WalterBright

It didn't work out too well for Christopher McCandless.

NASA couldn't do what spacex did, so NASA contracted the work out to spacex.

> twice in a row

If I ever hit a home run in baseball, it would be blind luck. If I did it twice, nah, that would be incredibly unlikely, as I have zero talent at any ball sports.

Gates, Jobs, and Musk - each had a home run 3 times. That is so unlikely to be happenstance, ya gotta admit they had talent.

Then we wouldn't have iphones and rockets.

Billionaires become that way by creating products and services that people are freely willing to pay for.

Nothing unethical about it.

There's nothing stopping other rocket companies from doing the same thing Musk is.

We already have NASA.

Companies spin off parts of their process into separate companies all the time. Auto and airframe companies are notable examples. If it was more profitable to do these in house, they would.

So we must break up a monopoly because it delivers more value at a lower cost than its competitors?

Musk initially started his rocket company by going to Russia and trying to buy Russian rockets. The Russians spat on his shoe.

The rest is history.

Jet engines, too.

LOL I get $0 compensation for my work.

Conduit is indeed a better idea, but it would have been too much work for me. I figured the bases were covered well enough with 4 cables to each destination - 2 cat5 and 2 rg6. The duality was in case one of the cables failed, or got a nail driven through it.

The problem is the beige plastic cases have all turned into the color of bile.

I have a friend who is a real estate agent for the wealthy. He laughs at the people who automate their homes. The automation inevitably fails, the vendor has disappeared, and the owner is faced with ripping all the wiring out of the walls and replacing it. Usually it gets replaced with conventional wiring.

When my home was built in 1999, I poured over all the home automation systems. I opted for conventional wiring. But I did wire every room (myself) with cat5 cable and RG6 coax, in a star configuration. It has served me very well, no problems at all.

I don't use the RG6 anymore, as my TV service comes over the intertoobs now. The cat5 isn't supposed to work with gigabit equipment, but it works fine. Wifi has improved by leaps and bounds, but I still rely on hardwired ethernet, as it is stupid reliable.

Typing in the code from a listing is one way I inadvertently learned to program.

The 747 had 4 independent hydraulic systems (one for each engine). There were still failures that took out all 4. What comes to mind is the one where the rear pressure bulkhead failed (due to a faulty repair), and the decompression took out the rudder and all 4 hydraulics.

The pilot no longer had flight controls. He desperately tried to control the airplane using variable thrust, but it just wasn't good enough, and crashed into a mountainside.

The fix was to add automatic valves in the lines so loss of pressure wouldn't bleed out the whole system.

The replies are all about workarounds for the law.

So what is the point of the law, if there are all these workarounds?

What if there was no job posting with a defined salary for A or B?

Sounds like lose-lose.

That would be making it difficult to adapt the job to fit the person.

And then the candidate sues claiming bait and switch.

I'm sure there are people who love working in the sewer, like Norton.

But I doubt there are enough to fill the need for them.

I contribute to open source. I made my peace long ago with someone using what I wrote to make money. (In fact, it pleases me if they make money off of it!)

If you contribute to open source, but get mad that someone is using it without paying you, then you did not contribute in good faith. It's like those religious cults who will press a "free" book on you, and then demand a "donation".

You can always walk away if you don't like the company's offer.

Sounds like a recipe for a lot of time and money wasted in court.

Sometimes companies create a specific position for an interviewee after getting to know the candidate. For example, a candidate might have an unexpected unusual skill.

The law seems to be about preventing negotiating.

How is that going to work if you interview Bob for X task at Y pay, but discover Bob would be much better suited for A task that is worth more salary? What if Bob didn't meet the requirements for X, but would be a perfect fit for B task that is not worth as much salary?

Somebody's got to do the dirty work, like fixing sewers. That's why we pay people, because they don't want to work for free.

And I speak as someone who has been contributing to open source for decades.

No, I am not going to mow someone else's lawn for free, unless they are a friend. And nobody is going to fix the blown head gasket on my car for free. Nor would I want them to.

Humans (likely) started out by trading favors. Then upgraded that with barter. Barter is pretty inefficient, so money was invented. A complex society cannot run on favors.

If curiosity wasn't good for us, we wouldn't have evolved it.

The point was that the PE cert is a low bar as an indication of competence.