flying in a spaceship build, owned and operated by a business and run by business owners looking to make money on space tours will be a GREAT personal achievement.
So...what are the civilians going to DO in space? Unlike astronauts, they don't have to take scientific readings of everything.
Other than the wow-factor of, "I've been in outer space!", there really isn't a reason for the average civilian to go...It's not like they're going to visit relatives on Mars;)
I think you're missing the point. You could just as easily ask why people climb Mt. Everest or run marathons. It's not like anyone climbing Everest is set to make some big scientific discovery. They are doing it to do it..for personal achievement.
I think you also miss the entire point of Scaled's interest in this venture. They have spent more money than the X-prize pays out, so what's their motivation? It's called space tourism. There are literally only a handful of people that can shell out 20 million for a ride to the space station, but there are a helluva lot more than can shell out $100,000 for a subortial flight. Seriously, look at the pictures. Can you honestly say that you wouldn't want to do that????
Can someone please explain the value of shelling out big bucks...ok....ANY money for an HD recorder when the only thing the networks are going to allow (via the broadcast flag rule) those rotten, good-for-nothing consumers to record is the advertisements? I can see it now. "Wow...look at this crisp view of the Frosted Flakes box...let's watch that again..."
I would recommend Clark Howard's site. Clark Howard has a nationally syndicated radio show and has written several fantastic books on smart financial principles. He is very well known here in the Atlanta area and his life story is very interested. He made his first million on an average salary by saving and investing for the long term (of course he makes a lot more now on his radio gig and his books).
His site contains an abundance of information on anything subject you can think of. Hey, he's pretty cool technology-wise...he even uses Vonage!
They deserved all the criticism and praise they got for the speech against Bush. They did not deserve a law enacted to specifically force them to apologize and give a free concert. I'll cut them some slack for feeling persecuted when this type of crap happens.
A "Resolution" is not a law. It is a chance for members of the House to speak their collective opinion on an issue. It doesn't force the Dixie Twits to do anything.
Why does the senate refuse to Retify the Kyoto accord? Because companies threaten that they would close or have to lay off workers if they had to pay for the environmental protections being requested.
One reason they refuse to ratify Kyoto is because developing nations do not have to conform to environmental requirements of the treaty and would therefore have even more of a competetive advantage over domestic labor.
Yes, you are the person I was thinking of. Check out www..org. Mine is the fifth entry down on the right-hand side (initials JP). You can get my e-mail address there. Send me a e-mail and let me know what's going on with you.
Wow...this guy really had me in mind when he decided to build this tricycle. Yes, doubters, there is definately a market for this bike. I will now be able to traverse my overzealously speed-conscience neighborhood without feeling one speed bump!
Considering the high cost of most payloads, do you think most companies will jump on board with them having no proven launch record in the hopes of saving some cash? Even with insurance, the considerable delays caused by losing a payload would likely outweigh any savings made by using one of their launch vehicles. That's not to say that they won't produce some great hardware, but it may be an awfully slow start for them.
I agree. The payloads tend to be *very* expensive. However, I would bet that many payloads are so expensive because of the cost of launching one into orbit. They take every conceivable precaution to make sure the satellite will actually work. I would guess that with cheaper launches, many launch customers would be willing to rush their payloads to orbit knowing that if something is wrong, they can diagnose the problem, build another and launch another satellite.
The cost to build a satellite is relatively minor. It's the research and the triple-redundancy that drives costs skyward (pun intended).
I agree. The solution is not to punish infringement, it is to increasingly legalize infringement so that people's behavior need not significantly change, but they get to stay on the right side of the law.
I agree completely for but for different reasons. I don't think laws should be ammended/discarded to keep people on the right side of the law. I do believe, however, that people are voting with their actions. People believe that casual, not-for-profit petty copying of copyrighted works should not be a crime. Can you name any other "crime" 30 million US citizens are guilty of? This bill would be...no...IS the ultimate in violation of the oath of public office. These politicians vow to represent the people of their districts and they think that the way to do this is to ignore the will of the people, pay close attention to the wishes of their contributors. The politicans of course know what's better for us than we do.
A: They put them in cold liquids, bombard them with gamma rays, do what's called differential power analysis. Basically, they've noticed that the chip uses a slightly different amount of power if you get an incorrect digit than if you get a correct digit, and they try to break the code that way. They take the chip apart and try to discover the password on the logic components.
To counter that, we use temperature sensors and radiation sensors on our chips. We have all kinds of voltage protection, so they can't monkey around with that. The logic is randomly distributed. We have coding on the chip that's licensed from the CIA that's really hard to scrape off without permanently damaging the chip. We're the only company that can do high-level, triple DES encryption in a contactless RFID tag.
I'm not sure what the heck this guy's talking about...but I'm sitting here with a Symbol 1555 RFID reader and I can read any RFID tag. Yeah, the *data* I read may be encrypted, but in terms of "breaking into it"....what???? RFID is a bar code without the bars...that's it. There's nothing more there.
Although I disagree terribly with any form on censorship, we should at least try to understand why so many people were upset about the Janet Jackson SuperBowl fiasco. Many Slashdotters are (rightfully) stating that parents should take charge of what their children are watching. This is precisely why people were so upset with the breast-baring SuperBowl. They were thinking that of all things on TV, their kids should be able to watch what is perhaps the most viewed annual sporting event in the world.
That's it, folks. I'm not saying I agree with the FCC's kneejerk reaction, but this is why people are upset and we should aknowledge it when discussing this topic.
Having said that, I do believe that there is no cause for relegating broadcast & cable television to G-rated content. If you don't like the services rendered to you, don't patronize it.
Bush wasn't elected. He was appointed by the judicial system. If Bush's presidency marked the end of the Microsoft case, the judicial system did NOT work
I'm in no way a supporter of Bush, but come on guys, this comment is informative? Perhaps the Slashdot admins should add a "Clueless" mod. That would be appropriate.
Anyone who actually took time to *read* about the election troubles in Florida would know the facts. The facts are as follows:
1) Gore is the one that took the battle to the courts after Florida was ready to declare Bush the winner. 2) The Gore campaign wanted votes counted differently for areas where they felt they didn't get the vote they expected. The Supremes ruled simply that if there was to be a recount, ALL votes in the entire state would have to be recounted using the same standards (i.e. was a hanging "chad" a vote). 3) Gore won the popular vote but not the electoral votes. Any grade school civics student should be able to explain this in depth. Find one and ask them about it.
The States elect the president, not the people. If the US was a federation of sovreign states as was intended by the framers of the Constitution, that would be entirely appropriate. The framers were afraid of pure democracy. Pure democracy doesn't *always* work. Just look at the Civil Rights movement. The movement would have never occurred (or been terribly delayed) in a purely democratic government.
Think, people. Don't just believe tin-hat stories because they fall in line with your hatred of the president.
Facts? You care about facts? How about 6,000,000. That's the number of Jews your countrymen killed. Yet, you're not a Nazi because your German but I'm a murderer and persecutor of non-believers because I am a Christian? Makes no sense to me.
Please, if you can, name ONE instance of modern-day Christian violence towards non-christians. Clearly you have pre-conceived notions about Christians that inhibits you from thinking clearly with an open mind.
Christians have done everthing possible not just to advocate their religion, but to eliminate all other religions. I'll tolerate Christians when you forswear the use of violence against us.
Geno, my friend, this is like saying that all Muslims are terrorists (which obviously is *not* true). I gather from your name and your web site that you're German. By your logic I would have to conclude that you're a Nazi?:-)
It's good to see that my little experiment in human psychology has succeeded. Just as I thought...there is no tolerance for people with different ideas. My original post was not indicitive of my true beliefs but was an attempt to see what type of responses I would receive. I guess I was right.
As a Christian and believer in God, I find your comments to be ignorant and intolerant.
You should know that I of course believe that God created the world in 7 days. Why not? If there is an omnipotent God, why could he *not* do it in 7 days? Put it this way, if you were God, and you created a mountain, then you allowed a geologist to immediately examine the strata in in the side of the mountain, would the geologist be able to determine that it was only minutes old? Anyway, that's neither here nor there.
The fact is that I am also a believer in science. Anyone who is a Christian will quickly realize that our beliefs tell us only about goings-on in Heaven and Earth, and contains no references to other planets or other extra-terrestrial life forms. I believe that there are probably many other intelligent and unintelligent life-forms in the universe.
I would bet that most Christian-bashers on Slashdot would consider themselves great, tolerant progressives, yet they seem to only be tolerant of the cause du jour. How sad.
Sorry, but the ESA orbiter showed this more than a month ago. NASA is just too late
It is obvious that you didn't read the article. The editor's post of the story was a little misleading because we've known about water on Mars for some time.
Having said that, the article states that they think they are actually SEEING liquid water freeze as it's being pressed upward out of the soil by the rover's wheels. That's much different than detecting it with an orbitor. Also, if I'm not mistaken the ESA orbitor suggested that water vapor exists in the atmosphere, not the soil. The missions are complimentary (ESA and NASA have been assisting one another by relaying commands through both of their orbitors and NASA has been trying to actually find Beagle visually using their orbitor). No one is taking credit for anything they haven't done. No need to get defensive.
IBM is immediately looked at as deceptive because they actually had a study performed on cancer rates among their employees. Wow...God forbid they actually try to find the truth.
Just because there may have been cancer-causing conditions in the workplace, it doesn't ensure that any particular case of cancer was caused by the workplace. Look at the main witness, the poor woman who developed breast cancer. I feel for her, as many women in my family have had breast cancer. However, there are millions of women across this country that have breast cancer and have never worked at IBM or with any of these chemicals. I think she's trying to be a little opportunistic and play the role of the victim (she is a victim of breast cancer, but not necessarily a victim of IBM's misdeeds). And no, we should not take into consideration her financial situation vs. IBM's.
Slashdot Mirror
flying in a spaceship build, owned and operated by a business and run by business owners looking to make money on space tours will be a GREAT personal achievement.
No, having $100,000 to blow on it is.
So...what are the civilians going to DO in space?
Unlike astronauts, they don't have to take scientific readings of everything.
Other than the wow-factor of, "I've been in outer space!", there really isn't a reason for the average civilian to go...It's not like they're going to visit relatives on Mars
I think you're missing the point. You could just as easily ask why people climb Mt. Everest or run marathons. It's not like anyone climbing Everest is set to make some big scientific discovery. They are doing it to do it..for personal achievement.
I think you also miss the entire point of Scaled's interest in this venture. They have spent more money than the X-prize pays out, so what's their motivation? It's called space tourism. There are literally only a handful of people that can shell out 20 million for a ride to the space station, but there are a helluva lot more than can shell out $100,000 for a subortial flight. Seriously, look at the pictures. Can you honestly say that you wouldn't want to do that????
Can someone please explain the value of shelling out big bucks...ok....ANY money for an HD recorder when the only thing the networks are going to allow (via the broadcast flag rule) those rotten, good-for-nothing consumers to record is the advertisements? I can see it now. "Wow...look at this crisp view of the Frosted Flakes box...let's watch that again..."
I would recommend Clark Howard's site. Clark Howard has a nationally syndicated radio show and has written several fantastic books on smart financial principles. He is very well known here in the Atlanta area and his life story is very interested. He made his first million on an average salary by saving and investing for the long term (of course he makes a lot more now on his radio gig and his books).
His site contains an abundance of information on anything subject you can think of. Hey, he's pretty cool technology-wise...he even uses Vonage!
Sounds like a time to try some alternatives like GigaTracks. (I have no affiliation with them, I just like the service).
They deserved all the criticism and praise they got for the speech against Bush. They did not deserve a law enacted to specifically force them to apologize and give a free concert. I'll cut them some slack for feeling persecuted when this type of crap happens.
A "Resolution" is not a law. It is a chance for members of the House to speak their collective opinion on an issue. It doesn't force the Dixie Twits to do anything.
Why does the senate refuse to Retify the Kyoto accord? Because companies threaten that they would close or have to lay off workers if they had to pay for the environmental protections being requested.
One reason they refuse to ratify Kyoto is because developing nations do not have to conform to environmental requirements of the treaty and would therefore have even more of a competetive advantage over domestic labor.
Whoops...that's supposed to be www.[our school name].org. Slashdot's filter didn't like that.
Yes, you are the person I was thinking of. Check out www..org. Mine is the fifth entry down on the right-hand side (initials JP). You can get my e-mail address there.
Send me a e-mail and let me know what's going on with you.
Claiming that the failure of a human endeavor was preventable? Unbelievable!
Hey, is this the same Valdrax from AHS in good'ol boy country?
Wow...this guy really had me in mind when he decided to build this tricycle. Yes, doubters, there is definately a market for this bike. I will now be able to traverse my overzealously speed-conscience neighborhood without feeling one speed bump!
It's called smoking weed.
Which is precisely why it shouldn't be a crime either.
Considering the high cost of most payloads, do you think most companies will jump on board with them having no proven launch record in the hopes of saving some cash? Even with insurance, the considerable delays caused by losing a payload would likely outweigh any savings made by using one of their launch vehicles. That's not to say that they won't produce some great hardware, but it may be an awfully slow start for them.
I agree. The payloads tend to be *very* expensive. However, I would bet that many payloads are so expensive because of the cost of launching one into orbit. They take every conceivable precaution to make sure the satellite will actually work. I would guess that with cheaper launches, many launch customers would be willing to rush their payloads to orbit knowing that if something is wrong, they can diagnose the problem, build another and launch another satellite.
The cost to build a satellite is relatively minor. It's the research and the triple-redundancy that drives costs skyward (pun intended).
I agree. The solution is not to punish infringement, it is to increasingly legalize infringement so that people's behavior need not significantly change, but they get to stay on the right side of the law.
I agree completely for but for different reasons. I don't think laws should be ammended/discarded to keep people on the right side of the law. I do believe, however, that people are voting with their actions. People believe that casual, not-for-profit petty copying of copyrighted works should not be a crime. Can you name any other "crime" 30 million US citizens are guilty of? This bill would be...no...IS the ultimate in violation of the oath of public office. These politicians vow to represent the people of their districts and they think that the way to do this is to ignore the will of the people, pay close attention to the wishes of their contributors. The politicans of course know what's better for us than we do.
A: They put them in cold liquids, bombard them with gamma rays, do what's called differential power analysis. Basically, they've noticed that the chip uses a slightly different amount of power if you get an incorrect digit than if you get a correct digit, and they try to break the code that way. They take the chip apart and try to discover the password on the logic components.
To counter that, we use temperature sensors and radiation sensors on our chips. We have all kinds of voltage protection, so they can't monkey around with that. The logic is randomly distributed. We have coding on the chip that's licensed from the CIA that's really hard to scrape off without permanently damaging the chip. We're the only company that can do high-level, triple DES encryption in a contactless RFID tag.
I'm not sure what the heck this guy's talking about...but I'm sitting here with a Symbol 1555 RFID reader and I can read any RFID tag. Yeah, the *data* I read may be encrypted, but in terms of "breaking into it"....what???? RFID is a bar code without the bars...that's it. There's nothing more there.
Although I disagree terribly with any form on censorship, we should at least try to understand why so many people were upset about the Janet Jackson SuperBowl fiasco. Many Slashdotters are (rightfully) stating that parents should take charge of what their children are watching. This is precisely why people were so upset with the breast-baring SuperBowl. They were thinking that of all things on TV, their kids should be able to watch what is perhaps the most viewed annual sporting event in the world.
That's it, folks. I'm not saying I agree with the FCC's kneejerk reaction, but this is why people are upset and we should aknowledge it when discussing this topic.
Having said that, I do believe that there is no cause for relegating broadcast & cable television to G-rated content. If you don't like the services rendered to you, don't patronize it.
Bush wasn't elected. He was appointed by the judicial system. If Bush's presidency marked the end of the Microsoft case, the judicial system did NOT work
I'm in no way a supporter of Bush, but come on guys, this comment is informative? Perhaps the Slashdot admins should add a "Clueless" mod. That would be appropriate.
Anyone who actually took time to *read* about the election troubles in Florida would know the facts. The facts are as follows:
1) Gore is the one that took the battle to the courts after Florida was ready to declare Bush the winner.
2) The Gore campaign wanted votes counted differently for areas where they felt they didn't get the vote they expected. The Supremes ruled simply that if there was to be a recount, ALL votes in the entire state would have to be recounted using the same standards (i.e. was a hanging "chad" a vote).
3) Gore won the popular vote but not the electoral votes. Any grade school civics student should be able to explain this in depth. Find one and ask them about it.
The States elect the president, not the people. If the US was a federation of sovreign states as was intended by the framers of the Constitution, that would be entirely appropriate. The framers were afraid of pure democracy. Pure democracy doesn't *always* work. Just look at the Civil Rights movement. The movement would have never occurred (or been terribly delayed) in a purely democratic government.
Think, people. Don't just believe tin-hat stories because they fall in line with your hatred of the president.
but I'm not using logic. I prefer the facts.
Facts? You care about facts? How about 6,000,000. That's the number of Jews your countrymen killed. Yet, you're not a Nazi because your German but I'm a murderer and persecutor of non-believers because I am a Christian? Makes no sense to me.
Please, if you can, name ONE instance of modern-day Christian violence towards non-christians. Clearly you have pre-conceived notions about Christians that inhibits you from thinking clearly with an open mind.
I agree, this method would be rather beneficial because it provides ease of tallying with the possibility of a paper recount and no chads!
Christians have done everthing possible not just to advocate their religion, but to eliminate all other religions. I'll tolerate Christians when you forswear the use of violence against us.
:-)
Geno, my friend, this is like saying that all Muslims are terrorists (which obviously is *not* true). I gather from your name and your web site that you're German. By your logic I would have to conclude that you're a Nazi?
It's good to see that my little experiment in human psychology has succeeded. Just as I thought...there is no tolerance for people with different ideas. My original post was not indicitive of my true beliefs but was an attempt to see what type of responses I would receive. I guess I was right.
I'll bite.
As a Christian and believer in God, I find your comments to be ignorant and intolerant.
You should know that I of course believe that God created the world in 7 days. Why not? If there is an omnipotent God, why could he *not* do it in 7 days? Put it this way, if you were God, and you created a mountain, then you allowed a geologist to immediately examine the strata in in the side of the mountain, would the geologist be able to determine that it was only minutes old? Anyway, that's neither here nor there.
The fact is that I am also a believer in science. Anyone who is a Christian will quickly realize that our beliefs tell us only about goings-on in Heaven and Earth, and contains no references to other planets or other extra-terrestrial life forms. I believe that there are probably many other intelligent and unintelligent life-forms in the universe.
I would bet that most Christian-bashers on Slashdot would consider themselves great, tolerant progressives, yet they seem to only be tolerant of the cause du jour. How sad.
Sorry, but the ESA orbiter showed this more than a month ago. NASA is just too late
It is obvious that you didn't read the article. The editor's post of the story was a little misleading because we've known about water on Mars for some time.
Having said that, the article states that they think they are actually SEEING liquid water freeze as it's being pressed upward out of the soil by the rover's wheels. That's much different than detecting it with an orbitor. Also, if I'm not mistaken the ESA orbitor suggested that water vapor exists in the atmosphere, not the soil. The missions are complimentary (ESA and NASA have been assisting one another by relaying commands through both of their orbitors and NASA has been trying to actually find Beagle visually using their orbitor). No one is taking credit for anything they haven't done. No need to get defensive.
IBM is immediately looked at as deceptive because they actually had a study performed on cancer rates among their employees. Wow...God forbid they actually try to find the truth.
Just because there may have been cancer-causing conditions in the workplace, it doesn't ensure that any particular case of cancer was caused by the workplace. Look at the main witness, the poor woman who developed breast cancer. I feel for her, as many women in my family have had breast cancer. However, there are millions of women across this country that have breast cancer and have never worked at IBM or with any of these chemicals. I think she's trying to be a little opportunistic and play the role of the victim (she is a victim of breast cancer, but not necessarily a victim of IBM's misdeeds). And no, we should not take into consideration her financial situation vs. IBM's.