That wasn't exactly the style of the time. It was the result of censorship. The comic books of the time were laboring under the Comics Code Authority. The powers that be had decided that comic books were the devil and the big comics companies struck the standard devils bargain to censor themselves to avoid having censorship thrust on them. One bit of fallout from this was the era of Batman comics that the Adam West series was based on.
Graphite is a mixture of all kinds of carbon molecules including buckyballs, carbon nanotubes and graphene. You can eat fistfuls of graphite without serious problems. It's not great for your lungs if inhaled, of course, but getting some in your drinking water isn't going to hurt you.
It does say right in the summary that they are focusing on generation III reactors with passive safety systems. So they are specifically addressing the "50 year old" part you mention. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "insufficient battery backup", but I'm guessing you're referring to the problems powering and operating the cooling pumps. Addressed by the the passive safety systems.
I don't know if that's true, since I didn't bother to read
Obviously, you must be very well informed. Why did you even bother posting a response? You should try to avoid these kinds of compulsions.
Just have to chime in on that blatantly obvious disingenuous remark. I mean, you even cut off the end of the other poster's sentence in the quote, changing its meaning. You did, after all, only post the links so that people could look at the pictures and compare. Reading the articles was unnecessary.
As for your original post... I don't really know what to say about that. One important detail you didn't address when pondering why Samsung changed their design since 1992 is changing technology. An important question for you, do you think that Samsung, or any other company, could have made a tablet that looks like a modern tablet back in 1992?
The simple fact is that tablet design reflects what's possible with technology. Electronic tablets are simply getting closer and closer to the design of non-electric tablets.
The cost of taking down the "whites only" sign in many communities was loss of business from the racists in the community along with the possibility of the premises being vandalized. Taking down the sign (or not having one in the first place) was certainly the moral thing to do, but don't imagine that it was inexpensive, easy or safe in all cases. Overturning institutionalized racism is not an easy thing. Having laws in place forcing store owners to take the sign down levelled the playing field.
I'll try to make this short as well. Spirit was launched on the 10th of June and landed on Mars on the 4th of January. That's six months and 24 days. Opportunity was 7th of July to 25th of January, so six months and 18 days. There's nothing special about a pressurized craft that would cause it to magically take longer. It's obvious that _you_ have no knowledge about this and can't be bothered to do the most basic research. When you're declaring something to be impossible it's a good idea to at least check to see if it's been done. You remind me of sophists back in the 19th century claiming that a human travelling faster than a horse would die (body can't take the stresses, air sucked out of lungs, etc.) while ignoring the fact that, thanks to sports like skiing, humans have been surviving those kinds of speeds for millennia.
Sadly, there's a very good chance that we won't go to Mars in our lifetimes as you say, but it's not due to technical infeasibility or microgravity/space rocks/radiation. It's due to lack of will, and the existence of wilfully ignorant naysayers like you.
I carefully read your response and it boils down to dismissal, a lot of denial, and some delusion.
I'm not in a very good mood today, so I'm just going to blunt, rude, and not sugar-coat anything. You're an idiot. I'm not delusional. I am dismissing and denying your claims, however. I'm dismissing and denying based on solid empirical evidence, however. Unlike you, I'm also not moving my goalposts, you explicitly stated "anyone going on that death trap is going to die". You don't seem to be sticking by that statement, now you just seem to be saying that a mission to Mars might be dangerous. Well duh! Do you think it's a revelation that human spaceflight can be difficult and dangerous? We know that. The three problems you mentioned are real problems, they're just not such large threats that they guaranty death for anyone going on such a mission. Not by a long shot. Death from equipment failure is far more likely.
1) Your assumptions about long term exposure to micro-gravity is mostly a denial of the problem. Not a working solution. We know that people react differently to different factors and to state that everyone, in particular the people landing on Mars, will be just fine after such a prolonged period of being in micro-gravity is simply a dismissal of the problem. If you've seen video of people that have returned from long term micro-gravity exposure experiments, you'd realize they are non-functional. They can't move. They can't stand. They need to be carried. While I'll admit, the effect may be less in a lower gravity environment like Mars, I don't believe you have any idea how long it will take for the each of crew to become functional again after such a long exposure. And it may be deadly to have the crew non-functional too in case there is an emergency. Also, don't forget it is a year back too. The long term effects of a 2 years of micro-gravity exposure could be deadly if the crew actually made it back to Earth alive too.
My "assumptions" about long term exposure to micro-gravity are not assumptions. Forty years ago they would have been assumptions. Today they're pretty solidly proven facts. Astronauts returning after a long time (or even a short time) in microgravity do indeed have trouble standing/walking/etc. I'm not denying that. But it's only for a short period of time. None of them have ended up bed-ridden and most are walking within a few hours. After months in space the astronauts are out of practice in balance and the coordination of all their muscles required to stand and walk. Just like riding a bicycle, it all comes back quickly. The astronauts muscles are weakened, but not enough that they don't have the strength to stand. Even in the unlikely case that the astronauts can't walk for days after landing, so what? Yes, if an emergency occurs, it could be bad for them, but they're going to be in a situation where that kind of emergency will be fatal no matter what they do. If they have to lie around for a few days before getting up and walking, then so be it, that can be part of the mission. It's just not very likely.
Astronauts travelling to Mars on the Mars Direct mission would spend about 1 year in microgravity, not two. And that 1 year combines the trip there with the return trip. The plan is for a 6 month flight to Mars, then 18 months on the surface, then 6 months back. So the astronauts arriving on Mars would have spent less time in microgravity than many other astronauts have already survived. The surface of Mars is not a microgravity environment so the 1 year they would actually spend in microgravity is still less than other astronauts have survived. Your attempt to spin it as if it would be two continuous years in microgravity is either ignorant or dishonest and possibly both. There is an open question of whether the lower gravity of Mars might also cause health problems, but it seems unlikely that it would be as severe as microgravity and might well be entirely mitigated by the simple use of arm and ankle weig
Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about.
Wow. Ok.
1) Astronauts that travel for a year without gravity to Mars (which has gravity) will be non-functional in a gravity environment. They will need to be exposed to a gravity environment to be able to perform their mission. Otherwise, they'll be bed ridden when they get to Mars.
Valeri Polyakov was able to walk within a matter of hours after returning from his 437 days in space. I'm pretty sure there hasn't been a single astronaut who has actually ended up "bed-ridden" after any stay in space. There's a short period of adaptation, then they're fine. Your musings on this subject might be worth listening to if humans had never gone into space. Indeed, before we actually put anyone into migrogravity for a prolonged period of time, there were perfectly valid theories that the human body would simply stop working and all astronauts in low-G would die. Then we actually started putting people into space and those theories were disproven. We have 51 years of data on humans in space to look at. So, while your theory about what would happen to Mars astronauts due to prolonged microgravity would have been something to consider decades ago, at this point in time, it is simply ignorant.
Also, Mars has about 1/3rd the surface gravity of Earth. That's going to reduce the adaptation/recovery time for the astronauts even more.
Now, I'm not claiming that the micro-gravity issue isn't a problem for astronauts. The long-term health effects are something to consider. The astronauts should be doped up with bone loss medication and on a strict excercise regimen for the entire trip both to ensure their health immediately after landing and also long after their mission as they age. But it's not going to magically make space travel impossible.
2) Robots are not people. The astronauts will be travelling outside of the Earth's magnetic field for the period of a year and they will be exposed to many solar flares during that time. It is not a matter of luck. There is a 100% chance they'll be hit by high doses of solar radiation from these events. This is not a large concern within the Earth's magnetic field. However, this would be deadly to anyone travelling outside of that field and was exposed without significant radiation shielding.
Sigh. I know that robots are not people. The point was that the robots have made the exact same trip and carry instruments for measuring radiation and therefore the expected radiation doses for such a trip are not a mystery. As it turns out, these known quantities of radiation are well within the levels human beings can survive. We've been actively working with radiation for at least 100 years and even though many stupid things have been done with it (actually, it might be because of all the stupid things that have been done) we now have a pretty good idea about the health effects of radiation.
The protection of the Earth's magnetic field is nice. Even without it, however, astronauts inside a flying tin can with a dedicated "storm cellar" for strong solar flares are going to be just fine. Barring an extremely unlikely massive solar flare aimed precisely at them the astronauts could stay out of the storm cellar during flares and be just fine on the short term with nearly 100% certainty but with mildly increased cancer risk later in life.
Your concerns about radiation belong with your concerns about microgravity back in an age before we'd actually sent plenty of people and machines into space to measure and experiment. Radiation is a real health concern, but even the most cautious scientists (who actually know what they're talking about) have to concede that the typical radiation levels for such a mission are extremely unlikely to be fatal during the mission itself. Your radiation panic is founded in ignorance.
3) Micro-meteorites. Again, this demonstrates you have no clue that you know what you
Mercury capsules massed just a little bit more than the Mars science lab. There seems to be no good reason you couldn't land supplies, habitat, etc. in separate loads and even completely separate missions then land the astronauts packed in a sardine can roughly the size of the Mars Science Lab.
It doesn't even pretend to address the big three problems that is going to kill anyone going to Mars (the lack of gravity, radiation from the Sun, and micro-meteorites
Ummm, haven't those three big problems been addressed? People have survived for years in microgravity on space stations. It's not terrific for their long-term health, but it's nowhere near fatal.
As for radiation, it's not as if the approximate amount of radiation the astronauts would be exposed to is a mystery. Various probes have been travelling to Mars since before I was born and most or all of them have had various kinds of radiation detectors. Barring some very bad luck with an unprecedented massive solar flare or a nearby supernova, the levels of radiation the astronauts would be exposed to should increase their chances of getting cancer by a few percentage points at worst.
The micro-meteorites threat is the most ridiculous one you mentioned. Once again, plenty of spacecraft have been sent to Mars and micro-meteorites haven't been a significant problem for them either in transit or on the surface. The various Mars rovers seem to have done quite well and not been destroyed by micro-meteorites. Also, since Mars has an atmosphere, micrometeorites are a non-issue. Bigger meteorites maybe, but a meteorite the size of a grain of sand entering the atmosphere of Mars is either going to burn up or be slowed down enough that it's not going to strike hard enough to do any damage when it reaches the surface.
Honestly, where did you come up with this nonsense?
That was the problem, yes. The space program basically needed warm bodies in good health to sit in a sealed up tin can without freaking out excessively over the danger. The air force pilots they tapped for that had those qualities, but were primarily pilots. They were all essentially overqualified for the job. There is a (dramatized, obviously) scene from the movie _The Right Stuff_ where the pilots demand a window and manual controls. While the movie is just a movie, it is somewhat based on reality.
Do you have any actual evidence that any tech for this launch was "stolen" from any other country. For that matter, have you considered the irony of accusing China of "stealing" rocket technology from other regions of the world?
This is not because men discriminate women, which is a stupid notion
The rest of what you said was a bit tainted by this little statement. There's plenty of discrimination by men (generally speaking) both throughout history and in the present day. In the particular field we're discussing, the US specifically discriminated against women through the early history of the space program when all the astronauts came from an air force background.
Of course, there are plenty of countries that do have extradition treaties with the US and there have probably been Stuxnet and Flame infections in every single one of them.
The arbitrarily high thing is a nice rationalization, but horizontal real estate and vertical real estate are essentially the same thing in an apartment building. I'll take the two storey apartment over the one story one with the sections that slide away into a bunch of dead-space compartments. Another possibility has occurred to me though. The extra area those things slide away into might not be dead space, but might be used for utilities. What sort of utilities is anyone's guess. If every apartment is like his, then that's a lot more room for utilities than a modern apartment building uses, but who knows what futuristic stuff they might have in there. Maybe, for example, those flying cars don't actually stay up by themselves and all the buildings are full of magnetic (or other) field generators that keep the cars flying. Or maybe the buildings are individually self-sustaining and they do their own power generation, sewerage treatment, even farming in those dead spaces. So, I guess there are ways to explain around it.
It's especially strange when you consider the "night of the long knives". Oh wait, no it isn't, since the party was run by a bunch of cynical, lying manipulators willing to use every hook and deception to propel themselves to power.
Also, where exactly did that shower go to when it slid away? Same for the rack that dropped down from the ceiling that he put that gun in. I think the mattress slid in and out of the wall as well. So, what was the deal? There was no indication that they had any transcendentally dimensional (bigger on the inside) technology, so there needed to be real spaces that these things were sliding away into. Was there just a bunch of pointlessly wasted space in that apartment building? Or were the apartments around him just really unlucky and had to put up with his appliances and so forth violating their personal space constantly? Or did he share his refrigerator, shower, bed, and gun-laden shelving with his neighbours?
I'm not sure if you're being facetious or not, but both those pdfs you link to debunk the claims of “Dust to Dust: The Energy Cost of New Vehicles From Concept to Disposal” from CNW Marketing Research.
The library is GPL, not LGPL. There may be an argument against mere linking being a violation with standard libraries, but when the library is being distributed as part of the application, that argument falls a little flat.
What about the Red Baron? Isn't he a contender for most famous pilot ever (even if most people don't know his actual name)? I think we can agree that Amelia Earhart is _one_ of the most famous pilots ever and that there probably isn't one singular "most famous pilot ever".
Slashdot Mirror
In this context, a ward is a foster kid.
That wasn't exactly the style of the time. It was the result of censorship. The comic books of the time were laboring under the Comics Code Authority. The powers that be had decided that comic books were the devil and the big comics companies struck the standard devils bargain to censor themselves to avoid having censorship thrust on them. One bit of fallout from this was the era of Batman comics that the Adam West series was based on.
Smaller than water molecules? There aren't really a lot of types of molecules smaller. Is there a lot of call for filtering hydrogen gas out of water?
Graphite is a mixture of all kinds of carbon molecules including buckyballs, carbon nanotubes and graphene. You can eat fistfuls of graphite without serious problems. It's not great for your lungs if inhaled, of course, but getting some in your drinking water isn't going to hurt you.
It does say right in the summary that they are focusing on generation III reactors with passive safety systems. So they are specifically addressing the "50 year old" part you mention. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "insufficient battery backup", but I'm guessing you're referring to the problems powering and operating the cooling pumps. Addressed by the the passive safety systems.
I don't know if that's true, since I didn't bother to read
Obviously, you must be very well informed. Why did you even bother posting a response? You should try to avoid these kinds of compulsions.
Just have to chime in on that blatantly obvious disingenuous remark. I mean, you even cut off the end of the other poster's sentence in the quote, changing its meaning. You did, after all, only post the links so that people could look at the pictures and compare. Reading the articles was unnecessary.
As for your original post... I don't really know what to say about that. One important detail you didn't address when pondering why Samsung changed their design since 1992 is changing technology. An important question for you, do you think that Samsung, or any other company, could have made a tablet that looks like a modern tablet back in 1992?
The simple fact is that tablet design reflects what's possible with technology. Electronic tablets are simply getting closer and closer to the design of non-electric tablets.
The cost of taking down the "whites only" sign in many communities was loss of business from the racists in the community along with the possibility of the premises being vandalized. Taking down the sign (or not having one in the first place) was certainly the moral thing to do, but don't imagine that it was inexpensive, easy or safe in all cases. Overturning institutionalized racism is not an easy thing. Having laws in place forcing store owners to take the sign down levelled the playing field.
I'll try to make this short as well. Spirit was launched on the 10th of June and landed on Mars on the 4th of January. That's six months and 24 days. Opportunity was 7th of July to 25th of January, so six months and 18 days. There's nothing special about a pressurized craft that would cause it to magically take longer. It's obvious that _you_ have no knowledge about this and can't be bothered to do the most basic research. When you're declaring something to be impossible it's a good idea to at least check to see if it's been done. You remind me of sophists back in the 19th century claiming that a human travelling faster than a horse would die (body can't take the stresses, air sucked out of lungs, etc.) while ignoring the fact that, thanks to sports like skiing, humans have been surviving those kinds of speeds for millennia.
Sadly, there's a very good chance that we won't go to Mars in our lifetimes as you say, but it's not due to technical infeasibility or microgravity/space rocks/radiation. It's due to lack of will, and the existence of wilfully ignorant naysayers like you.
I carefully read your response and it boils down to dismissal, a lot of denial, and some delusion.
I'm not in a very good mood today, so I'm just going to blunt, rude, and not sugar-coat anything. You're an idiot. I'm not delusional. I am dismissing and denying your claims, however. I'm dismissing and denying based on solid empirical evidence, however. Unlike you, I'm also not moving my goalposts, you explicitly stated "anyone going on that death trap is going to die". You don't seem to be sticking by that statement, now you just seem to be saying that a mission to Mars might be dangerous. Well duh! Do you think it's a revelation that human spaceflight can be difficult and dangerous? We know that. The three problems you mentioned are real problems, they're just not such large threats that they guaranty death for anyone going on such a mission. Not by a long shot. Death from equipment failure is far more likely.
1) Your assumptions about long term exposure to micro-gravity is mostly a denial of the problem. Not a working solution. We know that people react differently to different factors and to state that everyone, in particular the people landing on Mars, will be just fine after such a prolonged period of being in micro-gravity is simply a dismissal of the problem. If you've seen video of people that have returned from long term micro-gravity exposure experiments, you'd realize they are non-functional. They can't move. They can't stand. They need to be carried. While I'll admit, the effect may be less in a lower gravity environment like Mars, I don't believe you have any idea how long it will take for the each of crew to become functional again after such a long exposure. And it may be deadly to have the crew non-functional too in case there is an emergency.
Also, don't forget it is a year back too. The long term effects of a 2 years of micro-gravity exposure could be deadly if the crew actually made it back to Earth alive too.
My "assumptions" about long term exposure to micro-gravity are not assumptions. Forty years ago they would have been assumptions. Today they're pretty solidly proven facts. Astronauts returning after a long time (or even a short time) in microgravity do indeed have trouble standing/walking/etc. I'm not denying that. But it's only for a short period of time. None of them have ended up bed-ridden and most are walking within a few hours. After months in space the astronauts are out of practice in balance and the coordination of all their muscles required to stand and walk. Just like riding a bicycle, it all comes back quickly. The astronauts muscles are weakened, but not enough that they don't have the strength to stand. Even in the unlikely case that the astronauts can't walk for days after landing, so what? Yes, if an emergency occurs, it could be bad for them, but they're going to be in a situation where that kind of emergency will be fatal no matter what they do. If they have to lie around for a few days before getting up and walking, then so be it, that can be part of the mission. It's just not very likely.
Astronauts travelling to Mars on the Mars Direct mission would spend about 1 year in microgravity, not two. And that 1 year combines the trip there with the return trip. The plan is for a 6 month flight to Mars, then 18 months on the surface, then 6 months back. So the astronauts arriving on Mars would have spent less time in microgravity than many other astronauts have already survived. The surface of Mars is not a microgravity environment so the 1 year they would actually spend in microgravity is still less than other astronauts have survived. Your attempt to spin it as if it would be two continuous years in microgravity is either ignorant or dishonest and possibly both. There is an open question of whether the lower gravity of Mars might also cause health problems, but it seems unlikely that it would be as severe as microgravity and might well be entirely mitigated by the simple use of arm and ankle weig
Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about.
Wow. Ok.
1) Astronauts that travel for a year without gravity to Mars (which has gravity) will be non-functional in a gravity environment. They will need to be exposed to a gravity environment to be able to perform their mission. Otherwise, they'll be bed ridden when they get to Mars.
Valeri Polyakov was able to walk within a matter of hours after returning from his 437 days in space. I'm pretty sure there hasn't been a single astronaut who has actually ended up "bed-ridden" after any stay in space. There's a short period of adaptation, then they're fine. Your musings on this subject might be worth listening to if humans had never gone into space. Indeed, before we actually put anyone into migrogravity for a prolonged period of time, there were perfectly valid theories that the human body would simply stop working and all astronauts in low-G would die. Then we actually started putting people into space and those theories were disproven. We have 51 years of data on humans in space to look at. So, while your theory about what would happen to Mars astronauts due to prolonged microgravity would have been something to consider decades ago, at this point in time, it is simply ignorant.
Also, Mars has about 1/3rd the surface gravity of Earth. That's going to reduce the adaptation/recovery time for the astronauts even more.
Now, I'm not claiming that the micro-gravity issue isn't a problem for astronauts. The long-term health effects are something to consider. The astronauts should be doped up with bone loss medication and on a strict excercise regimen for the entire trip both to ensure their health immediately after landing and also long after their mission as they age. But it's not going to magically make space travel impossible.
2) Robots are not people. The astronauts will be travelling outside of the Earth's magnetic field for the period of a year and they will be exposed to many solar flares during that time. It is not a matter of luck. There is a 100% chance they'll be hit by high doses of solar radiation from these events. This is not a large concern within the Earth's magnetic field. However, this would be deadly to anyone travelling outside of that field and was exposed without significant radiation shielding.
Sigh. I know that robots are not people. The point was that the robots have made the exact same trip and carry instruments for measuring radiation and therefore the expected radiation doses for such a trip are not a mystery. As it turns out, these known quantities of radiation are well within the levels human beings can survive. We've been actively working with radiation for at least 100 years and even though many stupid things have been done with it (actually, it might be because of all the stupid things that have been done) we now have a pretty good idea about the health effects of radiation.
The protection of the Earth's magnetic field is nice. Even without it, however, astronauts inside a flying tin can with a dedicated "storm cellar" for strong solar flares are going to be just fine. Barring an extremely unlikely massive solar flare aimed precisely at them the astronauts could stay out of the storm cellar during flares and be just fine on the short term with nearly 100% certainty but with mildly increased cancer risk later in life.
Your concerns about radiation belong with your concerns about microgravity back in an age before we'd actually sent plenty of people and machines into space to measure and experiment. Radiation is a real health concern, but even the most cautious scientists (who actually know what they're talking about) have to concede that the typical radiation levels for such a mission are extremely unlikely to be fatal during the mission itself. Your radiation panic is founded in ignorance.
3) Micro-meteorites. Again, this demonstrates you have no clue that you know what you
Mercury capsules massed just a little bit more than the Mars science lab. There seems to be no good reason you couldn't land supplies, habitat, etc. in separate loads and even completely separate missions then land the astronauts packed in a sardine can roughly the size of the Mars Science Lab.
It doesn't even pretend to address the big three problems that is going to kill anyone going to Mars (the lack of gravity, radiation from the Sun, and micro-meteorites
Ummm, haven't those three big problems been addressed? People have survived for years in microgravity on space stations. It's not terrific for their long-term health, but it's nowhere near fatal.
As for radiation, it's not as if the approximate amount of radiation the astronauts would be exposed to is a mystery. Various probes have been travelling to Mars since before I was born and most or all of them have had various kinds of radiation detectors. Barring some very bad luck with an unprecedented massive solar flare or a nearby supernova, the levels of radiation the astronauts would be exposed to should increase their chances of getting cancer by a few percentage points at worst.
The micro-meteorites threat is the most ridiculous one you mentioned. Once again, plenty of spacecraft have been sent to Mars and micro-meteorites haven't been a significant problem for them either in transit or on the surface. The various Mars rovers seem to have done quite well and not been destroyed by micro-meteorites. Also, since Mars has an atmosphere, micrometeorites are a non-issue. Bigger meteorites maybe, but a meteorite the size of a grain of sand entering the atmosphere of Mars is either going to burn up or be slowed down enough that it's not going to strike hard enough to do any damage when it reaches the surface.
Honestly, where did you come up with this nonsense?
That was the problem, yes. The space program basically needed warm bodies in good health to sit in a sealed up tin can without freaking out excessively over the danger. The air force pilots they tapped for that had those qualities, but were primarily pilots. They were all essentially overqualified for the job. There is a (dramatized, obviously) scene from the movie _The Right Stuff_ where the pilots demand a window and manual controls. While the movie is just a movie, it is somewhat based on reality.
Do you have any actual evidence that any tech for this launch was "stolen" from any other country. For that matter, have you considered the irony of accusing China of "stealing" rocket technology from other regions of the world?
This is not because men discriminate women, which is a stupid notion
The rest of what you said was a bit tainted by this little statement. There's plenty of discrimination by men (generally speaking) both throughout history and in the present day. In the particular field we're discussing, the US specifically discriminated against women through the early history of the space program when all the astronauts came from an air force background.
I thought Your Guys had control sticks mainly to assuage their egos.
Anybody that seriously allergic should be living in a plastic bubble. Otherwise their chances of being dead are very close to 100%.
Of course, there are plenty of countries that do have extradition treaties with the US and there have probably been Stuxnet and Flame infections in every single one of them.
The arbitrarily high thing is a nice rationalization, but horizontal real estate and vertical real estate are essentially the same thing in an apartment building. I'll take the two storey apartment over the one story one with the sections that slide away into a bunch of dead-space compartments. Another possibility has occurred to me though. The extra area those things slide away into might not be dead space, but might be used for utilities. What sort of utilities is anyone's guess. If every apartment is like his, then that's a lot more room for utilities than a modern apartment building uses, but who knows what futuristic stuff they might have in there. Maybe, for example, those flying cars don't actually stay up by themselves and all the buildings are full of magnetic (or other) field generators that keep the cars flying. Or maybe the buildings are individually self-sustaining and they do their own power generation, sewerage treatment, even farming in those dead spaces. So, I guess there are ways to explain around it.
It's especially strange when you consider the "night of the long knives". Oh wait, no it isn't, since the party was run by a bunch of cynical, lying manipulators willing to use every hook and deception to propel themselves to power.
Also, where exactly did that shower go to when it slid away? Same for the rack that dropped down from the ceiling that he put that gun in. I think the mattress slid in and out of the wall as well. So, what was the deal? There was no indication that they had any transcendentally dimensional (bigger on the inside) technology, so there needed to be real spaces that these things were sliding away into. Was there just a bunch of pointlessly wasted space in that apartment building? Or were the apartments around him just really unlucky and had to put up with his appliances and so forth violating their personal space constantly? Or did he share his refrigerator, shower, bed, and gun-laden shelving with his neighbours?
I'm not sure if you're being facetious or not, but both those pdfs you link to debunk the claims of “Dust to Dust: The Energy Cost of New Vehicles
From Concept to Disposal” from CNW Marketing Research.
The library is GPL, not LGPL. There may be an argument against mere linking being a violation with standard libraries, but when the library is being distributed as part of the application, that argument falls a little flat.
What about the Red Baron? Isn't he a contender for most famous pilot ever (even if most people don't know his actual name)? I think we can agree that Amelia Earhart is _one_ of the most famous pilots ever and that there probably isn't one singular "most famous pilot ever".
Presumably this would need to be coupled with a storage bank of batteries, or something like that to meet peaks of demand.