Who are you accusing of not having any skin the game? People who actually breathe air? They don't have any 'skin' in the game?
Corporate average fleet mileage (CAFE) has a tenuous connection to air pollution (diesels get better mileage on average...ever stand behind one? Ever hear of 'Volkswagen?').
And carbon dioxide at 400ppm, 500ppm, 600ppm, 700ppm, etc. is a clear odorless gas with no impact on air quality.
The Church of Carbontology now sues EPA for survival (they need state power to make their moral misery a monopoly, like any church)...instead of dreaming up new ways to sue Exxon et al for an endless sinecure by said fiat.
What's that hayseed song from Team America..."Freedom isn't free? It costs a hefty f*'kin fee." Song needs a rework "Facebook isn't free, the bill is data from you and me."
Far cheaper (and safer) would be a spinning wheel in orbit a'la 2001. Doesn't have to even be human-sized (lab rats in space!); and the gravity level is user-selectable.
I don't think there's a realistic plan on the table anymore for a manned Mars mission that doesn't involve in-situ production of propellant on Mars as part of the propellant budget.
The best Mars-simulator available to humans is Antarctica here on Earth. Lets compare....
Atmosphere? Mars and Earth have one, Moon none.
Weather? Well, with atmospheres come weather. Sorry Moon.
Diurnal period? Earth's day = 24 hours. Mars day = ~24 hours. Moon day? About a month.
Temps? Antarctica very good imitator of Martian temps; Moon swings hundreds of degrees just between light and shadow.
The only thing Moon and Mars really share relative to us is that humans have to get on a rocket to go to either place. That's about it.
As all decent Sci-fi readers know the moon will become the industrial center of the solar system once we decide to start working in space for real.
Ideally the two things could be done in parallel, get people living on the moon at the same time advanced robotic missions to Mars are occurring.
Aerobraking is not small part of equation. Aerobraking changes delta-V req's and also needs a heatshield and some aerodynamics for atmospheric entry; a Moon lander would essentially be different vehicle from a Mars lander - i.e. there is no practical experience gained practicing Moon landings in Moon-landers as it relates to doing anything like that on Mars. You'd actually get better practice just lobbing Mars lander up close to escape and aerobrake coming back down. (that technique actually employed during Apollo - which is good analog of what I'm talking about...compare the CM to the LM. They are both landers and yet nothing alike).
Also the Moon becoming industrial center of solar system is more fiction than science. What resources are there (beyond the ice) is all diffuse in the regolith. Most everything you'd need on the Moon has to be shipped from somewhere else. It will always cost more delta-V (hence propellant) to ship something from point A to the Moon and then from Moon to point B instead of just going from point A to point B. Delta V is everything in space travel.
I've never understood how going to the Moon is good practice for manned trip to Mars.
For one thing, the voyages are completely different. Not just the distances and duration, but a Mars vehicle would use aerobraking (not possible on the Moon) which ironically takes total delta-V for a Mars mission below delta-V req for a Moon mission which has to expend propellant to land.
And the destinations are so different. The spacesuits, tools, transports, infrastructure...not much similarity between what would work well on the Moon vis-a-vis what would work ideally on Mars.
I think the manned-mission centric science that needs to be done in space is partial gravity research on biological systems. We have tons of experience and data telling us how bad it is for one's health to be in zero-g for extended periods. We basically have zero data on how bad 50% earth gravity is, or 10% earth gravity. Is the physiological impact of zero g vs. 1 g linear? Such to say if one is in gravity field 20% strong as Earth's for a long time, will they experience only 80% of the deleterious effects of zero G? Whats the scale there? Interesting very important aspect of our entire future in space and we have no data on it. Bizarre.
And quantum properties are always discreet state-changes, like flipping bits. There is no entanglement property that extends beyond a single degree of freedom; i.e. one single dimension. I've always thought that an interesting observation.
If I recall, John Bell was not a fan of the Copenhagen interpretation, was very interested in De Broglie-Bohm pilot-wave interpretation (using non-local hidden variables), and his theorem was built as a test of local-hidden variable theories - which have been ruled out by his theorem.
Reactions from a thermonuclear war would be identifiable and forensically reconstructible even from all the way back 65 million years ago. This is how the tritium would be found out; not from directly finding tritium, but exhausting other possible neutron sources that can explain isotope assay left behind today. Obviously nothing like a thermonuclear war is in earth's past.
Copyright has evolved with the tech. Since a movie is theoretically 'forever,' copyright has been expanding sunset provision to copyright holder out towards...forever. This is why Mickey Mouse's Steamboat Willie from 1928 is still controlled by Disney even though anybody who actually made it, or invented Mickey Mouse, is dead. The only 'copyright holder' is a corporation peopled by nobody who had a hand creating Mickey Mouse. If patents worked that way, patent infringement would be kinda rampant.
That corrupt setup with copyright worked between corporations, but only so long as corporations controlled the manufacture of movie media and distribution channels for said media. Ever since CD burners and the internet that (wait for it) 'paradigm' has changed
So now there's this copyright legal institution that is built to keep media properties proprietary to corporations in perpetuity decades after the creator died...yet the actual enforcing mechanism - corporations controlling media manufacture and distribution - no longer applies.
Maybe on CNN with their readers. But on Slashdot I think going assumption is outfits like Facebook try manipulating every piece of info on a user to target stupid ads.
Tomorrow we'll learn Facebook tried not-so-PC datapoints to target mortgage ads. Stuff like sexy preferences or what race the user might be etc. Everyone will be in shock I guess - except me because I assume they're doing that already. I would guess most Slashers are in same boat.
Copyright used to be approximate to patents in legal protections and tenure (~17 years).
In this form, copyright remained sleepy legal corner of patent law until record players, radios, and film.
The controllers of those innovations perverted copyright to suit control of media, calibrated to their distribution technologies. Unwittingly, they've constructed a legalism as outdated as the technologies that drove modern perception of copyright.
Technology incentivized copyright into becoming the legal disaster it is today. It has to evolve with that technology or become more toothless and pointless than it already is.
For the signal to be obvious in the geological record, it has to be sustained, but for a civilization to persist long enough to be obvious in geological time scales, they have to be in equilibrium with the environment.
But the premise is easily falsifiable just sitting at a table thinking. Total thermonuclear war would leave a long radionuclide record, one that today's nuclear scientists could forensically walk reactions back and wonder where all the tritium and plutonium must've come from.
Even pre-industrial outfit like the Roman Empire being all non-mechanized and 'sustainable' left permanent ice-core layer from all their silver-smelting in Spain, using sluice-flood techniques that shaped the Rio Tinto landscape into something like Bryce Canyon. That'll last a few millions of years or so.
These are societies that come and go in blink of geologic time, with all kinds of technologies. This is easy
If by 'industrial age' one means humanity circa, say, 19th Century steam age, there would be some traces I figure. Some inferred as mysteries unto themselves.
A good example is the "Colombian exchange."
Any paleontologist fifty million years from now, assuming they know plate tectonics, is going to be wondering why all these different fossils are found in only very specific places before a certain rock layer, then suddenly are everywhere in the world above that rock layer. From dogs to cows to sheep to peach trees to corn that's going to invite questions.
If prosecutor really wants to get you they just get you. If they want to go get all the lawyer-docs, they'll just do that. Look at the President for an example. Think Zuck or his lawyer gets wind of FISA warrants ahead of everyone else? Not if he's target of it.
Sign pledge not to 'assist the government in attacks?' That's cute, and it won't matter if government really wants something.
For instance, how many times I wonder did Backpage CEO guy talk tough; about protecting user data or never giving into the politicians or the cops or whatever. They wheeled him down to the station, let him think about couple decades in prison, and...voila: he rolled over like Rover on his business, all his customers, and undoubtedly some close associates and friends.
Now think of tough guys like Tim Cook or Zuck getting the treatment in situation like that. Yeah, pledge lolol.
Between them, the Americans and Chinese design and manufacture pretty much most the world's digital network.
Russians and all their hacking can't replace glaring disadvantage that they are, as a nation, basically a pilotfish getting dragged around by a shark they can only peripherally try to influence. Given such a disadvantage, their own IT security must be compromised eleventy billion interesting and critical ways I suspect.
I suspect there is something to having good analytics about what people - as in the vast majority of people living beyond pop-culture's limited horizon - actually watch. Nielsen ratings are as antiquated as NTSC, and everyone knew it but nobody had different datasets to compare. With Netflix et al, now they do.
And there is precedent for this in movies - which bank on books almost by default. Outside of Star Trek, Star Wars, and Pixar, every big franchise started with a book. And its been that way ever since Popcorn Movie era began with Jaws (not ironically originally a book).
There's been exceptions like Indiana Jones and The Matrix, but overwhelmingly Hollywood depends on books to not only get plots, but gauge popularity (and longevity) of a given book to ascertain market for making movies and TV based on it.
Slashdot Mirror
They can acknowledge unicorns for all I care. Just so long as the leach unicorn priests don't get a free check I'm fine.
And if that's the hardest anything you've seen on Slashdot your world must be rather soft - in all kinds of ways.
Who are you accusing of not having any skin the game? People who actually breathe air? They don't have any 'skin' in the game?
Corporate average fleet mileage (CAFE) has a tenuous connection to air pollution (diesels get better mileage on average...ever stand behind one? Ever hear of 'Volkswagen?').
And carbon dioxide at 400ppm, 500ppm, 600ppm, 700ppm, etc. is a clear odorless gas with no impact on air quality.
The Church of Carbontology now sues EPA for survival (they need state power to make their moral misery a monopoly, like any church)...instead of dreaming up new ways to sue Exxon et al for an endless sinecure by said fiat.
Judging from the typical FB feed, all the interesting and sexy singles (real ones, not bots) are the ones who aren't on Facebook.
What's that hayseed song from Team America..."Freedom isn't free? It costs a hefty f*'kin fee." Song needs a rework "Facebook isn't free, the bill is data from you and me."
Far cheaper (and safer) would be a spinning wheel in orbit a'la 2001. Doesn't have to even be human-sized (lab rats in space!); and the gravity level is user-selectable.
I don't think there's a realistic plan on the table anymore for a manned Mars mission that doesn't involve in-situ production of propellant on Mars as part of the propellant budget.
The best Mars-simulator available to humans is Antarctica here on Earth. Lets compare.... Atmosphere? Mars and Earth have one, Moon none. Weather? Well, with atmospheres come weather. Sorry Moon. Diurnal period? Earth's day = 24 hours. Mars day = ~24 hours. Moon day? About a month. Temps? Antarctica very good imitator of Martian temps; Moon swings hundreds of degrees just between light and shadow. The only thing Moon and Mars really share relative to us is that humans have to get on a rocket to go to either place. That's about it.
As all decent Sci-fi readers know the moon will become the industrial center of the solar system once we decide to start working in space for real. Ideally the two things could be done in parallel, get people living on the moon at the same time advanced robotic missions to Mars are occurring.
Aerobraking is not small part of equation. Aerobraking changes delta-V req's and also needs a heatshield and some aerodynamics for atmospheric entry; a Moon lander would essentially be different vehicle from a Mars lander - i.e. there is no practical experience gained practicing Moon landings in Moon-landers as it relates to doing anything like that on Mars. You'd actually get better practice just lobbing Mars lander up close to escape and aerobrake coming back down. (that technique actually employed during Apollo - which is good analog of what I'm talking about...compare the CM to the LM. They are both landers and yet nothing alike).
Also the Moon becoming industrial center of solar system is more fiction than science. What resources are there (beyond the ice) is all diffuse in the regolith. Most everything you'd need on the Moon has to be shipped from somewhere else. It will always cost more delta-V (hence propellant) to ship something from point A to the Moon and then from Moon to point B instead of just going from point A to point B. Delta V is everything in space travel.
I've never understood how going to the Moon is good practice for manned trip to Mars.
For one thing, the voyages are completely different. Not just the distances and duration, but a Mars vehicle would use aerobraking (not possible on the Moon) which ironically takes total delta-V for a Mars mission below delta-V req for a Moon mission which has to expend propellant to land.
And the destinations are so different. The spacesuits, tools, transports, infrastructure...not much similarity between what would work well on the Moon vis-a-vis what would work ideally on Mars.
I think the manned-mission centric science that needs to be done in space is partial gravity research on biological systems. We have tons of experience and data telling us how bad it is for one's health to be in zero-g for extended periods. We basically have zero data on how bad 50% earth gravity is, or 10% earth gravity. Is the physiological impact of zero g vs. 1 g linear? Such to say if one is in gravity field 20% strong as Earth's for a long time, will they experience only 80% of the deleterious effects of zero G? Whats the scale there? Interesting very important aspect of our entire future in space and we have no data on it. Bizarre.
And quantum properties are always discreet state-changes, like flipping bits. There is no entanglement property that extends beyond a single degree of freedom; i.e. one single dimension. I've always thought that an interesting observation.
If I recall, John Bell was not a fan of the Copenhagen interpretation, was very interested in De Broglie-Bohm pilot-wave interpretation (using non-local hidden variables), and his theorem was built as a test of local-hidden variable theories - which have been ruled out by his theorem.
Apparently, the source is open more ways than one.
Reactions from a thermonuclear war would be identifiable and forensically reconstructible even from all the way back 65 million years ago. This is how the tritium would be found out; not from directly finding tritium, but exhausting other possible neutron sources that can explain isotope assay left behind today. Obviously nothing like a thermonuclear war is in earth's past.
Copyright has evolved with the tech. Since a movie is theoretically 'forever,' copyright has been expanding sunset provision to copyright holder out towards...forever. This is why Mickey Mouse's Steamboat Willie from 1928 is still controlled by Disney even though anybody who actually made it, or invented Mickey Mouse, is dead. The only 'copyright holder' is a corporation peopled by nobody who had a hand creating Mickey Mouse. If patents worked that way, patent infringement would be kinda rampant.
That corrupt setup with copyright worked between corporations, but only so long as corporations controlled the manufacture of movie media and distribution channels for said media. Ever since CD burners and the internet that (wait for it) 'paradigm' has changed
So now there's this copyright legal institution that is built to keep media properties proprietary to corporations in perpetuity decades after the creator died...yet the actual enforcing mechanism - corporations controlling media manufacture and distribution - no longer applies.
Maybe on CNN with their readers. But on Slashdot I think going assumption is outfits like Facebook try manipulating every piece of info on a user to target stupid ads.
Tomorrow we'll learn Facebook tried not-so-PC datapoints to target mortgage ads. Stuff like sexy preferences or what race the user might be etc. Everyone will be in shock I guess - except me because I assume they're doing that already. I would guess most Slashers are in same boat.
Copyright used to be approximate to patents in legal protections and tenure (~17 years).
In this form, copyright remained sleepy legal corner of patent law until record players, radios, and film.
The controllers of those innovations perverted copyright to suit control of media, calibrated to their distribution technologies. Unwittingly, they've constructed a legalism as outdated as the technologies that drove modern perception of copyright.
Technology incentivized copyright into becoming the legal disaster it is today. It has to evolve with that technology or become more toothless and pointless than it already is.
For the signal to be obvious in the geological record, it has to be sustained, but for a civilization to persist long enough to be obvious in geological time scales, they have to be in equilibrium with the environment.
But the premise is easily falsifiable just sitting at a table thinking. Total thermonuclear war would leave a long radionuclide record, one that today's nuclear scientists could forensically walk reactions back and wonder where all the tritium and plutonium must've come from.
Even pre-industrial outfit like the Roman Empire being all non-mechanized and 'sustainable' left permanent ice-core layer from all their silver-smelting in Spain, using sluice-flood techniques that shaped the Rio Tinto landscape into something like Bryce Canyon. That'll last a few millions of years or so.
These are societies that come and go in blink of geologic time, with all kinds of technologies. This is easy
If by 'industrial age' one means humanity circa, say, 19th Century steam age, there would be some traces I figure. Some inferred as mysteries unto themselves. A good example is the "Colombian exchange." Any paleontologist fifty million years from now, assuming they know plate tectonics, is going to be wondering why all these different fossils are found in only very specific places before a certain rock layer, then suddenly are everywhere in the world above that rock layer. From dogs to cows to sheep to peach trees to corn that's going to invite questions.
If prosecutor really wants to get you they just get you. If they want to go get all the lawyer-docs, they'll just do that. Look at the President for an example. Think Zuck or his lawyer gets wind of FISA warrants ahead of everyone else? Not if he's target of it.
Sign pledge not to 'assist the government in attacks?' That's cute, and it won't matter if government really wants something.
For instance, how many times I wonder did Backpage CEO guy talk tough; about protecting user data or never giving into the politicians or the cops or whatever. They wheeled him down to the station, let him think about couple decades in prison, and...voila: he rolled over like Rover on his business, all his customers, and undoubtedly some close associates and friends.
Now think of tough guys like Tim Cook or Zuck getting the treatment in situation like that. Yeah, pledge lolol.
Between them, the Americans and Chinese design and manufacture pretty much most the world's digital network.
Russians and all their hacking can't replace glaring disadvantage that they are, as a nation, basically a pilotfish getting dragged around by a shark they can only peripherally try to influence. Given such a disadvantage, their own IT security must be compromised eleventy billion interesting and critical ways I suspect.
When Russian security services ban your product because encryption too good, isn't that like seal of approval for the encryption?
I suspect there is something to having good analytics about what people - as in the vast majority of people living beyond pop-culture's limited horizon - actually watch. Nielsen ratings are as antiquated as NTSC, and everyone knew it but nobody had different datasets to compare. With Netflix et al, now they do.
And there is precedent for this in movies - which bank on books almost by default. Outside of Star Trek, Star Wars, and Pixar, every big franchise started with a book. And its been that way ever since Popcorn Movie era began with Jaws (not ironically originally a book).
There's been exceptions like Indiana Jones and The Matrix, but overwhelmingly Hollywood depends on books to not only get plots, but gauge popularity (and longevity) of a given book to ascertain market for making movies and TV based on it.
Ambien is Foundation Series in a bottle. How does one express effects of a sleeping pill on the TV? An artistic challenge right there.
And its TV, which means they have to sex it up somehow. How do you do that with Foundation Series?
Its going to be nothing like the books, or its going to be unwatchable. Probably both.