... that'll be another 4425 bits of space junk. Genius idea - utterly pollute near space just so some company can make a short term profit on something thats a nice to have rather than essential infrastructure.
"SpaceX said it would follow federal guidelines to mitigate orbital debris"
And how does it plan to do that exactly? They're too high to be sent down to burn up in the atmosphere and too low to be sent off into a parking orbit.
All true about car engines, but I do wonder how long one would last if it had to sit at its max power rpm for hours on end. You could argue that stop start allows the engine to have a "rest" for want of a better word.
Luckily with NOx it doesn't hang around in the atmosphere very long , so while its a nasty pollutant its soon gone. CO2 however is the real problem right now.
You're right about aircraft efficiency. IIRC a 747 at full capacity has the same mileage per person as a person driving a small car the same distance. Of course the problem with the comparison is that its not possible to jump into a small car and drive 3000 miles in a day (and who would anyway even if it was?) then come back again the next, so air travel is still a horrendous polluter per person in comparison to ground transport.
"But "Business Class" planes are horrifically fuel inefficient; around 11-16% of that achieved by the Cattle Cars."
I reckon its safe to assume that the sort of people who fly in business jets don't give a rats backside about the enviroment. Its just something else for them to exploit.
An aircraft that burns even more fuel per mile than a normal one and nicely pollutes the stratosphere to boot. Perhaps Branson should just stay on his carribean island and enjoy the sea - before the hurricanes get so bad due to climate change that his house is blown away.
And yes, I know there are plenty of people on this site who don't think human induced climate change is real and I respect your right to hold that opinion. Try respecting mine and don't reply with a load of insulting bile. Thanks.
Sure , MongoDB is fast. But having used it after spending years with relational DBs my opinion of it is its a little more than a toy thats one step up from a flat file and is bascially a throwback to what existed back in the 70s before RDBs came along.
If all you want is a key value store then knock yourself out, but if you want proper relational operations - and don't say they're not important, they damn well are in any serious business data - then forget it. Mongo has some relational operators hacked in and the latest versions can do a piss poor simulcra of a join between collections but these can't use an index so are essentially useless for high speed operations. Also Mongo doesn't support transactions making dirty reads possible and hence its useless for simultanious multiclient operations on critical data. And don't get me started on its hideous bastard stepchild of javascript command line making even the simplest query a PITA exercise in bracket counting.
"MongoDB will run circles around MySQL because MongoDB is web scale."
Dishing up noddy website data is pretty much all its any use for.
"Really, though you typify the Brexit movement in that you don't seem to understand what it is you voted for. "
Spare me your feeble attempts at patronising, the usual remoaner response to any pro Brexit argument frankly. Your points are BS and you know it but hey, you lost so you can whine like a baby as much as you like, makes no difference.
Btw, you're confusing me with someone who gives a shit about your "respect".
Protection?? LOL, yeah, I bet Putin pisses his pants when he thinks about the EU armies. Laughing that is. NATO is what protects europe and it has precisely the square root of fuck all to do with the EU.
"In the end, I'm more likely to move to Canada than continental Europe."
UK government and judicial sovereignty. Plus stopping free movement will be a bonus. Norway only agree to those conditions to access the EU market tarif free. Hopefully May will see sense and we'll just pay the tarif.
"hat leaves the leavers and the remainers and a margin of 2% of one of those group over the other is not an overwhelming mandate, it isn't even a good mandate, that's a "by the skin of your teeth" mandate."
Its a majority and you can whine and bitch and thrash on the hook all you like, Leave won. End of.
"Britain will be torn up by this issue because of the weak mandate the leavers got in that referendum for decades and that incessant bickering will hurt your country badly."
Unlikely. But if the remoaners love the EU so much no one is stopping them sodding off and living on the continent.
Is poor ickle Special Snowflake still sore about the outcome? Diddums. You and the other remoaners need to grow the fuck up. If you don't like democracy and prefer rule by the minority then piss off to any one of a number of countries that implement that kind of system.
"The referendum had a 72.2% turnout. That makes the final results 37.5% leave, 34.7% remain, 27.8% abstain. That's a really crappy majority to claim that you have a mandate."
No it bloody well isn't. The date of the referendum was announced LONG before it happened. There was NO excuse for any fir and healthy person not to vote either directly or by post, and if they didn't then it was clearly because they didn't give a damn one way or the other. So YES, the 37.5% leave IS a good mandate and its a damn site better than you get in any general election for the winning party.
Every 5 or 10 years someone discovers some signal which they think maybe could be possibly be ET. Then it either turns out to be a some new stellar physics or interference from earth. IIRC one ET "discovery" turned out to be the microwave oven in the kitchen of the science centre.
Why? Because once a genie is out the bottle it can't be put back in because it only takes one person to use it. Plus an arms race seems to be a fact of life on this planet between humans and other animals too.
But hey, don't worry, we have the hippies at CND to save us. I'm sure one day they'll stop protesting at everything the west does and head off to russia to do the same thing there, right? I'm mean they're not a bunch of moronic congenital cowards who only protest against governments who they know won't hurt them are they.
Rising sea levels will be gradual and we have plenty of time to cope with them. Aside from the climate change aspect the more immediate problem is acidifcation and warming of the sea which has already killed off a quarter of the barrier reef and is having serious effects elsewhere with plankton. If the ocean food chain starts collapsing from the bottom up we're in deep deep shit and thats before you consider the reduction of fish stocks by overfishing and the destruction of the ocean floor by drag net trawling.
A bunch of pasty faced sad sack nerds sitting in a basement want to sound cool and tough, like they've just done a tour in 'Nam. So they don't say "enabled" by javascript, no no no, its "weaponised" with "attack vectors" instead of flaws or holes. Its just so lame and wannabe.
Oh look, lame sarcasm in place of a reasoned response. How unlike slashdot.
"The Microsat movement isn't going to contribute much to space pollution as low lifetime sats deployed to low orbits aren't the problem."
Who said they're only in low orbit?
"Creating an space-based economy and self sustaining workforce"
And what exactly does that hand waving soundbite mean in practise? What will the economy be based on, how will they be self sustaining in a hard vacuum with everything having to be shipped up from earth? Take your time.
Slashdot Mirror
... that'll be another 4425 bits of space junk. Genius idea - utterly pollute near space just so some company can make a short term profit on something thats a nice to have rather than essential infrastructure.
"SpaceX said it would follow federal guidelines to mitigate orbital debris"
And how does it plan to do that exactly? They're too high to be sent down to burn up in the atmosphere and too low to be sent off into a parking orbit.
I would assume. You move a mass around on something thats spinning and the acis of rotation (and often speed) at which it spins will change.
So aircraft producing 12% (and rising) of global transport CO2 emissions is a lie then is it?
All true about car engines, but I do wonder how long one would last if it had to sit at its max power rpm for hours on end. You could argue that stop start allows the engine to have a "rest" for want of a better word.
If you live so far from work that you have to fly their perhaps you should consider moving house.
Getting to work is an essential. Flying usually is not. And I'm no fan of Al Gore, the mans a screaming hypocrite.
Luckily with NOx it doesn't hang around in the atmosphere very long , so while its a nasty pollutant its soon gone. CO2 however is the real problem right now.
You're right about aircraft efficiency. IIRC a 747 at full capacity has the same mileage per person as a person driving a small car the same distance. Of course the problem with the comparison is that its not possible to jump into a small car and drive 3000 miles in a day (and who would anyway even if it was?) then come back again the next, so air travel is still a horrendous polluter per person in comparison to ground transport.
"But "Business Class" planes are horrifically fuel inefficient; around 11-16% of that achieved by the Cattle Cars."
I reckon its safe to assume that the sort of people who fly in business jets don't give a rats backside about the enviroment. Its just something else for them to exploit.
An aircraft that burns even more fuel per mile than a normal one and nicely pollutes the stratosphere to boot. Perhaps Branson should just stay on his carribean island and enjoy the sea - before the hurricanes get so bad due to climate change that his house is blown away.
And yes, I know there are plenty of people on this site who don't think human induced climate change is real and I respect your right to hold that opinion. Try respecting mine and don't reply with a load of insulting bile. Thanks.
Whats it like to be on the receiving end for once?
Just a bunch of non-entities with all the charisma of a boiled potato.
Sure , MongoDB is fast. But having used it after spending years with relational DBs my opinion of it is its a little more than a toy thats one step up from a flat file and is bascially a throwback to what existed back in the 70s before RDBs came along.
If all you want is a key value store then knock yourself out, but if you want proper relational operations - and don't say they're not important, they damn well are in any serious business data - then forget it. Mongo has some relational operators hacked in and the latest versions can do a piss poor simulcra of a join between collections but these can't use an index so are essentially useless for high speed operations. Also Mongo doesn't support transactions making dirty reads possible and hence its useless for simultanious multiclient operations on critical data. And don't get me started on its hideous bastard stepchild of javascript command line making even the simplest query a PITA exercise in bracket counting.
"MongoDB will run circles around MySQL because MongoDB is web scale."
Dishing up noddy website data is pretty much all its any use for.
Get over yourself. A majority is a majority however you want to spin it.
"Really, though you typify the Brexit movement in that you don't seem to understand what it is you voted for. "
Spare me your feeble attempts at patronising, the usual remoaner response to any pro Brexit argument frankly. Your points are BS and you know it but hey, you lost so you can whine like a baby as much as you like, makes no difference.
Btw, you're confusing me with someone who gives a shit about your "respect".
"protection being a member of the EU affords me."
Protection?? LOL, yeah, I bet Putin pisses his pants when he thinks about the EU armies. Laughing that is. NATO is what protects europe and it has precisely the square root of fuck all to do with the EU.
"In the end, I'm more likely to move to Canada than continental Europe."
Good, one less remoaner. Don't let us keep you.
"So tell me, what precisely did you win?"
UK government and judicial sovereignty. Plus stopping free movement will be a bonus. Norway only agree to those conditions to access the EU market tarif free. Hopefully May will see sense and we'll just pay the tarif.
"hat leaves the leavers and the remainers and a margin of 2% of one of those group over the other is not an overwhelming mandate, it isn't even a good mandate, that's a "by the skin of your teeth" mandate."
Its a majority and you can whine and bitch and thrash on the hook all you like, Leave won. End of.
"Britain will be torn up by this issue because of the weak mandate the leavers got in that referendum for decades and that incessant bickering will hurt your country badly."
Unlikely. But if the remoaners love the EU so much no one is stopping them sodding off and living on the continent.
Is poor ickle Special Snowflake still sore about the outcome? Diddums. You and the other remoaners need to grow the fuck up. If you don't like democracy and prefer rule by the minority then piss off to any one of a number of countries that implement that kind of system.
Translation: Fuck the majority result because I don't personally agree with the outcome.
"The referendum had a 72.2% turnout. That makes the final results 37.5% leave, 34.7% remain, 27.8% abstain. That's a really crappy majority to claim that you have a mandate."
No it bloody well isn't. The date of the referendum was announced LONG before it happened. There was NO excuse for any fir and healthy person not to vote either directly or by post, and if they didn't then it was clearly because they didn't give a damn one way or the other. So YES, the 37.5% leave IS a good mandate and its a damn site better than you get in any general election for the winning party.
Every 5 or 10 years someone discovers some signal which they think maybe could be possibly be ET. Then it either turns out to be a some new stellar physics or interference from earth. IIRC one ET "discovery" turned out to be the microwave oven in the kitchen of the science centre.
Why? Because once a genie is out the bottle it can't be put back in because it only takes one person to use it. Plus an arms race seems to be a fact of life on this planet between humans and other animals too.
But hey, don't worry, we have the hippies at CND to save us. I'm sure one day they'll stop protesting at everything the west does and head off to russia to do the same thing there, right? I'm mean they're not a bunch of moronic congenital cowards who only protest against governments who they know won't hurt them are they.
Rising sea levels will be gradual and we have plenty of time to cope with them. Aside from the climate change aspect the more immediate problem is acidifcation and warming of the sea which has already killed off a quarter of the barrier reef and is having serious effects elsewhere with plankton. If the ocean food chain starts collapsing from the bottom up we're in deep deep shit and thats before you consider the reduction of fish stocks by overfishing and the destruction of the ocean floor by drag net trawling.
Because its nothing like real war "dude".
A bunch of pasty faced sad sack nerds sitting in a basement want to sound cool and tough, like they've just done a tour in 'Nam. So they don't say "enabled" by javascript, no no no, its "weaponised" with "attack vectors" instead of flaws or holes. Its just so lame and wannabe.
Oh look, lame sarcasm in place of a reasoned response. How unlike slashdot.
"The Microsat movement isn't going to contribute much to space pollution as low lifetime sats deployed to low orbits aren't the problem."
Who said they're only in low orbit?
"Creating an space-based economy and self sustaining workforce"
And what exactly does that hand waving soundbite mean in practise? What will the economy be based on, how will they be self sustaining in a hard vacuum with everything having to be shipped up from earth? Take your time.