So, I rob a gun shop in the next State, in the sure knowledge that the Chicago PD will act as my fence? Yah, that's a good idea.
Note, by the by, that many places in the USA (basically all of them, since Chicago has one of the worst crime problems in the USA, and some of the most restrictive gun laws) get by just fine without worrying so much about guns in private hands.
The real problem is that profit is very much a part of human nature we can't seem to conquer.
Do keep in mind that your paycheck is "profit". Or, at least, the part of your paycheck that buys you the stuff above the subsistence level.
IOW, "profit" isn't a dirty word. It's perfectly acceptable to want profit, just as it's perfectly acceptable to want to be able to buy a nicer car.....
The us military could have won in Vietnam if allowed to fire bomb civilian targets.
The US military didn't even need that. All they needed was permission to go into North Vietnam and beat the crap out of them.
Alas, the Korean War was still fresh in everyone's mind - when we rolled up North Korea, the Chinese came into the war. So, the various Presidents said "no invading North Vietnam".
And it's still pretty much true that if you give the enemy a safe space, the enemy CANNOT be beaten. If he's losing, he just pulls back into his safe space until he's ready to go another round....
You don't fit, anywhere in the puzzle. I suggest you support legislature in support of a basic income, because in the future probably 75% of the workforce will be automated out of a job.
Y'know, that's just what Ludd and co. said! Once upon a time, 90% of the population were farmers, then they invented harvesters and combines and such, and most of those farmers were put out of business. Terrible the way 88% of the population has been unemployed for the last century, isn't it?
What's that you say? We haven't had 80+% unemployment for a century???? How can this be?! After all, if we automate something, there's no way that whole new fields of endeavor would develop, is there?
Hmm, would the lawsuit by a bunch of Uber drivers (in CA and MA) have had any effect on this decision? After all, self-driving cars would have to be pretty expensive to be more expensive than three-quarters of a billion dollars in legal bills and such....
This. When I read the summary and it mentioned that people don't like upgrading their phones so often, my first thought was "I've been using the same phone for years, what does the introduction of new phones have to do with when people get new phones?".
My second thought was "are people really that stupid???"
And my third was "why did I have that thought? Of course people are that stupid...."
Could eminent domain be used to terminate those franchise rights, seize ownership of the wires (with appropriate compensation), and let the homeowner or neighborhood choose the ISP?
Probably.
Note that eminent domain could probably be just as easily used to seize ownership of the house, evict the owners, and solve the problem that way.
Note also that the likelihood of anyone deciding to spend money putting fibre into an area where the government is inclined to seize property is very close to zero.
The fastest probe we ever has built goes 0.023%. It is doubtful we will even get to 1%, ever.
Seems to me I once read that early last century someone said words to the effect of "what's the point of airplanes? Not like they'll ever be able to fly nonstop across the Pacific or anything".
Venus is tide-locked between the Sun and Earth (always has the save face toward Earth when the two planets are closest together
You just described a planet that is tide-locked to the Sun ONLY. Pretty much by definition, when we're closest to Venus, it's directly between us and the Sun, and so we'll be looking at the dark side of Venus, which will always be the same, since it's tidelocked to the Sun.
A Pokestop is active onece every five minutes at most Hardly going to cause massive crowds to gather.
As far as I can tell, there are seven or eight Pokestops in my neighborhood (depending on how you count "in my neighborhood - the library is across the street at the outer corner), and I've never seen people gathering at any of them that wouldn't be there if there wasn't a Pokestop....
Which is irrelevant to the cause/effect that they saw.
Their effect did NOT include a relative decline in cognitive ability, which was specifically stated. If the effect they were observing were caused by the cause you describe, it WOULD have shown a decline in cognitive function.
So, no cognitive difference between the two groups implies strongly a different cause than the one you're describing, which DOES cause a decline in cognitive ability.
Note, by the by, that this in no way implies that your dietary assumptions are true and correct, nor does it mean they are incorrect. They are simply not related to the effect these guys observed (unless, of course, the effect you describe is incorrect)....
"More acceleration" to get into a higher orbit is not an incorrect concept.
Yes, actually it is. DeltaV is NOT acceleration. What you need to get into a higher orbit is "more deltaV", NOT "more acceleration". Yes, you need to accelerate. But the magnitude (and "higher acceleration" certainly suggests the magnitude of the acceleration, not the duration of same) isn't terribly important beyond a few special cases.
Note that you seem to be making the same error of usage that that scifi writer I mentioned earlier did. It's wrong when he/she/it (author could be using a pen name, though I don't think so) did it, it's wrong when you do it. Especially since you're trying (mostly successfully) to teach people who know little about the subject - don't leave them with a notion that a rocket scientist would look at them askance for using.....
You assume correctly. But since I was responding to someone who used the phrase "well within Earth's gravity well", I felt it necessary to use terms similar to his.
Note, by the by, that when you're in free fall (most of the time in space unless you're using an ion drive or something similar), the only thing that really matters when defining "the outer edge" or "well within" a gravity well is how close you are to escape speed (note that "escape velocity" is misleading in some ways - the only way the direction of the velocity matters is if you're going to hit something solid - otherwise, if you are faster than the magnitude of the velocity vector, you're headed out and not coming back. Hence my preference for the term "escape speed"). And when you're headed out toward Luna, you're running in excess of 99% of escape speed as you leave LEO...
What I meant was you need more acceleration than you need to just get into orbit.
Umm, no. Acceleration (the rate of change of velocity) is pretty much irrelevant except to overcome Earth's gravity.
What you need is more deltaV (which is NOT acceleration, though I've seen scifi where the author made that mistake). Starting from LEO, an acceleration of 1 mm/s^2 will get you to GEO if you do it long enough. Just as an acceleration of 1km/s^2 will if you want a very short burn.
Once you're in LEO, acceleration rate is pretty much irrelevant (caveat: there's one place you want a relatively high acceleration - pushing a manned vehicle through the Van Allen Belts - spending a lot of time in the radiation belts is bad), and deltaV is the important factor.
Actual horizontal speed required from the ground to reach Luna's orbit (which is 384400 km, about): 10992 m/s. Ignoring atmosphere, of course.
Note that that second number is only 183 m/s slower than the first.
As to "getting far enough for the Moon's gravity to take over". You can design a path that does that. It requires a midcourse burn, which doesn't fit within the definition of a "cannon". And it saves you maybe 100 m/s deltaV.
Seriously, the Moon may look like it's "well within Earth's gravity well", but in terms of velocities, it really is pretty close to the outer edge of same.
Required muzzle velocity would be about 11100 m/s. Which is rather more than twice as high as any cannon/railgun ever made.
And really, why bother. Design a rocket that can go from LEO to Lunar impact, then pay SpaceX to put it on top of one of their "previously used" Falcon 9 first stages (for the big discount. and did everyone notice that they testfired one of those previously used first stages with a full-power burn as long as the normal launch burn? And are planning on reusing one of the other four previously used first stages later this year (assuming they can find a customer willing to risk it in exchange for a big discount)?)
Of course, we're talking about a global superpower that had the world's biggest economy backing it vs. an insignificant backwards nation with a tinpot dictator that can't even feed his people, but it IS possible!
Easier for them than for us. They know it can be done, and they know what the easy/hard parts of the process require. And the computers they're using are several orders of magnitude more powerful than we used to do Apollo (remember, your smartphone is several orders of magnitude more powerful than the computers aboard Apollo, as well as being several orders of magnitude smaller). For that matter, materials science has improved vastly, and they can take advantage of that extra knowledge as well.
And, as an aside, remember when "computer" was a job description, not a piece of hardware (hence the old phrase "electronic computer" to distinguish between the machine and the person it replaced)? Nuclear weapons and the first real rockets were developed with computers (the job), not computers (the machine) - NK won't have to go through that hassle....
Slashdot Mirror
So, I rob a gun shop in the next State, in the sure knowledge that the Chicago PD will act as my fence? Yah, that's a good idea.
Note, by the by, that many places in the USA (basically all of them, since Chicago has one of the worst crime problems in the USA, and some of the most restrictive gun laws) get by just fine without worrying so much about guns in private hands.
Do keep in mind that your paycheck is "profit". Or, at least, the part of your paycheck that buys you the stuff above the subsistence level.
IOW, "profit" isn't a dirty word. It's perfectly acceptable to want profit, just as it's perfectly acceptable to want to be able to buy a nicer car.....
The US military didn't even need that. All they needed was permission to go into North Vietnam and beat the crap out of them.
Alas, the Korean War was still fresh in everyone's mind - when we rolled up North Korea, the Chinese came into the war. So, the various Presidents said "no invading North Vietnam".
And it's still pretty much true that if you give the enemy a safe space, the enemy CANNOT be beaten. If he's losing, he just pulls back into his safe space until he's ready to go another round....
Y'know, that's just what Ludd and co. said! Once upon a time, 90% of the population were farmers, then they invented harvesters and combines and such, and most of those farmers were put out of business. Terrible the way 88% of the population has been unemployed for the last century, isn't it?
What's that you say? We haven't had 80+% unemployment for a century???? How can this be?! After all, if we automate something, there's no way that whole new fields of endeavor would develop, is there?
Hmm, would the lawsuit by a bunch of Uber drivers (in CA and MA) have had any effect on this decision? After all, self-driving cars would have to be pretty expensive to be more expensive than three-quarters of a billion dollars in legal bills and such....
This. When I read the summary and it mentioned that people don't like upgrading their phones so often, my first thought was "I've been using the same phone for years, what does the introduction of new phones have to do with when people get new phones?".
My second thought was "are people really that stupid???"
And my third was "why did I have that thought? Of course people are that stupid...."
Umm, this is the UK. They don't have a First Amendment, and have no legal authority on the side of the pond where there IS a First Amendment.
So let them amuse themselves. It'll be interesting to see them try to do something about an asshat in the USA offending someone in the UK....
Probably.
Note that eminent domain could probably be just as easily used to seize ownership of the house, evict the owners, and solve the problem that way.
Note also that the likelihood of anyone deciding to spend money putting fibre into an area where the government is inclined to seize property is very close to zero.
Hmm, original submission spells it correctly, but the headline doesn't. Another case of semiliterate editors at /.?
Seems to me I once read that early last century someone said words to the effect of "what's the point of airplanes? Not like they'll ever be able to fly nonstop across the Pacific or anything".
Oddly, your comment reminded me of that....
You just described a planet that is tide-locked to the Sun ONLY. Pretty much by definition, when we're closest to Venus, it's directly between us and the Sun, and so we'll be looking at the dark side of Venus, which will always be the same, since it's tidelocked to the Sun.
Umm, Christianity IS the New Testament. The Old Testament is just background material from Judaism.
Though I've heard it described as "Do unto others as you would have them do to you. Everything else is just commentary"....
C'mon, it's a guy behind the wheel. His wife obviously wasn't in the car, so who else is there to blame? Himself??? Get real.
So, the Scotland Police do something bad, and the penalty is paid by the Scottish taxpayers rather than the police officers who did the bad thing?
Not much deterrent value in "if you get caught, someone else will pay your fine"....
A Pokestop is active onece every five minutes at most Hardly going to cause massive crowds to gather.
As far as I can tell, there are seven or eight Pokestops in my neighborhood (depending on how you count "in my neighborhood - the library is across the street at the outer corner), and I've never seen people gathering at any of them that wouldn't be there if there wasn't a Pokestop....
It should be noted that turning, climbing, and running aren't terribly important if the other guy can't find you, target you, or shoot at you.
Because RADIATION!!! How can you even consider doing releasing RADIOACTIVE MOSQUITOES on the world??
Which is irrelevant to the cause/effect that they saw.
Their effect did NOT include a relative decline in cognitive ability, which was specifically stated. If the effect they were observing were caused by the cause you describe, it WOULD have shown a decline in cognitive function.
So, no cognitive difference between the two groups implies strongly a different cause than the one you're describing, which DOES cause a decline in cognitive ability.
Note, by the by, that this in no way implies that your dietary assumptions are true and correct, nor does it mean they are incorrect. They are simply not related to the effect these guys observed (unless, of course, the effect you describe is incorrect)....
Yes, actually it is. DeltaV is NOT acceleration. What you need to get into a higher orbit is "more deltaV", NOT "more acceleration". Yes, you need to accelerate. But the magnitude (and "higher acceleration" certainly suggests the magnitude of the acceleration, not the duration of same) isn't terribly important beyond a few special cases.
Note that you seem to be making the same error of usage that that scifi writer I mentioned earlier did. It's wrong when he/she/it (author could be using a pen name, though I don't think so) did it, it's wrong when you do it. Especially since you're trying (mostly successfully) to teach people who know little about the subject - don't leave them with a notion that a rocket scientist would look at them askance for using.....
You assume correctly. But since I was responding to someone who used the phrase "well within Earth's gravity well", I felt it necessary to use terms similar to his.
Note, by the by, that when you're in free fall (most of the time in space unless you're using an ion drive or something similar), the only thing that really matters when defining "the outer edge" or "well within" a gravity well is how close you are to escape speed (note that "escape velocity" is misleading in some ways - the only way the direction of the velocity matters is if you're going to hit something solid - otherwise, if you are faster than the magnitude of the velocity vector, you're headed out and not coming back. Hence my preference for the term "escape speed"). And when you're headed out toward Luna, you're running in excess of 99% of escape speed as you leave LEO...
Umm, no. Acceleration (the rate of change of velocity) is pretty much irrelevant except to overcome Earth's gravity.
What you need is more deltaV (which is NOT acceleration, though I've seen scifi where the author made that mistake). Starting from LEO, an acceleration of 1 mm/s^2 will get you to GEO if you do it long enough. Just as an acceleration of 1km/s^2 will if you want a very short burn.
Once you're in LEO, acceleration rate is pretty much irrelevant (caveat: there's one place you want a relatively high acceleration - pushing a manned vehicle through the Van Allen Belts - spending a lot of time in the radiation belts is bad), and deltaV is the important factor.
Two things:
1) I rounded a bit. On purpose.
2) Escape speed from the ground: 11175 m/s.
Actual horizontal speed required from the ground to reach Luna's orbit (which is 384400 km, about): 10992 m/s. Ignoring atmosphere, of course.
Note that that second number is only 183 m/s slower than the first.
As to "getting far enough for the Moon's gravity to take over". You can design a path that does that. It requires a midcourse burn, which doesn't fit within the definition of a "cannon". And it saves you maybe 100 m/s deltaV.
Seriously, the Moon may look like it's "well within Earth's gravity well", but in terms of velocities, it really is pretty close to the outer edge of same.
It should, perhaps, be noted that not all ICBMs are single-stage....
Required muzzle velocity would be about 11100 m/s. Which is rather more than twice as high as any cannon/railgun ever made.
And really, why bother. Design a rocket that can go from LEO to Lunar impact, then pay SpaceX to put it on top of one of their "previously used" Falcon 9 first stages (for the big discount. and did everyone notice that they testfired one of those previously used first stages with a full-power burn as long as the normal launch burn? And are planning on reusing one of the other four previously used first stages later this year (assuming they can find a customer willing to risk it in exchange for a big discount)?)
Easier for them than for us. They know it can be done, and they know what the easy/hard parts of the process require. And the computers they're using are several orders of magnitude more powerful than we used to do Apollo (remember, your smartphone is several orders of magnitude more powerful than the computers aboard Apollo, as well as being several orders of magnitude smaller). For that matter, materials science has improved vastly, and they can take advantage of that extra knowledge as well.
And, as an aside, remember when "computer" was a job description, not a piece of hardware (hence the old phrase "electronic computer" to distinguish between the machine and the person it replaced)? Nuclear weapons and the first real rockets were developed with computers (the job), not computers (the machine) - NK won't have to go through that hassle....