If you turn it on, you should be able to just pull it along behind a train, assuming the tracks could be electrified as needed (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maglev for details if necessary). Then again, if this "superconductor" really has super powers as its name implies, it should be able to fly.
Could someone take a look at this? There appears to be a bug in the Slashdot code (is it still Slashcode?) that posts random release notes from obscure development projects as front page stories.
I think this is almost certainly wrong for two reasons.
1) It would be wonderful if "want" will disappear in the future when information technology, or technology in general, will have advanced in ways we can't imagine. But we are physically limited to whatever resources we have on the planet, and maybe a few close asteroids. Right now, even clean water, clean air, and food aren't as available as we would like everywhere on the planet, and it doesn't look like we can assume that will get better as the population continues to grow.
2) Even if we had unlimited energy and maybe a Star Trek replicator to create any kind of matter we need, wouldn't that tend to make a species more curious about the rest of the universe? Humans who are barely surviving don't wonder much about other planets when they're wondering where the next meal will come from. But humans (and maybe also aliens) who have most of their wants already answered would be much more likely to look farther afield for challenges.
In short, I believe in more of a Star Trek/Star Wars future than a Wall-E future.
How much do you plan for disaster cleanup? Probably the best you can do is base costs on history, which I believe have generally been fairly low, at least until now.
But then, to be fair, you'd have to include potential disaster cleanup costs for other industries too. I don't believe the LNG plants and other generators that were wiped out in that huge tidal wave included disaster cleanup costs, either (although it may be that rebuilding them all may be cheaper than decommissioning the Fukushima plant in the long run. I haven't heard much about those costs).
Also, while I agree that calculating long term storage costs should be included for nuclear power generation, how do you calculate the cost of the greenhouse gases generated by a coal-based generator? As I understand it, the CO2 we generate now will likely be affecting us for hundreds of years.
So in your scenario, if a Chinese citizen would attack the US power grid, and the Chinese government did nothing, the US government should declare war on China? Or are you saying it's okay to kill another country's citizens without declaring war?
Also, you didn't answer my questions. Does this work both ways? For example, does the Iranian government, assuming they knew that an American citizen wrote Stuxnet, have the right to kill that American?
I didn't think any country had the "right" to kill anyone living in another country, unless the countries were formally at war.
Questions: - Do you think the US has the right to kill someone currently living in another country if that individual is breaking US laws? - Do you think a foreign government has the right to kill an American living in the US if that individual is breaking that foreign country's laws?
Sounds like the best research project ever! Tell me, when you set up video experiments, what do you use as a control group? Do you just tape a bunch of test subjects walking around naked? Wait a second - do you pick your own test subjects, or do you have to take anyone who volunteers? JK.
I'm more worried about the injury and fatality rates, rather than the cost of the accidents.
I remember reading about a similar study about somewhere in Canada (sorry - don't remember the details) that said that while rear-end crashes were up (because of people hitting their brakes hard to avoid going through the intersection), the number of "T-bone" or right-angle crashes was down (because of less people going through on an "early red"). This study noted that the number of accidents didn't change much, but that injuries and fatalities were way down, because the T-bone accidents tend to be more dangerous.
The article quoted in the summary does mention that right-angle crashes are down in this report as well, but doesn't address injuries or fatalities.
From his excitement in receiving his turkey fryer, to his pain in having to say goodbye to it at the end - you can see the emotion he brings to the part.
I learned that if you have a team of people (students and teachers) all working together to produce a program, then it's possible you may actually create something so large that you're machine might actually require an expansion to 64K of RAM, rather than the default 16K.
I also learned that saving your program to a floppy is way more convenient than saving it on a regular cassette tape.
Of course, back in 1982 or so, our entire high school only had one Apple II.
I'd recommend taking the tour of the first nuclear reactor to provide power for public use, "Experimental Breeder Reactor number one" in Idaho.I toured it a couple of years ago, and it's one of the few places you can see an actual reactor core, containment vessel, or reactor control room, especially one of the first ones. Check out http://www.kmvt.com/news/local/122875114.html
Slashdot Mirror
> supported by Richard Branson, Bill Nye the Science Guy, and Seth Green
My imagination can't comprehend what a business meetting or board meeting would be like with these three, but I bet it's awesome!
If you turn it on, you should be able to just pull it along behind a train, assuming the tracks could be electrified as needed (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maglev for details if necessary).
Then again, if this "superconductor" really has super powers as its name implies, it should be able to fly.
Could someone take a look at this?
There appears to be a bug in the Slashdot code (is it still Slashcode?) that posts random release notes from obscure development projects as front page stories.
Let me check. It might be sitting on my desk.
Umm - this might take a couple of hours ...
I think this is almost certainly wrong for two reasons.
1) It would be wonderful if "want" will disappear in the future when information technology, or technology in general, will have advanced in ways we can't imagine. But we are physically limited to whatever resources we have on the planet, and maybe a few close asteroids. Right now, even clean water, clean air, and food aren't as available as we would like everywhere on the planet, and it doesn't look like we can assume that will get better as the population continues to grow.
2) Even if we had unlimited energy and maybe a Star Trek replicator to create any kind of matter we need, wouldn't that tend to make a species more curious about the rest of the universe? Humans who are barely surviving don't wonder much about other planets when they're wondering where the next meal will come from. But humans (and maybe also aliens) who have most of their wants already answered would be much more likely to look farther afield for challenges.
In short, I believe in more of a Star Trek/Star Wars future than a Wall-E future.
How much do you plan for disaster cleanup? Probably the best you can do is base costs on history, which I believe have generally been fairly low, at least until now.
But then, to be fair, you'd have to include potential disaster cleanup costs for other industries too. I don't believe the LNG plants and other generators that were wiped out in that huge tidal wave included disaster cleanup costs, either (although it may be that rebuilding them all may be cheaper than decommissioning the Fukushima plant in the long run. I haven't heard much about those costs).
Also, while I agree that calculating long term storage costs should be included for nuclear power generation, how do you calculate the cost of the greenhouse gases generated by a coal-based generator? As I understand it, the CO2 we generate now will likely be affecting us for hundreds of years.
So in your scenario, if a Chinese citizen would attack the US power grid, and the Chinese government did nothing, the US government should declare war on China? Or are you saying it's okay to kill another country's citizens without declaring war?
Also, you didn't answer my questions. Does this work both ways?
For example, does the Iranian government, assuming they knew that an American citizen wrote Stuxnet, have the right to kill that American?
I didn't think any country had the "right" to kill anyone living in another country, unless the countries were formally at war.
Questions:
- Do you think the US has the right to kill someone currently living in another country if that individual is breaking US laws?
- Do you think a foreign government has the right to kill an American living in the US if that individual is breaking that foreign country's laws?
Sounds like the best research project ever! Tell me, when you set up video experiments, what do you use as a control group? Do you just tape a bunch of test subjects walking around naked?
Wait a second - do you pick your own test subjects, or do you have to take anyone who volunteers?
JK.
Think how exciting it will be when they start applying this technology to passenger planes!
Sorry - next time I'll check which story I'm posting under first!
Think how exciting it will be when they start applying this technology to passenger planes!
I'm more worried about the injury and fatality rates, rather than the cost of the accidents.
I remember reading about a similar study about somewhere in Canada (sorry - don't remember the details) that said that while rear-end crashes were up (because of people hitting their brakes hard to avoid going through the intersection), the number of "T-bone" or right-angle crashes was down (because of less people going through on an "early red"). This study noted that the number of accidents didn't change much, but that injuries and fatalities were way down, because the T-bone accidents tend to be more dangerous.
The article quoted in the summary does mention that right-angle crashes are down in this report as well, but doesn't address injuries or fatalities.
I much prefer William Shatner's "Eat, Fry, Love" at http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=EYkRF_FmD40&feature=endscreen
From his excitement in receiving his turkey fryer, to his pain in having to say goodbye to it at the end - you can see the emotion he brings to the part.
This "basketball" game - what console is it on?
Well, I believe the Kinect has a microphone. Perhaps it will KNOW by looking for certain ... vocalizations.
and how much thinner is this new version?
... how many apps does it have?
I learned that if you have a team of people (students and teachers) all working together to produce a program, then it's possible you may actually create something so large that you're machine might actually require an expansion to 64K of RAM, rather than the default 16K.
I also learned that saving your program to a floppy is way more convenient than saving it on a regular cassette tape.
Of course, back in 1982 or so, our entire high school only had one Apple II.
Actually, I believe the name "Becquerelium" is to honour the famed assistant of Dr. Bunsen Honeydew.
If the US already believes corporations should have free speech, why not computers?
If I recall, Schmeiser lost because the court didn't believe him.
I'm from that area of Saskatchewan. The farmers I talked to privately admitted that they didn't believe Schmeiser either.
I don't know rt.com, but it seems to tend toward the sensationalistic side.
For example, my 1 minute of browsing the site took me to the story "FBI might shutdown the internet on March 8", ( http://rt.com/usa/news/fbi-internet-server-servers-409/)
Maybe we should all be more worried about the internet disappearing than Monsanto's evil deeds.
If I had a voice in this, I'd vote for Stephen Hawking and Bill Nye.
Wait, do they have to be alive? If not, I'd vote for Einstein and Newton!
If anything, I would think that granting a higher percentage of patents is a sign of lower quality.
But then again, I also don't see more patents as a rise in the "knowledge economy" or globalization lead by innovation.
I'd recommend taking the tour of the first nuclear reactor to provide power for public use, "Experimental Breeder Reactor number one" in Idaho.I toured it a couple of years ago, and it's one of the few places you can see an actual reactor core, containment vessel, or reactor control room, especially one of the first ones. Check out http://www.kmvt.com/news/local/122875114.html