Throughout the twentieth century (and I lived through half of it) we couldn't see forward past 2000, Now we can no longer see backward past the fall of 2001.
Manned ventures into space beyond LEO involve a high degree of personal risk. The US and European governments, sensitive as they are to the feeeee-lings of anti-science Luddites, cannot expose their astronauts to high degrees of risk. If there is to be any future for Americans in space, it will have to be a private one.
1. Do I have to specify the name of the person I want to rub out on the application site, or do I just type it into the iPhone app? 2. Does it do a Soundex match if there is any confusion of names, or do I have to get the SSN? 3. Does it work if he is indoors, or does he have to be outdoors? 4. Do special rules apply if the operation crosses state lines? In California? Day or night? 5. Do I get a choice of weapons? For style, I want a flamethrower. 6. Will it send a confirmation text with a picture?
What the anti-oil people also fail to grasp is not building Keystone does not prevent Canada from exploiting the tar sands. It just means we lose another ally, while China builds the more expensive pipeline and shipping channel through Hudson's Bay.
I fail to see the chain of reasoning here. So we didn't reprocess because we feared proliferation? Then how would our not reprocessing have any effect on the decision of India, et. al. to reprocess for themselves? The Cold War was still in effect at the time of Carter's decision, and since India at the time was aligned with the Soviet bloc, our huffing and puffing about a worldwide ban on reprocessing would probably have spurred any effort by India to reprocess, rather than stopping it.
In any case, proliferation is the weakest of all arguments against reprocessing. Carter could have very reasonably have used the argument that reprocessing was expensive and unnecessary at the time (as it still is) due to the low cost of fresh fuel, and that we would be better off storing the spent fuel for a generation or two until better, cheaper reprocessing tech gets here. Carter's decision to not reprocess was an obvious cave-in to the luddite lobby, which in the absence of any roadmap to reprocessing can claim that "nuclear waste is forever" if we have to store spent fuel until it decays by itself millions of years from now. Hence thosee silly schemes for inventing apocalyptic runes for marking "nuclear waste" so that our distant descendants will remember what it is. What they are not telling us, of course, is that all those years of decaying radioactivity represent the waste of innumerable gigawatts of energy that we could be using in our own century, given eventual reprocessing.
Now that the possibility of anthropogenic warming has become an issue, Carter's decision looks even worse than it did then. Even the left admits that if their worst fears about carbon are verified, humanity may prefer going nuclear to going caveman.
Reprocessing has not been done because Peanuthead declared it to be illegal. Meanwhile there is no rush to reprocess because new fuels is so cheap from bot mined supply and recycled from Cold War weapons through the Megatons to Megawatts program. While we wait for reprocessing to get cheaper and fuel to get more expensive, there's storage at Yucca Mountain, which is finished and waiting to be opened.
Does anyone still use those radically uncomfortable Scandinavian chairs where you sit on your knees? Back in the Seventies, having one of these was synonymous with being the office crank.
Audio only would explain how this recording could have been done unobtrusively with a tablet. Audio might not have had the polished production value of "United Breaks Guitars" but it could still have been a powerful addition to a video of the victim explaining the situation, the school and cop responses, etc.
If I had been that kid, my response to the police bullying that backed up the school bullying would have been to proudly put that video out there on YouTube, with a full and factual description of the police reaction, naming names and quoting the threats. Become such an Internet hot potato that no authority is going to punish you.
I have noted the same problem in the private sector: you have a consumer problem with some large company, which has found that just ignoring your complaint generally makes it go away. After putting up with months of the runaround, you create a "United Breaks Guitars" video and send it viral. THAT gets attention, and the fix you've been looking for.
3D printing is a prototyping technology, not a manufacturing technology. And today's crop of brilliant, low-cost LEDs might help with that dim-field problem cited above.
I would love to see a Constitutional amendment mandating that governments could only borrow for physical infrastructure, which would have to be accounted for in the same way as in the private sector. Given suhc a limitation, Washington could issue bonds to build something like Hoover Dam, but not to feed the non-productive budgets of those three-letter bloodsucker agencies. This wold cause politicians to vie to build things that actually return the value it takes to pay off their bonding. Meanwhile DEA, ATF, FDA and all their useless ilk would be budget-starved into perdition.
KIlling all human life is exactly what the hard-core environmental fringe wants. The more moderate ones will settle for destroying civilization and reducing us to agrarian subsistence. And if you ask them about, say, fish farming as a response to the obvious environmental problem of overfishing, they even come out against the "agrarian" part.
Yes, a key doctrine of the Church of Warminetics is that while all man-emitted carbon released into the environment has immediate effect, any proposed method of re-absorbing the carbon would "take generations" and involve imponderable complexities of a "highly complex and non-linear nature." We Earthlings call this 'having it both ways'.
Orbiting shields? With a sufficiently large space infrastructure, this will become possible at some point. But meanwhile, wouldn't manmade blooms of ocean algae and sulfur seeding be a lot easier to implement?
Slashdot Mirror
Throughout the twentieth century (and I lived through half of it) we couldn't see forward past 2000, Now we can no longer see backward past the fall of 2001.
So why does this system not prevent NASA's robotic missions from working so well?
Manned ventures into space beyond LEO involve a high degree of personal risk. The US and European governments, sensitive as they are to the feeeee-lings of anti-science Luddites, cannot expose their astronauts to high degrees of risk. If there is to be any future for Americans in space, it will have to be a private one.
And this being Portland, it's probable that homeopathy is enforced by city ordinance.
1. Do I have to specify the name of the person I want to rub out on the application site, or do I just type it into the iPhone app?
2. Does it do a Soundex match if there is any confusion of names, or do I have to get the SSN?
3. Does it work if he is indoors, or does he have to be outdoors?
4. Do special rules apply if the operation crosses state lines? In California? Day or night?
5. Do I get a choice of weapons? For style, I want a flamethrower.
6. Will it send a confirmation text with a picture?
What the anti-oil people also fail to grasp is not building Keystone does not prevent Canada from exploiting the tar sands. It just means we lose another ally, while China builds the more expensive pipeline and shipping channel through Hudson's Bay.
I fail to see the chain of reasoning here. So we didn't reprocess because we feared proliferation? Then how would our not reprocessing have any effect on the decision of India, et. al. to reprocess for themselves? The Cold War was still in effect at the time of Carter's decision, and since India at the time was aligned with the Soviet bloc, our huffing and puffing about a worldwide ban on reprocessing would probably have spurred any effort by India to reprocess, rather than stopping it.
In any case, proliferation is the weakest of all arguments against reprocessing. Carter could have very reasonably have used the argument that reprocessing was expensive and unnecessary at the time (as it still is) due to the low cost of fresh fuel, and that we would be better off storing the spent fuel for a generation or two until better, cheaper reprocessing tech gets here. Carter's decision to not reprocess was an obvious cave-in to the luddite lobby, which in the absence of any roadmap to reprocessing can claim that "nuclear waste is forever" if we have to store spent fuel until it decays by itself millions of years from now. Hence thosee silly schemes for inventing apocalyptic runes for marking "nuclear waste" so that our distant descendants will remember what it is. What they are not telling us, of course, is that all those years of decaying radioactivity represent the waste of innumerable gigawatts of energy that we could be using in our own century, given eventual reprocessing.
Now that the possibility of anthropogenic warming has become an issue, Carter's decision looks even worse than it did then. Even the left admits that if their worst fears about carbon are verified, humanity may prefer going nuclear to going caveman.
You're assuming that no Republican will ever be elected again and that Harry Reid will live forever?
Reprocessing has not been done because Peanuthead declared it to be illegal. Meanwhile there is no rush to reprocess because new fuels is so cheap from bot mined supply and recycled from Cold War weapons through the Megatons to Megawatts program. While we wait for reprocessing to get cheaper and fuel to get more expensive, there's storage at Yucca Mountain, which is finished and waiting to be opened.
Yeah, anybody knows that for kernel programming in 2014, you code in Open Office Macro.
Unfortunately, Voice of Linux only has versions for Windows 8 and OS X Mavericks.
Does anyone still use those radically uncomfortable Scandinavian chairs where you sit on your knees? Back in the Seventies, having one of these was synonymous with being the office crank.
If our bodies are intelligently designed, it would be by Microsoft.
Audio only would explain how this recording could have been done unobtrusively with a tablet. Audio might not have had the polished production value of "United Breaks Guitars" but it could still have been a powerful addition to a video of the victim explaining the situation, the school and cop responses, etc.
You can't secretly record someone using a tablet. A smartphone, yes.
You shouldn't have gone to Riyadh High.
If I had been that kid, my response to the police bullying that backed up the school bullying would have been to proudly put that video out there on YouTube, with a full and factual description of the police reaction, naming names and quoting the threats. Become such an Internet hot potato that no authority is going to punish you.
I have noted the same problem in the private sector: you have a consumer problem with some large company, which has found that just ignoring your complaint generally makes it go away. After putting up with months of the runaround, you create a "United Breaks Guitars" video and send it viral. THAT gets attention, and the fix you've been looking for.
3D printing is a prototyping technology, not a manufacturing technology. And today's crop of brilliant, low-cost LEDs might help with that dim-field problem cited above.
Sorry for the type. Actually it goes to 10.
Which is why I'm not the guy who proposed reflectors.
I would love to see a Constitutional amendment mandating that governments could only borrow for physical infrastructure, which would have to be accounted for in the same way as in the private sector. Given suhc a limitation, Washington could issue bonds to build something like Hoover Dam, but not to feed the non-productive budgets of those three-letter bloodsucker agencies. This wold cause politicians to vie to build things that actually return the value it takes to pay off their bonding. Meanwhile DEA, ATF, FDA and all their useless ilk would be budget-starved into perdition.
KIlling all human life is exactly what the hard-core environmental fringe wants. The more moderate ones will settle for destroying civilization and reducing us to agrarian subsistence. And if you ask them about, say, fish farming as a response to the obvious environmental problem of overfishing, they even come out against the "agrarian" part.
Yes, a key doctrine of the Church of Warminetics is that while all man-emitted carbon released into the environment has immediate effect, any proposed method of re-absorbing the carbon would "take generations" and involve imponderable complexities of a "highly complex and non-linear nature." We Earthlings call this 'having it both ways'.
Orbiting shields? With a sufficiently large space infrastructure, this will become possible at some point. But meanwhile, wouldn't manmade blooms of ocean algae and sulfur seeding be a lot easier to implement?
Why wait for Windows 9 when you can get OS X 9 right now? This will require a hardware upgrade, but it's worth it.