"That is a sign of a civilization that has lost not only the will to live, it isn't even all that curious anymore"
Jee's, talk about reading too much into stuff. Try reading the rest of the source of the quote. Taking one line out of context is just naive. Once classroom task, hardly constitutes the government "spewing propaganda to British school children".
If one takes the British position that 'man has no business in space' then there isn't a point to sending robots beyond geostationary orbit either.
Where exactly do the British government state 'man has no business in space'?
If you RTFA it seems their government disallowed human space flight on cost & safety grounds rather than any ideological objection. You could equally say Washington has 'banned' NASA from inter-stellar space travel. But the more correct answer is that everyone realizes inter-stellar travel is completely infeasible within current budgetary constraints, the British government obviously consider human space travel infeasible within their budget.
Considering the British have made good progress with robotic spacecraft, I can see some logic in their thinking. Of course I wish they (along with all governments) would devote a larger budget to space research, but failing that, specialization is definitely the way to go.
The whole point of sending robots is that they are cheaper and more expendable to send than humans, thus they are good for the early scouting missions
Um no, robotic spacecraft perform research in their own right, often performing tasks which humans cannot....unless of course you want to be shot into the surface of a comet, see how your crushed entering Juipter or spend years orbiting the sun at close orbit watching for solar flares.
They have a 6.5% share of the worldwide market after one full year
I have to question those figures. Maybe in the US, but in most of the world the iPhone hasn't met sales expectations. Here in the UK they've just dropped the price dramatically to try and encourage sales.
The automated docking is Russian. They have been using it since the 60's
Although the Russians have indeed used automated docking systems since the 60's, I don't really think you can say the ATV's system is anything but loosely based on the Russian system. The ATV uses GPS and laser guidance (in a pretty different way to the Russian designs).
Most countrys (and the WTO) define a counterfeit as something which implies it is the genuine article, rather than just items trying to make exact copies of the genuine article. This catches things like fake Handbags which are say made in the exact Prada style but on close inspection are actually named "Preda" etc.
Obviously, whether the items are deemed counterfeit is up to the courts of that country but it's often pretty obvious.
People taking their own drinks on planes is a real threat...to the profits of Airport Operators who make A LOT of money selling duty-free retail space.
the junk from a satellite that's about to reenter will also reenter promptly, whereas the junk from a satellite in a high orbit will remain in a high orbit
Except that a high-speed rocket, launched from earth, will inevitably propel debris into much higher orbits. As with the Chinese test, some pieces of debris may even completely escape earth's gravity field.
"take your pick, because it's one of the two."...or there may be a multitude of different motivators influencing every environmentalist in a different way. The environmentalist trying to stop his local park from being cut down and tarmacked over for another new Walmart has a tad different motivation from someone protesting against global warming.
It is always folly to categorize groups so simplistically and presume all people of one viewpoint, organization, society, nationality etc. are motivated by the exact same goals.
Are you trying to say all us nerd's, for example, are motivated by the exact same concerns and goals?
At first I was puzzled because the preference doesn't by default exist on the about:config URL page. You have to first create it by right-clicking in the about:config screen, selecting new->boolean, entering "extensions.checkCompatibility" as the name and then "false" as the value.
I found this technique works reasonably well. The several extensions I have all seem to work correctly however going to the Tools->Add-ons window crashes Firefox, so changing add-on preferences isn't so easy unless the add-on's preferences are also available in about:config.
Um, you completely contradict yourself there. It would only be "collapsed" if both a private buyer could not be found and the government were unwilling to loan it cash or buy it; thereby forcing it to stop trading.
As long as someone is willing to help keep a company afloat by definition it has not yet "collapsed". Otherwise lots of banks would be deemed either collapsed or near collapse at the end of a bad trading day (which these days is almost every other day!).
"It has ("The government faces this stark choice--between finding a fully financed private-sector saviour (which now looks increasingly elusive), taking the bank into public ownership or just letting it go bust"). "
Um, it would only be "collapsed" if both a private buyer could not be found and the government were unwilling to loan it cash or buy it.
Otherwise all banks would be deemed either collapsed or near collapse at the end of a bad trading day (which these days is almost every other day). As long as someone is willing to help keep z company afloat by definition it has not yet "collapsed".
"while still allowing the same people to rule: The companies and rich people who donate money to political parties."
Except that companies and commercial entities aren't allowed to donate to political parties in the UK. Rich people can donate personal equity but only up to a certain amount (depending on several variables).
"Hydro, geothermal, tidal and wave, wind and solar energy are all cleaner."
That's a massive over-generalization as the enviromental impact largely depends on specifics. E.G. Hydroelectricty dams can cause massive enviromental damage by flooding valleys and blocking rivers (as witnessed in South America), likewise tidal and wave energy can kill off entire fish/sea mammal species if they block rivers used by migrating marinelife. While a wind generator placed by a large bird nesting area may kill millions of birds a year. And so forth...
The enviromental impact of any engineering activity depends very much on the specific ecology of its location.
Additionally unintended sideffects must also be considered. Many recent large engineering projects in Africa and South America weren't to bad in themselves, but have required the cutting of roads through rainforests which have later been exploited by illegal logging gangs and poachers.
Therefor, you can't really say that one type of power generation is necessarily "cleaner" than another.
It's not just government which are incompetent. Most the big corporations excel at incompetence even more. That's whats good about small businesses, having the MD in the office - who's house and life savings are on the line if the business fails - is a great way to encourage competence.
As soon as you get national/multinational organizations, be they governmental or corporate, incompetence inevitable creeps in.
Big cars have nothing to do with practicality and everything to do with image.
That's why every car has its "top speed" highlighted as a major selling point despite the fact that only a few percent of cars will ever travel at that speed.
He's referring to the home consumer market, you are talking about the business/professional market. For the home market, there are really only 2 categories: normal and gamer. Those running "extensive calculations" on their PC, are almost always using the computer professionally (although the use of home computers for digital video watching & conversion is maybe changing this a little).
Photoshop is a bad example, home users might dabble with a photo or two in Photoshop SE or Paint Shop Pro which will happily perform such tasks on an average cheap home PC. This is completely different to the sort of professional graphic design activities for which a high-spec business PC is required.
I sure hope it is, but everything I see points to the situation gradually getting worse. Certain special interest groups and corporations getting ever of a say and backhand deals for larger piles of cash. Meanwhile the votes received by minority candidates continues to decrease (proportionately) along with their publicity received through mainstream media organizations (which these days, are nearly all owned by the very large umbrella groups donating massive amounts).
But the electability of candidates if unfortunately an extremely important factor in the system we have. It's whoever has the big bucks to spend on advertising that wins. For every 1 informed vote who has carefully decided which candidate is best for them x dozen won't have.
Whoever suggested 'every person has the ability to choose the president' was either mentally ill, extremely stupid or desired the corrupt system we now have masquerading as "democracy".
A vote for the small "honest, forthright, intelligent" candidate is simply a vote wasted. No candidate in the past 20 years has won without many millions in corporate sponsorship and if they're not willing to corrupt themselves and do whatever those companies want for that sponsorship then they quite simply won't get in (so we can immediately cross out the "honest, forthright" candidates).
Unfortunately, each election the advertising required to keep up goes up and up. Personally I think we should do what virtually every other western democracy does and ban corporate donations and personal donations over a certain amount. This won't happen soon though as it's an old catch 22 problem: someone else needs to get in to change it but until it changes noone but Democrats/Repbulicans will get it.
So there are good candidates out there? Big Deal, it's a winner takes all system and the honest candidates have ZERO chance of winning. The president will without a shadow of doubt be either the Democratic or Republican candidate, do you seriously deny that?
What's more, the reason they will win is precisely because they will give up their ideals and instead accepted hundreds of millions from any corporations willing to donate in return for presidential favors (e.g. oil companies got an extremely good deal from sponsoring Bush, who then had lots of money for campaign ad's to ensure he won).
So, I can either have 1 million dollars or waste a vote on someone who it's a certain won't become president anyway...I'd rather the million dollars!
Good point. Personally I don't think my iPhone was worth the many hundreds of dollars I paid for it. I kind of wish now I had got one of the other, similar featured phones for far cheaper. Many of the iPhone's features, while looking cool, aren't actually even as intuitive or user friendly as many older phones from companies like Nokia and Ericsson. iPhone Web browsing especially is annoyingly slow and awkward whenever I try it.
So some regrets, but hey, I'm a sucker for advertising.
At least with the US it will get better over time. In 10 to 20 years it'll be far better.
But this will only be because we're getting Iraq to sell off their huge oil stocks quickly. Under Saddam's old plan of being far more prudent with oil stocks, Iraq could become extremely wealthy in 40 or so years time when global oil stocks are seriously running out.
Slashdot Mirror
"That is a sign of a civilization that has lost not only the will to live, it isn't even all that curious anymore" Jee's, talk about reading too much into stuff. Try reading the rest of the source of the quote. Taking one line out of context is just naive. Once classroom task, hardly constitutes the government "spewing propaganda to British school children".
Where exactly do the British government state 'man has no business in space'?
If you RTFA it seems their government disallowed human space flight on cost & safety grounds rather than any ideological objection. You could equally say Washington has 'banned' NASA from inter-stellar space travel. But the more correct answer is that everyone realizes inter-stellar travel is completely infeasible within current budgetary constraints, the British government obviously consider human space travel infeasible within their budget.
Considering the British have made good progress with robotic spacecraft, I can see some logic in their thinking. Of course I wish they (along with all governments) would devote a larger budget to space research, but failing that, specialization is definitely the way to go.
Um no, robotic spacecraft perform research in their own right, often performing tasks which humans cannot.
I have to question those figures. Maybe in the US, but in most of the world the iPhone hasn't met sales expectations. Here in the UK they've just dropped the price dramatically to try and encourage sales.
Although the Russians have indeed used automated docking systems since the 60's, I don't really think you can say the ATV's system is anything but loosely based on the Russian system. The ATV uses GPS and laser guidance (in a pretty different way to the Russian designs).
Most countrys (and the WTO) define a counterfeit as something which implies it is the genuine article, rather than just items trying to make exact copies of the genuine article. This catches things like fake Handbags which are say made in the exact Prada style but on close inspection are actually named "Preda" etc.
Obviously, whether the items are deemed counterfeit is up to the courts of that country but it's often pretty obvious.
People taking their own drinks on planes is a real threat ...to the profits of Airport Operators who make A LOT of money selling duty-free retail space.
Except that a high-speed rocket, launched from earth, will inevitably propel debris into much higher orbits. As with the Chinese test, some pieces of debris may even completely escape earth's gravity field.
"take your pick, because it's one of the two." ...or there may be a multitude of different motivators influencing every environmentalist in a different way. The environmentalist trying to stop his local park from being cut down and tarmacked over for another new Walmart has a tad different motivation from someone protesting against global warming.
It is always folly to categorize groups so simplistically and presume all people of one viewpoint, organization, society, nationality etc. are motivated by the exact same goals.
Are you trying to say all us nerd's, for example, are motivated by the exact same concerns and goals?
Great work-around!
At first I was puzzled because the preference doesn't by default exist on the about:config URL page. You have to first create it by right-clicking in the about:config screen, selecting new->boolean, entering "extensions.checkCompatibility" as the name and then "false" as the value.
I found this technique works reasonably well. The several extensions I have all seem to work correctly however going to the Tools->Add-ons window crashes Firefox, so changing add-on preferences isn't so easy unless the add-on's preferences are also available in about:config.
Bloody good game it was too!
England were way too confident by the 2nd half, Wales deserved the win.
Can't wait for the rest of the 6 nations tournament.
Many IP addresses are static though. I don't really understand what NAT has to do with it in the vast majority of cases.
Um, you completely contradict yourself there. It would only be "collapsed" if both a private buyer could not be found and the government were unwilling to loan it cash or buy it; thereby forcing it to stop trading.
As long as someone is willing to help keep a company afloat by definition it has not yet "collapsed". Otherwise lots of banks would be deemed either collapsed or near collapse at the end of a bad trading day (which these days is almost every other day!).
"It has ("The government faces this stark choice--between finding a fully financed private-sector saviour (which now looks increasingly elusive), taking the bank into public ownership or just letting it go bust"). "
Um, it would only be "collapsed" if both a private buyer could not be found and the government were unwilling to loan it cash or buy it.
Otherwise all banks would be deemed either collapsed or near collapse at the end of a bad trading day (which these days is almost every other day). As long as someone is willing to help keep z company afloat by definition it has not yet "collapsed".
"while still allowing the same people to rule: The companies and rich people who donate money to political parties."
Except that companies and commercial entities aren't allowed to donate to political parties in the UK. Rich people can donate personal equity but only up to a certain amount (depending on several variables).
"Hydro, geothermal, tidal and wave, wind and solar energy are all cleaner."
That's a massive over-generalization as the enviromental impact largely depends on specifics. E.G. Hydroelectricty dams can cause massive enviromental damage by flooding valleys and blocking rivers (as witnessed in South America), likewise tidal and wave energy can kill off entire fish/sea mammal species if they block rivers used by migrating marinelife. While a wind generator placed by a large bird nesting area may kill millions of birds a year. And so forth...
The enviromental impact of any engineering activity depends very much on the specific ecology of its location.
Additionally unintended sideffects must also be considered. Many recent large engineering projects in Africa and South America weren't to bad in themselves, but have required the cutting of roads through rainforests which have later been exploited by illegal logging gangs and poachers.
Therefor, you can't really say that one type of power generation is necessarily "cleaner" than another.
It's not just government which are incompetent. Most the big corporations excel at incompetence even more. That's whats good about small businesses, having the MD in the office - who's house and life savings are on the line if the business fails - is a great way to encourage competence.
As soon as you get national/multinational organizations, be they governmental or corporate, incompetence inevitable creeps in.
Big cars have nothing to do with practicality and everything to do with image.
That's why every car has its "top speed" highlighted as a major selling point despite the fact that only a few percent of cars will ever travel at that speed.
He's referring to the home consumer market, you are talking about the business/professional market. For the home market, there are really only 2 categories: normal and gamer. Those running "extensive calculations" on their PC, are almost always using the computer professionally (although the use of home computers for digital video watching & conversion is maybe changing this a little).
Photoshop is a bad example, home users might dabble with a photo or two in Photoshop SE or Paint Shop Pro which will happily perform such tasks on an average cheap home PC. This is completely different to the sort of professional graphic design activities for which a high-spec business PC is required.
I sure hope it is, but everything I see points to the situation gradually getting worse. Certain special interest groups and corporations getting ever of a say and backhand deals for larger piles of cash. Meanwhile the votes received by minority candidates continues to decrease (proportionately) along with their publicity received through mainstream media organizations (which these days, are nearly all owned by the very large umbrella groups donating massive amounts).
But the electability of candidates if unfortunately an extremely important factor in the system we have. It's whoever has the big bucks to spend on advertising that wins. For every 1 informed vote who has carefully decided which candidate is best for them x dozen won't have.
Whoever suggested 'every person has the ability to choose the president' was either mentally ill, extremely stupid or desired the corrupt system we now have masquerading as "democracy".
A vote for the small "honest, forthright, intelligent" candidate is simply a vote wasted. No candidate in the past 20 years has won without many millions in corporate sponsorship and if they're not willing to corrupt themselves and do whatever those companies want for that sponsorship then they quite simply won't get in (so we can immediately cross out the "honest, forthright" candidates).
Unfortunately, each election the advertising required to keep up goes up and up. Personally I think we should do what virtually every other western democracy does and ban corporate donations and personal donations over a certain amount. This won't happen soon though as it's an old catch 22 problem: someone else needs to get in to change it but until it changes noone but Democrats/Repbulicans will get it.
So there are good candidates out there? Big Deal, it's a winner takes all system and the honest candidates have ZERO chance of winning. The president will without a shadow of doubt be either the Democratic or Republican candidate, do you seriously deny that?
...I'd rather the million dollars!
What's more, the reason they will win is precisely because they will give up their ideals and instead accepted hundreds of millions from any corporations willing to donate in return for presidential favors (e.g. oil companies got an extremely good deal from sponsoring Bush, who then had lots of money for campaign ad's to ensure he won).
So, I can either have 1 million dollars or waste a vote on someone who it's a certain won't become president anyway
Good point. Personally I don't think my iPhone was worth the many hundreds of dollars I paid for it. I kind of wish now I had got one of the other, similar featured phones for far cheaper. Many of the iPhone's features, while looking cool, aren't actually even as intuitive or user friendly as many older phones from companies like Nokia and Ericsson. iPhone Web browsing especially is annoyingly slow and awkward whenever I try it.
So some regrets, but hey, I'm a sucker for advertising.
But this will only be because we're getting Iraq to sell off their huge oil stocks quickly. Under Saddam's old plan of being far more prudent with oil stocks, Iraq could become extremely wealthy in 40 or so years time when global oil stocks are seriously running out.
Are we at war with Myanmar or something? What makes them an "enemy state"?
What I always wondered though is how it learned to speak?