I don't know how far away from retirement you are, but $300 now probably has a future worth of much more than $1000, depending on your circumstances. Figuring that 9% is a doable long term rate of return (many people figure 10%, but I'm a bit more conservative), $300 = $6,919.02 in 35 years, and $10,832.97 in 40 years. That is fine and dandy, but what you should also consider is that unless you've already maxed out your 401(k) or other tax deffered retirement account, $300 in your pocket is actually probably worth more like $350 or $400 pretax.
So revisiting the 9% calculations, we're talking about $400 pretax growing to $9,225.35 in 35 years, and $14,443.96 in 40 years. That's not chump change! And all it took was to buck up and not buy a complete luxury. Do not delude yourself and think that you'll be able to live on Social Security. Today's retirees can't even do that! Save, Save, Save, now that you're young and have time on your side. Plan it out, and force yourself to save according to the plan. Then you can buy any luxury you want with the money you have left over, guilt free, with the reassuring knowledge that you'll be free from worry not only in retirement, but in middle age, when you have even more responsibilities and with a fast approaching retirement.
It's not rocket science, folks. Spend less than you make. Invest a good chunk each month. You'll be wealthy!
Even with Schumi running away tear after year, you see those stands full, don't you?
Not a Schumi fan, eh? JK:-)
I thought it was pretty interesting that when I was at the US Grand Prix F1 race at Indy last October, the stands were not 100% full, yet the total number of people there far outnumbered any other F1 race.
Even in a sport that isn't fully embraced by the American public, we just do things bigger around here:-)
Speak to your friendly local police officer or cabbie. Aside from changing oil fairly often (every 2 weeks) and scheduled maintanence, Ford Crown Victorias can last for 300,000 miles after going through absolute torture (jackrabbit starts and stops in heavy traffic, long idling sessions, etc.) They usually overhaul the engine around 300k, then drive it for another 300k. They drive them more than half a million miles, or exactly 1 million kilometers. They are amazing.
My 93' CV police package had 90k miles when I got it in 1996. I have only had to follow scheduled maintanence and replace a bad ball joint, tie rod end, and radiator since then. I now have 165,000 miles of driving in ice, snow, and salted roads in Iowa and Massachusetts, and there is practically no rust. The thing just keeps on trucking. Eight years with no car payment. Less than $500 in maintancence per year, on average.
Ford is continually underrated with respect to its cars' reliability, and unfairly put in the same basket as the other detroit big three. In my opinion, Ford is head and shoulders above its domestic competition with respect to reliability.
To answer the question: In the U.S., per FAA regulations, landowners have control up to 500 feet. Above that is public domain airspace. It has been this way since very early on in aviation, since it is critical to have public airspace and federal jurisdiction thereof in order to have a viable air transportation system.
This X-prize candidate team is using the concept.
http://www.xprize.com/teams/davinci.html
However, looking at standard rocketry analysis, it seems that the advantages of baloon launch are relatively minor for orbital flight, since most of the energy in the rocket is used for acceleration to orbital velocity. The dynamic pressure of the thicker atmosphere below 10,000 to 20,000 feet becomes rather small in the grand scheme of things because that altitude is passed so quickly.
For more information:
Flight Mechanics of Manned Suborbital Vehicles
In aviation, there is no such thing as too cautious! You are totaly underestimating the level of danger involved. Anything that flies that is hard to control, is underpowered, and very fragile, like all early airplanes is potentially deadly, even though the craft may fly slow. Orville was almost killed in this crash, and his passenger became the first victim of a powered flight. This was in an improved airplane, too! So, please give a little more credit to people that want to recreate the first flight, not the first crash.
I have a lot of respect for the research and development that has been done by Dean Kamen and his company. They've done wonderful work with dynamic control systems for FRED, the "wheelchair" that can climb stairs and I'm assuming that this uses some of the same technology. However, it seems absolutely rediculous to me to put this technology into essentially a small scooter that can't do anything better than a simpler scooter with a third wheel for maintaining stability. I haven't figured out why you would possibly want to take that third wheel out and replace it with a heavier, more complicated, more expensive, and likely less reliable system?! Anyone pick up on something I missed?
The thing to realize about these UAV's is that they are extremely slow- on the order of 100 knots. Take a turbocharged Cessna 182 and a kalishnikov, and you can get up there and just shoot it down that way. But never fear, soon we'll have much better performing UAV's that will be stealthy, small, fast, and therefore damn hard to shoot down.
The unfortunate thing is that I don't think this will help us in Afganistan or in fighting terrorists. They don't live in bases or have infrastructure- they live in villages and huts and caves. All of our hardware and way of making war will fail in the face of goat herders in the mountains with nothing to lose:-(
There is a japanese company that has already built and flown successfully a personal helicopter. It was demonstrated at Airventure 99' in Oshkosh, WI. Their site is extremely slow, so someone please mirror:
http://www.engineeringsystem.co.jp/Prd_GENH-4.html
It's exactly what the exo-death machine hopes to be, only lighter, cheaper, and certainly safer. There are four independent engines on this japanese puppy, with a balistic parachute system for catastrophies. The test pilot at Oshkosh crashed recently but dusted himself off without any injuries greater than a bruised ego... The rotors were destroyed, but the pilot's minor injuries show that this thing has been tested and has proven itself reasonably safe.
I'm still deeply skeptical of the Moller deal- both whether the thing will ever lift off, and whether it will be possible to use it in the fully automated manner that they are suggesting. Flying requires a well trained and informed pilot with a cautious attitude to make the right decisions in order to be safe. Computers can never fully replace the decision making of a competent pilot, and no company will risk the liability!
Your idea sounds cool, but you already knew it's cool when you posted your question here. A million/.ers are gonna tell you "Ya, I'd love to have one of these things!" The problem is that voice controlled UI increases complexity, and MP3 players are already relatively complicated appliances for the mass market. So, in order to really get some feedback, you pretty much need to do what the corporations do: market research. Or more specifically, targetted market research. You need to define your market and set sales goals in order to be able to gauge your success. As much as I appreciate the technical arts (I am an engineering student), and as much as I make fun of my MBA roomate, I must give credit to the business people that are able to collect technical talent, capital, and ideas and turn them into products we all use. It's not as easy as we might think.... Good luck to you
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know how far away from retirement you are, but $300 now probably has a future worth of much more than $1000, depending on your circumstances. Figuring that 9% is a doable long term rate of return (many people figure 10%, but I'm a bit more conservative), $300 = $6,919.02 in 35 years, and $10,832.97 in 40 years. That is fine and dandy, but what you should also consider is that unless you've already maxed out your 401(k) or other tax deffered retirement account, $300 in your pocket is actually probably worth more like $350 or $400 pretax.
So revisiting the 9% calculations, we're talking about $400 pretax growing to $9,225.35 in 35 years, and $14,443.96 in 40 years. That's not chump change! And all it took was to buck up and not buy a complete luxury. Do not delude yourself and think that you'll be able to live on Social Security. Today's retirees can't even do that! Save, Save, Save, now that you're young and have time on your side. Plan it out, and force yourself to save according to the plan. Then you can buy any luxury you want with the money you have left over, guilt free, with the reassuring knowledge that you'll be free from worry not only in retirement, but in middle age, when you have even more responsibilities and with a fast approaching retirement.
It's not rocket science, folks. Spend less than you make. Invest a good chunk each month. You'll be wealthy!
Even with Schumi running away tear after year, you see those stands full, don't you?
:-)
:-)
Not a Schumi fan, eh? JK
I thought it was pretty interesting that when I was at the US Grand Prix F1 race at Indy last October, the stands were not 100% full, yet the total number of people there far outnumbered any other F1 race.
Even in a sport that isn't fully embraced by the American public, we just do things bigger around here
The Google interface is available in many languages, including H4x0r!
Speak to your friendly local police officer or cabbie. Aside from changing oil fairly often (every 2 weeks) and scheduled maintanence, Ford Crown Victorias can last for 300,000 miles after going through absolute torture (jackrabbit starts and stops in heavy traffic, long idling sessions, etc.) They usually overhaul the engine around 300k, then drive it for another 300k. They drive them more than half a million miles, or exactly 1 million kilometers. They are amazing.
My 93' CV police package had 90k miles when I got it in 1996. I have only had to follow scheduled maintanence and replace a bad ball joint, tie rod end, and radiator since then. I now have 165,000 miles of driving in ice, snow, and salted roads in Iowa and Massachusetts, and there is practically no rust. The thing just keeps on trucking. Eight years with no car payment. Less than $500 in maintancence per year, on average.
Ford is continually underrated with respect to its cars' reliability, and unfairly put in the same basket as the other detroit big three. In my opinion, Ford is head and shoulders above its domestic competition with respect to reliability.
To answer the question: In the U.S., per FAA regulations, landowners have control up to 500 feet. Above that is public domain airspace. It has been this way since very early on in aviation, since it is critical to have public airspace and federal jurisdiction thereof in order to have a viable air transportation system.
This X-prize candidate team is using the concept. http://www.xprize.com/teams/davinci.html However, looking at standard rocketry analysis, it seems that the advantages of baloon launch are relatively minor for orbital flight, since most of the energy in the rocket is used for acceleration to orbital velocity. The dynamic pressure of the thicker atmosphere below 10,000 to 20,000 feet becomes rather small in the grand scheme of things because that altitude is passed so quickly. For more information: Flight Mechanics of Manned Suborbital Vehicles
In aviation, there is no such thing as too cautious! You are totaly underestimating the level of danger involved. Anything that flies that is hard to control, is underpowered, and very fragile, like all early airplanes is potentially deadly, even though the craft may fly slow. Orville was almost killed in this crash, and his passenger became the first victim of a powered flight. This was in an improved airplane, too! So, please give a little more credit to people that want to recreate the first flight, not the first crash.
I have a lot of respect for the research and development that has been done by Dean Kamen and his company. They've done wonderful work with dynamic control systems for FRED, the "wheelchair" that can climb stairs and I'm assuming that this uses some of the same technology. However, it seems absolutely rediculous to me to put this technology into essentially a small scooter that can't do anything better than a simpler scooter with a third wheel for maintaining stability. I haven't figured out why you would possibly want to take that third wheel out and replace it with a heavier, more complicated, more expensive, and likely less reliable system?! Anyone pick up on something I missed?
The thing to realize about these UAV's is that they are extremely slow- on the order of 100 knots. Take a turbocharged Cessna 182 and a kalishnikov, and you can get up there and just shoot it down that way. But never fear, soon we'll have much better performing UAV's that will be stealthy, small, fast, and therefore damn hard to shoot down.
:-(
The unfortunate thing is that I don't think this will help us in Afganistan or in fighting terrorists. They don't live in bases or have infrastructure- they live in villages and huts and caves. All of our hardware and way of making war will fail in the face of goat herders in the mountains with nothing to lose
There is a japanese company that has already built and flown successfully a personal helicopter. It was demonstrated at Airventure 99' in Oshkosh, WI. Their site is extremely slow, so someone please mirror: http://www.engineeringsystem.co.jp/Prd_GENH-4.html
It's exactly what the exo-death machine hopes to be, only lighter, cheaper, and certainly safer. There are four independent engines on this japanese puppy, with a balistic parachute system for catastrophies. The test pilot at Oshkosh crashed recently but dusted himself off without any injuries greater than a bruised ego... The rotors were destroyed, but the pilot's minor injuries show that this thing has been tested and has proven itself reasonably safe.
I'm still deeply skeptical of the Moller deal- both whether the thing will ever lift off, and whether it will be possible to use it in the fully automated manner that they are suggesting. Flying requires a well trained and informed pilot with a cautious attitude to make the right decisions in order to be safe. Computers can never fully replace the decision making of a competent pilot, and no company will risk the liability!
Your idea sounds cool, but you already knew it's cool when you posted your question here. A million /.ers are gonna tell you "Ya, I'd love to have one of these things!" The problem is that voice controlled UI increases complexity, and MP3 players are already relatively complicated appliances for the mass market. So, in order to really get some feedback, you pretty much need to do what the corporations do: market research. Or more specifically, targetted market research. You need to define your market and set sales goals in order to be able to gauge your success. As much as I appreciate the technical arts (I am an engineering student), and as much as I make fun of my MBA roomate, I must give credit to the business people that are able to collect technical talent, capital, and ideas and turn them into products we all use. It's not as easy as we might think....
Good luck to you