It would be interesting to wonder how the power system would have developed had it been completly open market. But I honestly think as it has become such a nessessary utility while in the long run it may have been better in the open market. You would still have many rural areas without power. Honestly power is a national need. So I can understand the argument for government control. Personally I utilities should be completly run by the government (like most roads) or totally funded privatly and allowed to run themselves (like a toll road) The combination of hving government paying for the road then letting a company change for its use sickens me.
Noone is going to lay reduntant wire, they would simply pay for access to the existing wire if compitition was encouraged. What they would do it lay wire in places that the existing cable company hasn't bothered with, or new development areas. You would actually see them fighting with a new developer for the rights to lay cable. T
Actually the government sinks a lot of money into that infrastructure as it is so its not really fair to let just one company reap the rewards of the infrastructure. Honestly though the one company does deserve rewards for their investment, but it can still be done. With your power example, anyone can generate power (generally solar, anything else requires extensive permits that no normal human can afford) and sell it back to the power company. Of course you don't make nearly the amount of money that the power company charges. But if you produce enough power you will be paid a wholesale power cost for it, and the power company will turn around and sell it at retail price which covers their infrastructure cost. A simular thing happends with phone comapanies, as many markets are forced to allow competitors access. The phone company charges a carrier free to pay for their infrastructure, and the rest of the money goes to the phone company you use. There is no reason this can't happen with cable. Though honestly cable has sunk a lot of money into upgrading their infrastruture just to support cable internet, but there is no reason someone shouldn't be able to offer services if paying the cable company a set rate.
I guess the only problem is this rate has to be set by the government otherwise the cable companies will simply set the price too high for anyone to afford, this causes problems in that the government has to regulate the price. But as the government put money into the infrastructure in the first place, there really is no way getting around the fact that they have to regular the monopoly they created. I'd be willing to bet that if cable providers had to foot the bill from the start they would have been selling access to it from the start to finance the cost.
From what I have read as it will be right next to the cable there is little chance of something flying into it. Of course it could still happen, though such a system would be designed with communication that would cause immediant shutdown to power if link was broken so your talking a few milliseconds a radiation. Possibly enough to burn but shouldn't kill anything.
Yes, but the resistance along a wire that long would be huge especially compared to the minimal amount of power that such a device would be able to drawl. Then consider that the device needs to be made from a nano tubes which can transmit power, but I seriously doupt you could simply connect to them like you can connect to a normal wire by touch. And you don't want to add any more weight to the system than nessessary. Anyways as I said maser transmission is best for the system, hopefully we will get solar space based power running the system, or a combination of ground based and space based might be nice.. Transmit from the closest power source.
Umm yea sure.. Imagine climbing a wire and trying to suck power out of it without tapping directly into the wire, thus damaging it. Yea sure it can be done, but you'd have the resistance of the 1,000 KM + wire to deal with and the limited amount of power drawn from the device. Or how bought a long wire run from the car to the ground which retract and lets longer as it climbs, great all we need is more weight! Current suggestions are Maser or Laser power. The technology is already there, honestly don't know why NASA needs someone to add this to the project.
Hu? No, your manager should know how to use SQL. Its your database that should provide this security, not the frontend, and especially not the lack of knowledge of your database. Someday some lacky employee will be hired who knows SQL but you don't know it, and they will happily take this information.
Well if you pay them to take it, they will take it. If you need proof I guess you could put some radiation signature in the pill. But then I guess you could be screwin up the research with the radiation.
Yes, but if I tell you that you are getting a placebo and give you real medicine or visa vera there is real harm. No real harm was done in the shock thing, either way the shock experiment may even provoke lawsuits in the current state of medicine. And no waiver could exist as it would tip off the patients.
Actually they get their best milage at constant driving less than 45 MPH. Their horrible highway millage is due to the fact that at high speeds friction and drag increase exponentially. The engine is only 50 hp I believe so you litterly have to be running the engine at full tilt to maintain highway speeds, electric kicks in for passing acceleration, but obviously it can't help maintain the speed as it would drain the battery for long drives. A 6 cylinder could actually achieve better MPG at highway speeds as it can maintain those speeds at a much lower RPM without using as much gas if you continued to use the electric for passing. A variable cylinder hybrid would be perfect for this situation, but I don't know if any are in the works.
If your selling at cost I don't believe you fall into the catagory of commerical seller then. I'm sure it would only require one call for a perpetual license. Something any commerical for profit distro can handle.
Well honestly you don't want every joe blow calling you waisting your time. But how hard is it for a corperation to call you up and say "Hi, we'd like to use your icons?".
Actually I read something a while back about TiVo having a contingency plan that would basically allow TiVos to continue working if they went out of buisness. You would of course lose suggestions and whatnot, but not a paperweight completly.
Ok so you are now arguing for fixing it because do-orbiting cost of shuttle mission. While in the previous post you were aruging that it shouldn't be fixed. I'm guessing your implying that it can be deorbited now without a mission. But you arn't very clear on that. Why havn't I heard this arugment raised before. Yes if it can be deorbited NOW without any cost, definatly that is the best option.
Yes, but what about if you want to connect it to the internet. You don't want to have to remove your security on your home network to do this. I guess it could do it if its incompatible with computer based wifi and needs a repeater to be cabled into your network one that only allows game based traffic into the open network.
It may act as an AP as well. This would be a big selling point in that someone could use their wifi GB-DS as a controller. From what I understand the DS can already act as a controller for some gamecube games, but requires a cable currently. I guess this could be done with an external AP as well, but people would be missing out who did not have wifi in their house.
Yes, am remember boys and girls the rules for arguing on the internet. ALWAYS claim to have expert knowledge of the subject at hand, with no proof of such. (Just making the point that you shouldn't claim you work there if you can't prove it). And whats with all the TLAs?
So why do all the articles state that we need to send a manned mission to deorbit Hubble, if you say it can be deorbited now without it, or is that not what your saying. Because if its not you are very confusing in your writting style. Or what that the intent?
I havn't ever found a clear cost analysis of it. But basically yes its more expensive to fix hubble than to launch a new version but there are two important considerations being left out of the argument generally. 1. New version won't be ready for many years. 2. We are going to have to send a manned or robotic mission to saftly deorbit the satallie. 3. Cost of fixing hubble - cost we are going to have to spend to deorbit hubble is fairly low and I believe less than new version.
Slashdot Mirror
It would be interesting to wonder how the power system would have developed had it been completly open market. But I honestly think as it has become such a nessessary utility while in the long run it may have been better in the open market. You would still have many rural areas without power. Honestly power is a national need. So I can understand the argument for government control. Personally I utilities should be completly run by the government (like most roads) or totally funded privatly and allowed to run themselves (like a toll road) The combination of hving government paying for the road then letting a company change for its use sickens me.
Noone is going to lay reduntant wire, they would simply pay for access to the existing wire if compitition was encouraged. What they would do it lay wire in places that the existing cable company hasn't bothered with, or new development areas. You would actually see them fighting with a new developer for the rights to lay cable. T
Actually the government sinks a lot of money into that infrastructure as it is so its not really fair to let just one company reap the rewards of the infrastructure. Honestly though the one company does deserve rewards for their investment, but it can still be done. With your power example, anyone can generate power (generally solar, anything else requires extensive permits that no normal human can afford) and sell it back to the power company. Of course you don't make nearly the amount of money that the power company charges. But if you produce enough power you will be paid a wholesale power cost for it, and the power company will turn around and sell it at retail price which covers their infrastructure cost. A simular thing happends with phone comapanies, as many markets are forced to allow competitors access. The phone company charges a carrier free to pay for their infrastructure, and the rest of the money goes to the phone company you use. There is no reason this can't happen with cable. Though honestly cable has sunk a lot of money into upgrading their infrastruture just to support cable internet, but there is no reason someone shouldn't be able to offer services if paying the cable company a set rate.
I guess the only problem is this rate has to be set by the government otherwise the cable companies will simply set the price too high for anyone to afford, this causes problems in that the government has to regulate the price. But as the government put money into the infrastructure in the first place, there really is no way getting around the fact that they have to regular the monopoly they created. I'd be willing to bet that if cable providers had to foot the bill from the start they would have been selling access to it from the start to finance the cost.
Yes, but many people like me are lazy, and really don't give a damn about pride. I wouldn't do any serious work if I didn't have to.
From what I have read as it will be right next to the cable there is little chance of something flying into it. Of course it could still happen, though such a system would be designed with communication that would cause immediant shutdown to power if link was broken so your talking a few milliseconds a radiation. Possibly enough to burn but shouldn't kill anything.
Thats the point though the IE gives websites access to the APIs of other programs like WMP without asking the user.
Yes, but the resistance along a wire that long would be huge especially compared to the minimal amount of power that such a device would be able to drawl. Then consider that the device needs to be made from a nano tubes which can transmit power, but I seriously doupt you could simply connect to them like you can connect to a normal wire by touch. And you don't want to add any more weight to the system than nessessary. Anyways as I said maser transmission is best for the system, hopefully we will get solar space based power running the system, or a combination of ground based and space based might be nice.. Transmit from the closest power source.
Umm yea sure.. Imagine climbing a wire and trying to suck power out of it without tapping directly into the wire, thus damaging it. Yea sure it can be done, but you'd have the resistance of the 1,000 KM + wire to deal with and the limited amount of power drawn from the device. Or how bought a long wire run from the car to the ground which retract and lets longer as it climbs, great all we need is more weight!
Current suggestions are Maser or Laser power. The technology is already there, honestly don't know why NASA needs someone to add this to the project.
I think he means the IP of the SMTP sender will be loggged and it will be sent back to that IP. Many SMTP servers may simply deny the packets though.
Hu? No, your manager should know how to use SQL. Its your database that should provide this security, not the frontend, and especially not the lack of knowledge of your database. Someday some lacky employee will be hired who knows SQL but you don't know it, and they will happily take this information.
You sir are a twit :) The point is that the poster meant to say mass of sol but he said density of sol. The followup was simply pointing out his error.
Well if you pay them to take it, they will take it. If you need proof I guess you could put some radiation signature in the pill. But then I guess you could be screwin up the research with the radiation.
Yes, but if I tell you that you are getting a placebo and give you real medicine or visa vera there is real harm. No real harm was done in the shock thing, either way the shock experiment may even provoke lawsuits in the current state of medicine. And no waiver could exist as it would tip off the patients.
Actually they get their best milage at constant driving less than 45 MPH. Their horrible highway millage is due to the fact that at high speeds friction and drag increase exponentially. The engine is only 50 hp I believe so you litterly have to be running the engine at full tilt to maintain highway speeds, electric kicks in for passing acceleration, but obviously it can't help maintain the speed as it would drain the battery for long drives.
A 6 cylinder could actually achieve better MPG at highway speeds as it can maintain those speeds at a much lower RPM without using as much gas if you continued to use the electric for passing. A variable cylinder hybrid would be perfect for this situation, but I don't know if any are in the works.
If your selling at cost I don't believe you fall into the catagory of commerical seller then. I'm sure it would only require one call for a perpetual license. Something any commerical for profit distro can handle.
Well honestly you don't want every joe blow calling you waisting your time. But how hard is it for a corperation to call you up and say "Hi, we'd like to use your icons?".
Actually I read something a while back about TiVo having a contingency plan that would basically allow TiVos to continue working if they went out of buisness. You would of course lose suggestions and whatnot, but not a paperweight completly.
Its both!
Ok so you are now arguing for fixing it because do-orbiting cost of shuttle mission. While in the previous post you were aruging that it shouldn't be fixed. I'm guessing your implying that it can be deorbited now without a mission. But you arn't very clear on that. Why havn't I heard this arugment raised before. Yes if it can be deorbited NOW without any cost, definatly that is the best option.
Yes, but what about if you want to connect it to the internet. You don't want to have to remove your security on your home network to do this. I guess it could do it if its incompatible with computer based wifi and needs a repeater to be cabled into your network one that only allows game based traffic into the open network.
Yes, but wouldn't we already be "playing" god by allowing someone to live, and possibly breed, who genetically shouldn't make it past infancy?
Alter their germline or steralize them, going halfway is stupid.
It may act as an AP as well. This would be a big selling point in that someone could use their wifi GB-DS as a controller. From what I understand the DS can already act as a controller for some gamecube games, but requires a cable currently. I guess this could be done with an external AP as well, but people would be missing out who did not have wifi in their house.
Aren't these private organizations working together to run their private operations as they see fit?
This is a government organization, not a private organization.
Yes, am remember boys and girls the rules for arguing on the internet. ALWAYS claim to have expert knowledge of the subject at hand, with no proof of such. (Just making the point that you shouldn't claim you work there if you can't prove it). And whats with all the TLAs?
So why do all the articles state that we need to send a manned mission to deorbit Hubble, if you say it can be deorbited now without it, or is that not what your saying. Because if its not you are very confusing in your writting style. Or what that the intent?
I havn't ever found a clear cost analysis of it. But basically yes its more expensive to fix hubble than to launch a new version but there are two important considerations being left out of the argument generally.
1. New version won't be ready for many years.
2. We are going to have to send a manned or robotic mission to saftly deorbit the satallie.
3. Cost of fixing hubble - cost we are going to have to spend to deorbit hubble is fairly low and I believe less than new version.