You may appreciate that flying out of MEX about two weeks ago, security need to "pat down" my kippah-- not a very big kippah. In IAH a few days later, they actually did an explosives test on it! -- I fly with a rather small (6 inch) kippah.
I've been through security about six times since, with no "issue." Go figure.
>me visiting Tijuana and eating at a local taco stand. The health codes aren't up to US standards, but I know that.
Thank you for your racist comment. Mexico has health boards, thank you. How is the Tijuana stand different than the same stand operating in Far Rockaway? It isn't, except that you choose a racist example.
Uh, were you in the US? How did you set it up that you had any legal liability?
If they can sue the HOA, and the HOA is merely acting as an ISP, then they can sue the upstream ISP too, right? Except they can't because both are shielded as a common carrier.
Rogue DHCP? Heh. You're going to have infected machines advertizing proxy ARP, all kind of traffic if you don't know what you're doing and don't block it. Etc etc.; it's not plug&play. Even with Cisco management console;)
From the point of view of a former SFLan guy here, I took this as an interesting, potentially useful Q. It's always better when 50 people share research, rather than do it on their own, right?
You do make a lot of good points-- especially about legal structures and liability. In fact I ran a downtown wireless LAN in a city for a while, purely free. A lawyer _tenant_ was told by his landlord that "the place had internet," so the lawyer felt free to complain/demand to me every time he had an issue-- called me while I was on vacation, because he managed to flip the wifi switch off on his new laptop.
That said, if the group can manage expectations, it's a potential project. Likely you're right, and for the cost, people will be happier dealing with their own ISP (and thus having network control). If they're willing to pay more for the advantages, (a dubious proposition), this might work, but the "do you really want to have network ops in your condo" argument seems stronger. Outsourcing to a vendor is possible, but then you have the lock-in, and the process of determining vendor quality...
Wow. Not that I don't know that that's typical in some places, but it varies, you know? The local telco in the small rural town my mom lives in offers 100M fibre-to-premise for $100/month; I took the 10M, $40/mo plan for her. 100M is much more expensive in the nearest metro (~600K) where I have an apartment, but you'd better get *service* at $1400/mo. Heck, you'd better get a phone box, as we had 100M, and 30 phone lines at the office, for about $400/mo... years ago.
FWIW, I'm still amazed at how localized pricing is in this field, and how hard it is to tell service quality in advance.
Several years ago I shadowed a few students who were taking online courses in a large state university system in the US. What was clear, was that there was almost no online interaction in the forums, and that the ill-paid instructors had to give little attention, somewhat as a result-- if no one posted questions, then instructors didn't have to post answers, and they seemed fine with that.
No portion of the grade was "participation--" papers-based grading.
In the end, one of the students found papers roughly on the topics elsewhere on the internet, and reworked them enough that they seemed hers.
And in the end, I got the impression that distance learning throughout the system was somewhat of a joke, a way to boost enrollment numbers and revenue while delivering a low-cost product (official credit hours) that was essentially worthless.
Well, yeah, you can always find people with HS diploma/GED *somewhere* who are outliers. And it's probably even *easier* to find BS degrees (especially from low-tier unis) who are schmucks. On average, though, people with degrees are going to be better quality than just HS-level, especially with a lot of HS systems in the States of questionable standards.
> Ergo, use nukes at all and it's necessary to hit the Jerusalem area to kill Israeli military assets that will otherwise be nukeing you back.
This probably isn't worth commenting on, but there's a rather odd assumption that nuking Jerusalem would somehow prevent a retaliatory attack against Iran.
Let me assure you, if Iran uses nuclear weapons in any fashion, on any scale, against Israel, Iran's cities and military facilities simply will not exist within 5 minutes. There's nothing more to the situation than that.
It wasn't MT management that decided to launch "under pressure" in the face of clear evidence of the risk coming from their engineers. It was NASA management. MT did not tell NASA what to do. NASA management made its own decision.
I would also hardly call MT "private industry" in the sense of SpaceX.
The Falcon 9 heavy lifter WILL carry 125,000 lbs to orbit. Wanna guess the cost factor savings versus the taxpayer-funded excess above? 20 to 1? 50 to 1?
Sure the Saturn V was impressive-- in the way a muscle car burning all the fuel in the world is impressive. When you've got a fed tax agent with a gun to your head extracting the money to pay for the fuel and engineering, of course.
NASA was inefficient, pure and simple. Goddard would have puked-- he meant to innovate, make new and better engines, not scale 1940-s era inefficient designs to huge sizes (look at the posthumous patents his wife filed after his death). NASA's medicracy simply didn't know any better, or give a damn-- no incentive.
>Did you never listen to the radio control patter, especially during the early shuttle launches. > They were careful to say what "window options" were open during each phase of the flight. >There was "abort to launch site", "abort tranatlantic", (to Spain, I believe.) and "abort to orbit:".
Yada Yadda. I've got the shuttle operations manual right here. Your point?
If a shuttle failed-- it did happen!-- NASA went on. If a private rocket fails at this point, the private carrier dies in the water of "the market." That pretty much says it all for me.
Else go read Feynman's analysis of the shuttle disaster and complacency. Your point might have validity, were it not contradicted by historical fact. Sure, they had abort options. They also ignored the fact that the engineering team told them the shuttle *was* gong to explode in cold weather, and killed people doing it.
If "private industry" did the same, they would face manslaughter charges. Only government can get away with that level of incompetence and disregard for human life, and survive.
What I want is for them to DIE. I want an alternative to their money-grubbing, penny-pinching dinosaur. I don't want to have a subscription to them, to use Hulu.
RESULT 1: I just cancelled my Hulu subscription. I hope you will, too, today.
RESULT 2: Just cut the input cables to the Comcast box in my building. Hope they like that. Once more: SCREW THE CABLE COMPANIES.
I was being rhetorical, and based my figure on other replies that a 500 ton class C would burn up before entry. It's certainly possible that a more efficient retrieval would be cost-effective to bring down to Earth-- maybe you would add a heat shield manufactured from materials in orbit! -- but my guess is that the materials, will long have more value outside the gravity well, at least until and if scarcity on Earth increases 5-10 fold. For that matter, you'll likely mine the critically valuable materials in orbit (or lunar etc), and drop them.
FWIW. I haven't though about it enough, so I probably shouldn't post, but at least I'm not being a naysayer;)
Ah. It seems you're the post of the day that lives up to your 'nick.
You miss the point. The point is simply that the journalists in question make overblown claims (and act inappropriately) in order to get attention, when, if they behaved in a courteous manner, they likely wouldn't have the problems when flying.
Otherwise, I said nothing evaluative about the US's Security Theatre.
I agree that it's a crap rag. I wish I could agree that readership was low. Advertizers are very careful in their analytics, and they pay for placement in USAToday. Because... middle america sops it up with a straw.
Slashdot Mirror
You may appreciate that flying out of MEX about two weeks ago, security need to "pat down" my kippah-- not a very big kippah. In IAH a few days later, they actually did an explosives test on it! -- I fly with a rather small (6 inch) kippah.
I've been through security about six times since, with no "issue." Go figure.
>me visiting Tijuana and eating at a local taco stand. The health codes aren't up to US standards, but I know that.
Thank you for your racist comment. Mexico has health boards, thank you. How is the Tijuana stand different than the same stand operating in Far Rockaway? It isn't, except that you choose a racist example.
-- Gramma Z
Uh, were you in the US? How did you set it up that you had any legal liability?
If they can sue the HOA, and the HOA is merely acting as an ISP, then they can sue the upstream ISP too, right? Except they can't because both are shielded as a common carrier.
If you didn't set yourself up as an ISP, well...
Rogue DHCP? Heh. You're going to have infected machines advertizing proxy ARP, all kind of traffic if you don't know what you're doing and don't block it. Etc etc.; it's not plug&play. Even with Cisco management console ;)
From the point of view of a former SFLan guy here, I took this as an interesting, potentially useful Q. It's always better when 50 people share research, rather than do it on their own, right?
You do make a lot of good points-- especially about legal structures and liability. In fact I ran a downtown wireless LAN in a city for a while, purely free. A lawyer _tenant_ was told by his landlord that "the place had internet," so the lawyer felt free to complain/demand to me every time he had an issue-- called me while I was on vacation, because he managed to flip the wifi switch off on his new laptop.
That said, if the group can manage expectations, it's a potential project. Likely you're right, and for the cost, people will be happier dealing with their own ISP (and thus having network control). If they're willing to pay more for the advantages, (a dubious proposition), this might work, but the "do you really want to have network ops in your condo" argument seems stronger. Outsourcing to a vendor is possible, but then you have the lock-in, and the process of determining vendor quality...
>If you can get 100Mbit for $1400/month
Wow. Not that I don't know that that's typical in some places, but it varies, you know? The local telco in the small rural town my mom lives in offers 100M fibre-to-premise for $100/month; I took the 10M, $40/mo plan for her. 100M is much more expensive in the nearest metro (~600K) where I have an apartment, but you'd better get *service* at $1400/mo. Heck, you'd better get a phone box, as we had 100M, and 30 phone lines at the office, for about $400/mo... years ago.
FWIW, I'm still amazed at how localized pricing is in this field, and how hard it is to tell service quality in advance.
> you need to know the layout, what kind of lines are in the area, what kind of throughput are they expecting, etc.
The above is the type of answer the OP needed, thank you :) !
Replying to undo accidental neg. moderation. Sorry for the inconvenience, was trying to mod up!
I'm hrrmmm-ing here.
Several years ago I shadowed a few students who were taking online courses in a large state university system in the US. What was clear, was that there was almost no online interaction in the forums, and that the ill-paid instructors had to give little attention, somewhat as a result-- if no one posted questions, then instructors didn't have to post answers, and they seemed fine with that.
No portion of the grade was "participation--" papers-based grading.
In the end, one of the students found papers roughly on the topics elsewhere on the internet, and reworked them enough that they seemed hers.
And in the end, I got the impression that distance learning throughout the system was somewhat of a joke, a way to boost enrollment numbers and revenue while delivering a low-cost product (official credit hours) that was essentially worthless.
Well, yeah, you can always find people with HS diploma/GED *somewhere* who are outliers. And it's probably even *easier* to find BS degrees (especially from low-tier unis) who are schmucks. On average, though, people with degrees are going to be better quality than just HS-level, especially with a lot of HS systems in the States of questionable standards.
Not that this thread is exactly on-topic...
Mod parent up. I suspect SpaceX has done it's diligent and there are reasons not, but Mexico seems an excellent choice for lots of reasons:
-- Lowered regulation /paperwork
-- Position
-- Benefit to both countries (bi-lateral trade & exchange, ongoing relationship)
Etc.
Dihydrogen oxide. In sufficient quantities, it's 100% toxic to a wide variety of species.
> Ergo, use nukes at all and it's necessary to hit the Jerusalem area to kill Israeli military assets that will otherwise be nukeing you back.
This probably isn't worth commenting on, but there's a rather odd assumption that nuking Jerusalem would somehow prevent a retaliatory attack against Iran.
Let me assure you, if Iran uses nuclear weapons in any fashion, on any scale, against Israel, Iran's cities and military facilities simply will not exist within 5 minutes. There's nothing more to the situation than that.
(You'd better get the reference :)
It wasn't MT management that decided to launch "under pressure" in the face of clear evidence of the risk coming from their engineers. It was NASA management. MT did not tell NASA what to do. NASA management made its own decision.
I would also hardly call MT "private industry" in the sense of SpaceX.
That is all.
Someone modded this BS up? Please.
The Falcon 9 heavy lifter WILL carry 125,000 lbs to orbit. Wanna guess the cost factor savings versus the taxpayer-funded excess above? 20 to 1? 50 to 1?
Sure the Saturn V was impressive-- in the way a muscle car burning all the fuel in the world is impressive. When you've got a fed tax agent with a gun to your head extracting the money to pay for the fuel and engineering, of course.
NASA was inefficient, pure and simple. Goddard would have puked-- he meant to innovate, make new and better engines, not scale 1940-s era inefficient designs to huge sizes (look at the posthumous patents his wife filed after his death). NASA's medicracy simply didn't know any better, or give a damn-- no incentive.
>Did you never listen to the radio control patter, especially during the early shuttle launches.
> They were careful to say what "window options" were open during each phase of the flight.
>There was "abort to launch site", "abort tranatlantic", (to Spain, I believe.) and "abort to orbit:".
Yada Yadda. I've got the shuttle operations manual right here. Your point?
If a shuttle failed-- it did happen!-- NASA went on. If a private rocket fails at this point, the private carrier dies in the water of "the market." That pretty much says it all for me.
Else go read Feynman's analysis of the shuttle disaster and complacency. Your point might have validity, were it not contradicted by historical fact. Sure, they had abort options. They also ignored the fact that the engineering team told them the shuttle *was* gong to explode in cold weather, and killed people doing it.
If "private industry" did the same, they would face manslaughter charges. Only government can get away with that level of incompetence and disregard for human life, and survive.
I have fiber to my premise :P
Already been said by most other commenters, but:
SCREW THE CABLE COMPANIES.
What I want is for them to DIE. I want an alternative to their money-grubbing, penny-pinching dinosaur. I don't want to have a subscription to them, to use Hulu.
RESULT 1: I just cancelled my Hulu subscription. I hope you will, too, today.
RESULT 2: Just cut the input cables to the Comcast box in my building. Hope they like that.
Once more: SCREW THE CABLE COMPANIES.
I was being rhetorical, and based my figure on other replies that a 500 ton class C would burn up before entry. It's certainly possible that a more efficient retrieval would be cost-effective to bring down to Earth-- maybe you would add a heat shield manufactured from materials in orbit! -- but my guess is that the materials, will long have more value outside the gravity well, at least until and if scarcity on Earth increases 5-10 fold. For that matter, you'll likely mine the critically valuable materials in orbit (or lunar etc), and drop them.
FWIW. I haven't though about it enough, so I probably shouldn't post, but at least I'm not being a naysayer ;)
Ah. It seems you're the post of the day that lives up to your 'nick.
You miss the point. The point is simply that the journalists in question make overblown claims (and act inappropriately) in order to get attention, when, if they behaved in a courteous manner, they likely wouldn't have the problems when flying.
Otherwise, I said nothing evaluative about the US's Security Theatre.
I agree that it's a crap rag. I wish I could agree that readership was low. Advertizers are very careful in their analytics, and they pay for placement in USAToday. Because... middle america sops it up with a straw.
Do I have a stalker today? Four comments like the above, modded down? To my stalker: I can report mod abuse, you know ;)
Copying onto stencil paper, does not really count.