...because they have the resources to deal with such a catastrophe.
Yeah, it's called taxpayer dollars. In other words, I get forced to pay for the disaster and buy some schmuck a new house, even if I don't live anywhere near the crash site or have anything to do with it. Awesome how that works huh?
Yeah, and notice how they cut out large swaths of rural Michigan too? Alabama and Michigan are the only two states I really scrutized before tossing this map aside as the garbage as it is, since those are the ones I'm most familiar with.
And what makes you ASSume that the "areas in question" don't have Internet coverage? Some of the highest broadband speeds around are to be found in the South. Always has been that way. Before that I had a 56k dialup connection that was rock solid with low BER, way out in the sticks in Alabama, 20 miles out of town in God's country. Please stop ASSuming.
I'm also missing blobs up in the north that I happen to know are full of ignorant shits. This map is a fucking joke. Nothing more than a way for assholes from "anywhere other than the South" to assert their superiority over "Southerners."
I think they're just pissed because this good ole boy from Alabama is up in Michigan fucking all their "smart" women.
I agree. Let's build a wall to keep the Yankees out. You can keep your welfare states and your industrialized shitholes with all your rules and regulations and red tape; we'll keep on farm, fishing, enjoying God's country, and just generally being simple folk, without assholes from other parts of the country moving in to tell us how we should run the place.
^ This is the most insightful post in the discussion. We live in a nation of greedy fuckers who want to put their hands in our pockets at every turn, and masses of risk-averse cowards who will stand there and take it and cause they're so fucking scared of their own shadow. So sick of it. We need to return this country back to the Constitution, which emphatically states (in the 10th Amendment) that citizens not only have the right to travel, but also the right to drive. If I have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then I have the right to drive, because this country requires me to have an automobile in order to survive and prosper. Otherwise you have to pay others to cart you around and this is prohibitively expensive.
It is against the Constitution, immoral, and downright wrong to enslave people to insurance companies just so they can make a living.
No, insurance most certainly doesn't "enable" you to do anything. We are 100% capable of doing anything we want without blood sucking insurance companies, thanks.
Without insurance every mistake could potentially bankrupt the company.
This is because of our fucked legal system, not because insurance companies are saints who only want to help us.
But if a satellite hits your house in order to bring the joys of Satellite TV to the masses and the enrichment of the shareholders... why should you shoulder the cost?
Because I took the risk of knowingly moving to an area which is in the path of a spaceport.
I mean, who do I sue if a hurricane or earthquake hits?
Responsibility. Our nation would be 10x better if people would start taking it, instead of expecting to sue someone into oblivion the instant something goes wrong. Life is risky. The strong survive, the weak and stupid die.
But what about, for example, SpaceX Falcon boosters which are designed from the beginning for reliability and reuse?
Hell, what about the Wright Flyer, and other early aircraft? Were they 100% safe? Were there no buildings, houses, and other property destroyed and people killed when early aircraft crashed? Somehow humanity survived. What if our "solution" to this problem had been requiring every aircraft experimenter to take out $30 billion in insurance coverage "just in case"? Yeah, that idea would have done WONDERS for human progress and experimentation in powered flight.
Sure, but once the airplane + building hit the ground, it doesn't leave highly lethal debris floating in midair immediately in the approach/takeoff airspace over every airport on the globe. Space debris is there, effectively forever.
So just because someone MIGHT have a rocket blow up in orbit this adding to our already-existing space debris problem that is never going away and will have to be dealt with eventually anyway.... this means each and every single person who decides to launch into space should be required by law to write a huge check to an insurance company "just in case"?
That's almost as dumb as mandatory auto insurance.
Since these launches are from the US and the US signed the treaty, the US is potentally liable for what a non-government (e.g., private) entity does in outer space.
Bullshit. This is unenforceable cold war nonsense. If somebody decides to launch a rocket from the Congo or Madagascar with permission from the government, the U.S. isn't going to do a damn thing about it. If someone send a spacecraft to Mars and sets up a colony there, the U.S. isn't going to do a damn thing about it.
The insurance coverage requirement applies to all launches. This includes launches that occur outside of the United States by entities that do not have assets in the United States.
Is there a comprehensive list of problems that regulation has "solved? Can you also include a complete list of the problems it has caused, so we can decide for ourselves if the cost is worth it?
Could Insurance Coverage Hobble Commercial Space Flights?
No, because humanity as a whole is not stupid enough to continue hobbling itself with such ridiculous rackets as "insurance companies." If they are holding up progress, eventually they will be discarded as the worthless trash they are. Won't let me launch my rocket in the U.S.? Oh well, I'll find some other country that's interested in being a part of the solution, not the problem.
Anchorage, by the way, has an unusual concentration of engineers, as well as a sizable university.
Huntsville, AL has the highest PhD's per capita in the United States. Couldn't tell that by looking at this simplistic map of course, which serves no other purpose than to glorify the egos of Yankees who already know they're superior to us common salt of the earth country folk.
No, the most worrying question is, "what if insurance companies are still around by the time we discover all this fancy stuff? what if we haven't thrown out this tyrannical government and gotten rid of these outright scams that we are mandated to buy into in the name of health?"
And just who determines who is undesirable? The parents? Why?
I don't fucking know. Why don't you ask God? That's the way it has ALWAYS worked.
Why do they get to determine the relative worth of a human being they haven't even met yet?
Because technology enables them to do so.
And what traits make someone undesirable? Physical disability? Does having a less than perfect body make you worth less?
That's up to the parents to decide.
The parents are nothing more than tools of their genes, anyway. It's the genes that matter, in the big picture, not the individual people who pass them along from one generation to the next. With human and natural selection occurring every step of the way.
Stupid genes create stupid parents who make stupid decisions. End result = their line dies out.
Smart genes make smart parents who make excellent decisions. End result = genetic engineering benefits them greatly.
This is nothing more than natural selection at work.
Hellen Keller would disagree with you.
I would disagree with Helen Keller.
At what point is someone an "Undesirable" and to be discarded like garbage?
Well gee, I don't know. At what point is a girl too ugly for me to fuck? At what point is a girl too bitchy and dependent to marry? At what point is someone too stupid and ignorant for me to loan money to?
We all judge and are judged in this manner, all the time--whether we realize and accept it, or choose to cover our eyes and pretend it doesn't happen.
Life is a competition.
Maybe we should stop trying to "make people better" by destroying those that make us uncomfortable, and simply learn to appreciate people for who and what they are.
Yeah, GOOD LUCK with that one chief.
You'll have to genetically reengineer humanity to do it...
Slashdot Mirror
...because they have the resources to deal with such a catastrophe.
Yeah, it's called taxpayer dollars. In other words, I get forced to pay for the disaster and buy some schmuck a new house, even if I don't live anywhere near the crash site or have anything to do with it. Awesome how that works huh?
Just saying what? That you're an idiot who still believes in the Republican/Democrat false dichotomy?
Yeah, and notice how they cut out large swaths of rural Michigan too? Alabama and Michigan are the only two states I really scrutized before tossing this map aside as the garbage as it is, since those are the ones I'm most familiar with.
And what makes you ASSume that the "areas in question" don't have Internet coverage? Some of the highest broadband speeds around are to be found in the South. Always has been that way. Before that I had a 56k dialup connection that was rock solid with low BER, way out in the sticks in Alabama, 20 miles out of town in God's country. Please stop ASSuming.
Look at yourself. It's a crock of shit. Way to prove the GP's point through your blind ignorance.
I'm also missing blobs up in the north that I happen to know are full of ignorant shits. This map is a fucking joke. Nothing more than a way for assholes from "anywhere other than the South" to assert their superiority over "Southerners."
I think they're just pissed because this good ole boy from Alabama is up in Michigan fucking all their "smart" women.
I agree. Let's build a wall to keep the Yankees out. You can keep your welfare states and your industrialized shitholes with all your rules and regulations and red tape; we'll keep on farm, fishing, enjoying God's country, and just generally being simple folk, without assholes from other parts of the country moving in to tell us how we should run the place.
The problem with mandated insurance is that it exists
FTFY.
Well said.
^ This is the most insightful post in the discussion. We live in a nation of greedy fuckers who want to put their hands in our pockets at every turn, and masses of risk-averse cowards who will stand there and take it and cause they're so fucking scared of their own shadow. So sick of it. We need to return this country back to the Constitution, which emphatically states (in the 10th Amendment) that citizens not only have the right to travel, but also the right to drive. If I have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then I have the right to drive, because this country requires me to have an automobile in order to survive and prosper. Otherwise you have to pay others to cart you around and this is prohibitively expensive.
It is against the Constitution, immoral, and downright wrong to enslave people to insurance companies just so they can make a living.
The only required car insurance is liability.
Oh, that's all huh?
It doesn't protect you at all.
You're right. I'm perfectly capable of protecting myself, actually.
It protects the people that you injure and hospitalize, in addition to the damage you do to other people's property.
I have never hurt, injured, or hospitalized anyone in my life, with an automobile at least. Tell me again why I have to buy into this racket?
Insurance enables you to take risks.
No, insurance most certainly doesn't "enable" you to do anything. We are 100% capable of doing anything we want without blood sucking insurance companies, thanks.
Without insurance every mistake could potentially bankrupt the company.
This is because of our fucked legal system, not because insurance companies are saints who only want to help us.
But if a satellite hits your house in order to bring the joys of Satellite TV to the masses and the enrichment of the shareholders... why should you shoulder the cost?
Because I took the risk of knowingly moving to an area which is in the path of a spaceport.
I mean, who do I sue if a hurricane or earthquake hits?
Responsibility. Our nation would be 10x better if people would start taking it, instead of expecting to sue someone into oblivion the instant something goes wrong. Life is risky. The strong survive, the weak and stupid die.
The people who benefit from going there are the companies involved and their customers.
Who benefitted from invention of aircraft? Was it only Wilbur and Orville Wright?
But what about, for example, SpaceX Falcon boosters which are designed from the beginning for reliability and reuse?
Hell, what about the Wright Flyer, and other early aircraft? Were they 100% safe? Were there no buildings, houses, and other property destroyed and people killed when early aircraft crashed? Somehow humanity survived. What if our "solution" to this problem had been requiring every aircraft experimenter to take out $30 billion in insurance coverage "just in case"? Yeah, that idea would have done WONDERS for human progress and experimentation in powered flight.
Sure, but once the airplane + building hit the ground, it doesn't leave highly lethal debris floating in midair immediately in the approach/takeoff airspace over every airport on the globe. Space debris is there, effectively forever.
So just because someone MIGHT have a rocket blow up in orbit this adding to our already-existing space debris problem that is never going away and will have to be dealt with eventually anyway.... this means each and every single person who decides to launch into space should be required by law to write a huge check to an insurance company "just in case"?
That's almost as dumb as mandatory auto insurance.
Since these launches are from the US and the US signed the treaty, the US is potentally liable for what a non-government (e.g., private) entity does in outer space.
Bullshit. This is unenforceable cold war nonsense. If somebody decides to launch a rocket from the Congo or Madagascar with permission from the government, the U.S. isn't going to do a damn thing about it. If someone send a spacecraft to Mars and sets up a colony there, the U.S. isn't going to do a damn thing about it.
The insurance coverage requirement applies to all launches. This includes launches that occur outside of the United States by entities that do not have assets in the United States.
Bullshit. Let somebody try to enforce it.
Is there a comprehensive list of problems that regulation has "solved? Can you also include a complete list of the problems it has caused, so we can decide for ourselves if the cost is worth it?
Learn English, then you'll be welcome to back here and tell us what we can or can't do. TIA
Could Insurance Coverage Hobble Commercial Space Flights?
No, because humanity as a whole is not stupid enough to continue hobbling itself with such ridiculous rackets as "insurance companies." If they are holding up progress, eventually they will be discarded as the worthless trash they are. Won't let me launch my rocket in the U.S.? Oh well, I'll find some other country that's interested in being a part of the solution, not the problem.
Anchorage, by the way, has an unusual concentration of engineers, as well as a sizable university.
Huntsville, AL has the highest PhD's per capita in the United States. Couldn't tell that by looking at this simplistic map of course, which serves no other purpose than to glorify the egos of Yankees who already know they're superior to us common salt of the earth country folk.
And he would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you and your two cents.
He's a spic....you insensitive clod
No, the most worrying question is, "what if insurance companies are still around by the time we discover all this fancy stuff? what if we haven't thrown out this tyrannical government and gotten rid of these outright scams that we are mandated to buy into in the name of health?"
And just who determines who is undesirable? The parents? Why?
I don't fucking know. Why don't you ask God? That's the way it has ALWAYS worked.
Why do they get to determine the relative worth of a human being they haven't even met yet?
Because technology enables them to do so.
And what traits make someone undesirable? Physical disability? Does having a less than perfect body make you worth less?
That's up to the parents to decide.
The parents are nothing more than tools of their genes, anyway. It's the genes that matter, in the big picture, not the individual people who pass them along from one generation to the next. With human and natural selection occurring every step of the way.
Stupid genes create stupid parents who make stupid decisions. End result = their line dies out.
Smart genes make smart parents who make excellent decisions. End result = genetic engineering benefits them greatly.
This is nothing more than natural selection at work.
Hellen Keller would disagree with you.
I would disagree with Helen Keller.
At what point is someone an "Undesirable" and to be discarded like garbage?
Well gee, I don't know. At what point is a girl too ugly for me to fuck? At what point is a girl too bitchy and dependent to marry? At what point is someone too stupid and ignorant for me to loan money to?
We all judge and are judged in this manner, all the time--whether we realize and accept it, or choose to cover our eyes and pretend it doesn't happen.
Life is a competition.
Maybe we should stop trying to "make people better" by destroying those that make us uncomfortable, and simply learn to appreciate people for who and what they are.
Yeah, GOOD LUCK with that one chief.
You'll have to genetically reengineer humanity to do it...