It exacerbates tensions within nations that bloody well need to be exacerbated. case in point, communication by twitter during the iran protests. And to accuse the internet of dividing people in the context of a discussion about the catholic freaking church is pretty bloody rich. yeah. the catholic church united people, under the fear of being burnt at the stake as a heretic for questioning its teachings.
oooh. dont forget north korea, laos, burma, so on and so forth. so im gonna say he probably doesnt. the reality is probably that theres asian countries with good standards of living, and some that are forsaken shitholes.
ill tell you how its gonna happen in china. bloody revolution. thats how it usually happens. nothing quite like mortal fear to make a government sit up and take notice of their downtrodden populace.
maybe if this opinion came from someone other than a person who has spent their entire life criticising films, and had actully made something within even his narrow definition of "art" i might respect it. but all this guy does is talk about art. he dosent make things. he dosent create. he just criticises. and right now, hes trolling. hes trolling cause hes a attention whore. and the best thing we can do is ignore him, after we tell him hes a old ass fuck whos had the inconsequential life of a middleman, and that he is so out of touch, he doesnt know how wrong he is.
i think hes trying to set himself up as some sort of self appointed arbiter of the "legitimacy" of other peoples pursuits through some self created definition of a widely used term. hes a self important wanker, and hes playing makebelieve authoritah. let him play his little games, if it pleases him. well all just ignore him.
you brought a tesla roadster, but your not a fan of elon musk. seriously? you do realise all that controversy at tesla was him doing what needed to be done to make tesla profitable. and hell. when someone actully puts hardware in space entirely off his own fortune, that makes me a fan.
ill tell you whats left for the shuttle. to get out of the way of the development of a real reusable launch system, thats not engineered to such fine tolerances that it needs to be rebuilt after every damn flight, ending up costing more than a expendable launch system. also, to gather dust in the national air and space museum. as a warning from history.
you assume in your statement, that those ideas on the drawing boards that have the sorts of g forces that kill humans, would be unsuitable for all the cargo, and not just humans. you are mistaken in that assumption.
the thing is, the moon is close enough to allow pretty much real time operation of remote controlled robots. we chuck some solar panels up there, a cnc machine, a small foundry, and tadaa, all the things you need to build a human habitable shelter. especially now that theyve found water on the moon.
well theres a federal election coming up in australia in november. i dont think his seat is up for election this term, but if there is a swing far enough in labors favor, he wont hold the balance of power anymore, and hence have little influence.
not gonna happen. for one, the speed of light is a pretty insurmountable barrier to practical remote operation. you just cant operate things in real time when the signal takes 5 minutes to get there. so it ends up that theres no substitute for a actual person there.
they bloody well should rewrite the laws of physics to allow that, you could have nuclear powered spaceships, that spin up gyros and dump the rotational inertia for reactionless thrust. damn symmetry.
some sort of polarised flip-down clipon covers for our normal glasses would be ideal for 3d movies, and some sort of flip-down shutter lcds for 3d lcd displays would be good as well,
what we need is a forge in space. and a metal shop. and a greenhouse. although you could probably build that from raw materials from whatever asteroid or small moon you land on. but most of all your gonna need ice.
no matter what the contract says, they should be sued for advertising that they provide 'internet' access when they effectively censor parts of the internet. not that im a lawyer or anything.
im currently on internode. and of all the broadband ISPs ive ever had (and ive had a few), it is by and far the best. the p2p speeds are fast, latency is low, and their freezone has abc's iview, and nasatv!
Slashdot Mirror
It exacerbates tensions within nations that bloody well need to be exacerbated. case in point, communication by twitter during the iran protests. And to accuse the internet of dividing people in the context of a discussion about the catholic freaking church is pretty bloody rich. yeah. the catholic church united people, under the fear of being burnt at the stake as a heretic for questioning its teachings.
oooh. dont forget north korea, laos, burma, so on and so forth. so im gonna say he probably doesnt. the reality is probably that theres asian countries with good standards of living, and some that are forsaken shitholes.
ill tell you how its gonna happen in china. bloody revolution. thats how it usually happens. nothing quite like mortal fear to make a government sit up and take notice of their downtrodden populace.
maybe if this opinion came from someone other than a person who has spent their entire life criticising films, and had actully made something within even his narrow definition of "art" i might respect it. but all this guy does is talk about art. he dosent make things. he dosent create. he just criticises. and right now, hes trolling. hes trolling cause hes a attention whore. and the best thing we can do is ignore him, after we tell him hes a old ass fuck whos had the inconsequential life of a middleman, and that he is so out of touch, he doesnt know how wrong he is.
i think hes trying to set himself up as some sort of self appointed arbiter of the "legitimacy" of other peoples pursuits through some self created definition of a widely used term. hes a self important wanker, and hes playing makebelieve authoritah. let him play his little games, if it pleases him. well all just ignore him.
you brought a tesla roadster, but your not a fan of elon musk. seriously? you do realise all that controversy at tesla was him doing what needed to be done to make tesla profitable. and hell. when someone actully puts hardware in space entirely off his own fortune, that makes me a fan.
key word there being "under incumbent methods". spacex seems to be doing it for a hell of a lot less.
heh. i lived in emerald, Queensland, in the early 90s too. and yes. its a really boring place to live.
ill tell you whats left for the shuttle. to get out of the way of the development of a real reusable launch system, thats not engineered to such fine tolerances that it needs to be rebuilt after every damn flight, ending up costing more than a expendable launch system. also, to gather dust in the national air and space museum. as a warning from history.
you assume in your statement, that those ideas on the drawing boards that have the sorts of g forces that kill humans, would be unsuitable for all the cargo, and not just humans. you are mistaken in that assumption.
the thing is, the moon is close enough to allow pretty much real time operation of remote controlled robots. we chuck some solar panels up there, a cnc machine, a small foundry, and tadaa, all the things you need to build a human habitable shelter. especially now that theyve found water on the moon.
id like to see a substance that directly converts electricity into foward momentum.
tell me about it. its like they looked at F1 and asked, "how can we make it more like NASCAR?". ewwww. rally ftw.
me too! i call my furnace "burning man"
well theres a federal election coming up in australia in november. i dont think his seat is up for election this term, but if there is a swing far enough in labors favor, he wont hold the balance of power anymore, and hence have little influence.
you, sir, just lost.
why a story is about 15 libraries of congress tall.
not gonna happen. for one, the speed of light is a pretty insurmountable barrier to practical remote operation. you just cant operate things in real time when the signal takes 5 minutes to get there. so it ends up that theres no substitute for a actual person there.
to be fair, youd probably use another planet to sling you in the right direction.
they bloody well should rewrite the laws of physics to allow that, you could have nuclear powered spaceships, that spin up gyros and dump the rotational inertia for reactionless thrust. damn symmetry.
some sort of polarised flip-down clipon covers for our normal glasses would be ideal for 3d movies, and some sort of flip-down shutter lcds for 3d lcd displays would be good as well,
what we need is a forge in space. and a metal shop. and a greenhouse. although you could probably build that from raw materials from whatever asteroid or small moon you land on. but most of all your gonna need ice.
oops. i meant iinet instead of internode. silly me.
no matter what the contract says, they should be sued for advertising that they provide 'internet' access when they effectively censor parts of the internet. not that im a lawyer or anything.
im currently on internode. and of all the broadband ISPs ive ever had (and ive had a few), it is by and far the best. the p2p speeds are fast, latency is low, and their freezone has abc's iview, and nasatv!