The title suggest the ship was lost. Is this now news when something was found right where you left it?
They also seem to suggest this is some kind of environmental disaster, but really don't quantify it in any way, basically saying "there's bad radioactive stuff down there". In reality, any negative impact of the radioactivity from the wreck is likely immeasurable and unobservable. We are doing much worse things to the ocean on a daily basis today, so its a quite comical (or maybe better described as ignorant) to point to this as an example of the environmental atrocities of the past. There certainly have been great environmental mistakes in the past, including many by the DOD and some even radiological, but this is not even remotely comparable.
Branding does play a big role. A lot of teachers,often those are not tech savvy probably already have Ipads/Iphones because they never considered anything else. There is likely an easier sell to stick with what teh most fearful are familiar with.
My kid's STEM school used Dell Chromebooks. They are very useful for doing what is needed, creating reports, researching information, submitting homework, and occasional collaborative activities. They are not a mainstay of the educational day, but a tool used at the appropriate time.
These people had no idea what they were getting into and obviously just wanted to have their students carrying tablets around so they'd look like Starfleet Academy.
That is the heart of it. I imagine they publicly boasted quite often about how wonderful it would be to have the Ipads, without ever stating exactly how they would be used, but held it up as a sign of forward thinking progress.
OTOH, Apple knew better, and had the choice to bring their expectations down to reality rather than inflate them.
I think proven safe drivers can provide valuable input into an effort to understand safe driving. Safe driving is not a new body of knowledge, it is actually quite thoroughly researched and statistically assessed. The assumption that experienced, proven, trained safe drivers bring nothing to the table and that it can be better done without them may be its own form of hubris....or simple ignorance.
Umm, how about getting it developed by people who have quite a number of years driving experience instead. What an inexperienced driver might think is important might not be so to an experienced one and vice verca.
Its a very good suggestion. I think it is quite funny (and sad) how some responders completely dismiss experience as a useful input.
Probably not when they figure out how to land on the barge without exploding... at that point the damage from hitting the water and amount of cleaning & service required to be read for launch will be much more.
Maybe landing on a platform is not the best approach. Rather, I seems like some type of gantry that could grab the top of the rocket when it is just above the water would be easier and more reliable than having the rocket land and maintain its own upright position.
It might justify an accomplice, but finding one is very risky. Most folks will not want to participate and be compelled to turn you in just to protect themselves. I guess it would be easy enough to pay a guy to get your ticket for you. A better disguise may have helped.
What is really hard is getting the money in the end and not being noticed.
The idea that human society would operate in a fundamentally different manner after an apocalyptic event is probably not very realistic. We would have little reason to worry about anything but erecting energy production facilities as quickly and easily as possible. Fighting for survival trumps all.
The idea that an apocalyptic event would provide an opportunity for a big do-over is also probably not very realistic. The science fiction scenario is mass death, few people left, little knowledge retained, but is it much more likely large numbers of people would survive or nobody would survive.
The summary said it would be $500 if you make less than $1M in revenue. Doesn't seem like a ton of money.
That's the whole idea. Ask for (or in this case demand) a little more from everybody, and hope the complaints are not too loud and it gets pushed through. Its just another quick buck.
With its 2.2% African American/Black and 3.9% Latino/Hispanic tech workforce, who better to increase diversity than Microsoft, right?
A cheap shot from the submitter, but in reality they may actually be the best to lead this charge. They have been dealing with the challenge of trying to figure out how to increase qualified applicant diversity. There is not easy solution but they understand the challenge better than most, so yes, they just might be the one's to lead this.
Maybe because there is nothing substantive to comment on. They sent a robot in knowing there was a good chance it would not survive, it accomplished most of its inspections, it stopped working and due to where it failed it can't be pulled out. A more durable robot is already under development but was not yet ready to deploy.
What is there to really comment on? The way the press made it a big deal I suppose would be something to talk about.
This robot moved along a tortuous path, you can just pull it out, it has to move itself back out. They knew there was a good chance it would fail at some point, yet they accomplished most of the planned inspections so it was not a complete fail by any means, just the way the press likes to portray it. They have a more durable bot on the way.
But blind deletion is not what communities want. They procrastinate, and like second chances, etc. Plus, an algorithm is never going to be foolproof enough....hence the problem.
It is stupid to me because it does not solve a problem. Detecting trolls is certainly not a problem, dealing with them is. They need to work on algorithm for that.
They should not be using electricity in the first place. Desalination is a perfect pairing for cogeneration with Gen IV fission plants. Added benefit is you can put the entire output to desalination when demand is low to avoid using peeking plants.
High temperature gas reactor are very well suited for this purpose, even present generation PWRs would work well. You still need electricity for the process, you don't have to use electrolysis, but it still takes a lot of power. Reactors are a good choice because they produce the needed electricity within a small footprint, and the excess heat from the reactor can be used to increase the process temperature where it becomes much more efficient.
Getting a CSP plant big enough near the water source and keeping the system going 24/7 makes that technology much less attractive. And, since this is an energy intensive process, energy returns on energy invested (EROI) becomes an important consideration;
The FBI has a history of precipitating gun fights where bystanders were shot by the FBI or just shooting into areas were people were present without positively identifying their targets.
LOL. This is actually extremely rare. How many can you reference?
Slashdot Mirror
The title suggest the ship was lost. Is this now news when something was found right where you left it?
They also seem to suggest this is some kind of environmental disaster, but really don't quantify it in any way, basically saying "there's bad radioactive stuff down there". In reality, any negative impact of the radioactivity from the wreck is likely immeasurable and unobservable. We are doing much worse things to the ocean on a daily basis today, so its a quite comical (or maybe better described as ignorant) to point to this as an example of the environmental atrocities of the past. There certainly have been great environmental mistakes in the past, including many by the DOD and some even radiological, but this is not even remotely comparable.
How are they closer to solving the mystery just because they have scheduled a big meeting? Its that all it takes these days?
They need to use a Segway valve... that'll keep it upright.
We thought them chromebooks was gonna have some chrome on them, but no shiny chrome... we should sue too.
Branding does play a big role. A lot of teachers ,often those are not tech savvy probably already have Ipads/Iphones because they never considered anything else. There is likely an easier sell to stick with what teh most fearful are familiar with.
My kid's STEM school used Dell Chromebooks. They are very useful for doing what is needed, creating reports, researching information, submitting homework, and occasional collaborative activities. They are not a mainstay of the educational day, but a tool used at the appropriate time.
These people had no idea what they were getting into and obviously just wanted to have their students carrying tablets around so they'd look like Starfleet Academy.
That is the heart of it. I imagine they publicly boasted quite often about how wonderful it would be to have the Ipads, without ever stating exactly how they would be used, but held it up as a sign of forward thinking progress.
OTOH, Apple knew better, and had the choice to bring their expectations down to reality rather than inflate them.
I think proven safe drivers can provide valuable input into an effort to understand safe driving. Safe driving is not a new body of knowledge, it is actually quite thoroughly researched and statistically assessed. The assumption that experienced, proven, trained safe drivers bring nothing to the table and that it can be better done without them may be its own form of hubris....or simple ignorance.
Umm, how about getting it developed by people who have quite a number of years driving experience instead. What an inexperienced driver might think is important might not be so to an experienced one and vice verca.
Its a very good suggestion. I think it is quite funny (and sad) how some responders completely dismiss experience as a useful input.
Good points. thanks
Probably not when they figure out how to land on the barge without exploding... at that point the damage from hitting the water and amount of cleaning & service required to be read for launch will be much more.
Maybe landing on a platform is not the best approach. Rather, I seems like some type of gantry that could grab the top of the rocket when it is just above the water would be easier and more reliable than having the rocket land and maintain its own upright position.
With ISPs now considered utilities, the path to similar restrictions is shorter and easier.
the prize was claimed by a lawyer representing a shell company out of Belize. .
Which is a quite a big red flag in itself.
It might justify an accomplice, but finding one is very risky. Most folks will not want to participate and be compelled to turn you in just to protect themselves. I guess it would be easy enough to pay a guy to get your ticket for you. A better disguise may have helped.
What is really hard is getting the money in the end and not being noticed.
The idea that human society would operate in a fundamentally different manner after an apocalyptic event is probably not very realistic. We would have little reason to worry about anything but erecting energy production facilities as quickly and easily as possible. Fighting for survival trumps all.
The idea that an apocalyptic event would provide an opportunity for a big do-over is also probably not very realistic. The science fiction scenario is mass death, few people left, little knowledge retained, but is it much more likely large numbers of people would survive or nobody would survive.
The summary said it would be $500 if you make less than $1M in revenue. Doesn't seem like a ton of money.
That's the whole idea. Ask for (or in this case demand) a little more from everybody, and hope the complaints are not too loud and it gets pushed through. Its just another quick buck.
With its 2.2% African American/Black and 3.9% Latino/Hispanic tech workforce, who better to increase diversity than Microsoft, right?
A cheap shot from the submitter, but in reality they may actually be the best to lead this charge. They have been dealing with the challenge of trying to figure out how to increase qualified applicant diversity. There is not easy solution but they understand the challenge better than most, so yes, they just might be the one's to lead this.
None are substantive comments about the summary.
Maybe because there is nothing substantive to comment on. They sent a robot in knowing there was a good chance it would not survive, it accomplished most of its inspections, it stopped working and due to where it failed it can't be pulled out. A more durable robot is already under development but was not yet ready to deploy.
What is there to really comment on? The way the press made it a big deal I suppose would be something to talk about.
This robot moved along a tortuous path, you can just pull it out, it has to move itself back out. They knew there was a good chance it would fail at some point, yet they accomplished most of the planned inspections so it was not a complete fail by any means, just the way the press likes to portray it. They have a more durable bot on the way.
This really doesn't even qualify as news, IMHO.
But blind deletion is not what communities want. They procrastinate, and like second chances, etc. Plus, an algorithm is never going to be foolproof enough....hence the problem.
No need. Remove anonymity from said sites and the problem is solved. Better yet, don't bother having user comments everywhere.
posted by an AC. LOL.
It is stupid to me because it does not solve a problem. Detecting trolls is certainly not a problem, dealing with them is. They need to work on algorithm for that.
Desalination is an ideal use for fluctuating power sources in general..
Not true. It takes a lot of energy to re-start the process. It is much more energy efficient to keep the process going.
They should not be using electricity in the first place. Desalination is a perfect pairing for cogeneration with Gen IV fission plants. Added benefit is you can put the entire output to desalination when demand is low to avoid using peeking plants.
High temperature gas reactor are very well suited for this purpose, even present generation PWRs would work well. You still need electricity for the process, you don't have to use electrolysis, but it still takes a lot of power. Reactors are a good choice because they produce the needed electricity within a small footprint, and the excess heat from the reactor can be used to increase the process temperature where it becomes much more efficient.
Getting a CSP plant big enough near the water source and keeping the system going 24/7 makes that technology much less attractive. And, since this is an energy intensive process, energy returns on energy invested (EROI) becomes an important consideration;
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ja...
The FBI has a history of precipitating gun fights where bystanders were shot by the FBI or just shooting into areas were people were present without positively identifying their targets.
LOL. This is actually extremely rare. How many can you reference?