They take forever and a day to build and start recouping your investment, they require massive up front capital expenditures, and the nuke industry has shown nearly no ability to build them on time or on budget.
Part of that (not all, but a significant part) is the lawsuits that inevitably arise whenever an anti-nuke group hears that a nuclear power plant has been proposed.
It's hard to get something done on time when you're constantly fighting off lawsuits rather than actually, you know, building a power plant.
The problem is that it's literally impossible to be educated about all products on the market so you simply can't have the educated consumer base necessary for free markets to operate as theories would indicate.
No, it's not impossible. What's impossible is to make everyone in the world care about the same things you care about.
Remember, sometimes the smart move is to just do it, rather than spend months trying to squeeze out every penny of advantage in a transaction.
On that basis, worker's government is actually a rational choice for most people. It makes sense from a purely selfish, self-interested perspective.
No.
It is rational from a purely selfish, self-interested perspective to want to be in charge. It is not so rational to want a committee of other people to be in charge, and a "workers' government" will basically be a committee of other people.
And the guideline that the intelligence of a committee can be determined by taking the average intelligence of the committee-members and dividing that by the number of members is still pretty much true - just look at Congress.
Don't get so hung up on genetics. It's overrated....
Remember that whole evolution thing? If you have no kids, you failed at evolution. Though arguably doing what you can for your siblings' children would be evolutionarily advantageous, even if you have none of your own.
As to the GP, artificial insemination will likely work, even if your vasecotomy can't be effectively reversed.
Maybe GP was talking about growth in absolute sense.
Maybe the GGP shouldn't have typed "growth rate" if he meant "growth".
Whether growth is 1% or 2% doesn't really matter all that much, since any exponential growth on a bounded earth is going to run into problems at some point in time.
True. However, since the growth rate is slowing, it just may be that it's going to slow all the way to...zero. Or even lower (it's lower than zero in Japan, Europe, and the USA now, discounting immigration).
It's obviously not a question of whether we can support 7 billion people, since we basically are, but whether we can support the increasing growth rate.
Increasing growth rate?
Growth rate over this last billion was 1.3% per year.
Growth rate over the immediately previous billion was 1.5% per year.
When we went from three billion to four billion, population growth rate was 2.1% per year.
Looks like a steadily declining growth rate to me....
It's the American paradox: decry government involvement and authority in general, but allow four or five hundred cooks in the kitchen at all times.
The fraction of Americans "decrying government involvement and authority in general" aren't the same as the fraction that wants to "allow four or five hundred cooks in the kitchen at all times".
But what the hell does someone do with 100 PB?...
...I can't imagine someone ever using that much HD space except for perhaps a company that never destroys old customer data.
It seems to me I remember sometime along in the early 90's arguing with my wife about whether to put a 40MB HD in our new comp, or an 85MB HD. The wife couldn't imagine ever filling up 40MB, much less 85 MB.
Pretty much same argument happened a few years back, arguing over whether to put a 250GB HD in a new comp. That time, *I* was the one who couldn't imagine ever needing that much space.
And in the same way, our grandkids will wonder how we ever managed to limp along with ONLY 1 PB of HD in our comps....
the paper most likely contained fundamental methodological errors and false claims."
So, he resigned without bothering to find out for sure whether the paper in question contained fundamental methodological errors and/or false claims?
I can see resigning as editor because "I screwed up by allowing fundamentally unsound science into my magazine", but I have a hard time with resigning because it MIGHT have been bad (but he's not sure).
The Trieste wasn't autonomous however, it was a batiscaphe that was lowered and raised on a cable.
Umm, no. Trieste was lowered into the water from its tender by a cable, but the cable was released before it dove. Hence the need for a sonar/hydrophone voice system to communicate with the surface, rather than a telephone line in the (nonexistent) cable.
The Shinkai and the chinese sub are actual submarines that can move on their own at the bottom.
Sort of like the Trieste, you mean? Which could move at (the admittedly low speed of) 1 knot.
Perhaps it was the lifesystem hanging under the hull (where the crew could see things) that fooled you into thinking it wasn't really a submarine?
I can either pay the power company $.12/kWh, or make it myself for substantially less. So I am.
In my State, I can get ~30% of the cost of a solar system back through tax breaks and other subsidies (getting my neighbors to pay for it, in other words).
Does your "make it myself for substantially less" include subsidies at that level also?
Quite so. Nonetheless, it was sold as eugenics, and it was the primary reason eugenics got a bad rep post war.
At some point someone said 'Hey, we could do that to all the defective people.', and eugenics was born.
Note that sterilizing people against their will isn't "libertarian", it's "authoritarian".
Even if you do it "for their own good", since it presumes that YOU know what's for MY own good.
No one has ever been killed in the name of eugenics.
Umm, no.
Aktion T4 was part of the Nazi eugneics program. It ran for two years starting in September 1939, and euthanized 70,273 people during that period.
It should be noted, however, that the notion of killing people "unworthy of life" predated Hitler's rise to power, starting in the '20s in the extreme wing of Germany's eugenics movement.
If it was "black people" or "the Jews" instead of "the Chinese," we would be offended by this headline. But since the Chinese government is unpopular in America, it's a good chance to take a subtle and unwarranted jab at "those crazy Chinese, who will probably kill us all."
If it was "black people" or "the Jews", I'd think someone was joking.
Since it's the Chinese, my first thought is that they're way farther from being able to do this than they think, but that WHEN they do this, it'll be pretty cool.
Recall that the 365-foot Saturn V pushed a capsule the size of a VW Bug.
Actually, the 365-foot Saturn V put more than 150 tons in LEO. And about 45 tons of that went on to the moon.
Secondly, note the orbital change is a plane change, which takes orders of magnitude more Delta-V than an in-plane maneuver.
No. More, depending on the exact orbit in question, but not "orders of magnitude more".
Thirdly, what will they gain from this rock that will be worth the effort, energy, money, and risk to the planet?
Let's see. a couple billion tons of metal in high earth orbit. Which obviates the need to launch six million Saturn V's to get the same amount of metal up there.
At $1000/kg into LEO, a metallic asteroid one mile in diameter ought to be worth about $10,000 TRILLION dollars.
It should also be noted that once we've developed and demonstrated a method for moving an asteroid into Earth orbit, we've also demonstrated a method for diverting an asteroid from hitting Earth.
Sure, mining asteroids is a great idea, in principle, but not in theory.
Mining asteroids opens up the solar system. No meaningful attempts to extend our reach beyond this rock we live on is going to amount to a hill of beans till we start making use of the raw materials that are already out of Earth's gravity well.
What resource is of a high enough value to warrant the extreme costs of mining it in space and returning it to earth?
Whyever would you return the output of your mine to Earth?
The primary value of a bug chunk of rock and metal in orbit is that it's cheaper to make things from it than to haul the same amount of metal into space.
Right now, one of our big limiters on space activity is that we have to move EVERYTHING out of a deep gravity well to get it into space at all. If we can eliminate the need to move, say, the structural mass of a solar power satellite into orbit, we can reduce the cost of solar power satellites by an order of magnitude or three.
I heard rumours that some stakeholders (studios, xxIA's) would like to have a perpetual copyright. And, knowing how US politics worked so far, this may happen.
Perpetual Copyright in unconstitutional.
That said, they'll almost certainly go for another extension when they think they've bought enough politicians to get away with it.
And maybe next time, we can get a better lawyer on our side then Eben Moglen when it goes to the Supremes again.
Most places that get tropical storms often enough don't build transportation systems that move millions of people below sea level with nothing preventing them from flooding.
Did you know that most of Greater New Orleans is below sea level? The French Quarter is above sea level, and I think there's a manmade hill in the zoo that's a few feet above sea level, but pretty much all of the rest is below sea-level.
Slashdot Mirror
How much does he want for it?
Oh, and how big is it?
JUst a guess, mind you, but I suspect the Japanese anti-nuke movement has prevented the building of any nuclear plants since Chernobyl....
Part of that (not all, but a significant part) is the lawsuits that inevitably arise whenever an anti-nuke group hears that a nuclear power plant has been proposed.
It's hard to get something done on time when you're constantly fighting off lawsuits rather than actually, you know, building a power plant.
Note, by the by, that Standard Oil, like all limited liability corporations, is a government-created entity.
No, it's not impossible. What's impossible is to make everyone in the world care about the same things you care about.
Remember, sometimes the smart move is to just do it, rather than spend months trying to squeeze out every penny of advantage in a transaction.
So, Marx wanted it to be illegal to sell your shares of your company?
If not, then sooner or later, the shares will belong to "random investors", rather than the people who worked there.
Note, by the way, that if you can't sell the shares, they essentially have zero value, and don't actually imply ownership of anything....
No.
It is rational from a purely selfish, self-interested perspective to want to be in charge. It is not so rational to want a committee of other people to be in charge, and a "workers' government" will basically be a committee of other people.
And the guideline that the intelligence of a committee can be determined by taking the average intelligence of the committee-members and dividing that by the number of members is still pretty much true - just look at Congress.
Remember that whole evolution thing? If you have no kids, you failed at evolution. Though arguably doing what you can for your siblings' children would be evolutionarily advantageous, even if you have none of your own.
As to the GP, artificial insemination will likely work, even if your vasecotomy can't be effectively reversed.
Maybe the GGP shouldn't have typed "growth rate" if he meant "growth".
True. However, since the growth rate is slowing, it just may be that it's going to slow all the way to...zero. Or even lower (it's lower than zero in Japan, Europe, and the USA now, discounting immigration).
Increasing growth rate?
Growth rate over this last billion was 1.3% per year.
Growth rate over the immediately previous billion was 1.5% per year.
When we went from three billion to four billion, population growth rate was 2.1% per year.
Looks like a steadily declining growth rate to me....
The fraction of Americans "decrying government involvement and authority in general" aren't the same as the fraction that wants to "allow four or five hundred cooks in the kitchen at all times".
It seems to me I remember sometime along in the early 90's arguing with my wife about whether to put a 40MB HD in our new comp, or an 85MB HD. The wife couldn't imagine ever filling up 40MB, much less 85 MB.
Pretty much same argument happened a few years back, arguing over whether to put a 250GB HD in a new comp. That time, *I* was the one who couldn't imagine ever needing that much space.
And in the same way, our grandkids will wonder how we ever managed to limp along with ONLY 1 PB of HD in our comps....
So, he resigned without bothering to find out for sure whether the paper in question contained fundamental methodological errors and/or false claims?
I can see resigning as editor because "I screwed up by allowing fundamentally unsound science into my magazine", but I have a hard time with resigning because it MIGHT have been bad (but he's not sure).
Umm, no. Trieste was lowered into the water from its tender by a cable, but the cable was released before it dove. Hence the need for a sonar/hydrophone voice system to communicate with the surface, rather than a telephone line in the (nonexistent) cable.
Sort of like the Trieste, you mean? Which could move at (the admittedly low speed of) 1 knot.
Perhaps it was the lifesystem hanging under the hull (where the crew could see things) that fooled you into thinking it wasn't really a submarine?
Have any of the nuclear power plants failed to pay back their guaranteed loans?
In my State, I can get ~30% of the cost of a solar system back through tax breaks and other subsidies (getting my neighbors to pay for it, in other words).
Does your "make it myself for substantially less" include subsidies at that level also?
So, someone alleges something in the past, which proves that the same thing is happening in the present?
Do consider that even "former CIA operatives" occasionally lie....
Quite so. Nonetheless, it was sold as eugenics, and it was the primary reason eugenics got a bad rep post war.
Note that sterilizing people against their will isn't "libertarian", it's "authoritarian".
Even if you do it "for their own good", since it presumes that YOU know what's for MY own good.
Umm, no.
Aktion T4 was part of the Nazi eugneics program. It ran for two years starting in September 1939, and euthanized 70,273 people during that period.
It should be noted, however, that the notion of killing people "unworthy of life" predated Hitler's rise to power, starting in the '20s in the extreme wing of Germany's eugenics movement.
If it was "black people" or "the Jews", I'd think someone was joking.
Since it's the Chinese, my first thought is that they're way farther from being able to do this than they think, but that WHEN they do this, it'll be pretty cool.
Actually, the 365-foot Saturn V put more than 150 tons in LEO. And about 45 tons of that went on to the moon.
No. More, depending on the exact orbit in question, but not "orders of magnitude more".
Let's see. a couple billion tons of metal in high earth orbit. Which obviates the need to launch six million Saturn V's to get the same amount of metal up there.
At $1000/kg into LEO, a metallic asteroid one mile in diameter ought to be worth about $10,000 TRILLION dollars.
It should also be noted that once we've developed and demonstrated a method for moving an asteroid into Earth orbit, we've also demonstrated a method for diverting an asteroid from hitting Earth.
Mining asteroids opens up the solar system. No meaningful attempts to extend our reach beyond this rock we live on is going to amount to a hill of beans till we start making use of the raw materials that are already out of Earth's gravity well.
Whyever would you return the output of your mine to Earth?
The primary value of a bug chunk of rock and metal in orbit is that it's cheaper to make things from it than to haul the same amount of metal into space.
Right now, one of our big limiters on space activity is that we have to move EVERYTHING out of a deep gravity well to get it into space at all. If we can eliminate the need to move, say, the structural mass of a solar power satellite into orbit, we can reduce the cost of solar power satellites by an order of magnitude or three.
Ditto anything else we want up there....
California was one of the States that was big into eugenics before Hitler made it uncool.
So, no, eugenics wasn't libertarian...
Perpetual Copyright in unconstitutional.
That said, they'll almost certainly go for another extension when they think they've bought enough politicians to get away with it.
And maybe next time, we can get a better lawyer on our side then Eben Moglen when it goes to the Supremes again.
Did you know that most of Greater New Orleans is below sea level? The French Quarter is above sea level, and I think there's a manmade hill in the zoo that's a few feet above sea level, but pretty much all of the rest is below sea-level.
No, actually it didn't. NOAA forecasts predicted it calming down pretty much when it did.