It's not the "getting things into space" aspect that will result in the project paying for itself. It's all the other technological breakthroughs that will be used for who knows what. This is a Good Thing.
Bullshit. I'm entirely unlikely to buy an current generation, or even last generation, game console. I simply have no desire to own one and aside from looking pretty, they have no appeal for me.
OTOH, reliving my youth a little with a classic that requires little investment would be kind of cool.
The copyright holder of a 24 year old game/system is the one fucking up here by not marketing to me.
The engineer is worth $140K because of his expertise and training with expensive software...that same expensive software that leads to fewer people taking the plunge to learn it. Sounds a bit circular to me. Or like a protection scheme.
And because I'm always looking for a new service bureau, I've signed up.
They do accept STL now (good, because it's an industry standard), but they set their system to interpret STL in meters instead of millimeters. Pretty odd choice, especially considering the machine's build volume. Worse, it kicks out every design and requires the user to re-scale it.
They also print in High Speed mode instead of High Quality. They claim you won't notice the difference (goes from 16 micron to 30 micron), but you surely will if your model has any curves.
At the moment, I have to say "Pass."
I'm a garage-kit maker -- 1/285 Macross and 1/2500 Star Trek, available at
http://scifiskunkwerks.blogspot.com/. All of my models are done in CAD first, then rapid prototyped. I spent several months looking for an affordable way to get my parts printed out in the quality that I needed and I'm always on the lookout for being able to just buy my own machine.
So when this PAID ADVERTISEMENT masquerading as an article came along I was pretty interested. RTFA and you'll see:
"The 3-D printers that Shapeways is using are commercially available, made by Israeli firm Objet and Stratsys in Eden Prairie, MN."
That means they're nothing more than a print bureau. Big farking whoop. Last night I saw a nice, big Objet add on the front page and now I know why.
Incidentally, I'm already having my stuff printed on Objets. The quality is top-notch. I'm just irritated (no coffee this morning) because this is a non-article.
"As I said in my original post, nobody expects to go hunting with an automatic grenade launcher."
Strawman argument. It's not about hunting, it's about self-defense and that was pretty intellectually dishonest of you to say otherwise.
I have no problem with a small business owner defending his property with whatever he can get his hands on. Just as you acknowledge it being ridiculous for a militia armed with pistols staving off an invasion, so, too, would it be ridiculous to expect a pistol-wielding store-owner to stave off a robbery in the face of the hardware criminals are capable of bringing.
And we both know that claiming that this would be fixed by banning everything other than hunting rifles and pistols won't solve anything. Their proclivity for ignoring inconvenient laws is what makes them criminals.
While those are interesting points and I personally hold to the "in common use" theory, I think you're trying to limit it more than it should be. For one thing, it seems like you're reading this, and supplying your evidence, without regard to their very specific wording that defense from "depredations of a tyrannical government" is a key point in the 2nd Amendment.
That defense can't be achieved if all the populous is allowed is hunting rifles and pistols. While I don't necessarily believe I should be allowed my own Abrams tank or that it would be OK for me to try to build a MOAB in my basement, I see zero issue with possessing assault weapons.
The only reasons they're uncommon is because of various fees associated with their purchase, a seemingly concerted effort by local law enforcement to not expeditiously process paperwork and the increasing difficulty in acquiring suitable ammunition (thank you, UN). IOW, they would be common were it not for obstacles (deliberately?) placed in their way.
Wouldn't convoy and escort duty be a legitimate operation for a navy? Anyone's navy, that is.
A 3" gun and a few.50 Cals might encourage piracy, but I'm pretty sure an Arleigh Burke (and the obvious threat than piracy will be met with the full resources of the US Navy) on patrol would discourage attacks.
Wrong. They still wouldn't be accorded POW status because the GC also requires that militia/guerrilla fighters (the clause you're using) be fighting for a recognized government. These people are not. Sorry, they're not POWs, they don't get GC protections, they are enemy combatants and the US Constitution does not apply to non-Americans. You don't go to a foreign country and expect their rights, do you?
Exactly. That it passed is scary. Constitutional rights are for American citizens and don't apply to the rest of the world. This issue was already decided, correctly I might add, repeatedly in the past. Look it up.
Slashdot Mirror
"Do these idiots never ever learn?" If history has taught us anything it is that we do not learn from history.
It's not the "getting things into space" aspect that will result in the project paying for itself. It's all the other technological breakthroughs that will be used for who knows what. This is a Good Thing.
What does the study of the size of Walt's asshole have to do with this? From "Men at Work."
I *had* decided to get a Mac the next time I got a new computer. Not now. Good job.
Bullshit. I'm entirely unlikely to buy an current generation, or even last generation, game console. I simply have no desire to own one and aside from looking pretty, they have no appeal for me. OTOH, reliving my youth a little with a classic that requires little investment would be kind of cool. The copyright holder of a 24 year old game/system is the one fucking up here by not marketing to me.
The engineer is worth $140K because of his expertise and training with expensive software...that same expensive software that leads to fewer people taking the plunge to learn it. Sounds a bit circular to me. Or like a protection scheme.
And because I'm always looking for a new service bureau, I've signed up. They do accept STL now (good, because it's an industry standard), but they set their system to interpret STL in meters instead of millimeters. Pretty odd choice, especially considering the machine's build volume. Worse, it kicks out every design and requires the user to re-scale it. They also print in High Speed mode instead of High Quality. They claim you won't notice the difference (goes from 16 micron to 30 micron), but you surely will if your model has any curves. At the moment, I have to say "Pass."
I'm a garage-kit maker -- 1/285 Macross and 1/2500 Star Trek, available at http://scifiskunkwerks.blogspot.com/. All of my models are done in CAD first, then rapid prototyped. I spent several months looking for an affordable way to get my parts printed out in the quality that I needed and I'm always on the lookout for being able to just buy my own machine. So when this PAID ADVERTISEMENT masquerading as an article came along I was pretty interested. RTFA and you'll see: "The 3-D printers that Shapeways is using are commercially available, made by Israeli firm Objet and Stratsys in Eden Prairie, MN." That means they're nothing more than a print bureau. Big farking whoop. Last night I saw a nice, big Objet add on the front page and now I know why. Incidentally, I'm already having my stuff printed on Objets. The quality is top-notch. I'm just irritated (no coffee this morning) because this is a non-article.
Flamebait?! Are you people kidding me?! That was a Homer Simpson quote! For the freaking love of Pete. Look, here's what was written:
"They confirmed the shape of the molecules at each step using techniques such as nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy."
Good freaking grief people. Get a sense of humor.
..."nucular." Nucular.
It depends on what the meaning of "is" is.
"As I said in my original post, nobody expects to go hunting with an automatic grenade launcher."
Strawman argument. It's not about hunting, it's about self-defense and that was pretty intellectually dishonest of you to say otherwise.
I have no problem with a small business owner defending his property with whatever he can get his hands on. Just as you acknowledge it being ridiculous for a militia armed with pistols staving off an invasion, so, too, would it be ridiculous to expect a pistol-wielding store-owner to stave off a robbery in the face of the hardware criminals are capable of bringing.
And we both know that claiming that this would be fixed by banning everything other than hunting rifles and pistols won't solve anything. Their proclivity for ignoring inconvenient laws is what makes them criminals.
While those are interesting points and I personally hold to the "in common use" theory, I think you're trying to limit it more than it should be. For one thing, it seems like you're reading this, and supplying your evidence, without regard to their very specific wording that defense from "depredations of a tyrannical government" is a key point in the 2nd Amendment.
That defense can't be achieved if all the populous is allowed is hunting rifles and pistols. While I don't necessarily believe I should be allowed my own Abrams tank or that it would be OK for me to try to build a MOAB in my basement, I see zero issue with possessing assault weapons.
The only reasons they're uncommon is because of various fees associated with their purchase, a seemingly concerted effort by local law enforcement to not expeditiously process paperwork and the increasing difficulty in acquiring suitable ammunition (thank you, UN). IOW, they would be common were it not for obstacles (deliberately?) placed in their way.
"I had so much hope for our species."
That's the difference between you and me. As such, I am never disappointed and am occasionally presently surprised.
Wouldn't convoy and escort duty be a legitimate operation for a navy? Anyone's navy, that is.
A 3" gun and a few .50 Cals might encourage piracy, but I'm pretty sure an Arleigh Burke (and the obvious threat than piracy will be met with the full resources of the US Navy) on patrol would discourage attacks.
"The same method they use to come up with the imaginary losses they suffer due to copyright infringement"
In the Navy we called this PFA -- pulled from ass
or possibly PFM -- pure fucking magic
And the mere fact that they chose not to respond to these allegations (of child abuse, child pornography and treason) is proof of their guilt.
I'll get the rope.
KHAAANNNN!
[echo]
KHAAANNNN!
No, this kid turned himself into a criminal. Were there no laws on the books prohibiting his actions he would still deserve a serious ass-kicking.
Yes, he's 18, old enough to know better.
It sets, or reinforces, a precedent that you can't mark something however you see fit and expect it to be legally binding.
Wrong. They still wouldn't be accorded POW status because the GC also requires that militia/guerrilla fighters (the clause you're using) be fighting for a recognized government. These people are not. Sorry, they're not POWs, they don't get GC protections, they are enemy combatants and the US Constitution does not apply to non-Americans. You don't go to a foreign country and expect their rights, do you?
Exactly. That it passed is scary. Constitutional rights are for American citizens and don't apply to the rest of the world. This issue was already decided, correctly I might add, repeatedly in the past. Look it up.
I'm guessing it's a popular course. Ever have a student try to sue for false advertising?
1) stop riding in someone's blind-spot
2) stop weaving in and out of traffic
Jee, look, I can blanketly claim all motorcyclists are idiots...
Maybe we can convince an auto manufacturer to make the car from wood pulp...