4800 Degrees Fahrenheit. That's insane. Totally and completely insane.
Why can't they work on reducing friction to conserve fuel and increase speed simultaneously instead of simply focusing on the engine design? It seems to me that some type of atmospheric deflection technology would be more-deserving of DOD dollars than the make-it-so-fast-it-might-spontaneously-combust technology.
Could you use an EM field of some kind to "push" air out of the way? You just need a small gap where there's nothing (a vacuum), say a 1-2mm bubble around the aircraft, in order to slip through the air almost as effortlessly as in space. This technology might be a ways off, but it's far more interesting. It would have applications in a variety of departments, including the leading edge of ships, planes, re-entry vehicles for earth (or interplanetary) landings and so forth. (Not to mention what it'd do for NASCAR)
What with dubya trying to figure out how he can postpone the elections as a result of "terrorism" and the government being given nazi-esque power...
I mean, truly, honestly, what happens when people get bullied around to their limits? Well, the AMERICAN people fight back. I think John Kerry said it best in one of his recent speeches; he said something like, "In America, we shouldn't go to war because we want to, but only when we have to."
And friends, I don't know about you, but I see things getting a lot worse before they get better.
How about option 3: subscription-based software. You don't buy the software once, you buy the 2004 version and you can only use it during 2004. The 2005 version? Only works during 2005! I'm sure you see how this works. They do it now with antivirus software updates. You buy the antivirus software and you get free updates for one year or so, but after that you need to buy the next version.
Since USB can support a multitude of devices, I could even forsee a cheap pass-thru USB device with its own internal clock that the program communicates with in order to verify that the program can still run. Akin to those anti-piracy devices that connected to a serial/parallel port. This would keep people from being able to use the same version continuously just by resetting their clock. Or, just make it mandatory that they have an internet connection available when using the software so the software can phone home and see if it has expired yet.
When the program expires, it would phone home, grab a special code number which you could enter on a website somewhere to print out a coupon to save $20 on your next purchase of the software.
There will always be more than two goddamned ways. Think. outside. the. box.
hey now, those people keep me employed. I *like* charging $45/hr to sit in front of their computer with them and show them how to nuke viruses and spyware and explain why things like defragging regularly is good.
Though, you remind me of this client I had a few weeks ago. The poor fellow actually HAD a burner in his laptop and nobody ever showed him how to burn a CD. He had a ton of pictures on that laptop from a myriad of vacations he took over a period of YEARS, and then his hard drive physically died. I couldn't do a damn thing for him but show him how to back up his files in the future.:(
Funny, I didn't know "email address" was synonymous with "identity."
When somebody asks for your email address, they're asking for a way to contact you--like a phone number. They're not asking for you to uniquely identify yourself as you would with a driver's license or passport, they're only asking how they can reach you.
Email is not identity, and using a dummy email address is not illegal.
I think people are surprised by content in various shows. The super bowl excitement being the best example. It was supposed to be a nice, enjoyable, sporting, well, sports event--it was not supposed to be a titty show! People with children were watching that, and I (and you!) would be a fool if I (or you!) thought there wasn't at least one little boy who later tried to disrobe a classmate or friend or sibling in a similar manner, to "be like the man on teevee!"
If we had an adequate way to describe persistently the content of a show without violating the content of the show for its viewers, I think people would be more inclined to make their own informed decisions.
You know how the beginning of a show on TV is now accompanied by that little icon in the corner of the screen which gives you the rating of the show? Well why does it have to go away? It doesn't have to stay onscreen, but certainly, the information should be available somewhere: a display on the remote, an LCD on the television itself. something.
But why stop there? How about an itemized list of words and situations and contexts so that people can make their own decisions about what they and their children can watch. I'm in favor of separating the monitoring and censorship features from the screen itself, to prevent children from reading words like "sexual" and the various swear words and so on--something that would appeal to the extremely conservative.
The FCC should not be a regulatory commission, but a standards commission. The people who define "sexual situation" in the context of:
This movie Contains 2 heterosexual sexual situations 4 uses of the word "fuck", 1 in reference to intercourse 2 uses of "dogshit" as a personal insult
And then people can define rules on their system such as "no personal insults" or "no references to intercourse" or whatever. That's how it should be done, goddammit. Digital cable approaches this level of control, but nationwide standards established by the FCC would do wonders for defining various general topics and situations which may be offensive to some viewers, so that those viewers can avoid/filter out programs which involve those things.
Power to the people. The government is supposed to empower us, not control us. The government is a system that is supposed to protect us, not violate us. They're overstepping their bounds and I'm irritated about it.
I thought there'd be nuclear-powered robots with lasers melting the sand into giant greenhouses first. Greenhouses where we'd grow plants protected from bad radiation and solar storms. We could pump in CO2 from the existing atmosphere to stimulate their growth, venting some of the produced oxygen into a living area for a future manned mission.
"ready" is a question of vision. Nuclear robots, lasers, giant greenhouses, autonomous processes, it's all uncharted territory but there's nothing stopping us from going there besides our own lack of innovation.
Screw the X-prize, I want to see which corporation is first to get a billboard on the moon, and after that, which corporation is first to get to mars. That'll be some fun times, right there.
I'm sick of television. I don't even watch television anymore save for the periodic watching of the news. I hate commercials and I hate mass media and I hate 99% of what's on television these days.
So I say let them have it. Let them take television and censor the absolute shit out of it and make it "morally consumable by the masses" or whatever the fuck they're trying to do. I've got my internet, I've got my open communication and free speech, I've got my encryption and my firewalls and my geeky toys. Let them have television and everything that comes with it, I'll be on teh intarweb!
(note my use of 'shit' and 'fuck' -- two things I cannot do on television. But I can do them here, on TEH INTARWEB!!! Ah, freedom.)
Really, that isn't a bad idea. It doesn't have to be a judge either; how about his daughter? his mother? I'm sure we could turn up the heat on these dumb bastards rather easily.
As SpaceShipOne has shown us, it's all about baby steps. I'm sure this is a testbed for other kinds of satellites (mars global surveyor, et al) which may not be able to be directly controlled. It may someday be possible to send probes to alpha centauri and the like and having the ability to monitor a planet and "take interest" in things on the macroscopic level is a worthwhile function of a satellite. The "curiosity" of the satellite, however, needs to be in tandem with the curiosity of the scientists/governments/corporations/peoples back home.
As Iraq is showing us, anyone can make an IED, and they don't need rocket engines to do it. With the recent success of SpaceShipOne, I'm sure I'm not the only one wondering what kind of power old tires and laughing gas can provide when they fall into the wrong hands.
Hey wait, can we hit two birds with one stone and sell the ingredients and instructions on mixing rubber particles and N2O to MAKE model rocket engines, thereby skirting the legal restriction? hmmm. Like a website where you can order both ingredients and a reusable mixing chamber + exhaust for them to combust within. It might make model rocketry a little more complicated (hey, this isn't rocket science! oh, wait..) but all things considered, I'm curious what kind of altitude a model rocket can achieve with a propulsion system similar to SpaceShipOne's.
As everyone else has pointed out, there are a variety of reasons to go right instead of left: the door might be locked and they may believe the key to be behind the turrets; the window may be unbreakable; the door conceals potential unknown baddies, while the path to the right is in plain sight; and so forth.
The developers are, in a limited extent, gods. They will create this virtual world in a short period of time, comparable to the biblical story of creation. If you want to uphold the biblical parallel, the testers are the Adams and Eves of this new virtual world. Much as god was displaeased at the taking of the apple, the devs are displeased with the taking of the turreted path.
You've got two choices: direct herding (walls/fences, obvious impenetrable obstacles, the dreaded inivisible wall, a giant demon with six heads that instakills you on sight), or information.
In an ideal game the door is opened a little bit or is maybe off its hinges or has a corner blown off or the like, and you can see a light on inside. You whip out your pocket binocs and you don't see anyone inside through the window, so then you make some noise.
This is an option that is seldom presented in games. You can't usually yell, or throw things, or spit on things, or the like. (In the games where you can, it usually achieves little or nothing) It was a while, if you recall, before developers got a handle on the whole "crouching" thing. Your character's basic actions are quite limited, no matter how lifelike he may look and appear.
So, back to the ideal game: You should be able to at any time take any part of your inventory and throw it. In this case, you would throw an extra clip at the door of the room in an attempt to knock it open and attract the attention of any baddies inside, while you cautiously take aim at the door.
If nobody comes, you enter the room. If people come, you open fire.
I'm thinking that they want you to go into the room to the left because there's a switch to disable the turrets on the right. They may indeed need some smarter testers, but they need better possibilities in the game, and they need a way to expose those possibilities to the user.
One option is a "companion character" that accompanies you for the first level and does all the different things that are possible in a situation where you can get an onscreen tip on how to replicate the behavior. That's how you breed some smarter testers, just by building their training into the game's first level.
Then, if these testers were getting into a turret/door scenario on, say, level 3, they should know what to do. Ideally, level 1 and 2 would use the same map, but level 2 in reverse so you can do all of those interactions again towards some functional usefulness so that you're prepared for what the game can offer you by level three. Make the onscreen tips optional past level 3, mandatory on the easiest difficulty.
Your companion character says, "Through the window there, isn't that Tony?" Onscreen tip says "Direct your center of attention (the crosshairs) to the windows and press B to use your binoculars."
Your companion character says "Quiet, listen." OSD says "Direct your center of attention down the hall and press Q to listen."
If people aren't briefed on the mechanics of the game before hand, the game's mechanics will initially be, in their minds, either identical to every other game they've played, or an average of all games they've played recently. If they've just come off a strong binge on a particular game, you're in trouble; in that case, they're predisposed to a certain set of game mechanics, and without proper information they will only interact with the world around them on the level applicable to those game mechanics.
In short: Better on-screen with information about gameplay tactics as well as game functionality. Developer's fault. Better instruction = smarter world inhabitants.
Blue/white/green LEDs tend to require a voltage around 3.5, while red/orange/yellow LEDs tend to require a voltage around 1.9. Finding a bunch of different colors that operate at the same voltage is generally quite difficult.
The "cd" measurement is attuned to the spectral response of the human eye. If the output of the LEDs were radiometrically measured it would give a better inidication of how much overall emission is there. In general though, if you have three equally emissive light sources, one each of red, green and blue, the green one will appear the brightest because our eyes are most-sensitive to green light. (This is why the green LED has the highest cd rating)
And I highly doubt anybody outside of a national laboratory has an LED producing 3700cd/m2. I'm pretty sure you meant mcd, which stands for millicandela. (cd = candela)
Two different parts of the Hemp plant make the paper and the oil we're talking about here. The paper comes from the fibers in the stalk, and the oil comes from the hempseeds themselves.
The appeal of hemp isn't in its ability to provide us with one thing, but to provide us effectively with many different things on a yearly (or even more-often) renewable cycle, growable in every state in the USA. Highlighting only one of the benefits of hemp cultivation and its uses in industry without highlighting them all is a demonstration of ignorance.
Hemp, per acre of land, produces four times more fiber usable for paper than do trees. This occurs generally 3-5 times more often because hemp is an annual plant while trees can only be harvested every 3-5 years for paper. That alone should be reason to cultivate hemp in the USA. Not to mention that the seeds of these plants can be harvested without reducing paper production volume, and from these seeds, hempseed oil can be extracted and turned into BioDiesel. So you'd be getting more paper more often in the same amount of space, and free hemp oil as a "waste product" of hemp paper making. Now, try to tell me that isn't just a little appealing.
Also, because of the massive ways in which hemp can suck up CO2 from the atmosphere and the incredible growth rates it can achieve, there is the appeal of a section of farmland grown exclusively to be put in a landfill. That is, you reclaim all that greenhouse CO2 from the atmosphere and bury all that nastyness back inside the earth where it belongs.
Other motivations such as paper, textiles, building materials, composite fibers for cars, and so on? There's a killing to be made in the industrial hemp market because of the two different things the plant produces in quantity: oil and fiber. Oil for things like lubricants, fuels, polymers; fiber for things like fabrics four times softer than cotton, paper, rope, composite materials used to build houses and automobiles, and so forth. The thing to understand is that Industrial-Type Cannabis ("Hemp") and Drug-Type Cannabis (what is commonly called "Marijuana") are two different members of the same plant family.
NOBODY would want to smoke hemp. Seriously, "hemp" is classified as having less than one percent THC to CBD ratio. One type of cannabis gets you high (marijuana) and one doesn't (hemp) and though they look similar and share similar genetic heritage, they are different plants.
It's people who confuse these two DIFFERENT PLANTS who are holding us back from utilizing hemp to revolutionize industry. PRO-hemp doesn't automatically mean PRO-marijuana. PRO-hemp means PRO-HEMP!
Check out www.votehemp.org for more information.
It's actually uninformed people like yourself who accuse pro-hemp legalizers of being shady and dishonest which makes them look shady and dishonest. Please, stop it.
The appeal of hemp is what comes with it. Paper, textiles, building materials, composite fibers, and so on. Algae doesn't make good houses, last I checked.
And 6% of the land area is not that much if each state did its partial share to produce its own power and textiles and etc from the fibers of the hemp plant, making jobs and stimulating all local economies in the process. They would then be energy-independent, have a renewable source of paper, clothing, and so forth, and that wouldn't really be all that bad, would it?
Slashdot Mirror
4800 Degrees Fahrenheit. That's insane. Totally and completely insane.
Why can't they work on reducing friction to conserve fuel and increase speed simultaneously instead of simply focusing on the engine design? It seems to me that some type of atmospheric deflection technology would be more-deserving of DOD dollars than the make-it-so-fast-it-might-spontaneously-combust technology.
Could you use an EM field of some kind to "push" air out of the way? You just need a small gap where there's nothing (a vacuum), say a 1-2mm bubble around the aircraft, in order to slip through the air almost as effortlessly as in space. This technology might be a ways off, but it's far more interesting. It would have applications in a variety of departments, including the leading edge of ships, planes, re-entry vehicles for earth (or interplanetary) landings and so forth. (Not to mention what it'd do for NASCAR)
A parsec is a measure of distance, not time.
s &s ourceid=opera&num=100&ie=utf-8&oe=utf- 8
http://www.google.com/search?q=1+parsec+in+mile
1 Parsec = 1.91735281 × 10^13 miles
Am I the only one that smells civil war coming?
What with dubya trying to figure out how he can postpone the elections as a result of "terrorism" and the government being given nazi-esque power...
I mean, truly, honestly, what happens when people get bullied around to their limits? Well, the AMERICAN people fight back. I think John Kerry said it best in one of his recent speeches; he said something like, "In America, we shouldn't go to war because we want to, but only when we have to."
And friends, I don't know about you, but I see things getting a lot worse before they get better.
Two ways? Only two?
How about option 3: subscription-based software. You don't buy the software once, you buy the 2004 version and you can only use it during 2004. The 2005 version? Only works during 2005! I'm sure you see how this works. They do it now with antivirus software updates. You buy the antivirus software and you get free updates for one year or so, but after that you need to buy the next version.
Since USB can support a multitude of devices, I could even forsee a cheap pass-thru USB device with its own internal clock that the program communicates with in order to verify that the program can still run. Akin to those anti-piracy devices that connected to a serial/parallel port. This would keep people from being able to use the same version continuously just by resetting their clock. Or, just make it mandatory that they have an internet connection available when using the software so the software can phone home and see if it has expired yet.
When the program expires, it would phone home, grab a special code number which you could enter on a website somewhere to print out a coupon to save $20 on your next purchase of the software.
There will always be more than two goddamned ways. Think. outside. the. box.
That's one hell of an idea. I hope the author of Atak doesn't read slashdot. heh.
hey now, those people keep me employed. I *like* charging $45/hr to sit in front of their computer with them and show them how to nuke viruses and spyware and explain why things like defragging regularly is good.
:(
Though, you remind me of this client I had a few weeks ago. The poor fellow actually HAD a burner in his laptop and nobody ever showed him how to burn a CD. He had a ton of pictures on that laptop from a myriad of vacations he took over a period of YEARS, and then his hard drive physically died. I couldn't do a damn thing for him but show him how to back up his files in the future.
Funny, I didn't know "email address" was synonymous with "identity."
When somebody asks for your email address, they're asking for a way to contact you--like a phone number. They're not asking for you to uniquely identify yourself as you would with a driver's license or passport, they're only asking how they can reach you.
Email is not identity, and using a dummy email address is not illegal.
I have forever used only one dummy address, and I forever shall: spam@spam.org :-D
I think people are surprised by content in various shows. The super bowl excitement being the best example. It was supposed to be a nice, enjoyable, sporting, well, sports event--it was not supposed to be a titty show! People with children were watching that, and I (and you!) would be a fool if I (or you!) thought there wasn't at least one little boy who later tried to disrobe a classmate or friend or sibling in a similar manner, to "be like the man on teevee!"
If we had an adequate way to describe persistently the content of a show without violating the content of the show for its viewers, I think people would be more inclined to make their own informed decisions.
You know how the beginning of a show on TV is now accompanied by that little icon in the corner of the screen which gives you the rating of the show? Well why does it have to go away? It doesn't have to stay onscreen, but certainly, the information should be available somewhere: a display on the remote, an LCD on the television itself. something.
But why stop there? How about an itemized list of words and situations and contexts so that people can make their own decisions about what they and their children can watch. I'm in favor of separating the monitoring and censorship features from the screen itself, to prevent children from reading words like "sexual" and the various swear words and so on--something that would appeal to the extremely conservative.
The FCC should not be a regulatory commission, but a standards commission. The people who define "sexual situation" in the context of:
This movie Contains
2 heterosexual sexual situations
4 uses of the word "fuck", 1 in reference to intercourse
2 uses of "dogshit" as a personal insult
And then people can define rules on their system such as "no personal insults" or "no references to intercourse" or whatever. That's how it should be done, goddammit. Digital cable approaches this level of control, but nationwide standards established by the FCC would do wonders for defining various general topics and situations which may be offensive to some viewers, so that those viewers can avoid/filter out programs which involve those things.
Power to the people. The government is supposed to empower us, not control us. The government is a system that is supposed to protect us, not violate us. They're overstepping their bounds and I'm irritated about it.
if you're saying the letters "W", "T", and "F" then yes, I would say you shouldn't. It's pronounced "what the fuck" ;)
I thought there'd be nuclear-powered robots with lasers melting the sand into giant greenhouses first. Greenhouses where we'd grow plants protected from bad radiation and solar storms. We could pump in CO2 from the existing atmosphere to stimulate their growth, venting some of the produced oxygen into a living area for a future manned mission.
"ready" is a question of vision. Nuclear robots, lasers, giant greenhouses, autonomous processes, it's all uncharted territory but there's nothing stopping us from going there besides our own lack of innovation.
Screw the X-prize, I want to see which corporation is first to get a billboard on the moon, and after that, which corporation is first to get to mars. That'll be some fun times, right there.
I'm sick of television. I don't even watch television anymore save for the periodic watching of the news. I hate commercials and I hate mass media and I hate 99% of what's on television these days.
So I say let them have it. Let them take television and censor the absolute shit out of it and make it "morally consumable by the masses" or whatever the fuck they're trying to do. I've got my internet, I've got my open communication and free speech, I've got my encryption and my firewalls and my geeky toys. Let them have television and everything that comes with it, I'll be on teh intarweb!
(note my use of 'shit' and 'fuck' -- two things I cannot do on television. But I can do them here, on TEH INTARWEB!!! Ah, freedom.)
So, opening a store in Iraq would probably teach them a thing or two, no?
don't worry about it, it's merely accidental bashing.
Really, that isn't a bad idea. It doesn't have to be a judge either; how about his daughter? his mother? I'm sure we could turn up the heat on these dumb bastards rather easily.
And moving a phone number doesn't take a change in the configuration of the telephone routers?
Got links? pages with diagrams and such? I've got a lot of spare time and a few old tires I could grind into powder.
As SpaceShipOne has shown us, it's all about baby steps. I'm sure this is a testbed for other kinds of satellites (mars global surveyor, et al) which may not be able to be directly controlled. It may someday be possible to send probes to alpha centauri and the like and having the ability to monitor a planet and "take interest" in things on the macroscopic level is a worthwhile function of a satellite. The "curiosity" of the satellite, however, needs to be in tandem with the curiosity of the scientists/governments/corporations/peoples back home.
As Iraq is showing us, anyone can make an IED, and they don't need rocket engines to do it. With the recent success of SpaceShipOne, I'm sure I'm not the only one wondering what kind of power old tires and laughing gas can provide when they fall into the wrong hands.
Hey wait, can we hit two birds with one stone and sell the ingredients and instructions on mixing rubber particles and N2O to MAKE model rocket engines, thereby skirting the legal restriction? hmmm. Like a website where you can order both ingredients and a reusable mixing chamber + exhaust for them to combust within. It might make model rocketry a little more complicated (hey, this isn't rocket science! oh, wait..) but all things considered, I'm curious what kind of altitude a model rocket can achieve with a propulsion system similar to SpaceShipOne's.
"than"
(don't know if you did that intentionally or not. heh)
As everyone else has pointed out, there are a variety of reasons to go right instead of left: the door might be locked and they may believe the key to be behind the turrets; the window may be unbreakable; the door conceals potential unknown baddies, while the path to the right is in plain sight; and so forth.
The developers are, in a limited extent, gods. They will create this virtual world in a short period of time, comparable to the biblical story of creation. If you want to uphold the biblical parallel, the testers are the Adams and Eves of this new virtual world. Much as god was displaeased at the taking of the apple, the devs are displeased with the taking of the turreted path.
You've got two choices: direct herding (walls/fences, obvious impenetrable obstacles, the dreaded inivisible wall, a giant demon with six heads that instakills you on sight), or information.
In an ideal game the door is opened a little bit or is maybe off its hinges or has a corner blown off or the like, and you can see a light on inside. You whip out your pocket binocs and you don't see anyone inside through the window, so then you make some noise.
This is an option that is seldom presented in games. You can't usually yell, or throw things, or spit on things, or the like. (In the games where you can, it usually achieves little or nothing) It was a while, if you recall, before developers got a handle on the whole "crouching" thing. Your character's basic actions are quite limited, no matter how lifelike he may look and appear.
So, back to the ideal game: You should be able to at any time take any part of your inventory and throw it. In this case, you would throw an extra clip at the door of the room in an attempt to knock it open and attract the attention of any baddies inside, while you cautiously take aim at the door.
If nobody comes, you enter the room. If people come, you open fire.
I'm thinking that they want you to go into the room to the left because there's a switch to disable the turrets on the right. They may indeed need some smarter testers, but they need better possibilities in the game, and they need a way to expose those possibilities to the user.
One option is a "companion character" that accompanies you for the first level and does all the different things that are possible in a situation where you can get an onscreen tip on how to replicate the behavior. That's how you breed some smarter testers, just by building their training into the game's first level.
Then, if these testers were getting into a turret/door scenario on, say, level 3, they should know what to do. Ideally, level 1 and 2 would use the same map, but level 2 in reverse so you can do all of those interactions again towards some functional usefulness so that you're prepared for what the game can offer you by level three. Make the onscreen tips optional past level 3, mandatory on the easiest difficulty.
Your companion character says, "Through the window there, isn't that Tony?" Onscreen tip says "Direct your center of attention (the crosshairs) to the windows and press B to use your binoculars."
Your companion character says "Quiet, listen." OSD says "Direct your center of attention down the hall and press Q to listen."
If people aren't briefed on the mechanics of the game before hand, the game's mechanics will initially be, in their minds, either identical to every other game they've played, or an average of all games they've played recently. If they've just come off a strong binge on a particular game, you're in trouble; in that case, they're predisposed to a certain set of game mechanics, and without proper information they will only interact with the world around them on the level applicable to those game mechanics.
In short: Better on-screen with information about gameplay tactics as well as game functionality. Developer's fault. Better instruction = smarter world inhabitants.
Blue/white/green LEDs tend to require a voltage around 3.5, while red/orange/yellow LEDs tend to require a voltage around 1.9. Finding a bunch of different colors that operate at the same voltage is generally quite difficult.
The "cd" measurement is attuned to the spectral response of the human eye. If the output of the LEDs were radiometrically measured it would give a better inidication of how much overall emission is there. In general though, if you have three equally emissive light sources, one each of red, green and blue, the green one will appear the brightest because our eyes are most-sensitive to green light. (This is why the green LED has the highest cd rating)
And I highly doubt anybody outside of a national laboratory has an LED producing 3700cd/m2. I'm pretty sure you meant mcd, which stands for millicandela. (cd = candela)
Two different parts of the Hemp plant make the paper and the oil we're talking about here. The paper comes from the fibers in the stalk, and the oil comes from the hempseeds themselves.
The appeal of hemp isn't in its ability to provide us with one thing, but to provide us effectively with many different things on a yearly (or even more-often) renewable cycle, growable in every state in the USA. Highlighting only one of the benefits of hemp cultivation and its uses in industry without highlighting them all is a demonstration of ignorance.
Hemp, per acre of land, produces four times more fiber usable for paper than do trees. This occurs generally 3-5 times more often because hemp is an annual plant while trees can only be harvested every 3-5 years for paper. That alone should be reason to cultivate hemp in the USA. Not to mention that the seeds of these plants can be harvested without reducing paper production volume, and from these seeds, hempseed oil can be extracted and turned into BioDiesel. So you'd be getting more paper more often in the same amount of space, and free hemp oil as a "waste product" of hemp paper making. Now, try to tell me that isn't just a little appealing.
Also, because of the massive ways in which hemp can suck up CO2 from the atmosphere and the incredible growth rates it can achieve, there is the appeal of a section of farmland grown exclusively to be put in a landfill. That is, you reclaim all that greenhouse CO2 from the atmosphere and bury all that nastyness back inside the earth where it belongs.
Other motivations such as paper, textiles, building materials, composite fibers for cars, and so on? There's a killing to be made in the industrial hemp market because of the two different things the plant produces in quantity: oil and fiber. Oil for things like lubricants, fuels, polymers; fiber for things like fabrics four times softer than cotton, paper, rope, composite materials used to build houses and automobiles, and so forth. The thing to understand is that Industrial-Type Cannabis ("Hemp") and Drug-Type Cannabis (what is commonly called "Marijuana") are two different members of the same plant family.
NOBODY would want to smoke hemp. Seriously, "hemp" is classified as having less than one percent THC to CBD ratio. One type of cannabis gets you high (marijuana) and one doesn't (hemp) and though they look similar and share similar genetic heritage, they are different plants.
It's people who confuse these two DIFFERENT PLANTS who are holding us back from utilizing hemp to revolutionize industry. PRO-hemp doesn't automatically mean PRO-marijuana. PRO-hemp means PRO-HEMP!
Check out www.votehemp.org for more information.
It's actually uninformed people like yourself who accuse pro-hemp legalizers of being shady and dishonest which makes them look shady and dishonest. Please, stop it.
The appeal of hemp is what comes with it. Paper, textiles, building materials, composite fibers, and so on. Algae doesn't make good houses, last I checked.
And 6% of the land area is not that much if each state did its partial share to produce its own power and textiles and etc from the fibers of the hemp plant, making jobs and stimulating all local economies in the process. They would then be energy-independent, have a renewable source of paper, clothing, and so forth, and that wouldn't really be all that bad, would it?