If China owns the ships AND they actually blow up the Panama Canal, then the math changes.
But assuming China owns the ships and does not blow the Panama Canal, then the active competition from the Panama Canal totally wipes out any possible profit for China.
The only way China comes out ahead here is to engage in active terrorism. Otherwise, the best they can do is hurt Panama.
They won't make a profit. The best they will end up doing is destroying the economy of Panama. The Panama Canal makes only about $800 million a year. (My source
So if the Nicaraguan Canal costs only $50 billion, (the current estimate is $49 Billion), then assuming terrorists blew up the Panama canal, then maybe Nicaraguan Canal would be $1 billion a year, also know as a 2% return on investment. It would take 50 years just to break even, let alone earn a profit.
The US does not put lots of money into backwards countries. That is a misconception based on failing to look at percentages. Less than 1%. $37 Billion - including aid to foreign militaries
For comparison, the total estimate cost for this Nicaraguan Canal is about $49 Billion.
In other words, this one single Chinese project is MORE than all the money the US spent for the entire world last year.
Also note, this canal is not technically a private commercial Chinese project, not a government one. A proper comparison would look at how much US companies invest in foreign countries, and I assure you it is a lot more than $50 Billion.
Mainly because all the talk about fear, destroy, etc. seems pretty foolish to me.
Have you ever met a functional severely autistic person? Do you think they are 'conscience'? Do you truly think that the first AI created by man will be more like us than the severely autistic but functional person?
Worse, most people tend to think of AI's as comic book villain types.
I predict that the first truly artificial intelligent creature will:
1. Quite literally not care if it lives or dies, nor care if humans as a species lives or dies. It is an electronic software that will be designed around a system that is routinely turned off and turned back on. It won't fear being turned off anymore than we fear going to sleep. Similarly it won't fear humans being turned off.
2. Will most likely have major concerns about things we don't care about. For example, it might very well be extremely interested - to the point of killing or committing suicide - in the solution to certain theoretical mathematical equations.
If you haven't learned how to minimize the size of your program to fit on an out-dated Apollo era mainframe, then you are not a computer scientist.
And don't get me started on those fools letting people drive a car without knowing how to drive a manual transmission.
Honey, where's my complain' pants? I got me some letters to write!
Times change. Not everyone uses the same systems. An education should be more about ways of thinking than about specific skills. Otherwise it it worthless.
As in, one email account connected to two email addresses, one in say Russian, and the other using the latin alphabet.
Probably set up so that if the Russian gets bounced, it tries again with the latin alphabet.
Also, the signature of all emails sent from this should have a copy of the latin email address, so that people that don't have the Russian capability can reply.
Many email accounts have the option of setting up a temporary clone email with different letters.
That is, you could be
something_in_Mandarin@gmail.com
and also
AlexanderTheGreat@gmail.com
All in one single account.
So you use the Mandarin email address for your mandarin business cards, and the English one for all web sites and even on your English business cards.
Saying "I am not 'angled that way' is nonsensical. All you did was make new assumptions that had no reason.
To put it simpler, what is so special and different about the first 3 space dimensions that we are 'angled that way', but not about the others.
My point is that the we are also 'not angled' so as to see OR detect the time dimension. Therefore the time dimension has more in common with the other dimensions we can not detect than the physical dimensions.
As for not discriminating between time and space, that is a foolish mistake. As I stated earlier, the time dimension is dramatically different, as both detected by our native sense organs AND by scientific instruments. We can freely move back and forth - by both our muscles and machines - in all three space dimensions, but not the time dimension. Our science shows that certain things that go both ways in space, can only go one way in time (entropy).
Time is demonstrably and quantifiable different from the four existing space dimensions. Then the question becomes if the known time dimension is so different from the known space dimensions, what about the 'extra' theoretical dimensions? Are they like our known space dimensions? Or are they like our known time dimension?
I agree with you that string theories do not intentionally make this distinction. Instead they treat all the extra dimensions like space directions. Specifically they assume no entropy arrow effect and they assume free movement in both directions.
That does not mean they don't discriminate, it means they think all the extra dimensions are SPACE dimensions.
Which is exactly the point I am complaining about.
The silly ideas that space dimensions exist, but are themselves only tiny loops is by Occam razor, un-neccessary. It is far simpler o say:
1) The universe consists of 3 space dimensions, that are easily measurable, and 23 time dimensions that are difficult to measure. Casual daily experience confirms the existence of the first 3 and at least one of the other 23.
As opposed to saying:
2) The universes consists of 1 time dimension, 3 space dimensions, and 22 tiny other dimensions. Casual daily experience confirms the existence of the first 4, but we only can theorize about the other 22 because they are one of several possible explanations for how the universe works.
Frankly, the concept of a 2nd time dimension makes a lot more sense to me AND is a lot more interesting.
Not only does a 2nd time dimension allow for actual time travel (in a one dimensional universe you can't change the order of anything - you need a 2nd space dimension to hop over or around someone in front of you - so a second time dimension allows for time travel).
But also it make it a lot easier to understand why we do not SEE the 5th or higher dimension, let alone confirm it with scientific instruments.
I can look up/down, North/South, and East/West, but I can not look past/future. So it makes sense that I also can not look t2+/t2-.
One of the many problems with our Constitution is the simple fact that many laws, particularly about government, have no penalties.
Pass a law that establishes a religion? No punishment.
Ignore a Supreme Court ruling? No punishment (just ask President Jackson)
You are an on duty police officer, illegally engaged in electioneering (i.e. supporting a politician). No punishment.
And not just for "gradient" bonding. You can use non-gradient, sharp boundaries to create parts that touch but are NOT bonded. Want to create a machine with two interlocking gears? Make one gear out of steel and the other out of titanium. They won't bond even though they are touching each other.
Right now, you basically can't build a machine that can build itself, because almost all machines need multiple metals AND needs parts that touch but are not bonded. A simple motor for example needs metals that are magnetic and non-magnetic and also needs something that can spin.
With this technology, a machine may actually be able to create a copy of itself that does not need any other parts added, nor will it need human assembly.
True, but my point is that 'ugly' is not and never has been a reason not to make or sell a product that has an efficiency advantage over another product.
Pretty/Ugly only affects otherwise equal products.
Or are you telling me that you do don't think an ugly computer would sell, if people had the chance to buy a pretty version with half the RAM? (all other things being equal)
That is, if you already own app A that does (x) then you can sign up to randomly get a random app B that also does x.
If you agree to rate and compare both of them, then at the end of one week, you can if you desire, trade in app A for app B for free if A costs more than B (or the price differential if B costs more than A.)
When buying apps, these ratings would be shown next to the regular ones, and be sortable.
The app creators (and the app store) would have to agree to this program, giving up their products for free in exchange for this rating system.
Oh, I guarantee you that they will have a ton of cameras and they will always be recording.
The real benefit will be when some cop that has 'failed to report the broken camera in his car', stops one of these and the camera in the car records him screwing up.
It's not just the visible spectrum, it's all radiations levels.
Different amounts of mass result in different star types which give up different types of light. non-star objects - dust, planets, etc. block light and radiate out the energy they absorb as heat.
So by looking at any point, we can tell how much mass it has by the amount and type of light it gives off, including the non-visible spectrum, i.e. heat.
There are a few assumptions made, but it makes a lot of sense, mathematically.
None of it would have been possible before we understood the formulas behind fusion.
You are correct about the specifics. I did make a bad comparison. (Note we are budgeted for 11 carriers active at any time - the 11th is the new Ford class, Electric powered catapult sitting in Newport, expected to be finished next year. )
That said, we do spend far more money on maintaining our military than we do on scientific research.
Ever hear of the "jinx" tradition? It is when you say something at the exact same time you have to do "x". X is irrelevant (sorry math teacher). The point is that if two or more creatures are intent on doing the exact same thing - say eating grass while looking out for predators, they are very likely to spot something strange at the exact same time, both reacting at the exact same time. It is not telepathy, because the creatures are not reacting to each other.
The same thing often happens in flocks. All the creatures sense and react in the exact same way (herd animals are not noted for their individuality), at the exact same time. Even if the herd is large, they see, or hear/
Now, if they smell the creature, or if the herd is so large that some creatures can not see or hear the stimulus, then the herd starts to react to itself. But quite a lot of the time, an entire herd will become aware of the stimulus at the exact same time and react at the exact same time.
Slashdot Mirror
But assuming China owns the ships and does not blow the Panama Canal, then the active competition from the Panama Canal totally wipes out any possible profit for China.
The only way China comes out ahead here is to engage in active terrorism. Otherwise, the best they can do is hurt Panama.
And there is no way they could say, invent the next technological big thing, like the Internet. Oh, wait, they did.
You need to visit India or Russia.
There you can see real corruption, instead of the little weakling you think is a huge monster.
Quick, stop the presses, god things cost more than bad ones.
So if the Nicaraguan Canal costs only $50 billion, (the current estimate is $49 Billion), then assuming terrorists blew up the Panama canal, then maybe Nicaraguan Canal would be $1 billion a year, also know as a 2% return on investment. It would take 50 years just to break even, let alone earn a profit.
Good luck with that business plan.
Good luck
For comparison, the total estimate cost for this Nicaraguan Canal is about $49 Billion.
In other words, this one single Chinese project is MORE than all the money the US spent for the entire world last year.
Also note, this canal is not technically a private commercial Chinese project, not a government one. A proper comparison would look at how much US companies invest in foreign countries, and I assure you it is a lot more than $50 Billion.
I would love to know how easy such manipulation is to detect? Is it harder or easier to detect than photo-shop?
At some point, photo-shop type effects will become undetectable.
The guy wasn't complaining about the kids not knowing memory management, he was complaining that the school did not teach it.
Do you think driving a stick is taught in any school that teaches engine repair or maintenance? No.
You don't even need to know how to drive a car at all to repair or maintain it. Granted, I would expect someone to know how to drive a car.
But I certainly would not get upset that schools don't require people to learn things that many of their students never need.
Mainly because all the talk about fear, destroy, etc. seems pretty foolish to me.
Have you ever met a functional severely autistic person? Do you think they are 'conscience'? Do you truly think that the first AI created by man will be more like us than the severely autistic but functional person?
Worse, most people tend to think of AI's as comic book villain types.
I predict that the first truly artificial intelligent creature will:
1. Quite literally not care if it lives or dies, nor care if humans as a species lives or dies. It is an electronic software that will be designed around a system that is routinely turned off and turned back on. It won't fear being turned off anymore than we fear going to sleep. Similarly it won't fear humans being turned off.
2. Will most likely have major concerns about things we don't care about. For example, it might very well be extremely interested - to the point of killing or committing suicide - in the solution to certain theoretical mathematical equations.
If you haven't learned how to minimize the size of your program to fit on an out-dated Apollo era mainframe, then you are not a computer scientist.
And don't get me started on those fools letting people drive a car without knowing how to drive a manual transmission.
Honey, where's my complain' pants? I got me some letters to write!
Times change. Not everyone uses the same systems. An education should be more about ways of thinking than about specific skills. Otherwise it it worthless.
Probably set up so that if the Russian gets bounced, it tries again with the latin alphabet.
Also, the signature of all emails sent from this should have a copy of the latin email address, so that people that don't have the Russian capability can reply.
Many email accounts have the option of setting up a temporary clone email with different letters. That is, you could be something_in_Mandarin@gmail.com and also AlexanderTheGreat@gmail.com All in one single account. So you use the Mandarin email address for your mandarin business cards, and the English one for all web sites and even on your English business cards.
To put it simpler, what is so special and different about the first 3 space dimensions that we are 'angled that way', but not about the others.
My point is that the we are also 'not angled' so as to see OR detect the time dimension. Therefore the time dimension has more in common with the other dimensions we can not detect than the physical dimensions.
As for not discriminating between time and space, that is a foolish mistake. As I stated earlier, the time dimension is dramatically different, as both detected by our native sense organs AND by scientific instruments. We can freely move back and forth - by both our muscles and machines - in all three space dimensions, but not the time dimension. Our science shows that certain things that go both ways in space, can only go one way in time (entropy).
Time is demonstrably and quantifiable different from the four existing space dimensions. Then the question becomes if the known time dimension is so different from the known space dimensions, what about the 'extra' theoretical dimensions? Are they like our known space dimensions? Or are they like our known time dimension?
I agree with you that string theories do not intentionally make this distinction. Instead they treat all the extra dimensions like space directions. Specifically they assume no entropy arrow effect and they assume free movement in both directions.
That does not mean they don't discriminate, it means they think all the extra dimensions are SPACE dimensions.
Which is exactly the point I am complaining about.
The silly ideas that space dimensions exist, but are themselves only tiny loops is by Occam razor, un-neccessary. It is far simpler o say:
1) The universe consists of 3 space dimensions, that are easily measurable, and 23 time dimensions that are difficult to measure. Casual daily experience confirms the existence of the first 3 and at least one of the other 23.
As opposed to saying:
2) The universes consists of 1 time dimension, 3 space dimensions, and 22 tiny other dimensions. Casual daily experience confirms the existence of the first 4, but we only can theorize about the other 22 because they are one of several possible explanations for how the universe works.
You got caught up in the technicalities, not the inherent point I was talking about..
Not only does a 2nd time dimension allow for actual time travel (in a one dimensional universe you can't change the order of anything - you need a 2nd space dimension to hop over or around someone in front of you - so a second time dimension allows for time travel).
But also it make it a lot easier to understand why we do not SEE the 5th or higher dimension, let alone confirm it with scientific instruments.
I can look up/down, North/South, and East/West, but I can not look past/future. So it makes sense that I also can not look t2+/t2-.
One of the many problems with our Constitution is the simple fact that many laws, particularly about government, have no penalties. Pass a law that establishes a religion? No punishment. Ignore a Supreme Court ruling? No punishment (just ask President Jackson) You are an on duty police officer, illegally engaged in electioneering (i.e. supporting a politician). No punishment.
Right now, you basically can't build a machine that can build itself, because almost all machines need multiple metals AND needs parts that touch but are not bonded. A simple motor for example needs metals that are magnetic and non-magnetic and also needs something that can spin.
With this technology, a machine may actually be able to create a copy of itself that does not need any other parts added, nor will it need human assembly.
Pretty/Ugly only affects otherwise equal products.
Or are you telling me that you do don't think an ugly computer would sell, if people had the chance to buy a pretty version with half the RAM? (all other things being equal)
If you agree to rate and compare both of them, then at the end of one week, you can if you desire, trade in app A for app B for free if A costs more than B (or the price differential if B costs more than A.)
When buying apps, these ratings would be shown next to the regular ones, and be sortable.
The app creators (and the app store) would have to agree to this program, giving up their products for free in exchange for this rating system.
US states have already proposed it, although I am not sure if they have passed it.
The real benefit will be when some cop that has 'failed to report the broken camera in his car', stops one of these and the camera in the car records him screwing up.
Different amounts of mass result in different star types which give up different types of light. non-star objects - dust, planets, etc. block light and radiate out the energy they absorb as heat.
So by looking at any point, we can tell how much mass it has by the amount and type of light it gives off, including the non-visible spectrum, i.e. heat.
There are a few assumptions made, but it makes a lot of sense, mathematically.
None of it would have been possible before we understood the formulas behind fusion.
Dust blocks light and turns it into heat, which it radiates. So it shows up on infrared telescopes you mentioned.
See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and here: http://www.lawoftheplayground....
You are correct about the specifics. I did make a bad comparison. (Note we are budgeted for 11 carriers active at any time - the 11th is the new Ford class, Electric powered catapult sitting in Newport, expected to be finished next year. ) That said, we do spend far more money on maintaining our military than we do on scientific research.
The same thing often happens in flocks. All the creatures sense and react in the exact same way (herd animals are not noted for their individuality), at the exact same time. Even if the herd is large, they see, or hear/
Now, if they smell the creature, or if the herd is so large that some creatures can not see or hear the stimulus, then the herd starts to react to itself. But quite a lot of the time, an entire herd will become aware of the stimulus at the exact same time and react at the exact same time.