> With the amount of data requied there > will be a big boost of business for the > Hard Drive Companies
Hmm. Perhaps a way to fight the system? Someone needs to come up with a system that dramatically increases the number of connections/user accounts/identities that must be recorded, thus forcing the providers to complain...and hire their own lobbyists.
> Firefly wasn't as much about action > either, and I only saw half a dozen > episodes of it, but I loved it.
Didn't love it too much, I guess. The 1st few Firefly eps didn't do it for me, and I had to go back before it hooked me...and I became a total convert later.
My advice? Give it another chance. Go buy or rent the entire 1st season of BSG and give it some time to settle into you. I think it might grow on you.
If you can't deal with something minor like this, it's your loss. You might not like some aspect of the camera work, but you're missing some of the best TV out there.
This reminds me of people who refused to watch Buffy the Vampire Slayer because it was about a blonde teenage heroine and featured silly makeup. And THEY missed some of the best TV ever created.
> Wind is not practical as a sole energy source. > It's great for augmenting but the wind just doesn't > blow all the time.
Gosh! Now, what we need is a way around that. Sigh. Too bad we don't have one! Oh, wait! I think I've heard about a ways to store energy...a 'battery' is it?
And there are several other storage & distribution measures that make your argument fail. Sorry.
> Contrary to popular misguided belief, storage > of waste fuel is not a problem.
So: how did you overcome the problem of knowing in advance what's going to happen at and around the site for the next 25,000 years or so that the spent fuel (and all of the associated materials, which I'll wager aren't stored onsite, but shipped to bulk low-grade waste storage facilities...spent fuel is only part of the problem) will be dangerous?
Answer? You didn't. You've built a temporary storage solution for a non-temporary (on human timescales) problem. And the waste doesn't become non-dangerous for a long enough period that you simply can't ensure it will remain safe.
"My cousin Rhonda ate bell peppers for a whole year, along with some wheatgrass juice and some powdered starfish sperm. Now she's cured cancer, runs 50km every day, and is in touch with her inner goddess!"
> Move along, nothing to see here. Just more America-hating handwringing. So...we've managed to outrun the reaper so far, therefore everything's ok and we'll be fine so get me another order of 6mpg SUVs and needless wars and patriotic environmental destruction?
> Not long from now people will start speculating that the rovers > are CGI animation and start finding hundreds of "deffects" in the > Mars shots that demonstrate they've been "Photoshopped".
This fruit loop, oddly enough, uses photoshop himself to demonstrate that the GOVERNMENT IS LYING! The things that look like rocks all over the surface of Mars ARE ACTUALLY PIECES OF ALIEN MACHINERY! OMG!!!
Seriously, every time I go look at the site's front page, there's some new insane bit of conspiracy propaganda about "artificial features" and "NASA coverups" and other assorted drivel.
> People are cruel, people are doubtful. You can respect the latter but pitty the former.
Well, I pity farmers, but only because it's a hard life. With regard to cruel and doubtful, I mostly find that people are just plain stupid.
> Imagine yourself in the shoes of the person in NASA trying to explain > a budget subcommitee in the Senate that "the rover needs a clutch and this > is why it will be heavier by X pounds"
Imagine a senator or representative who is capable of even understanding the issue. Congressmen ('congresspeople'?) pay attention to pork, funding, and reelection. The best fit in a little actual thinking about issues from time to time, but they typically don't end up on oversight or budget committees.
> If they'd just get rid of those expensive shuttles and invest in new launch > hardware based on modern technology, they'd have plenty of money
If they'd just get rid of those expensive shuttles...then we'd have an unfinished boondoggle of a space station sitting in orbit with zero science capability that eats up billions of dollars and takes 2-3 guys just to keep it from falling apart.
> NASA = National Aeronautics and Space Administration > > Not a word in there about science.
Let's see...the Bureau of "Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms" has nothing in its name about explosives, so they really shouldn't be in the business of regulating anything else. The "Food and Drug Administration" doesn't have anything in its name about medical devices, so it really shouldn't be in the business of regulating those nifty devices doctors use on us during surgery. The "US Forest Service" says nothing about logging, so let's stop it from leasing to loggers.
This whole topic is starting to bring the dittoheads out of the woodwork, it seems. Too bad none of them can piece together a vlid argument...
> You're saying it is ok to rob from me to pay others to do research that I'm not interested in.
I see.
So it's "robbing from you" when taxes are used for fundamental research, but when my tax money goes to help the government kill people who don't look like I do across the ocean, it's "national security", eh?
> You also say that public research brings advances to society, but I don't believe that, either.
That may be the funniest, stupidest thing I've EVER read on/. And I've been here for a long time. Congrats.
> for them to take you seriously you're going to have to at least ask for 10 million....Or have an armada of sharks handy. With laser beams attached to their heads.
Yeah, agreed. Because so far 2.0 looks pretty lame.
From TFA:
> Both are planning on operating passenger sub-orbital flights.
Until they're doing more than a) planning, and b) better than sub-orbital, this whole thing is just an exercise in venture capitalist handjobs. "Suborbital space travel" ISN'T SPACE TRAVEL. It's a money hole for people with too much money (whether they're potential customers or Richard Branson).
Now, if they were doing REAL space travel (which I define as being further than Earth-orbit or to any body other than Earth - i.e., Moon qualifies), I'd be first in line.
More importantly, does anyone outside of the legal department in Redmond actually care that it's been leaked?
I mean, it might be good for a laugh before going back to real browsing in Opera and FF, but why in the world would anyone who is actually paying attention to browsers want to a) dwnload this, and b) actually install it?
> Anyway, who besides an adolescent male appends '69' to their username?
Someone who knows history? What happened in 1969? Could it be...no, wait a minute, I think I've got it....we landed on the moon? The moon, as in "Luna"?
You're right - FF was done a huge disservice by the people who put the lineup together. Well-written, character-driven SF on TV *can* be successful (e.g., BsG), but not if it's put in the wrong place at the wrong time. It's a shame, because the writing was great, the cast was obviously in sync, and there was plenty of room for storyline growth.
Oh well.
What will happen, eventually -- Hollywood is going to have to be dragged into the future kicking and screaming -- is that we will move away from this broadcast delivery model in which we are expected to watch shows at specific times. Once the whole issue of how money changes hands gets worked out, things will progress rapidly, I think - witness the popularity of TiVO and its copycats. As long as content producers can find a way to get paid, they'll be on board...and it may turn out that when people can watch whatever they want, whenever they want, that shows like FF have more of a shot at building an audience.
Of course then marketing shows to the public becomes an issue: in the broadcast model, there are only so many channels, and only so many hours in the day. This limits the pool of competitors for eyeballs. When people can choose from a wider array of content and watch it on their terms, profits can be diluted, competition can be fiercer for eyeball loyalty, etc.
On a related note: if I could, I would gladly pay a nominal fee to watch serial shows like BsG, FF, etc. without commercials. If I could buy access to what amounts to about 40 minutes of actual content, skip the commercials, and see the show in high def, I'd GLADLY pay the content producers.
> If only somebody could convince Sci-Fi to stop making > a new 'oh no monster' craptastic movie each month
Precisely.
I'd rather they spend their money on making maybe one great show per season (and fill the rest of the time with reruns, old movies, independently produced shows by up-and-coming directors, etc) than continue to try and force feed us a steady diet of "Stargate: [$x]" or "[$deadly_animal_name]: The Lost City" or "[$any_show_in_space]".
They're far too conservative (not taking chances with new and interesting material), pour too much money into schlock that appeals to nobody but twelve year old boys, and generally give "Science Fiction" a bad name. There's so much excellent, interesting, literary, smart science fiction out there, it's a crying shame that, for the most part, the best that hollywood seems to be able to do is cough up formulaic pap.
I *do* have to give them credit for carrying BsG, which ranks right up there with the best stuff on TV (I rate it, on my personal scale, in the same neighborhood as the best seasons of BtVS, Showtime's "Weeds", HBO's "Six Feet Under", etc).
Slashdot Mirror
> With the amount of data requied there
> will be a big boost of business for the
> Hard Drive Companies
Hmm. Perhaps a way to fight the system? Someone needs to come up with a system that dramatically increases the number of connections/user accounts/identities that must be recorded, thus forcing the providers to complain...and hire their own lobbyists.
> do they have any idea how much this would
> COST the ISP's and hosting companies??!
It is a vile and awful truth that cost is the one thing that might defeat such proposed bills.
Yes, they can...but they won't.
People are sheep.
(I live just outside Rep. DeGette's district, but sent her a lengthy comment anyway. Will it make a difference? No.)
> Firefly wasn't as much about action
> either, and I only saw half a dozen
> episodes of it, but I loved it.
Didn't love it too much, I guess. The 1st few Firefly eps didn't do it for me, and I had to go back before it hooked me...and I became a total convert later.
My advice? Give it another chance. Go buy or rent the entire 1st season of BSG and give it some time to settle into you. I think it might grow on you.
If you can't deal with something minor like this, it's your loss. You might not like some aspect of the camera work, but you're missing some of the best TV out there.
This reminds me of people who refused to watch Buffy the Vampire Slayer because it was about a blonde teenage heroine and featured silly makeup. And THEY missed some of the best TV ever created.
Cylons aren't robots. They're Cylons.
> Wind is not practical as a sole energy source.
> It's great for augmenting but the wind just doesn't
> blow all the time.
Gosh! Now, what we need is a way around that. Sigh. Too bad we don't have one! Oh, wait! I think I've heard about a ways to store energy...a 'battery' is it?
And there are several other storage & distribution measures that make your argument fail. Sorry.
> Contrary to popular misguided belief, storage
> of waste fuel is not a problem.
So: how did you overcome the problem of knowing in advance what's going to happen at and around the site for the next 25,000 years or so that the spent fuel (and all of the associated materials, which I'll wager aren't stored onsite, but shipped to bulk low-grade waste storage facilities...spent fuel is only part of the problem) will be dangerous?
Answer? You didn't. You've built a temporary storage solution for a non-temporary (on human timescales) problem. And the waste doesn't become non-dangerous for a long enough period that you simply can't ensure it will remain safe.
mod parent up!!!!
"My cousin Rhonda ate bell peppers for a whole year, along with some wheatgrass juice and some powdered starfish sperm. Now she's cured cancer, runs 50km every day, and is in touch with her inner goddess!"
Common, in Boulder, Colorado. Where I live. Not skinny, moderately fit, and only mildly crazy.
I'd be hard pressed to give that [meat] up, after all,
The fact that you'd be hard-pressed to give it up has little or nothing to do with whether it's a great healthy choice.
> Move along, nothing to see here. Just more America-hating handwringing.
So...we've managed to outrun the reaper so far, therefore everything's ok and we'll be fine so get me another order of 6mpg SUVs and needless wars and patriotic environmental destruction?
> Not long from now people will start speculating that the rovers
> are CGI animation and start finding hundreds of "deffects" in the
> Mars shots that demonstrate they've been "Photoshopped".
They already are: http://www.enterprisemission.com/spirit2.htm
This fruit loop, oddly enough, uses photoshop himself to demonstrate that the GOVERNMENT IS LYING! The things that look like rocks all over the surface of Mars ARE ACTUALLY PIECES OF ALIEN MACHINERY! OMG!!!
Seriously, every time I go look at the site's front page, there's some new insane bit of conspiracy propaganda about "artificial features" and "NASA coverups" and other assorted drivel.
> People are cruel, people are doubtful. You can respect the latter but pitty the former.
Well, I pity farmers, but only because it's a hard life. With regard to cruel and doubtful, I mostly find that people are just plain stupid.
> Imagine yourself in the shoes of the person in NASA trying to explain
> a budget subcommitee in the Senate that "the rover needs a clutch and this
> is why it will be heavier by X pounds"
Imagine a senator or representative who is capable of even understanding the issue. Congressmen ('congresspeople'?) pay attention to pork, funding, and reelection. The best fit in a little actual thinking about issues from time to time, but they typically don't end up on oversight or budget committees.
Good news?
This is the equivalent of [insert something at once infuriating and irrelevant here].
This is about as cool as "Socially retarded software engineer developes method for using slivers of wood to pick food from space between teeth."
Will my karma suffer because fanboys will mod this down as a troll?
Yes.
Am I posting as AC?
No.
> If they'd just get rid of those expensive shuttles and invest in new launch
> hardware based on modern technology, they'd have plenty of money
If they'd just get rid of those expensive shuttles...then we'd have an unfinished boondoggle of a space station sitting in orbit with zero science capability that eats up billions of dollars and takes 2-3 guys just to keep it from falling apart.
Oh, wait...
> NASA = National Aeronautics and Space Administration
>
> Not a word in there about science.
Let's see...the Bureau of "Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms" has nothing in its name about explosives, so they really shouldn't be in the business of regulating anything else. The "Food and Drug Administration" doesn't have anything in its name about medical devices, so it really shouldn't be in the business of regulating those nifty devices doctors use on us during surgery. The "US Forest Service" says nothing about logging, so let's stop it from leasing to loggers.
This whole topic is starting to bring the dittoheads out of the woodwork, it seems. Too bad none of them can piece together a vlid argument...
> You're saying it is ok to rob from me to pay others to do research that I'm not interested in.
/. And I've been here for a long time. Congrats.
I see.
So it's "robbing from you" when taxes are used for fundamental research, but when my tax money goes to help the government kill people who don't look like I do across the ocean, it's "national security", eh?
> You also say that public research brings advances to society, but I don't believe that, either.
That may be the funniest, stupidest thing I've EVER read on
> for them to take you seriously you're going to have to at least ask for 10 million. ...Or have an armada of sharks handy. With laser beams attached to their heads.
> Let's go for Space Race 3.0!!!
Yeah, agreed. Because so far 2.0 looks pretty lame.
From TFA:
> Both are planning on operating passenger sub-orbital flights.
Until they're doing more than a) planning, and b) better than sub-orbital, this whole thing is just an exercise in venture capitalist handjobs. "Suborbital space travel" ISN'T SPACE TRAVEL. It's a money hole for people with too much money (whether they're potential customers or Richard Branson).
Now, if they were doing REAL space travel (which I define as being further than Earth-orbit or to any body other than Earth - i.e., Moon qualifies), I'd be first in line.
> So has the first exploit been leaked too?
More importantly, does anyone outside of the legal department in Redmond actually care that it's been leaked?
I mean, it might be good for a laugh before going back to real browsing in Opera and FF, but why in the world would anyone who is actually paying attention to browsers want to a) dwnload this, and b) actually install it?
....Hey, let's just put EVERYTHING into the kernel! User space? Bah!
> It's just an object. Doesn't mean what you think.
Nice sig.
> Anyway, who besides an adolescent male appends '69' to their username?
Someone who knows history? What happened in 1969? Could it be...no, wait a minute, I think I've got it....we landed on the moon? The moon, as in "Luna"?
You're right - FF was done a huge disservice by the people who put the lineup together. Well-written, character-driven SF on TV *can* be successful (e.g., BsG), but not if it's put in the wrong place at the wrong time. It's a shame, because the writing was great, the cast was obviously in sync, and there was plenty of room for storyline growth.
Oh well.
What will happen, eventually -- Hollywood is going to have to be dragged into the future kicking and screaming -- is that we will move away from this broadcast delivery model in which we are expected to watch shows at specific times. Once the whole issue of how money changes hands gets worked out, things will progress rapidly, I think - witness the popularity of TiVO and its copycats. As long as content producers can find a way to get paid, they'll be on board...and it may turn out that when people can watch whatever they want, whenever they want, that shows like FF have more of a shot at building an audience.
Of course then marketing shows to the public becomes an issue: in the broadcast model, there are only so many channels, and only so many hours in the day. This limits the pool of competitors for eyeballs. When people can choose from a wider array of content and watch it on their terms, profits can be diluted, competition can be fiercer for eyeball loyalty, etc.
On a related note: if I could, I would gladly pay a nominal fee to watch serial shows like BsG, FF, etc. without commercials. If I could buy access to what amounts to about 40 minutes of actual content, skip the commercials, and see the show in high def, I'd GLADLY pay the content producers.
> If only somebody could convince Sci-Fi to stop making
> a new 'oh no monster' craptastic movie each month
Precisely.
I'd rather they spend their money on making maybe one great show per season (and fill the rest of the time with reruns, old movies, independently produced shows by up-and-coming directors, etc) than continue to try and force feed us a steady diet of "Stargate: [$x]" or "[$deadly_animal_name]: The Lost City" or "[$any_show_in_space]".
They're far too conservative (not taking chances with new and interesting material), pour too much money into schlock that appeals to nobody but twelve year old boys, and generally give "Science Fiction" a bad name. There's so much excellent, interesting, literary, smart science fiction out there, it's a crying shame that, for the most part, the best that hollywood seems to be able to do is cough up formulaic pap.
I *do* have to give them credit for carrying BsG, which ranks right up there with the best stuff on TV (I rate it, on my personal scale, in the same neighborhood as the best seasons of BtVS, Showtime's "Weeds", HBO's "Six Feet Under", etc).