Perhaps the point of his question to slashdot....you know, a technical news/information site, with a technically savvy audience...is to get an answer, not to get excoriated for having the question?
You know, your point "3. Research what components will achieve the expected result."
I think his question is valid - it used to be a fairly simple task to equate processor speed with power, to come up with a reasonable expectation of performance for a task. But to everyone (except, apparently, you), it perhaps isn't intuitive that a quad core at a lower speed will or won't perform better than a duo core at a higher speed. (Answer: sometimes it will perform better, sometimes it won't. How is he supposed to know, oh swami of computer tech?)
So you could offer actual advice or click through to the next news article, instead of bitching that someone asked a very valid question.
Chelsea King's murderer was nicely listed. Now an innocent 17 year old girl is dead, having probably spent the last moments of her short life in terror and misery, because she was foolish enough to go for a run.
How, precisely, did the list help her?
Personally, I think the lvl 3 sex offender list should be retitled to the "no legal consequences for murdering the scumbags on this list" list, but that's just me.
"...why the hell do you care if they give people the OPTION of choosing a government plan..."
1) guess who's going to be footing the bill? Suckers who are stupid enough to work their whole lives, have paying jobs, and pay their taxes. SUCKERS.
2) because what is OPTIONAL to start, from the government, soon becomes mandatory. And how fair is it that the private sector has to compete with a taxpayer-funded-and-backed-nonprofit?
"How many of these kids who may have grown up to enjoy classical music are turned off by it forever?"
Zero.
Actually not a single one of the chavs generally entertained by loitering, vandalism, and graffiti would ever have become your postulated classical aficionado, so we're good there.
Even AAA titles like Oblivion failed hard at this. I'm not looking at your game on a stupid 640x480 video monitor, so I don't need your text to be ginormous to be clear.
A corollary to this would be the UI in general - where every button is huge and lists only show 4 things at a time, because everything is supersized for the poor bastard navigating with a gamepad on a TV screen.
You never appreciate efficient UI design as much as you do playing a console game (badly) ported to a computer.
Wouldn't this be better titled "in another desperate attempt to control a marketplace, Sony is developing new controller which they will tout as 'universal' but in actuality will be used by less than 5% of their own console's owners because it sucks so bad"
What's the old saying? If you can't fight the facts, attack the witness?
FWIW they're easily as unbiased as the BBC, NPR, and other news sources (or are you asserting that they somehow carry the magic banner of objectivity?), not to mention the academics who have been PROVEN to have falsified, modified, and then conveniently "lost" data.
Next you're going to say I'm taking money from Exxon?
"Meanwhile Sagar Island shrinks away from rising oceans. " Really? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5067351/Rise-of-sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.html To quote: When running the International Commission on Sea Level Change, he launched a special project on the Maldives, whose leaders have for 20 years been calling for vast sums of international aid to stave off disaster. Six times he and his expert team visited the islands, to confirm that the sea has not risen for half a century. Before announcing his findings, he offered to show the inhabitants a film explaining why they had nothing to worry about. The government refused to let it be shown. Similarly in Tuvalu, where local leaders have been calling for the inhabitants to be evacuated for 20 years, the sea has if anything dropped in recent decades. The only evidence the scaremongers can cite is based on the fact that extracting groundwater for pineapple growing has allowed seawater to seep in to replace it. Meanwhile, Venice has been sinking rather than the Adriatic rising, says Dr Mörner. One of his most shocking discoveries was why the IPCC has been able to show sea levels rising by 2.3mm a year. Until 2003, even its own satellite-based evidence showed no upward trend. But suddenly the graph tilted upwards because the IPCC's favoured experts had drawn on the finding of a single tide-gauge in Hong Kong harbour showing a 2.3mm rise. The entire global sea-level projection was then adjusted upwards by a "corrective factor" of 2.3mm, because, as the IPCC scientists admitted, they "needed to show a trend".
"Meanwhile a UAB professor claims ocean acidification is yet another measurable effect of climate change. " A professor. Hm, that's convincing. Yet somehow corals and shellfish are nearly THE OLDEST ORGANISMS ON THE PLANET, having survived MUCH higher CO2 levels than today, and much warmer (& colder) climates than today.
"Meanwhile Eastern Antarctica (the steadfast 'unaffected' part of Antarctica) begins to show signs of melting (via NASA and U of TX). " http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/comment.php?comment.news.125 Contrary to media reports Antarctic sea ice continues to expand. Ice totals for November 2009 are significantly higher than 1979 when measurements began...Interior ice is also increasing but not due to warming as the models have predicted. According to NOAA GISS data winter temperatures in the antarctic have actually fallen by 1F since 1957, with the coldest year being 2004. All the while global CO2 levels have gone up and the main stream media has been reporting near catastrophic warming conditions.
"Feel free to keep using your local area to prove/disprove climate change. One day the facts will pile up..." Funny, I see the facts piling up regarding the falsification of data, the 'smoothing' of data, the "loss" of data, the irreplicability of results; I'm not sure the "facts" are quite piling up the way you believe they will.
But hey, that's the beauty of religion. Facts be damned, it's about faith.
I'm curious if they'd apply the 'person of size' rule to (for example) an NFL player who is in NO SENSE obese, but with his massive physique and shoulders would obviously overflow the seat width parameters.
I'm 6'4", and a medium-build 290lbs, so when I see another guy my size sitting in the adjacent seat, I think we both cry a little. I always take aisle seat, not for more legroom (hahah, as if anyone's knees bend sideways) but so if some poor bastard IS stuck in the seat next to me, I can lean 20 degrees out into the aisle so they're not crushed by my shoulders.
...I'd say that the moment silicon valley (a dynamic, spontaneous effusion of capitalism on the tech frontier) requires GOVERNMENT intervention to remain viable, you can probably stick a fork in it.
Sadly, it's more than "borderline insane" - at least according to the Obama Justice Department, it practically makes you a terrorist. (Certainly a right-wing extremist...since their binary worldview cannot comprehend someone who opposes their idea of Leftish 'benevolent despotism' and yet ALSO opposes the 'benevolent despotism' of the RIGHT.)
And I'd object to the previous poster's statement "Everywhere there are two or more people, there is a government."...that doesn't mean that such a thing is desirable. Everywhere there are more than a few thousand people, there tends to be rape and assault, that doesn't mean we want to encourage it. The US Constitution has been used as a doormat by presidents and congress at least since FDR, and the shambles that are left are being badly strained by the last couple of administrations.
I wonder how much longer we'll bother to pay lip service to them?
You're right, because the Liberal seats have a different set of Holy Cows to pander to such as the environment, race, and inter-class warfare
Just want to make sure people understand that it's BOTH sides that have such shibboleths, not just "conservatives" although we all understand that "conservative" is slashdottian for Evil.
....and that's why judges don't have despotic power.
The ruling of a state judge, for example, can be overturned by the prompt action of the elected body of legislators.
A judge makes an absurd ruling that local decency standards can be used to prosecute someone remotely? If it's really that big a deal, and really so unfair, then the locality/state/federal legislators can TODAY pass a law saying that's not the standard that should be used. Unless overturned due to constitutional grounds by the Supreme Court, THAT BECOMES THE LAW OF THE LAND, not the judge's ruling.
But then, you have to have an intelligent and engaged public. Whups, no, we have a stupid, disengaged public that's grown stupider through 50 years of educator's inability to control their students and a required focus on self-esteem over actual learning.
"....blah blah blah about why ebooks should be almost as expensive as real ones..."
Bullshit.
Double Bullshit, in fact.
See, the point you're overlooking is that the costs you mention are FLAT. What the author is paid for his intellectual and (very hard) work is a flat amount. Note, I of course recognize that this isn't true in the real world, most authors are paid a floating number - this make sense, as they are 'sharing' the profit over time, mainly so that the publishers can pay them less to start. They're wagering the book will be unsuccessful, in a sense. This is the publisher's choice, unless you are a supremely successful artist. But on the face of it, the author does a finite amount of work, and in a normal situation, would be paid a finite amount.
Marketing, editing, all that stuff - could all be accounted as one-time costs. But in a real, paper book, every book takes setup time, printing time, and raw materials to make. So for every book, there is an incremental increase in cost.
Not so with ebooks. You can pay the finite costs, and (aside from server time) it costs you no more to 'sell' a billion copies.
So arithmatically, the idea that ebooks should somehow be tied to this concept of infinite lucrative return despite fixed costs is truly, truly bullshit.
It's what makes the music/book/software world absolutely nonsensical to the rest of us who merely get paid for the work we do, and don't expect eternal compensation for something we did last year.
That's so 1990. This is 2010: "Drug-funded religious terrorists led by charismatic, evasive leader hiding in desert caves attacks and successfully overthrows hegemonic commercially-based government."...on that basis, I'm surprised the books haven't been banned.
"The US has now essentially ceded manned spaceflight to the Russians and the Chinese."
Really? Ceded is a pretty strong word.
Lots of Russian and Chinese manned missions going up, are there? (I mean Chinese missions that don't show floating BUBBLES, of course...)
Is the US space program in remission? Yep. Is NASA floundering? Yes, it's overbureacratized but occasionally puts out some really astonishingly good science and engineering - witness the Martian rovers, Cassini - so I suspect the talent is there, hiding under an increasing crust of politicized nonsense.
The space shuttle was a horrible design, made by committee. The ISS is a stupid setpiece project - too low, too small, & too incremental to really advance the concepts of long-term space habitation or construction.
Face it, we have an ever-increasing population here in the US that is less and less technologically oriented in real terms - sure, there are LOTS of 12 yr olds that can run Facebook or whip through the hardest PS3 game without breaking a sweat, but fewer engineers and astronomers. These people are electing representatives that choose to continue to spend a massive % of the Federal purse on: - medical care for elderly and poor - taking care of the seniors that didn't save enough for themselves (far longer than the originally-planned what, 6-8 years that were originally envisaged?) - caring for the unemployed/able
If you were to look at the economics of it rationally, are ANY of those things (representing about 52% of the FY2009 spend) really ever going to benefit the country in general in the longest term?
Basically, having an aggressive space program takes leadership with balls, people willing to accept that astronauts die in a terrifically dangerous job, people willing to accept the guns vs. butter choices economically that will hurt in the short term for a benefit in the longest terms. We tend not to elect them because they aren't willing to pander to US.
Look, the bulk of the real world is bullshit, with the stronger/more powerful/wealthy crapping on anyone they can. Learning that (and yes, sometimes that requires failure and sometimes failure is painful) and how to deal with it, is a MAJOR LIFE SKILL.
Protecting our precious little younglings from the scarring behavior of schoolyard chums does what, then? Leave them entirely unprepared for the serious fuck-with-you-ness of the adult world? Terrific!
Perhaps to you, a kid scamming them out of their lunch money in school is tragic, and makes them sad. To me, that gives them the first foretaste of how easily it is to be gulled, and might help them reflexively avoid getting taken for serious cash when a desperate Minister from Nigeria emails them looking for help with his $7 million account.
Your kid getting bullied at school? Don't just march into the school in a huff demanding someone 'do something' about it. TEACH your child how to deal constructively with the situation, or failing that, defend themselves physically. Solving the issue by talking to the principal or getting the other kid expelled teaches your child nothing but to rely on some uber-authority to fix everything, and that is what eventually makes Democrats and people who believe in the UN. (OK that was a joke, folks.)
First, please note that I don't take any issue with a number of your stated points - that the pop culture is obsessively superficial, etc. Yep, it is.
You have to understand the nature of democracy and capitalism. It's not efficient, it's not the quickest way from point A to point B, and it's not pretty. It's full of arguments, noise, dirt, and chaos; moreover it's usually grossly inefficient. Those are all frustrating as hell when you think there are a number of things that "need to be done" like renewable energy, infrastructure building, etc.
But in the same sense that Jefferson (?) said "A government strong enough to give you everything you need is also strong enough to take away everything you have." OBVIOUSLY a command economy like China is going to respond more quickly, more efficiently, and is able to make better long-term decisions, particularly about 'commons' items like infrastructure and huge, 30-year energy investments. Then again, they're also terrifically efficient at doing things that aren't so great - controlling dissent, making decisions 'for the good of the public' without actually ASKING the public, and so forth.
Great example: the US's lack of effort on renewable energy. China is making great strides in implementing hydropower, for example. The 3 Gorges Dam "...The project produces hydroelectricity, increases the river's navigation capacity, and reduces the potential for floods downstream by providing flood storage space." Not to even mention the stability of freshwater supplies for the entire region. All good, right? Of course, it only required the forcible relocation of 1.3 million people, the inundation of at least 1200 archaeological sites, and may prove to be catastrophic if its location on a seismic fault proves vulnerable.
Command economies are really good at other things, like autobahns, concentration camps, and making war. All ok with you?
It's a binary choice - if the public gets a say in their government, it's going to be chaotic and (generally) stupid. If you decouple the public from government, it becomes much more effective and efficient...of course, you no longer get to control which direction it goes.
Further, when you have a capitalistic system, you DON'T GET THE BEST OF EVERYTHING. Nope, doesn't work that way. Capitalism is the system of 'good enough'. So many people don't seem to understand that. A farmer might have a gravel driveway. Yes, he could put in an asphalt one, save on wear & tear on his vehicles, reduce his annual maintenance & grading costs, all sorts of good things. But: it's not worth it to him. The advantages don't exceed the costs, so he 'gets by' with a gravel road.
In that same sense, the moment that oil really IS a concern...say, when gas prices hit $5/gallon (real, not just $1.50/gal with $3.50 in politically motivated taxes), then you WILL see strides in efficiencies and the sale of efficient cars, because there will be a concrete value to it.
When coal and such are too politically/commercially unpleasant to power electrical plants, we'll finally get nuclear back because people will ignore the stinky hippies.
The moment there are enough people/goods that a high-speed rail system could preferentially serve over our current (shitty) system of individual vehicles and highways, and served better enough that they could make money on the deal? High speed rail would be built in a second. (Note that most passenger rail lines nowadays are little more than politically-motivated pork-barrel projects that end up being an annual subsidy project because "even though we built it, they didn't come.")
So yeah, there are a bunch of things wrong with the USA. But to whinge about it and then LEAVE? Then you need to shut up. Because if you're not staying here to WORK ON CHANGING IT, you no longer are entitled to a voice. If you think NASA is the most important government agency in the future of humanity? (Personally I'd agree that space exploration IS that
Shit man, you want to send a huge mammal, send a/.er.
1) they're used to living in a small space. Make the pod look like Mom's basement, you're good probably for a trip to Neptune. 2) antisocial: no need for companionship 3) tech-cool: they'd cheerfully blog from the Moon, even with latency of 8 bajillion. 4) nobody (even the/.er) would mind if it was a one-way trip, so no sad relatives here.
Giraffes and hippos we'd probably want to bring back, after all. Plus, no PETA objections to sending a slashdotter.
Slashdot Mirror
Shouldn't this article have a link to the Darwin Awards somewhere in it?
http://www.darwinawards.com/
Please, if you're going to buy a jetpack, please don't breed FIRST.
Perhaps the point of his question to slashdot....you know, a technical news/information site, with a technically savvy audience...is to get an answer, not to get excoriated for having the question?
You know, your point "3. Research what components will achieve the expected result."
I think his question is valid - it used to be a fairly simple task to equate processor speed with power, to come up with a reasonable expectation of performance for a task. But to everyone (except, apparently, you), it perhaps isn't intuitive that a quad core at a lower speed will or won't perform better than a duo core at a higher speed. (Answer: sometimes it will perform better, sometimes it won't. How is he supposed to know, oh swami of computer tech?)
So you could offer actual advice or click through to the next news article, instead of bitching that someone asked a very valid question.
Another list seems relatively pointless.
Chelsea King's murderer was nicely listed. Now an innocent 17 year old girl is dead, having probably spent the last moments of her short life in terror and misery, because she was foolish enough to go for a run.
How, precisely, did the list help her?
Personally, I think the lvl 3 sex offender list should be retitled to the "no legal consequences for murdering the scumbags on this list" list, but that's just me.
This is slashdot. I think you can be certain that you are.
"...why the hell do you care if they give people the OPTION of choosing a government plan..."
1) guess who's going to be footing the bill? Suckers who are stupid enough to work their whole lives, have paying jobs, and pay their taxes. SUCKERS.
2) because what is OPTIONAL to start, from the government, soon becomes mandatory. And how fair is it that the private sector has to compete with a taxpayer-funded-and-backed-nonprofit?
Your choice - pick 1, 2, or 1&2.
"How many of these kids who may have grown up to enjoy classical music are turned off by it forever?"
Zero.
Actually not a single one of the chavs generally entertained by loitering, vandalism, and graffiti would ever have become your postulated classical aficionado, so we're good there.
Screen resolution.
Even AAA titles like Oblivion failed hard at this.
I'm not looking at your game on a stupid 640x480 video monitor, so I don't need your text to be ginormous to be clear.
A corollary to this would be the UI in general - where every button is huge and lists only show 4 things at a time, because everything is supersized for the poor bastard navigating with a gamepad on a TV screen.
You never appreciate efficient UI design as much as you do playing a console game (badly) ported to a computer.
Wouldn't this be better titled "in another desperate attempt to control a marketplace, Sony is developing new controller which they will tout as 'universal' but in actuality will be used by less than 5% of their own console's owners because it sucks so bad"
What's the old saying? If you can't fight the facts, attack the witness?
FWIW they're easily as unbiased as the BBC, NPR, and other news sources (or are you asserting that they somehow carry the magic banner of objectivity?), not to mention the academics who have been PROVEN to have falsified, modified, and then conveniently "lost" data.
Next you're going to say I'm taking money from Exxon?
Refute the facts, or STFU.
First it's violence.
Now "New Riddick Movie Made Possible By Games?"
I'm sick and tired of video games being blamed for all the horrible things that happen in the world.
"Meanwhile Sagar Island shrinks away from rising oceans. "
Really?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5067351/Rise-of-sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.html
To quote: When running the International Commission on Sea Level Change, he launched a special project on the Maldives, whose leaders have for 20 years been calling for vast sums of international aid to stave off disaster. Six times he and his expert team visited the islands, to confirm that the sea has not risen for half a century. Before announcing his findings, he offered to show the inhabitants a film explaining why they had nothing to worry about. The government refused to let it be shown.
Similarly in Tuvalu, where local leaders have been calling for the inhabitants to be evacuated for 20 years, the sea has if anything dropped in recent decades. The only evidence the scaremongers can cite is based on the fact that extracting groundwater for pineapple growing has allowed seawater to seep in to replace it. Meanwhile, Venice has been sinking rather than the Adriatic rising, says Dr Mörner.
One of his most shocking discoveries was why the IPCC has been able to show sea levels rising by 2.3mm a year. Until 2003, even its own satellite-based evidence showed no upward trend. But suddenly the graph tilted upwards because the IPCC's favoured experts had drawn on the finding of a single tide-gauge in Hong Kong harbour showing a 2.3mm rise. The entire global sea-level projection was then adjusted upwards by a "corrective factor" of 2.3mm, because, as the IPCC scientists admitted, they "needed to show a trend".
"Meanwhile a UAB professor claims ocean acidification is yet another measurable effect of climate change. "
A professor. Hm, that's convincing. Yet somehow corals and shellfish are nearly THE OLDEST ORGANISMS ON THE PLANET, having survived MUCH higher CO2 levels than today, and much warmer (& colder) climates than today.
"Meanwhile Eastern Antarctica (the steadfast 'unaffected' part of Antarctica) begins to show signs of melting (via NASA and U of TX). "
http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/comment.php?comment.news.125
Contrary to media reports Antarctic sea ice continues to expand. Ice totals for November 2009 are significantly higher than 1979 when measurements began...Interior ice is also increasing but not due to warming as the models have predicted. According to NOAA GISS data winter temperatures in the antarctic have actually fallen by 1F since 1957, with the coldest year being 2004. All the while global CO2 levels have gone up and the main stream media has been reporting near catastrophic warming conditions.
"Feel free to keep using your local area to prove/disprove climate change. One day the facts will pile up ..."
Funny, I see the facts piling up regarding the falsification of data, the 'smoothing' of data, the "loss" of data, the irreplicability of results; I'm not sure the "facts" are quite piling up the way you believe they will.
But hey, that's the beauty of religion. Facts be damned, it's about faith.
I'm curious if they'd apply the 'person of size' rule to (for example) an NFL player who is in NO SENSE obese, but with his massive physique and shoulders would obviously overflow the seat width parameters.
I'm 6'4", and a medium-build 290lbs, so when I see another guy my size sitting in the adjacent seat, I think we both cry a little. I always take aisle seat, not for more legroom (hahah, as if anyone's knees bend sideways) but so if some poor bastard IS stuck in the seat next to me, I can lean 20 degrees out into the aisle so they're not crushed by my shoulders.
...I'd say that the moment silicon valley (a dynamic, spontaneous effusion of capitalism on the tech frontier) requires GOVERNMENT intervention to remain viable, you can probably stick a fork in it.
Adam Smith cringes in disgust.
Sadly, it's more than "borderline insane" - at least according to the Obama Justice Department, it practically makes you a terrorist. (Certainly a right-wing extremist...since their binary worldview cannot comprehend someone who opposes their idea of Leftish 'benevolent despotism' and yet ALSO opposes the 'benevolent despotism' of the RIGHT.)
And I'd object to the previous poster's statement "Everywhere there are two or more people, there is a government."...that doesn't mean that such a thing is desirable. Everywhere there are more than a few thousand people, there tends to be rape and assault, that doesn't mean we want to encourage it. The US Constitution has been used as a doormat by presidents and congress at least since FDR, and the shambles that are left are being badly strained by the last couple of administrations.
I wonder how much longer we'll bother to pay lip service to them?
You're right, because the Liberal seats have a different set of Holy Cows to pander to such as the environment, race, and inter-class warfare
Just want to make sure people understand that it's BOTH sides that have such shibboleths, not just "conservatives" although we all understand that "conservative" is slashdottian for Evil.
....and that's why judges don't have despotic power.
The ruling of a state judge, for example, can be overturned by the prompt action of the elected body of legislators.
A judge makes an absurd ruling that local decency standards can be used to prosecute someone remotely? If it's really that big a deal, and really so unfair, then the locality/state/federal legislators can TODAY pass a law saying that's not the standard that should be used. Unless overturned due to constitutional grounds by the Supreme Court, THAT BECOMES THE LAW OF THE LAND, not the judge's ruling.
But then, you have to have an intelligent and engaged public. Whups, no, we have a stupid, disengaged public that's grown stupider through 50 years of educator's inability to control their students and a required focus on self-esteem over actual learning.
So yeah, I guess we are in trouble.
Simple, we'll just program them to die after 4 years.
If so, I hope to god that a) they name the first models Roy, Pris, Zhora, and Leon; and b) the lead developer wears really good eye-protection.
I think you just described Congress.
"....blah blah blah about why ebooks should be almost as expensive as real ones..."
Bullshit.
Double Bullshit, in fact.
See, the point you're overlooking is that the costs you mention are FLAT.
What the author is paid for his intellectual and (very hard) work is a flat amount. Note, I of course recognize that this isn't true in the real world, most authors are paid a floating number - this make sense, as they are 'sharing' the profit over time, mainly so that the publishers can pay them less to start. They're wagering the book will be unsuccessful, in a sense. This is the publisher's choice, unless you are a supremely successful artist. But on the face of it, the author does a finite amount of work, and in a normal situation, would be paid a finite amount.
Marketing, editing, all that stuff - could all be accounted as one-time costs.
But in a real, paper book, every book takes setup time, printing time, and raw materials to make. So for every book, there is an incremental increase in cost.
Not so with ebooks. You can pay the finite costs, and (aside from server time) it costs you no more to 'sell' a billion copies.
So arithmatically, the idea that ebooks should somehow be tied to this concept of infinite lucrative return despite fixed costs is truly, truly bullshit.
It's what makes the music/book/software world absolutely nonsensical to the rest of us who merely get paid for the work we do, and don't expect eternal compensation for something we did last year.
"Rampaging cult overthrows galactic government."
That's so 1990. ...on that basis, I'm surprised the books haven't been banned.
This is 2010:
"Drug-funded religious terrorists led by charismatic, evasive leader hiding in desert caves attacks and successfully overthrows hegemonic commercially-based government."
"The US has now essentially ceded manned spaceflight to the Russians and the Chinese."
Really? Ceded is a pretty strong word.
Lots of Russian and Chinese manned missions going up, are there?
(I mean Chinese missions that don't show floating BUBBLES, of course...)
Is the US space program in remission? Yep.
Is NASA floundering? Yes, it's overbureacratized but occasionally puts out some really astonishingly good science and engineering - witness the Martian rovers, Cassini - so I suspect the talent is there, hiding under an increasing crust of politicized nonsense.
The space shuttle was a horrible design, made by committee.
The ISS is a stupid setpiece project - too low, too small, & too incremental to really advance the concepts of long-term space habitation or construction.
Face it, we have an ever-increasing population here in the US that is less and less technologically oriented in real terms - sure, there are LOTS of 12 yr olds that can run Facebook or whip through the hardest PS3 game without breaking a sweat, but fewer engineers and astronomers. These people are electing representatives that choose to continue to spend a massive % of the Federal purse on:
- medical care for elderly and poor
- taking care of the seniors that didn't save enough for themselves (far longer than the originally-planned what, 6-8 years that were originally envisaged?)
- caring for the unemployed/able
If you were to look at the economics of it rationally, are ANY of those things (representing about 52% of the FY2009 spend) really ever going to benefit the country in general in the longest term?
Basically, having an aggressive space program takes leadership with balls, people willing to accept that astronauts die in a terrifically dangerous job, people willing to accept the guns vs. butter choices economically that will hurt in the short term for a benefit in the longest terms. We tend not to elect them because they aren't willing to pander to US.
Look, the bulk of the real world is bullshit, with the stronger/more powerful/wealthy crapping on anyone they can. Learning that (and yes, sometimes that requires failure and sometimes failure is painful) and how to deal with it, is a MAJOR LIFE SKILL.
Protecting our precious little younglings from the scarring behavior of schoolyard chums does what, then? Leave them entirely unprepared for the serious fuck-with-you-ness of the adult world? Terrific!
Perhaps to you, a kid scamming them out of their lunch money in school is tragic, and makes them sad. To me, that gives them the first foretaste of how easily it is to be gulled, and might help them reflexively avoid getting taken for serious cash when a desperate Minister from Nigeria emails them looking for help with his $7 million account.
Your kid getting bullied at school? Don't just march into the school in a huff demanding someone 'do something' about it. TEACH your child how to deal constructively with the situation, or failing that, defend themselves physically. Solving the issue by talking to the principal or getting the other kid expelled teaches your child nothing but to rely on some uber-authority to fix everything, and that is what eventually makes Democrats and people who believe in the UN. (OK that was a joke, folks.)
I dunno, isn't it more credible if some tests DO fail?
It's a government contract - of COURSE it's rife with collusion, padding, selective data, etc. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try to develop the tech.
You've left? How sad.
First, please note that I don't take any issue with a number of your stated points - that the pop culture is obsessively superficial, etc. Yep, it is.
You have to understand the nature of democracy and capitalism. It's not efficient, it's not the quickest way from point A to point B, and it's not pretty. It's full of arguments, noise, dirt, and chaos; moreover it's usually grossly inefficient. Those are all frustrating as hell when you think there are a number of things that "need to be done" like renewable energy, infrastructure building, etc.
But in the same sense that Jefferson (?) said "A government strong enough to give you everything you need is also strong enough to take away everything you have." OBVIOUSLY a command economy like China is going to respond more quickly, more efficiently, and is able to make better long-term decisions, particularly about 'commons' items like infrastructure and huge, 30-year energy investments. Then again, they're also terrifically efficient at doing things that aren't so great - controlling dissent, making decisions 'for the good of the public' without actually ASKING the public, and so forth.
Great example: the US's lack of effort on renewable energy. China is making great strides in implementing hydropower, for example. The 3 Gorges Dam "...The project produces hydroelectricity, increases the river's navigation capacity, and reduces the potential for floods downstream by providing flood storage space." Not to even mention the stability of freshwater supplies for the entire region. All good, right? Of course, it only required the forcible relocation of 1.3 million people, the inundation of at least 1200 archaeological sites, and may prove to be catastrophic if its location on a seismic fault proves vulnerable.
Command economies are really good at other things, like autobahns, concentration camps, and making war. All ok with you?
It's a binary choice - if the public gets a say in their government, it's going to be chaotic and (generally) stupid. If you decouple the public from government, it becomes much more effective and efficient...of course, you no longer get to control which direction it goes.
Further, when you have a capitalistic system, you DON'T GET THE BEST OF EVERYTHING. Nope, doesn't work that way. Capitalism is the system of 'good enough'. So many people don't seem to understand that. A farmer might have a gravel driveway. Yes, he could put in an asphalt one, save on wear & tear on his vehicles, reduce his annual maintenance & grading costs, all sorts of good things. But: it's not worth it to him. The advantages don't exceed the costs, so he 'gets by' with a gravel road.
In that same sense, the moment that oil really IS a concern...say, when gas prices hit $5/gallon (real, not just $1.50/gal with $3.50 in politically motivated taxes), then you WILL see strides in efficiencies and the sale of efficient cars, because there will be a concrete value to it.
When coal and such are too politically/commercially unpleasant to power electrical plants, we'll finally get nuclear back because people will ignore the stinky hippies.
The moment there are enough people/goods that a high-speed rail system could preferentially serve over our current (shitty) system of individual vehicles and highways, and served better enough that they could make money on the deal? High speed rail would be built in a second. (Note that most passenger rail lines nowadays are little more than politically-motivated pork-barrel projects that end up being an annual subsidy project because "even though we built it, they didn't come.")
So yeah, there are a bunch of things wrong with the USA. But to whinge about it and then LEAVE? Then you need to shut up. Because if you're not staying here to WORK ON CHANGING IT, you no longer are entitled to a voice. If you think NASA is the most important government agency in the future of humanity? (Personally I'd agree that space exploration IS that
Giraffe or Hippo?
Shit man, you want to send a huge mammal, send a /.er.
1) they're used to living in a small space. Make the pod look like Mom's basement, you're good probably for a trip to Neptune. /.er) would mind if it was a one-way trip, so no sad relatives here.
2) antisocial: no need for companionship
3) tech-cool: they'd cheerfully blog from the Moon, even with latency of 8 bajillion.
4) nobody (even the
Giraffes and hippos we'd probably want to bring back, after all. Plus, no PETA objections to sending a slashdotter.