Java backend or as Greasemonkey scripts in a web browser
I will state, however, that they do not follow the scientific method and cannot back up their claims with scientific studies.
Are you an idiot?
The oldest mass tests - usually done on convicts or prisoners of war (which usually became slaves) - for acupuncture are probably 4000 years old. And since the west has adopted acupuncture we have thousands of 'scientific studies' about it, probably 10,000ds.
Chiropractics is a branch of orthopedy. Why you claim it is not following 'scientific methods' is beyond me.
Either you can fix a dislocated joint or you can't, that is super easy to test, facepalm.
And to practice either as a professional, you need a medical diploma.
But god help you if you see an acupuncturist for malignant melanoma...
And god help that acupuncturist, too. He would be sued into oblivion and had likely jail time. Oh, I forgot: in the sane world, probably not in the US.
You forgot to add the important keywords: in the USA
And for all those 'medical professions' you need in every country of the world -- except the USA, ofc. -- a medical education. Either a university degree or at least a "healing practitioner" certificate.
So what exactly was your point?
Getting the actual people there (and back) is the costly part. "Stuff" doesn't require four or five levels of fail-safe. "Stuff" doesn't need to take a shit or get sick or argue about politics.
Then the solution seems pretty straightforward: send only "stuff" up there for the first few years.
Once the "stuff" has organized itself (because robots) and is looking pretty good, then send up some human beings, if you still want to. They can walk right into to their prefab moon-hotel.
Falun Gong is strictly speaking not forbidden because it is a religion, but for two main reasons:
a) they started to advice their members to reject certain medical treatments, that put them under investigations
b) because of the investigations, they started mass demonstrations, thousands of sitting blockades all over China
Showing the government how many they are and being able to organize such big demonstrations urged the government to forbid them.
Here's how to calculate a 100% accurate estimate 100% of the time, when your manager asks you to predict how long it will take to implement feature X:
1. Tell your manager you'll get the estimate for them as soon as you've done the necessary research
2. Go back to your desk
3. Write down the current time
4. Implement the feature
5. Subtract the time you wrote down in step (3) from the current time. This is your 100% accurate estimate of how long it took you to implement the feature
6. Email your manager, and let them know the estimate value. If you're feeling like it, you can also let them know that the feature is now implemented (although this may make them feel like the estimate you gave them is no longer particularly useful, so treat cautiously there)
A list is only as strong as its weakest link. -- Don Knuth