Well yeah, it's a trade off like everything else in space-vehicle design. If you are definitely sending your robot to rocky parts of the moon, then you should probably use legs. However, if you are going to be wandering around in a fairly small area where rocks can be avoided, wheels make much more sense. Also, wheeled configurations can do much better on rough terrain than those found on Spirit and Opportunity. Just look at the capabilities of a quad or a hummer to see just how rough terrain can get and still allow for wheeled designs. At this point, of course, things probably become so expensive that it does make sense to switch to legs. My point was just that, unless you really are designing a robot to clamber over obstacles, or climb moon-cliffs, legs may very well be an over-design to the system.
As most of the powers in WWII figured out, the most efficient means of getting rid of a pesky sniper involves an excessive use of explosive directed in the general direction of the sniper. That said, those RPGs can come in very handy.;)
Re:Planetary visits are an obsolete idea
on
Gardening On Mars
·
· Score: 1
Hold on just a second. If you want to make an argument that manned spacelfight/settlement is an intrinsically flawed idea, then by all means, do your best. However, you state:
if we pushed on molecular nanotechnology just a little harder by 2030 we would be disassembling Mars for material to build the Matrioshka Brain
But just before that you criticize the idea of developing a manned space presence as:
misguided romantic ideas
So you honestly think that in twenty years we could dematerialize a planet and use the resources to construct a Dyson Sphere or Dyson Swarm (probably multiple ones) in such a manner that it can perform powerful computations for whatever reason we need? And you can criticize other ideas for being romantic and misguided with a straight face? Don't get me wrong, the manned vs. unmanned presence in space is a reasonable enough discussion to have, if it is being had reasonably. However, I don't think you quite understand the engineering feats necessary to construct something on the level of a Matrioshka Brain if you think we are going to be doing that in twenty years. I also would be very prone to declare your ideas to be rather romantic and, at best, far too optimistic. I'm just curious, what sources of information do you have access to that make you think we, as a species, could develop anything near a Matrioshka brain in the 2030's?
Also, I would like to ask you one more thing that I think a lot of the, "manned spaceflight is outdated," crowd fails to consider. I will admit, that it is a romantic question, but I still have to ask it. Do you ever think a goal is worth pursuing simply because it is impressive, difficult, and/or fascinating?
Maybe manned spaceflight is not the most practical or logical means to explore space. Maybe one day, soon, robots will be able to perform as many diverse tasks as humans so as to make them as effective as humans in space. Those are separate arguments. However, I would assert that sending a man or woman, or multiple men or women, to visit planetary bodies and/or colonies is worth pursuing precisely because it is difficult. As you said, we meatbags are not designed for space. However, not being designed for an environment has never kept us from pursuing some outrageous goals. Humans are not designed for flight, yet we built airplanes. Humans are not designed to live underwater, yet we built submarines. Hell, humans aren't even designed to live in Antartica, but we have habitats and science research stations there.
Humans have an incredible track record of spitting in Mother Nature's face when it comes to doing what we are supposed to do. If we only did what we were designed to do, we would have never studied volcanoes, we would have never tamed cattle, and we would probably have never upgraded from tents to houses. Sometimes we go against this harsh, entropic reality for logical and practical reasons. However, sometimes we go against this harsh, entropic reality precisely because it is difficult and, by all logical analysis, irrational and impossible. And when we succeed in those ridiculous ventures, the entire species comes together with a swelling sense of pride and inspiration that drives each and every one of us to work harder and progress our species further. You can say that pursuing goals for purely inspirational purposes is silly, impractical, and downright stupid if you want. But I would have to disagree with your and wonder just how boring of a life you lead. Sometimes gumption and motivation are resources that need to be mined and stockpiled just like any other resource worth having. In the end, it all comes down to what we choose, as a species, to place more value on. I think that taking a balance approach, rather than an extremely one sided approach (like doing things for purely logical reasons, or doing things for purely emotional reasons), is the best approach to take. You, of course, are welcome to disagree.
Wow, way to completely avoid the entire scope of the nuclear energy generation topic in your rant. You mentioned Germany, but completely failed to mention France and Russia and their respective track records and power generation capabilities based on nuclear energy production. You ranted about how fusion power doesn't even exist yet, but you completely failed to discuss or bring up existing, efficient, waste reducing technologies like breeder reactors and thorium fueled reactors. You manage to bring up Chernobyl to scare people, but fail completely to discuss the relevant safety measures and failsafes that were completely disregarded or disabled in that plant which led to the terrible clusterfuck it was. You also fail to mention more recent disasters like Three Mile Island which, while still terrible, were significantly smaller in scope than Chernobyl due to improved designs and safety standards. Furthermore, you fail to address the fact that modern designs of various nuclear reactors bypass risks like Three Mile Island and Chernobyl by their very nature because the ignition and power production processes are set up to prevent a critical overload/meltdown entirely. You mange to discuss all of the terrible efficiencies used in modern societies but fail to produce, or even mention, any better technologies that are practical, affordable, and could be used to replace these outdated systems.
All in all, you managed to show yourself to be suffering from an extraordinary case of confirmation bias by displaying a very one sided, 'discussion,' that seemed more fueled by emotion than any form of rationality or balanced research. In short, you fail at being taken seriously by anyone with half a brain.
Don't get me wrong, wind, solar, geothermal, hydroelectric, and numerous other sources of green energy are all great technologies and should be incorporated into modern power grids as appropriate. However, dismissing all nuclear energy (even existing fission nuclear energy plants) as being irrelevant or stupid because we have not yet perfected nuclear fusion plants (a completely different atomic process, involving different fundamental forces) is nothing short of retarded. Please hang your bias at the door next time you log into slashdot, or at least warn us readers how much drivel your post contains with a classic [/unfounded_rant] tag. Christ.
If you have paid any Federal taxes in the last 50 years, you're helping somebody else explore the possibility of getting extremely wealthy through the use of the facilities you built.
See, I look at it as:
If you have paid any Federal taxes in the last 50 years, you're helping invest in an industry that can open the door to incredible science, information, resources, and potential for the entire species.
That being said, this is one thing I actually like the idea of paying taxes towards. Well, this along with a standing army, a functioning power network, nice roads, etc...but that's all off topic. I guess what I am getting at is that this is helping a whole new industry blossom, just like cars blossomed in the early 1900's, and personal computers blossomed in the 1980's. That's something well worth investing in, in my opinion. Of course, your view may well (and certainly seems to) vary.;)
I know you mean well and that's fine, but there is something you need to understand. All orbital spaceflights originating in the US have very strict requirements that a large portion of their initial launch trajectory ground traces over open ocean. This is done specifically so that you don't have rockets or fuel crashing down on your populace. Now, I don't know what kind of restrictions are being discussed by the FAA, but commercial launches already have to adhere to these guidelines (The Atlas V and Delta IV are commercial launches and do, often, launch purely commercial payloads). I am not sure exactly how involved the FAA is in these current regulations but I just figured you should know that many of the launch restrictions and regulations you are discussing are already largely in place in the US. Now as for other countries, that's a different story. China is particularly fond of dropping shit on their populace.
I doubt there will be objections; Santa Barbara has already had off-shore oil wells.
True, but there are a LOT of objections about those oil rigs. I read a couple of Santa Barbara County newspapers and about once every two weeks there is a story about Lois Capps or other political folk mucking about with, and talking about changing, the operations of those oil rigs. For the most part, the complaints center around the rigs mucking up the Santa Barbara beach waters (and yeah, those waters really are gross). However, there are some complaints about how terrible they look sitting off the coast. I don't know if the eco-folk in SB county would be completely okay with large windmills or not. It would be interesting to see how they reacted though, if for no other reason than to see just how hypocritical the green movement in Santa Barbara County can be.
But they recently landed a probe on an asteroid, and returned it to earth with asteroid rocks
Well, not exactly. They sent a spacecraft to an asteroid to hover above the asteroid, shoot a pellet at it, scoop up some debris, and come back. Instead, part of the system failed. The spacecraft landed to preserve its health while possible fixes were discussed. The landing caused the pellet shooting system to fail so no asteroid debris was collected for sure. The Japanese decided there was still some chance that something, somehow, ended up in the collection bin. They uploaded some patches to the spacecraft. The spacecraft started its journey home when more propulsion systems failed. The Japanese hacked components from three different thrusters (of four) to get one bastardized thruster working. And now it is about two months from touching down if it manages to perform all of its appropriate maneuvers with its single, bastardized thruster.
Now, that's not to trivialize the Hayabusa mission. Frankly I think it is one of the coolest space missions flying right now and I am hoping it does, indeed, have asteroid material within it. However, saying it has asteroid rocks on board is simply not true.
Also, yes, JAXA is kicking ass and taking names. It is amazing what a country of intelligent humans can do when you forbid them from developing weapons for half of a century. See also, the Japanese robotics industry. That said, JAXA is making a big push to have a presence in space right now because they see Space as one developing industry that will take off in the next few decades (as do many others). They also see robotics to be in this position hence their great achievements in that field. So, in conclusion, Japan is rocking hard in tech development because they are trying to ride the next PC wave if you will. Any entrepreneurs and investors in any other country would do well to take notes on this trend.
That said, they aren't the only ones doing really cool science right now. NASA also has solar sail and ion thruster proof of concept missions on the table (in fact, some of them use satellite buses that are only 10 cm x 10 cm x 30 cm), NASA is still developing the MSL, the Indians have a very successful lunar orbiter that detected water in lunar regolith, Armadillo Aerospace is still pioneering ahead with its work on hovering rockets for lunar landings, and the Chinese are starting to mature their launch capabilities giving them a significant presence orbit. In other words, it's not just Japan that's exciting, its everyone. But yes, I do agree that JAXA is kicking ass lately.
You know I never actually read the XKCD blog but damn, that was an interesting theory. The final death ray design phase reminds me, starkly, of Nikola Tesla....
While your discussion of thin film solar cells is true, most solar cells deployed in spacecraft are covered in doped cover glass to help protect the solar cell and extend its life (constant bombarding from various wavelengths that the cell is not manufactured to absorb decreases lifetime). That said, while thin film solar cells do exist and can be used, they will have a significantly reduced lifespan when compared to glass covered hard cells. I am sure the designers of this mission accounted for this reduced lifespan, but it should be noted that using thin film flexible cells, as opposed to glass covered cells involves a trade-off. Also, thin film cells have slightly different thermal problems that need to be dealt with. Whereas rigid cells usually have a heat rejection path designed into them, thin film cells may not. Although, this can easily be accounted for by painting the 'back' side of the solar cell the right color and using the whole damn thing as a radiator.
And just to discourage any [citation needed] stuff, please seeThe Fundamentals of Space Systems - Vincent L. Pisacane, Chapter 6: Space Power Systems. Section 6.5: Solar Cell Arrays, Subsection 6.5.1 Array Construction.... for a general discussion of conventional solar cell architecture for space applications.
Simply build a keel of conductive material on the spacecraft that will give the ship a preferred direction of motion through the Luminiferous Aether and you can tack 'upwind' as easily as you tack up a river!
Generally speaking, having a surface charge on your spacecraft is dangerous. It tends to induce errors in the internal electronics and it can also enact a magnetic moment on the spacecraft itself. Of course, if the surface charge can be modeled in advance then such effects can be accounted for, but that adds a whole new layer of complexity to the design.
And California wonders why their state is ready to self-implode.
No we don't, at least, not all of us. California has a decently large population so there are plenty of people here who facepalm themselves every time they read about shit like this. Those people even go out of their way to stop it. We attend local meetings at government centers. We try to meet with our legislators at the state level. We even help the city-councilman next door carry groceries in from his car in an attempt to get his ear. We talk about things rationally. We vote with plenty of sense. We even try to convince others that shit like this is retarded, regularly.
Unfortunately, those of us that are trying to fix this state are fighting a constant uphill battle against strung-out junkies, the radical religious zealots, the love-will-fix-everything nutjobs, the city-slicking Sierra clubbers (seriously, the Bay is not part of the Sierras guys, get your title straight), and the apathetic, fuck-you types that can't be bothered with anything that doesn't involve their favorite music or X-box game. It's a hard battle. =P
That said, don't discount all Californians as bat-shit crazies, just realize that since we have a nice climate, a lot of people move here so the ratio of common-sense to dumb-fuckery is extraordinarily low. Think of it as a population made up of the entirety of 4chan and slashdot. While the slashdotters (most of the time) try to be rational, they are far outnumbered by the/b-tards that think their penis is more important than it really is.
Get over it, your team screwed the pooch, but lucky for you, the grownups are now here to fix things, again. You're welcome.
Hmmm, so my team screwed the pooch? The only message I even wrote regarding my team was that I was following the entire discussion up until your most recent post. At that point, you came off as biased, irrational, and uncritical. Thus, I said that I couldn't take you seriously anymore. I am not sure how you could derive, from that info. what my team is, or, for that matter whether I even have a team or not? Then again, that doesn't matter to you does it? You think in terms of us vs. them. Therefore, if someone disagrees or criticizes your post, your immediate response is to get defensive and act as if you're superior. Thus, you effectively discontinue any further analysis or dialogue regarding the topic at hand and can walk away with your ego still intact feeling smug and intelligent. Yep, that sure sounds like grown up behavior to me. If you, and folk who think like you, are the only ones that can, 'fix things,' then I suppose we really are as screwed as all the end of the world nutters think we are.
I think the most amusing part of your response was that you failed to address my point entirely. Instead you went straight for the ad-hominem based on the assumption that I had formulated an opinion in favor of, or against, one team. What I said in my original post was that the CRA created a situation where banks had to deal with choosing between the lesser of two evils. By creating that situation, it contributed to poor lending practices becoming more widely adopted which did, indeed, contribute to the financial meltdown. Thus, the CRA actually did contribute to the financial meltdown to some extent. Whether it did as much, more, or less damage than wall street investors is not something I am discussing. However, your answer to that point was, "Tough shit, banking's a hard business so deal with it." Oh yeah, that definitely sounds like a mature, rational, grown-up position to me. Are you sure you are as grown up as you claim to be? Or are you just an insecure teenager in an adult's body that likes to talk about being grown-up when he/she can't provide any rational discussion and or relevant solutions to a complicated problem.
See, in my book, claiming to be a grown up that can fix things doesn't show you to be mature or capable at all. If you want to show that you are grown up and can fix things, then try offering some valid solutions or fixes. For that matter, just try discussing the problem rationally without all the personal attacks. See, the funny part is, I don't know all the gooey details about the economic situation that led up to the current crisis. So when I see a discussion regarding it, I listen in to those discussing the matter so that I can learn something that I may not have known. However, as soon as one party in a discussion starts throwing around smug insults, and stops discussing what logical cause/effect relationships contributed to the topic, I stop listening to them because it becomes apparent that anything they could teach me will be inherently fused with irrationality and/or emotion. That, to me, is a grown-up way to learn about a topic and, thus, move one step closer to fixing any problems associated with that topic. Your approach of badmouthing those who respond to you is not, in any way, grown up. So congratulations, you've proven yourself to be a complete tool regarding this subject and I won't be able to take most of your posts seriously without an extreme grain of skepticism from here on out simply due to the fact that your emotional, unintelligent responses betrayed your ignorance and bias.
For the record, I am criticizing you in my own post not to form an ad-hominem but because I want you to understand just why posting in such an irrational manner will discredit any knowledge you actually do have on the subject. It seems like you have at least done some research regarding the economic crisis so you sho
This is a bit offtopic but it's becoming more prevalent and frustrating on slashdot. Is there a chance we could stop posting so many Inhabitat stories to slashdot? More often than not they aren't even stories so much as single paragraph posts that say, "Look at this really cool technology! Isn't it cool and, more importantly green?" They never even bother to go into a decent amount of technical detail about the really cool technology. Hell, in this case, the wikipedia article has more relevant technical details than the Inhabitat article. It's not like we put a post to slashdot every time a new wikipedia article on technology opens up. For that matter, if we are just posting links to websites about really cool technology, we could easily go digging through websites that are dedicated to the particular technology to get the really juicy bits of interest. For instance, when talking about Ikaros, why don't we try looking it up on one of the dozens of websites dedicated to cataloging spacecraft? Well that's not news is it? That's just cataloging interesting technology which, as far as I can tell, is all Inhabitat does.
I guess what I am getting at is that just because Inhabitat stumbled upon something cool they didn't know existed, it doesn't mean there is any news regarding that particular item. Now, if Ikaros launched recently, or if it's mission was underway, or if it was experiencing some technical difficulties, that would be something. The fact that the mission exists in the first place is neither a recent development nor particularly newsworthy. It seems like the firehose is getting clogged with Inhabitat submissions and frankly its starting to seem like slashvertising for the blog.
That's your rebuttal? It doesn't matter because the bank can just take a low federal rating instead of partaking in, possibly, poor loaning practices? I don't know about you, but when I choose a bank or loaning agency, federal rating is one of the first metrics I look at. I would wager that larger investors than myself (such as businesses) also look at said rating. So if a bank were to just say, "Nah, screw it, we'll just take the poor federal rating," I would bet they would lose a significant portion of their business.
So you say, the CRA gives them the option of partaking in risky loan programs (thus inflating the housing bubble) or taking a bad federal rating (thus causing the bank to lose business and reputation), but somehow that did not contribute to the financial clusterfuck that we're in today? Sorry, I was taking you seriously up until this point but now you just seem radical.
In other words, the Rocket Racing league found a way to make the most common form of space propulsion marketable to the general public: entertainment. Well played. If this rocket racing league takes off, it will certainly spurn advances in chemical based propulsion and reusable rocket engines since entertainment seems to be a great way to generate R&D money for technology (see NASCAR). I'm impressed.
I always like it when I see thanks extended to answers of inquiries on slashdot. It reaffirms my belief that this site is not entirely made up of elitist, tech-savvy trolls that like to kick and scream as much as every other immature wank on the internet. Well done, sir.
Today's security related threads USA is facing can not be solved with developing new weapons.
I know! Imagine the nerdrage that it would generate to bomb slashdot to prevent more security related threads from being posted. Although....it might not hurt if kdawson was involved in the collateral damage. =P
...which they had to fight and work hard for. Otherwise they would have just been Brits a long way from home.
vast tracts of relatively unpopulated land and natural resources
...which they had to explore, settle, cultivate, and discover. All of this took hard work, a pioneering spirit, and a tenacity reminiscent of legends.
coupled with a rapidly advancing technology base?
...which advanced rapidly due to the hard work, sharp cunning, long hours, and high levels of gumption that the Americans poured into it. Technology only begets more technology if people are willing to work hard on existing systems.
I am not disagreeing with you, merely reaffirming my original point. One of the defining factors of success of the Yanks was their willingness to break their backs working hard to earn a free existence. A man or woman that has earned their existence through such work, doesn't put up with bullshit from anyone, friend or foe. The pride that comes from such accomplishments assures this. As such, America was given the opportunity to prosper and rise to power because the individuals that settled this country worked hard and stood by their works proudly.
Yeah I lived there up until my twenties. I still visit regularly and have quite a few friends who still live their in their midtwenties and thirties. They don't seem to describe any of the behavior you did. Different lives, different experiences I guess.
Slashdot Mirror
Well yeah, it's a trade off like everything else in space-vehicle design. If you are definitely sending your robot to rocky parts of the moon, then you should probably use legs. However, if you are going to be wandering around in a fairly small area where rocks can be avoided, wheels make much more sense. Also, wheeled configurations can do much better on rough terrain than those found on Spirit and Opportunity. Just look at the capabilities of a quad or a hummer to see just how rough terrain can get and still allow for wheeled designs. At this point, of course, things probably become so expensive that it does make sense to switch to legs. My point was just that, unless you really are designing a robot to clamber over obstacles, or climb moon-cliffs, legs may very well be an over-design to the system.
Or, you know, they could just use wheels like other, very successful robotic explorers....Legs are complicated.
You're going to be fucked after
What if that's precisely what you enjoy?
As most of the powers in WWII figured out, the most efficient means of getting rid of a pesky sniper involves an excessive use of explosive directed in the general direction of the sniper. That said, those RPGs can come in very handy. ;)
if we pushed on molecular nanotechnology just a little harder by 2030 we would be disassembling Mars for material to build the Matrioshka Brain
But just before that you criticize the idea of developing a manned space presence as:
misguided romantic ideas
So you honestly think that in twenty years we could dematerialize a planet and use the resources to construct a Dyson Sphere or Dyson Swarm (probably multiple ones) in such a manner that it can perform powerful computations for whatever reason we need? And you can criticize other ideas for being romantic and misguided with a straight face? Don't get me wrong, the manned vs. unmanned presence in space is a reasonable enough discussion to have, if it is being had reasonably. However, I don't think you quite understand the engineering feats necessary to construct something on the level of a Matrioshka Brain if you think we are going to be doing that in twenty years. I also would be very prone to declare your ideas to be rather romantic and, at best, far too optimistic. I'm just curious, what sources of information do you have access to that make you think we, as a species, could develop anything near a Matrioshka brain in the 2030's?
Also, I would like to ask you one more thing that I think a lot of the, "manned spaceflight is outdated," crowd fails to consider. I will admit, that it is a romantic question, but I still have to ask it. Do you ever think a goal is worth pursuing simply because it is impressive, difficult, and/or fascinating?
Maybe manned spaceflight is not the most practical or logical means to explore space. Maybe one day, soon, robots will be able to perform as many diverse tasks as humans so as to make them as effective as humans in space. Those are separate arguments. However, I would assert that sending a man or woman, or multiple men or women, to visit planetary bodies and/or colonies is worth pursuing precisely because it is difficult. As you said, we meatbags are not designed for space. However, not being designed for an environment has never kept us from pursuing some outrageous goals. Humans are not designed for flight, yet we built airplanes. Humans are not designed to live underwater, yet we built submarines. Hell, humans aren't even designed to live in Antartica, but we have habitats and science research stations there.
Humans have an incredible track record of spitting in Mother Nature's face when it comes to doing what we are supposed to do. If we only did what we were designed to do, we would have never studied volcanoes, we would have never tamed cattle, and we would probably have never upgraded from tents to houses. Sometimes we go against this harsh, entropic reality for logical and practical reasons. However, sometimes we go against this harsh, entropic reality precisely because it is difficult and, by all logical analysis, irrational and impossible. And when we succeed in those ridiculous ventures, the entire species comes together with a swelling sense of pride and inspiration that drives each and every one of us to work harder and progress our species further. You can say that pursuing goals for purely inspirational purposes is silly, impractical, and downright stupid if you want. But I would have to disagree with your and wonder just how boring of a life you lead. Sometimes gumption and motivation are resources that need to be mined and stockpiled just like any other resource worth having. In the end, it all comes down to what we choose, as a species, to place more value on. I think that taking a balance approach, rather than an extremely one sided approach (like doing things for purely logical reasons, or doing things for purely emotional reasons), is the best approach to take. You, of course, are welcome to disagree.
Possibly. =P
Do you really want to end up throwing chairs at people?
To be honest, that sounds like a lot more fun than wearing turtlenecks and starting a cult....
Wow, way to completely avoid the entire scope of the nuclear energy generation topic in your rant. You mentioned Germany, but completely failed to mention France and Russia and their respective track records and power generation capabilities based on nuclear energy production. You ranted about how fusion power doesn't even exist yet, but you completely failed to discuss or bring up existing, efficient, waste reducing technologies like breeder reactors and thorium fueled reactors. You manage to bring up Chernobyl to scare people, but fail completely to discuss the relevant safety measures and failsafes that were completely disregarded or disabled in that plant which led to the terrible clusterfuck it was. You also fail to mention more recent disasters like Three Mile Island which, while still terrible, were significantly smaller in scope than Chernobyl due to improved designs and safety standards. Furthermore, you fail to address the fact that modern designs of various nuclear reactors bypass risks like Three Mile Island and Chernobyl by their very nature because the ignition and power production processes are set up to prevent a critical overload/meltdown entirely. You mange to discuss all of the terrible efficiencies used in modern societies but fail to produce, or even mention, any better technologies that are practical, affordable, and could be used to replace these outdated systems.
All in all, you managed to show yourself to be suffering from an extraordinary case of confirmation bias by displaying a very one sided, 'discussion,' that seemed more fueled by emotion than any form of rationality or balanced research. In short, you fail at being taken seriously by anyone with half a brain.
Don't get me wrong, wind, solar, geothermal, hydroelectric, and numerous other sources of green energy are all great technologies and should be incorporated into modern power grids as appropriate. However, dismissing all nuclear energy (even existing fission nuclear energy plants) as being irrelevant or stupid because we have not yet perfected nuclear fusion plants (a completely different atomic process, involving different fundamental forces) is nothing short of retarded. Please hang your bias at the door next time you log into slashdot, or at least warn us readers how much drivel your post contains with a classic [/unfounded_rant] tag. Christ.
If you have paid any Federal taxes in the last 50 years, you're helping somebody else explore the possibility of getting extremely wealthy through the use of the facilities you built.
See, I look at it as:
If you have paid any Federal taxes in the last 50 years, you're helping invest in an industry that can open the door to incredible science, information, resources, and potential for the entire species.
That being said, this is one thing I actually like the idea of paying taxes towards. Well, this along with a standing army, a functioning power network, nice roads, etc...but that's all off topic. I guess what I am getting at is that this is helping a whole new industry blossom, just like cars blossomed in the early 1900's, and personal computers blossomed in the 1980's. That's something well worth investing in, in my opinion. Of course, your view may well (and certainly seems to) vary. ;)
*facepalm*
I know you mean well and that's fine, but there is something you need to understand. All orbital spaceflights originating in the US have very strict requirements that a large portion of their initial launch trajectory ground traces over open ocean. This is done specifically so that you don't have rockets or fuel crashing down on your populace. Now, I don't know what kind of restrictions are being discussed by the FAA, but commercial launches already have to adhere to these guidelines (The Atlas V and Delta IV are commercial launches and do, often, launch purely commercial payloads). I am not sure exactly how involved the FAA is in these current regulations but I just figured you should know that many of the launch restrictions and regulations you are discussing are already largely in place in the US. Now as for other countries, that's a different story. China is particularly fond of dropping shit on their populace.
I doubt there will be objections; Santa Barbara has already had off-shore oil wells.
True, but there are a LOT of objections about those oil rigs. I read a couple of Santa Barbara County newspapers and about once every two weeks there is a story about Lois Capps or other political folk mucking about with, and talking about changing, the operations of those oil rigs. For the most part, the complaints center around the rigs mucking up the Santa Barbara beach waters (and yeah, those waters really are gross). However, there are some complaints about how terrible they look sitting off the coast. I don't know if the eco-folk in SB county would be completely okay with large windmills or not. It would be interesting to see how they reacted though, if for no other reason than to see just how hypocritical the green movement in Santa Barbara County can be.
But they recently landed a probe on an asteroid, and returned it to earth with asteroid rocks
Well, not exactly. They sent a spacecraft to an asteroid to hover above the asteroid, shoot a pellet at it, scoop up some debris, and come back. Instead, part of the system failed. The spacecraft landed to preserve its health while possible fixes were discussed. The landing caused the pellet shooting system to fail so no asteroid debris was collected for sure. The Japanese decided there was still some chance that something, somehow, ended up in the collection bin. They uploaded some patches to the spacecraft. The spacecraft started its journey home when more propulsion systems failed. The Japanese hacked components from three different thrusters (of four) to get one bastardized thruster working. And now it is about two months from touching down if it manages to perform all of its appropriate maneuvers with its single, bastardized thruster.
Now, that's not to trivialize the Hayabusa mission. Frankly I think it is one of the coolest space missions flying right now and I am hoping it does, indeed, have asteroid material within it. However, saying it has asteroid rocks on board is simply not true.
Also, yes, JAXA is kicking ass and taking names. It is amazing what a country of intelligent humans can do when you forbid them from developing weapons for half of a century. See also, the Japanese robotics industry. That said, JAXA is making a big push to have a presence in space right now because they see Space as one developing industry that will take off in the next few decades (as do many others). They also see robotics to be in this position hence their great achievements in that field. So, in conclusion, Japan is rocking hard in tech development because they are trying to ride the next PC wave if you will. Any entrepreneurs and investors in any other country would do well to take notes on this trend.
That said, they aren't the only ones doing really cool science right now. NASA also has solar sail and ion thruster proof of concept missions on the table (in fact, some of them use satellite buses that are only 10 cm x 10 cm x 30 cm), NASA is still developing the MSL, the Indians have a very successful lunar orbiter that detected water in lunar regolith, Armadillo Aerospace is still pioneering ahead with its work on hovering rockets for lunar landings, and the Chinese are starting to mature their launch capabilities giving them a significant presence orbit. In other words, it's not just Japan that's exciting, its everyone. But yes, I do agree that JAXA is kicking ass lately.
You know I never actually read the XKCD blog but damn, that was an interesting theory. The final death ray design phase reminds me, starkly, of Nikola Tesla....
While your discussion of thin film solar cells is true, most solar cells deployed in spacecraft are covered in doped cover glass to help protect the solar cell and extend its life (constant bombarding from various wavelengths that the cell is not manufactured to absorb decreases lifetime). That said, while thin film solar cells do exist and can be used, they will have a significantly reduced lifespan when compared to glass covered hard cells. I am sure the designers of this mission accounted for this reduced lifespan, but it should be noted that using thin film flexible cells, as opposed to glass covered cells involves a trade-off. Also, thin film cells have slightly different thermal problems that need to be dealt with. Whereas rigid cells usually have a heat rejection path designed into them, thin film cells may not. Although, this can easily be accounted for by painting the 'back' side of the solar cell the right color and using the whole damn thing as a radiator.
... for a general discussion of conventional solar cell architecture for space applications.
And just to discourage any [citation needed] stuff, please seeThe Fundamentals of Space Systems - Vincent L. Pisacane, Chapter 6: Space Power Systems. Section 6.5: Solar Cell Arrays, Subsection 6.5.1 Array Construction.
Simply build a keel of conductive material on the spacecraft that will give the ship a preferred direction of motion through the Luminiferous Aether and you can tack 'upwind' as easily as you tack up a river!
Generally speaking, having a surface charge on your spacecraft is dangerous. It tends to induce errors in the internal electronics and it can also enact a magnetic moment on the spacecraft itself. Of course, if the surface charge can be modeled in advance then such effects can be accounted for, but that adds a whole new layer of complexity to the design.
And California wonders why their state is ready to self-implode.
No we don't, at least, not all of us. California has a decently large population so there are plenty of people here who facepalm themselves every time they read about shit like this. Those people even go out of their way to stop it. We attend local meetings at government centers. We try to meet with our legislators at the state level. We even help the city-councilman next door carry groceries in from his car in an attempt to get his ear. We talk about things rationally. We vote with plenty of sense. We even try to convince others that shit like this is retarded, regularly.
/b-tards that think their penis is more important than it really is.
Unfortunately, those of us that are trying to fix this state are fighting a constant uphill battle against strung-out junkies, the radical religious zealots, the love-will-fix-everything nutjobs, the city-slicking Sierra clubbers (seriously, the Bay is not part of the Sierras guys, get your title straight), and the apathetic, fuck-you types that can't be bothered with anything that doesn't involve their favorite music or X-box game. It's a hard battle. =P
That said, don't discount all Californians as bat-shit crazies, just realize that since we have a nice climate, a lot of people move here so the ratio of common-sense to dumb-fuckery is extraordinarily low. Think of it as a population made up of the entirety of 4chan and slashdot. While the slashdotters (most of the time) try to be rational, they are far outnumbered by the
Get over it, your team screwed the pooch, but lucky for you, the grownups are now here to fix things, again. You're welcome.
Hmmm, so my team screwed the pooch? The only message I even wrote regarding my team was that I was following the entire discussion up until your most recent post. At that point, you came off as biased, irrational, and uncritical. Thus, I said that I couldn't take you seriously anymore. I am not sure how you could derive, from that info. what my team is, or, for that matter whether I even have a team or not? Then again, that doesn't matter to you does it? You think in terms of us vs. them. Therefore, if someone disagrees or criticizes your post, your immediate response is to get defensive and act as if you're superior. Thus, you effectively discontinue any further analysis or dialogue regarding the topic at hand and can walk away with your ego still intact feeling smug and intelligent. Yep, that sure sounds like grown up behavior to me. If you, and folk who think like you, are the only ones that can, 'fix things,' then I suppose we really are as screwed as all the end of the world nutters think we are.
I think the most amusing part of your response was that you failed to address my point entirely. Instead you went straight for the ad-hominem based on the assumption that I had formulated an opinion in favor of, or against, one team. What I said in my original post was that the CRA created a situation where banks had to deal with choosing between the lesser of two evils. By creating that situation, it contributed to poor lending practices becoming more widely adopted which did, indeed, contribute to the financial meltdown. Thus, the CRA actually did contribute to the financial meltdown to some extent. Whether it did as much, more, or less damage than wall street investors is not something I am discussing. However, your answer to that point was, "Tough shit, banking's a hard business so deal with it." Oh yeah, that definitely sounds like a mature, rational, grown-up position to me. Are you sure you are as grown up as you claim to be? Or are you just an insecure teenager in an adult's body that likes to talk about being grown-up when he/she can't provide any rational discussion and or relevant solutions to a complicated problem.
See, in my book, claiming to be a grown up that can fix things doesn't show you to be mature or capable at all. If you want to show that you are grown up and can fix things, then try offering some valid solutions or fixes. For that matter, just try discussing the problem rationally without all the personal attacks. See, the funny part is, I don't know all the gooey details about the economic situation that led up to the current crisis. So when I see a discussion regarding it, I listen in to those discussing the matter so that I can learn something that I may not have known. However, as soon as one party in a discussion starts throwing around smug insults, and stops discussing what logical cause/effect relationships contributed to the topic, I stop listening to them because it becomes apparent that anything they could teach me will be inherently fused with irrationality and/or emotion. That, to me, is a grown-up way to learn about a topic and, thus, move one step closer to fixing any problems associated with that topic. Your approach of badmouthing those who respond to you is not, in any way, grown up. So congratulations, you've proven yourself to be a complete tool regarding this subject and I won't be able to take most of your posts seriously without an extreme grain of skepticism from here on out simply due to the fact that your emotional, unintelligent responses betrayed your ignorance and bias.
For the record, I am criticizing you in my own post not to form an ad-hominem but because I want you to understand just why posting in such an irrational manner will discredit any knowledge you actually do have on the subject. It seems like you have at least done some research regarding the economic crisis so you sho
This is a bit offtopic but it's becoming more prevalent and frustrating on slashdot. Is there a chance we could stop posting so many Inhabitat stories to slashdot? More often than not they aren't even stories so much as single paragraph posts that say, "Look at this really cool technology! Isn't it cool and, more importantly green?" They never even bother to go into a decent amount of technical detail about the really cool technology. Hell, in this case, the wikipedia article has more relevant technical details than the Inhabitat article. It's not like we put a post to slashdot every time a new wikipedia article on technology opens up. For that matter, if we are just posting links to websites about really cool technology, we could easily go digging through websites that are dedicated to the particular technology to get the really juicy bits of interest. For instance, when talking about Ikaros, why don't we try looking it up on one of the dozens of websites dedicated to cataloging spacecraft? Well that's not news is it? That's just cataloging interesting technology which, as far as I can tell, is all Inhabitat does.
I guess what I am getting at is that just because Inhabitat stumbled upon something cool they didn't know existed, it doesn't mean there is any news regarding that particular item. Now, if Ikaros launched recently, or if it's mission was underway, or if it was experiencing some technical difficulties, that would be something. The fact that the mission exists in the first place is neither a recent development nor particularly newsworthy. It seems like the firehose is getting clogged with Inhabitat submissions and frankly its starting to seem like slashvertising for the blog.
That's your rebuttal? It doesn't matter because the bank can just take a low federal rating instead of partaking in, possibly, poor loaning practices? I don't know about you, but when I choose a bank or loaning agency, federal rating is one of the first metrics I look at. I would wager that larger investors than myself (such as businesses) also look at said rating. So if a bank were to just say, "Nah, screw it, we'll just take the poor federal rating," I would bet they would lose a significant portion of their business.
So you say, the CRA gives them the option of partaking in risky loan programs (thus inflating the housing bubble) or taking a bad federal rating (thus causing the bank to lose business and reputation), but somehow that did not contribute to the financial clusterfuck that we're in today? Sorry, I was taking you seriously up until this point but now you just seem radical.
I am so happy you posted that under the UID: "Areyoukiddingme." Very nice.
In other words, the Rocket Racing league found a way to make the most common form of space propulsion marketable to the general public: entertainment. Well played. If this rocket racing league takes off, it will certainly spurn advances in chemical based propulsion and reusable rocket engines since entertainment seems to be a great way to generate R&D money for technology (see NASCAR). I'm impressed.
I always like it when I see thanks extended to answers of inquiries on slashdot. It reaffirms my belief that this site is not entirely made up of elitist, tech-savvy trolls that like to kick and scream as much as every other immature wank on the internet. Well done, sir.
Today's security related threads USA is facing can not be solved with developing new weapons.
I know! Imagine the nerdrage that it would generate to bomb slashdot to prevent more security related threads from being posted. Although....it might not hurt if kdawson was involved in the collateral damage. =P
A clean-slate advantage,
vast tracts of relatively unpopulated land and natural resources
coupled with a rapidly advancing technology base?
I am not disagreeing with you, merely reaffirming my original point. One of the defining factors of success of the Yanks was their willingness to break their backs working hard to earn a free existence. A man or woman that has earned their existence through such work, doesn't put up with bullshit from anyone, friend or foe. The pride that comes from such accomplishments assures this. As such, America was given the opportunity to prosper and rise to power because the individuals that settled this country worked hard and stood by their works proudly.
Yeah I lived there up until my twenties. I still visit regularly and have quite a few friends who still live their in their midtwenties and thirties. They don't seem to describe any of the behavior you did. Different lives, different experiences I guess.