Re:Scientists have lost their jobs after NIH probe into fore...
by catalogia on Sunday June 14, 2020 @01:17PM
(#23519446)
I'm pretty sure that sentence should be parsed as:
> Of course [China] would have [had an ICBM program] anyways, but it would have likely taken longer.
rather than
> Of course [Qian Xuesen] would have [defected] anyways, but it would have likely taken longer.
Re:Scientists have lost their jobs after NIH probe into fore...
by nn3 on Sunday June 14, 2020 @02:10PM
(#23519845)
Yes I was referring to the ICBM program.
No idea what Xuesen would have done without McCarthyism, but he might have well ended up staying in the US.
Re:Scientists have lost their jobs after NIH probe into fore...
by sct202 on Sunday June 14, 2020 @12:52PM
(#23519211)
People have plans but get comfortable. How many FAANG engineers have grand startup plans but are comfortable with their jobs that they don't go out and pursue those plans?
Re:Scientists have lost their jobs after NIH probe into fore...
by dominotw on Sunday June 14, 2020 @01:13PM
(#23519403)
> Such actions have a tendency to back fire.
So this conclusion was drawn based on speculation that he was complacent person?
> FAANG engineers have grand startup plans but are comfortable with their jobs
In this case he got a job with another govt agency( Chinese ) so equivalent would be FANG engineers getting a job in another FANG company, which they do all the time.
why? what was he waiting for?