I just discovered the existence of Cortana a few weeks ago while visiting my parents. Dad wanted a backup PC, something I could use while visiting, so we spent around $300 on a Dell laptop with Win-10 installed. My very first Google search on that machine was: "how to make cortana shut up forever".
After using Linux almost exclusively for over 20 years, these brief forays into Win-world are quite jarring. I don't know how people can stand it.
All this depends on Tesla being able to get the damn things produced and delivered to customers. The Model 3 production ramp up has been much slower than Elon predicted, but it is steadily improving, even as TSLA stock takes a beating (mostly due to Elon's regrettable antics on social media). Ironically, Elon's bold claims are probably more to blame than Tesla's actual performance. In any other context, a 100% increase in production in one year would be seen as quite strong, but because they keep failing to meet Elon's projections, they keep getting criticized by analysts.
Ultimately, I think they will get over this hump, but "production hell" is going to continue for a good while yet. Ramping up to high-volume production of automobiles is a unique challenge for Elon, and building a production line in tents has an unpleasant aroma of desperation.
It probably depends on how many corrupt members of congress the big old firms can buy and whether its enough to defeat the policy change.
Methinks the definition of "reusable" is about to get very flexible. The legacy contractors will take many years to develop and deploy reusability on anything remotely approaching the level SpaceX has already achieved. That said, however, even SpaceX is still throwing away their upper stages. We'll have to wait for BFR (or maybe Skylon) to get a fully reusable ride to space.
At first China will just demand a token governor be appointed, with only ceremonial powers, as symbolic recognition.
This would be a non-starter in Taiwan. The people have always favored the "status-quo" (as opposed to outright independence) simply to avoid friction with the mainland. But they chafe at this sort of diplomatic isolation, such as participating in the Olympics as "Chinese Taipei". The more the PRC pushes, the more they push the Taiwanese people away. I find it difficult to imagine any sort of "unification" beyond a superficial "Greater-China Federation" agreement wherein PRC and ROC are co-equal partners. Anything that smacks of control from the mainland will be resoundingly rejected by the population.
I don't pretend to know how all this will work out in the long run, and I would be skeptical of anyone who claims to know.
I'd be interested to see what role vitamin D3 plays as well. It would be easy to test serum levels of D3 before and after the trial, and see if there's any correlation in the results.
The problem is volatility. These things don't happen in nice, smooth supply/demand curves. Even a 2% drop in demand would wreak havoc on the market... as some suppliers go offline (or bankrupt) the price spikes again, and you get a yoyo effect that could spiral out of control. The "light tight" oil coming out of these fracking plays is not a drop-in replacement for West Texas crude, it's a different product with very different economics -- with EROEI in the single digits, and most producers leveraged to the gills, not covering much more than their operating costs, even at $60/bbl. The whole business is a house of cards.
My question is: will the transaction time be an issue? I haven't been following crypto-currencies very closely, but the impression I got was that this was becoming an obstacle. Has that issue been solved already?
Maybe I've just grown cynical from recent history, but my first reaction to this headline was: "I wonder what angle the pharmaceutical companies are trying to push here."
My second thought is: If you spent half as much on security as you do on advertising, this story would never have happened.
preferring an industry whose workforce doesn't want to adapt or change
More to the point, it's about preferring any policy option that will make liberals cry. If they actually gave a crap about reality, they'd be pushing investment in infrastructure and human capital to accelerate the transition to a sustainable economy (kinda like China is doing). But no, this is just pure, spiteful politics to gin-up their base and ass-kiss their donors. Not much to see here...
Yes. This is basically just a desperate attempt to keep SLS relevant (sorta) long enough to keep the money flowing for a few more years before SpaceX makes this colossal waste of money so obvious that it can no longer be tolerated, even by an utterly supine Congress.
Still wondering why the uber-geek who sent a car beyond Mars orbit with "DON'T PANIC!" on the dashboard didn't name his satellite swarm "Skynet" instead. Somebody else must already have the trademark.
The AP apocalypse is already upon us, meaning artificial persons -- and no, I don't mean Bishop from Aliens, I'm talking about corporations, which are considered artificial persons under the law. The Supreme Court, in its very finite wisdom, granted corporations "equal protection" under the 14th Amendment, which gives them to right to "speak" (ie: spend money) in elections and on lobbyists. They have already taken more-or-less complete control of the US government.
Our only hope is to end corporate personhood with a constitutional amendment, stating clearly that corporations are not people and money is not speech.
A couple of groups that are working on this issue now: MoveToAmend.org and Wolf-PAC.com
The real hazard that concerns me is Elon himself, or rather his wealth and fame, both of which make him an attractive target for enterprising trial lawyers. As I said, I'm sure he made certain it's all legal, but this is essentially a toy weapon that actually works. That is skating closer to the edge than most products you can buy. And a lot of "safe" products generate lawsuits too.
In any case, bad accidents are bad PR, and Elon doesn't need more of that. So I hope nothing like that happens. That is all.
While I can definitely appreciate Elon's twisted sense of humor, I am concerned about liability in this latest "venture" of his. I'd assume he's had a team of lawyers cover his ass nine ways from Sunday, but all it would take is one high-visibility mishap -- say, a fatal kindergarten fire -- to spoil the fun for everybody. I'd hate to see something like that get in the way of all the other good things he's doing.
BTW, I'm bummed that I didn't order a Boring Co. hat in time.:-(
Assuming you're serious... You seem to be confusing habitat overrun (a regional phenomenon) with global warming. AFAIK nobody knows for sure what brought down the Mayan civilization, but most people figure they grew too big too fast and cut down all the trees, etc.. That's not good behavior, certainly, but calling it "global warming" is way off base.
Plants are just one part of the system, soil is the more important factor. Herbivores and other fauna convert the one to the other. As years go by, and more new topsoil is added, the previous years' topsoil gets buried deeper and deeper. From what I gather, there is some debate about how long the carbon remains "sequestered" in such soil deposits, but the general consensus seems to be at least a few centuries.
Re-greening the desert is actually one of the most effective ways to sequester CO2, and it can be done with a lot less water than most of us would assume. Both Joel Salatin and Allan Savory have stated that large scale adoption of managed intensive rotational grazing (MIRG) could re-sequester all the CO2 we've added to the atmosphere since the industrial revolution within a couple of decades.
In a nutshell, well managed herbivores help keep the soil healthy, and actually increase the topsoil layer. More soil stores more carbon, as does healthier soil, so it's a double win. A triple win if you consider the healthier livestock -- grazing outdoors instead of crammed into factory feedlot "farms". More and healthier soil also retains more water, helping to alleviate the looming water crisis.
Slashdot Mirror
I just discovered the existence of Cortana a few weeks ago while visiting my parents. Dad wanted a backup PC, something I could use while visiting, so we spent around $300 on a Dell laptop with Win-10 installed. My very first Google search on that machine was: "how to make cortana shut up forever".
After using Linux almost exclusively for over 20 years, these brief forays into Win-world are quite jarring. I don't know how people can stand it.
All this depends on Tesla being able to get the damn things produced and delivered to customers. The Model 3 production ramp up has been much slower than Elon predicted, but it is steadily improving, even as TSLA stock takes a beating (mostly due to Elon's regrettable antics on social media). Ironically, Elon's bold claims are probably more to blame than Tesla's actual performance. In any other context, a 100% increase in production in one year would be seen as quite strong, but because they keep failing to meet Elon's projections, they keep getting criticized by analysts.
Ultimately, I think they will get over this hump, but "production hell" is going to continue for a good while yet. Ramping up to high-volume production of automobiles is a unique challenge for Elon, and building a production line in tents has an unpleasant aroma of desperation.
It probably depends on how many corrupt members of congress the big old firms can buy and whether its enough to defeat the policy change.
Methinks the definition of "reusable" is about to get very flexible. The legacy contractors will take many years to develop and deploy reusability on anything remotely approaching the level SpaceX has already achieved. That said, however, even SpaceX is still throwing away their upper stages. We'll have to wait for BFR (or maybe Skylon) to get a fully reusable ride to space.
At first China will just demand a token governor be appointed, with only ceremonial powers, as symbolic recognition.
This would be a non-starter in Taiwan. The people have always favored the "status-quo" (as opposed to outright independence) simply to avoid friction with the mainland. But they chafe at this sort of diplomatic isolation, such as participating in the Olympics as "Chinese Taipei". The more the PRC pushes, the more they push the Taiwanese people away. I find it difficult to imagine any sort of "unification" beyond a superficial "Greater-China Federation" agreement wherein PRC and ROC are co-equal partners. Anything that smacks of control from the mainland will be resoundingly rejected by the population.
I don't pretend to know how all this will work out in the long run, and I would be skeptical of anyone who claims to know.
I'd be interested to see what role vitamin D3 plays as well. It would be easy to test serum levels of D3 before and after the trial, and see if there's any correlation in the results.
Sorry, I was unclear there... I meant a persistent drop of 2%, not a temporary fluctuation.
+1 Informative
The problem is volatility. These things don't happen in nice, smooth supply/demand curves. Even a 2% drop in demand would wreak havoc on the market... as some suppliers go offline (or bankrupt) the price spikes again, and you get a yoyo effect that could spiral out of control. The "light tight" oil coming out of these fracking plays is not a drop-in replacement for West Texas crude, it's a different product with very different economics -- with EROEI in the single digits, and most producers leveraged to the gills, not covering much more than their operating costs, even at $60/bbl. The whole business is a house of cards.
Falling asleep in class would be a huge loss of, umm... prestige?
My question is: will the transaction time be an issue? I haven't been following crypto-currencies very closely, but the impression I got was that this was becoming an obstacle. Has that issue been solved already?
Why don't they just skip the fuel densification for crewed flights? Even without it, the F9 would still have plenty of lift to put a Dragon-2 in LEO.
Y is to X as 3 is to S (model Y is a cheaper crossover for the mid-price market).
Maybe I've just grown cynical from recent history, but my first reaction to this headline was: "I wonder what angle the pharmaceutical companies are trying to push here."
My second thought is: If you spent half as much on security as you do on advertising, this story would never have happened.
preferring an industry whose workforce doesn't want to adapt or change
More to the point, it's about preferring any policy option that will make liberals cry. If they actually gave a crap about reality, they'd be pushing investment in infrastructure and human capital to accelerate the transition to a sustainable economy (kinda like China is doing). But no, this is just pure, spiteful politics to gin-up their base and ass-kiss their donors. Not much to see here...
But it's all about money and jobs,
Yes. This is basically just a desperate attempt to keep SLS relevant (sorta) long enough to keep the money flowing for a few more years before SpaceX makes this colossal waste of money so obvious that it can no longer be tolerated, even by an utterly supine Congress.
Best of luck to them...
Still wondering why the uber-geek who sent a car beyond Mars orbit with "DON'T PANIC!" on the dashboard didn't name his satellite swarm "Skynet" instead. Somebody else must already have the trademark.
The AP apocalypse is already upon us, meaning artificial persons -- and no, I don't mean Bishop from Aliens, I'm talking about corporations, which are considered artificial persons under the law. The Supreme Court, in its very finite wisdom, granted corporations "equal protection" under the 14th Amendment, which gives them to right to "speak" (ie: spend money) in elections and on lobbyists. They have already taken more-or-less complete control of the US government.
Our only hope is to end corporate personhood with a constitutional amendment, stating clearly that corporations are not people and money is not speech.
A couple of groups that are working on this issue now: MoveToAmend.org and Wolf-PAC.com
Bishop was in Aliens (1986), it was Ash in the first movie.
The real hazard that concerns me is Elon himself, or rather his wealth and fame, both of which make him an attractive target for enterprising trial lawyers. As I said, I'm sure he made certain it's all legal, but this is essentially a toy weapon that actually works. That is skating closer to the edge than most products you can buy. And a lot of "safe" products generate lawsuits too.
In any case, bad accidents are bad PR, and Elon doesn't need more of that. So I hope nothing like that happens. That is all.
While I can definitely appreciate Elon's twisted sense of humor, I am concerned about liability in this latest "venture" of his. I'd assume he's had a team of lawyers cover his ass nine ways from Sunday, but all it would take is one high-visibility mishap -- say, a fatal kindergarten fire -- to spoil the fun for everybody. I'd hate to see something like that get in the way of all the other good things he's doing.
BTW, I'm bummed that I didn't order a Boring Co. hat in time. :-(
I couldn't help noticing the ironic word-wrap on the first line of your post:
Indeed. The majority of people are self-centered, self-absorbed, and self-important. As such people are not interested in introspection,
Assuming you're serious... You seem to be confusing habitat overrun (a regional phenomenon) with global warming. AFAIK nobody knows for sure what brought down the Mayan civilization, but most people figure they grew too big too fast and cut down all the trees, etc.. That's not good behavior, certainly, but calling it "global warming" is way off base.
Plants are just one part of the system, soil is the more important factor. Herbivores and other fauna convert the one to the other. As years go by, and more new topsoil is added, the previous years' topsoil gets buried deeper and deeper. From what I gather, there is some debate about how long the carbon remains "sequestered" in such soil deposits, but the general consensus seems to be at least a few centuries.
Re-greening the desert is actually one of the most effective ways to sequester CO2, and it can be done with a lot less water than most of us would assume. Both Joel Salatin and Allan Savory have stated that large scale adoption of managed intensive rotational grazing (MIRG) could re-sequester all the CO2 we've added to the atmosphere since the industrial revolution within a couple of decades.
In a nutshell, well managed herbivores help keep the soil healthy, and actually increase the topsoil layer. More soil stores more carbon, as does healthier soil, so it's a double win. A triple win if you consider the healthier livestock -- grazing outdoors instead of crammed into factory feedlot "farms". More and healthier soil also retains more water, helping to alleviate the looming water crisis.
Yup. That's why I described this sort of theorizing as a modern-day cargo cult in my original post.