It's kind of odd that you had to dig up such an offhand copy of that paper. Usually NASA's scientific papers are freely available through their website, being a publicly funded organization and all that. I wonder if you could get a copy of the paper by e-mailing NASA's astrobiology department.
Wikileaks founder arrested on suspicion of sexual assault, United States and many other countries partake in secret, scandalous dealings outside of the public view, the DOJ cracks down on piracy sites thus paving the way for internet censorship, the space shuttle launch delays another month, slashdotters begin to buy tinfoil hats by the case as human society faces major upheavals....
No, we don't believe in equality of the sexes in this world. Women are always the victims. Men are evil, power hungry bastards that don't want women to earn equal respect for the hard work they do. Don't be such a sexist asshole.
Why, then, have Visa and MasterCard refused to do business with the (still completely legal, as far as I'm aware) website for whom he acts as a spokesperson?
Possible answer: Because Visa and Mastercard run a business based on their reputation and doing business with a company/organization that has earned a reputation of pissing off the single biggest customer in the world (the U.S. Government) might tarnish their own reputation, or lose them potential business from that super large customer.
Possible answer 2: Because wikileaks has talked about disclosing economically shocking information regarding the world's biggest financial institutions (of which MasterCard and Visa could be considered members), and they are trying to get a step ahead for damage control purposes.
Why have bank accounts been frozen?
As far as I understand, his account has been closed, not frozen...a bit different. As was explained in a previous story, this could be due to a technicality based on how that particular account was set up. In other words, wikileaks and/or Assange may still be able to access their funds, they just can't use the account for donations/payments due to a technicality.
Why have PayPal cut off their account?
See the possible answer #1 for Visa and Mastercard above. Also, Paypal is currently the single most popular internet payment system in the U.S. It would do a lot of harm to them to have their name conflated with a potential sexual assault criminal (not that he is, but it's public consciousness that matters).
Why have their web hosts and DNS provider given them the cold shoulder?
Well, wikileaks was recently DDOSed pretty badly. Maybe they got tired of hosting content that damaged their services to other customers as well. In other words, wikileaks business was not sufficient, benefits wise, to make the cost of hosting them worth while.
Why do leading US politicians advocate cold blooded murder by government troops?
Because they are idiots pandering to idiots and they get reelected by coming off as being, "Tough, patriotic, and badass..." or something along those lines. Politicians saying hyperbolic, stupid shit is nothing new or novel to this case.
Why are US legislators promising to change the law to make his journalistic, first amendment protected actions retroactively against the law?
Because they are idiots pandering to idiots and they get reelected by coming off as being, "Tough, patriotic, and badass..." or something along those lines. Legislators writing stupid laws is nothing new or novel to this case.
I'm not saying these are the absolute reasons or answers to your questions, but it is important to remember that there are a number of benign possibilities that answer all your uncertainties just as there are a number of malignant ones. We probably won't know what wheels are turning behind this great ballet of international politics for a few years, when wikileaks, or someone like them, release information regarding all of this. Try to keep things in perspective. It makes discussions healthier.
That is very probably stage II of this project (not this mission). Once the deployment mechanisms and actual sail material are tested on orbit (which is what this mission is doing, neither of these pieces of hardware have been flown before), then they will be implemented on increasingly more complex missions and satellites until they are as ubiquitous as reaction wheel systems and bang-bang thrusters. However, researching and developing a fundamentally new technology for on-orbit use takes time...even decades. Patience is a big part of spacecraft engineering.;)
No, in this particular mission it isn't really being used as a solar sail at all. The material used for the sail is, in fact, what a solar sail would be/will be made out of. The idea of this mission is to demo the structural properties of the material so that there is some scientific data on hand that can be used for reference when designing future missions. This particular bird is, as you are saying, simply using solar sail material to act as an atmospheric parachute to induce drag. Ideally, after this mission flies, NASA will put together a bird with a real solar sail made of the exact same material that will use it for navigation due to interaction with the sun.
Also, this mission will be used to test out NASA's deployment mechanism for proposed solar sails. From a mechanical engineering standpoint, it's actually a pretty cool mechanism.
...will require a fundamentally reexamination of the theory of common descent.
Which is precisely what being a scientific theory allows the theory of evolution of natural selection to do. It can be reexamined in light of new evidence.
But creationists don't know enough about biology to be able to use that argument in their favor.
Unfortunately, in my experience, not knowing much about a topic has never stopped creationists from trying to use that topic as an argument in their favor. See the second law of thermodynamics. I've honestly heard creationists try to apply that as a reason why the theory of evolution is flawed.
...to implement highly integrated, powerful artificial brains on cheap and widely available hardware within five years.
*snicker* Is it April 1st already Soulskill?
Don't get me wrong, this is cool research, but cheap, available, artificial brains in five years? In 2015? Color me skeptical. I say give it 25 at least.
Meanwhile, variousotherlaunchsystems, that aren't pork-bloated, politically-designed flying bricks, just keep chugging along with their launches and schedules successfully. I suppose this is what happens when politicians and business majors decide they can be engineers. Go figure
All those decisions are made as the result of trade studies (which are sometimes biased based on personal/political ideas). Ideally, what should happen is that the system integrators of the shuttle launch system should gather all the relevant data of the possible parts they want to use for their system. In the case of this tank, that would involve looking at data like money, time to build, dry and wet weight, and risk factors associated, etc. They would then compile all of this data into a very complex trade study. They would use the risk estimates from each potential component in a large risk model and see how the risk of each part failing affects the over all chance of catastrophic failure of the system. They would integrate all of the possible money figures into their budget models to determine how far over or under budget each potential part would cause the system to go. The would do mass stack ups and schedule models (including potential slips) to determine how those factors affect the system design.
Then, they would take all of those factors, determine which things are more important to them (less risk, less money, less weight, or less time, what's more important?), and make a component/subcontractor selection based off of this data in order to get the highest quality "bang for their buck" so to speak. So it is not likely that NASA, an organization of extraordinarily smart people, is sitting around looking at a price list and selecting the cheapest components every time.
Of course, the real problem is that NASA is a government organization and, like all government organizations (or really, any large organization) it is prone to misinformation, bias, and the development of a "company personality" if you will. If the final design decision comes down to two subcontractors' parts: X, or Y, and the trade studies show that they are very close in nature, then NASA will probably chose subcontractor X if it has a long history with X because having worked with them before means something to everyone working on the project. Alternatively, maybe the PR guys at subcontractor Y can fudge their data just enough to make their part look more appealing. Well then, NASA might select that part due to the misinformation it has been fed. Finally, if a lobbyist catches the ears of certain congressmen (I'm looking at you Hatch and Shelby, you corrupt bastards), then those congressmen may write an "offer that NASA can't refuse" into the budget legislation, thus forcing NASA to use a particular part or subcontractor even if it sucks compared to others.
Really, the situation at NASA is much more complicated than simply, "We don't have much money, find the cheapest shit you can and use it!" Due to politics, dishonesty, corruption,incompetence, and good ol' fashioned laziness inherent in all parties involved, NASA is both the proprietor of, and victim of, a very complicated design process that sometimes leaves them doing their best to keep a few humans alive using sub-par systems. That said, I very much respect, and feel for, my fellow aero- engineers at NASA.
Now, whether or not this new tank turns out to be one of those sub-par components I mentioned is not really clear yet. It hasn't had enough flight time to make that determination. Hopefully, the engineers at NASA currently working to hash out this new issue will help to determine that.
Well you certainly fail the scientific method 101. Fuckin' A I can't believe a comment that contained,
If people want to push their religion of evolution (it's a religion... it has not been and cannot be absolutely PROVEN)
Got modded up on Slashdot. The theory of evolution is not a religion in any reasonable sense of the word. It is a scientific model that currently fits very well to all available data obtained on the subject. By your standards, the theory of gravity, the theory of classical mechanics, the big bang theory, the various laws of thermodynamics, and hell, even the theory that electron activity can be used to deliver power to devices are all simply religions. The simple truth (and it is a truth) is that the current theory of evolution based on natural selection fits all of the obtained evidence regarding the development of life on this planet extremely well. It fits it so well, in fact, that intelligent people generally accept it as true. Just like people generally accept it as true that if you stimulate electron movement in a copper wire, there will be a transfer of energy that can be harnessed and manipulated for applicable purposes.
The only people that claim the theory of evolution is a belief system that cannot be absolutely proven are retards who don't understand what the word theory means regarding the scientific method. The scientific method states that you should make a hypothesis, conduct an experiment, record observations, and draw conclusions from that experiment. As multiple data sets (observations) are compiled on a common subject (the development of life) then conclusions can be logically drawn from the combination of that data into a theory. This is what the theory of evolution is. It is a data-backed, experiment-backed theory that is just as strong as the theory that states your ass isn't going to go flying into the nether regions of space when the Earth spins (gravity).
It is not a religion.
It is not a belief system.
It does not require faith.
It does not ask one to conduct rituals regularly at the arbitrary behest of some pronounced authority.
In fact, skepticism of the theory is encouraged so that further data will be collected and, if some data is obtained that contradicts the theory, then the theory can change, dynamically, as appropriate.
That's science. And whether you like it or not, it works. So deal with it.
And for fuck's sake don't post anything that freakin' asinine again, please.
And in a world where it is, supposedly, very profitable to gather together any and all data about you and sell it to the highest bidder, no information regarding you is protected by the 4th amendment.
It's funny, our founding fathers put massive amounts of effort and intellectual practice into drafting a fantastic document that protects the people from the government. It's too bad none of them thought to draft up the same type of document to protect the people from large social entities like corporations, businesses, special interest groups, powerful churches, political parties, etc. You would have thought they had heard about the abuses of the British East India Trading Company and the abuses of the Vatican that caused Martin Luther to separate back then...ah well. Maybe next time around we'll get it right.
I usually back up my friends in a bar fight too, even if we've had minor disagreements in the past. The difference is, of course, that me and my friends don't walk around punching people in the face for shits and giggles...or for cash.
Really, the valley is a tiny part of the whole park and to not go because it is popular would be sad.
And the whole park is a tiny part of the incredible Sierra Nevada, and, in my opinion, not even the coolest part. The fact that it is so popular simply makes it messy and makes the wildlife annoying as fuck. Any location where squirrels are brave enough to walk up to tourists and beg for food can be considered a tourist trap. If I wanted to go to a place where bears have little qualms of breaking into tourists' cars and campers' tents I would go to Yosemite. If I wanted to go somewhere were I can actually get away from annoying pets and have the freedom to relax, I would go camping in 1 of 1000 other places in the Sierra Nevada, like, say, somewhere along Sonora Pass.
It is too incredible to skip.
Quite honestly it isn't. It's just popular. There are other impressive, amazing rock formations nearby that don't have all the hype about them. Personally, I think Table Mountain is really cool. But even looking past that, places like Moaning Caverns, Crystal Palace, and Natural Bridges make for better day trips. Hell, I can head up Highway 108 to Pinecrest and go on a 30 minute hike to end up at Cleo's Bath where I can actually play near waterfalls safely and keep away from annoying people with Cameras. I can rip my clothes off and go splash around in the South Fork with no fear of getting caught for exposing myself. I can go perch myself up on the top of Yankee or Big Hill and catch a better sunset than I can from the top of Half Dome (And let me tell you, take a girl up there and she's more likely to get twitterpated and plant one on you than at Half Dome, the Half Dome hike just makes her tired and cranky). I am not just blathering out of ignorance. I have been to all these places and I know of dozens more that I haven't had the opportunity to explore yet. My point is, Yosemite is over-hyped. There are cooler places in the Sierra Nevada: places where you can find flowers that few people have ever seen, places where you can catch sight of Bald Eagles tending to their young, places where you can get naked, get drunk, and fire off shotguns indiscriminately without hurting anything. That's a vacation right there. That's freedom. Yosemite isn't much more than the nature's version of Disney Land in my opinion: too much cost and not enough wow, but the kids should visit it once anyways just to say they did.
For the record, I also refer to men that I look down upon for being petty and stupid as Sweetheart as well. Assuming that I used that word because she is a woman, rather than because I had every intention of making a derogatory and insulting post about her, is your problem, not mine.
Well, to be fair, pretty much all of California is so far out at this point that the entire state seems like its own planet that exists in a completely different plane of reality.*;)
* Disclaimer: I was born and raised in, and still live in, California. As a native boy, I get to poke fun at my batshit-insane state with pride.
Hey, just wanted to weigh in before you ruin your own vacation this spring. I grew up in Tuolumne County, California, just west of the Mono Lake area (in fact, we have a few historical sites dedicated to Mark Twain in that area). The foothills of the Sierra Nevada were my playground and Yosemite is nothing more than a tourist trap to us locals. If you are going to head up to Mono Lake or the nearby Bridgeport Reservoir or Grant Lake for vacation, don't go in the spring. The snowpack will last well into May and you will freeze your tucus off if you decide to go swimming in any of those mountain lakes that early (essentially you would just be swimming in melted snow...and it really is frackin' cold). If you really want to check out that location, especially for lake activities, I suggest waiting until very late July or, even better August. The drive up there will be hot as all balls, but the lakes will be much more temperate and kind to splash around in.
Just do us a favor and be careful with your campfires and such that time of year. A lot of us get tired of having half our damn county burn down every summer because of tourists being careless with cigarette butts and such. Dry grass burns fast. Just remember that and you should have a dandy vacation. Enjoy the Sierra Nevada when you get here. =)
Sarah Palin is going to target Julian Assange? With what sweetheart? Your caribou hunting rifle? Somehow I don't think it has the range to reach the UK, or wherever he is sitting these days.
No, honestly Sarah, what in the hell does your statement mean? Are you going to commit troops and military resources to "get him?" How are you going to do that since you are not in charge of any executive branch of any government in the entire world? Or does your current employer (isn't it Fox News nowadays?) have it's own private army that you can summon up just as easily as dipping into the petty cash?
Here's an idea, Sweetheart, instead of all the political grandstanding about what you are going to do to some dude on the other side of the world, why don't you put your money where your mouth is and actually try to go after him yourself? You don't want to break a nail? You don't want to put in the money or effort of conducting a manhunt? Well neither do the rest of us, nor do the citizens of the rest of the world, nor do most members of the U.S. military from what I can gather. We are tired of you politico retards, whom seem so adept at living with your heads on a completely different plain of reality, committing our resources, time, and efforts to some wild goose-chases that don't seem to produce any results anyways (Where is that last guy we went on a manhunt for? What was his name again? Osama Bin Something?). Nah, if you're really so outraged at Assange, go do your dirty work yourself. The rest of us are sick and tired of shoveling the shit for you student-body president, prom queen, princes and princesses that seem to think world politics is a popularity contest and a game.
For the tl:dr crowd, "Sarah, you're a stuck up, dolled up, dumb shit that isn't fit to find the path for getting your head out of your ass, much less hunting down a man on the other side of the world."
Solar microwave satellites were fun in SimCity 2000, and I'd still like to see them operational, but I've not seen even any proof of concept devices yet.
...why will we be building megastructures in space in the first place?
Because some of us think it is boring and downright stupid to keep our entire species piddling away on this silly little blue marble of ours. If you are comfortable in the warm, cushy confines of your home, that's fine and dandy. Other folks, with different values than you, would be happy living out the remainder of their days barely scratching a living from harsh environment that is space, even if that living is only for another couple days, hours, or minutes. Why? I couldn't tell you. Maybe we really are all nuts. But some of us value pushing the envelope, even at the risk of our own lives, far more than we do a comfy home and a warm fireplace.
Slashdot Mirror
It's kind of odd that you had to dig up such an offhand copy of that paper. Usually NASA's scientific papers are freely available through their website, being a publicly funded organization and all that. I wonder if you could get a copy of the paper by e-mailing NASA's astrobiology department.
Wikileaks founder arrested on suspicion of sexual assault, United States and many other countries partake in secret, scandalous dealings outside of the public view, the DOJ cracks down on piracy sites thus paving the way for internet censorship, the space shuttle launch delays another month, slashdotters begin to buy tinfoil hats by the case as human society faces major upheavals....
"And the universe does not even notice...."
That's how the world turns, young padawan. Now come to the darkside. We have cookies!
I dunno, I'd say they're equal. =P
No, we don't believe in equality of the sexes in this world. Women are always the victims. Men are evil, power hungry bastards that don't want women to earn equal respect for the hard work they do. Don't be such a sexist asshole.
Why, then, have Visa and MasterCard refused to do business with the (still completely legal, as far as I'm aware) website for whom he acts as a spokesperson?
Possible answer: Because Visa and Mastercard run a business based on their reputation and doing business with a company/organization that has earned a reputation of pissing off the single biggest customer in the world (the U.S. Government) might tarnish their own reputation, or lose them potential business from that super large customer.
Possible answer 2: Because wikileaks has talked about disclosing economically shocking information regarding the world's biggest financial institutions (of which MasterCard and Visa could be considered members), and they are trying to get a step ahead for damage control purposes.
Why have bank accounts been frozen?
As far as I understand, his account has been closed, not frozen...a bit different. As was explained in a previous story, this could be due to a technicality based on how that particular account was set up. In other words, wikileaks and/or Assange may still be able to access their funds, they just can't use the account for donations/payments due to a technicality.
Why have PayPal cut off their account?
See the possible answer #1 for Visa and Mastercard above. Also, Paypal is currently the single most popular internet payment system in the U.S. It would do a lot of harm to them to have their name conflated with a potential sexual assault criminal (not that he is, but it's public consciousness that matters).
Why have their web hosts and DNS provider given them the cold shoulder?
Well, wikileaks was recently DDOSed pretty badly. Maybe they got tired of hosting content that damaged their services to other customers as well. In other words, wikileaks business was not sufficient, benefits wise, to make the cost of hosting them worth while.
Why do leading US politicians advocate cold blooded murder by government troops?
Because they are idiots pandering to idiots and they get reelected by coming off as being, "Tough, patriotic, and badass..." or something along those lines. Politicians saying hyperbolic, stupid shit is nothing new or novel to this case.
Why are US legislators promising to change the law to make his journalistic, first amendment protected actions retroactively against the law?
Because they are idiots pandering to idiots and they get reelected by coming off as being, "Tough, patriotic, and badass..." or something along those lines. Legislators writing stupid laws is nothing new or novel to this case.
I'm not saying these are the absolute reasons or answers to your questions, but it is important to remember that there are a number of benign possibilities that answer all your uncertainties just as there are a number of malignant ones. We probably won't know what wheels are turning behind this great ballet of international politics for a few years, when wikileaks, or someone like them, release information regarding all of this. Try to keep things in perspective. It makes discussions healthier.
"The problem with parody is that it often goes unnoticed" - Anonymous
He's not making shit up. Here's the underwear bomber he is referring to...whom was mobbed by a passenger when his pant leg started smoking.
That is very probably stage II of this project (not this mission). Once the deployment mechanisms and actual sail material are tested on orbit (which is what this mission is doing, neither of these pieces of hardware have been flown before), then they will be implemented on increasingly more complex missions and satellites until they are as ubiquitous as reaction wheel systems and bang-bang thrusters. However, researching and developing a fundamentally new technology for on-orbit use takes time...even decades. Patience is a big part of spacecraft engineering. ;)
No, in this particular mission it isn't really being used as a solar sail at all. The material used for the sail is, in fact, what a solar sail would be/will be made out of. The idea of this mission is to demo the structural properties of the material so that there is some scientific data on hand that can be used for reference when designing future missions. This particular bird is, as you are saying, simply using solar sail material to act as an atmospheric parachute to induce drag. Ideally, after this mission flies, NASA will put together a bird with a real solar sail made of the exact same material that will use it for navigation due to interaction with the sun.
Also, this mission will be used to test out NASA's deployment mechanism for proposed solar sails. From a mechanical engineering standpoint, it's actually a pretty cool mechanism.
...will require a fundamentally reexamination of the theory of common descent.
Which is precisely what being a scientific theory allows the theory of evolution of natural selection to do. It can be reexamined in light of new evidence.
But creationists don't know enough about biology to be able to use that argument in their favor.
Unfortunately, in my experience, not knowing much about a topic has never stopped creationists from trying to use that topic as an argument in their favor. See the second law of thermodynamics. I've honestly heard creationists try to apply that as a reason why the theory of evolution is flawed.
...to implement highly integrated, powerful artificial brains on cheap and widely available hardware within five years.
*snicker* Is it April 1st already Soulskill?
Don't get me wrong, this is cool research, but cheap, available, artificial brains in five years? In 2015? Color me skeptical. I say give it 25 at least.
Meanwhile, various other launch systems, that aren't pork-bloated, politically-designed flying bricks, just keep chugging along with their launches and schedules successfully. I suppose this is what happens when politicians and business majors decide they can be engineers. Go figure
All those decisions are made as the result of trade studies (which are sometimes biased based on personal/political ideas). Ideally, what should happen is that the system integrators of the shuttle launch system should gather all the relevant data of the possible parts they want to use for their system. In the case of this tank, that would involve looking at data like money, time to build, dry and wet weight, and risk factors associated, etc. They would then compile all of this data into a very complex trade study. They would use the risk estimates from each potential component in a large risk model and see how the risk of each part failing affects the over all chance of catastrophic failure of the system. They would integrate all of the possible money figures into their budget models to determine how far over or under budget each potential part would cause the system to go. The would do mass stack ups and schedule models (including potential slips) to determine how those factors affect the system design.
Then, they would take all of those factors, determine which things are more important to them (less risk, less money, less weight, or less time, what's more important?), and make a component/subcontractor selection based off of this data in order to get the highest quality "bang for their buck" so to speak. So it is not likely that NASA, an organization of extraordinarily smart people, is sitting around looking at a price list and selecting the cheapest components every time.
Of course, the real problem is that NASA is a government organization and, like all government organizations (or really, any large organization) it is prone to misinformation, bias, and the development of a "company personality" if you will. If the final design decision comes down to two subcontractors' parts: X, or Y, and the trade studies show that they are very close in nature, then NASA will probably chose subcontractor X if it has a long history with X because having worked with them before means something to everyone working on the project. Alternatively, maybe the PR guys at subcontractor Y can fudge their data just enough to make their part look more appealing. Well then, NASA might select that part due to the misinformation it has been fed. Finally, if a lobbyist catches the ears of certain congressmen (I'm looking at you Hatch and Shelby, you corrupt bastards), then those congressmen may write an "offer that NASA can't refuse" into the budget legislation, thus forcing NASA to use a particular part or subcontractor even if it sucks compared to others.
Really, the situation at NASA is much more complicated than simply, "We don't have much money, find the cheapest shit you can and use it!" Due to politics, dishonesty, corruption,incompetence, and good ol' fashioned laziness inherent in all parties involved, NASA is both the proprietor of, and victim of, a very complicated design process that sometimes leaves them doing their best to keep a few humans alive using sub-par systems. That said, I very much respect, and feel for, my fellow aero- engineers at NASA.
Now, whether or not this new tank turns out to be one of those sub-par components I mentioned is not really clear yet. It hasn't had enough flight time to make that determination. Hopefully, the engineers at NASA currently working to hash out this new issue will help to determine that.
If people want to push their religion of evolution (it's a religion... it has not been and cannot be absolutely PROVEN)
Got modded up on Slashdot. The theory of evolution is not a religion in any reasonable sense of the word. It is a scientific model that currently fits very well to all available data obtained on the subject. By your standards, the theory of gravity, the theory of classical mechanics, the big bang theory, the various laws of thermodynamics, and hell, even the theory that electron activity can be used to deliver power to devices are all simply religions. The simple truth (and it is a truth) is that the current theory of evolution based on natural selection fits all of the obtained evidence regarding the development of life on this planet extremely well. It fits it so well, in fact, that intelligent people generally accept it as true. Just like people generally accept it as true that if you stimulate electron movement in a copper wire, there will be a transfer of energy that can be harnessed and manipulated for applicable purposes.
The only people that claim the theory of evolution is a belief system that cannot be absolutely proven are retards who don't understand what the word theory means regarding the scientific method. The scientific method states that you should make a hypothesis, conduct an experiment, record observations, and draw conclusions from that experiment. As multiple data sets (observations) are compiled on a common subject (the development of life) then conclusions can be logically drawn from the combination of that data into a theory. This is what the theory of evolution is. It is a data-backed, experiment-backed theory that is just as strong as the theory that states your ass isn't going to go flying into the nether regions of space when the Earth spins (gravity).
It is not a religion.
It is not a belief system.
It does not require faith.
It does not ask one to conduct rituals regularly at the arbitrary behest of some pronounced authority.
In fact, skepticism of the theory is encouraged so that further data will be collected and, if some data is obtained that contradicts the theory, then the theory can change, dynamically, as appropriate.
That's science. And whether you like it or not, it works. So deal with it.
And for fuck's sake don't post anything that freakin' asinine again, please.
And in a world where it is, supposedly, very profitable to gather together any and all data about you and sell it to the highest bidder, no information regarding you is protected by the 4th amendment.
It's funny, our founding fathers put massive amounts of effort and intellectual practice into drafting a fantastic document that protects the people from the government. It's too bad none of them thought to draft up the same type of document to protect the people from large social entities like corporations, businesses, special interest groups, powerful churches, political parties, etc. You would have thought they had heard about the abuses of the British East India Trading Company and the abuses of the Vatican that caused Martin Luther to separate back then...ah well. Maybe next time around we'll get it right.
but would that be more or less weird than you getting into bar fights?
Honestly? It depends on which fight you're talking about. I've been in some damn strange situations in my lifetime. I won't deny that.
I usually back up my friends in a bar fight too, even if we've had minor disagreements in the past. The difference is, of course, that me and my friends don't walk around punching people in the face for shits and giggles...or for cash.
Yosemite is a tourist trap?
Yep.
Really, the valley is a tiny part of the whole park and to not go because it is popular would be sad.
And the whole park is a tiny part of the incredible Sierra Nevada, and, in my opinion, not even the coolest part. The fact that it is so popular simply makes it messy and makes the wildlife annoying as fuck. Any location where squirrels are brave enough to walk up to tourists and beg for food can be considered a tourist trap. If I wanted to go to a place where bears have little qualms of breaking into tourists' cars and campers' tents I would go to Yosemite. If I wanted to go somewhere were I can actually get away from annoying pets and have the freedom to relax, I would go camping in 1 of 1000 other places in the Sierra Nevada, like, say, somewhere along Sonora Pass.
It is too incredible to skip.
Quite honestly it isn't. It's just popular. There are other impressive, amazing rock formations nearby that don't have all the hype about them. Personally, I think Table Mountain is really cool. But even looking past that, places like Moaning Caverns, Crystal Palace, and Natural Bridges make for better day trips. Hell, I can head up Highway 108 to Pinecrest and go on a 30 minute hike to end up at Cleo's Bath where I can actually play near waterfalls safely and keep away from annoying people with Cameras. I can rip my clothes off and go splash around in the South Fork with no fear of getting caught for exposing myself. I can go perch myself up on the top of Yankee or Big Hill and catch a better sunset than I can from the top of Half Dome (And let me tell you, take a girl up there and she's more likely to get twitterpated and plant one on you than at Half Dome, the Half Dome hike just makes her tired and cranky). I am not just blathering out of ignorance. I have been to all these places and I know of dozens more that I haven't had the opportunity to explore yet. My point is, Yosemite is over-hyped. There are cooler places in the Sierra Nevada: places where you can find flowers that few people have ever seen, places where you can catch sight of Bald Eagles tending to their young, places where you can get naked, get drunk, and fire off shotguns indiscriminately without hurting anything. That's a vacation right there. That's freedom. Yosemite isn't much more than the nature's version of Disney Land in my opinion: too much cost and not enough wow, but the kids should visit it once anyways just to say they did.
For the record, I also refer to men that I look down upon for being petty and stupid as Sweetheart as well. Assuming that I used that word because she is a woman, rather than because I had every intention of making a derogatory and insulting post about her, is your problem, not mine.
Well, to be fair, pretty much all of California is so far out at this point that the entire state seems like its own planet that exists in a completely different plane of reality.* ;)
* Disclaimer: I was born and raised in, and still live in, California. As a native boy, I get to poke fun at my batshit-insane state with pride.
Hey, just wanted to weigh in before you ruin your own vacation this spring. I grew up in Tuolumne County, California, just west of the Mono Lake area (in fact, we have a few historical sites dedicated to Mark Twain in that area). The foothills of the Sierra Nevada were my playground and Yosemite is nothing more than a tourist trap to us locals. If you are going to head up to Mono Lake or the nearby Bridgeport Reservoir or Grant Lake for vacation, don't go in the spring. The snowpack will last well into May and you will freeze your tucus off if you decide to go swimming in any of those mountain lakes that early (essentially you would just be swimming in melted snow...and it really is frackin' cold). If you really want to check out that location, especially for lake activities, I suggest waiting until very late July or, even better August. The drive up there will be hot as all balls, but the lakes will be much more temperate and kind to splash around in.
Just do us a favor and be careful with your campfires and such that time of year. A lot of us get tired of having half our damn county burn down every summer because of tourists being careless with cigarette butts and such. Dry grass burns fast. Just remember that and you should have a dandy vacation. Enjoy the Sierra Nevada when you get here. =)
It's called Craigslist, and it already exists. ;)
Sarah Palin is going to target Julian Assange? With what sweetheart? Your caribou hunting rifle? Somehow I don't think it has the range to reach the UK, or wherever he is sitting these days.
No, honestly Sarah, what in the hell does your statement mean? Are you going to commit troops and military resources to "get him?" How are you going to do that since you are not in charge of any executive branch of any government in the entire world? Or does your current employer (isn't it Fox News nowadays?) have it's own private army that you can summon up just as easily as dipping into the petty cash?
Here's an idea, Sweetheart, instead of all the political grandstanding about what you are going to do to some dude on the other side of the world, why don't you put your money where your mouth is and actually try to go after him yourself? You don't want to break a nail? You don't want to put in the money or effort of conducting a manhunt? Well neither do the rest of us, nor do the citizens of the rest of the world, nor do most members of the U.S. military from what I can gather. We are tired of you politico retards, whom seem so adept at living with your heads on a completely different plain of reality, committing our resources, time, and efforts to some wild goose-chases that don't seem to produce any results anyways (Where is that last guy we went on a manhunt for? What was his name again? Osama Bin Something?). Nah, if you're really so outraged at Assange, go do your dirty work yourself. The rest of us are sick and tired of shoveling the shit for you student-body president, prom queen, princes and princesses that seem to think world politics is a popularity contest and a game.
For the tl:dr crowd, "Sarah, you're a stuck up, dolled up, dumb shit that isn't fit to find the path for getting your head out of your ass, much less hunting down a man on the other side of the world."
Solar microwave satellites were fun in SimCity 2000, and I'd still like to see them operational, but I've not seen even any proof of concept devices yet.
We're working on it. These things take time though.
...why will we be building megastructures in space in the first place?
Because some of us think it is boring and downright stupid to keep our entire species piddling away on this silly little blue marble of ours. If you are comfortable in the warm, cushy confines of your home, that's fine and dandy. Other folks, with different values than you, would be happy living out the remainder of their days barely scratching a living from harsh environment that is space, even if that living is only for another couple days, hours, or minutes. Why? I couldn't tell you. Maybe we really are all nuts. But some of us value pushing the envelope, even at the risk of our own lives, far more than we do a comfy home and a warm fireplace.