Both storage and production should be distributed as widely as possible. If half the homes in your neighborhood have solar panels, wind turbines, and on-site storage, then there will be much less need for the coal-fired "utility" plant to adjust to localized spikes.
Yes, distractions are everywhere these days. What I wonder is, will the new generation see this as "normal" background distraction? We have an entire generation now that don't remember a time before cell phones and the WWW. Presumably they are comfortable with this level of distraction, but does anyone have data on how this affects job performance?
I like to play kakuro while I watch (mostly listen to) the news in the morning. Muting all background tabs would make that more difficult. I would prefer having the option to mute all or some background tabs, or perhaps have a "whitelist" of sites allowed to make noise in the background.
If they minted actual currency that could be spent into the economy that would expand the money supply in a more tangible way. Whereas the single-$5T-coin idea would lack credibility, seeming like a "clever" parlour trick.
Yes they could do that, but nobody would accept such a coin. It's useless as a medium of exchange. But if they made the coins in denominations small enough to circulate, this scheme could scheme could actually work.
Exactly. Apparently SuperKendall hasn't heard the news that even supply-siders are abandoning the ridiculous Laffer Curve claims that tax cuts always increase revenues.
Current supply-side economics is primarily concerned with economic growth in general, and does not hold that decreasing taxes increases government revenue.... A 2003 piece on page A4 of the Wall Street Journal commented on a Congressional Budget Office report which concluded that taxes cannot be reduced without losing revenue, and declared the debate "ended". Economists remain divided concerning the conditions necessary to effect a revenue increase while cutting rate.
Sure, it may have worked when Kennedy dropped the top marginal rate from 89% down to 76%, or when Reagan cut it down to 70%, but we've reached the point where there's nothing more to be gained from further cuts. (Reform would be great, and could bring down the rate while increasing revenue, but just blindly cutting more won't help anything.)
Judging by economic performance, job growth, budget deficits and debt growth, I'd say Clinton came pretty close to hitting that optimal balance you describe. (Too bad he signed the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act though. What a disaster that turned out to be.)
Horseshit! The MMA was notorious for the underhanded, high-pressure way it was rammed through Congress by the Republican leadership. Perhaps this piece from Forbes will refresh your memory:
Consequently, when the legislation came up for its final vote on Nov. 22, 2003, it was failing by 216 to 218 when the standard 15-minute time allowed for voting came to an end.
What followed was one of the most extraordinary events in congressional history. The vote was kept open for almost three hours while the House Republican leadership brought massive pressure to bear on the handful of principled Republicans who had the nerve to put country ahead of party. The leadership even froze the C-SPAN cameras so that no one outside the House chamber could see what was going on.
Oh yeah (duh!) thanks. Sorry, with all the talk about the "gold standard" I jumped to that conclusion.
Still, that would take a lot of Pt, even if the coins were in $1k denominations. Does the statute require that they use pure Pt, or could they use an alloy or plate process?
Either way, I like this idea! It would be nice to see the gov't printing its own cash for a change, instead of borrowing all its money at interest from a private bank.
> the US just wants to SPEND MORE than its bringing in
If by "the US" you mean the Republican party, then yes. The current budget deficit comprises four major components:
1. The Bush tax cuts. 2. Medicare Part-D drug benefit (which prevents Medicare from negotiating bulk prices). 3. The two "unfunded" wars. 4. The 2008 recession (which severely reduced tax revenues, due to high unemployment).
Each of these is roughly 1/4th of the deficit. All were created, either intentionally or un-, by Bush-II, when he had control of both houses of Congress. (Although, arguably Clinton shares responsibility for the recession, for signing the repeal of Glass-Steagall.)
Not at the moment, but I grew up in Iowa, so I know all about cold winters. But I never thought it was that big a deal to run out and fire up the engine. Chances are you're going to have to scrape the windows anyway, so that's plenty of time to get the heater working. It might not be "toasty" in such a short time, but it'll be a lot better than being outside.
For that matter, what if it's so cold that your car doesn't start on the first try? Does it retry on its own, or do you have to send it another text msg? As you no doubt know, an older car often needs a little TLC to get started... does the software handle that for you?
My friend has an SUV with a phone-enabled car alarm system that calls him whenever the alarm gets tripped. Unfortunately, the alarm is so sensitive it often goes off whenever a heavy vehicle like a dump truck rumbles past. They've taken it to the dealer several times to get the thing adjusted, but it never seems to work.
I acknowledge that this "feature" would be useful for some people sometimes, but implementing it via SMS just screams all kinds of stupid.
Interesting, I've heard about these, but haven't used one yet. Still, one could argue that the "fob" is a key of sorts. In any case, you still need to "be there" to drive the car, and if a thief can open the door with a cell phone, he could probably drive away as well.
I wouldn't mind having a keypad/PIN-code system to use the car, but I'd want it to have at least an 8-digit password, and definitely NOT be accessible by wireless.
While unlocking my car with a txt msg is nifty and cool, I don't see the point. If I want to unlock the car, presumably I want to drive it. For that I'm going to need a key anyway, so...??
Sure, you can imagine a weird scenario where this would be useful... you locked your keys in the car, etc... but every time they add a new convenience (electric locks, electric windows) that's another failure point to deal with. Is it even possible to buy a new car without electric windows these days?
It's bad enough when the nifty features are analog devices, but when they cross the line into network-aware digital tech, the hazards increase exponentially.
Interesting idea. With the recent progress in commercial launch services, by 2020 it might even be economical for a private entity such as SpaceX to do the job on spec. Another poster (above) suggested selling it instead of ditching it, this would be a good tie-in with that idea.
My main concern would be the survivability of ISS and crew outside the Van Allen radiation belts. Also, just the sheer age of the thing after that long in space could be an issue. I don't have a good idea of how safe it would be at that point. But it sure seems a shame to just trash such an investment.
For that matter, you wouldn't have to go all the way to Luna, you could just bump it up to a higher orbit (say 5000mi) where it might be "safe" for a couple of decades without constantly needing a boost just to stay up.
No, but it did use a lot of shuttle pieces & parts (like SRB's) which would keep certain contractors flush with money.
I agree with the GP (Michael_gr) that it's nice to see SpaceX showing us how it should be done. The authors of this article are either ignorant of SpaceX or deliberately disregarding it. Notice that they published this piece in Politico, where many non-geek readers are likely to be unaware of SpaceX's success.
> In coming weeks we, with others committed to the HSF program, will offer a more detailed plan to return to flight.
So... what? Do they have a plan already, and the just aren't ready to tell us? Or are they still thinking about it? What's the point of even making an announcement like this if all you've got to say is a few extremely general talking points?
Basically, we have a TX congressman who wants to get the pork flowing back to his deep-pocket-donor pals in the military/industrial complex. [yawn]
Slashdot Mirror
I was thinking the same thing. Kinda ties in with the previous /. story about Why The US Will Lose a Cyber War.
It's tempting to deploy every new gadget that looks useful, but the military (rather, the gov't in general) has a spotty record in new-tech security.
Upmost is a b-grade peripherals manufacturer in Taiwan. I think you meant utmost instead. ;-)
Both storage and production should be distributed as widely as possible. If half the homes in your neighborhood have solar panels, wind turbines, and on-site storage, then there will be much less need for the coal-fired "utility" plant to adjust to localized spikes.
Yes, distractions are everywhere these days. What I wonder is, will the new generation see this as "normal" background distraction? We have an entire generation now that don't remember a time before cell phones and the WWW. Presumably they are comfortable with this level of distraction, but does anyone have data on how this affects job performance?
I like to play kakuro while I watch (mostly listen to) the news in the morning. Muting all background tabs would make that more difficult. I would prefer having the option to mute all or some background tabs, or perhaps have a "whitelist" of sites allowed to make noise in the background.
Played up or not, it is a problem.
If they minted actual currency that could be spent into the economy that would expand the money supply in a more tangible way. Whereas the single-$5T-coin idea would lack credibility, seeming like a "clever" parlour trick.
I agree completely. I don't think it's feasible to outlaw HFT, but I'd settle a STET tax to put a damper on it.
Well put, sir! Wish I had mod points...
Yes they could do that, but nobody would accept such a coin. It's useless as a medium of exchange. But if they made the coins in denominations small enough to circulate, this scheme could scheme could actually work.
Exactly. Apparently SuperKendall hasn't heard the news that even supply-siders are abandoning the ridiculous Laffer Curve claims that tax cuts always increase revenues.
Sure, it may have worked when Kennedy dropped the top marginal rate from 89% down to 76%, or when Reagan cut it down to 70%, but we've reached the point where there's nothing more to be gained from further cuts. (Reform would be great, and could bring down the rate while increasing revenue, but just blindly cutting more won't help anything.)
Judging by economic performance, job growth, budget deficits and debt growth, I'd say Clinton came pretty close to hitting that optimal balance you describe. (Too bad he signed the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act though. What a disaster that turned out to be.)
Horseshit! The MMA was notorious for the underhanded, high-pressure way it was rammed through Congress by the Republican leadership. Perhaps this piece from Forbes will refresh your memory:
Oh yeah (duh!) thanks. Sorry, with all the talk about the "gold standard" I jumped to that conclusion.
Still, that would take a lot of Pt, even if the coins were in $1k denominations. Does the statute require that they use pure Pt, or could they use an alloy or plate process?
Either way, I like this idea! It would be nice to see the gov't printing its own cash for a change, instead of borrowing all its money at interest from a private bank.
My only question: Does the US gov't happen to have $5T worth of platinum laying around somewhere? If not, how do they get around that minor obstacle?
> the US just wants to SPEND MORE than its bringing in
If by "the US" you mean the Republican party, then yes. The current budget deficit comprises four major components:
1. The Bush tax cuts.
2. Medicare Part-D drug benefit (which prevents Medicare from negotiating bulk prices).
3. The two "unfunded" wars.
4. The 2008 recession (which severely reduced tax revenues, due to high unemployment).
Each of these is roughly 1/4th of the deficit. All were created, either intentionally or un-, by Bush-II, when he had control of both houses of Congress. (Although, arguably Clinton shares responsibility for the recession, for signing the repeal of Glass-Steagall.)
That would explain the discrepancy between this report and all those others in recent years saying that climate change is actually turning out worse than the models predicted.
Not at the moment, but I grew up in Iowa, so I know all about cold winters. But I never thought it was that big a deal to run out and fire up the engine. Chances are you're going to have to scrape the windows anyway, so that's plenty of time to get the heater working. It might not be "toasty" in such a short time, but it'll be a lot better than being outside.
For that matter, what if it's so cold that your car doesn't start on the first try? Does it retry on its own, or do you have to send it another text msg? As you no doubt know, an older car often needs a little TLC to get started... does the software handle that for you?
My friend has an SUV with a phone-enabled car alarm system that calls him whenever the alarm gets tripped. Unfortunately, the alarm is so sensitive it often goes off whenever a heavy vehicle like a dump truck rumbles past. They've taken it to the dealer several times to get the thing adjusted, but it never seems to work.
I acknowledge that this "feature" would be useful for some people sometimes, but implementing it via SMS just screams all kinds of stupid.
Interesting, I've heard about these, but haven't used one yet. Still, one could argue that the "fob" is a key of sorts. In any case, you still need to "be there" to drive the car, and if a thief can open the door with a cell phone, he could probably drive away as well.
I wouldn't mind having a keypad/PIN-code system to use the car, but I'd want it to have at least an 8-digit password, and definitely NOT be accessible by wireless.
While unlocking my car with a txt msg is nifty and cool, I don't see the point. If I want to unlock the car, presumably I want to drive it. For that I'm going to need a key anyway, so...??
Sure, you can imagine a weird scenario where this would be useful... you locked your keys in the car, etc... but every time they add a new convenience (electric locks, electric windows) that's another failure point to deal with. Is it even possible to buy a new car without electric windows these days?
It's bad enough when the nifty features are analog devices, but when they cross the line into network-aware digital tech, the hazards increase exponentially.
Maybe they should just throw in the towel and hire LulzSec to handle their online security.
About 20yrs ago was when I saw the bumper sticker: "C code. C code run. Run code run! Run damnit run!"
Yeah, mostly on Linux boxes by old-fart gamers who need it to play Lode Runner or some other "legacy" diversion.
Interesting idea. With the recent progress in commercial launch services, by 2020 it might even be economical for a private entity such as SpaceX to do the job on spec. Another poster (above) suggested selling it instead of ditching it, this would be a good tie-in with that idea.
My main concern would be the survivability of ISS and crew outside the Van Allen radiation belts. Also, just the sheer age of the thing after that long in space could be an issue. I don't have a good idea of how safe it would be at that point. But it sure seems a shame to just trash such an investment.
For that matter, you wouldn't have to go all the way to Luna, you could just bump it up to a higher orbit (say 5000mi) where it might be "safe" for a couple of decades without constantly needing a boost just to stay up.
No, but it did use a lot of shuttle pieces & parts (like SRB's) which would keep certain contractors flush with money.
I agree with the GP (Michael_gr) that it's nice to see SpaceX showing us how it should be done. The authors of this article are either ignorant of SpaceX or deliberately disregarding it. Notice that they published this piece in Politico, where many non-geek readers are likely to be unaware of SpaceX's success.
> In coming weeks we, with others committed to the HSF program, will offer a more detailed plan to return to flight.
So... what? Do they have a plan already, and the just aren't ready to tell us? Or are they still thinking about it? What's the point of even making an announcement like this if all you've got to say is a few extremely general talking points?
Basically, we have a TX congressman who wants to get the pork flowing back to his deep-pocket-donor pals in the military/industrial complex. [yawn]