once sufficient oxygen was generated by the first organisms...
Except that the scientists in the article claim that life may have originated in/near hydrothermal vents. If this is the case, the composition of the atmosphere would be totally irrelevant. There isn't much molecular oxygen at the depths of hydrothermal vents.
Like plastic springs (in the heel? are you supposed to jump off your heel?
I would assume that the springs are supposed to cushion the foot on landing. Unless you're into excersize that involves foot travel, $20 should be enough for a pair of generic shoes or sneakers.
What I want to know is, where are they getting the people to lie still and take a brain scan while looking at ads?
They are probably paying them. The problem that I have with this kind of research is that all this will do is show how to influence people who are willing to take these brian scans.
I have the same problem with telephone polls. I never answer my phone; I always let the answering machine do it. That means that an organization that takes telephone polls will not be able to poll me or people like me. Now, how can they say that "45% of Americans feel this way, and 55% feel that way", when what they mean is "45% of Americans who have telephones and are willing to participate in telephone polls feel this way, and 55% of them feel that way"?
The research that these people are doing raises the related question: How do they know that the brains of people willing to have themselves tested aren't different in some way from the brains of the rest of us? If the brains are different, then the results of the tests are much less useful, or possibly even totally useless.
We can actually use long variable names without a performace hit!
Long variable names aren't always better. A long, long time ago (late 70s), before I knew any better, I once named a variable named something like "INTEGER_VARIABLE_USED_FOR_TEMPORARY_STORAGE_PURPO SES". (Yes, I thought that I was being funny.)
Sometimes, naming a variable "i" results in more readable code than naming a variable "index". Also, I usually name as "r" the variable whose value will be returned from a function, when such a variable is necessary. I do agree with you, though, that, in most cases, a fully-spelled-out variable name is preferable to its abbreviation. However, there are exceptions even to that rule. For example, IMO, "lib" is preferable to "library" when referring to a software code library (although "library" is preferable when referring to a book-library object).
... then complain about it. That's probably not feasible for those who receive 100s of SPAMs/day, but if you receive only three or four, complain about them. If you receive a lot of SPAM, complain about the three or four most obnoxious.
I do an RDNS of the immediate sender's IP address, and, if I believe that they are valid (not forged), other IP addresses in the return-path trail. I do a DNS of any domain in the SPAM body (and appropriate domains in the SPAM header), and an RDNS of the returned IP address (which, when it works, is often different from the original domain). I do "whois"es of all of the above (both domains and IP addresses), and note all of the domains of the appropriate contact emails. (Currently, SamSpade is helping me with all of these tasks, but I am writing an app that will do a lot of this automatically.) I then send complaints to abuse@, admin@, hostmaster@, mail-abuse@, netadmin@, postmaster@, remove@, root@, sales@, spam@, spamcomplaints@, support@, sysadmin@, sysop@, and webmaster@ each of those domains and IP addresses (plus abuse@ any domain name that I believe was forged in the header, with advice that they take legal action against the SPAMmer, plus the contact of the registrar of any domain name in the SPAM body). Eventually, people at these companies may become so tired of complaints about SPAM that they will actually do something about it.
This takes about a half-hour to an hour per day. (I am currently under-employed, so this is not a big deal to me.) (Encrypted SPAMs take a little longer (because I have to convert the JavaScript into Python), but are good excercise.:-) ) I usually send out between 20 and 50 complaints for each SPAM that I receive. I have made such a nuisance of myself that many days I receive no SPAM at all.
If a large number of people were to take similar actions, then I believe that the quantity of SPAM would seriously diminish.
Greed is part of human nature. Just look at any baby or small child. Many of us outgrow greed to some extent, but it is a trait that must be unlearned.
Even cooperation, to a large extent, is a form of greed, because people usually cooperate only when each party thinks that the cooperation is in its best interest, and the more that each is likely to get, the more that each is likely to cooperate. Even some altruism (which is also a learned trait) is based on greed, because many altruistic people are that way because they want to get into "Heaven" after they die, or they want to please their "god" (and thus receive "favors") while they are alive.
To get back on topic, it's understandable why a potential employer would want someone for a long-term position who won't job-hop. It's also understandable why a potential employee looking for long-term employment would want assurances that he/she wouldn't be laid off two months after moving halfway across the country. (This happened to a friend of mine recently.) The solution is to get an agreement in writing.
if $t $m then you would be saving the company $m-$t dollars.
Don't forget that Slashdot doesn't show less/greater than signs by default. Try aphersand lt; next time, & l t; without the spaces.
Don't forget that Slashdot doesn't show & l t; without the spaces signs by default. Try aphersand amp; next time to have < without the spaces. Don't forget that Slashdot doesn't show ampersand amp; without the spaces signs by default. Try & next time to have &.
The story to which you are referring is called "The Last Question", but the one about the PDA's was actually "Foundation". In that story, Hari Seldon used a hand-held device to do calculations, years before calculators were invented.
but only if every mathematician who's ever worked out an orbital mechanics equation is dead wrong
You're wrong. Several pre-Copernican astronomers/mathematicians worked out mathematical equations to explain and predict the motions of the planets based on a stationary Earth.
BTW, what essay competition are you talking about?
Fabricators to my knowledge don't exist in the Firefly universe...
But the point that the earlier post was arguing (that horse and buggy in the Firefly universe were unrealistic when one could build tractors) is what I was defending. The fact is that fabricators should exist in the Firefly universe, because they will exist in our own universe within the next thirty to fifty years or so. And don't mean fabricators that can transmute elements. (If they could do that, then there would be no need for trade of raw materials.) And I also don't mean fabractors that can create any imaginable molecular structure. I mean fabricators that can break down a sufficiently large set of molecular structures, and create a sufficiently large set of molecular structures, that they can provide for the needs of most people. They would be able to create parts for large machines, and smaller machines in their entirety. They would be able to create nutritional substances in various forms. There would be no problem with radioactive waste because the fabricator would run on sunlight. The waste heat problem would be solved as it is today: the heat would be radiated off into space. There would be little problem with waste materials because it would simply be left in place. For a present-day example, look at plants. They fabricate complex nutrients using sunlight and simpler nutrients from the soil. The waste heat produced as a result of this process is radiated off into the atmosphere or space. The waste materials are left in-place. (If you are worried about waste heat, what about all of the heat produced in lifting a spacecraft from a planet's surface?)
If the Alliance had replicators, it would have that much power or presence. If they didn't, they'd sure as shit make sure no one else did.
Let's look at how succesful the US government has been at suppressing technology and other things. There has been a so-called "war on drugs" being waged for over thirty years in this country, but people can still get illegal drugs. The government has not been able to stop the West Nile virus, the Zebra Mussel, or Killer Bees. It can't stop people from building home-made bombs that blow up federal buildings. It has been able to keep its subjects from building atomic weapons so far, but that's only because of the large infrastructure required for all of the parts needed to build a bomb, and to refine the radioactive material for it (Plutonium or Uranium). A fabricator would not need this kind of infrastructure to reproduce itself, any more than a plant needs a large infrastructure to reproduce itself. All that is needed are sunlight and raw materials. As I mentioned earlier, someone has to smuggle one just fabricator out, and the government monopoly is over.
there will be haves and have-nots
This is true in a world of limited resources. If people are crowded together, there will be competition for limited resources. However, in most of the Firefly episodes that I have seen so far, the people are not crowded together, and raw materials are abundant. In this case, the "have-nots" would be those deficient in information, or living on worlds lacking a vital element (e.g., iodine), and who have to trade for it. Even then, they wouldn't have to import much, because a fabricator will be able to recyle human waste, and thus recover most of it (if not all of it) for reuse.
So, I guess the point that I'm trying to make is that I agree with tftp's response to Daemonik's post; horses and wagons are not credible in the Firefly universe. Suspension of disbelief can be taken only so far. For me, it broke in the first episode, when I saw telephone poles running alongside the maglev track. At that point, Firefly moved from science fiction into science fantasy for me.
If an American travels to Zimbabwe, will they automatically have a car, grocery stores, and gas stations like they had in the U.S. made available when they get there? Why not? Can you think of a plausible way to get around that? If so, many people in the world would love to hear about it.
The reason is that there is no infrastructure to support such luxuries. What happens when the car breaks down? Where does the gas come from? Where do spare parts come from?
So, let us assume, for the moment, that there is "no plausible way to get around" these problems on that part of our planet. (Ignore, for the moment, that the reasons for such great disparities between the "haves" and the "have-nots" of this world is largely due to politics, and not any great technical barriers.) It is currently not possible to have all of the manufacturing of all of the parts for a car, the refinery, etc., etc., in one area. Currently, parts of the world must trade with each other to maintain an industrial standard of living.
Now, let us assume that a replicating machine, or "fabricator", is invented. This fabricator can take raw materials and energy, and produce a large selection of items, including all parts necessary to build another fabricator. Someone will take one of these machines to Zimbabwe. The fabricator will produce the parts for another fabricator, which will then be assembled. More and more fabricators will be produced, until eventually, everybody has one, assuming the raw materials are available.
Once these machines are prevalent, the only trade necessary will be in raw materials and designs of things to fabricate. People will be able to fabricate their own cars, fuel, and replacement parts. Gas stations will not be necessary. Each household will be able to produce all of its own food, not to mention shelter, medical equipment, computers, etc., and, yes, even a steamliner. The resulting economic upheaval will be more catastrophic than anything seen thus far, more catastrophic than the invention of paper money, possibly as catastrophic as the invention of trade itself.
Now, to get back on-topic, let us assume that the Alliance wishes to keep this technology to itself, to help control the outer worlds. All it would take is one fabricator smuggled to a world -- just one! -- and eventually there would be hundreds, thousands, millions. There is no way to keep this technology bottled up without spying on everybody, kind of like a galactic USAPATRIOT act. From what I've seen of the show, the Alliance doesn't have that much power or presence. So, yes, in the Firefly universe, everyone would have access to this technology.
+1 Funny. I thought that I was the only one who remembered that. Don't forget that he was sued for plagarism for that book, so I don't know how much stock that would give him.
Why are Christian churches laid out in the form of a cross? If you look at the floor plan for almost any Medieval Christian church or cathedral, you will see that it is laid out in the form of a cross. This cross can be seen only from the air.
So why were they laid out that way? They were built that way because they were meant to be viewed by their gods (Jesus and Yahweh).
It's not too much of a stretch to consider that the Nazca lines were created the way they were because they were meant to be viewed by their creators' god(s).
The pyramids were built by the pharoahs pretty much because they were big and awesome and they didn't really care if slaves died in the process of stroking the pharoah's ego.
Current archaeological theory holds that the pyramids were built by hired craftsmen. Archaeologists have discovered some financial records from the time, listing payments to workers, etc., and have also discovered small pyramids in a cemetary near the workers' villiage in which were entombed supervisors (mid-level managers?), etc. It is now thought that the workers were well-fed and, in general, well-treated.
Light isn't a radio source. Radio is light. (Both "radio" and so-called "visible light" (actually, "human-visible light") are forms of electromagnetic radiation.) I can focus microwaves as easily as light waves because microwaves are light waves. However, focusing microwave radiation is not necessarily as easy as focusing human-visible light (mainly because human-visible light is, well, visible to me, so my eyes can help me in my focusing efforts). As to whether or not microwaves diffuse as much as human-visible light, it depends on the medium through which they are traveling. In Earth's atmosphere, higher-frequency human-visible light diffuses more than lower-frequency human-visible light. This is why the sky is blue, because red light diffuses less than blue. Next down the frequency scale is infrared radiation, followed by microwave radiation. I don't know whether or not these diffuse less than visible light, but you can't assume that because lower-frequency light diffuses less in the human-visible spectrum, it will also diffuse less outside of that narrow range.
I almost forgot - in the future, you might not even need tractors to do farming; fields could plant themselves using nanotechnology, GMOs, or other methods yet unknown. Or farming might not be necessary at all; fabricators could produce food directly, pre-packaged, possibly pre-heated, and ready-to-eat (like on Star Trek, but without the cheesy sparkly special effects). All that's needed are energy and raw materials.
Tractors require fuel. Constantly replenished sources of fuel. Fuel on any non-trivial scale is dependant upon refineries.
Not necessarily. The tractor could have an electirc motor powered by a fuel cell running on hydrogen. The fuel could be made from ordinary water using a simple solar cell array (plus a pump to compress it). You would not have to ship fuel anywhere; you could produce it on-site anywhere there was water and sunlight.
It's also not unreasonable (at least for SF) to assume that in the future energy could be derived from cold fusion or other means.
Now, as to maintaining the machines, in the future, either the machines could be self-repairing, or there could exist fabricators using nanotechnology or other means to produce replacement parts. All that is needed is energy and raw materials.
The problem with most "futuristic" SF shows is that they don't project far enough ahead using technology that's theorectically possible even today.
Your post is laden with such an enormous mass of bovine excrement that light has difficulty escaping from its surface.
These companies should be fined. I know they did nothing wrong,...
What a novel concept, fining companies for doing nothing wrong!
... did nothing to prevent DMCA from becoming a law.
Most of my neighbors also did nothing to prevent the DMCA from becoming law. Let's fine them, too!
Oppenheimer is actually the worst perpetrator.
(Nothing like violently veering the post off in a totally different direction.) Yeah, it would have been much better to do nothing, and let the Nazis get the Bomb first. (Yes, I know that the Nazis were nowhere near getting the Bomb, but the US government and Oppenheimer didn't know that during the time of the Manhatten project.)
At the end I think Amnesty International is after some quick bucks.
Well, OK, you have a point there. Large human rights organizations shouldn't be asking for money. Everyone who works for them should do it for free, without compensation, because that's the only way to attract full-time qualified people.
I was going to suggest that you be sure that you are awake and reasonably coherent before you post again, but then I remembered that this is slashdot.
When people are killed because they were caught reading something on the net using this technology, it is wrong.
The technology isn't there to catch people who are reading "subversive" literature; it's there to prevent them from seeing it in the first place. If I were living under an extremely repressive regime like the one in Red China (as opposed to a relatively less repressive regime like the one here in the USA), I'd rather have what I read censored than being put to death because I accidentally clicked on the wrong link.
The policies of the Red Chinese government are reprehensible, but the censoring[*] software may actually be saving lives.
[*] "censoring software" is, IMO, a more accurate term than "filtering software" in this case. It's "filtering software" if it keeps you from receiving things that you don't want to receive; it's "censoring software" if it keeps you from receiving things that others don't want you to receive.
I had to ask myself *when*, not *if*, this actually might be the way movie theaters work.... I can easily see the day when a photorealistic movie could be generated solely by the computer.
There are "movies" being distributed now that work very similar to the way that you have described. These are not big productions, though, and they are definitely not photorealistic. If you are interested, there is at least one web site devoted to the movies: Machinima.
Slashdot Mirror
once sufficient oxygen was generated by the first organisms ...
Except that the scientists in the article claim that life may have originated in/near hydrothermal vents.
If this is the case, the composition of the atmosphere would be totally irrelevant.
There isn't much molecular oxygen at the depths of hydrothermal vents.
Like plastic springs (in the heel? are you supposed to jump off your heel?
I would assume that the springs are supposed to cushion the foot on landing.
Unless you're into excersize that involves foot travel, $20 should be enough for a pair of generic shoes or sneakers.
when at a store, would you choose the cute, female cashier, or the surly male cashier?
I choose whatever line is shortest or moving most quickly.
OTOH, I bought Tomb Raider.
What I want to know is, where are they getting the people to lie still and take a brain scan while looking at ads?
They are probably paying them.
The problem that I have with this kind of research is that all this will do is show how to influence people who are willing to take these brian scans.
I have the same problem with telephone polls.
I never answer my phone; I always let the answering machine do it.
That means that an organization that takes telephone polls will not be able to poll me or people like me.
Now, how can they say that "45% of Americans feel this way, and 55% feel that way", when what they mean is "45% of Americans who have telephones and are willing to participate in telephone polls feel this way, and 55% of them feel that way"?
The research that these people are doing raises the related question:
How do they know that the brains of people willing to have themselves tested aren't different in some way from the brains of the rest of us?
If the brains are different, then the results of the tests are much less useful, or possibly even totally useless.
We can actually use long variable names without a performace hit!
O SES".
Long variable names aren't always better.
A long, long time ago (late 70s), before I knew any better, I once named a variable named something like "INTEGER_VARIABLE_USED_FOR_TEMPORARY_STORAGE_PURP
(Yes, I thought that I was being funny.)
Sometimes, naming a variable "i" results in more readable code than naming a variable "index".
Also, I usually name as "r" the variable whose value will be returned from a function, when such a variable is necessary.
I do agree with you, though, that, in most cases, a fully-spelled-out variable name is preferable to its abbreviation.
However, there are exceptions even to that rule.
For example, IMO, "lib" is preferable to "library" when referring to a software code library (although "library" is preferable when referring to a book-library object).
because humans don't photosynthesize
Neither do pieces of pottery (except for Chia pets).
Does that mean that pieces of pottery (except for Chia pets) are animals?
... then complain about it.
:-) )
That's probably not feasible for those who receive 100s of SPAMs/day, but if you receive only three or four, complain about them.
If you receive a lot of SPAM, complain about the three or four most obnoxious.
I do an RDNS of the immediate sender's IP address, and, if I believe that they are valid (not forged), other IP addresses in the return-path trail.
I do a DNS of any domain in the SPAM body (and appropriate domains in the SPAM header), and an RDNS of the returned IP address (which, when it works, is often different from the original domain).
I do "whois"es of all of the above (both domains and IP addresses), and note all of the domains of the appropriate contact emails.
(Currently, SamSpade is helping me with all of these tasks, but I am writing an app that will do a lot of this automatically.)
I then send complaints to abuse@, admin@, hostmaster@, mail-abuse@, netadmin@, postmaster@, remove@, root@, sales@, spam@, spamcomplaints@, support@, sysadmin@, sysop@, and webmaster@ each of those domains and IP addresses (plus abuse@ any domain name that I believe was forged in the header, with advice that they take legal action against the SPAMmer, plus the contact of the registrar of any domain name in the SPAM body).
Eventually, people at these companies may become so tired of complaints about SPAM that they will actually do something about it.
This takes about a half-hour to an hour per day.
(I am currently under-employed, so this is not a big deal to me.)
(Encrypted SPAMs take a little longer (because I have to convert the JavaScript into Python), but are good excercise.
I usually send out between 20 and 50 complaints for each SPAM that I receive.
I have made such a nuisance of myself that many days I receive no SPAM at all.
If a large number of people were to take similar actions, then I believe that the quantity of SPAM would seriously diminish.
No, that is greed, not human nature
Greed is part of human nature.
Just look at any baby or small child.
Many of us outgrow greed to some extent, but it is a trait that must be unlearned.
Even cooperation, to a large extent, is a form of greed, because people usually cooperate only when each party thinks that the cooperation is in its best interest, and the more that each is likely to get, the more that each is likely to cooperate.
Even some altruism (which is also a learned trait) is based on greed, because many altruistic people are that way because they want to get into "Heaven" after they die, or they want to please their "god" (and thus receive "favors") while they are alive.
To get back on topic, it's understandable why a potential employer would want someone for a long-term position who won't job-hop.
It's also understandable why a potential employee looking for long-term employment would want assurances that he/she wouldn't be laid off two months after moving halfway across the country.
(This happened to a friend of mine recently.)
The solution is to get an agreement in writing.
Seriously, use < for <.
the one where the computer creates the universe
The story to which you are referring is called "The Last Question", but the one about the PDA's was actually "Foundation".
In that story, Hari Seldon used a hand-held device to do calculations, years before calculators were invented.
but only if every mathematician who's ever worked out an orbital mechanics equation is dead wrong
You're wrong.
Several pre-Copernican astronomers/mathematicians worked out mathematical equations to explain and predict the motions of the planets based on a stationary Earth.
BTW, what essay competition are you talking about?
Actually I'd really like to ride on a zepplin.
Wouldn't that be a bit chiily?
I'd rather ride in a Zepplin myself.
(Actually, I'd rather ride in a starship, or, better yet, pilot a starship.)
Consider stepping into the 20th century, 'tard. That openacs.org article is horribly outdated.
Which century is that now?
I thought that we were currently occupying the 21st century.
If you are going to call someone a "'tard", try to avoid looking like one yourself.
redaction
edition
derivation
[...]
derived from french
You forgot "surrender", which the French usually use immediately following the word "We".
Fabricators to my knowledge don't exist in the Firefly universe ...
But the point that the earlier post was arguing (that horse and buggy in the Firefly universe were unrealistic when one could build tractors) is what I was defending.
The fact is that fabricators should exist in the Firefly universe, because they will exist in our own universe within the next thirty to fifty years or so.
And don't mean fabricators that can transmute elements.
(If they could do that, then there would be no need for trade of raw materials.)
And I also don't mean fabractors that can create any imaginable molecular structure.
I mean fabricators that can break down a sufficiently large set of molecular structures, and create a sufficiently large set of molecular structures, that they can provide for the needs of most people.
They would be able to create parts for large machines, and smaller machines in their entirety.
They would be able to create nutritional substances in various forms.
There would be no problem with radioactive waste because the fabricator would run on sunlight.
The waste heat problem would be solved as it is today: the heat would be radiated off into space.
There would be little problem with waste materials because it would simply be left in place.
For a present-day example, look at plants.
They fabricate complex nutrients using sunlight and simpler nutrients from the soil.
The waste heat produced as a result of this process is radiated off into the atmosphere or space.
The waste materials are left in-place.
(If you are worried about waste heat, what about all of the heat produced in lifting a spacecraft from a planet's surface?)
If the Alliance had replicators, it would have that much power or presence. If they didn't, they'd sure as shit make sure no one else did.
Let's look at how succesful the US government has been at suppressing technology and other things.
There has been a so-called "war on drugs" being waged for over thirty years in this country, but people can still get illegal drugs.
The government has not been able to stop the West Nile virus, the Zebra Mussel, or Killer Bees.
It can't stop people from building home-made bombs that blow up federal buildings.
It has been able to keep its subjects from building atomic weapons so far, but that's only because of the large infrastructure required for all of the parts needed to build a bomb, and to refine the radioactive material for it (Plutonium or Uranium).
A fabricator would not need this kind of infrastructure to reproduce itself, any more than a plant needs a large infrastructure to reproduce itself.
All that is needed are sunlight and raw materials.
As I mentioned earlier, someone has to smuggle one just fabricator out, and the government monopoly is over.
there will be haves and have-nots
This is true in a world of limited resources.
If people are crowded together, there will be competition for limited resources.
However, in most of the Firefly episodes that I have seen so far, the people are not crowded together, and raw materials are abundant.
In this case, the "have-nots" would be those deficient in information, or living on worlds lacking a vital element (e.g., iodine), and who have to trade for it.
Even then, they wouldn't have to import much, because a fabricator will be able to recyle human waste, and thus recover most of it (if not all of it) for reuse.
So, I guess the point that I'm trying to make is that I agree with tftp's response to Daemonik's post; horses and wagons are not credible in the Firefly universe.
Suspension of disbelief can be taken only so far.
For me, it broke in the first episode, when I saw telephone poles running alongside the maglev track.
At that point, Firefly moved from science fiction into science fantasy for me.
If an American travels to Zimbabwe, will they automatically have a car, grocery stores, and gas stations like they had in the U.S. made available when they get there? Why not? Can you think of a plausible way to get around that? If so, many people in the world would love to hear about it.
The reason is that there is no infrastructure to support such luxuries.
What happens when the car breaks down?
Where does the gas come from?
Where do spare parts come from?
So, let us assume, for the moment, that there is "no plausible way to get around" these problems on that part of our planet.
(Ignore, for the moment, that the reasons for such great disparities between the "haves" and the "have-nots" of this world is largely due to politics, and not any great technical barriers.)
It is currently not possible to have all of the manufacturing of all of the parts for a car, the refinery, etc., etc., in one area.
Currently, parts of the world must trade with each other to maintain an industrial standard of living.
Now, let us assume that a replicating machine, or "fabricator", is invented.
This fabricator can take raw materials and energy, and produce a large selection of items, including all parts necessary to build another fabricator.
Someone will take one of these machines to Zimbabwe.
The fabricator will produce the parts for another fabricator, which will then be assembled.
More and more fabricators will be produced, until eventually, everybody has one, assuming the raw materials are available.
Once these machines are prevalent, the only trade necessary will be in raw materials and designs of things to fabricate.
People will be able to fabricate their own cars, fuel, and replacement parts.
Gas stations will not be necessary.
Each household will be able to produce all of its own food, not to mention shelter, medical equipment, computers, etc., and, yes, even a steamliner.
The resulting economic upheaval will be more catastrophic than anything seen thus far, more catastrophic than the invention of paper money, possibly as catastrophic as the invention of trade itself.
Now, to get back on-topic, let us assume that the Alliance wishes to keep this technology to itself, to help control the outer worlds.
All it would take is one fabricator smuggled to a world -- just one! -- and eventually there would be hundreds, thousands, millions.
There is no way to keep this technology bottled up without spying on everybody, kind of like a galactic USAPATRIOT act.
From what I've seen of the show, the Alliance doesn't have that much power or presence.
So, yes, in the Firefly universe, everyone would have access to this technology.
author of the beloved "Blood on the Badge."
+1 Funny.
I thought that I was the only one who remembered that.
Don't forget that he was sued for plagarism for that book, so I don't know how much stock that would give him.
Why are Christian churches laid out in the form of a cross?
If you look at the floor plan for almost any Medieval Christian church or cathedral, you will see that it is laid out in the form of a cross.
This cross can be seen only from the air.
So why were they laid out that way?
They were built that way because they were meant to be viewed by their gods (Jesus and Yahweh).
It's not too much of a stretch to consider that the Nazca lines were created the way they were because they were meant to be viewed by their creators' god(s).
The pyramids were built by the pharoahs pretty much because they were big and awesome and they didn't really care if slaves died in the process of stroking the pharoah's ego.
Current archaeological theory holds that the pyramids were built by hired craftsmen.
Archaeologists have discovered some financial records from the time, listing payments to workers, etc., and have also discovered small pyramids in a cemetary near the workers' villiage in which were entombed supervisors (mid-level managers?), etc.
It is now thought that the workers were well-fed and, in general, well-treated.
Light isn't a radio source.
Radio is light.
(Both "radio" and so-called "visible light" (actually, "human-visible light") are forms of electromagnetic radiation.)
I can focus microwaves as easily as light waves because microwaves are light waves.
However, focusing microwave radiation is not necessarily as easy as focusing human-visible light (mainly because human-visible light is, well, visible to me, so my eyes can help me in my focusing efforts).
As to whether or not microwaves diffuse as much as human-visible light, it depends on the medium through which they are traveling.
In Earth's atmosphere, higher-frequency human-visible light diffuses more than lower-frequency human-visible light.
This is why the sky is blue, because red light diffuses less than blue.
Next down the frequency scale is infrared radiation, followed by microwave radiation.
I don't know whether or not these diffuse less than visible light, but you can't assume that because lower-frequency light diffuses less in the human-visible spectrum, it will also diffuse less outside of that narrow range.
I almost forgot - in the future, you might not even need tractors to do farming; fields could plant themselves using nanotechnology, GMOs, or other methods yet unknown.
Or farming might not be necessary at all; fabricators could produce food directly, pre-packaged, possibly pre-heated, and ready-to-eat (like on Star Trek, but without the cheesy sparkly special effects).
All that's needed are energy and raw materials.
And a little technology.
Tractors require fuel. Constantly replenished sources of fuel. Fuel on any non-trivial scale is dependant upon refineries.
Not necessarily.
The tractor could have an electirc motor powered by a fuel cell running on hydrogen.
The fuel could be made from ordinary water using a simple solar cell array (plus a pump to compress it).
You would not have to ship fuel anywhere; you could produce it on-site anywhere there was water and sunlight.
It's also not unreasonable (at least for SF) to assume that in the future energy could be derived from cold fusion or other means.
Now, as to maintaining the machines, in the future, either the machines could be self-repairing, or there could exist fabricators using nanotechnology or other means to produce replacement parts.
All that is needed is energy and raw materials.
The problem with most "futuristic" SF shows is that they don't project far enough ahead using technology that's theorectically possible even today.
Your post is laden with such an enormous mass of bovine excrement that light has difficulty escaping from its surface.
...
... did nothing to prevent DMCA from becoming a law.
These companies should be fined. I know they did nothing wrong,
What a novel concept, fining companies for doing nothing wrong!
Most of my neighbors also did nothing to prevent the DMCA from becoming law.
Let's fine them, too!
Oppenheimer is actually the worst perpetrator.
(Nothing like violently veering the post off in a totally different direction.)
Yeah, it would have been much better to do nothing, and let the Nazis get the Bomb first.
(Yes, I know that the Nazis were nowhere near getting the Bomb, but the US government and Oppenheimer didn't know that during the time of the Manhatten project.)
At the end I think Amnesty International is after some quick bucks.
Well, OK, you have a point there.
Large human rights organizations shouldn't be asking for money.
Everyone who works for them should do it for free, without compensation, because that's the only way to attract full-time qualified people.
I was going to suggest that you be sure that you are awake and reasonably coherent before you post again, but then I remembered that this is slashdot.
When people are killed because they were caught reading something on the net using this technology, it is wrong.
The technology isn't there to catch people who are reading "subversive" literature; it's there to prevent them from seeing it in the first place.
If I were living under an extremely repressive regime like the one in Red China (as opposed to a relatively less repressive regime like the one here in the USA), I'd rather have what I read censored than being put to death because I accidentally clicked on the wrong link.
The policies of the Red Chinese government are reprehensible, but the censoring[*] software may actually be saving lives.
[*] "censoring software" is, IMO, a more accurate term than "filtering software" in this case.
It's "filtering software" if it keeps you from receiving things that you don't want to receive; it's "censoring software" if it keeps you from receiving things that others don't want you to receive.
I had to ask myself *when*, not *if*, this actually might be the way movie theaters work. ... I can easily see the day when a photorealistic movie could be generated solely by the computer.
There are "movies" being distributed now that work very similar to the way that you have described.
These are not big productions, though, and they are definitely not photorealistic.
If you are interested, there is at least one web site devoted to the movies: Machinima.