Physicists, and to a lesser extent astronomers, have a real problem starting with the assumption that the universe may be populated by species which have evolved there technology and intelligence to the limits allowed by physical laws...
That's mostly because there isn't any known way of breaking physical laws. Every example discovered to date has turned out to be evidence that we failed to understand the law completely, not that it was broken.
Not to mention that a Matrioshka Brain at best merely bends the laws a touch, not breaks them.
A ship HAS to be registered and carry the flag of SOME nation, and it will be subject to the laws of that country. So a ship is no more or less outside the law than if you built your data center in that country.
That's true, but just as countries offering flags of convenience (Liberia, Cambodia) are happy to do away with other hassles shipowners don't like (taxes, safety regulations, inspections) I'm sure they'd be willing to accommodate Google's needs in the very unlikely event that this happens.
The downside of that is that ruling regulations with regards to safety, environment, etc... are not that of flag nation - but that of the nation that controls the water the ship is operating within. If you fail to comply, and thus represent a danger to persons or the environment in local waters, the nation controlling the local waters is within it's rights to deny you entrance or in exceptional cases seize the offending vessel. (And the US and pretty much every other developed nations exercise those rights on a regular basis.)
In addition, if the ship is insured (and a multi million data center will be), then you have to deal with the environmental, safety, and inspection requirements imposed by the insurance company. And when dealing with Lloyd's or any other major insurer, those requirements can (and often are) quite stringent.
Then there are international conventions such as SOLAS and ISPS...
The freedom offered by a flag of convenience is much exaggerated.
Disclaimer: IANAL, but I have actually studied these issues.
Other than the fact that meets essentially none of the [laughably hard to meet I grant] criteria set by the OP.
It's not reasonably lucrative, in fact the pay is mediocre at best when figure everything in. Doing trade shows and fairs requires a specific time commitment. It's not doable from a hotel room at all. Nor is it particularly geeky - being largely rote. (Yeah, you can break the rote - but most of your customers will mostly want more of the same.)
Not to mention that as the economy worsens, not only are more and more people turning to 'crafty' sidelines to make a few extra bucks (which means you have a lot of competition), your customer base is also slowly evaporating.
Despite all that - you can make good money in soap if you work your ass off, but it's not a part time commitment and you aren't paying for a serious remodel unless you are one of the one-in-a-zillion soapers who hit it big.
(Disclaimer: I am a part time soaper and follow the soap boards.)
If this is a crime so is alerting your neighbor that their door is unlocked while they were gone.
Except he didn't "alert his neighbor". He opened the door (which he has no business even trying to do in the first place), and then riffled through the neighbors desk, refrigerator, garage, and basement. Before leaving he made a copy of the front door key, installed taps on the phones, a webcam in the bathroom. Then he told the neighbor that his door was unlocked, his checkbook needed balancing, his taste in soda abominable, his garage was a mess, and the furnace filters needed cleaning.
Why would they have to do that? It seems like they'd gain more fans and get continued community support by not-forking.
HP isn't interested in gaining fans or community support, at least not in the (relatively small) geek community. HP wants to sell lots, and lots, and lots of machines and support contracts - which they can't do without proceeding as the grandparent describes.
Don't you need water to make electricity with a nuclear reactor, and also to cool the core?
Yes, kinda. The heat transfer material you use in the loops is chosen using a variety of criteria - you can also use gases or liquid metals. But, the loops are closed so you don't need to add any more after the initial loadout.
Ah yes, the editor is at fault. Google can't possibly be at fault. Hint: stories from reputable sources virtually always have a date attached to them (exceptions are incredibly rare) - for copyright purposes if nothing else. A story without a date should have been a major red flag for the bot. Period.
One: NASA uses public property to allow private commerce, encouraging it in fact. (I remember they were quite impressed with SpaceShipOne.)
Two: NASA keeps private rocketry from injuring themselves or others by using an wide, secure area intended for rocket flight.
Cape Canaveral belongs to the USAF, not NASA.
Three: The location is a tourist area, giving the business an opportunity to gain needed funds from spectators.
Um, how? It's not like you can charge admission to see something visible for a hundred miles. Range safety regs keep everyone so far back that you might as well watch it from the veranda of a hotel on the Indian River where you can keep your cooler handy. Not to mention that one of the few problems SpaceX doesn't have is lack of cash.
Maybe, but there are good reasons for trying to launch at the lower latitudes. The amount of fuel needed to get into orbit is lower meaning that you can launch heavier payloads.
That's only true if you are launching from a lower latitude site into a low inclination orbit. The higher your orbital inclination, the less gain you get from latitude regardless of your latitude.
Once again, Slashdot gives Google a free pass - blaming everyone and his brother but Google...
Yet it never occurs to them to realize that this shows a major bug in the bot, one with potentially far reaching implications... The bot failed to error out when it did not find a date on the story, instead defaulting to today's date. Sure, there are guys up the line who share some of the fault, but bottom line - Google screwed up. Badly.
Re:Ignorance vs. the Unknown
on
LHC Success!
·
· Score: 1
Just remember - when they tested the first atomic bomb, they didn't know if it would ignite the atmosphere or not.
Actually, they knew damn well that it wouldn't. They'd already studied the issue and found it impossible.
The loons get airplay because the loony airplay gets the ratings - and TV/radio is about ad revenue first and actual content second.
The supposedly smart folks making jokes and playing to ignorance rather than spreading truth aren't helping.
In general, all things being equal, with typical usage, you will ALWAYS create less pollution with a plug-in-hybrid than with a non-hybrid.
Summary and translation: In general, all things being equal, and depending on a large number of questionable assumptions. You will generate less pollution with a hybrid. Maybe..
After RTFA/shock, the focus seems to be not on the fact they survived in space but more the fact that they survived being dosed repeteadly with huge amounts of radiation, without any apparent damage to the DNA structure.
Given the low survival rate however, one wonders if that was merely chance.
There are serious drawbacks, but mostly they aren't actually Google's fault.
The problem is, this kind of preservation costs serious money - so it's only done once from one master. Then that one master is distributed widely.
An anecdote from the early 90's, when moving newspaper archives onto microfiche really got started in a serious way. A friend was doing research for a college thesis, and the microfiche copy at his university of an obscure and long defunct western paper was missing a page (a page of the newspaper had been lost sometime in the past and thus was not in the microfiche copy) - the precise page he needed in fact. So he called around and got photocopies (real photocopies back then) from other universities whose libraries held microfiche copies of that newspaper.
Each and every one of them was missing the same page.
Turns out one library had paid to have their archives copied onto microfiche - and then recouped their costs by selling copies. Each and every library that had held dead tree copies had replaced them with this microfiche and then heaved the hardcopies into the dumpster.
That would be akin to pumping money into the Wright Brothers in the hopes of getting the 747 faster.
Which, in all likelihood, would work. With sufficient funding you can build more than one model and test several ideas in parallel, and hire engineers to solve solve details in one model while you work on another.
You don't need to build more than one model, or test more than one idea in parallel. All that does is burn cash without increasing the speed of progress one whit. SpaceX's problems lie in basic engineering, basic technology, and the fact that they are at the bottom of a steep and unforgiving learning curve. Extra cash solves none of these.
but the research they do before that will help advance the field
The field isn't in need of advancement or research - and the wrongheaded belief that it is has held back space development for decades. The field needs development and experience.
The Soyuz design is the most tested manned flight system out there.
Not even remotely, the current mark of the design only has thirteen flights. Soyuz, overall, only has 90 odd flights *total* as compared to the Shuttle which is up around 120.
So while yes it may be old and crappy, its got a solid reputation.
A reputation totally undeserved and based on many people being utterly ignorant of the history of Soyuz - which includes a long series of dangerous near misses, total mission failures, and landing issues. Three of the last five landings have had serious failures!
Not to mention that it is cheap, and fast to launch.
Yeah, it's cheap. So is a Yugo or a Vespa scooter. You get what you pay for.
Nobody did sufficient forward planning to replace the space shuttle... planning that should have begun no later than the day it first launched.
In that, you are wrong. There's been plenty of planning, plenty of studies, plenty of groundwork... But Congress has steadily declined to fund anything other than the status quo, and successive Administrations haven't been inclined to push the issue.
That would be akin to pumping money into the Wright Brothers in the hopes of getting the 747 faster. The problem isn't that SpaceX lacks cash, the problem is that they aren't anywhere near a booster to replace the Soyuz let alone a capsule to replace the Soyuz. (Yes, the Russians call the booster 'Soyuz' and the capsule 'Soyuz'.)
Techies are hired for their technical knowledge, not their fluency in English
Techies are hired as professionals. Part of being professional is reasonable fluency in the language spoken at your place of work or in the language spoken by the people you are expected to deal with in the course of your work.
Your apparent refusal to translate my previous answer in dutch illustrates my point: it is pretty arrogant to demand foreigners to speak your language flawlessly when communicating with you.
This conversation was, and is, being conducted in English. The arrogant ass in this conversation is the one who refused to continue the conversation in the original language without consulting other parties in the conversation. The ignorant ass in this conversation is the one that believes such a switch 'proved' anything.
Now they are trying to make themselves virtually indistinguishable from other providers by selling the one piece of their company that made them different, their make-to-order factories.
Huh? I've got three HP systems within arms reach... All built to order.
Building to order hasn't been unique to Dell for many years.
Slashdot Mirror
That's mostly because there isn't any known way of breaking physical laws. Every example discovered to date has turned out to be evidence that we failed to understand the law completely, not that it was broken.
Not to mention that a Matrioshka Brain at best merely bends the laws a touch, not breaks them.
The downside of that is that ruling regulations with regards to safety, environment, etc... are not that of flag nation - but that of the nation that controls the water the ship is operating within. If you fail to comply, and thus represent a danger to persons or the environment in local waters, the nation controlling the local waters is within it's rights to deny you entrance or in exceptional cases seize the offending vessel. (And the US and pretty much every other developed nations exercise those rights on a regular basis.)
In addition, if the ship is insured (and a multi million data center will be), then you have to deal with the environmental, safety, and inspection requirements imposed by the insurance company. And when dealing with Lloyd's or any other major insurer, those requirements can (and often are) quite stringent.
Then there are international conventions such as SOLAS and ISPS...
The freedom offered by a flag of convenience is much exaggerated.
Disclaimer: IANAL, but I have actually studied these issues.
Other than the fact that meets essentially none of the [laughably hard to meet I grant] criteria set by the OP.
It's not reasonably lucrative, in fact the pay is mediocre at best when figure everything in. Doing trade shows and fairs requires a specific time commitment. It's not doable from a hotel room at all. Nor is it particularly geeky - being largely rote. (Yeah, you can break the rote - but most of your customers will mostly want more of the same.)
Not to mention that as the economy worsens, not only are more and more people turning to 'crafty' sidelines to make a few extra bucks (which means you have a lot of competition), your customer base is also slowly evaporating.
Despite all that - you can make good money in soap if you work your ass off, but it's not a part time commitment and you aren't paying for a serious remodel unless you are one of the one-in-a-zillion soapers who hit it big.
(Disclaimer: I am a part time soaper and follow the soap boards.)
lol :)
Except he didn't "alert his neighbor". He opened the door (which he has no business even trying to do in the first place), and then riffled through the neighbors desk, refrigerator, garage, and basement. Before leaving he made a copy of the front door key, installed taps on the phones, a webcam in the bathroom. Then he told the neighbor that his door was unlocked, his checkbook needed balancing, his taste in soda abominable, his garage was a mess, and the furnace filters needed cleaning.
HP isn't interested in gaining fans or community support, at least not in the (relatively small) geek community. HP wants to sell lots, and lots, and lots of machines and support contracts - which they can't do without proceeding as the grandparent describes.
Yes, kinda. The heat transfer material you use in the loops is chosen using a variety of criteria - you can also use gases or liquid metals. But, the loops are closed so you don't need to add any more after the initial loadout.
Ah yes, the editor is at fault. Google can't possibly be at fault. Hint: stories from reputable sources virtually always have a date attached to them (exceptions are incredibly rare) - for copyright purposes if nothing else. A story without a date should have been a major red flag for the bot. Period.
Cape Canaveral belongs to the USAF, not NASA.
Um, how? It's not like you can charge admission to see something visible for a hundred miles. Range safety regs keep everyone so far back that you might as well watch it from the veranda of a hotel on the Indian River where you can keep your cooler handy. Not to mention that one of the few problems SpaceX doesn't have is lack of cash.
That's only true if you are launching from a lower latitude site into a low inclination orbit. The higher your orbital inclination, the less gain you get from latitude regardless of your latitude.
Once again, Slashdot gives Google a free pass - blaming everyone and his brother but Google...
Yet it never occurs to them to realize that this shows a major bug in the bot, one with potentially far reaching implications... The bot failed to error out when it did not find a date on the story, instead defaulting to today's date. Sure, there are guys up the line who share some of the fault, but bottom line - Google screwed up. Badly.
Actually, they knew damn well that it wouldn't. They'd already studied the issue and found it impossible.
The supposedly smart folks making jokes and playing to ignorance rather than spreading truth aren't helping.
The subject line says it all. Watching a bunch of engineers watch computer screens is about as interesting as watching paint dry.
Look at what used to be where the water is now. Consider the effects of changed water flows downstream.
Destroying ecosystems is green? News to me.
Summary and translation: In general, all things being equal, and depending on a large number of questionable assumptions. You will generate less pollution with a hybrid. Maybe..
Given the low survival rate however, one wonders if that was merely chance.
There are serious drawbacks, but mostly they aren't actually Google's fault.
The problem is, this kind of preservation costs serious money - so it's only done once from one master. Then that one master is distributed widely.
An anecdote from the early 90's, when moving newspaper archives onto microfiche really got started in a serious way. A friend was doing research for a college thesis, and the microfiche copy at his university of an obscure and long defunct western paper was missing a page (a page of the newspaper had been lost sometime in the past and thus was not in the microfiche copy) - the precise page he needed in fact. So he called around and got photocopies (real photocopies back then) from other universities whose libraries held microfiche copies of that newspaper.
Each and every one of them was missing the same page.
Turns out one library had paid to have their archives copied onto microfiche - and then recouped their costs by selling copies. Each and every library that had held dead tree copies had replaced them with this microfiche and then heaved the hardcopies into the dumpster.
That page is now forever lost to history.
This isn't one of those times. Money doesn't build experience - launching rockets does.
Which, in all likelihood, would work. With sufficient funding you can build more than one model and test several ideas in parallel, and hire engineers to solve solve details in one model while you work on another.
You don't need to build more than one model, or test more than one idea in parallel. All that does is burn cash without increasing the speed of progress one whit. SpaceX's problems lie in basic engineering, basic technology, and the fact that they are at the bottom of a steep and unforgiving learning curve. Extra cash solves none of these.
The field isn't in need of advancement or research - and the wrongheaded belief that it is has held back space development for decades. The field needs development and experience.
Fast tracking? As compared to who? Two flights, with a third in the offing, in five years isn't 'fast' by any reasonable usage of the word.
Not even remotely, the current mark of the design only has thirteen flights. Soyuz, overall, only has 90 odd flights *total* as compared to the Shuttle which is up around 120.
A reputation totally undeserved and based on many people being utterly ignorant of the history of Soyuz - which includes a long series of dangerous near misses, total mission failures, and landing issues. Three of the last five landings have had serious failures!
Yeah, it's cheap. So is a Yugo or a Vespa scooter. You get what you pay for.
In that, you are wrong. There's been plenty of planning, plenty of studies, plenty of groundwork... But Congress has steadily declined to fund anything other than the status quo, and successive Administrations haven't been inclined to push the issue.
That would be akin to pumping money into the Wright Brothers in the hopes of getting the 747 faster. The problem isn't that SpaceX lacks cash, the problem is that they aren't anywhere near a booster to replace the Soyuz let alone a capsule to replace the Soyuz. (Yes, the Russians call the booster 'Soyuz' and the capsule 'Soyuz'.)
Techies are hired as professionals. Part of being professional is reasonable fluency in the language spoken at your place of work or in the language spoken by the people you are expected to deal with in the course of your work.
This conversation was, and is, being conducted in English. The arrogant ass in this conversation is the one who refused to continue the conversation in the original language without consulting other parties in the conversation. The ignorant ass in this conversation is the one that believes such a switch 'proved' anything.
Huh? I've got three HP systems within arms reach... All built to order.
Building to order hasn't been unique to Dell for many years.