He's not part of an affluent family with high level connections, he makes the perfect sacrificial lamb to appease the commoners in an election year. He can be ran through the wringer (if that's what you want to call the few months to a couple years he'll likely get) without significant political fallout and it gives the commoners the illusion that something is being done. Not that he doesn't deserve significant prison time, but he is an insignificant part of a much larger corrupt system.
Its not the bulbs, its the bridge that controls the bulbs. Basically you've got some smart lightbulbs, but they need an intermediary between the network/internet and the bulbs to relay commands (over RF I believe). Philips updated the firmware on their bridge to only command Philips bulbs.
What part of my post suggested building cars out of more expensive materials? Simply powder coat or paint exposed parts with a more durable coating. When done on a manufacturing scale it shouldn't add more than a percent or two to the cost of the individual coated parts, probably less than $50 to a whole car.
I thought people this stupid only existed in comedy films. However it should be noted that two other solar projects in the same area have been approved and one is already under construction. Sounds similar to something that took place in my area, they were trying to put up a wind farm and same NIMBY arguments were used (they're unhealthy (sound waves) they'll destroy property values (its all farmland anyway), etc). So instead of a new industry brought to our community, increased tax revenue and more (though limited) employment opportunities we've got nothing. I'm not saying that all renewable energy projects are worthwhile, but sabotaging them for these idiotic arguments is akin to burning all of your money because you're afraid the trace amounts of cocaine on the bills will get you thrown in jail.
Making metal parts extremely corrosion resistant is pretty easy, most manufacturers simply choose to go the cheap way to decrease sales prices and increase profits. While I am sure some manufactures would like for their vehicles to fail more quickly to increase their sales due to what has become known as "planned obsolescence". However hopefully they fear the fallout if their vehicles deteriorate too quickly, I think there was a well known instance in the UK where a manufacturer (Lancia I believe) built a car out of cheap metal that rusted quickly and were forced to buy back many of the cars they sold and their loss of reputation in the UK eventually forced them out of that market.
They've proven they can put it down in a preselected area, the only hang-up appears to be the landing which judging from the last two attempts is due to not having a decent sized pad more than a control difficulty. Here's hoping that a landing on a much larger pad gives them the area they need for success.
Expanding on the analogy of a "backyard" it would be like asking a person with an acre or so of uniquely suited property to give up a few hundred square feet of un-buildable swamp/hillside that they don't use and isn't even visible from their home most of the time in order to set up a weather station that would give tens of thousands of people reliable forecasts. As a general rule if that person had a hissy fit because they didn't didn't want the 5 minutes a week that they happened to be in a location to actually see the station sullied by its existence they'd probably be seen by the community around them as a selfish ass.
The levels of crazy that woman is capable of never cease to amaze me. She's like a female, Democrat version of Trump, only difference is the good people of California have seen fit keep electing her into various government offices since the 70s.
Maybe because ULA has been gouging the Air Force and NASA doesn't want to get stuck in the same boat? The Air Force is still trying to phase out the Billion dollars a year they pay to ULA for "assured space access". At the same time their launch costs have at least 166%.
"The attack is also expected to renew the debate over privacy versus security for software encryption"
Why? Is the any evidence they used any form of communication or encryption? These attacks barely show as a rounding error in overall homicide statistics. Just catch/kill those who commit such acts, remove as many of the drives as possible (unemployment, collateral damage, injustice, etc) and move on with life. Our "solution" to terrorism of wildly throwing billions of dollars at the defense industry and forsaking our rights is like "fixing" a paper-cut on our finger by cutting off our arm.
NIMBYs have used "environmental concerns" for a few decades to try to scuttle things they don't like, I suppose it was only a matter of time before someone tried to use religion. There have been telescopes at that site for over 4 decades, if there religion was offended it was done and over with 2 decades ago.
The hypocrisy of it all is quite astonishing. A decade or so ago utilities were screaming that they needed to implement peak metering because of the added costs of handling increased demand. Recently they've been pushing for higher overall rates because, *gasp*, energy usage is down because of energy efficient appliances, efficient lighting, home solar and off peak load balancing (water heaters, special AC units, etc). Sadly I'm not surprised that they lied to increase profits, but that they so unabashedly changed directions to justify a new round of rate hikes.
While I have no doubt that some of the current heavyweights in the energy market like to buy up and sit on some companies with promising developments I highly doubt that they can keep major advances held down too long. The article notes that lithium-ion batteries were developed in Europe but never commercialized (patents? NIMBYs? Lack of production capacity?), then Asia got a hold of the technology and it exploded onto the market. You may be able to control minor advances in a few markets where corrupt government officials are willing to play ball with you but major advances are going to find a market somewhere no matter what, and those places are more likely to locations where governments haven't wrapped everything up in 12 layers of red tape (patents, copyright, OSHA, etc).
And what is your source for this statement? Everything I've ever seen says that the FAA is responsible only for "navigable airspace", which the FAA itself defines as 500' AGL (except around airports where their claims are more extensive). And in any case courts have never really ruled where your property ends and "navigable airspace" begins, the only case I know of on point is United States v. Causby which put it somewhere above 83ft.
They chose one of the more expensive commercially available battery technologies for their flow battery? Next I expect them to try to integrate 2 carat diamonds into Lowes brand light fixtures to try to improve their light distribution. The point of an industrial flow battery is storing energy as cheaply as possible, energy density is one of the last considerations. There are of course limitations, but given the choice between something the size of a cargo container with rare earth materials running through it that costs $1 Million dollars or something the size of a grain silo full of cheap and non-toxic compounds for $100,000 the latter is preferable for most applications.
I recall a controversy here in the US when an atheist group wanted to run some Superbowl/subway advertisements. Religious groups instantly began claiming persecution. I'm all for allowing one religious group to advertise, as long as they don't have a hissy fit whenever another group chooses to do so.
If its not transmitting the data to the internet, and doesn't have the capacity to store video/audio streams itself its not "recording". That said any device with a video/audio input should have hardware based light indicating if that capability is powered or not. No form of software updating/hacking should be able to disable that functionality.
Why do so many people blithely ignore the the next part of the same sentence in the second amendment? Even if you buy the garbage that it applies to the "militia" (any able bodied male between 18 and 45 throughout most of the countries early history) the very next part says that it applies to everyone (IE: People).
Meanwhile, in the United States our own "glorified dowsing rods" the TSA continues to rake in somewhere around $8 Billion dollars a year in direct costs alone (likely tens of billions when you factor in economic losses, increased road deaths and secondary costs) and is 95% ineffective at finding lighters and knives. And chances are no one responsible for that debacle is ever going to see a fine let alone a prison sentence.
That would be neat, however if it were a station I would bet its inexplicable mass (probably much lighter) would be driving astrophysicists crazy. I assume that all of the equations are working out as this isn't the case.
From what I understand a large number of their clients these days are governmental, so this move isn't all that surprising. If they took a different stance they probably would end up like QWest when they told the government to shove it when they started their illegal wiretaping program suddenly all of QWests government contracts were canceled and they found themselves under "investigation".
Zero-knowledge encryption? Sounds like they're trying to invent some new buzzword to try to make something almost no one could argue against, secured communications and records for banking, conversations & confidential information (medical records, personal matters, etc). It should also be noted that there is a really good reason for this move to decentralized encryption, the feds simply couldn't keep their hands out of the cookie jar. That and there are no indications that allowing the government full access to communications has any effect on terrorist activity, its pretty obvious that they were hoovering information before 9/11 and it didn't stop that, they've created massive data centers and tied in with ISPs throughout the globe and they didn't stop Paris, Metrojet Flight 9268, Boston or any of the other major attacks. I find it disturbing they can argue for ever increasing levels of surveillance when the massive levels they are already spending tens of billions of dollars and not stopping a few nuts chatting over text messages.
Gold mines don't run on a couple million dollars of equipment either. They have conga lines of multi-million dollar dump trucks hauling material out of the mine (T 282Bs are $4-5 Million each). While there are far fewer of them in a standard mine excavators are also far more expensive, they often cost tens of millions of dollars each. I'd bet that your average precious metal mine requires at least $150 Million dollars of equipment just to get material out of the mine, some much more. When Goldcorp established a new mine in Canada it cost them $2 Billion.
If the yields were the same you would no doubt be correct, but the article suggested that the deposits around these hydro-thermal vents are 10 times the density of modern land based deposits and they don't have to remove massive amounts of stone/dirt covering them in order to start mining, they're sitting right on the sea floor. That of course still doesn't make it a sure thing, but it definitely helps.
Deep sea mining is GOING to happen, whether it is good for the environment or not. If environmentalists/scientists are afraid of its effects they need to work with companies/governments to ensure that it is done with as little damage as is feasible. Attempts to sabotage it with claims of doom and gloom or wrapping it up in untenable amounts of red tape will only succeed in creating another "us vs them" mentality where each side is constantly trying to screw over the other with lies and propaganda campaigns resulting in more damage to the economy & environment.
Slashdot Mirror
"But this guy was singled out for a reason."
He's not part of an affluent family with high level connections, he makes the perfect sacrificial lamb to appease the commoners in an election year. He can be ran through the wringer (if that's what you want to call the few months to a couple years he'll likely get) without significant political fallout and it gives the commoners the illusion that something is being done. Not that he doesn't deserve significant prison time, but he is an insignificant part of a much larger corrupt system.
Its not the bulbs, its the bridge that controls the bulbs. Basically you've got some smart lightbulbs, but they need an intermediary between the network/internet and the bulbs to relay commands (over RF I believe). Philips updated the firmware on their bridge to only command Philips bulbs.
What part of my post suggested building cars out of more expensive materials? Simply powder coat or paint exposed parts with a more durable coating. When done on a manufacturing scale it shouldn't add more than a percent or two to the cost of the individual coated parts, probably less than $50 to a whole car.
I thought people this stupid only existed in comedy films. However it should be noted that two other solar projects in the same area have been approved and one is already under construction. Sounds similar to something that took place in my area, they were trying to put up a wind farm and same NIMBY arguments were used (they're unhealthy (sound waves) they'll destroy property values (its all farmland anyway), etc). So instead of a new industry brought to our community, increased tax revenue and more (though limited) employment opportunities we've got nothing. I'm not saying that all renewable energy projects are worthwhile, but sabotaging them for these idiotic arguments is akin to burning all of your money because you're afraid the trace amounts of cocaine on the bills will get you thrown in jail.
Making metal parts extremely corrosion resistant is pretty easy, most manufacturers simply choose to go the cheap way to decrease sales prices and increase profits. While I am sure some manufactures would like for their vehicles to fail more quickly to increase their sales due to what has become known as "planned obsolescence". However hopefully they fear the fallout if their vehicles deteriorate too quickly, I think there was a well known instance in the UK where a manufacturer (Lancia I believe) built a car out of cheap metal that rusted quickly and were forced to buy back many of the cars they sold and their loss of reputation in the UK eventually forced them out of that market.
They've proven they can put it down in a preselected area, the only hang-up appears to be the landing which judging from the last two attempts is due to not having a decent sized pad more than a control difficulty. Here's hoping that a landing on a much larger pad gives them the area they need for success.
Expanding on the analogy of a "backyard" it would be like asking a person with an acre or so of uniquely suited property to give up a few hundred square feet of un-buildable swamp/hillside that they don't use and isn't even visible from their home most of the time in order to set up a weather station that would give tens of thousands of people reliable forecasts. As a general rule if that person had a hissy fit because they didn't didn't want the 5 minutes a week that they happened to be in a location to actually see the station sullied by its existence they'd probably be seen by the community around them as a selfish ass.
The levels of crazy that woman is capable of never cease to amaze me. She's like a female, Democrat version of Trump, only difference is the good people of California have seen fit keep electing her into various government offices since the 70s.
Maybe because ULA has been gouging the Air Force and NASA doesn't want to get stuck in the same boat? The Air Force is still trying to phase out the Billion dollars a year they pay to ULA for "assured space access". At the same time their launch costs have at least 166%.
"The attack is also expected to renew the debate over privacy versus security for software encryption"
Why? Is the any evidence they used any form of communication or encryption? These attacks barely show as a rounding error in overall homicide statistics. Just catch/kill those who commit such acts, remove as many of the drives as possible (unemployment, collateral damage, injustice, etc) and move on with life. Our "solution" to terrorism of wildly throwing billions of dollars at the defense industry and forsaking our rights is like "fixing" a paper-cut on our finger by cutting off our arm.
NIMBYs have used "environmental concerns" for a few decades to try to scuttle things they don't like, I suppose it was only a matter of time before someone tried to use religion. There have been telescopes at that site for over 4 decades, if there religion was offended it was done and over with 2 decades ago.
The hypocrisy of it all is quite astonishing. A decade or so ago utilities were screaming that they needed to implement peak metering because of the added costs of handling increased demand. Recently they've been pushing for higher overall rates because, *gasp*, energy usage is down because of energy efficient appliances, efficient lighting, home solar and off peak load balancing (water heaters, special AC units, etc). Sadly I'm not surprised that they lied to increase profits, but that they so unabashedly changed directions to justify a new round of rate hikes.
While I have no doubt that some of the current heavyweights in the energy market like to buy up and sit on some companies with promising developments I highly doubt that they can keep major advances held down too long. The article notes that lithium-ion batteries were developed in Europe but never commercialized (patents? NIMBYs? Lack of production capacity?), then Asia got a hold of the technology and it exploded onto the market. You may be able to control minor advances in a few markets where corrupt government officials are willing to play ball with you but major advances are going to find a market somewhere no matter what, and those places are more likely to locations where governments haven't wrapped everything up in 12 layers of red tape (patents, copyright, OSHA, etc).
"from the ground to outer space, period"
And what is your source for this statement? Everything I've ever seen says that the FAA is responsible only for "navigable airspace", which the FAA itself defines as 500' AGL (except around airports where their claims are more extensive). And in any case courts have never really ruled where your property ends and "navigable airspace" begins, the only case I know of on point is United States v. Causby which put it somewhere above 83ft.
https://www.faa.gov/air_traffi...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
They chose one of the more expensive commercially available battery technologies for their flow battery? Next I expect them to try to integrate 2 carat diamonds into Lowes brand light fixtures to try to improve their light distribution. The point of an industrial flow battery is storing energy as cheaply as possible, energy density is one of the last considerations. There are of course limitations, but given the choice between something the size of a cargo container with rare earth materials running through it that costs $1 Million dollars or something the size of a grain silo full of cheap and non-toxic compounds for $100,000 the latter is preferable for most applications.
I recall a controversy here in the US when an atheist group wanted to run some Superbowl/subway advertisements. Religious groups instantly began claiming persecution. I'm all for allowing one religious group to advertise, as long as they don't have a hissy fit whenever another group chooses to do so.
If its not transmitting the data to the internet, and doesn't have the capacity to store video/audio streams itself its not "recording". That said any device with a video/audio input should have hardware based light indicating if that capability is powered or not. No form of software updating/hacking should be able to disable that functionality.
"right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms"
Why do so many people blithely ignore the the next part of the same sentence in the second amendment? Even if you buy the garbage that it applies to the "militia" (any able bodied male between 18 and 45 throughout most of the countries early history) the very next part says that it applies to everyone (IE: People).
Meanwhile, in the United States our own "glorified dowsing rods" the TSA continues to rake in somewhere around $8 Billion dollars a year in direct costs alone (likely tens of billions when you factor in economic losses, increased road deaths and secondary costs) and is 95% ineffective at finding lighters and knives. And chances are no one responsible for that debacle is ever going to see a fine let alone a prison sentence.
That would be neat, however if it were a station I would bet its inexplicable mass (probably much lighter) would be driving astrophysicists crazy. I assume that all of the equations are working out as this isn't the case.
From what I understand a large number of their clients these days are governmental, so this move isn't all that surprising. If they took a different stance they probably would end up like QWest when they told the government to shove it when they started their illegal wiretaping program suddenly all of QWests government contracts were canceled and they found themselves under "investigation".
Zero-knowledge encryption? Sounds like they're trying to invent some new buzzword to try to make something almost no one could argue against, secured communications and records for banking, conversations & confidential information (medical records, personal matters, etc). It should also be noted that there is a really good reason for this move to decentralized encryption, the feds simply couldn't keep their hands out of the cookie jar. That and there are no indications that allowing the government full access to communications has any effect on terrorist activity, its pretty obvious that they were hoovering information before 9/11 and it didn't stop that, they've created massive data centers and tied in with ISPs throughout the globe and they didn't stop Paris, Metrojet Flight 9268, Boston or any of the other major attacks. I find it disturbing they can argue for ever increasing levels of surveillance when the massive levels they are already spending tens of billions of dollars and not stopping a few nuts chatting over text messages.
Gold mines don't run on a couple million dollars of equipment either. They have conga lines of multi-million dollar dump trucks hauling material out of the mine (T 282Bs are $4-5 Million each). While there are far fewer of them in a standard mine excavators are also far more expensive, they often cost tens of millions of dollars each. I'd bet that your average precious metal mine requires at least $150 Million dollars of equipment just to get material out of the mine, some much more. When Goldcorp established a new mine in Canada it cost them $2 Billion.
If the yields were the same you would no doubt be correct, but the article suggested that the deposits around these hydro-thermal vents are 10 times the density of modern land based deposits and they don't have to remove massive amounts of stone/dirt covering them in order to start mining, they're sitting right on the sea floor. That of course still doesn't make it a sure thing, but it definitely helps.
Deep sea mining is GOING to happen, whether it is good for the environment or not. If environmentalists/scientists are afraid of its effects they need to work with companies/governments to ensure that it is done with as little damage as is feasible. Attempts to sabotage it with claims of doom and gloom or wrapping it up in untenable amounts of red tape will only succeed in creating another "us vs them" mentality where each side is constantly trying to screw over the other with lies and propaganda campaigns resulting in more damage to the economy & environment.