Strangely, no one has ever found a timestamp on a cave painting. It's like they didn't know how to do it.
I mean, how hard can it be to write "31832 B.C." in the corner?
While I agree that public transportation is the way to go for the foreseeable future, I think you're way off in saying we need to cut our energy use. That may be true in the very short term, but eventually that won't be a solution - we have to come up with renewable means of producing energy.
See, energy consumption has risen steadily and continues to rise, because consuming energy is part of raising living standards. Clean water requires energy (at least in most parts of the world). House heating requires energy. Computers, household appliances, lighting, industries. As you say, consumerism requries growth, but most of this growth is actually good. Advances in medical science, agriculture and infrastructure are all powered by this consumerism. It's not possible to raise the standard in developing countries without increasing energy usage.
My point is that energy consumption is not bad per se, it is only bad if it's produced in ways that are harmful to the environment. The sun provides an excellent source of energy, beating down with 1300 W per square meter all over the Earth, and if we stick to the sun no harm will be done to the environment no matter how much we waste. THAT is where we should concentrate our efforts: on the transition from fossil to renewable energy production. Cutting energy consumption is good, but it will only get us so far. Completely eliminating fossil based fuels will get us all the way to an ecologically sustainable society.
Once we have that, even a sports car can be green.
People who think it's acceptable to monitor their teens' driving habits, cellphone position or bank transactions have an awful basic view of their children. I could understand such measures for small children up to 12 years of age or so, but after that they should be taught trust and responsibility. How are you supposed to grow up as a responsible adult if you have your parents watching and commenting your every move?
The trouble with granting your children privacy is that you also run the risk of them doing things you don't like. They might lie to you. They might go to a parties and drink alcohol. They might even have sex (oh noes!). But this is something that is bound to happen sooner or later anyway, and it's impossible to stop teens from being teens. The solution is not to monitor your children 24/7, but to give them the knowledge and ability to handle those situations. Teach them the risks of alcohol in itself and drunk driving in particular. Tell them about STDs, birth control and safe sex. Let them know when you find out they've lied about their whereabouts and give them a reasonable punishment (e.g. not borrowing the car again for month or so). Better yet, take the opportunity to talk about said things.
As it happens, I don't doubt that Teen Safe Driver works when it comes to reducing accidents. I just think it's an awful way of raising your children.
After reading about some of those guys, if you made the program too safe, they'd take up free climbing or something else to get the rush. The possibility of dying early gives it that rush.
I don't know, I've got the impression that many astronauts are serious scientists with a deep love for astronomy and space, and that the possibility of dying is much less of a factor than, say, the chance of experiencing weightlessness or watching the earth from orbit.
I, for one, would be much more inclined to go to space if the risks were lowered.
While we're all thankful for the awe-inspiring images that the Hubble Space Telescope produces, I think in some regards these kinds of plots are just as cool. With these data points we can say more about this planet than the HST ever could. Neil deGrasse Tyson described this in a clever way:
And I simply say that gravity is as much a signature of something's existence as a direct photograph of it, we
have many ways we can measure something is there. Just as you do if you live in a cabin
in the woods, you come to learn what a bear footprint looks like very quickly, and if you
see such a footprint outside one morning, you'll start looking for the bear that was once
there. You're not going to say, "oh, I didn't see the bear, therefore it couldn't have
existed."
That's how astronomy works. You're looking for bear prints in the vast space of the universe.
Sending robots to other space objects (e.g. Mars) has some certain advantages though:
1) It's much easier, and the cost is lower. Therefore it's a good starting place - you must learn how to crawl before you learn how to walk, etc.
2) The risks are lower. If a probe crashes against the surface of Mars, that's a setback. If a manned expedition crashes in the same manner, that is several dead astronauts. A tragic accident in space would hardly be the PR stunt that these kinds of projects need.
It is therefore important to do stuff in the correct order. First we send space probes, then we send landers, then we send people (if it's even possible given the conditions of the planet). We have still not gained enough experience to launch a manned expedition - the demands on reliability for such a mission will be far higher than our current track record.
In short, I agree that manned space exploration is "the stuff that dreams are made of", but robotic space exploration is, for the moment, what reality is made of. Visions alone won't get us there, hard work and realistic plans will - and unmanned vehicles are an indispensible part of those plans.
Sweden has for a long time been known as an advanced IT nation with widespread computer use, broadband connections, IT companies and so on. In the last few years that has come to change with new repressive laws like FRA and IPRED, but today we took back some of our lost pride. It's good to see that we give Europe a voice for a reformed copyright and patent law, free culture, and privacy and democracy on the Internet.
Even if it's difficult for this person - most likely Christian Engström - to affect decisions directly among 735 other MPs, his presence will have two important consequences:
1) It gives Brussels some sorely needed competence on these issues to act as a counterweight against lobbyists trying to influence decisions.
2) It sends a message to the other parties that they cannot continue ignoring the rights of their citizens forever.
I voted for the Pirate Party and I hope this result will be the first step towards a European Union that cares more about our rights online.
Slashdot Mirror
Strangely, no one has ever found a timestamp on a cave painting. It's like they didn't know how to do it. I mean, how hard can it be to write "31832 B.C." in the corner?
What? An entire network protocol written in Whitespace? That must have been hard as hell!
While I agree that public transportation is the way to go for the foreseeable future, I think you're way off in saying we need to cut our energy use. That may be true in the very short term, but eventually that won't be a solution - we have to come up with renewable means of producing energy.
See, energy consumption has risen steadily and continues to rise, because consuming energy is part of raising living standards. Clean water requires energy (at least in most parts of the world). House heating requires energy. Computers, household appliances, lighting, industries. As you say, consumerism requries growth, but most of this growth is actually good. Advances in medical science, agriculture and infrastructure are all powered by this consumerism. It's not possible to raise the standard in developing countries without increasing energy usage.
My point is that energy consumption is not bad per se, it is only bad if it's produced in ways that are harmful to the environment. The sun provides an excellent source of energy, beating down with 1300 W per square meter all over the Earth, and if we stick to the sun no harm will be done to the environment no matter how much we waste. THAT is where we should concentrate our efforts: on the transition from fossil to renewable energy production. Cutting energy consumption is good, but it will only get us so far. Completely eliminating fossil based fuels will get us all the way to an ecologically sustainable society.
Once we have that, even a sports car can be green.
Please, mod parent up! This is spot on.
People who think it's acceptable to monitor their teens' driving habits, cellphone position or bank transactions have an awful basic view of their children. I could understand such measures for small children up to 12 years of age or so, but after that they should be taught trust and responsibility. How are you supposed to grow up as a responsible adult if you have your parents watching and commenting your every move?
The trouble with granting your children privacy is that you also run the risk of them doing things you don't like. They might lie to you. They might go to a parties and drink alcohol. They might even have sex (oh noes!). But this is something that is bound to happen sooner or later anyway, and it's impossible to stop teens from being teens. The solution is not to monitor your children 24/7, but to give them the knowledge and ability to handle those situations. Teach them the risks of alcohol in itself and drunk driving in particular. Tell them about STDs, birth control and safe sex. Let them know when you find out they've lied about their whereabouts and give them a reasonable punishment (e.g. not borrowing the car again for month or so). Better yet, take the opportunity to talk about said things.
As it happens, I don't doubt that Teen Safe Driver works when it comes to reducing accidents. I just think it's an awful way of raising your children.
After reading about some of those guys, if you made the program too safe, they'd take up free climbing or something else to get the rush. The possibility of dying early gives it that rush.
I don't know, I've got the impression that many astronauts are serious scientists with a deep love for astronomy and space, and that the possibility of dying is much less of a factor than, say, the chance of experiencing weightlessness or watching the earth from orbit.
I, for one, would be much more inclined to go to space if the risks were lowered.
While we're all thankful for the awe-inspiring images that the Hubble Space Telescope produces, I think in some regards these kinds of plots are just as cool. With these data points we can say more about this planet than the HST ever could. Neil deGrasse Tyson described this in a clever way:
And I simply say that gravity is as much a signature of something's existence as a direct photograph of it, we have many ways we can measure something is there. Just as you do if you live in a cabin in the woods, you come to learn what a bear footprint looks like very quickly, and if you see such a footprint outside one morning, you'll start looking for the bear that was once there. You're not going to say, "oh, I didn't see the bear, therefore it couldn't have existed."
That's how astronomy works. You're looking for bear prints in the vast space of the universe.
Sending robots to other space objects (e.g. Mars) has some certain advantages though:
1) It's much easier, and the cost is lower. Therefore it's a good starting place - you must learn how to crawl before you learn how to walk, etc.
2) The risks are lower. If a probe crashes against the surface of Mars, that's a setback. If a manned expedition crashes in the same manner, that is several dead astronauts. A tragic accident in space would hardly be the PR stunt that these kinds of projects need.
It is therefore important to do stuff in the correct order. First we send space probes, then we send landers, then we send people (if it's even possible given the conditions of the planet). We have still not gained enough experience to launch a manned expedition - the demands on reliability for such a mission will be far higher than our current track record.
In short, I agree that manned space exploration is "the stuff that dreams are made of", but robotic space exploration is, for the moment, what reality is made of. Visions alone won't get us there, hard work and realistic plans will - and unmanned vehicles are an indispensible part of those plans.
Sweden has for a long time been known as an advanced IT nation with widespread computer use, broadband connections, IT companies and so on. In the last few years that has come to change with new repressive laws like FRA and IPRED, but today we took back some of our lost pride. It's good to see that we give Europe a voice for a reformed copyright and patent law, free culture, and privacy and democracy on the Internet. Even if it's difficult for this person - most likely Christian Engström - to affect decisions directly among 735 other MPs, his presence will have two important consequences:
1) It gives Brussels some sorely needed competence on these issues to act as a counterweight against lobbyists trying to influence decisions.
2) It sends a message to the other parties that they cannot continue ignoring the rights of their citizens forever.
I voted for the Pirate Party and I hope this result will be the first step towards a European Union that cares more about our rights online.
African or European?
I don't know that! (AAAAARRGGHHHHHH!!!)