Environmental Review is a front. It's a pro-solar pressure group, and their concern for accurate science is secondary to that aim.
Not that nuclear power is a bad thing - it's clean, it's dependable, it's free of troublesome political dependencies. But Environmental Review take it too far - just look through their website. It's nothing but glowing praise of nuclear power and total condemnation without exception of everything else.
Or just an extremely lax judge. Investigators know how to play the system - if they want to push the limits of a warrant, they will know which judge is most likely to say yes.
Coal is cheap, dependable, and a great way to mess up the climate. It also contributes a lot to local pollution - clean coal is really only clean in comparison with conventional coal, and a lot more expensive. You may have seen the Kemper plant story on Slashdot shortly after this one - five years late and four billion dollars over budget trying to make their clean coal systems work, and they finally gave up and converted it to run on natural gas instead.
Or they'll do what subversive types have been doing for the last ten thousand years: Talk about it down the pub, or at someone's house, or in a side-room off the temple.
Properly encrypted data looks just like random data. But so does well-compressed data. Identifying encrypted data usually means looking for headers, not any sort of statistical analysis.
More common than you'd think - there's a support group for atheist priests. No atheist deliberately becomes a priest, but there are many priests that lose their faith and remain stuck in the profession because it's the only field that hold qualifications and experience in. So they do what many nonbelievers in highly religious communities do: Fake it.
We don't need another piece of technology. There are already several possibilities in play which are in desperate need of resources and support. If Mozilla really wants to decentralise the internet, why don't they start supporting something like IPFS? That project does exactly what they want, but like many others is stuck in the chicken-and-egg stage: No-one will make a website that needs a protocol very few people can access, and no browser or OS vendor will bother to support a protocol that no-one is using.
Different operators, different requirements. For the military, decentralisation and redundancy was a core goal - they needed a network that would continue to function even if large parts of it were being bombed. But a commercial operator just doesn't have that requirement, and is more concerned about cost.
The error correction codes operate on the block size. That's a major reason 4k drives were introduced - larger blocks allows the use of more efficient error correction codes.
The US administration can't do anything over the course of decades, because every few years the pendulum swings, the other party takes over, and their first order of business is to burn to the ground anything that their rivals just achieved.
For the first few decades, certainly. You don't build a self-sustaining colony overnight. There's no physical reason it can't be done, and most of the technology already exists - the real barrier is financial. It would be, quite possibly, the single most expensive endeavour in the history of mankind.
Mars is 'habitable' for a loose enough definition - because it has resources. There are things to mine. Raw materials to harvest and refine. Humans would have to do the thing that they do best in hostile environments: Adapt through technology. A space suit might be a bit more sophisticated than a mammoth-fur coat, but the principle is the same.
Probably won't happen. Ever-increasing population used to be a real concern, but demographics are trending differently now. The story is the same in country after country, and should be true on a global scale too: There is a huge population explosion following industrialisation due to reliable food, medicine, clean water, etc. People stop dying. But eventually the birth rate falls as well, due to the progression of other social factors that follow industrialisation - the need for longer periods in education, and increasing numbers of women in employment. Sure, people don't drop dead of old age at forty any more - but they don't start breeding at 17 either.
Right now, some politicians are planning how best they can pass a new law that will do exactly the same, but be just different enough that it can be tied up in court for a few years before being struck down.
Sex offenders are perhaps the most reviled people in the US. Any law which causes them difficulty is an easy pass with overwhelming public support.
Parents want to keep an eye on their kids. That used to be easy. Now, though? The kids interactions are largely digital, staying shut up in their room or curled up on the couch with a phone. They could be studying hard, taking advantage of that little device that gives them access to the sum of all human knowledge. Or they could be arguing with people. Or wasting their time collecting meme images about cats. Or looking at porn - because, sorry parents, but sexual curiosity is not a switch that flips upon the morning of the eighteenth birthday. It's very easy to keep secrets from parents, and so parents are terrified.
Youtube are just reacting to the demands of advertisers. Advertisers are very protective of their brand associations - they don't want their ad appearing right before someone launches off on a profanity-laden rant, or be seen implicitly endorsing a very fringe political view by advertising next to it.
It's not political. Flagging videos you disagree with is a tactic used by all factions, regardless of politics. There's been a lot of upset in the youtube atheist community lately over videos being taken down and at least one channel being closed due to a mass-flagging campaign organised by a Muslim organisation who are trying to rid the site of blasphemy.
Businesses would love it. Buy tis $199 air conditioning upgrade (it would, naturally, be obscenely overpriced) and save 2% on your energy bills.
For residential users to follow would need regulation, but nothing more invasive then the Energy Star certification scheme.
I'm sure there would be political backlash just the same - someone would end up here posting "Big government is coming to steal your air conditioning!"
It couldn't, because such a high rate would make saving money impossible. No investments could possibly return a rate so high, so no bank could pay interest. As a result credit would be entirely unavailable, and anyone (business or individual) intending to maintain long-term wealth would do it by buying assets of consistent value. The retirement fund would return to being a stash of gold bars under the floorboards.
Slashdot Mirror
Environmental Review is a front. It's a pro-solar pressure group, and their concern for accurate science is secondary to that aim.
Not that nuclear power is a bad thing - it's clean, it's dependable, it's free of troublesome political dependencies. But Environmental Review take it too far - just look through their website. It's nothing but glowing praise of nuclear power and total condemnation without exception of everything else.
Or just an extremely lax judge. Investigators know how to play the system - if they want to push the limits of a warrant, they will know which judge is most likely to say yes.
Coal is cheap, dependable, and a great way to mess up the climate. It also contributes a lot to local pollution - clean coal is really only clean in comparison with conventional coal, and a lot more expensive. You may have seen the Kemper plant story on Slashdot shortly after this one - five years late and four billion dollars over budget trying to make their clean coal systems work, and they finally gave up and converted it to run on natural gas instead.
Because he still has more than three years left in office, and that's enough time to do a lot of damage.
It could also be interpreted as most people voting based purely on party affiliation, rather than the individual representative.
Keeping third parties from influence is one of the areas on which democrats and republicans are happy to cooperate.
The medium one looks like it's leveling off as well.
Or they'll do what subversive types have been doing for the last ten thousand years: Talk about it down the pub, or at someone's house, or in a side-room off the temple.
Properly encrypted data looks just like random data. But so does well-compressed data. Identifying encrypted data usually means looking for headers, not any sort of statistical analysis.
More common than you'd think - there's a support group for atheist priests. No atheist deliberately becomes a priest, but there are many priests that lose their faith and remain stuck in the profession because it's the only field that hold qualifications and experience in. So they do what many nonbelievers in highly religious communities do: Fake it.
We don't need another piece of technology. There are already several possibilities in play which are in desperate need of resources and support. If Mozilla really wants to decentralise the internet, why don't they start supporting something like IPFS? That project does exactly what they want, but like many others is stuck in the chicken-and-egg stage: No-one will make a website that needs a protocol very few people can access, and no browser or OS vendor will bother to support a protocol that no-one is using.
That looks a lot like a piratebox.
Different operators, different requirements. For the military, decentralisation and redundancy was a core goal - they needed a network that would continue to function even if large parts of it were being bombed. But a commercial operator just doesn't have that requirement, and is more concerned about cost.
Sorry, but shortwave isn't going to get you 9600bps. Shortwave gets you 1200.
The error correction codes operate on the block size. That's a major reason 4k drives were introduced - larger blocks allows the use of more efficient error correction codes.
Somewhere, in the Encyclopedia Galactica, is the entry for this planet. And it reads "no intelligent life."
The US administration can't do anything over the course of decades, because every few years the pendulum swings, the other party takes over, and their first order of business is to burn to the ground anything that their rivals just achieved.
For the first few decades, certainly. You don't build a self-sustaining colony overnight. There's no physical reason it can't be done, and most of the technology already exists - the real barrier is financial. It would be, quite possibly, the single most expensive endeavour in the history of mankind.
Mars is 'habitable' for a loose enough definition - because it has resources. There are things to mine. Raw materials to harvest and refine. Humans would have to do the thing that they do best in hostile environments: Adapt through technology. A space suit might be a bit more sophisticated than a mammoth-fur coat, but the principle is the same.
Probably won't happen. Ever-increasing population used to be a real concern, but demographics are trending differently now. The story is the same in country after country, and should be true on a global scale too: There is a huge population explosion following industrialisation due to reliable food, medicine, clean water, etc. People stop dying. But eventually the birth rate falls as well, due to the progression of other social factors that follow industrialisation - the need for longer periods in education, and increasing numbers of women in employment. Sure, people don't drop dead of old age at forty any more - but they don't start breeding at 17 either.
Right now, some politicians are planning how best they can pass a new law that will do exactly the same, but be just different enough that it can be tied up in court for a few years before being struck down.
Sex offenders are perhaps the most reviled people in the US. Any law which causes them difficulty is an easy pass with overwhelming public support.
Parents want to keep an eye on their kids. That used to be easy. Now, though? The kids interactions are largely digital, staying shut up in their room or curled up on the couch with a phone. They could be studying hard, taking advantage of that little device that gives them access to the sum of all human knowledge. Or they could be arguing with people. Or wasting their time collecting meme images about cats. Or looking at porn - because, sorry parents, but sexual curiosity is not a switch that flips upon the morning of the eighteenth birthday. It's very easy to keep secrets from parents, and so parents are terrified.
Youtube are just reacting to the demands of advertisers. Advertisers are very protective of their brand associations - they don't want their ad appearing right before someone launches off on a profanity-laden rant, or be seen implicitly endorsing a very fringe political view by advertising next to it.
It's not political. Flagging videos you disagree with is a tactic used by all factions, regardless of politics. There's been a lot of upset in the youtube atheist community lately over videos being taken down and at least one channel being closed due to a mass-flagging campaign organised by a Muslim organisation who are trying to rid the site of blasphemy.
Businesses would love it. Buy tis $199 air conditioning upgrade (it would, naturally, be obscenely overpriced) and save 2% on your energy bills.
For residential users to follow would need regulation, but nothing more invasive then the Energy Star certification scheme.
I'm sure there would be political backlash just the same - someone would end up here posting "Big government is coming to steal your air conditioning!"
It couldn't, because such a high rate would make saving money impossible. No investments could possibly return a rate so high, so no bank could pay interest. As a result credit would be entirely unavailable, and anyone (business or individual) intending to maintain long-term wealth would do it by buying assets of consistent value. The retirement fund would return to being a stash of gold bars under the floorboards.