Yes it is a hostile environment but three things drive expansion -
1. economics 2. technology 3. discontent
The technology and economics still don't work. Those are the current limiting factors. When we get a an economic model that matches available technology to potential resources we WILL start sending large numbers of people into space. There are too many potential resources not to.
At that point it comes down to WHO will be willing to go out to the new frontier - based on history it's going to be those who are unhappy with the societal limitations here on Earth. They are probably NOT going to go out with the intent of starting a family but that will come unless there is some reason pregnancy is not viable in space.
The next big question - does it make more sense to gown down a gravity well like Mars or mine asteroids and build in space?
Once people CAN get into space cheaply they WILL go into space if they can find the freedom economic/political/societal that they can't find on earth.
Yeah I did. And I unlike you realize the following -
1. stripping the email address was almost certainly at a minimum an attempt to hide the fact that she was using a private server for government emails. (Something which would have gotten a "normal" person fired if not charged with multiple felonies)
2. stripping/altering the email address would have allowed them to cherry pick items - e.g. "well this email is potentially a problem, good thing it doesn't have clinton's email address on it!"
3. Later actions by the IT consultant (destroying evidence which was under subpoena) indicate the above was not simply "oooh we want to protect her private email address" rather it indicates they were looking at hiding or destroying the information.....
I dislike Trump but seriously just because he's the Republican candidate should not mean you are willing to overlook this kind of crap. If the DNC wasn't corrupt at the core you probably would have had Sanders instead....
You seriously would vote for someone to uphold the "rule of law" who it seems has no respect for the law??? Seriously amazing. So you are fine with one set of rules for the "elite" and one set for everyone else eh?
Trump may be slime, but at the moment I don't think there is any sort of definitive proof he's broken the law,. If there were it almost certainly would have come out by now and be front page headlines for every news organization in the US....
Here's a thought how about the DNC replaces her with someone who has NOT attempted to break the law? Failing that how about someone who doesn't have a paper trail showing they tried??????
max had almost no dialog, no character development. almost his sole dialog was a monologue to himself/audience at the start essentially saying "I'm crazy because I failed to save some people after the world went to shit"
He was essentially a cardboard caricature put there to sell a movie with mad max in the title.
If you expect to see a "Roadwarrior" movie with Max as an actual self-sacrificing hero type, skip this movie....
Had some cool visuals for the vehicles though.
Spoilers - * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
What sucked -
He starts off looking like a hobo, gets captured right at the beginning and cleaned up by the bad guys. His biggest action sequence is right here when he tries to escape and fails. You really don't see him go "bad ass" on anyone - although it is implied in one "after action" scene. He doesn't kill the villain, and never really has any sort of "hey e - do I survive or try to help out" forced on him.
His only real contribution is towards the end when he convinces the escapees that they should head back and take over the place they left.
The movie had some cool visuals, but I think they spent too much time on some scenery shots at the expense of characters.
I'd say the best performance was probably Nicholas Hoult as a "war boy" - essentially he ended up in the mad max role almost.
The only negative I can say is the conversion of his character seemed a little too easy - from "I'm a bad guy who REALLY believes in what I'm doing" - to - "Hey, you mean all those fanatical beliefs I held all my life are wrong?" "Okay I'll do a 180 and now I'm a good guy"
It was an action movie where essentially all the good characters were female, and all the bad ones were male. But they were almost ALL throwaway parts IMO.
Charlize Theron was okay but she did not seem to fit IMO as an action hero. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for bad ass females action movies - Underworld and Resident Evil, but this was supposed to be Mad Max.
Why the fuck do people keep on mentioning Thorium reactors? They still produce fission products. And fission products are the only thing that nuclear reactors need to protect against releasing to the public. Fission products are also statistically determined. You will always get short medium and long term radionuclides even if you burn up some.
There are benefits to Thorium reactors, but in a major accident they will still release enough highly radioactive substances that will require evacuation and quarantine of the affected area for decades. Yes, a thorium reactor can still meltdown, it still has decay heat, and it would require complex engineered safeguards to protect it.
You do realize that EXISTING thorium reactor designs -
1. Do not need water as coolant (hence no high pressure evironment and much smaller) 2. As designed will shutdown on their own with no outside intervention. 3. As designed they can't "overheat".
"Best results occur with molten salt reactors (MSRs), such as ORNL's liquid fluoride thorium reactor (LFTR), which have built-in negative-feedback reaction rates due to salt expansion and thus reactor throttling via load. This is a great safety advantage, since no emergency cooling system is needed, which is both expensive and adds thermal inefficiency. In fact, an MSR was chosen as the base design for the 1960s DoD nuclear aircraft largely because of its great safety advantages, even under aircraft maneuvering. In the basic design, an MSR generates heat at higher temperatures, continuously, and without refuelling shutdowns, so it can provide hot air to a more efficient (Brayton Cycle) turbine. An MSR run this way is about 30% better in thermal efficiency than common thermal plants, whether combustive or traditional solid-fuelled nuclear.[27]"
Gold is no more "real money" than anything else. The only value gold has is what people think it's worth, just like regular dollars.
We need to get back to sound money that "connects" to something of constant value, like gold or land.
No, we don't.
YES we do. The ability of government to fund policy by the creation of new money invites corruption at the highest level. Hence the rise of ongoing deficit spending.
1 Votes are essentially "bought" for unfunded social and military spending through lobbying. 2 Politicians then pass unbalanced budgets bringing this new currency into being. 3 The lobbyists who are essentially the beneficiaries of #2 above then fund election campaigns for said politicians. 4. go to step 1 and repeat.
"Second lesson: The "devaluation" that you speak of is called inflation. Yes, over time an individual dollar is worth less. We also make more of these dollars for our time. This is not some giant conspiracy."
Bull.
First Lesson - a program of CONSTANT Inflation is in effect a recurring tax upon saved capital. E.G. I am already taxed on wages, inflation then continuously erodes the value of those savings. And don't give me the "put it in the bank" BS because interest earned on deposits is LESS than inflation so I would in effect be losing value by depositing it.
Second Lesson - Since these new dollars are brought into being to fund government deficit spending and benefit the federal reserve banks as well. I'd say yeah there is indeed a "conspiracy". Both people in government and banking are WELL AWARE of the game, who it benefits and how.
Third Lesson - A powerful argument for using gold as a medium of exchange is primarily based upon the idea that it removes the ability of the government to continue deficit spending via inflation as they cannot easily create gold (as opposed to fiat currency). Value is based upon supply, demand and time preference.
When government is given the ability to create money political corruption necessarily follows. I.E. the power to "create" wealth attracts people and lobbyists who then fund the politicians providing them said wealth.
Your argument that using gold as a medium of exchange is a return to a barter system is invalid. I could make the same argument that trading little green pieces of paper for goods or services does the same thing. E.G. bartering paper for goods instead of gold.
Last lesson - The dollar was backed by gold up until Nixon severed the last remaining ties in the 70's Why did he do this? because other countries were redeeming our currency and demanding the gold it was backed by. Since then government spending has essentially been from from any restraint as there is no inherent limiting factor upon the emission of money. The only real limit to the debasement will be the destruction of the nation and/or world economy.
"Of course a bigger problem with the law is that ignorance of the law is no excuse but it's impossible for me to know every law and precedent that applies to me."
Ja, Ve should all accept some risk for ze Vaterland.....
Let's make it a law because after all we wouldn't want people to believe they own their OWN bodies, and actually have the temerity to say what does or does not go into it.
BTW besides the despicable ideals that you are espousing there is also a flaw in logic -
I.E. if someone else was to get sick via a non-vaccinated person then in theory they were also NOT vaccinated. Hence they only people suffering would be those who chose not to get the shot.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes it is a hostile environment but three things drive expansion -
1. economics
2. technology
3. discontent
The technology and economics still don't work. Those are the current limiting factors. When we get a an economic model that matches available technology to potential resources we WILL start sending large numbers of people into space. There are too many potential resources not to.
At that point it comes down to WHO will be willing to go out to the new frontier - based on history it's going to be those who are unhappy with the societal limitations here on Earth. They are probably NOT going to go out with the intent of starting a family but that will come unless there is some reason pregnancy is not viable in space.
The next big question - does it make more sense to gown down a gravity well like Mars or mine asteroids and build in space?
Once people CAN get into space cheaply they WILL go into space if they can find the freedom economic/political/societal that they can't find on earth.
Oh yes! So true!
It's not like the MSM invents news at all...
Hey What's this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
or this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Nothing to see here right?
CNN is an "official" source so it must not be fake....
As a response, let me use a phrase I've heard from government apologists since the Bush administration -
If You've done nothing wrong,
YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE.
Liked BC when I went to visit from Portland.
Always wondered how hard it is to get clearance etc to work up there if you are from the US...
What's the demand like for network eng?
Yeah I did. And I unlike you realize the following -
1. stripping the email address was almost certainly at a minimum an attempt to hide the fact that she was using a private server for government emails. (Something which would have gotten a "normal" person fired if not charged with multiple felonies)
2. stripping/altering the email address would have allowed them to cherry pick items - e.g. "well this email is potentially a problem, good thing it doesn't have clinton's email address on it!"
3. Later actions by the IT consultant (destroying evidence which was under subpoena) indicate the above was not simply "oooh we want to protect her private email address" rather it indicates they were looking at hiding or destroying the information.....
I dislike Trump but seriously just because he's the Republican candidate should not mean you are willing to overlook this kind of crap.
If the DNC wasn't corrupt at the core you probably would have had Sanders instead....
You seriously would vote for someone to uphold the "rule of law" who it seems has no respect for the law???
Seriously amazing. So you are fine with one set of rules for the "elite" and one set for everyone else eh?
Trump may be slime, but at the moment I don't think there is any sort of definitive proof he's broken the law,. If there were it almost certainly would have come
out by now and be front page headlines for every news organization in the US....
Here's a thought how about the DNC replaces her with someone who has NOT attempted to break the law? Failing that how about someone who doesn't have a paper trail showing they tried??????
She's been playing by Animal Farm -
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others....
I seem to remember when Americans were begin snooped on, the argument for doing so pretty much always devolved to -
"You have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide."
Seems to me politicians should be held to that standard BEFORE the average citizen is.....
Full transparency for politicians before we have our rights violated.
Whoop There it is!
Sounds like the suits took a contract but did not want to pay for the back end infrastructure to really support it.
I can't tell you the number of times I've seen this mentality -
From Banks to Airlines to Healthcare to "Service" Providers....
Usually it seems to be a combination of cheap C-level people and a layer of "yes" men between them and IT.
Unfortunately the deciders in chief don't feel the pain when deals like this cause the company to implode....
saw it, as a mad max movie it sucked IMO.
max had almost no dialog, no character development.
almost his sole dialog was a monologue to himself/audience
at the start essentially saying "I'm crazy because I failed to save some people after the world went to shit"
He was essentially a cardboard caricature put there to sell a movie with mad max in the title.
If you expect to see a "Roadwarrior" movie with Max as an actual self-sacrificing hero type, skip this movie....
Had some cool visuals for the vehicles though.
Spoilers -
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
What sucked -
He starts off looking like a hobo, gets captured right at the beginning and cleaned up by the bad guys.
His biggest action sequence is right here when he tries to escape and fails.
You really don't see him go "bad ass" on anyone - although it is implied in one "after action" scene.
He doesn't kill the villain, and never really has any sort of "hey e - do I survive or try to help out" forced on him.
His only real contribution is towards the end when he convinces the escapees that they should head back and take over the place they left.
The movie had some cool visuals, but I think they spent too much time on some scenery shots at the expense of characters.
I'd say the best performance was probably Nicholas Hoult as a "war boy" - essentially he ended up in the mad max role almost.
The only negative I can say is the conversion of his character seemed a little too easy
- from "I'm a bad guy who REALLY believes in what I'm doing" - to -
"Hey, you mean all those fanatical beliefs I held all my life are wrong?"
"Okay I'll do a 180 and now I'm a good guy"
It was an action movie where essentially all the good characters were female, and all the bad ones were male. But they were almost ALL throwaway parts IMO.
Charlize Theron was okay but she did not seem to fit IMO as an action hero. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for bad ass females action movies - Underworld and Resident Evil, but this was supposed to be Mad Max.
And in case you haven't been paying attention, who do you think does the background checks??
Do you think they are really going to delete that data in the age of "big terror"????
http://www.examiner.com/article/alaska-gun-stores-say-atf-engaging-new-illegal-activity
Is it time to retire the old "you've got nothing to fear if you've done nothing wrong" lie yet????
recommended change to the national anthem:
O say does that star-spangled banner yet wave,
O'er the land of the free, or the home of the SLAVE......
"Oh say does that start spangled banner yet wave....
o'er the land of the free, or the home of the slave?"
Touche!
Although I believe it's 2.2 imperial fucktons to one metric fuckton....
Boromir's answer -
One does not simply stop the "Star Wars"
Why the fuck do people keep on mentioning Thorium reactors? They still produce fission products. And fission products are the only thing that nuclear reactors need to protect against releasing to the public. Fission products are also statistically determined. You will always get short medium and long term radionuclides even if you burn up some.
There are benefits to Thorium reactors, but in a major accident they will still release enough highly radioactive substances that will require evacuation and quarantine of the affected area for decades. Yes, a thorium reactor can still meltdown, it still has decay heat, and it would require complex engineered safeguards to protect it.
You do realize that EXISTING thorium reactor designs -
1. Do not need water as coolant (hence no high pressure evironment and much smaller)
2. As designed will shutdown on their own with no outside intervention.
3. As designed they can't "overheat".
"Best results occur with molten salt reactors (MSRs), such as ORNL's liquid fluoride thorium reactor (LFTR), which have built-in negative-feedback reaction rates due to salt expansion and thus reactor throttling via load. This is a great safety advantage, since no emergency cooling system is needed, which is both expensive and adds thermal inefficiency. In fact, an MSR was chosen as the base design for the 1960s DoD nuclear aircraft largely because of its great safety advantages, even under aircraft maneuvering. In the basic design, an MSR generates heat at higher temperatures, continuously, and without refuelling shutdowns, so it can provide hot air to a more efficient (Brayton Cycle) turbine. An MSR run this way is about 30% better in thermal efficiency than common thermal plants, whether combustive or traditional solid-fuelled nuclear.[27]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium#Commercial_nuclear_power_station
4. The US has a metric fuckton of thorium in it's coal deposits.
well then Thorium nuclear reactors would seem to be a better bet.
And not real money.
Gold is no more "real money" than anything else. The only value gold has is what people think it's worth, just like regular dollars.
We need to get back to sound money that "connects" to something of constant value, like gold or land.
No, we don't.
YES we do.
The ability of government to fund policy by the creation of new money invites corruption at the highest level. Hence the rise of ongoing deficit spending.
1 Votes are essentially "bought" for unfunded social and military spending through lobbying.
2 Politicians then pass unbalanced budgets bringing this new currency into being.
3 The lobbyists who are essentially the beneficiaries of #2 above then fund election campaigns for said politicians.
4. go to step 1 and repeat.
"Second lesson: The "devaluation" that you speak of is called inflation. Yes, over time an individual dollar is worth less. We also make more of these dollars for our time. This is not some giant conspiracy."
Bull.
First Lesson - a program of CONSTANT Inflation is in effect a recurring tax upon saved capital. E.G. I am already taxed on wages, inflation then continuously erodes the value of those savings. And don't give me the "put it in the bank" BS because interest earned on deposits is LESS than inflation so I would in effect be losing value by depositing it.
Second Lesson - Since these new dollars are brought into being to fund government deficit spending and benefit the federal reserve banks as well. I'd say yeah there is indeed a "conspiracy". Both people in government and banking are WELL AWARE of the game, who it benefits and how.
Third Lesson - A powerful argument for using gold as a medium of exchange is primarily based upon the idea that it removes the ability of the government to continue deficit spending via inflation as they cannot easily create gold (as opposed to fiat currency). Value is based upon supply, demand and time preference.
When government is given the ability to create money political corruption necessarily follows. I.E. the power to "create" wealth attracts people and lobbyists
who then fund the politicians providing them said wealth.
Your argument that using gold as a medium of exchange is a return to a barter system is invalid. I could make the same argument that trading little green pieces of paper for goods or services does the same thing. E.G. bartering paper for goods instead of gold.
Last lesson - The dollar was backed by gold up until Nixon severed the last remaining ties in the 70's Why did he do this? because other countries were redeeming our currency and demanding the gold it was backed by. Since then government spending has essentially been from from any restraint as there
is no inherent limiting factor upon the emission of money. The only real limit to the debasement will be the destruction of the nation and/or world economy.
You do realize this checkpoint could be many miles inside the country right?
I.E. you do not necessarily have to have come from mexico to be going through the checkpoint.
"Of course a bigger problem with the law is that ignorance of the law is no excuse but it's impossible for me to know every law and precedent that applies to me."
Unless of course your John Corzine....
Not only demands for Jury Trials -
Occupy should start the Nullify movement - E.G. if you are on a jury refuse to return a guilty verdict for victimless BS charges.
It is your right and DUTY to judge not only guilt or innocence but also the merit of the law itself.
Fully Informed Jury Association -
http://fija.org/
Glad to learn we have not had any wars since the founding of the UN -
(please ignore the 140 plus wars since it was founded in 1945)
Ja, Ve should all accept some risk for ze Vaterland.....
Let's make it a law because after all we wouldn't want people to believe they own their OWN bodies, and actually have the temerity to say what does or does not go into it.
BTW besides the despicable ideals that you are espousing there is also a flaw in logic -
I.E. if someone else was to get sick via a non-vaccinated person then in theory they were also NOT vaccinated. Hence they only people suffering would be those who chose not to get the shot.
Come on.
If some people are attracted to the light side, there are going to be some attracted to the dark side as well.....
As a "jedi" he should know this.
To find them he just needs to yell out "Hey Darth!!!" in a crowd.