Indeed. I'm active on a number of USN submarine veterans groups.... and there's a very high percentage of nuclear power personnel - guys that have been through the (intellectually) toughest school the USN has to offer. These guys, according to the grandparent, are 'low-IQ idiots'. Submariners, especially nukes, are many things... but low IQ? There's very few of my shipmates I'd tag with that. And that's not mentioning the wide variety of engineers among my friends.
I'll have some of whatever he's smoking.
Seriously, I've never grasped Slashdot's need to marginalize Facebook users and attempts to hand wave away it's technology and usefulness. (And this goes back to the very beginning - long before they started amping up the ways they use personal information.)
I've never used Facebook exactly because of shit like this. I just don't get how it got so big and stays so big.
If you don't get it by now (it's been explained in the comments on numerous/. articles on Facebook), you're either seriously dense or just trolling/karmawhoring.
Here's what I've done on Facebook today... it's a fairly typical day actually;
Gotten the latest updates on my boat's upcoming re-union.
Linked a gentleman in a submarine veterans group up to his boats re-union association.
Discussed the early history of Japanimation in the US on an anime fan group.
Shared screenshots from a game session last night with a small private group of my friends who play the game.
Seen pictures of my nephew on his first day of school (today isn't a holiday in the UK).
Discussed the impact of a potential policy change on a club I belong to (again, in a private group).
Updated the information on a beer tasting class I'm holding in a few weeks for a different club.
Etc... etc...
It's one site, one login, and messages/posts never bounce (unlike email). If I want to share photos, there's no need to upload them one place and then try and figure out how to link to it and use a different communications link to disseminate the link. Two, three clicks and it's done. If I want to set up a public or private discussion group, again, two, three clicks and a few seconds typing and I'm in business. It's a simple site with a simple UI, fairly unobtrusive advertising, and it just bloody works. The trade of "stuff I like" for "so damn much useful stuff, functionality, and access" is a fair one.
There were already riches to had in the farther reaches of the North Atlantic:
There were some people making a living fishing the North Atlantic, but riches? Not by any reasonable standard. (Hint: There's a reason why only relatively few made the crossing to do so - where there are riches, there is a rush.)
There is no reason to believe either of those things would not have happened if government hadn't stepped in.
Other than the fact that no evidence to support the notion, no. There's completely no reason to not have faith in an imaginary friend in the sky and that private enterprise would have done these things. But using that blind faith in place of facts - that's an entirely different matter.
There are vast riches to be had from space. The problem is that it'll take many years and huge outlays of cash before we can get at them, and even then it will be a seriously risky undertaking; not something investors will jump on eagerly.
Once again, your faith is touching - but it's seriously out of touch with reality. Private investors aren't jumping on space mining because of those things - but because there is not one natural or processed material which you wouldn't go broke hauling back from space. Not. One. Not without lowering launch costs considerably past "significantly" and down into the "hallucinogenic dreaming" range of costs. (Oh, and lets not mention the slight problem of none of the equipment existing even as power point slides.)
To say that the Atlantic wasn't opened by private enterprise is obtusely semantic.
No, it's plain black-and-white fact. The 'companies' you refer to range from outright government enterprises only thinly disguised to what amounted to government contractors. They were almost universally backed with special privileges afforded by law, etc... etc..
It's supremely ignorant to pretend these were equivalent to the companies of today. The one playing semantic games is you, by pretending that the word represents the same thing then and now.
So was crossing the atlantic in a boat. So was heavier-than-air flight.
But there were riches to be had if you risked that crossing in a boat - there isn't in space. Etc... etc... And, as he notes and you conveniently ignore, the Atlantic wasn't opened by private enterprise. The same goes for heaver-than-air flight. From the NACA to the enormous jumpstart that came from truckloads goverment cash spending on research, training pilots (who later became available for civil employment), aircraft production, etc... etc... (especially in the two world wars)
Cheap soundbites only make you look wise to the uneducated and kool-aid swillers.
I've known this for... well, the better part of two decades now. It's blindingly obvious to anyone who has actually studied the history of exploration. And he doesn't go far enough at that - most of the voyages and expeditions were indeed backed by governments, but for commercial, political, and military advantages. The big problem, is that there really isn't much of that in space that we aren't exploiting already.
Seriously - does this guy have any clue as to how frickin' BIG the Moon is? You could carve a hole in it the size of New York City and it would barely be noticeable
New York City has a surface area of 468 square miles - which makes for a crater 12 miles across. Metro New York has an area of 12,000 square miles - which makes for a crater 60 miles across (on the same order as the crater Tycho). The former is not a naked eye feature, but the latter *decidedly* is.
That being disposed of... There's abysmally low quantity of He2/kg of regolith, So it's not beyond belief that a mining program that runs more than a decade or two *could* dig a hole the size of [Metro] Nee York.
Reading comprehension - get some. I didn't say "handles" the paperwork and details, I said "ensures they are handled". Not even remotely the same thing.
Not to mention there are details that are beyond the (very narrow) purview of the title company.
Actually if vaccinations did confer lifelong and perfect immunity I wouldn't care as much, it is precisely because they don't that I am so worried.
What part of "except in extremely rare cases, measles vaccine confers lifetime immunity" did you find difficult to grasp?
If you're "so worried", then you're rejecting science. Period. Worse yet, is that you're so willing to handwave and waffle and drag in irrelevancies as if that "proves" your feelings are correct. You're no better than them.
Vaccines are science, if you think they are causing health issues use real science, not a personal feeling.
Yet you base your response to them on personal feelings... rather than science. Except in extraordinarily rare cases, measles vaccinations confer immunity for life.
It's sad that going to the moon six times is worth less in preparatory work than what had been done up to 1961.
It's only "sad" if you're unaware that it's 2013 and that materials, processes, etc... have changed radically in the intervening fifty years and that impacts pretty much every aspect of the project. Not to mention being ignorant enough to not grasp that every major engineering projects requires considerable ground and preparatory work beforehand (roughly proportional to the size of the project), even if it's something done routinely (like building a bridge).
We've lost so much knowledge and experience that we've regressed as a species, at least in terms of human space exploration. Hopefully this time around we never forget how to do it.
If we lived in a universe where we'd "forgotten" anything, you'd have a point. So, either you live in a different universe than the rest of us or you're just abysmally clueless.
Some of the groundwork has been done - but this project isn't getting the thing that made the real difference... a huge budget. Which wasn't a direct result of Kennedy's commitment - he was actually looking for ways to scale it back. The huge budget came because he died in Dallas and LBJ pushed for the program as a monument to Kennedy.
None of which means it wasn't the intellectual property of Lockheed. That depends on the terms of the contract AWA had with Lockheed, not on who owned the company or who hosted the computing resources. (And, FWIW, the same goes for the 'right' to auction off said intellectual property.)
from Kennedy's challenge to first man on the moon was 8 years
Only because of the years and years of preparatory work already done. Development of the F-1 started in 1956. Much of the design and engineering for the Apollo capsule was already complete (although as a general purpose earth orbiter). The same goes for the engineering and development of the Saturn family of boosters.
One of the reasons Kennedy chose a moon landing as a goal (over the other options considered) in the first place was because so much of the necessary groundwork was already in work.
Slashdot Mirror
That sound you heard was my point going over your head. You win at knowing facts, you fail utterly at allusion.
Only so long as the bonuses keep flowing. Once you've paid the Danegeld... stopping isn't so easy.
Indeed. I'm active on a number of USN submarine veterans groups.... and there's a very high percentage of nuclear power personnel - guys that have been through the (intellectually) toughest school the USN has to offer. These guys, according to the grandparent, are 'low-IQ idiots'. Submariners, especially nukes, are many things... but low IQ? There's very few of my shipmates I'd tag with that. And that's not mentioning the wide variety of engineers among my friends.
I'll have some of whatever he's smoking.
Seriously, I've never grasped Slashdot's need to marginalize Facebook users and attempts to hand wave away it's technology and usefulness. (And this goes back to the very beginning - long before they started amping up the ways they use personal information.)
If you don't get it by now (it's been explained in the comments on numerous /. articles on Facebook), you're either seriously dense or just trolling/karmawhoring.
Here's what I've done on Facebook today... it's a fairly typical day actually;
Etc... etc...
It's one site, one login, and messages/posts never bounce (unlike email). If I want to share photos, there's no need to upload them one place and then try and figure out how to link to it and use a different communications link to disseminate the link. Two, three clicks and it's done. If I want to set up a public or private discussion group, again, two, three clicks and a few seconds typing and I'm in business. It's a simple site with a simple UI, fairly unobtrusive advertising, and it just bloody works. The trade of "stuff I like" for "so damn much useful stuff, functionality, and access" is a fair one.
There were some people making a living fishing the North Atlantic, but riches? Not by any reasonable standard. (Hint: There's a reason why only relatively few made the crossing to do so - where there are riches, there is a rush.)
Other than the fact that no evidence to support the notion, no. There's completely no reason to not have faith in an imaginary friend in the sky and that private enterprise would have done these things. But using that blind faith in place of facts - that's an entirely different matter.
Once again, your faith is touching - but it's seriously out of touch with reality. Private investors aren't jumping on space mining because of those things - but because there is not one natural or processed material which you wouldn't go broke hauling back from space. Not. One. Not without lowering launch costs considerably past "significantly" and down into the "hallucinogenic dreaming" range of costs. (Oh, and lets not mention the slight problem of none of the equipment existing even as power point slides.)
No, it's plain black-and-white fact. The 'companies' you refer to range from outright government enterprises only thinly disguised to what amounted to government contractors. They were almost universally backed with special privileges afforded by law, etc... etc..
It's supremely ignorant to pretend these were equivalent to the companies of today. The one playing semantic games is you, by pretending that the word represents the same thing then and now.
Is such utter ignorance and lack of reading comprehension a natural talent, or did you study?
But there were riches to be had if you risked that crossing in a boat - there isn't in space. Etc... etc... And, as he notes and you conveniently ignore, the Atlantic wasn't opened by private enterprise. The same goes for heaver-than-air flight. From the NACA to the enormous jumpstart that came from truckloads goverment cash spending on research, training pilots (who later became available for civil employment), aircraft production, etc... etc... (especially in the two world wars)
Cheap soundbites only make you look wise to the uneducated and kool-aid swillers.
I've known this for... well, the better part of two decades now. It's blindingly obvious to anyone who has actually studied the history of exploration. And he doesn't go far enough at that - most of the voyages and expeditions were indeed backed by governments, but for commercial, political, and military advantages. The big problem, is that there really isn't much of that in space that we aren't exploiting already.
Seriously - does this guy have any clue as to how frickin' BIG the Moon is? You could carve a hole in it the size of New York City and it would barely be noticeable
New York City has a surface area of 468 square miles - which makes for a crater 12 miles across. Metro New York has an area of 12,000 square miles - which makes for a crater 60 miles across (on the same order as the crater Tycho). The former is not a naked eye feature, but the latter *decidedly* is.
That being disposed of... There's abysmally low quantity of He2/kg of regolith, So it's not beyond belief that a mining program that runs more than a decade or two *could* dig a hole the size of [Metro] Nee York.
Reading comprehension - get some. I didn't say "handles" the paperwork and details, I said "ensures they are handled". Not even remotely the same thing.
Not to mention there are details that are beyond the (very narrow) purview of the title company.
Considering the size and complexity of the US grid, no, it's not really. And everything is feasible on paper.
Just because the services are available, that doesn't mean they're actually useful or effective.
But it's the other 10% - ensuring all the legal paperwork and details are handled that makes it worth paying them.
Which sounds bad... until you actually look at the data. Then it looks pretty dang good. But soundbites sweeties! Have to make it sound bad.
It's always easy to have unreasonable standards.
What part of "except in extremely rare cases, measles vaccine confers lifetime immunity" did you find difficult to grasp?
If you're "so worried", then you're rejecting science. Period. Worse yet, is that you're so willing to handwave and waffle and drag in irrelevancies as if that "proves" your feelings are correct. You're no better than them.
Yet you base your response to them on personal feelings... rather than science. Except in extraordinarily rare cases, measles vaccinations confer immunity for life.
Um, care to repeat that in English, or at least in properly phrased English?
It's only "sad" if you're unaware that it's 2013 and that materials, processes, etc... have changed radically in the intervening fifty years and that impacts pretty much every aspect of the project. Not to mention being ignorant enough to not grasp that every major engineering projects requires considerable ground and preparatory work beforehand (roughly proportional to the size of the project), even if it's something done routinely (like building a bridge).
If we lived in a universe where we'd "forgotten" anything, you'd have a point. So, either you live in a different universe than the rest of us or you're just abysmally clueless.
And the legal term for that kind of thing is.... (drum roll)... intellectual property.
Some of the groundwork has been done - but this project isn't getting the thing that made the real difference... a huge budget. Which wasn't a direct result of Kennedy's commitment - he was actually looking for ways to scale it back. The huge budget came because he died in Dallas and LBJ pushed for the program as a monument to Kennedy.
None of which means it wasn't the intellectual property of Lockheed. That depends on the terms of the contract AWA had with Lockheed, not on who owned the company or who hosted the computing resources. (And, FWIW, the same goes for the 'right' to auction off said intellectual property.)
from Kennedy's challenge to first man on the moon was 8 years
Only because of the years and years of preparatory work already done. Development of the F-1 started in 1956. Much of the design and engineering for the Apollo capsule was already complete (although as a general purpose earth orbiter). The same goes for the engineering and development of the Saturn family of boosters.
One of the reasons Kennedy chose a moon landing as a goal (over the other options considered) in the first place was because so much of the necessary groundwork was already in work.
Only being able to produce three a day doesn't mean the technology is complicated, it only means they don't have enough machines.