Re: Throwing down the glove [was Re: Nanotech/Opensource: OpinionsNeeded.]

From: Spike Jones (
Date: Mon Jul 17 2000 - 21:57:22 MDT

> James Rogers wrote: Note
> that this type of accounting is how you apparently have the government
> spending $400 on a hammer and similar; they include the direct and
> indirect costs at all steps of acquisition/production rather than using
> the "on paper" purchase price....

Ja, except that this example is misleading. The famous $x00 hammer
that started the meme that the government was being wasteful, etc,
was a modal hammer, which is a device that looks a little like a hammer
but the similarities end there. It is not used for driving nails at all, but
has accelerometers mounted on it to measure resonances and vibration
modes. If you or I were to try to buy such a device that the government
bought for $x00, it would cost us twice as much since we dont purchase
in quantity. spike

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:34:50 MDT