I was talking to a college professor I know a couple weeks ago about this exact thing. And what they said comprised a substantial amount of the expenses of their 4 year private college made perfect sense, because it's happening to every business.
Health insurance costs.
Now, add to this:
salaries and other benefits to both staff and educators.
liability insurance.
increased food costs.
I'm certain facilities have increased costs also, from new construction to utilities.
*Plus anything else I've left out.
Let's face it, everything has become more expensive. The Five Guys meal of a little cheeseburger, little fries, and regular drink which cost me $12 4 years ago in March, 2020 (I keep records), would cost me $17-18 today (I checked the prices today at noon and walked away). That's a 40-50% increase.
Why would we expect higher education to not be effected?
I don’t think anybody is surprised that college tuition has increased. They’re surprised it’s increased faster than the prices for almost every other service. So have health care costs. And in both cases, the system is designed to make it difficult and pointless to shop based on price.
I have a hard time believing health insurance costs have driven the drastic increase in college costs. They’ve certainly played a role, but I don’t see any reason they would increase the cost of education more than they’ve increased the price of everything else.
Salaries are the primary cost not health insurance. There are more administrators than students. Also there is no excuse, the educational institutions are incompetent at managing their finances.
> Let's face it, everything has become more expensive. The Five Guys meal of a little cheeseburger, little fries, and regular drink which cost me $12 4 years ago in March, 2020 (I keep records), would cost me $17-18 today (I checked the prices today at noon and walked away). That's a 40-50% increase.
Couldn't this just be combated using shrinkflation? I'm sure that rice, beans, ramen, and other grad student fare is still cheap yet provides enough nutrients to study.
After all, these are supposed to be institutions of the mind, not institutions of the stomach.
14dBm EIRP is extremely low power for a radar however. Off the bat the author is using 1W (30dBm) PA, and you could readily get another 20dB from a moderate sized antenna (e.g. repurpose a scrap DirecTV dish).
Unless you're next to a base, it's the FCC that will come knocking long before the military.
It's always difficult for people to ask for help. The best thing senior engineers can do is set the example and ask for help when they get stuck on something--even if it's something they could figure out on their own with some time.
100%. If your seniors aren’t asking for help or even casually chatting in channels, then why would the juniors be expected to start. Setting the example helps encourage it and make it no big deal.
In the mid-/late-80's, you could easily get full PII (SSN, Name, DOB, address, mother's maiden name, etc) green-bar paper reports someone tossed in the trash when finished.
Plus,the University of Nebraska mentions this regarding winter wheat:
A review of seedling rates vs. yield potential is helpful. On average, there are 22 seeds per head and 5 heads per plant, or 110 seeds per plant. With an average seed size of 15,000 seeds per pound or 900,000 seeds per bushel, a pound of average-sized seed with 80% germination and emergence has a yield potential of approximately 1.5 bushels per acre. Seeding 40 lb of seed with a weight of 15,000 seed per pound has a yield potential of 60 bushels per acre.https://cropwatch.unl.edu/2019/determining-seeding-rate-wint...
You know I think you are right and that this often repeated answer on the internet may be wrong or maybe the yield you can get using permaculture type methods at home is drastically lower than professional farmers using fertilizer and industrial equipment (very likely).
Let's say a home grower could maybe get 1/4 of a professional farmer's yield. 45/4= 11.25 bushels per acre is 675 lbs per acre, which would be enough for four people for a year.
It makes me feel better about the feasibility of growing my own grains and living on it in an apocalypse. I've always wanted to try growing a field of wheat or something in my backyard. Maybe I'll try it someday. I've often wondered if garden grown grains and bread would have the same massive difference in quality and taste that you get with a homegrown tomato vs. store-bought.
A three year savings of $10B would be equal to their stated investment into OpenAI. Assume there is a global slowdown, and a corresponding decline in revenues; layoffs may be the way they've decided to free up cash flow to pay for the investment.
I don't think the drones flew over the installation. Rather, the article states, "features YouTube videos taken from drones flown over places around Area 51". (emphasis mine)
So long as the areas are either public lands, or he has permission from the owners, and follows FAA regs on drone operations, nothing wrong with it.
Even if in plain view, it can be very illegal [0].
Never assume that your own "common-sense" expectation of how the law or taxes works is the way it actually works. You are almost always guaranteed to be wrong [1]. In this case, your error could have seriously bad consequences,and your ignorance would be no excuse
>> "(a) Whenever, in the interests of national defense, the President defines certain vital military and naval installations or equipment as requiring protection against the general dissemination of information relative thereto, it shall be unlawful to make any photograph, sketch, picture, drawing, map, or graphical representation of such vital military and naval installations or equipment without first obtaining permission of the commanding officer of the military or naval post, camp, or station, or naval vessels, military and naval aircraft, and any separate military or naval command concerned, or higher authority, and promptly submitting the product obtained to such commanding officer or higher authority for censorship or such other action as he may deem necessary.
(b) Whoever violates this section shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both."
[1] Married to a top attny, the first thing said about almost any question is "go read the actual contract or the actual code" before even bothering to start reasoning about the thing. Even an attny's inital assumptions are very often wrong. We'd (at least should) be saying the same thing about any software system.
The flip side is that the rights and freedoms we take for granted in the US are fundamentally upheld by the people believing that we have them. The broad first pass in this case is referenced by the 1st amendment, which we generally take to mean living in an open society where we have the freedom to report on what we can observe. This thread being full of people chiming in to defend the general concept, regardless of whatever small-picture legal theory has motivated the government to do this, demonstrates this dynamic. Ultimately, the more people that naively say "These actions are plainly un-American", the better off we are.
You are saying that it is plainly un-American to have military secrets?
They go back to George Washington, before the founding of the country.
The rights and freedoms we have are not absolute. They are also tempered by responsibility to maintain, sometimes by force, the ability to have those freedoms.
Of course, all of us would like to live without the need for police or military. But the fact of the actual (not ideal) world is that there are always bullies and authoritarians who are happy to take what they want and rule how they like, not by assent or fairness, but by deceit, force, and violence. Anyone who wants to live a self-determining life or live in a democracy must be better armed than the bullies and expansionist autocracies, or they will soon be ruled by them.
Military and technological secrets are a key part of maintaining an advantage over expansionist autocracies, and are at least as American than Apple Pie.
So, NO, people claiming that we should not have a military or secret technologies are not making us better off — they are literally helping undermine the only force that keeps us from being ruled by the likes of Putin or Xi. Ask any Ukrainian, Lithuanian, Estonian, Latvian, or Taiwanese. They did not enjoy the privilege of growing up well-enough protected to be ignorant of the threat. Consider that before posting that ignorance.
You do realize there is a huge distinction between having military secrets, and persecuting private citizens who report on things that are openly discoverable, right?
This tension has also been there the whole time. Leaking classified information is a crime, while propagating information that has leaked into the public domain is not. For good reason - those with deliberate access to classified information have been entrusted to keep it secret, whereas the public and the press have not.
As far as military advantage, we are made stronger by the military needing to stay ahead of the investigations of an open society. Because if private citizens can discover things from mere curiosity then foreign spy agencies most certainly can. If you care about military strength, attempts by the military to maintain superiority by lazily asserting control over civil society should concern you very much.
Seeing and disseminating info are two vastly different things.
Seeing something, vs taking a photograph, vs publishing a set of photographs are very different things.
Assembling a set of information, making a drawing, documenting in a more digestible form, analysis, those are all actions more related to leaking classified information than publishing info someone else found.
That distinction is what the laws are about. Plus, the legal conventions surrounding prior restraint are strong, but not absolute.
So, if you're talking about publishing a picture of the front of the Pentagon building, which thousands walk/drive by every day, fine. Using dozens of visitors to compile an architectural drawing of the interior locations of guarded rooms and publishing that? Not so much.
Inhibiting the compilation and free exchange of information is absolutely an inhibitor to adversaries. Even if they could technically see any of it publicly, it becomes insurmountable to see all of it publicly, or enough to compile an accurate picture.
That is why information is highly compartmentalized and distributed only on a need-to-know basis. I'm literally now working on components to a Navy machine that I can only guess what are the other parts and how they fit together. My parts aren't classified, but fall under CUI, Confidential Unclassified Info".
There's a very good reason that. E.g., even though you and I could walk to the door of every data center and power substation in the country, these things are kept obscure. Every data center I've seen is extremely nondescript. If you start assembling the exact location and configuration of every such installation, you'll soon and rightly see some friendly guys with FBI badges.
No professional pretends that this is an absolute protection, anymore than any professional pretends that an uncrackable safe can be built.
Of course a foreign spy agency could discover anything a curious citizen might. But they can't discover everything that every curious citizen might.
The point is to increase the workload and uncertainty for the adversaries.
Permitting open information compilation and publication at all times would dramatically reduce that workload, especially with the internet. So, look and be curious all you want. Just don't start compiling and publishing it.
And in this case, using drones to look "over the fence" into a USAF secret testing grounds should indeed get you targeted for investigation real quick, just as it would any foreign adversary's agent doing the same thing.
And no, it is not an argument that "stay[ing] ahead of the investigations of an open society" 'makes us stronger'. That is no more of an argument that curious hackers digitally wandering around some org's network will make them stronger. Yes, it is the responsibility of both to keep themselves secure, including employing white-hat hackers and such, but that doesn't mean that randos should be tolerated.
If you click the Notes tab it's right there. Executive Order 10104
Ex. Ord. No. 10104. Defining Certain Vital Military and Naval Installations and Equipment as Requiring Protection Against the General Dissemination of Information Relative Thereto
Ex. Ord. No. 10104, Feb. 1, 1950, 15 F.R. 597, provided: WHEREAS section 795 of title 18 of the United States Code provides: [Omitted.] AND WHEREAS section 797 of title 18 of the United States Code provides: [Omitted.] NOW, THEREFORE, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the foregoing statutory provisions, and in the interests of national defense, I hereby define the following as vital military and naval installations or equipment requiring protection against the general dissemination of information relative thereto: 1. All military, naval, or air-force installations and equipment which are now classified, designated, or marked under the authority or at the direction of the President, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of the Navy, or the Secretary of the Air Force as “top secret”, “secret”, “confidential”, or “restricted”, and all military, naval, or air-force installations and equipment which may hereafter be so classified, designated, or marked with the approval or at the direction of the President, and located within: (a) Any military, naval, or air-force reservation, post, arsenal, proving ground, range, mine field, camp, base, airfield, fort, yard, station, district, or area. (b) Any defensive sea area heretofore established by Executive order and not subsequently discontinued by Executive order, and any defensive sea area hereafter established under authority of section 2152 of title 18 of the United States Code. (c) Any airspace reservation heretofore or hereafter established under authority of section 4 of the Air Commerce Act of 1926 (44 Stat. 570; 49 U.S.C. 174) except the airspace reservation established by Executive Order No. 10092 of December 17, 1949.
Considering that this is pretty standard around all military installations, and that it took me about 10sec. to search "area 51 entry gate photos" and find a huge red "NO PHOTOGRAPHY" sign [0], and even one showing a citation of "18 USC 795" [1] among a brace of oth1er WARNING! signs, I'd characterize your attitude as, at best, damn foolish.
Yes, there is are very large amounts of things that the US Mil does in secret to maintain it's edge in the ability to fight off expansionist autocracies and be the arsenal of democracy. This is a very good thing, as without it, we'd be ruled already by the likes of Putin, Xi, or Un. People with a clue do NOT want access to TS+ info outside their role. But fools rush in ...
What's the case law on this? Has this been ruled constitutional? Looks like it was created in the run-up to WWII, and has only been modified to change the fine.
I'll refrain from expressing my opinion on what a load of horseshit the mere existence of this law is.
Ironically, the only reason you can so loudly make such a claim about the law is that the US military is sufficiently powerful over several generations to keep expansionist authoritarian governments at bay, even merely by supplying friends with our technology.
Maintaining the edge over expansionist authoritarian govts is essential to maintain democracy.
Maintaining that edge will necessarily involve controlling significant amounts of information.
The only horseshit I smell around here is an ignorant opinion loudly stated. But go right ahead and take some pics and publish them. Be sure to report back on the results.
There are a few variables to this. Are you a contractor or consultant (there is a difference). What you offer (warm body or solution). Location. Target companies size and industry sector. Economy status. Personal relationships with clients.
I started in '09 in the midst of the Great Recession, and did well. Companies were laying off, but still had projects needing done. Between 2010-2020, I also did well. 2020-now, I'm doing OK, but half the work, with regular (non-tech sector) clients have been worried about the economy, holding back on non-essential projects.
The biggest intangible though is how hard you're willing to go out and sell yourself. You have to have more than just knowledge, you have to have belief in what you're selling--which is yourself. If you can sell yourself, you'll do ok.
While remote work has made it easier and more prevalent, "hiring fraud" has been around forever. Especially in larger corporations, where interviewing was done by loosely associated teams, and the faces of all the in-person candidates blended together or were rapidly forgotten. I personally witnessed this 3 or 4 times back in the 90's, while an employee of a Fortune 5 company.
Contracting agencies were the worst with the bait-and-switch game though, even prior to H-1Bs.
Yes! I have a long-ish tenure at my current org (10+ years). I have had at least two co-workers in that time window who were clearly having someone else do their work assignments off-hours.
Honestly, it kind of worked for them. I was very naive about it and it took me a long time to realize that the reason both co-workers could not discuss technical issues at work (or "their" own code) was that they simply didn't know anything (and it wasn't "their" code). As far as I know, only a very small number of tech people suspected anything.
Health insurance costs.
Now, add to this: salaries and other benefits to both staff and educators. liability insurance. increased food costs. I'm certain facilities have increased costs also, from new construction to utilities. *Plus anything else I've left out.
Let's face it, everything has become more expensive. The Five Guys meal of a little cheeseburger, little fries, and regular drink which cost me $12 4 years ago in March, 2020 (I keep records), would cost me $17-18 today (I checked the prices today at noon and walked away). That's a 40-50% increase.
Why would we expect higher education to not be effected?