Unless you mean longitudinal "stretching", I can imagine this fat, spherical bottle offering too much cross sectional area (and therefore drag) to be able to go any far. There's a reason rockets are the shape that they are. Dunno how far you can stretch a pop bottle along its length, though. I guess I'll leave that to the "real scientists", lol.
Québec certainly was, I have criminal ancestors to prove it! (My great great(n times) grandfather was deported to the colonies in 1624 for petty theft). But then is Québec really Canada at all? That's a whole other argument right there, "tabarnac";)
Yes because blowing up a couple thousand pounds of hydrazine in space and have it enter the atmosphere as droplets and diffuse everywhere in its toxic form is far preferable to letting it ignite in the atmosphere in the extreme heat of re-entry and hopefully combine with amospheric gases/water vapor to make less toxic substances by the time it gets spread over several hundred miles of ground/ocean. I mean, this is the government thinking for you.
But probably someone has worked out the likely re-entry trajectory and doesn't like it. Ooops, can't have our satellites crashing into Moscow now with a 70% probability, can we?
You're cheating. In real life air resistance will not do you the favor of excluding itself on the way down. I have no fear of being hit on the head by a falling empty plastic soda bottle from ANY height.
I'm not saying it's a bad thing at all. I'm saying that a certain nation is in for one hell of a shock in a decade or two. Either way I'm neither American nor Chinese.
This new information kinda blows a hole in that theory, huh?
Yes, but His Spaghettiness is most forgiving. May you be touched by His Noodly Appendage forever. Hang on, that sounds a bit like icky things Japanese do with tentacles... oh second thoughts...
As long as the temperature of the liquid is sufficiently stable, there are sufficient chemical building blocks and there is not too much current, single cell organisms and then multi cell organisms could emerge..
Depends on how you define "intelligence". Our liquids are certainly teeming with intelligent life. Life itself apparently began in our oceans. Fish are certainly very smart - they feed themselves, find mates, defend territory, build defensive structures, some species live and travel in social groups, etc. These are all signs of "intelligence". Then if you want to cheat a bit and look at the ocean mammals - seals, porpoises, whales, these are extremely intelligent aquatic beings.
Arthur C. Clarke, however, argued that CIVILIZATION, however, could not evolve in an aquatic environment, for the simple reason that you cannot have fire underwater. His interesting theory claims that fire, and our control of fire - has been a driving force in our technology. First the fire we would use for slash and burn agriculture - which while being devastating for the environment over the long term gave many short term advantages to the primitive farmer. Fire to make steam is what drove the industrial revolution. And that same power is still in use today, though we get our "fire" in the form of Uranium, or by burning fossil fuels. Then there is the "fire" from the sky - electricity. Harnessing this particular "fire" would be pretty tricky underwater.
I guess it's an interesting concept to play with, and surely there are many possibilities that we biased, land dwelling humans could never dream of, but I respect Mr. Clarke and his idea. I think it would be difficult for an aquatic civilization to arise here or anywhere else.
The truth is that innovation is relentless and unless you have a self-sustaining model over the long haul, it will not work.
The thing is, though, that a dollar will go a lot further in China than it will in the US or Japan. The US currently spends about $100 million per year of public funds for research. The Chinese $400 million. Perhaps a decade or so ago, one could have argued that China wasn't up to it - the infrastructure in gray matter wasn't there. But today - there are many Chinese institutions, with smart Chinese scientists. Yet costs in China are still far less.
So proportionally China is not spending 4 times more than the us, but a great deal more. They have successfully put a man in space - all on their own. Japan has never done this, only Russia and the US.
China is planning both a manned moon mission and a manned mission to Mars. While the proof is in the pudding, they have very ambitious goals. Impressive though Japan's industrial growth and development has been, the need for toys and entertainment and standard of living in Japan has caused a lot of resources to be wasted. I don't think neither you nor I could afford to live very well in Japan. The Chinese political philosophy, however allows them a focus no one else can achieve. They are getting close to the edge of the curve in innovation, and they can still afford to take it much further. This time I think it's for real. Yet America still sleeps.
Yes, complacency is comfortableisn't it? After all, the Chinese economy is booming while the US economy collapses.
Chinese students have been coming to the US for years, learning HARD science - engineering, physics, math, analytical chemistry, etc. Guess what? They don't come here so often any more. THEY DON'T HAVE TO. Chinese universities are now more than adequate. Chinese culture is rich with a history of invention and innovation. And want to know the scary part? They are nowhere NEAR being a fully developed nation, and yet are now the worlds single largest manufacturer of ANYTHING.
Sure, laugh, and be complacent. No way the Chinese will "beat" us. I'd say guess again. The US can't afford its own space shuttle, but it can afford to fight pointless wars on concepts on foreign soil. The US cut its national science budget. 20% of US citizens apparently believe that the sun orbits the earth. Sure, go ahead. USA #1 we rule. Right. Wait.
I'd say the patent troll is just an extremely environmentally friendly way of doing so: by not producing anything at all in return.
It produces lawyers. And the more money changes hands, the more lawyers will appear. I would rather breathe 3% CO2, have to run my air conditioner at full crank in the middle of a Canadian winter and eat Soylent Green than live in a world where every other person is a lawyer!
The point is to so fully integrate the "problem" into the system that it serves as a source of energy for and an excuse for the continued existence of the system itself.
And thus the followers of the Broken Window Fallacy justify their existence as a "good thing" for society, when actually they are just generating wasted resources. What do all the lawyers, court hours, law enforcement hours, internet monitoring resources, political capital get us? A net loss. Time and money that could have been invested elsewhere for increased production and efficiency.
However markets and economics do not forgive, be it in the form of bankruptcies or economic collapse, or revolution. Sooner or later there is a price to pay if you squander your limited resources.
Oh yeah, that bell labs didn't create anything, same with Xerox, and don't get me started on IBM. Bunch of no nothing corporation that never spend a penny on RnD.
That was when only Bell Labs, IBM and Xerox had computers. You know, pre -1980's?
the discovery of a solar system that is analogous to ours
So there's ANOTHER star out there named Sol?
No, our telescope technology has become so advanced that we can now see ourselves from here, because everyone knows instinctively that if you look far enough - you'll end up seeing the back of your head.
Computer programming is also very amateur friendly. Corporations that throw money into development only end up making similar copies of what already exists. The true innovation has always come from startups and no-names.
Hey, McDonald's is suing a dictionary to try to get the definition of "McJob" changed. Corporate types thing they can push everyone around like they push their slaves. So in Microsoft's case, they are betting that the general public is just as greedy and dumb as their company is. Oh yes brainwash me for a shitty T-shirt made by kids in Malaysia and a one in a couple million chance of winning a $15k (retail) "home entertainment system". How about dropping the price of the OS to $30, and selling more copies?
Hey LiENUS my laptop died and I have a report due, could you lend me your computer for a second? (download download download, burn CD burn CD burn CD) Thanks man, all done.
IP address does not a copyright infringer make. Encryption and passwords or not. Just like arresting everyone in the neighborhood where a gunshot was heard does not make any sense.
There was a legal request for these names, under enforcement by the court, and the University was still refusing. The University should not break the law to protect the accused.
They did the right thing in going ALL the way. IANAL but I can imagine it can't be all that hard to get a "legal request for information". Just have to get a good lawyer to make a convincing argument to a judge. Being told "give the info or go to jail" is pretty much as far as the University can go, and that's where they should go, especially since the RIAA has been known to sue dead people and cats in the past.
And since I AM a doctor, I'll have you know that medical privacy is SO serious that I am not allowed to reveal patient info without the patient's permission. I'm not even allowed to disclose if a person is or is not a patient of mine, without permission. If a judge holds me in contempt, so be it. My duty is to go to jail if faced with contempt. However I won't be too happy with that patient should this happen, and he will be getting a rather large bill for my jail-time on his behalf.
it is assumed that the University should help protect students from the consequences of their (potentially) illegal actions
So according to you, Universities should hand over lists of their students to anyone on demand? How about banks - I'd like to know how much is in your account. If you have too much money then you must have earned it illegally. Hey maybe I should have a look at your medical records too while I'm at it. Our studies show a positive correlation between piracy and type 2 diabetes...
I can envision a probe burrowing and rolling and sliding around the moon's surface, enjoying an unlimited supply of power by sucking in some fuel whenever it needs it.
All those hydrocarbons are completely useless if you don't have an oxidizer. When we combust (here on Earth) we take the atmospheric oxygen for granted despite it being an essential part of the equation. However if there is no oxygen all those hydrocarbons are completely useless to your probe. The limiting factor now becomes how big an oxygen tank you can carry...
Slashdot Mirror
Turnabout is fair play.
"I have no idea - have you been visiting a lot of porn sites dear?"
Unless you mean longitudinal "stretching", I can imagine this fat, spherical bottle offering too much cross sectional area (and therefore drag) to be able to go any far. There's a reason rockets are the shape that they are. Dunno how far you can stretch a pop bottle along its length, though. I guess I'll leave that to the "real scientists", lol.
they'd probably send back pamphlets detailing the benefits of recycling plastic bottles.
;)
Yes because chopping down trees to create pamphlets to send to another planet is much more ecologically sound than sending them our plastic
Canada was never a penal colony?
;)
Québec certainly was, I have criminal ancestors to prove it! (My great great(n times) grandfather was deported to the colonies in 1624 for petty theft). But then is Québec really Canada at all? That's a whole other argument right there, "tabarnac"
Yes because blowing up a couple thousand pounds of hydrazine in space and have it enter the atmosphere as droplets and diffuse everywhere in its toxic form is far preferable to letting it ignite in the atmosphere in the extreme heat of re-entry and hopefully combine with amospheric gases/water vapor to make less toxic substances by the time it gets spread over several hundred miles of ground/ocean. I mean, this is the government thinking for you.
But probably someone has worked out the likely re-entry trajectory and doesn't like it. Ooops, can't have our satellites crashing into Moscow now with a 70% probability, can we?
(air resistance excluded)
You're cheating. In real life air resistance will not do you the favor of excluding itself on the way down. I have no fear of being hit on the head by a falling empty plastic soda bottle from ANY height.
I'm not saying it's a bad thing at all. I'm saying that a certain nation is in for one hell of a shock in a decade or two. Either way I'm neither American nor Chinese.
This new information kinda blows a hole in that theory, huh?
Yes, but His Spaghettiness is most forgiving. May you be touched by His Noodly Appendage forever. Hang on, that sounds a bit like icky things Japanese do with tentacles... oh second thoughts...
Yes, this is known as the Anthropic Principle.
As long as the temperature of the liquid is sufficiently stable, there are sufficient chemical building blocks and there is not too much current, single cell organisms and then multi cell organisms could emerge..
Depends on how you define "intelligence". Our liquids are certainly teeming with intelligent life. Life itself apparently began in our oceans. Fish are certainly very smart - they feed themselves, find mates, defend territory, build defensive structures, some species live and travel in social groups, etc. These are all signs of "intelligence". Then if you want to cheat a bit and look at the ocean mammals - seals, porpoises, whales, these are extremely intelligent aquatic beings.
Arthur C. Clarke, however, argued that CIVILIZATION, however, could not evolve in an aquatic environment, for the simple reason that you cannot have fire underwater. His interesting theory claims that fire, and our control of fire - has been a driving force in our technology. First the fire we would use for slash and burn agriculture - which while being devastating for the environment over the long term gave many short term advantages to the primitive farmer. Fire to make steam is what drove the industrial revolution. And that same power is still in use today, though we get our "fire" in the form of Uranium, or by burning fossil fuels. Then there is the "fire" from the sky - electricity. Harnessing this particular "fire" would be pretty tricky underwater.
I guess it's an interesting concept to play with, and surely there are many possibilities that we biased, land dwelling humans could never dream of, but I respect Mr. Clarke and his idea. I think it would be difficult for an aquatic civilization to arise here or anywhere else.
The truth is that innovation is relentless and unless you have a self-sustaining model over the long haul, it will not work.
The thing is, though, that a dollar will go a lot further in China than it will in the US or Japan. The US currently spends about $100 million per year of public funds for research. The Chinese $400 million. Perhaps a decade or so ago, one could have argued that China wasn't up to it - the infrastructure in gray matter wasn't there. But today - there are many Chinese institutions, with smart Chinese scientists. Yet costs in China are still far less.
So proportionally China is not spending 4 times more than the us, but a great deal more. They have successfully put a man in space - all on their own. Japan has never done this, only Russia and the US.
China is planning both a manned moon mission and a manned mission to Mars. While the proof is in the pudding, they have very ambitious goals. Impressive though Japan's industrial growth and development has been, the need for toys and entertainment and standard of living in Japan has caused a lot of resources to be wasted. I don't think neither you nor I could afford to live very well in Japan. The Chinese political philosophy, however allows them a focus no one else can achieve. They are getting close to the edge of the curve in innovation, and they can still afford to take it much further. This time I think it's for real. Yet America still sleeps.
Yes, complacency is comfortable isn't it? After all, the Chinese economy is booming while the US economy collapses.
Chinese students have been coming to the US for years, learning HARD science - engineering, physics, math, analytical chemistry, etc. Guess what? They don't come here so often any more. THEY DON'T HAVE TO. Chinese universities are now more than adequate. Chinese culture is rich with a history of invention and innovation. And want to know the scary part? They are nowhere NEAR being a fully developed nation, and yet are now the worlds single largest manufacturer of ANYTHING.
Sure, laugh, and be complacent. No way the Chinese will "beat" us. I'd say guess again. The US can't afford its own space shuttle, but it can afford to fight pointless wars on concepts on foreign soil. The US cut its national science budget. 20% of US citizens apparently believe that the sun orbits the earth. Sure, go ahead. USA #1 we rule. Right. Wait.
it will need to be replaced in a few years.
I'd say the patent troll is just an extremely environmentally friendly way of doing so: by not producing anything at all in return.
It produces lawyers. And the more money changes hands, the more lawyers will appear. I would rather breathe 3% CO2, have to run my air conditioner at full crank in the middle of a Canadian winter and eat Soylent Green than live in a world where every other person is a lawyer!
The point is to so fully integrate the "problem" into the system that it serves as a source of energy for and an excuse for the continued existence of the system itself.
And thus the followers of the Broken Window Fallacy justify their existence as a "good thing" for society, when actually they are just generating wasted resources. What do all the lawyers, court hours, law enforcement hours, internet monitoring resources, political capital get us? A net loss. Time and money that could have been invested elsewhere for increased production and efficiency.
However markets and economics do not forgive, be it in the form of bankruptcies or economic collapse, or revolution. Sooner or later there is a price to pay if you squander your limited resources.
Oh yeah, that bell labs didn't create anything, same with Xerox, and don't get me started on IBM. Bunch of no nothing corporation that never spend a penny on RnD.
That was when only Bell Labs, IBM and Xerox had computers. You know, pre -1980's?
As for idiot - fuck yourself.
No, our telescope technology has become so advanced that we can now see ourselves from here, because everyone knows instinctively that if you look far enough - you'll end up seeing the back of your head.
Computer programming is also very amateur friendly. Corporations that throw money into development only end up making similar copies of what already exists. The true innovation has always come from startups and no-names.
Hey, McDonald's is suing a dictionary to try to get the definition of "McJob" changed. Corporate types thing they can push everyone around like they push their slaves. So in Microsoft's case, they are betting that the general public is just as greedy and dumb as their company is. Oh yes brainwash me for a shitty T-shirt made by kids in Malaysia and a one in a couple million chance of winning a $15k (retail) "home entertainment system". How about dropping the price of the OS to $30, and selling more copies?
Idiots.
Hey LiENUS my laptop died and I have a report due, could you lend me your computer for a second? (download download download, burn CD burn CD burn CD) Thanks man, all done.
IP address does not a copyright infringer make. Encryption and passwords or not. Just like arresting everyone in the neighborhood where a gunshot was heard does not make any sense.
There was a legal request for these names, under enforcement by the court, and the University was still refusing. The University should not break the law to protect the accused.
They did the right thing in going ALL the way. IANAL but I can imagine it can't be all that hard to get a "legal request for information". Just have to get a good lawyer to make a convincing argument to a judge. Being told "give the info or go to jail" is pretty much as far as the University can go, and that's where they should go, especially since the RIAA has been known to sue dead people and cats in the past.
And since I AM a doctor, I'll have you know that medical privacy is SO serious that I am not allowed to reveal patient info without the patient's permission. I'm not even allowed to disclose if a person is or is not a patient of mine, without permission. If a judge holds me in contempt, so be it. My duty is to go to jail if faced with contempt. However I won't be too happy with that patient should this happen, and he will be getting a rather large bill for my jail-time on his behalf.
it is assumed that the University should help protect students from the consequences of their (potentially) illegal actions
So according to you, Universities should hand over lists of their students to anyone on demand? How about banks - I'd like to know how much is in your account. If you have too much money then you must have earned it illegally. Hey maybe I should have a look at your medical records too while I'm at it. Our studies show a positive correlation between piracy and type 2 diabetes...
I can envision a probe burrowing and rolling and sliding around the moon's surface, enjoying an unlimited supply of power by sucking in some fuel whenever it needs it.
All those hydrocarbons are completely useless if you don't have an oxidizer. When we combust (here on Earth) we take the atmospheric oxygen for granted despite it being an essential part of the equation. However if there is no oxygen all those hydrocarbons are completely useless to your probe. The limiting factor now becomes how big an oxygen tank you can carry...
Well perhaps OP knew that you yourself would provide the Microsoft reference.
Oh - BINGO!
to rip off & steal, buying something for a buck, & selling it for 3 to PROFIT, etc. et al
This is how Microsoft was BORN. I suggest you revise the company's history a little.