alienasa
Think space launch is cool? Want to help make sure it's done safely?
We are seeking a talented and motivated Software Developer to join our application development team while serving as a forward-engineer for application systems deployed at U.S. Space Force locations in Florida. Ideally you'll be comfortable deploying and troubleshooting applications in Windows and Linux environments and have a strong software development background in .NET or a similar object-oriented programming (OOP) language. Strong communication skills and the ability to collaborate with a remote team are a must.
Because of the requirements, this is for US Persons only. If you're interested, we'd like to talk. Email me if you have questions at christopher.wacek at arctos-us dot com, or apply here with a note you saw this on HN: https://workforcenow.adp.com/mascsr/default/mdf/recruitment/...
(there are tags, there are <br>'s between each paragraph inside the <p>)
Yes it does. Per https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/commercial-space-transportation... "An FAA license is required for any launch or reentry, or the operation of any launch or reentry site, by U.S. citizens anywhere in the world, or by any individual or entity within the U.S. "
Also, there are no moderators anymore.
We are looking for a passionate Lead Software Engineer to help build a team developing next generation assessment and repair capabilities for critical United States aircraft systems. You will have direct input into all software aspects of the technology and will be expected to help design, document, and develop appropriate solutions to enable the desired capability.
ARCTOS is a technology-oriented small business providing aerospace, defense, and digital solutions in the United States.
Job Post: https://workforcenow.adp.com/mascsr/default/mdf/recruitment/...
1. When you ride a Bird scooter, you agree to accept liability for all injuries, possibly with the exception of gross negligence (even if you didn't read the fine print, you'd be insane to think it didn't say that).
2. Peña sued the city for not maintaining a sidewalk and causing his injuries.
3. Bird indemnified the city for all liability involving Bird scooters.
Those three things together make the situation that "seems abominable", but they're really quite reasonable. Basically the city isn't liable, and neither is Bird, and it's not actually a surprise to anyone except those writing breathless news stories.
Edit: just read parent's reply talking about RDP
In sortition, rather than polling the entire populace about complicated issues on which they are likely not well informed, we select a balanced random sample of people from the populace , provide them information, and then allow them to engage each other on the issue. Then we have those people vote.
This has several advantages:
1. It actually places "faith in a large number of people selected from all social backgrounds" depending on how large your sample, as opposed to letting elected politicians decide, which is the definition of "a small number of people selected from a potentially narrow social background".
2. It solves the problem where a huge number of people end up voting because of gut instinct or misinformation. Consider the passage of Proposition 13 in California which prohibits the raising of property taxes. If you poll the entire population, that referendum is going to win 100 times out of 100, because for most people the gut check decision is "no I don't want my taxes to go up". However, the correct way to consider that proposition is to get an understanding of how property taxes are used, how they are collected, what the procedures are for changing them in the legislature, etc. and then come to a determination. That determination might be "Yes", it might be "No", or it might be "we should not limit increases in property tax rates but instead limit increases to the real value of collected taxes, by accounting for changes in property values". [1]
[1] I'm not proposing that is the right answer, I'm just suggesting that you might arrive at that conclusion if you actually had time to study the issue. Almost by definition, the vast majority of people do not have that time.
The water in the lake is only refilled during Panama's rainy season, and drought conditions in recent years have on occasion made it necessary to put restrictions on the ships transiting the system.[1]
Those huge basins next to the new locks in the video are a water cycling system. They aim to capture a significant percentage of the water as they cycle the locks and then re-use it, rather than just draining the lakes.
[1] http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/business/panama-canal-re...
On the other hand, if Bob invents something, but chooses not to produce it, then he's effectively relinquishing his rights to patent protection.
When we allow Bob to simply transfer his "invention" (an idea basically) to Patent Corp. in exchange for cash, and Patent Corp then uses that to extort people, we massively incentivize dreaming up random ideas in the hope of getting them patented. That incentive exists whether or not the idea is a good one, practical, effective or any other characteristics that reasonable people use to evaluate things.
This isn't true in the US. Many schools do actually try to collect this data, but they're typically dealing with far larger populations with far less response rate to surveys, so it isn't as readily available.
Law schools especially report the number of students with jobs, but they're notorious for gaming the system by doing things like hiring their own graduates for a year post graduation and similar nonsense.
Perhaps we'll see an effect where bootcamps that do high quality reporting will actually be chosen more frequently and thus push other bootcamps to do the same.
Counterpoint: this is self selection mechanism in itself. I don't want to be dating the person who can't handle getting a phone call without it being "awkward" or "weird".
Playing the game by the numbers is only worthwhile if your goal is ephemeral (i.e. to "score"). If your goal is to have a lasting meaningful relationship, then who cares what the numbers are. Be yourself.
> After the initial courting phase, I've found things to be a bit different and more dependent upon the individual. That's the time to show your own preferences rather than play the game.
If your preferences matter to you, use them as a selection methodology or you're just wasting time.
This is a problem I observed and experienced myself. Many kids (especially at elite schools) have been carefully honed to excel in high school and on tests so that they can get into good colleges. They start to think that they are massively intelligent and can do anything as long as they apply the same techniques.
Then they arrive at college, where all of a sudden a massive proportion of the population is at least as smart as them, if not smarter or harder working. Just as they are dealing with a bunch of emotionally roiling events such as living alone and having to make new friends, kaboom, their goes their overinflated sense of self esteem.
I think that's precisely the point of the article. If you are in fact in the middle of a conversation with someone, then it is polite to pay attention. If you don't want to be in a conversation with them, then exit the conversation (i.e. tell them that you don't have time and walk away). Pretending to pay attention while doing nothing of the sort cheapens the interaction.
By all means, communicate with your friends over the internet using all the means availed to you by technology. On the other hand, when you're sitting at a coffeeshop with your friend right next to you, that isn't the time to be chatting with someone half way across the country.
As the article says, it takes more than 30 second to divine whether or not a conversation is going to go somewhere interesting, and if you stop paying attention at the drop of a hat, it never has a chance.
The issue is that frequently systems like OnStar sit on both buses, because they are used for things like engine diagnostics. If you investigate you'll notice that every single one of these car hacking attacks starts somewhere, pivots to an OnStar like system, then can control the car.
Doesn't really make your point less true, but fits perfectly in the features over security mindset.
Hash Tables are faster than Tries when your only requirement is that you don't duplicate storage.
The Go language designers explicitly didn't include exceptions because "coupling exceptions to a control structure, as in the try-catch-finally idiom, results in convoluted code. It also tends to encourage programmers to label too many ordinary errors, such as failing to open a file, as exceptional" [1].
I agree with them. While handling errors everywhere is a little painful to write, it enforces better practices by making you acknowledge that things could fail and ignore, handle, or pass the buck.