So we can double federal taxes (and likely make them more progressive) and in return, nobody goes homeless or wonders where their next meal is coming from, or ends up indigent over medical bills again. Meanwhile, we can eliminate the minimum wage, food stamps, welfare, etc etc. and the massive bureaucracy behind them (and so, re-capturing some of the costs of the basic income).
Yes, your taxes will go up but you'll get a fair bit back and you can slash your health insurance costs. Given that (based on actual figures from other countries) the added bargaining power in healthxare can cut the total cost to 25% of what we pay on average now, you could even come out ahead.
They already allow the banks at the top of the chain to just wish money into existence so they can make even more money demanding interest on it. Why not wish the money in at the bottom of the pile where it will actually fuel the economy that keeps the country running rather than the non-productive swapping of game tokens?
Yep, gotta get a jump on the excuses now so it won't be so embarrassing when it works and you continue demanding that the poor deserve it for not getting a small $1,000,000 from their dads.
Again, it's not about claims. They won't even be able to sell them if they tell the customer "I'm not sure what that is or what it does but it's $40 if you want it". It's about the ability to sell it at all. Same for the e-liquids.
According to the FDA, helping a customer put the battery in the device constitutes "manufacturing" and is now forbidden. I'm not kidding!
Do chemicals from the battery leach into the vapor?
No, as a matter of fact they don't. Have you even seen one? They're standard batteries used in high end flashlights and RC cars and planes. Also used in laptops. The battery is not in the airstream that produces the vapor.
These are the very devices that have been used for years by millions without a problem.
If only. What the FDA said is that without testing that is expected to cost a million dollars per model, they will not be allowed to sell e-cigs AT ALL. When you consider that the only e-cigs worth using are sold by small businesses, that million dollars is well out of reach.
The FDA has "deemed" that even the general purpose 18650 battery that goes in an e-cig will be considered a tobacco product!
By refuted I mean the early experiments in China that were not done in a vacuum. Their thrust measurements were orders of magnitude greater than the results in any of the experiments that were done in vacuum.
So fatally flawed, not refuted. I'll leave it at that since I can't prove my suspicions there. But what does that have to do with the question at hand?
When you look at all the experiment results combined, it actually looks worse than any single experiment because while each of them measured some unaccounted for thrust, the results are not consistent across experiments
Different setups produced different results? You don't say! But nevertheless, you're willing to mash it all together in order to generate the meaningless mismash data you needed to see? Shocking!
Meanwhile, researchers trying to push the noise floor down to get a less ambiguous signal? The audacity of those quacks! They have some nerve trying to get a clear signal out of a science experiment!
As for the space thing, I consider that a bit premature, but since it's a private effort, I have no problem with him trying.
Credulous? No. I am not a true believer. I am a Septic. That is, I reserve judgement. Perhaps it's a thing and perhaps it's not. There is a paper about to come out claiming positive results. I'd like to read it before passing judgement.
Someone who claims it is not and cannot be a thing without even reading the paper is not a skeptic.
Absolutely agreed. From the theoretical side, the EmDrive should be among the hotytest topics out there. Compared to LHC or a neutrino detector, the tests can be done for pocket change, involve perfection of measurement techniques and offer a huge mystery as a prize. It should be nearly irresistible.
And if we had a sensible and functional regulatory body, I would be happy to see it at work, but as long as we have bought out ass-clowns, I would prefer them toothless.
What makes you so certain it will fail spectacularly? It hasn't so far. Worst case, we learn valuable lessons about how to avoid another whole class of experimental error. Shouldn't you at least read the upcoming paper before deciding? After all, that money is already spent.
As for the military, it spends more every single day to blow up a single tent in the desert.
That's one reason I would like to see the FDA demoted to an advisory only capacity. It would at least limit the damage they can cause when they decide it's time for someone else to kiss their ass and lick their boots.
I would have no objection to the FDA demanding accurate labeling including "This product contains chemicals that have not been proven safe for human use and have no proven benefit" and let the people decide from there.
Personally, I avoid "antibacterial" soaps. I have known for a long time that they probably do more harm than good. But at the same time, the FDA has screwed up enough as it is without allowing it to expand it's reach ever further. Do we really want soap and foods to become as expensive as drugs?
I am far from one of those anti any kind of regulation people but I do believe that regulation needs to be sensible and make an effort to minimize impact. The FDA has in general proven incapable of that.
In some ways the goalposts have moved but not in a simple linear progression. Because of technology, the poor can have cheap TVs and phones. But in trade, they now cannot afford a place to call home. If they tried the popular solution from the middle ages of pick out an un-occupied spot and build a house, the city would come arrest them and bulldoze the place. They can no-longer make a job for themselves by planting on the commons and selling whatever surplus they grow (In many places, you are not even permitted to plant crops on the land you own).
An income is no longer optional, but the ability to have an income is not guaranteed.
As has always been the case, the nobility doesn't trouble itself with these things.
I think he means the hard cover on the battery instead of it being a soft battery contained within material like a thick plastic bag like they use for non-replacable batteries now.
Personally, I have no desire to chop onions with the edge of my phone and would prefer that it be thick enough to not stress the glass when I sneeze so I see no problem with a proper replaceable battery.
To me, replaceable battery is a must. I will keep my old phone (now on it's second battery) until it fails or the new phones offer that valuable feature.
Absolutely nobody actually involved in any of the experiments has made any such claim. Stop spreading FUD.
The claim is that when power is applied, a propulsive force is measured. I see no reason to believe that deeper observation and understanding won't find the equal and opposite reaction.
So while you're sitting in the corner punching yourself in the forehead shouting "IMPOSSIBLE!", we'll be looking to see if this is a thing (or at least watching the people confirming that this is a thing) and how useful it might be.
Slashdot Mirror
So we can double federal taxes (and likely make them more progressive) and in return, nobody goes homeless or wonders where their next meal is coming from, or ends up indigent over medical bills again. Meanwhile, we can eliminate the minimum wage, food stamps, welfare, etc etc. and the massive bureaucracy behind them (and so, re-capturing some of the costs of the basic income).
Yes, your taxes will go up but you'll get a fair bit back and you can slash your health insurance costs. Given that (based on actual figures from other countries) the added bargaining power in healthxare can cut the total cost to 25% of what we pay on average now, you could even come out ahead.
So how long did you spend studying the 'hood to come to that conclusion? Did you actually talk to anyone there?
You're not basing it on what you saw on TV, are you?
They already allow the banks at the top of the chain to just wish money into existence so they can make even more money demanding interest on it. Why not wish the money in at the bottom of the pile where it will actually fuel the economy that keeps the country running rather than the non-productive swapping of game tokens?
Really? That's the best you can come up with?
Yep, gotta get a jump on the excuses now so it won't be so embarrassing when it works and you continue demanding that the poor deserve it for not getting a small $1,000,000 from their dads.
Again, it's not about claims. They won't even be able to sell them if they tell the customer "I'm not sure what that is or what it does but it's $40 if you want it". It's about the ability to sell it at all. Same for the e-liquids.
According to the FDA, helping a customer put the battery in the device constitutes "manufacturing" and is now forbidden. I'm not kidding!
Do chemicals from the battery leach into the vapor?
No, as a matter of fact they don't. Have you even seen one? They're standard batteries used in high end flashlights and RC cars and planes. Also used in laptops. The battery is not in the airstream that produces the vapor.
These are the very devices that have been used for years by millions without a problem.
Stupid or excessive regulation bad, vote 3rd party!
If only. What the FDA said is that without testing that is expected to cost a million dollars per model, they will not be allowed to sell e-cigs AT ALL. When you consider that the only e-cigs worth using are sold by small businesses, that million dollars is well out of reach.
The FDA has "deemed" that even the general purpose 18650 battery that goes in an e-cig will be considered a tobacco product!
By refuted I mean the early experiments in China that were not done in a vacuum. Their thrust measurements were orders of magnitude greater than the results in any of the experiments that were done in vacuum.
So fatally flawed, not refuted. I'll leave it at that since I can't prove my suspicions there. But what does that have to do with the question at hand?
When you look at all the experiment results combined, it actually looks worse than any single experiment because while each of them measured some unaccounted for thrust, the results are not consistent across experiments
Different setups produced different results? You don't say! But nevertheless, you're willing to mash it all together in order to generate the meaningless mismash data you needed to see? Shocking!
Meanwhile, researchers trying to push the noise floor down to get a less ambiguous signal? The audacity of those quacks! They have some nerve trying to get a clear signal out of a science experiment!
As for the space thing, I consider that a bit premature, but since it's a private effort, I have no problem with him trying.
Credulous? No. I am not a true believer. I am a Septic. That is, I reserve judgement. Perhaps it's a thing and perhaps it's not. There is a paper about to come out claiming positive results. I'd like to read it before passing judgement.
Someone who claims it is not and cannot be a thing without even reading the paper is not a skeptic.
Just because all of the experiments thus far have either failed or been refuted
Citation please. ALL? And by refutation, you mean something beyond, "Nahhhh, can't be" but rather "You made a math error and here it is"?
Absolutely agreed. From the theoretical side, the EmDrive should be among the hotytest topics out there. Compared to LHC or a neutrino detector, the tests can be done for pocket change, involve perfection of measurement techniques and offer a huge mystery as a prize. It should be nearly irresistible.
And if we had a sensible and functional regulatory body, I would be happy to see it at work, but as long as we have bought out ass-clowns, I would prefer them toothless.
What makes you so certain it will fail spectacularly? It hasn't so far. Worst case, we learn valuable lessons about how to avoid another whole class of experimental error. Shouldn't you at least read the upcoming paper before deciding? After all, that money is already spent.
As for the military, it spends more every single day to blow up a single tent in the desert.
RTFA
That's one reason I would like to see the FDA demoted to an advisory only capacity. It would at least limit the damage they can cause when they decide it's time for someone else to kiss their ass and lick their boots.
I would have no objection to the FDA demanding accurate labeling including "This product contains chemicals that have not been proven safe for human use and have no proven benefit" and let the people decide from there.
Personally, I avoid "antibacterial" soaps. I have known for a long time that they probably do more harm than good. But at the same time, the FDA has screwed up enough as it is without allowing it to expand it's reach ever further. Do we really want soap and foods to become as expensive as drugs?
I am far from one of those anti any kind of regulation people but I do believe that regulation needs to be sensible and make an effort to minimize impact. The FDA has in general proven incapable of that.
Absolutely! In fact, the FDA is now hard at work trying to get people who vape to go back to smoking.
In some ways the goalposts have moved but not in a simple linear progression. Because of technology, the poor can have cheap TVs and phones. But in trade, they now cannot afford a place to call home. If they tried the popular solution from the middle ages of pick out an un-occupied spot and build a house, the city would come arrest them and bulldoze the place. They can no-longer make a job for themselves by planting on the commons and selling whatever surplus they grow (In many places, you are not even permitted to plant crops on the land you own).
An income is no longer optional, but the ability to have an income is not guaranteed.
As has always been the case, the nobility doesn't trouble itself with these things.
The problem is the people crossing the line by insisting it's fake and so further testing must not be funded. Talk about self fulfilling.
A close second is those declaring the latest test flawed when they haven't even read the paper yet.
Skepticism is appropriate but that goes beyond.
Extra plastic?
I think he means the hard cover on the battery instead of it being a soft battery contained within material like a thick plastic bag like they use for non-replacable batteries now.
Personally, I have no desire to chop onions with the edge of my phone and would prefer that it be thick enough to not stress the glass when I sneeze so I see no problem with a proper replaceable battery.
To me, replaceable battery is a must. I will keep my old phone (now on it's second battery) until it fails or the new phones offer that valuable feature.
I'd mod this up but it's already at 5. We have a winner.
They're probably former residents that got priced out.
It makes it extremely interesting if that thing it reacts against is present in space. For example, the quantum foam.
Absolutely nobody actually involved in any of the experiments has made any such claim. Stop spreading FUD.
The claim is that when power is applied, a propulsive force is measured. I see no reason to believe that deeper observation and understanding won't find the equal and opposite reaction.
So while you're sitting in the corner punching yourself in the forehead shouting "IMPOSSIBLE!", we'll be looking to see if this is a thing (or at least watching the people confirming that this is a thing) and how useful it might be.