> We're about as close to achieving a usable cloak of illusion as we are to achieving > world piece...
Hardly. We have a sketchy, highly speculative theory for a cloak of illusion. I wouldn't even say were about as close to achieving world peace as we are to achieving faster than light travel.
World piece, on the other hand, is something else entirely. Perhaps it's related to whirled peas?
> Inertial confinement fusion is a bit different. You're essentially firing a laser at (or > otherwise zapping) a pellet containing fusion fuel, in the hopes it will react faster > than it expands.
The laser pulse actually compresses the pellet. The pellet has a complex layered structure somewhat like that of a modern nuclear weapon (which is why laser fusion research was classified for a while).
> The technique in the article could help make an inertial fusion reactor more viable.
Right. A bit of this stuff at the core of the pellet and you'd probably be past break-even with current lasers.
> In France, do you have to give your social security number to get an internet connection?
I would guess that you must show your government ID card. What's the difference, though? Looks to me as though it is going to be effectively addresses that will be banned, not people.
> If not, what's to stop people signing up with a false name and paying in cash?
I believe that using a false name is a crime in France (though I would not mind learning that I am wrong about this).
> This sort of thing has been done for ages. The cops know who the 'bad' people are.
In that case why don't they round them all up, lock them in prison for life, and eliminate crime? Why waste time on silly stuff like evidence and trials? Oh. Wait. The cops would all be out of work then. Unless, of course, they then expand the definition of "bad" a little. And then a little more...
There has not yet been a Federal decision on this issue. Until there is the states are free to go either way. A Federal decision banning the practice would be binding on the states. One permitting it would leave them free to ban it.
> States can grant you MORE rights than the Federal Constitution, but they may not > restrict you more than it does.
Only if a Federal decision finding this unconstitutional comes out must the states fall into line. Were the Federal courts to decide its ok, WI could still permit it and NY could still forbid it. There is no Federal precedent on the issue yet so NY can forbid while WI permits without conflict.
There need be no "time of flight" if the state can be achieved in situ in a target immediately before it is struck by the compressing laser pulses. Thus you might hit a structured target with a pulse designed to create some D(-1) followed immediately by a compression and detonation pulse (or even structure the compression pulse to create some D(-1). You also need not rely on a D-D reaction: driving tritium nuclei into a core of D(-1) should enhance yield.
There is not necessarily any conflict. That which is forbidden by the constitution and/or statutes of one state may be permitted in another. Whether or not this is permitted by the US Constitution must be decided by a Federal court.
Depends on whether or not they can identify features that vary from one individual to the next but not in the same individual over time. Seems unlikely, but I'm not a neurologist.
> Convicted by no action of their own, just observation of a brain scan.
No more so than by a fingerprint.
> Only a few can read brain scans.
No one can read a brain scan. This is just a (proposed) identification system. It would no more tell anyone what you are thinking than does face recognition (which it probably work no better than).
The "features" that these machines are interested are likely to be ones considered irrelevant by physicians. I expect that the software in the scanner processes and compresses the data in such a way as to make it useless for medical purposes. This would be done to speed and simplify processing and storage, not to protect your privacy, of course.
Slashdot Mirror
> In other words the creation of a material that doesn't (or cannot in our universe)
> exist.
Read up on metamaterials. It's already been done, though not in the exact form these guys suggest.
> We're about as close to achieving a usable cloak of illusion as we are to achieving
> world piece...
Hardly. We have a sketchy, highly speculative theory for a cloak of illusion. I wouldn't even say were about as close to achieving world peace as we are to achieving
faster than light travel.
World piece, on the other hand, is something else entirely. Perhaps it's related to whirled peas?
> I just had primordial soup for lunch.
Isn't that what was in that fridge in San Jose?
> It wasn't really the smell per se...
No. It was the hysteria. "Ohno! A smell! A SMELL!! A STRONG SMELL!!! Oh my god! We're all going to DIE!! Call 911!"
> Inertial confinement fusion is a bit different. You're essentially firing a laser at (or
> otherwise zapping) a pellet containing fusion fuel, in the hopes it will react faster
> than it expands.
The laser pulse actually compresses the pellet. The pellet has a complex layered structure somewhat like that of a modern nuclear weapon (which is why laser fusion research was classified for a while).
> The technique in the article could help make an inertial fusion reactor more viable.
Right. A bit of this stuff at the core of the pellet and you'd probably be past break-even with current lasers.
Sounds like an open and shut false arrest case.
> I doubt anyone had that in mind when they elected the gremlin.
Careful. It's a crime to insult the president of France.
I take it that you have never heard of selective enforcement?
Ok, that takes care of .001% of the population.
These are the first steps in that direction.
> The french presidential majority, you mean. Don't mistake the french with their :)
> politicians, or we could all think you're clones of G.W. Bush
For the last eight years many of you have behaved as though you thought exactly that.
Unpasteurized cheese is readily available in the USA.
> In France, do you have to give your social security number to get an internet connection?
I would guess that you must show your government ID card. What's the difference, though? Looks to me as though it is going to be effectively addresses that will be banned, not people.
> If not, what's to stop people signing up with a false name and paying in cash?
I believe that using a false name is a crime in France (though I would not mind learning that I am wrong about this).
In this sort of thing the French have been way ahead of us for centuries.
> This sort of thing has been done for ages. The cops know who the 'bad' people are.
In that case why don't they round them all up, lock them in prison for life, and eliminate crime? Why waste time on silly stuff like evidence and trials? Oh. Wait. The cops would all be out of work then. Unless, of course, they then expand the definition of "bad" a little. And then a little more...
No, the main problem is that "He's running! Get him!" is instinctive. Especially with cops.
There has not yet been a Federal decision on this issue. Until there is the states are free to go either way. A Federal decision banning the practice would be binding on the states. One permitting it would leave them free to ban it.
> States can grant you MORE rights than the Federal Constitution, but they may not
> restrict you more than it does.
Only if a Federal decision finding this unconstitutional comes out must the states fall into line. Were the Federal courts to decide its ok, WI could still permit it and NY could still forbid it. There is no Federal precedent on the issue yet so NY can forbid while WI permits without conflict.
> Imagine a society where personal transportation via cars is available with zero
> emissions and cheap enough for every human who wants this.
And a pocket nuclear weapon as well.
> I have to wonder if they haven't made metallic deuterium.
No. This is something quite different (if it exists at all).
There need be no "time of flight" if the state can be achieved in situ in a target immediately before it is struck by the compressing laser pulses. Thus you might hit a structured target with a pulse designed to create some D(-1) followed immediately by a compression and detonation pulse (or even structure the compression pulse to create some D(-1). You also need not rely on a D-D reaction: driving tritium nuclei into a core of D(-1) should enhance yield.
It's worth investigating.
There is not necessarily any conflict. That which is forbidden by the constitution and/or statutes of one state may be permitted in another. Whether or not this is permitted by the US Constitution must be decided by a Federal court.
Depends on whether or not they can identify features that vary from one individual to the next but not in the same individual over time. Seems unlikely, but I'm not a neurologist.
> Convicted by no action of their own, just observation of a brain scan.
No more so than by a fingerprint.
> Only a few can read brain scans.
No one can read a brain scan. This is just a (proposed) identification system. It would no more tell anyone what you are thinking than does face recognition (which it probably work no better than).
The "features" that these machines are interested are likely to be ones considered irrelevant by physicians. I expect that the software in the scanner processes and compresses the data in such a way as to make it useless for medical purposes. This would be done to speed and simplify processing and storage, not to protect your privacy, of course.