It's actually quite comical to see the 'instant gratification' generation(s) happier with 2-day delayed gratification over the inconvenience of shopping!
Granted it does let people be even more lazy...I mean save the time they'd spend shopping.
Except there are millions who disagree because their use case differs from yours:
Those who live in large/busy cities where driving isn't convenient (or NYC where car ownership is just uncommon)
Those times when you don't need something immediately
Those times when it's easier to wait 2 days (or less) than spend the time to go to the store
Those times when you simply CAN'T go to the store (kids, sick, busy, traveling, etc.)
Things you can't get locally...and so on.
Now, I've seen plenty of cases where amazon is selling common household items at significantly marked up prices compared to the local mass-mart. But that's also in a big city where people care less about their bottle of soap costing $2.50 or $5.82 because it just shows up at their door in a day.
There are only two significant available sources of energy on this planet period.
Solar and nuclear. Neither is renewable!
Everything else is derived from one or the other (ignoring minor one-time energy from gravity).
Oil is nothing more than the long end-process of solar...so all you haters are basically putting OIL PANELS ON YOUR HOUSES>!@?$?@#>>@
For those who don't get sarcasm, above is meant to poke at those decrying pretty much every/any energy option. It's also not incorrect in the very, very long-term view:)
Ok, and when the birds get stuck against the cage itself? or killed while flying into the cage?
Even ignoring the complexity of building a durable, weather-resistant, upright 1000 m^2 'cage' with a wire pitch fine enough to stop small birds (1-2cm) it I have to question if it would even help with what you're trying to accomplish.
There's some no-brainer going on here indeed, but it's not from the side of people who decided not to build a cage.
While I agree about the decommissioning issue being something that should be resolved for all of these sorts of energy projects, I'd say the undersea cables are very likely of low risk. Much (and I don't really know, but I'm guessing +95%) of the cable is going to be at depths that there is little life, never mind "sharks". Only the short pass of the line that extends from the shore before the shelf is going to have any such impact, if there even is any.
While I agree this project should go ahead, your statement above is incorrect.
Based on links to the detailed project, this is in ~100m deep water which is still well with the range of 'normal' sealife.
So basically your entire post is FUD and fear-mongering.
Something MIGHT be wrong even though you have zero evidence or reason to believe so. That's despite multiple use cases which are still quite similar to the one you're objecting to. Also despite the fact that any of these projects DOES typically include an environmental impact plan.
I'm curious though. How are we to gather evidence on the impact of this...without trying it? I'd agree with you if someone proposed a 10,000 turbine deep-sea windfarm as the first project. This is 5...FIVE turbines. This IS the POC you're crying over not having.
As for the rest of the nonsense like 'species... genetically more different from shore species than from you and me' - you're just flat out making up nonsense.
Oversimplification of the actual truth: there are many interpretations of any given set of actions and, often, very limited means to understand the intent behind them. That goes even more so with the crappy reporting that keeps getting worse lately.
Looking at TFS...maybe the other party is trying to force them to comply with some unreasonable demand (sell the brand? take a lower % of revenue?) and using this as a tool to starve them out.
Maybe the other party believes they own all the content based on the now-expired contract and they're being asked to relinquish it?
Some things can be factually demonstrated while others are based on thought/intent/interpretation.
Irfanview is fast, versatile, small, and easy to use the basics...while still having plenty you can dig into. Add a plugin pack and it can play/open just about anything.
I picked it up back in the 90s and it's still one of my default-load programs on every new computer I get. Well, except on macs but I try not to use them in general.
Perspective is an interesting thing. GDP vs federal budget.
$600b out of $18t is only about 3%. But...
Out of the $3.8t federal budget in 2015, $600b or 16% was spent on the military.
If you look at discretionary spending (i.e. exclude social security, unemployment, healthcare, debt interest etc.) then it's $600b out $1.1t or about 54%.
So more than HALF the money our government has to spend on whatever they think would best improve our country goes to the military. Mind you, I fully believe that number is grossly over-inflated from what it should be due to the types of work and contracts our military hand out.
Start on the moon, the gravity well is negligible in comparison. Granted, you need to lift your factory into place first.
I don't think any of it is especially efficient, but the big advantage isn't the 100kt+ nuke equivalent. It's the.1-10kt range with focus on the smaller side. The largest conventional bomb (FOAB) is about 0.044kt or 44 tonne equivalent. Being able to attack with multiple, high-accuracy, non-nuclear 0.1kt weapons in a short span is...a considerable advantage. And that without needing (currently non-existent) super huge bombers which would be subject to interception, overflight rules, fueling, etc. makes it even more so.
While space based weapons are undoubtedly going to be more vulnerable in the short to medium term, the number of countries capable of attacking them is small. When compared to the near-invulnerability of the 'missle' once launched it's an intriguing platform to say the least.
Oddly enough, if SpaceX truly lowers the launch costs as much as they predict these types of weapons become reasonably practical from a cost standpoint even. I'm sure some politician will find a way to make them cost even more though.
The big difference being, today it's possible to put objects into LEO which would be deorbited to bombard the planet.
It's not currently possible to alter sizable asteroid orbits in any useful manner, much less so accurately that you can either park them on earth orbit or target them at a very specific place. IIRC NASA plans to *attempt* to *slightly* modify the orbit of an asteroid in the fairly near future.
Furthermore, unless one country has total control of this capability it's just as easy to send something else up and re-target that asteroid as long as it's reasonably far away unless you actively defend it. Or, by the same measure, if you park one in orbit then you have to defend it because anyone else could de-orbit it on YOUR head.
Realistically, an asteroid is never going to be a tactical weapon until technology is so far advanced that there's little point in using one. The resources that would go into acquiring, aiming, and defending one far exceed any conceivable gain (or cost to achieve the same goal via more conventional means). At best, they are a doomsday weapon for a species.
Do you think people on Earth couldn't shoot those on the moon just as easily as the reverse? I think you've been reading too much science fiction.
I was about to disagree with you based on the depth of the gravity well on earth vs. the moon but in reality it would probably be more efficient (in a large scale) to go to the moon, build projectiles, then move them to earth orbit since that transfer requires much less energy. Then you use the PE of earth's gravity to bring your projectiles down.
But for smaller scales, it's far more efficient to just go to earth orbit and drop things back down. Not that it's especially efficient anyway of course. It just doesn't involve nuclear fallout if you use the weapons.
They're tracking things down to the size* of a walnut.
*Size - as observed by your viewing/tracking platform
Intentionally stealthy things aren't going to be the same. From a radar perspective, you could have a stealth jet up there and miss it entirely. There's still optical and thermal tracking, but this side of the arms race is in it's infancy.
Take a small object with state of the art stealth systems and a long term mission window (i.e. low delta-v isn't an issue) and I don't expect it would be very difficult to hide from the various tracking systems. Satellites don't currently (AFAIK) have the weight or energy budget to mount active scanning that would detect stealth objects approaching. Granted, a stealthed space drone would be actual cutting edge space technology... you know, the things the USA used to be capable of like when they got some folks to the moon with far less computer power total than your smartwatch has today.
Someone remind me what the airforce mini-shuttle has been doing in space for years at a stretch again?/tinfoilhat
If the recent election tells us anything, it's not a large number of people DO NOT give a flying fsck about 'men being men' and 'women being women' much of the time...and if anything, they rather like that.
However, the vast minority often gets the vast majority if airtime these days (refer to the FCC and vulgarity complaints a few years back) despite the vast majority not really caring either way.
I'm not condoning harassment, but what we define as harassment has become so utterly subjective that it's pretty much useless. "I felt cornered, coerced, attacked, dismissed, and am scared to xyz or abc anymore" is considered far more justified that the counterpoint of "I called them an idiot because they ruined 3 days of a production run with a careless mistake, why am I sitting in HR instead of working to fix the problem?"
While "hey sexy, wanna have a party in my pants? everyone's coming" is crude and juvenile, but so is "you cheap fuck, what do you mean I have to pay for my own dinner?? I didn't even bring any money because I thought you were a MAN"
I don't see the Tesla cars losing their value 'horrifically' by any means. In fact the 7+ year old roadsters sell for 60-70% of their original value which is astounding. Unlike some cars which claim to be an 'instant classic' these just about achieved that.
Nor do you hear any of the doomsday predictions about batteries dying coming true either. The biggest risk seems to be if you let a pack fully discharge, then it's 'bricked' and the car won't charge it anymore.
Maybe the Leaf is selling for peanuts, but it wasn't in the same class to begin with.
This is not a trivial task. Going to Sherman Oaks means going through the Sepulveda Pass, 1100 feet above LAX. Electric propulsion is going to add a significant burden to LA's already marginal power grid.
Sucks is relative though. They keyboard on the MBP is HORRIBLE even in comparison to this keyboard. The trackpad on this is...not the worst thing I've used but I've also had laptops that were 2+" thick and had the 'upgraded' 800x600 LCD. It's pretty bad.
AFAIK, Virgin Mobile is an MVNO for Sprint anyhow.
So while this is a deal, it's quite literally the same thing that the ACTUAL carrier is doing anyway... with the added 'bonus' of being forced to buy a new locked phone.
It's going to get Sprint a whole lot of new service and likely overwhelm their network. The difference is, with Sprint, it's way easier to get in and get out since you can BYO Phone. Well, until a year from now when Sprint is overwhelmed by port-outs.
Agreed and mind you I never claimed it did. This is gross incompetence and lack of proper training. These kinds of individuals should not be working as mall cops let alone as police officers.
Well it appears that he isn't welcome back to his job at least. I agree completely that he was absolutely not trained/capable of handling what should be an infrequent, but not unique, situation.
And even if we allow for a gross miscommunication between the cop and the victim, none of that should have gotten the cop off the reckless endangerment charges. He unloaded his gun point-blank into a car with a small child in the back seat. I may be mistaken, but I don't think cops are supposed to even RETURN fire in a situation with a child (or bystander) immediately in the line of fire. That alone is insane. What this guy did goes even beyond that.
No, there'll be FOUR of them working 8 hours a day, 3 days a week at two different jobs (math is hard)... and the companies will extoll how they're working to reduce unemployment!!! They've quadrupled their staff after all!
You're dead on regarding using PT workers to avoid benefits which are often LEGALLY required (forget things expected, those are ignored). Not too long ago they passed a whole bunch of laws requiring companies to provide benefits and, unfortunately, had to pick a threshold for coverage. Big companies just force much of their staff below that since it's 'cheaper' to invest in managing more people then it is to pay for benefits.
Slashdot Mirror
At first you seem to grasp evolution, then you demonstrate otherwise.
It's actually quite comical to see the 'instant gratification' generation(s) happier with 2-day delayed gratification over the inconvenience of shopping!
Granted it does let people be even more lazy...I mean save the time they'd spend shopping.
Except there are millions who disagree because their use case differs from yours:
Those who live in large/busy cities where driving isn't convenient (or NYC where car ownership is just uncommon)
Those times when you don't need something immediately
Those times when it's easier to wait 2 days (or less) than spend the time to go to the store
Those times when you simply CAN'T go to the store (kids, sick, busy, traveling, etc.)
Things you can't get locally ...and so on.
Now, I've seen plenty of cases where amazon is selling common household items at significantly marked up prices compared to the local mass-mart. But that's also in a big city where people care less about their bottle of soap costing $2.50 or $5.82 because it just shows up at their door in a day.
There are only two significant available sources of energy on this planet period.
Solar and nuclear. Neither is renewable!
Everything else is derived from one or the other (ignoring minor one-time energy from gravity).
Oil is nothing more than the long end-process of solar...so all you haters are basically putting OIL PANELS ON YOUR HOUSES>!@?$?@#>>@
For those who don't get sarcasm, above is meant to poke at those decrying pretty much every/any energy option. It's also not incorrect in the very, very long-term view :)
Ok, and when the birds get stuck against the cage itself? or killed while flying into the cage?
Even ignoring the complexity of building a durable, weather-resistant, upright 1000 m^2 'cage' with a wire pitch fine enough to stop small birds (1-2cm) it I have to question if it would even help with what you're trying to accomplish.
There's some no-brainer going on here indeed, but it's not from the side of people who decided not to build a cage.
While I agree about the decommissioning issue being something that should be resolved for all of these sorts of energy projects, I'd say the undersea cables are very likely of low risk. Much (and I don't really know, but I'm guessing +95%) of the cable is going to be at depths that there is little life, never mind "sharks". Only the short pass of the line that extends from the shore before the shelf is going to have any such impact, if there even is any.
While I agree this project should go ahead, your statement above is incorrect.
Based on links to the detailed project, this is in ~100m deep water which is still well with the range of 'normal' sealife.
So basically your entire post is FUD and fear-mongering.
Something MIGHT be wrong even though you have zero evidence or reason to believe so. That's despite multiple use cases which are still quite similar to the one you're objecting to. Also despite the fact that any of these projects DOES typically include an environmental impact plan.
I'm curious though. How are we to gather evidence on the impact of this...without trying it? I'd agree with you if someone proposed a 10,000 turbine deep-sea windfarm as the first project. This is 5...FIVE turbines. This IS the POC you're crying over not having.
As for the rest of the nonsense like 'species ... genetically more different from shore species than from you and me' - you're just flat out making up nonsense.
If you want spoiled views, revisit LA and the smog of the 80s and 90s.
Now consider a windfarm several km offshore interrupting your...what? View of where the ocean meets the horizon? I don't get this nonsense.
Oversimplification of the actual truth: there are many interpretations of any given set of actions and, often, very limited means to understand the intent behind them. That goes even more so with the crappy reporting that keeps getting worse lately.
Looking at TFS...maybe the other party is trying to force them to comply with some unreasonable demand (sell the brand? take a lower % of revenue?) and using this as a tool to starve them out.
Maybe the other party believes they own all the content based on the now-expired contract and they're being asked to relinquish it?
Some things can be factually demonstrated while others are based on thought/intent/interpretation.
Irfanview does.
Irfanview doesn't have tons of bloat.
Irfanview is fast, versatile, small, and easy to use the basics...while still having plenty you can dig into. Add a plugin pack and it can play/open just about anything.
I picked it up back in the 90s and it's still one of my default-load programs on every new computer I get. Well, except on macs but I try not to use them in general.
Perspective is an interesting thing. GDP vs federal budget.
$600b out of $18t is only about 3%. But...
Out of the $3.8t federal budget in 2015, $600b or 16% was spent on the military.
If you look at discretionary spending (i.e. exclude social security, unemployment, healthcare, debt interest etc.) then it's $600b out $1.1t or about 54%.
So more than HALF the money our government has to spend on whatever they think would best improve our country goes to the military. Mind you, I fully believe that number is grossly over-inflated from what it should be due to the types of work and contracts our military hand out.
Start on the moon, the gravity well is negligible in comparison. Granted, you need to lift your factory into place first.
I don't think any of it is especially efficient, but the big advantage isn't the 100kt+ nuke equivalent. It's the .1-10kt range with focus on the smaller side. The largest conventional bomb (FOAB) is about 0.044kt or 44 tonne equivalent. Being able to attack with multiple, high-accuracy, non-nuclear 0.1kt weapons in a short span is...a considerable advantage. And that without needing (currently non-existent) super huge bombers which would be subject to interception, overflight rules, fueling, etc. makes it even more so.
While space based weapons are undoubtedly going to be more vulnerable in the short to medium term, the number of countries capable of attacking them is small. When compared to the near-invulnerability of the 'missle' once launched it's an intriguing platform to say the least.
Oddly enough, if SpaceX truly lowers the launch costs as much as they predict these types of weapons become reasonably practical from a cost standpoint even. I'm sure some politician will find a way to make them cost even more though.
The big difference being, today it's possible to put objects into LEO which would be deorbited to bombard the planet.
It's not currently possible to alter sizable asteroid orbits in any useful manner, much less so accurately that you can either park them on earth orbit or target them at a very specific place. IIRC NASA plans to *attempt* to *slightly* modify the orbit of an asteroid in the fairly near future.
Furthermore, unless one country has total control of this capability it's just as easy to send something else up and re-target that asteroid as long as it's reasonably far away unless you actively defend it. Or, by the same measure, if you park one in orbit then you have to defend it because anyone else could de-orbit it on YOUR head.
Realistically, an asteroid is never going to be a tactical weapon until technology is so far advanced that there's little point in using one. The resources that would go into acquiring, aiming, and defending one far exceed any conceivable gain (or cost to achieve the same goal via more conventional means). At best, they are a doomsday weapon for a species.
Do you think people on Earth couldn't shoot those on the moon just as easily as the reverse? I think you've been reading too much science fiction.
I was about to disagree with you based on the depth of the gravity well on earth vs. the moon but in reality it would probably be more efficient (in a large scale) to go to the moon, build projectiles, then move them to earth orbit since that transfer requires much less energy. Then you use the PE of earth's gravity to bring your projectiles down.
But for smaller scales, it's far more efficient to just go to earth orbit and drop things back down. Not that it's especially efficient anyway of course. It just doesn't involve nuclear fallout if you use the weapons.
They're tracking things down to the size* of a walnut.
*Size - as observed by your viewing/tracking platform
Intentionally stealthy things aren't going to be the same. From a radar perspective, you could have a stealth jet up there and miss it entirely. There's still optical and thermal tracking, but this side of the arms race is in it's infancy.
Take a small object with state of the art stealth systems and a long term mission window (i.e. low delta-v isn't an issue) and I don't expect it would be very difficult to hide from the various tracking systems. Satellites don't currently (AFAIK) have the weight or energy budget to mount active scanning that would detect stealth objects approaching. Granted, a stealthed space drone would be actual cutting edge space technology ... you know, the things the USA used to be capable of like when they got some folks to the moon with far less computer power total than your smartwatch has today.
Someone remind me what the airforce mini-shuttle has been doing in space for years at a stretch again? /tinfoilhat
That's more job security that most people have.
Squeaky wheel.
If the recent election tells us anything, it's not a large number of people DO NOT give a flying fsck about 'men being men' and 'women being women' much of the time...and if anything, they rather like that.
However, the vast minority often gets the vast majority if airtime these days (refer to the FCC and vulgarity complaints a few years back) despite the vast majority not really caring either way.
I'm not condoning harassment, but what we define as harassment has become so utterly subjective that it's pretty much useless. "I felt cornered, coerced, attacked, dismissed, and am scared to xyz or abc anymore" is considered far more justified that the counterpoint of "I called them an idiot because they ruined 3 days of a production run with a careless mistake, why am I sitting in HR instead of working to fix the problem?"
While "hey sexy, wanna have a party in my pants? everyone's coming" is crude and juvenile, but so is "you cheap fuck, what do you mean I have to pay for my own dinner?? I didn't even bring any money because I thought you were a MAN"
I don't see the Tesla cars losing their value 'horrifically' by any means. In fact the 7+ year old roadsters sell for 60-70% of their original value which is astounding. Unlike some cars which claim to be an 'instant classic' these just about achieved that.
Nor do you hear any of the doomsday predictions about batteries dying coming true either. The biggest risk seems to be if you let a pack fully discharge, then it's 'bricked' and the car won't charge it anymore.
Maybe the Leaf is selling for peanuts, but it wasn't in the same class to begin with.
Aren't a bunch of states (and/or the fed) working on laws against doxxing?
How is it that CNN can do (or threaten to which is also a crime) this and be in the clear?
Companies are people these days after all. Can we put CNN in jail...or at least give them probation??
This is not a trivial task. Going to Sherman Oaks means going through the Sepulveda Pass, 1100 feet above LAX. Electric propulsion is going to add a significant burden to LA's already marginal power grid.
https://hardware.slashdot.org/...
I'm not so sure about that.
Wait, people use speech to text? For real?
Huh...maybe I should go check and see if someone is on my lawn.
It still sucks. I'm using one right now.
Sucks is relative though. They keyboard on the MBP is HORRIBLE even in comparison to this keyboard. The trackpad on this is...not the worst thing I've used but I've also had laptops that were 2+" thick and had the 'upgraded' 800x600 LCD. It's pretty bad.
AFAIK, Virgin Mobile is an MVNO for Sprint anyhow.
So while this is a deal, it's quite literally the same thing that the ACTUAL carrier is doing anyway ... with the added 'bonus' of being forced to buy a new locked phone.
It's going to get Sprint a whole lot of new service and likely overwhelm their network. The difference is, with Sprint, it's way easier to get in and get out since you can BYO Phone. Well, until a year from now when Sprint is overwhelmed by port-outs.
Agreed and mind you I never claimed it did. This is gross incompetence and lack of proper training. These kinds of individuals should not be working as mall cops let alone as police officers.
Well it appears that he isn't welcome back to his job at least. I agree completely that he was absolutely not trained/capable of handling what should be an infrequent, but not unique, situation.
And even if we allow for a gross miscommunication between the cop and the victim, none of that should have gotten the cop off the reckless endangerment charges. He unloaded his gun point-blank into a car with a small child in the back seat. I may be mistaken, but I don't think cops are supposed to even RETURN fire in a situation with a child (or bystander) immediately in the line of fire. That alone is insane. What this guy did goes even beyond that.
No, there'll be FOUR of them working 8 hours a day, 3 days a week at two different jobs (math is hard) ... and the companies will extoll how they're working to reduce unemployment!!! They've quadrupled their staff after all!
You're dead on regarding using PT workers to avoid benefits which are often LEGALLY required (forget things expected, those are ignored). Not too long ago they passed a whole bunch of laws requiring companies to provide benefits and, unfortunately, had to pick a threshold for coverage. Big companies just force much of their staff below that since it's 'cheaper' to invest in managing more people then it is to pay for benefits.