> weren't on their deathbeds with covid claiming it was a hoax

Have you treated many patients with COVID? I’ve heard the opposite of your claim from those who have.

People with first hand experience offering counterpoints like Dr Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi did but unfortunately their videos explaining their side of the story were conveniently removed from places your YouTube -- while conveniently leaving the videos remaining to hear the kind of stories you heard.

Step back a moment and ask yourself,

“How exactly would Dr Dan Erickson know if someone else’s patient said this?”

There was massive regional differences in how different parts of the country and even different parts of the same state responded to COVID.

Was this a yes or a no?

The issue was their extrapolation of their local keyhole perception to the entire country.

Flawed in many ways: https://www.acep.org/corona/COVID-19-alert/covid-19-articles...

> but I wondered why a petty thief thought she could get into the Agency.

It’s reassuring to know no one at the CIA has ever done anything wrong, like stealing fifty dollars.

Knowing someone had committed petty theft is at least a red flag. I can't blame an employer for considering it disqualifying when they have many equally qualified candidates without it. Even for a burger flipper, let alone a secret agent.

We know nothing about the situation. It's entirely possible that the person took $50 from their parent's purse as a child.

My parents used to love to tease me about the time I stole candy from the grocery store as a child. Is that a red flag?

If you don’t at least mention that damning fact on your polygraph, of course it is!

Since you asked: How old of a child?

Six or seven.

37. (/s)

> Knowing someone had committed petty theft is at least a red flag.

Not really, since everyone has done so. Even you.

Not getting caught for it on the other hand could be a positive.

I'm not sure what culture or friends you live around, but to believe everyone has thieved is disturbing. What other ills may you believe everyone does, and so do flippantly?

> but to believe everyone has thieved is disturbing.

No, it's fact. It's part of learning and growing up. You never stole anything in your life, not a piece of candy, nothing?

I genuinely have no memory of doing that.

Convenient.

The problem from the CIA's perspective isn't petty theft, it's getting caught.

I remember hearing you can't even get government clearance if you admit you have ever smoked weed. Incredible

Why would anyone believe this?

“basically nothing back at all,” or, “ the time value of money.”

We must differentiate between capital and land. They aren’t the same thing. OP is saying that his landlord is profiting off land. This is indeed doing nothing, and has nothing to do with the time value of money, in the sense that the time value of money is due to capital, not land.

This is a common misunderstanding. Henry George made it very clear in the 1890s where the distinction lies.

We really mustn’t

> your most socially competent engineer

Unfortunately, he’s already two of our SEs and the CTO and we’re starting to run low on coders.

What are we going to do when we need a customer success manager or a profserv team?

> administrative subpoenas - i.e. not reviewed by a real judge

I have some bad news for you about magistrates.

And yet ICE can't be bothered to reach even that low bar.

To be completely fair, neither of us is even a magistrate.

malice aforethought

> the whole capacity

Wouldn’t something like half of the panels be in shadow at any time?

Depends where you put them. The current vogue option is a sun-synchronous orbit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun-synchronous_orbit

polar orbit

There are only so many people who can make satellites; there are only so many things to make satellites out of; and there are only so many orbits to put them in. There are only so many reasons why a person might want a satellite. There are only so many ways of placing satellites in orbit and each requires some amount of energy, and we have access to a finite amount of energy over time.

Finally, if we limited ourselves to earth-based raw materials, we would eventually reach a point where the remaining mass of the earth would have less gravitational effect on the satellite fleet than the fleet itself, which would have deleterious effects on the satellite fleet.

Seven reasons are intuitive; I’m sure there are many others.

People can build a factory that makes satellites. And then a factory that makes factories to make satellites.

There is plenty of material in the solar system (see my other response), and plenty of orbits, and launch capability can scale with energy harvested so the launch rate can grow exponentially.

Lots of people will probably decide they don't want any more satellites. But it only takes a few highly determined people to get it done anyway.

>Just imbest[1] and it will grow exponentially.

That's how that argument sounds like, particularly when you hear it from someone who is as broke as it can be.

It's easy to type those ideas in a comment, or a novel, or a scientific paper ... bring them to reality, oh surprise! that's the hard part.

1: The dumb version to invest

> Finally, if we limited ourselves to earth-based raw materials, we would eventually reach a point where the remaining mass of the earth would have less gravitational effect on the satellite fleet than the fleet itself, which would have deleterious effects on the satellite fleet.

The Earth's crust has an average thickness of about 15-20 km. Practically we can only get at maybe the top 1-2 km, as drill bits start to fail the deeper you go.

The Earth's radius is 6,371 km.

So even if we could somehow dug up entire crust we can get to and flung it into orbit, that would barely be noticeable to anything in orbit.

Once you dig up the top kilometer of a planet's crust, what's under your feet? The next kilometer!

That would suck to do to Earth, but we can launch all of Mars's mass into the swarm.

> the lubricant

Are you absolutely, positively kidding me?