You'd need to get hold of something they'd handled recently, preferably with a nice shiny glass or plastic surface, like maybe a.... Oh, wait, yeah, a mobile phone.:-)
There are many different loads and orbits. The rocket can launch a lighter load or a lower orbit, and make a successful return, or it can launch a heavy load into a higher orbit, and act as a standard disposable rocket. Once they get a routine started, they can relaunch a rocket multiple times, and when it starts to wear out, use it for one last disposable launch.
OK AC, then please explain where the universe came from
Time itself started with the beginning of the universe. It doesn't make sense to speak of what happened "before" time existed. Your frame of reference simply isn't equipped for asking these kinds of questions.
Again, trees look like the better option for carbon removal.
Trees aren't very efficient at converting energy. Solar panels are much better. The trick, however, is not use electricity to sequester carbon (which is inefficient), but to use solar to replace coal fired plants.
Why can't they just require a login for the iPlayer ? If you have a TV and you pay the license fee, they can send a free login code. If not, you can pay on-line. That would also solve the problem of people living outside the UK who may be interested in watching the shows on-line.
Even major outlets, such as the New York Times, have become incredibly sloppy, publishing a great deal of blatantly garbage content, that five minutes of checking sources and facts would catch.
The funny thing is that the government doesn't even have to accept the cash anymore. As long as other people accept it, it's still useful on the black market.
This reminds of the day I went into the university book store to get a required book for a class. Apparently, they didn't print enough and it was sold out. The clerk told me "you should have come earlier", apparently not realizing that somebody else wouldn't have a book then.
I don't know why this gets downmodded, but according to the bitcoin wiki:
Note that a typical transaction is 500 bytes, so the typical transaction fee for low-priority transactions is 0.1 mBTC (0.0001 BTC), regardless of the number of bitcoins sent.
At current prices, 0.1 mBTC equals about $0.04 for a simple transaction. If your transaction is $1, that means you pay 4% in transaction fees, which is not "fantastically cheap". I can do an electronic bank transfer in the Euro zone for free.
Sure. I have trust because everybody else has it, and it makes no sense for me to be first to abandon my trust.
I can imagine that the trust would rapidly disappear if China stopped purchasing US bonds and assets. If that were to happen, there's not much the US military could do to restore trust.
I don't know why this gets downmodded, but according to the bitcoin wiki:
Note that a typical transaction is 500 bytes, so the typical transaction fee for low-priority transactions is 0.1 mBTC (0.0001 BTC), regardless of the number of bitcoins sent.
At current prices, 0.1 mBTC equals about $0.04 for a simple transaction. If your transaction is $1, that means you pay 4% in transaction fees, which is not "fantastically cheap". I can do an electronic bank transfer in the Euro zone for free.
It's not about force, it's about trust. I'll take your dollars in exchange for work or goods because I trust that someone else will accept my dollars in the future.
Your prices change, either they go up or they go down in response and people react accordingly.
Accordingly means that falling prices should result in a negative interest rate, but you can always get a zero interest rate by keeping the money in a box. This means that in a deflationary environment, you can't borrow (enough) money to invest, and the economy slows down.
Obviously yes. You can't have a fair market without intervention. However, the intervention should be limited to playing the part of "referee", making sure the playing field is level, and everybody sticks to the same fair rules.
And it would include siezing property
Splitting it up doesn't mean it's seized. It just means that you tell companies what they can and cannot do with their property.
and arguably a greater intrusion on liberty
I don't consider the liberty to exploit monopolies very worthy of protecting.
Slashdot Mirror
We already have sat measurements for a few years: http://www.climatecentral.org/...
No reason you can't do both at the same time.
Just being dead exposes you to about the same.
We should not be generating AC power in the first place. DC is much more efficient.
I look forward to your design that can convert generator output to 300kV DC for long distance transmission.
You'd need to get hold of something they'd handled recently, preferably with a nice shiny glass or plastic surface, like maybe a.... Oh, wait, yeah, a mobile phone. :-)
Or you simply cut off their finger.
Actually their one successful landing was from a launch in Florida, but they had enough fuel to return to the launch site.
See this comparison including handy graphic: http://www.popularmechanics.co...
There are many different loads and orbits. The rocket can launch a lighter load or a lower orbit, and make a successful return, or it can launch a heavy load into a higher orbit, and act as a standard disposable rocket. Once they get a routine started, they can relaunch a rocket multiple times, and when it starts to wear out, use it for one last disposable launch.
It's no secret that Firefox is seriously losing market share. Firefox is likely under 8% of the browser market
If you don't mind, I'll wait for Netcraft to confirm this.
OK AC, then please explain where the universe came from
Time itself started with the beginning of the universe. It doesn't make sense to speak of what happened "before" time existed. Your frame of reference simply isn't equipped for asking these kinds of questions.
Why? What's the benefit of getting the carbon from the atmosphere, as opposed to from less energy-intensive sources?
You get much better press.
Again, trees look like the better option for carbon removal.
Trees aren't very efficient at converting energy. Solar panels are much better. The trick, however, is not use electricity to sequester carbon (which is inefficient), but to use solar to replace coal fired plants.
Why can't they just require a login for the iPlayer ? If you have a TV and you pay the license fee, they can send a free login code. If not, you can pay on-line. That would also solve the problem of people living outside the UK who may be interested in watching the shows on-line.
Even major outlets, such as the New York Times, have become incredibly sloppy, publishing a great deal of blatantly garbage content, that five minutes of checking sources and facts would catch.
Thank God we have slashdot.
The funny thing is that the government doesn't even have to accept the cash anymore. As long as other people accept it, it's still useful on the black market.
This reminds of the day I went into the university book store to get a required book for a class. Apparently, they didn't print enough and it was sold out. The clerk told me "you should have come earlier", apparently not realizing that somebody else wouldn't have a book then.
I don't know why this gets downmodded, but according to the bitcoin wiki: Note that a typical transaction is 500 bytes, so the typical transaction fee for low-priority transactions is 0.1 mBTC (0.0001 BTC), regardless of the number of bitcoins sent. At current prices, 0.1 mBTC equals about $0.04 for a simple transaction. If your transaction is $1, that means you pay 4% in transaction fees, which is not "fantastically cheap". I can do an electronic bank transfer in the Euro zone for free.
People also have trust in Swiss franks, perhaps even more than in the US dollar, and they have only a very small military.
Sure. I have trust because everybody else has it, and it makes no sense for me to be first to abandon my trust. I can imagine that the trust would rapidly disappear if China stopped purchasing US bonds and assets. If that were to happen, there's not much the US military could do to restore trust.
Note that a typical transaction is 500 bytes, so the typical transaction fee for low-priority transactions is 0.1 mBTC (0.0001 BTC), regardless of the number of bitcoins sent.
At current prices, 0.1 mBTC equals about $0.04 for a simple transaction. If your transaction is $1, that means you pay 4% in transaction fees, which is not "fantastically cheap". I can do an electronic bank transfer in the Euro zone for free.
Bitcoin transactions have been fantastically cheap, which everyone sensible knew couldn't possibly last.
Actually not. They've been quite expensive, especially for small amounts.
It's not about force, it's about trust. I'll take your dollars in exchange for work or goods because I trust that someone else will accept my dollars in the future.
Your prices change, either they go up or they go down in response and people react accordingly.
Accordingly means that falling prices should result in a negative interest rate, but you can always get a zero interest rate by keeping the money in a box. This means that in a deflationary environment, you can't borrow (enough) money to invest, and the economy slows down.
Except you can't just take something away from a company that owns it.
Not "just", but if companies are violating anti trust laws, you can enforce regulation. It's been done before.
That would be government intervention
Obviously yes. You can't have a fair market without intervention. However, the intervention should be limited to playing the part of "referee", making sure the playing field is level, and everybody sticks to the same fair rules.
And it would include siezing property
Splitting it up doesn't mean it's seized. It just means that you tell companies what they can and cannot do with their property.
and arguably a greater intrusion on liberty
I don't consider the liberty to exploit monopolies very worthy of protecting.