I agree with the sentiment, but if we’re going to make that argument based around professionalism, I would also have to argue that it’s not very professional to use that kind of language in a work setting.
So maybe this is a situation where both sides can grow.
6% is very conservative though. Even at 7%, which is a widely accepted inflation adjusted number, it’s over 2 mil.
Recent JD Vance interview went something like this:
Lulu Garcia-Navarro: “Senator, yes or no: Did Donald Trump lose the 2020 election?”
JD Vance: “Let me ask you a question. Is it OK that big technology companies censored the Hunter Biden laptop story, which independent analysts have said cost Trump millions of votes?”
Lulu Garcia-Navarro: “Senator Vance, I’m going to ask you again, did Donald Trump lose the 2020 election?”
JD Vance: “Did big technology companies censor a story that independent studies have suggested cost Trump millions of votes? I think that’s the question.”
🤔
Right…so we would be unable to retask it to observe something else that did not align with the satellite’s current orbital position. Seems like a pretty big limitation to me.
I like how the article discounts other deep space telescope ideas because they would require more advanced technology than we already possess…but then is like “but if we use the sun, all we have to do is send a whole bunch of spacecraft 3 times farther than the farthest thing we’ve ever sent”.
It’s an interesting idea. But even if we got the required satellites that far out, at that distance, how could you expect to aim this sun telescope? Or would it just be stuck with whatever it’s currently pointed at?
I miss Ginni! She was so much better.
That is a pretty big help financially… indirectly anyway.
Or aluminum
It may be more common among certain job types, but I don’t think that makes it professional behavior to do so regardless of the type of work.