But then some government agency will point out that deceleration trauma is unhealthy and then waste money on making sure the hard droppers have parachutes. *rolls eyes*
2.5D . It looks 3d, but the internals of the engine treat the maps as 2d. Ah, the wonders of ray casting. Although I should point out that, while the graphics aren't, uhm, modern, those engines themselves weren't too bad when it comes to running with little memory and processing power.
Although what qualifies for being a 3d engine? Having the full out homogeneous transformations for every model? Or creating a world where the graphics can be perpendicular to your plane of movement? It's a bit fuzzy, but I would include Doom et al, since they laid the foundation for 3d games, and the final product on the screen did have a depth, width, and height. Even ray casters have a primitive perspective divide. Per ray, not per vertex, but a division by distance is still a division by distance.
How easy is it to make nano-diamonds anyways? I'm wondering if there's a cheap way to make graphite on the small scale to order themselves like a diamond for at least a short period of time.
Thing is, nobody proposes going about stealing embryos from mothers in the dark of night. In fact, the embryos proposed for stem cell research are from those that would be tossed anyways, figuratively speaking.
But I guess organ donations are something to Godwin this over too. Being mutilated so others can take your organs. Nasty, barbaric, fascist business, I say.
I would rather speed up the process, natural selection by itself is a little too slow. With a chainsaw, some magic blasted into DNA, and the right breeding methods, I can make the perfect Chocobo-err, human.
This is off the top of my head, but I think the wear on the road goes up with the cube of the weight. So a couple trucks carrying heavy cargo could do the same damage as a whole lot of smaller cars. And those wind turbines don't look small or light . ..
But this seems more of a planning and transportation issue with moving large, heavy objects as opposed to an issue specific to wind turbines themselves.
Why not just equip the crew capsule with retro rockets?
...Oh, right, the exploding part. Is there any powerful form of lift that doesn't require exothermic reactions and isn't privy to melting/boiling/exploding?
The weight is still the same. The hard drives are now exerting a force on the blimp. According to Mister Newton's third (3) law of motion, the blimp's buoyancy to keep itself up (it's own mass + the mass of hard drives) is equal to the force on the air in the opposite direction (downwards).
And it does matter what information is on the disks too. For example, a hard drive with Xubuntu installed is much lighter than one with Vista. If you don't believe be, get a weight scale and try it. Although a petabyte array would be a little hard to way in itself.
In other news, the coldest telescope became the hottest telescope upon the discovery of two coincidental mistakes where all analog switch were labeled backwards and the purchased fuses closed on failure.
It would be a long stretch, and we'd need new technology, but it's not strictly impossible. I would wager, if price isn't an issue, that could very well become a possible reality in the future.
I'm being pedantic, but oh well,
What about the energy to get a shuttle or Ares rocket? A shuttle is a little over 2000 tons for reference. The Ares V rockets are larger, although I don't know how much those beasts are supposed weigh (on Earth, of course).
I also don't think a 200 MW setup that gathers power and also beams it is going to be a ton. My guess (from a little research) is that a 100 kilowatt solar panel has the mass of 10 kilograms. Let's assume that these will gather 5 times more power per kilogram. 200,000 kilowatts / 50 kilowatts per kilogram ~ 4000 kilograms for the solar array. Including diagnostic hardware, shielding, communications, sensors, structure support, what ever is beaming the power here, etc, is going to add on some more weight. How much? I don't know. Depending on what we use to put it up there, we may need a second trip.
And finally, you have to factor in maintenance and repair. This is a big, expensive investment that's supposed to being a job never done before for over a decade in a not-too caring environment. It will have failures. It will need somebody or something to go up there and replace/fix things.
It would be cool if it worked well, but I doubt it. Don't get me wrong; I'm not against it because it's green tech or whatnot. But there are better ways to get the same job done, and in a place where it's human friendly.
Basic physics. Conservation of energy; the energy you need to put into moving a mass away from the Earth is very large. That energy comes from somewhere, such as the fossil fuels for the rockets. It's safer, cheaper, and much, much more efficient to have Earthbound power plants power Earthbound power needs.
Slashdot Mirror
Graphics does relate to gameplay when it's the reason you're running at 10 fpm.
Then put them in bubble wrap.
import crowbars
Or crowbars.
Epic Pricelessness.
On the bright side, it doubles as a hand-held space heater!
A bunch of white dorky male geeks with no lives.
I being one of them.
You are brilliant!
But then some government agency will point out that deceleration trauma is unhealthy and then waste money on making sure the hard droppers have parachutes. *rolls eyes*
You have much to learn, grasshopper.
2.5D . It looks 3d, but the internals of the engine treat the maps as 2d. Ah, the wonders of ray casting. Although I should point out that, while the graphics aren't, uhm, modern, those engines themselves weren't too bad when it comes to running with little memory and processing power.
Although what qualifies for being a 3d engine? Having the full out homogeneous transformations for every model? Or creating a world where the graphics can be perpendicular to your plane of movement? It's a bit fuzzy, but I would include Doom et al, since they laid the foundation for 3d games, and the final product on the screen did have a depth, width, and height. Even ray casters have a primitive perspective divide. Per ray, not per vertex, but a division by distance is still a division by distance.
How easy is it to make nano-diamonds anyways? I'm wondering if there's a cheap way to make graphite on the small scale to order themselves like a diamond for at least a short period of time.
Thing is, nobody proposes going about stealing embryos from mothers in the dark of night. In fact, the embryos proposed for stem cell research are from those that would be tossed anyways, figuratively speaking.
But I guess organ donations are something to Godwin this over too. Being mutilated so others can take your organs. Nasty, barbaric, fascist business, I say.
I would rather speed up the process, natural selection by itself is a little too slow. With a chainsaw, some magic blasted into DNA, and the right breeding methods, I can make the perfect Chocobo-err, human.
This is off the top of my head, but I think the wear on the road goes up with the cube of the weight. So a couple trucks carrying heavy cargo could do the same damage as a whole lot of smaller cars. And those wind turbines don't look small or light . . .
But this seems more of a planning and transportation issue with moving large, heavy objects as opposed to an issue specific to wind turbines themselves.
RAIC? (Redundant Array of Inexpensive Colonies)
Maybe way way way waaaaaaay down in the future. Mars/Moon (our moon) couldn't be a bad first step.
Why not just equip the crew capsule with retro rockets?
...Oh, right, the exploding part. Is there any powerful form of lift that doesn't require exothermic reactions and isn't privy to melting/boiling/exploding?
Programs, fauna, flora, and flash programmers all go to /dev/null in the end.
The weight is still the same. The hard drives are now exerting a force on the blimp. According to Mister Newton's third (3) law of motion, the blimp's buoyancy to keep itself up (it's own mass + the mass of hard drives) is equal to the force on the air in the opposite direction (downwards).
And it does matter what information is on the disks too. For example, a hard drive with Xubuntu installed is much lighter than one with Vista. If you don't believe be, get a weight scale and try it. Although a petabyte array would be a little hard to way in itself.
Hrm, one sibling is conniving and aggressive; and the other prefers to be left to its own devices. Sounds just like humans.
In other news, the coldest telescope became the hottest telescope upon the discovery of two coincidental mistakes where all analog switch were labeled backwards and the purchased fuses closed on failure.
Nah. 64 baud is all you'll ever need.
- "But can they run asynchronous?"
It takes up no RAM.
It requires not a single CPU cycle.
It can run on produce.
It's called common sense and discretion.
Although using a *nix system can most certainly help.
Running low in RAM? Just run this emulated PC in your browser and you can double your memory! Watch your memory multiply for each tab you run!
It would be a long stretch, and we'd need new technology, but it's not strictly impossible. I would wager, if price isn't an issue, that could very well become a possible reality in the future.
I'm being pedantic, but oh well,
What about the energy to get a shuttle or Ares rocket? A shuttle is a little over 2000 tons for reference. The Ares V rockets are larger, although I don't know how much those beasts are supposed weigh (on Earth, of course).
I also don't think a 200 MW setup that gathers power and also beams it is going to be a ton. My guess (from a little research) is that a 100 kilowatt solar panel has the mass of 10 kilograms. Let's assume that these will gather 5 times more power per kilogram. 200,000 kilowatts / 50 kilowatts per kilogram ~ 4000 kilograms for the solar array. Including diagnostic hardware, shielding, communications, sensors, structure support, what ever is beaming the power here, etc, is going to add on some more weight. How much? I don't know. Depending on what we use to put it up there, we may need a second trip.
And finally, you have to factor in maintenance and repair. This is a big, expensive investment that's supposed to being a job never done before for over a decade in a not-too caring environment. It will have failures. It will need somebody or something to go up there and replace/fix things.
It would be cool if it worked well, but I doubt it. Don't get me wrong; I'm not against it because it's green tech or whatnot. But there are better ways to get the same job done, and in a place where it's human friendly.
Basic physics. Conservation of energy; the energy you need to put into moving a mass away from the Earth is very large. That energy comes from somewhere, such as the fossil fuels for the rockets. It's safer, cheaper, and much, much more efficient to have Earthbound power plants power Earthbound power needs.