This is more "we corporations wanna advertise our product as having medicinal benefits!" than "the government does not encourage drinking water for hydration".
There won't be any wreckage, because there was never a rocket-submersible. Only smoke and mirrors to convince gullible people to invest their money into Rossi's scam.
Wrong. Since the removal of mercury, cases of Autism have continued to rise at a pretty steady rate.
Today the only vaccines that still have it (in the form of Thimerosal) are a few Tetanus-Diphtheria vaccines, and some snake anti-venoms. All of those are rarely used on adults, and almost never used on children.
Know what's going into your body before you complain about it.
Ithought advanced societies of the world also figured out that in order to have a reasonably open political discourse, sometimes people's feelings will be hurt. If someone is a drunk or a sociopath or a racist (or all three, as I've seen with many Australian politicians) and they're in (or running for) a position of power, someone who points out why this person is dangerous to the health of society shouldn't be punished.
There's a place in civilised societies for laws to keep people from being falsely accused of things like paedophilia or rape, but if you're going to have laws to keep rich arseholes who can afford expensive lawyers from getting their feelings hurt you might as well bring back duels. At least a duel gives the accuser a chance.
You're missing the point. Paul's plan isn't to "let the states handle it". He wants to privatise. Those agencies are there to protect people. They don't always work perfectly, but they're better than letting corporations take over.
Soyuz works very well and is extremely reliable, but it's also limited in capability. It was designed for short trips to LEO where it can dock with something that has a better life support system. That's all fine and dandy if all you want to do is get to the ISS, but it's no use at all if you want to get further than that.
The Shuttle wasn't so much a step back as a step sideways. The Apollo program had only one use - get a lander on the moon. The Shuttle OTOH could transport 7 people to the ISS, launch large satellites or space station modules, send repair crews to fix delicate equipment like the Hubble, and act as a space lab all on its own. Sometimes all at once. It wasn't perfect for any one thing, but it was pretty good for a lot of things. And you could reuse the whole thing over again.
At this point, the most China's moonshot can do is give them a propaganda boost. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it, but we shouldn't expect any major breakthroughs from the project.
Colonisation is possible, but not practical. The costs are prohibitive (from $4000 to $13000 per kilo to get to LEO). Even a fairly small scientific station with a crew of only 6 (like the ISS) has a mass of 450,000 kilos. Add in development costs, supplies, fuel, and relief crews and that brings the cost to around $138,130,000 for 30 years. A practical space colony would need to support hundreds or thousands of times that population, and would need much more space per person than on a scientific station. Even if there was money to build, launch, and assemble that kind of structure, there's no practical reason. Anything people can do in space, robots can do cheaper and more efficiently. Take Mars for example. For the cost of one manned mission, you could launch 20 robots, each generation an improvement on the previous one. On the moon, you could use robots to mine He-3 without the need for a single human to ever set foot on the surface. Humans' need for food, water, and oxygen, as well as our tendency to die when exposed to large amounts of radiation make us pretty useless in space. Robots don't have those problems, and they're expendable.
"back on earth" was meant to imply the previous poster had his head in the clouds. Iguess someone didn't get the joke.
Ramping up? Russia has been using the same spacecraft for almost half a century, and they aren't going to replace it any time soon. China just copies the Russians (their current spacecraft is basically a bootleg Soyuz) and hasn't shown the imagination necessary to plan anything really big. Iran can't even get a monkey into space without fucking it up. Everyone else just focuses on putting up satellites. Maybe Russia or China will send a manned spacecraft to the moon, but I wouldn't call doing something NASA did 40 years ago "progress". More like "catching up". Overall, space exploration is pretty stagnant. It's going to take a major breakthrough (like a space elevator or other cheap way to reach orbit) to change that, and I don't see anything of the sort on the horizon.
Meanwhile back on Earth, we've just retired our only manned spacecraft with no successor. NASA's funding is so low that they're cobbling together their next heavy launch vehicle together out of leftover parts from the last one. They barely have money to send robot explorers into space, much less humans.
We're certainly capable of overcoming the obstacles in fusion and space elevator technology, but the only people with the resources to make it happen are more interested in short-term monetary gain.
definition: a 'Sense of Entitlement' is an unrealistic, unmerited or inappropriate expectation of favorable living conditions and favorable treatment at the hands of others.
Example: Complaining about UI design changes in a browser you got for free.
"Design Patent" implies there's something distinctive about the design, or at least some ornament that distinguishes one company's product from those of its rivals, like the shape of the Coca-Cola bottle. One of the requirements for a design patent is that the patented design can't be an part of the object's function (i.e, you can't patent the shape of a gear). In the case of the iPad and the Galaxy Tab (and the Microsoft Tablet PC that preceded them both) the form *is* the function - that's what makes it a tablet. Unless the Tab copied the button layout and the proportions (which it didn't), there's no actual IPinfringement.
The real issue here is Apple using the courts to stifle competition so they can keep their monopoly.
The whole purpose of this is to create a new place to cram ads in that are harder to ignore. You can't create a full-page ad when there aren't pages, and Opera wants to "fix" that.
Just one more reason to choose open source browsers.
Just because he accepts the facts on global climate change doesn't mean the rest of his ideas are based in reality. Just look at his solution: the "free market". Seriously? We should just let capitalism fix everything? The same capitalism that causes massive economic meltdowns for the majority while a small minority gets richer than ever, that actually tries to calculate a dollar value for a human life when deciding whether or not to make a recall that will prevent hundreds of deaths? The same system that caused climate change in the first place and has no incentive to stop it?
Science should absolutely be king in politics. But Bob Ingliss and his ilk have no place in a science-based governent.
The blame for this can't be put solely on Obama's shoulders. Both parties have supported this abomination of a copyright law from the start. The DMCA was introduced by a Republican, passed by a Republican Congress, and signed by a Democratic president. Both parties have advanced the corporatist agenda, at the expense of the people. Blaming Obama for a trend that goes back to 1709 (when the Statute of Anne, predecessor to American IP laws, was passed) is ignoring hundreds of years of forced dry anal on anyone who believes information should be free.
The DMCA was introduced by Howard Coble (R-NC), passed in 1998 by a majority Republican Congress, and signed by a Democratic president. If anything, hatred of freedom of information is bipartisan.
Slashdot Mirror
Where do you get the idea that scientists don't believe in extraterrestrial life?
This is more "we corporations wanna advertise our product as having medicinal benefits!" than "the government does not encourage drinking water for hydration".
Nothing to do with government bureaucrats, but everything to do with health insurance corporation bureaucrats and lawyers, which are way worse.
There won't be any wreckage, because there was never a rocket-submersible. Only smoke and mirrors to convince gullible people to invest their money into Rossi's scam.
Well, seeing as how the US government is known to illegally spy on its own citizens...
I think the chances of this ever being put to non-nefarious purposes are pretty slim.
Wrong. Since the removal of mercury, cases of Autism have continued to rise at a pretty steady rate.
Today the only vaccines that still have it (in the form of Thimerosal) are a few Tetanus-Diphtheria vaccines, and some snake anti-venoms. All of those are rarely used on adults, and almost never used on children.
Know what's going into your body before you complain about it.
Ithought advanced societies of the world also figured out that in order to have a reasonably open political discourse, sometimes people's feelings will be hurt. If someone is a drunk or a sociopath or a racist (or all three, as I've seen with many Australian politicians) and they're in (or running for) a position of power, someone who points out why this person is dangerous to the health of society shouldn't be punished.
There's a place in civilised societies for laws to keep people from being falsely accused of things like paedophilia or rape, but if you're going to have laws to keep rich arseholes who can afford expensive lawyers from getting their feelings hurt you might as well bring back duels. At least a duel gives the accuser a chance.
If saving face is so important, why not just bring back duels?
You're missing the point. Paul's plan isn't to "let the states handle it". He wants to privatise. Those agencies are there to protect people. They don't always work perfectly, but they're better than letting corporations take over.
Soyuz works very well and is extremely reliable, but it's also limited in capability. It was designed for short trips to LEO where it can dock with something that has a better life support system. That's all fine and dandy if all you want to do is get to the ISS, but it's no use at all if you want to get further than that.
The Shuttle wasn't so much a step back as a step sideways. The Apollo program had only one use - get a lander on the moon. The Shuttle OTOH could transport 7 people to the ISS, launch large satellites or space station modules, send repair crews to fix delicate equipment like the Hubble, and act as a space lab all on its own. Sometimes all at once. It wasn't perfect for any one thing, but it was pretty good for a lot of things. And you could reuse the whole thing over again.
At this point, the most China's moonshot can do is give them a propaganda boost. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it, but we shouldn't expect any major breakthroughs from the project.
Colonisation is possible, but not practical. The costs are prohibitive (from $4000 to $13000 per kilo to get to LEO). Even a fairly small scientific station with a crew of only 6 (like the ISS) has a mass of 450,000 kilos. Add in development costs, supplies, fuel, and relief crews and that brings the cost to around $138,130,000 for 30 years. A practical space colony would need to support hundreds or thousands of times that population, and would need much more space per person than on a scientific station. Even if there was money to build, launch, and assemble that kind of structure, there's no practical reason. Anything people can do in space, robots can do cheaper and more efficiently. Take Mars for example. For the cost of one manned mission, you could launch 20 robots, each generation an improvement on the previous one. On the moon, you could use robots to mine He-3 without the need for a single human to ever set foot on the surface. Humans' need for food, water, and oxygen, as well as our tendency to die when exposed to large amounts of radiation make us pretty useless in space. Robots don't have those problems, and they're expendable.
"back on earth" was meant to imply the previous poster had his head in the clouds. Iguess someone didn't get the joke.
Ramping up? Russia has been using the same spacecraft for almost half a century, and they aren't going to replace it any time soon. China just copies the Russians (their current spacecraft is basically a bootleg Soyuz) and hasn't shown the imagination necessary to plan anything really big. Iran can't even get a monkey into space without fucking it up. Everyone else just focuses on putting up satellites. Maybe Russia or China will send a manned spacecraft to the moon, but I wouldn't call doing something NASA did 40 years ago "progress". More like "catching up". Overall, space exploration is pretty stagnant. It's going to take a major breakthrough (like a space elevator or other cheap way to reach orbit) to change that, and I don't see anything of the sort on the horizon.
Meanwhile back on Earth, we've just retired our only manned spacecraft with no successor. NASA's funding is so low that they're cobbling together their next heavy launch vehicle together out of leftover parts from the last one. They barely have money to send robot explorers into space, much less humans.
We're certainly capable of overcoming the obstacles in fusion and space elevator technology, but the only people with the resources to make it happen are more interested in short-term monetary gain.
definition: a 'Sense of Entitlement' is an unrealistic, unmerited or inappropriate expectation of favorable living conditions and favorable treatment at the hands of others.
Example: Complaining about UI design changes in a browser you got for free.
Chrome isn't, but Chromium, from which Chrome draws its source code, is.
Whoever says this is the most relaxing music ever has never heard Justin Bieber slowed down 800%. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ry9vqMy6AwM
It's not so much a news story, as a setup for a Monty Python skit.
"Design Patent" implies there's something distinctive about the design, or at least some ornament that distinguishes one company's product from those of its rivals, like the shape of the Coca-Cola bottle. One of the requirements for a design patent is that the patented design can't be an part of the object's function (i.e, you can't patent the shape of a gear). In the case of the iPad and the Galaxy Tab (and the Microsoft Tablet PC that preceded them both) the form *is* the function - that's what makes it a tablet. Unless the Tab copied the button layout and the proportions (which it didn't), there's no actual IPinfringement.
The real issue here is Apple using the courts to stifle competition so they can keep their monopoly.
The whole purpose of this is to create a new place to cram ads in that are harder to ignore. You can't create a full-page ad when there aren't pages, and Opera wants to "fix" that.
Just one more reason to choose open source browsers.
Didn't see yours when Iposted mine :-/
when the sun is turned off.
Plato's idea of the Philosopher King wasn't too far off the mark.
Instead of parties we could have competing schools of philosophy.
Just because he accepts the facts on global climate change doesn't mean the rest of his ideas are based in reality. Just look at his solution: the "free market". Seriously? We should just let capitalism fix everything? The same capitalism that causes massive economic meltdowns for the majority while a small minority gets richer than ever, that actually tries to calculate a dollar value for a human life when deciding whether or not to make a recall that will prevent hundreds of deaths? The same system that caused climate change in the first place and has no incentive to stop it?
Science should absolutely be king in politics. But Bob Ingliss and his ilk have no place in a science-based governent.
The blame for this can't be put solely on Obama's shoulders. Both parties have supported this abomination of a copyright law from the start. The DMCA was introduced by a Republican, passed by a Republican Congress, and signed by a Democratic president. Both parties have advanced the corporatist agenda, at the expense of the people. Blaming Obama for a trend that goes back to 1709 (when the Statute of Anne, predecessor to American IP laws, was passed) is ignoring hundreds of years of forced dry anal on anyone who believes information should be free.
Hey, Obama's shilling for corporations is enough to condemn him. You don't need to bring your racism into this. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Lawn_jockey
The DMCA was introduced by Howard Coble (R-NC), passed in 1998 by a majority Republican Congress, and signed by a Democratic president. If anything, hatred of freedom of information is bipartisan.