Private ownership must be the critical part. Perhaps the entire capitalism can be derived from just private ownership. "Means of production" seems almost superficial.
There are a lot of possibilities once LEO can be reached reliably. I think SpaceX has a good chance to do it.
Once LEO access is cheap enough, someone could build a nuclear powered space-only vehicle, that would never land on Earth and would stay in space all the time (to make the environmentalists happy).
At first it could be powered with RTG-s (the tech already exists today). Later it could be upgraded to use actual nuke reactors.
Something like that could escape the Earth's gravity very easily.
This may be the last chance to see it from Earth in the next 100 years, but Venus transits can be seen all the time from an orbit around the Sun. With the development of space travel in the near future, it is very likely that many people will get another chance to see a Venus transit from space, within their lifetime.
I can imagine space tourism companies offering "Venus Transit" tours in the not so distant future. (Maybe 10 - 15 years?)
Thanks for the diagram with the project completion estimates. It creates a nice context for the "20 years away" predictions. The level of detail in the answers is great too.
Letting private companies use it as a transfer station for their own flights, might bring up questions of ownership. The ISS is essentially owned by politicians. That's a very uncomfortable situation for any private company, if they want to rely on it for their own missions.
Maybe it would be cheaper and easier for private companies to launch and maintain their own simple orbiting stations for a few $million, than to have to deal with the politics of the ISS.
When only nerds have PC-s, it will become much easier to ban them (because PCs can run "unapproved" code, or some other excuse). Only large companies with government licenses will be allowed to operate general purpose PCs.
The tablet owning grannies will not oppose that of course. Why would they care.
You want to save electricity? Ban clothes dryers, electric heaters, dishwashers and electric kettles. At least you'd cost less lives than this insanity.
And let's ban the internet. All those computers use so much electricity.
Here is how: you scan a person at atomic resolution. Then you send a *description* of their body, atom for atom via powerful laser. At the destination, a nanotech assembler builds a copy atom for atom.
That's kind of like writing a program bit by bit, and in machine language...
Maybe more efficient methods for writing that program could be invented.
Ah, the figure refers to traffic and number of unique visitors per day. It was in the article, I just skimmed over it... (I thought those diagrams were ads)
It might be possible again with RFID technology combined with face recognition.
A camera on the bus records your face, and the detector in the door scans your RFID-enabled bus ticket or pass (which is linked to your face data), then charges you a fee... all automatic.
I think they are wasting the descent stage module. In the video it hovers above the ground with rocket propulsion, at a very low altitude (10 meters?) while the rover itself descends to the surface, then releases the rover and flies away in a random direction like crazy (and presumably crashes) - what a waste after it flew all the way to mars and got so close to an actual landing? Why not just let the descent stage land softly nearby, and use it for something, maybe as a radio relay or as a backup solar panel?
I wonder if it might be possible to point a laser at the craft's solar panels to recharge its batteries? That is if it has opened its solar panels and they are pointing towards Earth at least some of the time?
Slashdot Mirror
Private ownership must be the critical part. Perhaps the entire capitalism can be derived from just private ownership. "Means of production" seems almost superficial.
The UN has been promoting internet censorship lately. No help to expect from them.
It paid for the education of Rovio founders and employees. Education in Finland is free up to and including university level.
Oh well, the country doesn't fall from a few leeches showing their true colours.
The purpose of tax is to provide "free" services?
Why do people become "leeches" for using this "free" service without paying anything back? Is the service not really "free"?
Or is the problem that someone else pays for this "free" service? Aren't the taxes supposed to work like that?
Why not tax
That is already too far.
7 GHz processor speed and it still takes 10 seconds to load Windows. . .
File-sharing for slaves, slave-sharing for politicians...
There are a lot of possibilities once LEO can be reached reliably. I think SpaceX has a good chance to do it.
Once LEO access is cheap enough, someone could build a nuclear powered space-only vehicle, that would never land on Earth and would stay in space all the time (to make the environmentalists happy).
At first it could be powered with RTG-s (the tech already exists today). Later it could be upgraded to use actual nuke reactors.
Something like that could escape the Earth's gravity very easily.
Politicians don't own the economy, it's not theirs.
Also technology tends to advance and prices tend to go down. What costs 50 trillion today may cost only 1 billion tomorrow. It's better to wait.
This may be the last chance to see it from Earth in the next 100 years, but Venus transits can be seen all the time from an orbit around the Sun. With the development of space travel in the near future, it is very likely that many people will get another chance to see a Venus transit from space, within their lifetime.
I can imagine space tourism companies offering "Venus Transit" tours in the not so distant future. (Maybe 10 - 15 years?)
Watermarks can be destroyed by averaging multiple watermarked copies into a single copy.
Incandescent bulbs give sharp shadows and they have a superior light spectrum.
They also cost 1% of the price of this new light bulb, and are not poisonous.
I don't care if 99% of the power they consume is turned into heat. I will pay happily for it.
Thanks for the diagram with the project completion estimates. It creates a nice context for the "20 years away" predictions. The level of detail in the answers is great too.
Digging underground, going into space, colonizing the oceans. There is plenty of room for expansion.
The ISS has cost about $150 billion.
Letting private companies use it as a transfer station for their own flights, might bring up questions of ownership. The ISS is essentially owned by politicians. That's a very uncomfortable situation for any private company, if they want to rely on it for their own missions.
Maybe it would be cheaper and easier for private companies to launch and maintain their own simple orbiting stations for a few $million, than to have to deal with the politics of the ISS.
We can see Proxima Centauri from here, so there is not enough junk there to block the light. That means it's mostly empty space.
When only nerds have PC-s, it will become much easier to ban them (because PCs can run "unapproved" code, or some other excuse). Only large companies with government licenses will be allowed to operate general purpose PCs.
The tablet owning grannies will not oppose that of course. Why would they care.
You want to save electricity? Ban clothes dryers, electric heaters, dishwashers and electric kettles. At least you'd cost less lives than this insanity.
And let's ban the internet. All those computers use so much electricity.
That's kind of like writing a program bit by bit, and in machine language...
Maybe more efficient methods for writing that program could be invented.
Such freedom could do wonders in politics.
Ah, the figure refers to traffic and number of unique visitors per day. It was in the article, I just skimmed over it... (I thought those diagrams were ads)
In that Megaupload song they say it was 4% of the internet, and what does that mean exactly? 4% of all internet users used it? 4% of all traffic?
It might be possible again with RFID technology combined with face recognition.
A camera on the bus records your face, and the detector in the door scans your RFID-enabled bus ticket or pass (which is linked to your face data), then charges you a fee... all automatic.
True, the rockets have served their purpose by that point. But any kind of reuse would be better than letting it crash.
From the way it's shown in the video, the amount of fuel it uses to fly away could be enough to allow it to land softly instead.
I think they are wasting the descent stage module. In the video it hovers above the ground with rocket propulsion, at a very low altitude (10 meters?) while the rover itself descends to the surface, then releases the rover and flies away in a random direction like crazy (and presumably crashes) - what a waste after it flew all the way to mars and got so close to an actual landing? Why not just let the descent stage land softly nearby, and use it for something, maybe as a radio relay or as a backup solar panel?
I wonder if it might be possible to point a laser at the craft's solar panels to recharge its batteries? That is if it has opened its solar panels and they are pointing towards Earth at least some of the time?