How much do/can they use their own thrusters to change/correct their directions? I'm guessing it's just fractions of a degree? And needs to be extremely precise, done weeks? before reaching the next planet to slingshot around?
The Voyager probes were built with many course corrections and maneuvers in mind. They carried 100kg of Hydrazine fuel at launch, and it is almost all used up. That was about 1/8th of total craft mass at launch, which is significant.
Midcourse corrections are a standard and planned part of lots of probe missions.
I think we even did midcourse corrections for the moon missions.
I don’t but there was national news about this policy some days ago - they must exist because of the enormous volume (one third of all scams in US not to mention abroad) and the fact that they created this policy for a reason. Meta is a criminal empire
Pour a rink on someone's land. Play on basketball courts or blacktops instead of rinks. It's not the same, but walking to work surely wasn't the same as riding the bus. If you can't show them that you can live without them, they'll treat you like you're dependent on them.
Bonuses. Usually there is no penalty for failed referrals, so the more people they refer, the more likely someone gets hired and sticks around long enough for the bonus.
Wikipedia's first line is: "A startup or start-up is a company or project typically undertaken by an entrepreneur to seek, develop, and validate a scalable business model."
Then it has a notion of "growing large beyond the solo founder". But I argue that most of the time, this is just the story they tell to justify their losing money. As in: "we are not profitable YET, because we need to grow larger to reach the scale we need, hence you should give us more money".
> A startup can be profitable.
Is Logitech a startup? They (or at least not so long ago) call themselves a startup. I disagree: it's an established company.
If a company of 20 employees has been profitable for 10 years and doesn't grow, would you call it a startup? If it is profitable and keeps growing while staying profitable, wouldn't you say it's "expanding"?
Now if that company of 20 employees suddently gets a big funding to try to become a company of 2000 and goes into a state where it may well bankrupt in the next 2 years if it fails, then I would again consider it a startup: it's "trying a completely new business model" (one that works for 2000 employees instead of 20, probably with the goal of making the leadership rich).
Another thing is that startups usually tend to be those Ponzi schemes where employees are badly treated but get not-so-worthy stock options (that may compensate someday for the bad conditions, but often don't) while the founders get a shot at getting rich. If your company is profitable and stable, it's much harder to do: how would you justify the bad conditions if you could actually afford better ones?
But of course, saying that you are a startup is "cool", which is exactly why Logitech was saying it though they were one of the big tech companies in the world.
Taking this more seriously than it perhaps deserves: if that’s true, why isn’t widespread adoption of this approach growing?
Whether or not it’s a good idea, “realistic” implies practicality, which could presumably be measured by whether people find it worthwhile to do the thing.
I suppose it depends on what you're protecting, who's out there to get you, and how boring and time consuming it is to clean up after a breach (can't that take weeks or months), etc.
Aren't you're a bit asking "When X transportation method isn't used by everyone, can it really be any good?" :-)
Not having half of your kids die, could be one thing:
"For most of human history, around 1 in 2 newborns died before reaching the age of 15. By 1950, that figure had declined to around one-quarter globally. By 2020, it had fallen to 4%."
