|
|
And yet the US still gives 10's of millions of US dollars to India in the form of aid every year. More than a billion dollars over the last decade. Why is that?
BTW - Congrats on the Mars project! 
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
I find myself asking the same about the UK nowadays - India is becoming economically strong, I'll be more impressed when they deal with the appalling poverty in their own country.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Wasting absurd amounts of money on government programs without crashing the economy is one of the greatest sources of pride and joy in the USA. The US Government is like a showy tycoon who buys hundreds of luxury cars, yachts, and private jets as status symbols that he has no intention of ever even using once.
Burning only $74 million on a Mars mission is a sign of weakness on India's part. If they really wanted to be a bad-ass nation, they should have sent a Mars lander with AC, cruise control, a sun roof, oversized tires, and a load of other accessories that are absolutely pointess and absurdly expensive to build and blast into space.
|
|
|
|
|
Are you kidding ? You don't have a point to say anything about $74 million on a Mars.. BTW wasting 100 Million dollars on Gravity movie is that really worth ?
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the film grossed $274,084,951, making a handsome profit. The Mars mission, however, doesn't look like it will make a profit.
|
|
|
|
|
There is a reason for everything to do and it's not a movie or a joke they wanted to perform.
It's really strange that you think the Mars mission is about a profit thing. Do you have answers for the NASA's $671 million mars Maven mission ? Obviously they are not looking for any profit.
Well here's a link to know the objective of this mission, directly from ISRO
http://www.isro.org/pslv-c25/mission-objective.aspx[^]
Thanks,
modified 24-Sep-14 15:35pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't think it was about profit, but you seemed to think that the movie Gravity was a waste of money. I merely pointed out that your argument was fallacious.
Oh, and I assume that no further aid needs to be sent to India.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: you seemed to think that the movie Gravity was a waste of money
I, OTOH, think it was a waste of time.
I was so unenchanted with it that I can't even remember how it ended -- and I'll be damned if I'll give them more money, just to find out.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Labor is 8x cheaper in India. Hence $74 million vs. $671 million.
Besides, it'd be an egg on India's face (an American expression) if they spent $740 million when 68.7% of the country lives in poverty. Here, Clickity[^], Cickity[^] Meow
HERE's PROOF!
Today, NASA reviews each step of mission development closely, almost "to a fault," Betts said. That kind of attention to detail doesn't come cheap. Nor do American engineers. According to PayScale.com's global survey, aerospace engineers are paid a median annual salary of $9,773 in India, and almost eight times more — $75,940 — in the United States. Linky[^]
modified 24-Sep-14 18:13pm.
|
|
|
|
|
It looks like they don't have a common scene to spend $740 million, when the USA outsource software to India and almost every tiny hardware manufacturing to China 
Based on your link one interesting thing which I found out was NASA Choosing Atlas 5 Rocket to launch new mars orbiter. And the total launch service itself costed $187 million.
Quote: Each Atlas V rocket uses a Russian-built RD-180 engine burning kerosene and liquid oxygen to power its first stage and an American-built RL10 engine burning liquid hydrogen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V[^]
http://www.space.com/9392-nasa-chooses-atlas-5-rocket-launch-mars-orbiter.html[^]
modified 24-Sep-14 20:17pm.
|
|
|
|
|
yes we agree that Govt. needs to concentrate to improve our hardware manufacturing
Sankarsan Parida
|
|
|
|
|
Way to answer a different question!
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: "Are we alone in the universe?"
No, your are cruising with curiosity[^] 
|
|
|
|
|
"As missions go, Maven represents a Mercedes 'S' class to the Volkswagen that is MOM*," Pillai wrote. Linky[^]
There, now you know why it cost more!
*Mars Orbiter Mission, also known by the acronym MOM or the Hindi word Mangalyaan ("Mars-Craft")
|
|
|
|
|
The lack of quality manuals and documentation for developer tools greatly diminishes our ability to work well in subtle but important ways. Where's The Fine Manual?
|
|
|
|
|
In the movie Good Morning, Vietnam, Adrian Cronauer (Robin Williams) says "Yo, Sparky!"
MeThinks we need to change that up a bit to: Yo, Sharkey!
Eh, @Kent-Sharkey?!
|
|
|
|
|
hmmm, well I have been known to be snarky
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
In this study, we use the largely untapped research potential of Rosetta Code, a code repository of solutions to common programming tasks in various languages, to draw a fair and well-founded comparison of some programming languages. Your champion, for 40 years running...
|
|
|
|
|
I believe it. But concise code and performance aren't my top criteria. I would like to see comparison on maintainability and readability. Then again, those are quite subjective aren't they.  
|
|
|
|
|
'struth
I do think that Ruby would come up high on that again - it's remarkably readable code IMO. (And Perl would be locked in a box, wrapped in chains, and thrown into the ocean).
Doesn't mean it's perfect for every situation of course.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Good site that - I have bookmarked "ISAAC" and will be dropping it into one of my projects tomorrow.
On the other hand, since most of the reference code is in C first then translated into other languages some of the power of those other languages is lost. None of the C# examples seem to use the Task Parallel Library for example...
|
|
|
|
|
That's an interesting analysis; but I'm surprised that they found Java programs to be shorter than C# equivalents. Java's always felt more verbose to me, especially compared to newer version of .net. Has anyone looked at the rosettacode samples to have an idea why?
Also, the conventional wisdom is that Java's supposed to be somewhat faster to run than C#; and since I've seen that claim on an MS slide deck earlier this year (ranked languages from slow to develop but high performing to fast development but poor performing and put java between C# and C++) I'm reasonably confident about the correctness of conventional wisdom here.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
igPa atinLa is-a e-tha est-ba anguage-La. arBa one-na.
AssPa e-tha aconBa, easePla.
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft today launched the Microsoft Online Services Bug Bounty Program, offering security researchers rewards for submitted vulnerabilities. Coming soon: Microsoft declares bankruptcy
Urgle. Another URL mangled. Going to do these old-school today: http://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2014/09/23/microsoft-launches-online-services-bug-bounty-program-includes-office-365-rewards-starting-500/
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
