well, its a effective way to get everyones fingerprints on record, whether theyve commited a crime or not. its basically a way to sqeeze a great big brick over everyones privacy. and it also primes people to be more accepting of giving up biometric data for a government database.
what do you mean by abuse? do you mean welfare fraud? or working while still collecting welfare? cause thats abuse. not just plain collecting welfare. and what do you expect the people who dont meet whatever convoluted conditions you set for "demonstrably do something to get out of welfare" to do if they fail your 'conditions'? thats the thing. people who have never been unemployed are all too ready to string the unemployed up as scapegoats, they are easy targets to score cheap political points on, come election time. they "attached strings" to the welfare system in australia back in the 90s, and it has proven a abject failure. turns out jerking unemployed people around like puppets, with no hope of a job at the end of it, didnt help. it didnt bring back the manufacturing jobs from china, or the call centre jobs from india. it didnt stop robots replacing people on assembly lines. it turns out that society has as much a obligation to provide opportunity and jobs, as people have to look for those jobs. and kicking people when there down does not help.
all that claptrap about problems with safe nuclear waste disposal is bullshit. what the hell do you think we dug the nuclear material out of in the first place? if anything, by extracting energy from nuclear fission, we are reducing the total amount of nuclear material in the earth with nuclear power stations.
ok. i need to put a end to this. a launch loop is fucking ridiculous. you dont realize how difficult a problem it is to have 1000km of cable flying around in magnetic suspension in a vacuum at mach 25. and cornering at mach 25. and then hanging things off it to launch. nothings impossible, but this is really fucking close. and will end up a hell of a lot more expensive than conventional rockets.
the nuclear rocket would be nice, if people werent such pussies about nuclear material on a rocket.
the laser rocket design that heats up hydrogen with lasers from the ground with a heat exchanger is quite the excellent idea. most of the advantages of the nuclear approach with none of the political queasiness.
i personally like the idea of the rail launched scramjet first stage that flys back, with a reusable second stage that launches when the scramjet stage reaches the edge of the envelope.
ares and orion look like bits of pork projects from the shuttle sewn together into some hulking pig atrocity. shuttle solid rocket boosters, shuttle hydrogen tanks, shuttle engines. the idea of designing from a clean slate is endemic to the pork barrel nature of government aerospace cost plus subcontracting. thank fucking christ for elon musk is all i can say. he has the capital, and the vision, and, most importantly, no politicians meddling in what really is a engineering domain.
well in that case it would be the cost difference between a tv with the high refresh capabilities needed for 3d, and a equivalent size tv without those capabilities. which is only probably 100 - 200 dollars difference.
the term 'fusion bomb' is a little bit misleading. the deuterium is compressed by a normal fission explosion, leading to fusion, which provides a whole lot of neutrons which rain on the original fission explosion, which further fissions the uranium, thus increasing the yield.
we could always put the radioactive material back in the ground where we dug it up. i mean, its not like theres a net gain in radioactive material in a fission reactor. as for nixon wanting to pursue renewable strategies, that was just empty rhetoric. just like every other damn president.
well, they still cool the walls in this reactor, but thats because of the high energy neutrons the fusion reaction throws off. the plasma is still contained away from the walls by magnetic fields,
hey man, nothing like the south of france to keep a bunch of primadonna scientists happy. its much the same logic that went into the choosing of the main site for the manhattan project.
you have absolutely no idea what your talking about. the thing will be going at at least mach 1 at least when it leaves the rail. it dosent need that much wing at that speed to stay aloft. the only reason airplanes have large wings is so they can get off the ground at the low speeds nessecitated by runways. nevermind the fact that it will also be accelerating quickly up through the mach numbers. and what, you cant angle the track upwards? like up the side of a mountain perhaps?
as for a miracle in engine technology, the x-51 has sucessfully demonstrated the required scramjet technology already. tadaaa.
im pretty sure mach 25 is orbital velocity. which would make mach 6 a bit over 20% of the speed needed. which is more than 6%. and altitude dosent really even come into the equation. if your going mach 6 at 60k feet, your trajectory is gonna get you to the needed altitude for space anyway. the majority of energy needed for orbit is for lateral motion, not height.
Slashdot Mirror
well, its a effective way to get everyones fingerprints on record, whether theyve commited a crime or not. its basically a way to sqeeze a great big brick over everyones privacy. and it also primes people to be more accepting of giving up biometric data for a government database.
thats not 3ds fault. thats the fault of the director being a idiot.
Yes, minister.
what do you mean by abuse? do you mean welfare fraud? or working while still collecting welfare? cause thats abuse. not just plain collecting welfare. and what do you expect the people who dont meet whatever convoluted conditions you set for "demonstrably do something to get out of welfare" to do if they fail your 'conditions'? thats the thing. people who have never been unemployed are all too ready to string the unemployed up as scapegoats, they are easy targets to score cheap political points on, come election time. they "attached strings" to the welfare system in australia back in the 90s, and it has proven a abject failure. turns out jerking unemployed people around like puppets, with no hope of a job at the end of it, didnt help. it didnt bring back the manufacturing jobs from china, or the call centre jobs from india. it didnt stop robots replacing people on assembly lines. it turns out that society has as much a obligation to provide opportunity and jobs, as people have to look for those jobs. and kicking people when there down does not help.
corporations should be treated as the groups of people they are. not as a single 'person' in the eyes of the law.
you need a frontier to be a pioneer. and the only real frontier these days is space, and theres not too many people living there yet.
all that claptrap about problems with safe nuclear waste disposal is bullshit. what the hell do you think we dug the nuclear material out of in the first place? if anything, by extracting energy from nuclear fission, we are reducing the total amount of nuclear material in the earth with nuclear power stations.
you could buy a real hat for that price...
ok. i need to put a end to this. a launch loop is fucking ridiculous. you dont realize how difficult a problem it is to have 1000km of cable flying around in magnetic suspension in a vacuum at mach 25. and cornering at mach 25. and then hanging things off it to launch. nothings impossible, but this is really fucking close. and will end up a hell of a lot more expensive than conventional rockets. the nuclear rocket would be nice, if people werent such pussies about nuclear material on a rocket. the laser rocket design that heats up hydrogen with lasers from the ground with a heat exchanger is quite the excellent idea. most of the advantages of the nuclear approach with none of the political queasiness. i personally like the idea of the rail launched scramjet first stage that flys back, with a reusable second stage that launches when the scramjet stage reaches the edge of the envelope.
ares and orion look like bits of pork projects from the shuttle sewn together into some hulking pig atrocity. shuttle solid rocket boosters, shuttle hydrogen tanks, shuttle engines. the idea of designing from a clean slate is endemic to the pork barrel nature of government aerospace cost plus subcontracting. thank fucking christ for elon musk is all i can say. he has the capital, and the vision, and, most importantly, no politicians meddling in what really is a engineering domain.
well in that case it would be the cost difference between a tv with the high refresh capabilities needed for 3d, and a equivalent size tv without those capabilities. which is only probably 100 - 200 dollars difference.
thats a unfair comparison of the tangible monetary benefit of a solar array vs the intangible entertainment value of a 3d tv.
you would need staff, nay, crews, to literally "crews the VISTA"
the term 'fusion bomb' is a little bit misleading. the deuterium is compressed by a normal fission explosion, leading to fusion, which provides a whole lot of neutrons which rain on the original fission explosion, which further fissions the uranium, thus increasing the yield.
we could always put the radioactive material back in the ground where we dug it up. i mean, its not like theres a net gain in radioactive material in a fission reactor. as for nixon wanting to pursue renewable strategies, that was just empty rhetoric. just like every other damn president.
well, they still cool the walls in this reactor, but thats because of the high energy neutrons the fusion reaction throws off. the plasma is still contained away from the walls by magnetic fields,
hey man, nothing like the south of france to keep a bunch of primadonna scientists happy. its much the same logic that went into the choosing of the main site for the manhattan project.
even if the plan was mach 10 on the track, rocket sleds achieve mach 8.5 on tracks on the ground already.
you have absolutely no idea what your talking about. the thing will be going at at least mach 1 at least when it leaves the rail. it dosent need that much wing at that speed to stay aloft. the only reason airplanes have large wings is so they can get off the ground at the low speeds nessecitated by runways. nevermind the fact that it will also be accelerating quickly up through the mach numbers. and what, you cant angle the track upwards? like up the side of a mountain perhaps? as for a miracle in engine technology, the x-51 has sucessfully demonstrated the required scramjet technology already. tadaaa.
well the rail guided rocket sled speed record is mach 8.5: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_sled
im pretty sure mach 25 is orbital velocity. which would make mach 6 a bit over 20% of the speed needed. which is more than 6%. and altitude dosent really even come into the equation. if your going mach 6 at 60k feet, your trajectory is gonna get you to the needed altitude for space anyway. the majority of energy needed for orbit is for lateral motion, not height.
well apple is not often in the position where its oses have a large enough marketshare for any hackers to really bother with them.
if you got something to say, then damn well say it man. your vague insinuations are the way of the weasel.
quicktime is the new realplayer. NOOOOOOOOO
i hear assange also picks up stray puppies and stews them up. into puppy stew. with puppies in it.