Nonsense. Any good scientist, when faced with a mystery, will be more than happy to say "I don't know how that happened" and start trying to figure it out. Can't get much more intellectually honest than that. A good Creationist, faced with a question s/he can't answer, says "God did it". Now this answer may well be true, but it's almost useless for predicting future outcomes (which is one thing that science can be awfully good at).
Sure. And the sun might not rise tomorrow, and God may well have created the world a second ago and caused all of our memories to deny that fact...lots of things/may/ be so. But, without good solid evidence (not hand waving and anecdotes), I'm going to go with Occam's Razor.
With one very important switch: I accept, as a non-rational article of faith, that God created the universe. I believe He created a system which inevitably resulted in sentient life, and that he didn't need to resort to waving a magic wand: He built the system such that His desired outcome was inevitable. That, to me, is way more impressive than just wishing the Cosmos into being as it now exists.
Yeah. Watch the video. If you can fly your heli, inverted, for as long as these MIT people did, I'll buy you another one.
You will not be able to perform these maneuvers, I guaran-damn-tee you. Outside loop? Ten feet above the ground? I'll believe you can do it when I see it.
Had you read the article, you would know that this helicopter can execute such rolls autonomously, without constant control inputs from the pilot. Essentially, it's a full-up autonomous fly-by-wire model helicopter. Not a trivial achievement.
Is there a single blessing on the planet for which you could not make the same statement? It's the human condition...all we can do, as people of good conscience, is to make the best of it.
Fair enough, but how would this be changed if oil went away? The wealthy and powerful would still be wealthy and powerful, and the peasants would get screwed. Business as usual.
Leaving aside your ad-hominem attacks, which prove beyond a shadow of a doubt the quality of your reasoning, you fail to illustrate how exactly you are going to obtain enough hydrogen to run our society.
As for me and my death-dealing nukes, believe me when I say that I'm trying to get off this rock as fast as I can, and I'm going to take as many smart people with me as I can. Rest assured in knowing that you will not make the cut.
My point is that the US Army Rangers and the US Army Special Forces are both subsets of the Joint Special Operations Command. You are naming that set "Special Operations Forces", which could lead somebody to mistakenly conclude that the Rangers are a subset of the Special Forces.
In other words, the original poster is correct: The soldiers in question were not Special Forces soldiers, they were Army Rangers. Although the Rangers might be classed as Special Operations soldiers, the two groups are NOT synonymous or interchangeable.
Aha. You fell into my trap. How do you get H2 out of H20? You crack it out...with a large amount of electricity. Where do we get the electricity?
You guessed it. Fossil fuels.
Hydrogen is not an energy source, like fossil fuels are. It is an energy transfer mechanism, like a battery. Unless and until we figure out how to make a large amount of electricity cheaply and cleanly, hydrogen as a fuel is a non-starter. (pardon the pun.)
Hint: Cheap clean power comes from one place: Nuclear. Too bad it's gauche to talk about that anymore...
SOCOM (Special Operations Command) is a new, joint-service umbrella organization responsible for, among other forces, the Army Rangers, Army Special Forces (Green Berets), Navy SEALs, and the Air Force's Special Operations Command. The Rangers and the Green Berets are two different organizations. The Rangers are, if you'll pardon the imagery, the junior varsity of the Army's special operations soldiers. The Green Berets are the varsity squad. That's not intended in any way to disparage the Rangers, as they are probably among the best light-infantry fighters on the planet. They do not, however, have the age and experience that a Special Forces A-Team brings into the field. Many Rangers continue on to become Green Berets.
Sure. I bet Microsoft would do a lot better in the marketplace if they were allowed to go ahead and murder people who disagreed with them. And that should be OK, because they're acting in their shareholders' interest, right?
Microsoft broke the law. If they want to use laws to protect themselves (like copyright and patent laws) they shouldn't think themselves above other laws (like anti-trust laws).
(argumentative non-sequitur) The thing about most randian objectivists is that they want to pick and choose the sorts of government intervention they want to see in commerce.
Call me crazy, but how many new features does a word processor need? What major functional changes have occured in Office since Office95? I'm serious...don't know of any major functionality changes. Extra bells and whistles, sure...but what major new labor-saving advances are we talking about here?
But how many mid- or rear-engine American production cars can you think of? Betcha the number is awful damn close to zero.
When you're talking about SERIOUS performance, mid engine is really hard to beat. Low polar moment of inertia and good weight distribution is a Good Thing. How many non-mid-engine Formula 1 cars are there? Remember that close to zero number we talked about? : )
And, while we're on the subject, NASCAR does not race performance cars in any meaningful sense of the word.
SSX was a great game...lots and lots of fun. I was surprised how much I liked it. However, EA also makes Madden NFL 2001. And Madden NFL 2000. And Madden NFL 99. And Madden NFL 98. And Madden NFL 97. Same for all the other sports licenses...they just refine and rehash the same game, adding bells and whistles and chrome, and only very rarely reward a truly innovative, engaging game concept with development funds.
There were parts of IV that I rather liked. Those parts went away quickly after about the nine zillionth playthrough. Now, I loathe that game with the loathing of one thousand loathes.
They saved the village, by destroying it. I worked at Origin during the Wing Commander IV era, and EA's revolving door management, and utter intolerance for any new ideas out of Austin, made certain that Origin would never do anything innovative again. All EA wanted to hear from Origin was "Yes, Master, the new Ultima/Wing Commander/Crusader game is on schedule and under budget. May we please refrain from laying off our staff this year?"
With the possible exception of UO, which I personally didn't enjoy very much, but other people apparently groove to. And don't get me started about Ultima:Ascention.
I can't speak to Mr. Garriott's company management skills. Hell, I certainly wouldn't have the first idea how to run a company like that...I don't think anybody really does. He did, at one point, have a unique gift for storytelling in the medium of computer games. Unfortunately, that got buried under creeping featuritis. Hopefully, he'll be able to start with a clean slate (or a Tabula Rasa...wonder if that name is more than just coincidental? : ) and get back to his unique visionary roots.
I sure hope so. U6 is one of my favourite games ever.
Then you don't have a good enough reflector set up.
Honestly, didn't you ever burn your name into leaves with a magnifying glass? Concentrating solar energy is pretty easy...just use a curved mirror or a lens. 480 degrees would be no problem at all.
The key difference is that he has a big-ass workshop, and I like to keep tools in my pants. (huh huh. Tool. Pants. huh huh)
My Leatherman Wave is arguably not as good as a dedicated pair of pliers and a mess of screwdrivers, but in 99.44% of the cases when I'm away from my toolbox, it's Good Enough. As a matter of fact, the only serious drawback is that I don't have a screwdriver AND a pair of pliers simultaneously. But, the fact that I can have it on my person at all times (except when I'm flying on a plane, dammit) makes up for its (modest) functionality limitations.
Portability is the killer application for these electronic devices, and for me it's paramount. The Handspring Treo looks to be the killer device...just wish I could afford one. : )
Slashdot Mirror
OK, so can you provide us unwashed heathens with the means to edify ourselves on the subject, or were you there to witness it?
Nonsense. Any good scientist, when faced with a mystery, will be more than happy to say "I don't know how that happened" and start trying to figure it out. Can't get much more intellectually honest than that. A good Creationist, faced with a question s/he can't answer, says "God did it". Now this answer may well be true, but it's almost useless for predicting future outcomes (which is one thing that science can be awfully good at).
Sure. And the sun might not rise tomorrow, and God may well have created the world a second ago and caused all of our memories to deny that fact...lots of things /may/ be so. But, without good solid evidence (not hand waving and anecdotes), I'm going to go with Occam's Razor.
With one very important switch: I accept, as a non-rational article of faith, that God created the universe. I believe He created a system which inevitably resulted in sentient life, and that he didn't need to resort to waving a magic wand: He built the system such that His desired outcome was inevitable. That, to me, is way more impressive than just wishing the Cosmos into being as it now exists.
Yeah. Watch the video. If you can fly your heli, inverted, for as long as these MIT people did, I'll buy you another one.
You will not be able to perform these maneuvers, I guaran-damn-tee you. Outside loop? Ten feet above the ground? I'll believe you can do it when I see it.
Had you read the article, you would know that this helicopter can execute such rolls autonomously, without constant control inputs from the pilot. Essentially, it's a full-up autonomous fly-by-wire model helicopter. Not a trivial achievement.
Don't let the riff-raff in. Oldest play in the elitist's book. Works well in country clubs, why not in online games?
Oh yeah. Because it's morally reprehensible. That's right.
Is there a single blessing on the planet for which you could not make the same statement? It's the human condition...all we can do, as people of good conscience, is to make the best of it.
Fair enough, but how would this be changed if oil went away? The wealthy and powerful would still be wealthy and powerful, and the peasants would get screwed. Business as usual.
Leaving aside your ad-hominem attacks, which prove beyond a shadow of a doubt the quality of your reasoning, you fail to illustrate how exactly you are going to obtain enough hydrogen to run our society.
As for me and my death-dealing nukes, believe me when I say that I'm trying to get off this rock as fast as I can, and I'm going to take as many smart people with me as I can. Rest assured in knowing that you will not make the cut.
My point is that the US Army Rangers and the US Army Special Forces are both subsets of the Joint Special Operations Command. You are naming that set "Special Operations Forces", which could lead somebody to mistakenly conclude that the Rangers are a subset of the Special Forces.
In other words, the original poster is correct: The soldiers in question were not Special Forces soldiers, they were Army Rangers. Although the Rangers might be classed as Special Operations soldiers, the two groups are NOT synonymous or interchangeable.
Aha. You fell into my trap. How do you get H2 out of H20? You crack it out...with a large amount of electricity. Where do we get the electricity?
You guessed it. Fossil fuels.
Hydrogen is not an energy source, like fossil fuels are. It is an energy transfer mechanism, like a battery. Unless and until we figure out how to make a large amount of electricity cheaply and cleanly, hydrogen as a fuel is a non-starter. (pardon the pun.)
Hint: Cheap clean power comes from one place: Nuclear. Too bad it's gauche to talk about that anymore...
You're going off half-cocked.
SOCOM (Special Operations Command) is a new, joint-service umbrella organization responsible for, among other forces, the Army Rangers, Army Special Forces (Green Berets), Navy SEALs, and the Air Force's Special Operations Command. The Rangers and the Green Berets are two different organizations. The Rangers are, if you'll pardon the imagery, the junior varsity of the Army's special operations soldiers. The Green Berets are the varsity squad. That's not intended in any way to disparage the Rangers, as they are probably among the best light-infantry fighters on the planet. They do not, however, have the age and experience that a Special Forces A-Team brings into the field. Many Rangers continue on to become Green Berets.
So there ya have it.
Where are we gonna get the hydrogen, sparky?
Sure. I bet Microsoft would do a lot better in the marketplace if they were allowed to go ahead and murder people who disagreed with them. And that should be OK, because they're acting in their shareholders' interest, right?
Microsoft broke the law. If they want to use laws to protect themselves (like copyright and patent laws) they shouldn't think themselves above other laws (like anti-trust laws).
(argumentative non-sequitur) The thing about most randian objectivists is that they want to pick and choose the sorts of government intervention they want to see in commerce.
Call me crazy, but how many new features does a word processor need? What major functional changes have occured in Office since Office95? I'm serious...don't know of any major functionality changes. Extra bells and whistles, sure...but what major new labor-saving advances are we talking about here?
Hell, the Enron brass had enough money to buy a country...that didn't stop them from stealing money.
But how many mid- or rear-engine American production cars can you think of? Betcha the number is awful damn close to zero.
When you're talking about SERIOUS performance, mid engine is really hard to beat. Low polar moment of inertia and good weight distribution is a Good Thing. How many non-mid-engine Formula 1 cars are there? Remember that close to zero number we talked about? : )
And, while we're on the subject, NASCAR does not race performance cars in any meaningful sense of the word.
(OK, so I'm just trying to start a fight. : )
SSX was a great game...lots and lots of fun. I was surprised how much I liked it. However, EA also makes Madden NFL 2001. And Madden NFL 2000. And Madden NFL 99. And Madden NFL 98. And Madden NFL 97. Same for all the other sports licenses...they just refine and rehash the same game, adding bells and whistles and chrome, and only very rarely reward a truly innovative, engaging game concept with development funds.
There were parts of IV that I rather liked. Those parts went away quickly after about the nine zillionth playthrough. Now, I loathe that game with the loathing of one thousand loathes.
Catscratch...that whiny ass little punk bitch...
I'm not saying it's Wrong, I'm not even saying that given the current climate it's not good business...but it does NOT make good video games.
Of course, making good video games is a great way to go out of business or get bought out. I wish that were not so, but that's the way it seems to be.
They saved the village, by destroying it. I worked at Origin during the Wing Commander IV era, and EA's revolving door management, and utter intolerance for any new ideas out of Austin, made certain that Origin would never do anything innovative again. All EA wanted to hear from Origin was "Yes, Master, the new Ultima/Wing Commander/Crusader game is on schedule and under budget. May we please refrain from laying off our staff this year?"
With the possible exception of UO, which I personally didn't enjoy very much, but other people apparently groove to. And don't get me started about Ultima:Ascention.
I can't speak to Mr. Garriott's company management skills. Hell, I certainly wouldn't have the first idea how to run a company like that...I don't think anybody really does. He did, at one point, have a unique gift for storytelling in the medium of computer games. Unfortunately, that got buried under creeping featuritis. Hopefully, he'll be able to start with a clean slate (or a Tabula Rasa...wonder if that name is more than just coincidental? : ) and get back to his unique visionary roots.
I sure hope so. U6 is one of my favourite games ever.
The technology is interesting. The hype is ludicrous. THAT is what everybody is reacting to.
Is a device that will change electricity into money. Like Enron does.
Oh, I mean did. "Power of why" my left buttcheek. Can somebody please explain to me who thought that this energy broker was a good idea?
Then you don't have a good enough reflector set up.
Honestly, didn't you ever burn your name into leaves with a magnifying glass? Concentrating solar energy is pretty easy...just use a curved mirror or a lens. 480 degrees would be no problem at all.
The key difference is that he has a big-ass workshop, and I like to keep tools in my pants. (huh huh. Tool. Pants. huh huh)
My Leatherman Wave is arguably not as good as a dedicated pair of pliers and a mess of screwdrivers, but in 99.44% of the cases when I'm away from my toolbox, it's Good Enough. As a matter of fact, the only serious drawback is that I don't have a screwdriver AND a pair of pliers simultaneously. But, the fact that I can have it on my person at all times (except when I'm flying on a plane, dammit) makes up for its (modest) functionality limitations.
Portability is the killer application for these electronic devices, and for me it's paramount. The Handspring Treo looks to be the killer device...just wish I could afford one. : )