In another/. I ranted about spend $50M on CGI, $5K for writers. Someone replied, "why don't you contribute to this group making a sci-fi using pre-CGI techniques?" And a link to a Kickstarter type of webpage as this indie group relied on donations. I didn't followup so missed their deadline. But this indie group intend was to do what used to be done. Take a compelling story with engaging characters, have some special effects to add to the story. But since their special effects was not superior to current Hollywood, they relied more on story and actors to keep audience interested.
And there is the 1970s BSG cylon with a cup and sign, "replaced by CGI."
They don't *HAVE* have to be expensive. The expensive is a side effect of the massive Hollywood egos.
And there is "Hollywood Accounting" (I read someplace all Harry Potter movies lost money. Distribution costs ate up the profits so movie makers didn't have to pay taxes). I also wonder if there are some that make lots of money, others not so much except bragging rights. Perhaps going OT, an article about music piracy/studios losing money, etc. someone posted a link to an article written in 1990s about several musicians that have "sold" millions of albums but received meager amount from the studios. And some even owed money back to the studio. Author described how expenses are tallied to the gross revenue (all those expenses from production/distribution/promotion is "necessary") but end result is artists didn't get much to speak of. These accounting procedures were virtually like those portrayed in "The Harder They Fall" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt00...
On the subject of large scale ventures, author Dennis Wingo wrote, " think what having access to rights over a billion kilos of platinum would do for your corporate portfolio." http://www.amazon.com/gp/produ...
ok, maybe going OT but reminds me a line from a movie: "How much taxes will Soviet govt make on $50,000?" Peter Lorre as a Soviet commissar answers, "$50,000."
Reminds me of article about when Ford exec mentioned company tracks and collects data on it's cars. Someone posted something like, "1965 Mustangs became much more cool to own."
Going out on a limb here (at risk of getting modded down or worse my butt flamed in front of all my friends) but someone wrote there was a time when RF was new and FCC carved out spectrum for various services. Then along comes the computer people, "we need wireless!" But everything was taken, except 2.4GHz that was given to ISM and microwave ovens. Kind of like land grabbing in early 1800s, by end of that century all the good stuff was taken. And everything that is licensed-free wireless is all put in 2.4GHz. Don't have a choice unless you get licensed services meaning Part 97 amateur radio but mostly limited as it is perceived as old school (i.e. operators are senior retired people) and cannot use it for business and entertainment. But most spectrum belongs to the big boys that bought lots of it from FCC so they can deploy all the stuff made in China to operate in their spectrum, and sell use of it to people (and many get screwed with data caps or charged lotsa bux when exceeding data limits).
sounds like a good idea to me but lots of luck getting that to happen. For starters schools will need more funding (i.e. teacher salaries that are livable,classroom supplies provided so teachers don't have to pay for paper, materials, etc. out of their own personal pocket). However, everyone will complain about high income and corp taxes (where else does govt get money?) and those leading the charge are these same businessmen listed in article. Then there will be redistribution of wealth, higher income neighborhoods paying more taxes into general state treasury and some of this money will be spent in lower income neighborhoods (poor people don't pay much taxes because they don't have much money, that's why they are poor). But then someone will scream socialism and thus any proposals fall flat.
I met this lady who was a public school teacher, she said after WWII and Japan rebuilding the country hired many teachers from California. They figured Calif had the best public school system (which in 1940s and 50s they did) so why not hire some of those same teachers to make a great school system. I should have asked her what did schools in 1947 do that they are not doing now, unfortunately she passed away so her knowledge is lost. What I do remember her saying when traveling to Japan, only available transport was a cargo ship. Not much air travel and all passenger liners were filled with troops heading for the Korean War that was waging at the time.
talk to some older Canucks and they are still fuming over Diefenbaker about loss of that program. man o man, at Mach 3 in late 1950s it was the hottest bird in the air.
really. It began as the Common Affordable Lightweight Fighter. I somewhat follow its developmental process but not all the details. I remember when planners looked at F22 and saw where its costs were going (this was during the decade of downsizing) and determined an alternate must be made. What happened? Did Steindle screw up someplace or did others override his longterm planning?
Will there ever be a President that I can respect?
when there is a president like George Washington who resigns his commission and surrenders the sword, takes a position to preside and gives power to two other branches for checks and balances. Yes, it ain't perfect and the system has been abused but better than what we got now.
From Mad Magazine around 1970: When United States wants to know activities of other countries, we employ intelligence agents. When another country does the same to us, we accuse them of using spies.
Someone came into the room quickly and said "Challenger just blew up!" I first said that's not true, it's just media complaining about another launch delay. But a minute later, I realized it was real. It seemed everyone stopped what they were doing and productivity went to zero for rest of day. A calibration lab and also that repairs VCRs taped the launch footage and were playing it back and forth in slow-mo, kind of their own analysis trying to pinpoint the cause. Kind of interesting because just a few short years before only major investigative teams had these kinds of tools. I'm sure many households were doing the same. Though it took a few days when they released footage showing the flame coming out side of SRB, that seem to completely change the discussion of the cause. Me along with many others had no clue what that flame meant but it was very unusual. We had to wait until Feynmann spoke.
Contrasting to Columbia disaster in 2003, the country didn't seem to stop and mourn like after Challenger because the country was gearing up to invade Iraq.
I dunno. I was at Morton-Thiokol when it happened,
Few years ago I met someone who worked at Morton-Thiokol and left shortly after it became ATK. He said it seemed ATK was doing all it could to rid the name and history of Morton-Thiokol.
and were upset that the mass media was ridiculing repeated launch delays.
I remember the day before they scrubbed the launch because closeout crew could not remove handles from the side hatch. Many media people were commenting, "why o why are there so many launch delays? Geez, back in the 1960s they were launching right and left with no delays." Yeah, I guess they all forgot of so many times when astronauts lie on their backs for hours waiting for ground crews to work out all the problems, or things going great but the Agena docking spacecraft fails to launch.
There's a comment in the article stating that the court found the FCC regulations are not needed because consumers have a choice in broadband providers.
of course they have a choice! it's like if they don't have bread then they can eat cake. Back to reality, yes this broadband choice argument makes my head shake as well. And I'm certain other countries look at this situation and wonder how people put up with this.
if there is an example of politicians putting themselves first instead of service, just like those third world countries that cannot get themselves out of the 6th century because govt rulers doing stuff like this. Regardless whether you are D or R, but why why why does this kind thing has to happen? Oh well another reason to vote for other parties (yes, I know these third parties like the Libertians, the Greens, etc. have a very small chance but imagine increasing votes even if small, that may raise attention and get some of these candidates air time to voice their positions).
Yes, I remember the OTRAG and various political problems. Your discussion is a good summary, I had a feeling this was the situation. Or at least one of the best summaries on commercial space I have recently read. Just goes to show technical issues are difficult to solve, very tedious and lengthly process. But political issues, politicians move in mysterious ways.
I find myself keep asking this question though answer is govt never thought private companies can do space (actually there was since 1950s, i.e. Lockheed, Boeing, McDonnell, Convair). It took Scaled Composites with Space Ship One and the CNXT (or CXNT) civilian space shot to demonstrate it can be done. Much of what is happening now is suborbital, much less difficult than orbital space flight, but there are customers besides rich people with a few 200K to blow. There are researchers with projects wanting suborbital flights that want to fly with their experiment. As time goes on, some of these companies will become history, some may survive, and there may new commercial spaceflight companies. An interesting time this is, reminds me of 1920s when all kinds of aircraft start-ups, most became history. What they had was govt support such as N.A.C.A., NASA should fill that role for these companies.
But I still ask, how come commercial space didn't happen in 1980s. Was technology too exotic? There was the Soviet threat but no ITAR.
Does this mean PC sales are down or just shipment of PCs (is there a difference?) which means less money spent in countries outside USA, and that money stays here? I know a silly question. Car analogy: If people slowdown buying cars, then they will use that money someplace else. And if trying to keep that clunker going, they will spend it locally to the mechanic.
Slashdot Mirror
another problem is everywhere they went, they all speak English.
In another /. I ranted about spend $50M on CGI, $5K for writers. Someone replied, "why don't you contribute to this group making a sci-fi using pre-CGI techniques?" And a link to a Kickstarter type of webpage as this indie group relied on donations. I didn't followup so missed their deadline. But this indie group intend was to do what used to be done. Take a compelling story with engaging characters, have some special effects to add to the story. But since their special effects was not superior to current Hollywood, they relied more on story and actors to keep audience interested.
And there is the 1970s BSG cylon with a cup and sign, "replaced by CGI."
They don't *HAVE* have to be expensive. The expensive is a side effect of the massive Hollywood egos.
And there is "Hollywood Accounting" (I read someplace all Harry Potter movies lost money. Distribution costs ate up the profits so movie makers didn't have to pay taxes). I also wonder if there are some that make lots of money, others not so much except bragging rights. Perhaps going OT, an article about music piracy/studios losing money, etc. someone posted a link to an article written in 1990s about several musicians that have "sold" millions of albums but received meager amount from the studios. And some even owed money back to the studio. Author described how expenses are tallied to the gross revenue (all those expenses from production/distribution/promotion is "necessary") but end result is artists didn't get much to speak of. These accounting procedures were virtually like those portrayed in "The Harder They Fall" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt00...
On the subject of large scale ventures, author Dennis Wingo wrote, " think what having access to rights over a billion kilos of platinum would do for your corporate portfolio." http://www.amazon.com/gp/produ...
ok, maybe going OT but reminds me a line from a movie: "How much taxes will Soviet govt make on $50,000?" Peter Lorre as a Soviet commissar answers, "$50,000."
my vhf/uhf units may not have the flash and dazzle of smartphones, but no way to kill or hack my units.
it's been said when someone in Europe honks a horn it means, "I'm here!" When someone in USA honks a horn it means, "F---- You!"
Reminds me of article about when Ford exec mentioned company tracks and collects data on it's cars. Someone posted something like, "1965 Mustangs became much more cool to own."
gotta find a Dilbert or a xkcd cartoon for your list.
Going out on a limb here (at risk of getting modded down or worse my butt flamed in front of all my friends) but someone wrote there was a time when RF was new and FCC carved out spectrum for various services. Then along comes the computer people, "we need wireless!" But everything was taken, except 2.4GHz that was given to ISM and microwave ovens. Kind of like land grabbing in early 1800s, by end of that century all the good stuff was taken. And everything that is licensed-free wireless is all put in 2.4GHz. Don't have a choice unless you get licensed services meaning Part 97 amateur radio but mostly limited as it is perceived as old school (i.e. operators are senior retired people) and cannot use it for business and entertainment. But most spectrum belongs to the big boys that bought lots of it from FCC so they can deploy all the stuff made in China to operate in their spectrum, and sell use of it to people (and many get screwed with data caps or charged lotsa bux when exceeding data limits).
sounds like a good idea to me but lots of luck getting that to happen. For starters schools will need more funding (i.e. teacher salaries that are livable,classroom supplies provided so teachers don't have to pay for paper, materials, etc. out of their own personal pocket). However, everyone will complain about high income and corp taxes (where else does govt get money?) and those leading the charge are these same businessmen listed in article. Then there will be redistribution of wealth, higher income neighborhoods paying more taxes into general state treasury and some of this money will be spent in lower income neighborhoods (poor people don't pay much taxes because they don't have much money, that's why they are poor). But then someone will scream socialism and thus any proposals fall flat.
I met this lady who was a public school teacher, she said after WWII and Japan rebuilding the country hired many teachers from California. They figured Calif had the best public school system (which in 1940s and 50s they did) so why not hire some of those same teachers to make a great school system. I should have asked her what did schools in 1947 do that they are not doing now, unfortunately she passed away so her knowledge is lost. What I do remember her saying when traveling to Japan, only available transport was a cargo ship. Not much air travel and all passenger liners were filled with troops heading for the Korean War that was waging at the time.
talk to some older Canucks and they are still fuming over Diefenbaker about loss of that program. man o man, at Mach 3 in late 1950s it was the hottest bird in the air.
really. It began as the Common Affordable Lightweight Fighter. I somewhat follow its developmental process but not all the details. I remember when planners looked at F22 and saw where its costs were going (this was during the decade of downsizing) and determined an alternate must be made. What happened? Did Steindle screw up someplace or did others override his longterm planning?
Will there ever be a President that I can respect?
when there is a president like George Washington who resigns his commission and surrenders the sword, takes a position to preside and gives power to two other branches for checks and balances. Yes, it ain't perfect and the system has been abused but better than what we got now.
I can see it now, someone arrested for copyright infringement accepts a plea bargain for a violent crime conviction to get less jail time.
12 million years ago.
thanks for clarifying that, I mistaken from the article it was two weeks ago.
could reason be there are so many problems is because priorities of top men in govt/corp is other than healthcare.gov.
From Mad Magazine around 1970: When United States wants to know activities of other countries, we employ intelligence agents. When another country does the same to us, we accuse them of using spies.
Someone came into the room quickly and said "Challenger just blew up!" I first said that's not true, it's just media complaining about another launch delay. But a minute later, I realized it was real. It seemed everyone stopped what they were doing and productivity went to zero for rest of day. A calibration lab and also that repairs VCRs taped the launch footage and were playing it back and forth in slow-mo, kind of their own analysis trying to pinpoint the cause. Kind of interesting because just a few short years before only major investigative teams had these kinds of tools. I'm sure many households were doing the same. Though it took a few days when they released footage showing the flame coming out side of SRB, that seem to completely change the discussion of the cause. Me along with many others had no clue what that flame meant but it was very unusual. We had to wait until Feynmann spoke.
Contrasting to Columbia disaster in 2003, the country didn't seem to stop and mourn like after Challenger because the country was gearing up to invade Iraq.
I dunno. I was at Morton-Thiokol when it happened,
Few years ago I met someone who worked at Morton-Thiokol and left shortly after it became ATK. He said it seemed ATK was doing all it could to rid the name and history of Morton-Thiokol.
and were upset that the mass media was ridiculing repeated launch delays.
I remember the day before they scrubbed the launch because closeout crew could not remove handles from the side hatch. Many media people were commenting, "why o why are there so many launch delays? Geez, back in the 1960s they were launching right and left with no delays." Yeah, I guess they all forgot of so many times when astronauts lie on their backs for hours waiting for ground crews to work out all the problems, or things going great but the Agena docking spacecraft fails to launch.
There's a comment in the article stating that the court found the FCC regulations are not needed because consumers have a choice in broadband providers.
of course they have a choice! it's like if they don't have bread then they can eat cake. Back to reality, yes this broadband choice argument makes my head shake as well. And I'm certain other countries look at this situation and wonder how people put up with this.
if there is an example of politicians putting themselves first instead of service, just like those third world countries that cannot get themselves out of the 6th century because govt rulers doing stuff like this. Regardless whether you are D or R, but why why why does this kind thing has to happen? Oh well another reason to vote for other parties (yes, I know these third parties like the Libertians, the Greens, etc. have a very small chance but imagine increasing votes even if small, that may raise attention and get some of these candidates air time to voice their positions).
Yes, I remember the OTRAG and various political problems. Your discussion is a good summary, I had a feeling this was the situation. Or at least one of the best summaries on commercial space I have recently read. Just goes to show technical issues are difficult to solve, very tedious and lengthly process. But political issues, politicians move in mysterious ways.
I find myself keep asking this question though answer is govt never thought private companies can do space (actually there was since 1950s, i.e. Lockheed, Boeing, McDonnell, Convair). It took Scaled Composites with Space Ship One and the CNXT (or CXNT) civilian space shot to demonstrate it can be done. Much of what is happening now is suborbital, much less difficult than orbital space flight, but there are customers besides rich people with a few 200K to blow. There are researchers with projects wanting suborbital flights that want to fly with their experiment. As time goes on, some of these companies will become history, some may survive, and there may new commercial spaceflight companies. An interesting time this is, reminds me of 1920s when all kinds of aircraft start-ups, most became history. What they had was govt support such as N.A.C.A., NASA should fill that role for these companies.
But I still ask, how come commercial space didn't happen in 1980s. Was technology too exotic? There was the Soviet threat but no ITAR.
Does this mean PC sales are down or just shipment of PCs (is there a difference?) which means less money spent in countries outside USA, and that money stays here? I know a silly question. Car analogy: If people slowdown buying cars, then they will use that money someplace else. And if trying to keep that clunker going, they will spend it locally to the mechanic.