1000 years of wars, infighting, sellouts, torture, serfdom and broken promises by those in power, and you still don't get it? There are differences between the systems 1000 years ago and the current systems.
We don't count on the politicians to be perfect. If you do, you'll inevitably be extremely disappointed, since they are people like other people. They'll look out for themselves just like most people do. Plus many of them love power. We count on that, and adjust our system in such ways that their self-interest will work in our favor.
There's no need to expect extraordinary idealism and then be surprised and despise them for being just like everybody. Expect them to be selfish and work with it.
(e.g. overdiagnosis of ADD to include kids who are just undiscipled), [...] people who just don't want to try to get it right. Which kind are you? Undiscipled? Or don't want to get it right?
This American disdain for politicians is perplexing. You claim to be so proud of your democracy. And yet you despise the people who personify and work for that democracy?
The American debate scene is far too filled with disdain, aggression and closed minds.
I'm guessing that you're American, since that attitude seems to be prevalent only in the US.
The gene that controls the impulse to tell others what to do, when it isn't necessary to tell them what to do. The 'busybody' gene. Stop calling people names just because they tell you what to do. It's for your own good.
I don't think there are any FOSS spaceflight applications. Which is odd, I'd expect lots of people would be thrilled to be part of that.
Granted, the requirements for correctness are extreme. But I think open-source people could organize very good code reviews and tests. Properly organized, in the long run I think the risk of metric/imperial confusions, premature triggerings and the like would be much smaller with a FOSS approach.
You know, that's odd, an Internet Service Provider is a company that provides access to the Internet. A company that provides an online service is not called an Internet Service Provider.
Why don't we say IAP, Internet Access Provider, instead of ISP?
Don't believe him. Conspiracy theorists aren't for real. They are government agents pretending to be conspiracy theorists, in order to distract us, to keep us from discovering their great conspiracy.
Fidelity is a common word in financial institution names. Don't be swayed by labels without substance. Choose instead an honest firm with an honest name. Entrust your savings to us at Crooks, Plunderers and Embezzlers, Inc.
and I don't know where any candidate stands on those issues FTA:
Presidential candidate Barack Obama has promised to slash funding for the Orion, delaying its operational date five more years.
What's to prevent the next president from rescinding the 2010 shuttle shutdown date? [...] But is the 2010 drop-dead cutoff date cast in stone, or is there enough in the pipeline to run another couple of years' worth of shuttle missions? The article raises this point:
Another effort, led by Rep. Dave Weldon, a Republican from Florida, would keep the shuttle orbiter fleet flying until the Orion is ready. On the surface this seems to be a mad idea. It takes about three billion dollars a year to keep the shuttle fleet operational. If the Congress cannot find the money to bring Orion closer to reality, how can it be expected to come up with six times the amount to keep the shuttle fleet flying? If Congress takes the money out of the Orion program, then the Orion is delayed, perhaps indefinitely, defeating the purpose of the exercise.
Even worse, the shuttle fleet, in order to fly past 2010, will need a major overhaul if it is to fly with an even modicum of safety. That overhaul would cost more untold billions of dollars. Dispensing with the overhaul would place the lives of astronauts at risk and create the real possibility of a third orbiter and crew being lost in some accident.
The article mentions this:
Indeed it could be argued that Orion would not be needed for the resupply of the International Space Station, with a private firm already providing the service.
Perhaps, therefore, NASA could decide to bypass the development of the orbital Orion and go straight to one capable of going to the Moon. How much money would be saved is open to question, but perhaps enough would be to advance the return of explorers to the Moon by a few months, if not years. And for those who have been waiting over a generation for that event, it cannot come too soon.
America is left without any ability to waste hundreds of millions of dollars firing people into low earth orbit Don't worry, the Iraq money sink still remains, and it's far, far more efficient. There's also the general terrorism scare money sink. And others. Spacefaring is a drop in the ocean, lots of efficient money sinks remain!
How dare you compare Microsoft to people who club baby seals? Why is everyone at slashdot so aggressive and offensive? You're offending the people who club baby seals!
but sometimes people are going to want to be able to run what nearly everyone else runs. If OLPC without Windows becomes popular, then "what nearly everyone else runs" will be OLPC without Windows.
Microsoft's only argument seems to be that there's lots of educational software written for Windows that becomes available this way. But if the OLPC becomes very widespread, surely those programs will be adapted for the OLPC. If the OLPC doesn't have Windows, the software will be adapted to the Windows-less OLPC.
Would you agree that with enough funding we could probably establish a foothold on Mars or Luna with existing technology? No, I don't agree. Not with existing technology. New technology will be needed. But I do think that this new technology is within reach. I do think that with sufficient funding we can very likely solve all the inherent problems, although I do think that some of them are quite formidable.
Maybe that was exactly what you meant and I'm just being more pedantic.
Can the same be said about Venus? I don't yet have enough information to judge that.
Before yesterday I found every non-science fiction, seriously intended idea about deploying people on Venus utterly preposterous and ridiculous, or hopelessly ill-informed, based primarily on the fact that you just can't get rid of the heat at the surface, much less while trying to cope with the surface pressure, the corrosiveness, and so on. I'd say that to colonize Venus you'd first need to convince the Universe to change the laws of thermodynamics, and that's just the first step among several.
Now I'm still feeling the surprise of finding an idea that does sidestep some of the most glaring total impossibilities. At first sight the new solution does sound preposterous too — but is that because of remaining unsolved problems, or is it just because I'm not yet used to the idea, and have not yet thought it through?
One shouldn't dismiss new ideas during the initial period, while one is still reeling from the surprise. If you do that, you can't accept trips to Mars either, unless you hear about such trips while you're too young to "know" that they are "impossible".
I can see several huge problems with the notion of blimps floating in the atmosphere of Venus, but I don't know what ideas people have for solving the problems I see. I'm still reeling from the surprise, and during that period I tend to give an idea the benefit of the doubt.
I see huge problems with Mars too. That doesn't deter me from thinking that human ingenuity may overcome them.
Slashdot Mirror
We don't count on the politicians to be perfect. If you do, you'll inevitably be extremely disappointed, since they are people like other people. They'll look out for themselves just like most people do. Plus many of them love power. We count on that, and adjust our system in such ways that their self-interest will work in our favor.
There's no need to expect extraordinary idealism and then be surprised and despise them for being just like everybody. Expect them to be selfish and work with it.
I still wonder what you'd prefer instead.
Considering this it makes more sense if the practice of journalism becomes punishable by death.
I'm amazed that I haven't heard of or noticed this. Thanks for the link.
What would you have instead?
This American disdain for politicians is perplexing. You claim to be so proud of your democracy. And yet you despise the people who personify and work for that democracy?
The American debate scene is far too filled with disdain, aggression and closed minds.
I'm guessing that you're American, since that attitude seems to be prevalent only in the US.
What would you have instead?
I don't think there are any FOSS spaceflight applications. Which is odd, I'd expect lots of people would be thrilled to be part of that.
Granted, the requirements for correctness are extreme. But I think open-source people could organize very good code reviews and tests. Properly organized, in the long run I think the risk of metric/imperial confusions, premature triggerings and the like would be much smaller with a FOSS approach.
You know, that's odd, an Internet Service Provider is a company that provides access to the Internet. A company that provides an online service is not called an Internet Service Provider.
Why don't we say IAP, Internet Access Provider, instead of ISP?
Very illogical.
They should be fined if they cooperate with any government, foreign or domestic.
No, I haven't!
Don't believe him. Conspiracy theorists aren't for real. They are government agents pretending to be conspiracy theorists, in order to distract us, to keep us from discovering their great conspiracy.
Even worse, the shuttle fleet, in order to fly past 2010, will need a major overhaul if it is to fly with an even modicum of safety. That overhaul would cost more untold billions of dollars. Dispensing with the overhaul would place the lives of astronauts at risk and create the real possibility of a third orbiter and crew being lost in some accident.
Perhaps, therefore, NASA could decide to bypass the development of the orbital Orion and go straight to one capable of going to the Moon. How much money would be saved is open to question, but perhaps enough would be to advance the return of explorers to the Moon by a few months, if not years. And for those who have been waiting over a generation for that event, it cannot come too soon.
To any non-techies reading this, don't take the parent comment seriously.
Some people think that tricking people into destroying their gear is fun. Call me boring if you will, but I don't think it's fun.
I get the impression that what they want is an internal SD card, and that the existing slot is external.
How dare you compare Microsoft to people who club baby seals? Why is everyone at slashdot so aggressive and offensive? You're offending the people who club baby seals!
They want a slot for an internal SD card.
I suppose the extra cost is less offensive if it's hidden inside the case.
Microsoft's only argument seems to be that there's lots of educational software written for Windows that becomes available this way. But if the OLPC becomes very widespread, surely those programs will be adapted for the OLPC. If the OLPC doesn't have Windows, the software will be adapted to the Windows-less OLPC.
Maybe that was exactly what you meant and I'm just being more pedantic. Can the same be said about Venus? I don't yet have enough information to judge that.
Before yesterday I found every non-science fiction, seriously intended idea about deploying people on Venus utterly preposterous and ridiculous, or hopelessly ill-informed, based primarily on the fact that you just can't get rid of the heat at the surface, much less while trying to cope with the surface pressure, the corrosiveness, and so on. I'd say that to colonize Venus you'd first need to convince the Universe to change the laws of thermodynamics, and that's just the first step among several.
Now I'm still feeling the surprise of finding an idea that does sidestep some of the most glaring total impossibilities. At first sight the new solution does sound preposterous too — but is that because of remaining unsolved problems, or is it just because I'm not yet used to the idea, and have not yet thought it through?
One shouldn't dismiss new ideas during the initial period, while one is still reeling from the surprise. If you do that, you can't accept trips to Mars either, unless you hear about such trips while you're too young to "know" that they are "impossible".
I can see several huge problems with the notion of blimps floating in the atmosphere of Venus, but I don't know what ideas people have for solving the problems I see. I'm still reeling from the surprise, and during that period I tend to give an idea the benefit of the doubt.
I see huge problems with Mars too. That doesn't deter me from thinking that human ingenuity may overcome them.
Thanks!