increased risk of a fatal cancer for the rest of your life...
versus
not having to listen to the moron in chief nor hear about his twitter shit posts for a year
sign me up
There's no such escape -- the ISS has around a 3mbit/10mbit (upstream is faster than downstream) internet connection. Faster than many American home internet connections, though those in other countries may find it to be limiting.
There's lots of things we can do that we aren't doing because of the cost. We could be building a vehicle right now that would send a man to Mars at the 2024 launch window. But we're talking about at least 10+ years after that for a good reason: nobody wants to spend the kind of money it would take to have the kind of program where you could commit to an actual date for a mission. But we are willing to spend enough to kick the can down the road roughly in the direction of Mars.
Same goes with engineering systems. It would be great to have a non-rocket launch system that could put stuff in orbit. That would save a ton of money on a per-mission basis, but nobody wants to spend the kind of money it would take to even start seriously looking at a space elevator or sky hook.
There are some useful intermediate steps that would also make a Mars mission much more realistic and affordable, though they are likely decades away -- like the ability to mine nearby asteroids for fuel and other supplies (like water, which could be turned into fuel). Getting 5 tons of fuel into geosynchronous orbit would take around 250 tons of fuel using today's rockets. Getting that fuel from a space based asteroid could be much more efficient. Even getting it from the moon would be better than getting it from earth, but even the moon as a sizable gravity well to launch out of.
Probably sending a high-altitude balloon would have accomplished the same thing for 1,000x less spending...
And then just raise its orbit to get it out of the atmosphere and accelerate it to a stable orbital velocity and keep it in free-fall like the ISS (around 17,000mph) and you're there!
Though you'll need a bigger balloon to carry the hundreds (thousands?) of tons of rocket needed to get it into orbit.
I think you've just reinvented the Rockoon, which is still being pursued, but not, afaik, for large payloads like a space capsule that can support a human.
I would argue that he *should* go to the E.R., or see a doctor for the pain at least. There are doctors that have seen at least one of the 533 people that have been to space. I bet you NASA has the number to a few of those doctors too.
Good advice, I'm sure it never dawned on this NASA Astronaut that he should see a NASA physician after returning to earth, the first thing he did when he landed was probably to hop out of the Soyuz and catch an Uber home and go to bed like the slacker he is. Probably never even occurred to anyone at NASA to have him see a physician. Sounds like they should have just talked to you.
My car has aux in. They talk about how 3.5mm Jack's are crap and wear out. Well now I'm going to wear out my charging port and turn my phone into a paper weight. I think about it every time I plug my phone in to it.
One reason Apple got rid of earphone jack was to help with water resistance (or so they say). I think MicroSD slot would be a step backward on that metric.
My camera is waterproof to 50 feet and has a SD slot.
If Google can have a USB port and keep the phone water resistance I don't see why they can't do the same with a MicroSD slot.
Tesla may one day be as big as ford is today, but their upside isn't much bigger than ford is today, and their downside is bankruptcy.
\
Except Tesla has several spin-off industries related to their electric car business that also have the potential for high rewards -- that's solar panels and batteries (both for home and large-scale power leveling systems)
The O-Ring temperature specs were always known and engineers warned the management that it was too cold to fly and not to launch that day but the warning was overridden. https://www.nasa.gov/centers/l...
The problem is that there was no evidence that the O-Rings would definitely fail at launch temperatures, so management chose to ignore the warnings. Saying "It has never been tested at that temperature and is only certified down to 40 degrees" is a lot different than saying "We've done exhaustive testing and concluded that the O-Rings are going to fail to seal at 35 degrees or below"
So yes, the engineers said that they thought the O-Rings would fail, but they didn't have conclusive proof that could have convinced management to scrub the launch. Clearly the wrong decision was made, but after 10 years of successful launches, management felt emboldened to push the limits.
Airplanes have crashes on occasion and people still take them. If something is cheap enough and quick enough, people will do it once it becomes routine. Furthermore, like airplanes, one gets more safety as one runs it more since one has more data about what minor things have gone wrong or things have almost gone wrong, and since all the rockets are reusable one is getting much better data than one would for disposable rockets since one can inspect the craft after.
Plenty of people are still afraid of flying even though airplanes are one of the safest forms of travel possible -- in 2016 there were 2 accidents per million departures.
The Falcon 9 has a perfect launch record in 2017 (13 out of 13 successful launches), and a perfect landing record (10 out of 10 attempts - 3 launches intentionally did not land). But in 2016, 4 out of 9 trips had failures (1 exploded on the launch pad, 3 failed on landing).
It's going to take a lot more trips and a more than a decade from now to even have enough data to come up with reasonable accident statistics -- the Falcon Heavy has not even launched yet, so it remains to be seen how reliable it will be. The Space Shuttle was 10 years into its program until the fatal flaw in the o-ring cold temperature performance was discovered.
Pretty sure safety isn't the issue. We don't allow supersonic flights because they're obnoxious - a rocket isn't much different in that regard. At best this drops it to a 30 minute flight plus 2 hours commuting each way away from civilization to get somewhere they are allowed to take off and land from.
Safety is an issue, their rocket will need to approach airline levels of safety before it'll become popular, the Falcon 9 is no where near that. It has a perfect 10/10 record for 2017 (so far), a commuter aircraft may do 10 trips a *day* for a decade with no significant incidents. 2016's record was less impressive -- out of 9 launches, there was one on-pad loss of payload, and 3 landing failures. How many people would fly in an airplane if they had a nearly 50% chance of dying?
In any case, even adding a few hours of travel time would make the trip worthwhile, I'd rather ride 2 hours in a comfortable ferry, fly for 30 minutes, then ride another 2 hours on a ferry than spend 15 hours in a plane. And the wealthy won't even have the 2 hour ferry ride to the rocket terminal, they'll take a 20 minute helicopter flight.
Why? Mobile customers would be a lot less likely to subscribe to streaming music services if they could just listen to traditional, free broadcast radio
Is that really the justification? Seems pretty weak. My car has an FM radio, yet I still choose to pair it with my phone so I can listen to streaming stations -- radio is not a substitute for a station where I get to pick the music.
And since cellular providers are always whining that their customers are eating up valuable cellular bandwidth with streaming (which forces them to cap "unlimited" plans), seems like they'd be *happy* to reduce streaming.
Nope - a picture will not unlock it - it works on 3D shape, not on image comparison - hence why it works in pitch black - because it's using IR to measure the shape, not visible light.
It's a good thing there's no commonly available technology that someone could use to print a 3d replica of your face.
The same problem already exists with airplane pilots , and it can be even worse where the autopilot compensates for some building condition (like icing), and by the time it gives up control to the pilot, the plane may already be in a bad state and the pilot has little time to figure out why.
That's a pretty easy problem to solve, though. When the systems kick in, alert the driver. Some vehicles flash the ABS light when ABS engages. Put that sort of information on a HUD and let the operator know what is happening and why, so that they're not caught off guard.
Sure, but flashing an "Icy Conditions" alert doesn't help the driver recover when the car is already in a spin and the car gives up control back to the driver. By the time the autonomous system decides it can't handle the situation, it's going to be hard for a driver to get up to speed unless he's paying as much attention as he would when driving.
I mentioned all the BLIS errors I got when I had the car in for something else and the mechanic said not to bother, it was probably working normally, as in not very well.
I think the audible warnings my wife's Acura gets for lane changes are way more useful than visual alerts on the mirrors (although I suppose both is even better).
I suppose some of the driving assistance stuff like lane warnings has helpful use cases, but maybe I overestimate the general public's ability to drive sanely, cell phone use, etc.
My Mazda gives a visual warning on the side mirrors when it detects a car in the blind spot, and an audible warning if you put your turn signal on in that direction. Seems like the best of both worlds. (for drivers that use their turn signals)
I hope you're not suggesting that the hurricane zones are places for the poor. They are some of the most expensive places in the US to live, what with being coastal.
If you want a place for the poor, move to Nebraska or South Dakota or some shit. No hurricanes there. Not much of anything there, but it's cheap.
Did I say something that suggests I wanted to uproot poor people from wherever they live now and force them into containment camps out of the way of hurricans?
Besides, why do you want to move them from hurricane country to tornado country? There are few places in the USA that are not subject to some natural disaster whether hurricanes, flooding, fires, tornados, earthquakes, volcanoes, etc.
As autonomous cars get better and better, we'll see more and more accidents attributed to driver inattention -- the better the car is at driving, the less the human is going to pay attention to the car or the road, and by the time the car tells the driver "Oh hey, I don't know how to handle this situation, you take over!", the driver won't have enough situational awareness to get out of the situation.
Though the flip side is that as the cars get better at driving, the overall accident rate will decrease.
The same problem already exists with airplane pilots , and it can be even worse where the autopilot compensates for some building condition (like icing), and by the time it gives up control to the pilot, the plane may already be in a bad state and the pilot has little time to figure out why.
Not everyone that rides out a hurricane is "stupid", some don't have the means to leave the area. Then I would slowly start to question 'what is wrong' with "your system".
It's easy to say that when you're wealthy enough that you can afford to fill your car with gas (and you have a car) to take your valuables and get out of town, but when you're faced with leaving everything you value in life back in your home so you can wait for a bus that never comes to take you to a shelter of unknown safety/supplies to be packed in a room with 1000 other people who, like you , are also too poor to evacuate.... you might reconsider.
I'd say the GP AC is a "decent human being", to use your words, because of this part of the comment: "Why risk lives saving the stupid?". So clearly the GP AC is compassionate and cares about people, but just people who aren't stupid. If anyone is lacking compassion, I have to agree that it would be the people who chose to stay behind despite ample warning, and who then demand to be rescued, needlessly endangering the lives of the rescuers. Putting other people in danger out of your own negligent behavior is not "being a decent human being".
Not everyone that rides out a hurricane is "stupid", some don't have the means to leave the area.
Bad idea. Let the cops handle things. You won't be able to absorb the legal liability.
During a large scale disaster, you may as well say "Let the people die". Police and other government agencies are completely overwhelmed in such situations. San Francisco and other cities in earthquake regions realize that and train local citizens in CERT/NERT classes to take part in a neighborhood emergency response team knowing that it can be days before rescuers outside the area can make it in.
Nobody said it was sustainable. They did it, and they're not filing for bankruptcy, therefore they could afford it. QED, motherfucker.
But they didn't do it. They didn't ship 75KWh batteries at the same price point as the 60KWh hour batteries. They shipped 75KWh batteries downrated to 60KWh to preserve the premium 75KWh model -- if they didn't do that, then no one would pay extra for the larger battery.
Selling a product at a particular price doesn't prove that it's sustainable to do so.
They could even be taking a net loss on the car, and still be better off if by using the larger batteries they can sell them faster. It can be better for a company's financial situation to earn $60K today for a car that cost $65K to build than to earn $65K when you can sell it in 6 months when the smaller battery is in stock. And if you lose orders when customers are forced to wait longer for their cars, you could lose much more money by waiting and not selling at all than by selling at a loss.
If Apple or Sony did something like this with the iPhone or PS4, the comment sections would filled with people screaming boycott.
But when Tesla did this, yay, what a good guy!
Yep, this is the rampant fanboism in/. This is basically no different from mindless left/right, R/D, creationist religious nut that/.ers like to look down upon.
How do you know they don't? How do you know that the only difference between a 64GB and 128GB iPhone isn't that they blow a fuse at the factory to restrict the memory when they sell the 64GB model, but it has the exact same storage hardware? And if they do this, do you care? You paid less for the 64GB phone than the 128GB phone.
Slashdot Mirror
increased risk of a fatal cancer for the rest of your life...
versus
not having to listen to the moron in chief nor hear about his twitter shit posts for a year
sign me up
There's no such escape -- the ISS has around a 3mbit/10mbit (upstream is faster than downstream) internet connection. Faster than many American home internet connections, though those in other countries may find it to be limiting.
There's lots of things we can do that we aren't doing because of the cost. We could be building a vehicle right now that would send a man to Mars at the 2024 launch window. But we're talking about at least 10+ years after that for a good reason: nobody wants to spend the kind of money it would take to have the kind of program where you could commit to an actual date for a mission. But we are willing to spend enough to kick the can down the road roughly in the direction of Mars.
Same goes with engineering systems. It would be great to have a non-rocket launch system that could put stuff in orbit. That would save a ton of money on a per-mission basis, but nobody wants to spend the kind of money it would take to even start seriously looking at a space elevator or sky hook.
There are some useful intermediate steps that would also make a Mars mission much more realistic and affordable, though they are likely decades away -- like the ability to mine nearby asteroids for fuel and other supplies (like water, which could be turned into fuel). Getting 5 tons of fuel into geosynchronous orbit would take around 250 tons of fuel using today's rockets. Getting that fuel from a space based asteroid could be much more efficient. Even getting it from the moon would be better than getting it from earth, but even the moon as a sizable gravity well to launch out of.
Probably sending a high-altitude balloon would have accomplished the same thing for 1,000x less spending...
And then just raise its orbit to get it out of the atmosphere and accelerate it to a stable orbital velocity and keep it in free-fall like the ISS (around 17,000mph) and you're there!
Though you'll need a bigger balloon to carry the hundreds (thousands?) of tons of rocket needed to get it into orbit.
I think you've just reinvented the Rockoon, which is still being pursued, but not, afaik, for large payloads like a space capsule that can support a human.
I would argue that he *should* go to the E.R., or see a doctor for the pain at least. There are doctors that have seen at least one of the 533 people that have been to space. I bet you NASA has the number to a few of those doctors too.
Good advice, I'm sure it never dawned on this NASA Astronaut that he should see a NASA physician after returning to earth, the first thing he did when he landed was probably to hop out of the Soyuz and catch an Uber home and go to bed like the slacker he is. Probably never even occurred to anyone at NASA to have him see a physician. Sounds like they should have just talked to you.
My car has aux in. They talk about how 3.5mm Jack's are crap and wear out. Well now I'm going to wear out my charging port and turn my phone into a paper weight. I think about it every time I plug my phone in to it.
USB Type-C is rated for 10,000 connect/disconnect cycles, So that's 4.5 years worth at 6 cycles/day.
One reason Apple got rid of earphone jack was to help with water resistance (or so they say). I think MicroSD slot would be a step backward on that metric.
My camera is waterproof to 50 feet and has a SD slot.
If Google can have a USB port and keep the phone water resistance I don't see why they can't do the same with a MicroSD slot.
Tesla may one day be as big as ford is today, but their upside isn't much bigger than ford is today, and their downside is bankruptcy.
\
Except Tesla has several spin-off industries related to their electric car business that also have the potential for high rewards -- that's solar panels and batteries (both for home and large-scale power leveling systems)
The O-Ring temperature specs were always known and engineers warned the management that it was too cold to fly and not to launch that day but the warning was overridden. https://www.nasa.gov/centers/l...
The problem is that there was no evidence that the O-Rings would definitely fail at launch temperatures, so management chose to ignore the warnings. Saying "It has never been tested at that temperature and is only certified down to 40 degrees" is a lot different than saying "We've done exhaustive testing and concluded that the O-Rings are going to fail to seal at 35 degrees or below"
So yes, the engineers said that they thought the O-Rings would fail, but they didn't have conclusive proof that could have convinced management to scrub the launch. Clearly the wrong decision was made, but after 10 years of successful launches, management felt emboldened to push the limits.
Airplanes have crashes on occasion and people still take them. If something is cheap enough and quick enough, people will do it once it becomes routine. Furthermore, like airplanes, one gets more safety as one runs it more since one has more data about what minor things have gone wrong or things have almost gone wrong, and since all the rockets are reusable one is getting much better data than one would for disposable rockets since one can inspect the craft after.
Plenty of people are still afraid of flying even though airplanes are one of the safest forms of travel possible -- in 2016 there were 2 accidents per million departures.
The Falcon 9 has a perfect launch record in 2017 (13 out of 13 successful launches), and a perfect landing record (10 out of 10 attempts - 3 launches intentionally did not land). But in 2016, 4 out of 9 trips had failures (1 exploded on the launch pad, 3 failed on landing).
It's going to take a lot more trips and a more than a decade from now to even have enough data to come up with reasonable accident statistics -- the Falcon Heavy has not even launched yet, so it remains to be seen how reliable it will be. The Space Shuttle was 10 years into its program until the fatal flaw in the o-ring cold temperature performance was discovered.
Pretty sure safety isn't the issue. We don't allow supersonic flights because they're obnoxious - a rocket isn't much different in that regard. At best this drops it to a 30 minute flight plus 2 hours commuting each way away from civilization to get somewhere they are allowed to take off and land from.
Safety is an issue, their rocket will need to approach airline levels of safety before it'll become popular, the Falcon 9 is no where near that. It has a perfect 10/10 record for 2017 (so far), a commuter aircraft may do 10 trips a *day* for a decade with no significant incidents. 2016's record was less impressive -- out of 9 launches, there was one on-pad loss of payload, and 3 landing failures. How many people would fly in an airplane if they had a nearly 50% chance of dying?
In any case, even adding a few hours of travel time would make the trip worthwhile, I'd rather ride 2 hours in a comfortable ferry, fly for 30 minutes, then ride another 2 hours on a ferry than spend 15 hours in a plane. And the wealthy won't even have the 2 hour ferry ride to the rocket terminal, they'll take a 20 minute helicopter flight.
So does keeping servers powered on 24x7
That's a damn lie! You take that back. Slashdot doesn't run 24x7 and you know it!
It does, but neither the 24 hours or 7 days are contiguous.
Why? Mobile customers would be a lot less likely to subscribe to streaming music services if they could just listen to traditional, free broadcast radio
Is that really the justification? Seems pretty weak. My car has an FM radio, yet I still choose to pair it with my phone so I can listen to streaming stations -- radio is not a substitute for a station where I get to pick the music.
And since cellular providers are always whining that their customers are eating up valuable cellular bandwidth with streaming (which forces them to cap "unlimited" plans), seems like they'd be *happy* to reduce streaming.
Nope - a picture will not unlock it - it works on 3D shape, not on image comparison - hence why it works in pitch black - because it's using IR to measure the shape, not visible light.
It's a good thing there's no commonly available technology that someone could use to print a 3d replica of your face.
The same problem already exists with airplane pilots , and it can be even worse where the autopilot compensates for some building condition (like icing), and by the time it gives up control to the pilot, the plane may already be in a bad state and the pilot has little time to figure out why.
That's a pretty easy problem to solve, though. When the systems kick in, alert the driver. Some vehicles flash the ABS light when ABS engages. Put that sort of information on a HUD and let the operator know what is happening and why, so that they're not caught off guard.
Sure, but flashing an "Icy Conditions" alert doesn't help the driver recover when the car is already in a spin and the car gives up control back to the driver. By the time the autonomous system decides it can't handle the situation, it's going to be hard for a driver to get up to speed unless he's paying as much attention as he would when driving.
I mentioned all the BLIS errors I got when I had the car in for something else and the mechanic said not to bother, it was probably working normally, as in not very well.
I think the audible warnings my wife's Acura gets for lane changes are way more useful than visual alerts on the mirrors (although I suppose both is even better).
I suppose some of the driving assistance stuff like lane warnings has helpful use cases, but maybe I overestimate the general public's ability to drive sanely, cell phone use, etc.
My Mazda gives a visual warning on the side mirrors when it detects a car in the blind spot, and an audible warning if you put your turn signal on in that direction. Seems like the best of both worlds. (for drivers that use their turn signals)
I hope you're not suggesting that the hurricane zones are places for the poor. They are some of the most expensive places in the US to live, what with being coastal.
If you want a place for the poor, move to Nebraska or South Dakota or some shit. No hurricanes there. Not much of anything there, but it's cheap.
Did I say something that suggests I wanted to uproot poor people from wherever they live now and force them into containment camps out of the way of hurricans?
Besides, why do you want to move them from hurricane country to tornado country? There are few places in the USA that are not subject to some natural disaster whether hurricanes, flooding, fires, tornados, earthquakes, volcanoes, etc.
As autonomous cars get better and better, we'll see more and more accidents attributed to driver inattention -- the better the car is at driving, the less the human is going to pay attention to the car or the road, and by the time the car tells the driver "Oh hey, I don't know how to handle this situation, you take over!", the driver won't have enough situational awareness to get out of the situation.
Though the flip side is that as the cars get better at driving, the overall accident rate will decrease.
The same problem already exists with airplane pilots , and it can be even worse where the autopilot compensates for some building condition (like icing), and by the time it gives up control to the pilot, the plane may already be in a bad state and the pilot has little time to figure out why.
If they don't have the means to leave, they shouldn't be there at all, which is where the stupid comes in.
Then where should poor people live? Or does society just incinerate them since poor people have no place in our society?
Not everyone that rides out a hurricane is "stupid", some don't have the means to leave the area.
Then I would slowly start to question 'what is wrong' with "your system".
Politics.
It's easy to say that when you're wealthy enough that you can afford to fill your car with gas (and you have a car) to take your valuables and get out of town, but when you're faced with leaving everything you value in life back in your home so you can wait for a bus that never comes to take you to a shelter of unknown safety/supplies to be packed in a room with 1000 other people who, like you , are also too poor to evacuate.... you might reconsider.
I'd say the GP AC is a "decent human being", to use your words, because of this part of the comment: "Why risk lives saving the stupid?". So clearly the GP AC is compassionate and cares about people, but just people who aren't stupid. If anyone is lacking compassion, I have to agree that it would be the people who chose to stay behind despite ample warning, and who then demand to be rescued, needlessly endangering the lives of the rescuers. Putting other people in danger out of your own negligent behavior is not "being a decent human being".
Not everyone that rides out a hurricane is "stupid", some don't have the means to leave the area.
Bad idea. Let the cops handle things. You won't be able to absorb the legal liability.
During a large scale disaster, you may as well say "Let the people die". Police and other government agencies are completely overwhelmed in such situations. San Francisco and other cities in earthquake regions realize that and train local citizens in CERT/NERT classes to take part in a neighborhood emergency response team knowing that it can be days before rescuers outside the area can make it in.
Nobody said it was sustainable. They did it, and they're not filing for bankruptcy, therefore they could afford it. QED, motherfucker.
But they didn't do it. They didn't ship 75KWh batteries at the same price point as the 60KWh hour batteries. They shipped 75KWh batteries downrated to 60KWh to preserve the premium 75KWh model -- if they didn't do that, then no one would pay extra for the larger battery.
The proof is the fact that they did it.
Selling a product at a particular price doesn't prove that it's sustainable to do so.
They could even be taking a net loss on the car, and still be better off if by using the larger batteries they can sell them faster. It can be better for a company's financial situation to earn $60K today for a car that cost $65K to build than to earn $65K when you can sell it in 6 months when the smaller battery is in stock. And if you lose orders when customers are forced to wait longer for their cars, you could lose much more money by waiting and not selling at all than by selling at a loss.
If Apple or Sony did something like this with the iPhone or PS4, the comment sections would filled with people screaming boycott.
But when Tesla did this, yay, what a good guy!
Yep, this is the rampant fanboism in /. This is basically no different from mindless left/right, R/D, creationist religious nut that /.ers like to look down upon.
How do you know they don't? How do you know that the only difference between a 64GB and 128GB iPhone isn't that they blow a fuse at the factory to restrict the memory when they sell the 64GB model, but it has the exact same storage hardware? And if they do this, do you care? You paid less for the 64GB phone than the 128GB phone.