Re: Engineers often simply lack understanding of emotional situations
>> Sales 'people' on the other hand are actually evil. Truely dead inside and would happily eat a baby if there was
>> margin in it.
Surely you mean marketing droids? Or legal?
20 posts • joined 7 Jul 2009
> Facebook outs teens as gay, putting them at risk of their lives and enables murder and other crimes,
Not a fan of facebook, but teen in your example did themselves place that information on public forum. If they didn't want to be outed, surely they would keep that information to theyselves, hmm?
> The thing is, that they aren't intending to put it in the exact point behind the moon. It would orbit in
> a circular motion in a plane that is perpendicular to Earths orbit. That means that it would appear
> from the Earth to be travelling in a circle around the moon. I would guess that the NASA DSN
> would be used to talk to it.
The thing is that while it would orbit in a circular motion around the moon, the moon is orbiting in a circular motion around the earth. From the earth it would appear to be orbiting the earth at the Lagrangian point L2. Which is directly behind the moon. All the time. And from the moon, whose face is turned towards the earth all the time, the backside of the moon faces L2. All the time.
I don't follow the bit about L2 orbit being perpendicular to earth orbit.
> Above piccie shows the locations. L4 or 5 would be better choices as objects there remain in
> place where the others need to expend fuel to maintain position.
Actually the blue and red arrowheads show the tendency at the various points. Objects at any of the points will require some minor orbital adjustments from time to time. On a potential surface L1, L2 and L3 are saddles and a body there will have the tendency to run away in one of two directions; L4 and L5 are hilltops and the tendency there is to run away in any direction. The advantage to any of the Lagrangian points is that in their vicinity the potential curve is relatively flat and orbital adjustments required would be minor.
< this is one of those rare moments when Microsoft acted with professionalism and honesty. It
< means that even for them, GPL counts as a valid license.
`Microsoft', `professionalism' and `honesty' in the same sentence? Huh! No, dear AC. They were caught! Someone noticed! That is the only reason. It does seem significant, though, that to fix their problem they acknowledge the GPL rather than take it to court to attempt to have the GPL voided.
How to be a fully funded college research professor: pick at random any urban legend or blindingly obvious bit of common sense and write your research paper based on your preconceptions and misguided notions, and possibly, just possibly, one or two interviews with those in your immediate family or group of like-minded friends. Then sit back and wait for the kudos and credits to come rolling in. What a load of bollocks! Some will not be able to cope with the new technology as they age, others will. Stating this kind of nonsense as if it were serious research is a coil, as is picking one side and stating that DOOM IS UPON US! THE END OF LIFE AND TECH SUPPORT AS WE KNOW IT, etc. I'm leaving.
The insistence by some commentards that driving requires/should require speaking/reading/understanding english is puzzling at best: do any of you out there drive AT ALL? At most you need to understand ``stop'', ``slow'', have a basic understanding that numbers like ``35'' and ``55'' relate to miles per hour (in merkia) and are speeds that should not be exceeded while travelling on various sections of roadway, and be able to distinguish between red, green and orange lights at intersections. Most signs are designed with the illiterate in mind and are reduced to symbols and graphic designs. It seems to me understanding english is required only to ponder the pearls of wisdom falling like rose petals from the esteemed police constable's eloquent lips. NOT.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019