I've seen numerous such studies since the 1980's back it was said the violent TV shows were making kids be violent. I don't know why anyone would spend money on looking at changes in adults for these kinds of things.
The studies that I find are meaningful look for changes and differences between individual children rather than average changes for the groups as a whole. Correlation studies of groups of people for this topic are not interesting because it's the aberrant individuals that are the problem, and the ratio of healthy to aberrant buries the problem when large group studies are done. Marginally increasing aggression in healthy people makes no difference to society, but increasing violent tendencies in a schizophrenic American teenager can (has) create a huge problem.
People vary greatly, and what I find interesting is how violent TV and games affect those people who already show disturbing tendencies. It appears to me that studies show most (i.e healthy) kids are not affected or only slightly affected by such shows and games. But studies that seek (or control for) kids already showing violent tendencies do show significant effects.
The author of the book, Gloria Origgi, is saying nearly the opposite of what many posters think she is saying. She is saying you need to understand how you acquire knowledge and she says you need to examine the sources of that knowledge. There's no blind trust anywhere in her writing.
She is also making two cases. One is that reputation-trusting is how things actually work in the modern world.
There is an underappreciated paradox of knowledge that plays a pivotal role in our advanced hyper-connected liberal democracies: the greater the amount of information that circulates, the more we rely on so-called reputational devices to evaluate it. What makes this paradoxical is that the vastly increased access to information and knowledge we have today does not empower us or make us more cognitively autonomous. Rather, it renders us more dependent on other people’s judgments and evaluations of the information with which we are faced.
Two is that you should not blindly accept new information.
Whenever we are at the point of accepting or rejecting new information, we should ask ourselves: Where does it come from? Does the source have a good reputation? Who are the authorities who believe it? What are my reasons for deferring to these authorities?
For three simple cases: You cannot personally verify the moon landings. You cannot personally verify the efficacy and dangers of vaccines. You cannot personally verify the predictions of climate scientists.
All these things come from other sources, and ultimately you will need to choose and defer to the authority of one or another of these sources as being an objective authority, if you are going to accept new knowledge. And because ultimately you will be making decisions based upon the reputation of these sources, you should be aware that you are making that decision based upon a trust of reputation.
I suppose you could also do these calculations against our motion relative to the cosmic background radiation, that being we move about 390 kilometers/second in the general direction of Regulus, presently.
As of 16 March 2018 at 7:32 EDT, the roadster has gone this far relative to the sun. "The car exceeded its 36,000 mile warranty 1,895.6 times while driving around the Sun, (68,240,857 miles, 109,823,048 km, 0.73 AU) moving at a speed of 70,832 mi/h (113,993 km/h, 31.66 km/s). The orbital period is about 557 days."
Your post brings up my question about the original article, where some guy said "40% of parts" required rework. What does that mean? The way it's written makes it sound like 40% of all the parts used to make a Telsa requires rework. What, 40% overall of all the parts needed to make a Tesla are bad? I call bullshit. This sounds like a reporter that is either misunderstanding what he was told, or intentionally misquoting.
Or does it mean 40% of some certain part? I can believe there's a 40% rate on some certain part such as maybe 40% of window motors required rework or 40% of some transmission gear, but that's not how the article is written.
You are far too optimistic to think they would want to flog us only once a year.
Yes, this. A 24-hour channel streaming ancestor torment.
"Daddy, why are they torturing Elon Musk's brain all year?" "Son, it's because he built the rockets that brought us to this forsaken planet with no way to return to home, to sweet Earth."
These preserved brains will at some point just be recognized as what they are (medical trash) and be disposed off. It is far to easy to make more humans, nobody will care to revive some fossils that have fallen out of time. That is if the possibility is even there in the first place.
I don't doubt that our descendants will want to revive some of us for an annual punishment ceremony.
"nothing in federal law allows them to exempt themselves from standard time"
Does it really work that way, that states can only do things if federal law explicitly allows it? That seems to run contrary to all western law since the Magna Carta, in the sense that they're asking for permission rather than having freedom by default (natural law) and then perhaps an explicit law is made to limit that for the good of wider society.
Florida can get around this if Congress doesn't want to play along. All Florida has to do is leave DST completely and run Eastern Time all year as a few other states have done.
They then set the government office hours and school to be an hour earlier than they would be in Eastern Standard Time.. For example if the driver's license office presently opens at 9:00 AM in January (which is EST), then they set the open time to be 8:00AM for this and all other offices all year long. If schools begin at 9:00AM presently, change the start time to 8:00AM EST all year long. The state can only control school and government office times anyway, and they can change it seasonally if they want. Businesses can set their times around that or not just as they do now.
If they want, the state can allow their offices in the far west part of the state (lower Alabama) to begin an hour later. Or not... and the Feds have no say about that.
What Florida is voting for is to move from EST/EDT to AST (no daylight savings). They are not exempting themselves from Standard Time, they are voting to adopt a different standard timezone. They are voting to eliminate daylight savings time. Standard time in most of the world follows political borders not some raw calculated mean position every 60 minutes apart.
I've seen other posts saying the same thing about this (actually they're moving to Atlantic time), but the wording of the legislative act is about daylight saving time. Go read the actual legislative act, HB1013. http://www.flsenate.gov/Sessio...
short title; providing legislative intent regarding
the State of Florida and its political subdivisions
observing daylight saving time year-round under
certain conditions; providing an effective date.
WHEREAS, the State of Florida is known as the "Sunshine
State," and WHEREAS, as the "Sunshine State," Florida should be kept
sunny year-round, NOW, THEREFORE,
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
Section 1. (1) This section may be cited as the "Sunshine
Protection Act."
(2) If the United States Congress amends 15 U.S.C. s. 260a
to authorize states to observe daylight saving time year-round,
it is the intent of the Legislature that daylight saving time
shall be the year-round standard time of the entire state and
all of its political subdivisions.
Section 2. This act shall take effect July 1, 2018.
The less your opinion about Daylight Savings matters.
That's true, and also the closer you are to the "land of the midnight sun" the less you care about DST.
Furthermore, people on the eastern side of a time zone have a different feeling about DST than those on the western side, because on the western side the sun rises and sets an hour later than for those on the eastern side so they have a built-in DST advantage, or punishment, depending on how long before sunrise you have to get up to get the kids to school.
Here comes another issues which may cause bitcoin value and price to fall
Why would Bitcoin price fall? Nothing has changed because theft has long been a common and practical route to obtaining Bitcoins.
And I doubt that these thieves intend to do mining considering they stole GPU-based miners. Selling the computer parts for Bitcoins would be a quicker route to obtaining Bitcoins.
If, as these industry leaders say, these products are so dangerous, then liability for errors in their design needs to be written into law. And especially for well known bad design errors such as common admin passwords, backdoors, and ports open by default to incoming connections.
At first I agreed that letting the consumers be the judge of what's a danger. There's no way a consumer can know about the internal design of these products, and it's probably illegal to try to find out anything if the manufacturer chooses not to publish. It's not always the purchaser that gets harmed. Buying a device that becomes part of a botnet may cause much more harm to third parties than the purchaser. Who is liable for that harm? Right now, pretty much no one. I can't support making the consumer responsible for making a poor choice of a device that has an obfuscated design and interface.
They claim these are dangerous products. So, let's take their word for it, and make these dangerous products have lawfully required minimum standards in the same way that cars, airplanes, household electric devices, and plumbing do. And make the manufacturer liable for civil and criminal charges if they fail.
My wish list; not in order. Some are supposedly in production, some not. "Grass" by Sherri Tepper "Hyperion" by Dan Simmons "Old Man's War" by John Scalzi The oeuvre of S. Clay Wilson
Not science fiction, but should be filmed "News of the World" by Paulette Jiles "All the Light We Cannot See" by Anthony Doerr
Julian is quite right not to leave the Ecuadoran Embassy while the UK arrest warrant is active. That's because he promised to come to the USA if Chelsea Manning got clemency. Chelsea was granted clemency, is out of jail, and is now running for Congress. Julian Assange wants nothing more than to keep his promise to the USA, and it would make him feel very sad if he could not keep his promise because he was in a British jail. And he probably feels like it would not count as keeping his promise if he came to the USA stuffed in a duffel bag rolling around on the floor of a C-130. It's all about keeping his promise to the USA.
Most legislators are indeed like Ryden. That's why you've never heard of them. No thanks to CNN, FOX, and their ilk for only quoting the spewings of the ones who are clowns.
What I'd like to see is a list of innovations (by industry) made in the last 5 years (or even 10), and next to that where that innovation was made and by whom. Then we would have some idea of how to make an innovation ranking.
Bloomberg's rankings don't look at actual innovations but rather the potential for innovations being created. For example, India produces something like 25% of the world's engineers, but I'm pretty sure 25% of the world's engineering is not being done in India.
Here's Bloomberg's categories:
R&D intensity (R&D expenditure as % of GDP)
Manufacturing value-added (MVA as % GDP and per capita)
Productivity (GDP and GNI per employed person age 15+ and 3Y improvement)
High-tech density (Number of domestic high-tech public companies such as aerospace, defense, biotech,hardware, software, semiconductors, internet software and services, and renewable energy companies as % of publicly listed companies and as share of total world public high-tech)
Tertiary efficiency (how much of population has advanced degrees in the labor force plus what percent is tech degrees)
Researcher concentration (percent of population (per million) that are engaged in R&D)
Patent activity (patent filings, patents in force, per million population, patent filings per $100 billion GDP, and total grants by country as share of world total.)
Countries whose economies grow a lot of food, or use natural resources, or have low unemployment get dinged by the per capita and percent rankings. Bloomberg's methodology favors small manufacturing-intensive countries whether or not that country actually invents anything new at all.
That's why Iceland is above Russia. Or Ireland above the UK. really?
I did see a study done back in the 1990's sort of like what you're describing. They observed some groups of the kids for some time before bringing in games, and the kids were graded on how many times they acted aggressively (toy-stealing, shoving, hitting, etc). Kids are people. Most are decent and some are jerks.
Then some groups got non-violent video games and some got violent video games. In the places that got non-violent games, the individual kids aggression levels remained much the same before and after. In the groups that got violent games, what they observed is that the non-aggressive kids remained the same, but the aggressive kids got worse, and some much worse.
This sort of thing has been born out in other studies in various populations and situations. It looks to me like healthy people aren't affected by exposure to violent shows, porn, criminal caper TV shows or whatever. People who aren't mentally healthy get worse. I suspect those people whose lives get devoted to playing Everquest, CoD, Warcraft or whatever, would get "addicted" to something else, perhaps poker playing, perhaps collecting Hummel figurines, if the games did not exist.
I read many studies on the topic of media-induced behavior changes, and I am very sure that the people who have an agenda know this about the differing reactions of healthy and non-healthy people and design their studies in such a way to take advantage of this phenomenon.
For example, suppose that the people who did the study I described above chose to not differentiate ( not publish those measurements) between the known violent and non-violent kids, but just published the group's number e.g. "before violent games, the group had 5 assaults per hours, and after there were 10 assaults per hour". If you didn't know that only one kid in the group was doing all the assaults, you would get a different conclusion that if you did know that fact.
And you remind me that it get dark on Mars for 12 hours each day, so solar would require battery backup able to supply the 10's of kilowatts for half the day. And to provide battery backup for the weeks-long dust storms would be enormously heavier than the proposed nuclear reactor. Mars rovers can shutdown during storms and nights, people not so much.
The proposed reactor is designed to run for a decade or more. Do we have lithium batteries that can supply a daily charge cycle to provide daily 12 hours of 10's of kilowatts that will last for 10 years? I suppose, though, that regular re-supply would be part of any Mars project for whether a nuclear reactor, pumps, and generators solution or a solar/battery installation. It seems to me that a Mars installation will probably have both nuclear and solar for electricity and heat.
Also, solar is simply not possible for use in Mars polar regions. Mars orbital axis has a tilt of 25.2 degrees (Earth is 23.5), and a year of ~667 Earth days, so winter is darkness for twice as long as a Earth winter. What would be the expense to transport batteries that could supply 10's of kW for 6 months?
Hold on to your out of date clothing. They will be back in style in 10 years. This is why I don't buy name brand clothing. It doesn't have any more quality and hearing people say "cool jacket" is only nice for so long.
Funny you say that. Back in the early 1970's, I was in Rome, and saw an older homeless gentleman in an old suit, probably 30 or 40 years old, because it had wide lapels... just like what had recently come back in style!
I think I saw the youtube video of you fighting him for that jacket. Kudos for your win! It's hard to tell, though; it appeared to be originally recorded in 8mm.
Slashdot Mirror
I've seen numerous such studies since the 1980's back it was said the violent TV shows were making kids be violent.
I don't know why anyone would spend money on looking at changes in adults for these kinds of things.
The studies that I find are meaningful look for changes and differences between individual children rather than average changes for the groups as a whole.
Correlation studies of groups of people for this topic are not interesting because it's the aberrant individuals that are the problem, and the ratio of healthy to aberrant buries the problem when large group studies are done.
Marginally increasing aggression in healthy people makes no difference to society, but increasing violent tendencies in a schizophrenic American teenager can (has) create a huge problem.
People vary greatly, and what I find interesting is how violent TV and games affect those people who already show disturbing tendencies.
It appears to me that studies show most (i.e healthy) kids are not affected or only slightly affected by such shows and games.
But studies that seek (or control for) kids already showing violent tendencies do show significant effects.
The author of the book, Gloria Origgi, is saying nearly the opposite of what many posters think she is saying.
She is saying you need to understand how you acquire knowledge and she says you need to examine the sources of that knowledge.
There's no blind trust anywhere in her writing.
She is also making two cases.
One is that reputation-trusting is how things actually work in the modern world.
There is an underappreciated paradox of knowledge that plays a pivotal role in our advanced hyper-connected liberal democracies: the greater the amount of information that circulates, the more we rely on so-called reputational devices to evaluate it. What makes this paradoxical is that the vastly increased access to information and knowledge we have today does not empower us or make us more cognitively autonomous. Rather, it renders us more dependent on other people’s judgments and evaluations of the information with which we are faced.
Two is that you should not blindly accept new information.
Whenever we are at the point of accepting or rejecting new information, we should ask ourselves: Where does it come from? Does the source have a good reputation? Who are the authorities who believe it? What are my reasons for deferring to these authorities?
For three simple cases:
You cannot personally verify the moon landings.
You cannot personally verify the efficacy and dangers of vaccines.
You cannot personally verify the predictions of climate scientists.
All these things come from other sources, and ultimately you will need to choose and defer to the authority of one or another of these sources as being an objective authority, if you are going to accept new knowledge. And because ultimately you will be making decisions based upon the reputation of these sources, you should be aware that you are making that decision based upon a trust of reputation.
I suppose you could also do these calculations against our motion relative to the cosmic background radiation, that being we move about 390 kilometers/second in the general direction of Regulus, presently.
This guy who says "I'm just this guy" is doing the work for us: http://www.whereisroadster.com...
As of 16 March 2018 at 7:32 EDT, the roadster has gone this far relative to the sun.
"The car exceeded its 36,000 mile warranty 1,895.6 times while driving around the Sun, (68,240,857 miles, 109,823,048 km, 0.73 AU) moving at a speed of 70,832 mi/h (113,993 km/h, 31.66 km/s). The orbital period is about 557 days."
Your post brings up my question about the original article, where some guy said "40% of parts" required rework.
What does that mean? The way it's written makes it sound like 40% of all the parts used to make a Telsa requires rework.
What, 40% overall of all the parts needed to make a Tesla are bad? I call bullshit. This sounds like a reporter that is either misunderstanding what he was told, or intentionally misquoting.
Or does it mean 40% of some certain part?
I can believe there's a 40% rate on some certain part such as maybe 40% of window motors required rework or 40% of some transmission gear, but that's not how the article is written.
But the way the article is written,
You are far too optimistic to think they would want to flog us only once a year.
Yes, this. A 24-hour channel streaming ancestor torment.
"Daddy, why are they torturing Elon Musk's brain all year?"
"Son, it's because he built the rockets that brought us to this forsaken planet with no way to return to home, to sweet Earth."
These preserved brains will at some point just be recognized as what they are (medical trash) and be disposed off. It is far to easy to make more humans, nobody will care to revive some fossils that have fallen out of time. That is if the possibility is even there in the first place.
I don't doubt that our descendants will want to revive some of us for an annual punishment ceremony.
What you suggest is sort of already being done in the adjacent cities of Phenix City Alabama/Columbus Georgia region.
Here's an article about that
http://legacy.decaturdaily.com...
"nothing in federal law allows them to exempt themselves from standard time"
Does it really work that way, that states can only do things if federal law explicitly allows it? That seems to run contrary to all western law since the Magna Carta, in the sense that they're asking for permission rather than having freedom by default (natural law) and then perhaps an explicit law is made to limit that for the good of wider society.
Florida can get around this if Congress doesn't want to play along.
All Florida has to do is leave DST completely and run Eastern Time all year as a few other states have done.
They then set the government office hours and school to be an hour earlier than they would be in Eastern Standard Time..
For example if the driver's license office presently opens at 9:00 AM in January (which is EST), then they set the open time to be 8:00AM for this and all other offices all year long. If schools begin at 9:00AM presently, change the start time to 8:00AM EST all year long.
The state can only control school and government office times anyway, and they can change it seasonally if they want.
Businesses can set their times around that or not just as they do now.
If they want, the state can allow their offices in the far west part of the state (lower Alabama) to begin an hour later. ... and the Feds have no say about that.
Or not
What Florida is voting for is to move from EST/EDT to AST (no daylight savings). They are not exempting themselves from Standard Time, they are voting to adopt a different standard timezone. They are voting to eliminate daylight savings time. Standard time in most of the world follows political borders not some raw calculated mean position every 60 minutes apart.
I've seen other posts saying the same thing about this (actually they're moving to Atlantic time), but the wording of the legislative act is about daylight saving time.
Go read the actual legislative act, HB1013.
http://www.flsenate.gov/Sessio...
short title; providing legislative intent regarding
the State of Florida and its political subdivisions
observing daylight saving time year-round under
certain conditions; providing an effective date.
WHEREAS, the State of Florida is known as the "Sunshine
State," and WHEREAS, as the "Sunshine State," Florida should be kept
sunny year-round, NOW, THEREFORE,
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
Section 1. (1) This section may be cited as the "Sunshine
Protection Act."
(2) If the United States Congress amends 15 U.S.C. s. 260a
to authorize states to observe daylight saving time year-round,
it is the intent of the Legislature that daylight saving time
shall be the year-round standard time of the entire state and
all of its political subdivisions.
Section 2. This act shall take effect July 1, 2018.
The less your opinion about Daylight Savings matters.
That's true, and also the closer you are to the "land of the midnight sun" the less you care about DST.
Furthermore, people on the eastern side of a time zone have a different feeling about DST than those on the western side, because on the western side the sun rises and sets an hour later than for those on the eastern side so they have a built-in DST advantage, or punishment, depending on how long before sunrise you have to get up to get the kids to school.
And it's already over, 11 people arrested.
http://fortune.com/2018/03/05/...
Here comes another issues which may cause bitcoin value and price to fall
Why would Bitcoin price fall?
Nothing has changed because theft has long been a common and practical route to obtaining Bitcoins.
And I doubt that these thieves intend to do mining considering they stole GPU-based miners. Selling the computer parts for Bitcoins would be a quicker route to obtaining Bitcoins.
If, as these industry leaders say, these products are so dangerous, then liability for errors in their design needs to be written into law.
And especially for well known bad design errors such as common admin passwords, backdoors, and ports open by default to incoming connections.
At first I agreed that letting the consumers be the judge of what's a danger. There's no way a consumer can know about the internal design of these products, and it's probably illegal to try to find out anything if the manufacturer chooses not to publish.
It's not always the purchaser that gets harmed. Buying a device that becomes part of a botnet may cause much more harm to third parties than the purchaser. Who is liable for that harm? Right now, pretty much no one. I can't support making the consumer responsible for making a poor choice of a device that has an obfuscated design and interface.
They claim these are dangerous products. So, let's take their word for it, and make these dangerous products have lawfully required minimum standards in the same way that cars, airplanes, household electric devices, and plumbing do. And make the manufacturer liable for civil and criminal charges if they fail.
My wish list; not in order. Some are supposedly in production, some not.
"Grass" by Sherri Tepper
"Hyperion" by Dan Simmons
"Old Man's War" by John Scalzi
The oeuvre of S. Clay Wilson
Not science fiction, but should be filmed
"News of the World" by Paulette Jiles
"All the Light We Cannot See" by Anthony Doerr
Everything has happened before, and everything will happen again.
Whoa!
I thought I'd heard everything, but not that one.
Julian is quite right not to leave the Ecuadoran Embassy while the UK arrest warrant is active.
That's because he promised to come to the USA if Chelsea Manning got clemency.
Chelsea was granted clemency, is out of jail, and is now running for Congress.
Julian Assange wants nothing more than to keep his promise to the USA, and it would make him feel very sad if he could not keep his promise because he was in a British jail. And he probably feels like it would not count as keeping his promise if he came to the USA stuffed in a duffel bag rolling around on the floor of a C-130.
It's all about keeping his promise to the USA.
With those ping times, playing StarCraft is going to be less fun.
Most legislators are indeed like Ryden. That's why you've never heard of them.
No thanks to CNN, FOX, and their ilk for only quoting the spewings of the ones who are clowns.
What I'd like to see is a list of innovations (by industry) made in the last 5 years (or even 10), and next to that where that innovation was made and by whom. Then we would have some idea of how to make an innovation ranking.
Bloomberg's rankings don't look at actual innovations but rather the potential for innovations being created.
For example, India produces something like 25% of the world's engineers, but I'm pretty sure 25% of the world's engineering is not being done in India.
Here's Bloomberg's categories:
R&D intensity (R&D expenditure as % of GDP)
Manufacturing value-added (MVA as % GDP and per capita)
Productivity (GDP and GNI per employed person age 15+ and 3Y improvement)
High-tech density (Number of domestic high-tech public companies such as aerospace, defense, biotech,hardware, software, semiconductors, internet software and services, and renewable energy companies as % of publicly listed companies and as share of total world public high-tech)
Tertiary efficiency (how much of population has advanced degrees in the labor force plus what percent is tech degrees)
Researcher concentration (percent of population (per million) that are engaged in R&D)
Patent activity (patent filings, patents in force, per million population, patent filings per $100 billion GDP, and total grants by country as share of world total.)
Countries whose economies grow a lot of food, or use natural resources, or have low unemployment get dinged by the per capita and percent rankings. Bloomberg's methodology favors small manufacturing-intensive countries whether or not that country actually invents anything new at all.
That's why Iceland is above Russia.
Or Ireland above the UK. really?
I did see a study done back in the 1990's sort of like what you're describing.
They observed some groups of the kids for some time before bringing in games, and the kids were graded on how many times they acted aggressively (toy-stealing, shoving, hitting, etc). Kids are people. Most are decent and some are jerks.
Then some groups got non-violent video games and some got violent video games.
In the places that got non-violent games, the individual kids aggression levels remained much the same before and after.
In the groups that got violent games, what they observed is that the non-aggressive kids remained the same, but the aggressive kids got worse, and some much worse.
This sort of thing has been born out in other studies in various populations and situations.
It looks to me like healthy people aren't affected by exposure to violent shows, porn, criminal caper TV shows or whatever. People who aren't mentally healthy get worse. I suspect those people whose lives get devoted to playing Everquest, CoD, Warcraft or whatever, would get "addicted" to something else, perhaps poker playing, perhaps collecting Hummel figurines, if the games did not exist.
I read many studies on the topic of media-induced behavior changes, and I am very sure that the people who have an agenda know this about the differing reactions of healthy and non-healthy people and design their studies in such a way to take advantage of this phenomenon.
For example, suppose that the people who did the study I described above chose to not differentiate ( not publish those measurements) between the known violent and non-violent kids, but just published the group's number e.g. "before violent games, the group had 5 assaults per hours, and after there were 10 assaults per hour". If you didn't know that only one kid in the group was doing all the assaults, you would get a different conclusion that if you did know that fact.
Here's a NASA video that offers some detail on the setup.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
And you remind me that it get dark on Mars for 12 hours each day, so solar would require battery backup able to supply the 10's of kilowatts for half the day. And to provide battery backup for the weeks-long dust storms would be enormously heavier than the proposed nuclear reactor. Mars rovers can shutdown during storms and nights, people not so much.
The proposed reactor is designed to run for a decade or more. Do we have lithium batteries that can supply a daily charge cycle to provide daily 12 hours of 10's of kilowatts that will last for 10 years?
I suppose, though, that regular re-supply would be part of any Mars project for whether a nuclear reactor, pumps, and generators solution or a solar/battery installation.
It seems to me that a Mars installation will probably have both nuclear and solar for electricity and heat.
Also, solar is simply not possible for use in Mars polar regions.
Mars orbital axis has a tilt of 25.2 degrees (Earth is 23.5), and a year of ~667 Earth days, so winter is darkness for twice as long as a Earth winter.
What would be the expense to transport batteries that could supply 10's of kW for 6 months?
And when the company's C-levels are going to work on driverless motorcycles, then I'll believe driverless technology is ready.
http://media1.break.com/dnet/m...
Hold on to your out of date clothing. They will be back in style in 10 years. This is why I don't buy name brand clothing. It doesn't have any more quality and hearing people say "cool jacket" is only nice for so long.
Funny you say that. Back in the early 1970's, I was in Rome, and saw an older homeless gentleman in an old suit, probably 30 or 40 years old, because it had wide lapels ... just like what had recently come back in style!
I think I saw the youtube video of you fighting him for that jacket. Kudos for your win!
It's hard to tell, though; it appeared to be originally recorded in 8mm.