You're saying that he loses credibility because someone else wrongly suspected him of something?
Or perhaps he's saying that some people will, after an acquittal, suspect that he was found Not Guilty because he was a celebrity. As opposed to being found Not Guilty because he was, well, innocent.
Note that he has a great deal of armour against most any criminal charge not accompanied by videotape (and maybe even that), since a lot of people will assume that any charges against him were politically motivated. You can get away with a lot when most people will assume that any crime you commit was based on faked evidence/charges.
Good education should be a guaranteed right for all children, weather or not they or their parents want or care about it. The proper evaluation, hiring, and if necessary, dismissal of teachers is essential to this.
Not sure it's a win. The weight of a launch escape system doesn't impact total system weight much since it is jettisoned shortly after launch.
As an example, Apollo jettisoned its escape tower after Saturn V second-stage burnout. Which translates to nearly LEO, since most of the deltaV from the third stage was used for injection into the transfer orbit to the moon.
Since you pretty much have to dump the escape tower when none of the boosters are boosting, and Falcon 9 is only a two-stage rocket, you're going to be spending a lot of fuel carrying that thing first till stage separation (or to LEO, if you wait till second stage separation).
I think gravitational forces may not cause that problem as it will pull the moon but then pull it back when it rotates 180 degrees (as for the earths observation) I don't think those forces would create that type of an effect.
Someone did explain to you that the moon doesn't rotate relative to Earth, right? Same face is looking at us all the time...
If no-one has explained that yet, consider this to be a brief introduction: the moon is "tide-locked" to Earth, and its rotation period is the same as its orbital period. What this means is that tidal effects of the Earth on the moon are never cancelled out "when it rotates 180 degrees (as for the earths observation)"....
What about just having a moderator/psychologist on stuff that has a little chat with those people that hang around for thousands of hours?
So, requiring a business to keep a psychologist on staff to deal with customers who really like what you sell doesn't qualify as "regulation"?
Note also that if an in-game psychologist started bothering me when I was playing, I'd just/ignore him. and if that wasn't possible, I'd ignore him the old-fashioned way....;)
True but a Nuclear engine will also let you get more out of your fuel than basic chemical will, the most basic designs give substantially higher Specific Impulse as well as thrust
First part true - even a basic NERVA can manage 800-900 seconds Isp.
Second part false. Thrust from a nuclear rocket is pathetic compared to a chemical rocket. That same basic NERVA was rated at 15000 pounds thrust, as opposed, say, to the F1, which had 1,500,000 pounds thrust.
Of course, an Orion qualifies as both "nuclear" and "high thrust". But odds of anyone approving the building of one are about zero. Unless we need one to deal with an alien invasion, of course....
The reactors could be similar to those use on submarines, so the technology would be mostly COTS.
Umm, no. Submarine reactors depend on having an ocean around them to cool the secondary system (the part that generates electricity). Not many oceans between here and Saturn.
Their one child policy means there's 400 million less Chinese than there otherwise would be. That means huge cuts in emissions in China already
Alas, you don't actually get carbon credits for not having children.
And no, there haven't been "huge cuts in emissions in China already". What there have been are "huge increases in emissions in China already". And this announcement will result in (assuming they even abide by it) MORE huge increases in emissions in China....
And note how "A million march to US Capitol" in the headline becomes "tens of thousands" in the text.
And if you actually read the article, you'll notice that in the title, "US Capitol" refers to Washington D.C., but in the text, they say "tens of thousands" went to Capitol Hill.
Capitol Hill is a quite small part of Washington D.C.
The government's role in Net Neutrality is to require ISPs to not block or degrade access to specific content sources. It's just basic ground rules, not a pile of regulation akin to the tax code.
And we all know that once the government has provided basic ground rules, it would never think of adding more regulations to those ground rules every year (or every election year, at least).
The biggest problem with allowing the government to start monkeying with something new is that if you find out later that they're just making things worse there's no way to make them STOP monkeying with something.
Which is not, in and of itself, reason to not have NN legislation. But do be aware that the assumption that any actual bill won't contain language you won't like is a bad assumption - when was the last time you actually read a bill and found absolutely nothing to disapprove of?
They are the worlds largest manufacturer of wind power equipment and has put serious efforts into solar, wind, energy crops, has this written into law and they even (gasp!) signed the Kyoto protocol the US took a dump on.
1) They have no obligations under the Kyoto Treaty, so signing it was just a matter of finding a pen.
2) Did you notice that "reduce carbon emissions by 2020 to 40% below 2005 levels per unit output? Kyoto, if you recall, requires a reduction below 1995 levels. Not a reduction per unit output, but a flat reduction. What the Chinese are promising to do here is to increase their carbon output slightly less slowly than they're increasing it now - and they're already the largest carbon emitter....
We directly elect our representative (who becomes a Member of Parliament, or MP) by a simple majority - whoever has the most votes in an area is the MP for that area. (This can actually mean that a fairly unpopular person becomes MP, if the votes are split 30:28:28:14, the candidate with 30% of the vote becomes MP even though 70% of the people in the area didn't want him. We don't have a two-party system, so this can easily happen.)
In case you're not aware, the "two party system" doesn't actually guarantee that the winner of an election gets greater than 50% of the vote. Especially since "two party" really means "two major parties". Most Congressional elections have more than two candidates, and the winner frequently has less than 50% of the popular vote.
I'm curious, which ones are those? Off the top of my head, I can't think of any universally recognized rights. Some governments recognize some, others don't. Just depends on the country and the "right"...
but a billion dollars to certify the Merlin 2 is twice what was spent to develop two rockets, three engines, and a capsule.
Note, by the by, that Merlin 2 will be the most powerful rocket engine ever built at 1.7 million pounds thrust. The F1 in Saturn V was only 1.5 million.
In other words, it's taking us to places we've never been before, engineering-wise. I'd expect it to be expensive....
Two different designs (Falcon X Heavy and Falcon XX), either capable of boosting a Mars Direct type mission on its way...
Which would give us capabilities in space we haven't had since the last Saturn V was launched.
Hopefully, SpaceX won't have problems coming up with the cash (or contracts) required to finish the designs and get them certified, since I'd really like to see the first manned Mars mission in my lifetime. And from the looks of things today, if SpaceX doesn't do it, no-one will.
Read to your kids every night at bedtime, and they will love books.
Even better, read every night at bedtime. If the only reading you do is read to your kids, your kids won't learn to love books. If they see YOU reading for pleasure, they will....
Unfortunately, from what I have read, authors receive the effective royalty of 1 book from all the ebook sales. This is crazy, but as there is one original copy, this is how the publishers feel it should be handled.
You are mistaken.
Authors receive a royalty check based on number of eBooks sold every so often from the publishers that cover eBook sales. I'm not sure what "average" is for such royalty checks, but the two or three I've seen mentioned in various places were in the hundreds of dollars (and this was some years ago).
And the SF crew carried radiation detectors that were "ticking" frequently enough to indicate the area is still filled with radiation.
Just fyi, you can adjust the settings on those things quite a lot, so that they tick with even tiny amounts of radiation. Or so that they don't tick very much with quite large amounts.
And the scifi channel has an interest in making it look hazardous, since the show is pretty pointless if everything is pristine....
If you include social security as income (and payments as expenses), and if you count "the government buying debt from itself" as well as "the government paying interest to itself" as a wash, the Clinton administration did run a slight "surplus."
So, do you think that you have more money to spend when you lend yourself money and then pay that money back to yourself with interest? I didn't think so.
In any case, it was damn impressive that he got the budget under control to the point where it was even close.
Give credit to the Republican Congress as well. It's not like the previous (or subsequent) Democratic Congress has made any attempts to rein in expenditures. Not that I consider a less than $20 billion surplus in one year as making up for the ~$1.4 trillion net deficit for that eight year period.
Personally, I never give any President credit/blame for budget surpluses/deficits. The House and Senate, whether Republican or Democrat, deserve all the blame/credit for that. And if more Americans would remember that come polling time, we'd probably all be better off.
Note, in addition, that if the Congress runs up a couple trillion in debt in any two year period, but you vote YOUR congressmen back in because they voted against it, then you're doing the wrong thing too - strategic voting has always been part of politics ("I can't vote for your gun control measure unless it's absolutely required to make the measure pass, since my constituents would kick me out if I did. So I'll provide vote number 51 of 51, but if there are already 51, I'll vote no...."), and should never be discounted....
but when we had a "surplus" instead of using that to pay down the debt, the public thought we were in the green again !?#@!
We haven't had a surplus in the Federal government since 1956. That particular surplus went from 1955-56, and totalled $4 billion before we went back to spending more than we take in taxes.
No, Clinton and the Republican Congress didn't have a surplus, even once, in spite of what either side would have you believe. The closest they got was $18 billion in the red in Clinton's last year in office - impressive in itself to get the deficit that small even once, but not a surplus.
So, what you're saying is that we didn't want the USSR to make a separate peace with Japan because we were afraid that the Soviets would then be forced to do exactly what we wanted them to do?
Slashdot Mirror
Or perhaps he's saying that some people will, after an acquittal, suspect that he was found Not Guilty because he was a celebrity. As opposed to being found Not Guilty because he was, well, innocent.
Note that he has a great deal of armour against most any criminal charge not accompanied by videotape (and maybe even that), since a lot of people will assume that any charges against him were politically motivated. You can get away with a lot when most people will assume that any crime you commit was based on faked evidence/charges.
Slightly ironic, eh?
As an example, Apollo jettisoned its escape tower after Saturn V second-stage burnout. Which translates to nearly LEO, since most of the deltaV from the third stage was used for injection into the transfer orbit to the moon.
Since you pretty much have to dump the escape tower when none of the boosters are boosting, and Falcon 9 is only a two-stage rocket, you're going to be spending a lot of fuel carrying that thing first till stage separation (or to LEO, if you wait till second stage separation).
Someone did explain to you that the moon doesn't rotate relative to Earth, right? Same face is looking at us all the time...
If no-one has explained that yet, consider this to be a brief introduction: the moon is "tide-locked" to Earth, and its rotation period is the same as its orbital period. What this means is that tidal effects of the Earth on the moon are never cancelled out "when it rotates 180 degrees (as for the earths observation)"....
So, requiring a business to keep a psychologist on staff to deal with customers who really like what you sell doesn't qualify as "regulation"?
Note also that if an in-game psychologist started bothering me when I was playing, I'd just /ignore him. and if that wasn't possible, I'd ignore him the old-fashioned way....;)
First part true - even a basic NERVA can manage 800-900 seconds Isp.
Second part false. Thrust from a nuclear rocket is pathetic compared to a chemical rocket. That same basic NERVA was rated at 15000 pounds thrust, as opposed, say, to the F1, which had 1,500,000 pounds thrust.
Of course, an Orion qualifies as both "nuclear" and "high thrust". But odds of anyone approving the building of one are about zero. Unless we need one to deal with an alien invasion, of course....
Umm, no. Submarine reactors depend on having an ocean around them to cool the secondary system (the part that generates electricity). Not many oceans between here and Saturn.
Alas, you don't actually get carbon credits for not having children.
And no, there haven't been "huge cuts in emissions in China already". What there have been are "huge increases in emissions in China already". And this announcement will result in (assuming they even abide by it) MORE huge increases in emissions in China....
And if you actually read the article, you'll notice that in the title, "US Capitol" refers to Washington D.C., but in the text, they say "tens of thousands" went to Capitol Hill.
Capitol Hill is a quite small part of Washington D.C.
And we all know that once the government has provided basic ground rules, it would never think of adding more regulations to those ground rules every year (or every election year, at least).
The biggest problem with allowing the government to start monkeying with something new is that if you find out later that they're just making things worse there's no way to make them STOP monkeying with something.
Which is not, in and of itself, reason to not have NN legislation. But do be aware that the assumption that any actual bill won't contain language you won't like is a bad assumption - when was the last time you actually read a bill and found absolutely nothing to disapprove of?
I think if you check you'll find that no-one in the previous Administration violated the Geneva Conventions.
Alas, while it's still inconvenient as hell, the only part of the Geneva Conventions binding on the USA are the parts we're actually signatory to.
Even more inconvenient, the parts we didn't sign onto include all those bits about treating guerrillas as the same as soldiers....
1) They have no obligations under the Kyoto Treaty, so signing it was just a matter of finding a pen.
2) Did you notice that "reduce carbon emissions by 2020 to 40% below 2005 levels per unit output? Kyoto, if you recall, requires a reduction below 1995 levels. Not a reduction per unit output, but a flat reduction. What the Chinese are promising to do here is to increase their carbon output slightly less slowly than they're increasing it now - and they're already the largest carbon emitter....
In case you're not aware, the "two party system" doesn't actually guarantee that the winner of an election gets greater than 50% of the vote. Especially since "two party" really means "two major parties". Most Congressional elections have more than two candidates, and the winner frequently has less than 50% of the popular vote.
I'm curious, which ones are those? Off the top of my head, I can't think of any universally recognized rights. Some governments recognize some, others don't. Just depends on the country and the "right"...
Note, by the by, that Merlin 2 will be the most powerful rocket engine ever built at 1.7 million pounds thrust. The F1 in Saturn V was only 1.5 million.
In other words, it's taking us to places we've never been before, engineering-wise. I'd expect it to be expensive....
Two different designs (Falcon X Heavy and Falcon XX), either capable of boosting a Mars Direct type mission on its way...
Which would give us capabilities in space we haven't had since the last Saturn V was launched.
Hopefully, SpaceX won't have problems coming up with the cash (or contracts) required to finish the designs and get them certified, since I'd really like to see the first manned Mars mission in my lifetime. And from the looks of things today, if SpaceX doesn't do it, no-one will.
Not all of them. There are alpha emitters with a halflife of less than a year.
Hell, there are alpha emitters with a halflife of less than an hour.
Actually, he wrote:
"War is a mere continuation of policy by other means."
Well, when we translate into English what he actually wrote, anyway.
Even better, read every night at bedtime. If the only reading you do is read to your kids, your kids won't learn to love books. If they see YOU reading for pleasure, they will....
Either English is not your native language, or you're a bureaucrat, right?
Otherwise, you might want to use "inspired" instead.
You are mistaken.
Authors receive a royalty check based on number of eBooks sold every so often from the publishers that cover eBook sales. I'm not sure what "average" is for such royalty checks, but the two or three I've seen mentioned in various places were in the hundreds of dollars (and this was some years ago).
Just fyi, you can adjust the settings on those things quite a lot, so that they tick with even tiny amounts of radiation. Or so that they don't tick very much with quite large amounts.
And the scifi channel has an interest in making it look hazardous, since the show is pretty pointless if everything is pristine....
So, do you think that you have more money to spend when you lend yourself money and then pay that money back to yourself with interest? I didn't think so.
Give credit to the Republican Congress as well. It's not like the previous (or subsequent) Democratic Congress has made any attempts to rein in expenditures. Not that I consider a less than $20 billion surplus in one year as making up for the ~$1.4 trillion net deficit for that eight year period.
Personally, I never give any President credit/blame for budget surpluses/deficits. The House and Senate, whether Republican or Democrat, deserve all the blame/credit for that. And if more Americans would remember that come polling time, we'd probably all be better off.
Note, in addition, that if the Congress runs up a couple trillion in debt in any two year period, but you vote YOUR congressmen back in because they voted against it, then you're doing the wrong thing too - strategic voting has always been part of politics ("I can't vote for your gun control measure unless it's absolutely required to make the measure pass, since my constituents would kick me out if I did. So I'll provide vote number 51 of 51, but if there are already 51, I'll vote no...."), and should never be discounted....
We haven't had a surplus in the Federal government since 1956. That particular surplus went from 1955-56, and totalled $4 billion before we went back to spending more than we take in taxes.
No, Clinton and the Republican Congress didn't have a surplus, even once, in spite of what either side would have you believe. The closest they got was $18 billion in the red in Clinton's last year in office - impressive in itself to get the deficit that small even once, but not a surplus.
So, what you're saying is that we didn't want the USSR to make a separate peace with Japan because we were afraid that the Soviets would then be forced to do exactly what we wanted them to do?
You simply enlarge my view of the possible....