Yes, they CAN go if people would SUE.
I make a habit to never put my CC in stores that run windows or that outsource to India, or any nation where the coders are paid a pitance of western coders. As such, I have not had my CC's stolen.
People need to put together mass lawsuits against companies and their CEO/CIO personally. Once that starts happening, then and only then, will things change.
Even here, it would be nice to see a lawyer step up and state that they are willing to do a class action against these companies.
The company, along with the CEO and CIO need to be held accountable. Once these ppl realize that they can be held PERSONALLY responsible for their bad actions, then and only then, will we see real issues solved.
Look, everybody is ignoring the common things. Instead, they see what the crackers WANT them to see, which is other doorways than what was initially used.
Look, the problem here is that ALL OF THESE COMPANIES THAT WERE CRACKED have 3 things in common:
1) they run windows.
2) they outsourced to India.
3) the company is not allowed to operate in India.
Basically, Indians are being bought off to leave backdoors on the production system.
The problem is, that they are no different than any of the others that have been cracked. Every last one of them is running windows and have outsourced to India. Now, 30 years ago, when considering security clearences, payrolls were looked at. Why? Because if somebody was on clearence and had too low of a salary, they could be bought.
Well, the Indian coders are paid less than $10K / year back in India. All it takes is somebody from china, Russia, North Korea, Venezuela, Iran, etc to offer just ONE of them 100k (or 10 years worth of their salaries) to release a bug in the production systems. Of course, it is happening.
This is how and why these companies are getting cracked. What is really needed is for customers and banks to SUE these companies, and NOW. And not just the company, but the CIO and CEO for putting their data at this much risk. Once CEO/CIOs are looking being held personally responsible for their actions, well, things will change.
Issue solved.
Not likely. One of the large costs with any of these missions is launch. With SpaceX pushing re-usable systems, and about to drop their prices a great deal in about 3 years, it will make missions like this possible.
In addition, keep in mind that Musk is now looking at building a satellite factory. Once he starts that, he will be after all sat manufacturing to make them cheap. While this is an airship, the guts will be satellite based.
This actually makes sense for an interesting science mission. Not sure if it makes sense for humans to go there, but loads of science can be done from above.
First off, B&W already has a reactor that could be up within 5 years. They are nervous about demand. What is needed is a guaranteed number of reactor buys (say 10 ) to get them moving again.
BUT, what is really needed is to focus on gen IV reactors esp. using thorium. They can burn up the old waste.
Now, with the last congress, I would have agreed with you. And IMHO, this coming CONgress is going to be a major fuck-up. HOWEVER, the GOP supports nukes. In addition, so does O. As such, I think that we will see an energy bill that will push new reactors.
Actually, Audi, GM, Ford, BMW, etc are all going to push FC cars. They are doing the EVs currently because California as well as Tesla forces the issue. But, other than nissan, all of the major car companies have said that the battery is dead and that FC are the way to the future.
That is why Gen 3 is so very important. When it comes out at say 35K and the owners have access to the Super Chargers AND Tesla is building out the new battery exchange mechanism, well, at that point, I think that the FCs makers will look foolish since relatively few cars will be sold while Tesla (and hopefully nissan) will be backed up.
BTW, I have issues with Nissan. The leaf is a POS. In fact, IMHO, all of the EVs are poorly designed except for Tesla. The leaf does not deal with heating/cooling of the batteries. The range SUX.
Uhhh, you realise that Ariane 5 has launched many many many missions successfully, and has a better reliability record than the US's launch vehicles, right?
That was the original quote from beelsebob. He made it Europe vs. US, not me.
While what you wrote is 100% accurate (as pertains to the efficiency), economics and regulations play major parts in deciding winners.
H2 is a disaster. BUT, if oil companies, along with all of the top 10 major car companies push it, it is POSSIBLE for them to win.
Now, with that said, I think that when Tesla releases Gen 3, I believe that it is all over. I think that the majority of buyers will INSIST on cars to be built like a tesla. And sales will slide for the top 10 companies.
FH is not really vaporware. It consists of 3 cores, which are fully flight tested. These are tied together via plumbing that is software controlled. Well, that part is fully tested as well. Remember those 6-12x where spacex announced louder than normal testing? Those were FH testing. What remains to test can only be tested in flight, which is the side separation. OTOH, explosive bolts are well known and tested. Iow, slim chance of issue there. What is holding back FH testing is that spacex is focused on stage recovery, along with dragon2 and that Kennedy needs to be modified for FH.
so, u can claim that it is vaporware, but, Russia, Europe, China, japan, american, and Indian launch groups say that it is close enough to reality that they can not compete. And I will trust their opinion, over yours.
No, it was canceled and restarted because it was awarded wrong based on the stated criteria. Airbus out and out lost the contract based on what was the stated criteria. However, Airbus had other side offerings that was considered but should not have been.
Had the procurement officer done things correctly, then Boeing NEVER would have had a second chance at it, even had airbus won it.
Ariane is NOT ahead and that is what has them scared.
The only way for Ariane 5 to be profitable is by launching 2 sats at once. The smaller sat is now much cheaper to fly on the current F9. When FH comes out this summer, it will be capable of launch multiple sats in 1 launch that will costs less than what Ariane 5 charges for just 1 of the 2 sats.
Keep in mind that Ariane gets an annual subsidy to do 5-7 launches / year. And this year, because SpaceX ate into their meal, Europe had to double it. If SpaceX successfully returns a first stage, I have no doubt that they will be offering much lower costs to future launches, which will guarantee that Ariane loses all commercial space. At that point, to remain viable, it will take several billion euros / year of subsidies to keep them afloat.
Oh, I am a believer in converting our coal into methane (great point energy). As you said, we can not have a monoculture. As it is, it was the fact that we allowed coal to grow to 60% of our electricity that is leaving America in its current situation.
BUT, if we allow coal to go to methane, and add nukes, and other AE, etc, well, that makes good sense.
I did not characterize the best solution as right vs left. I said that both of you fools are just that: fools.
You can NOT stall out anything. Economics forces the issues. Tar Sands are economical at 40 / bl. As such, they are viable RIGHT NOW.
The right strategy is to move the west from oil to EVs, but use nat gas as the extender. Like H2, and electricity, Nat gas or Methane can be CARRIERS of energy.
yeah, the far right is not much better. However, the far left screams about Nat gas and says that it hurts things, when in reality, it is the smartest way to go.
Wether it is developed or not, does not change the emissions. The same amount of oil will be burned if it comes from tar sands or from a well. RIght now, you are making the issue one of tar sand vs. pumped oil. That is a no win situation. At best, it is a tactical issue.
HOWEVER, if you let keystone go through, while getting all NEW COMMERCIAL VEHICLES (that burn that tar sand) to be using nat gas, and then doing EV with 'range extender' (basically serial hybrid), you start dropping the demand for diesel or tar sands. In addition, it will move the commercial vehicles into EVs
the far left need to quit thinking tactical and start thinking strategically. Otherwise, CO2 emissions will NOT drop.
in fact, the cars from before about 1950's burned gasoline, ethanol, diesel, or..... kerosene. As such, they worked with the fueling stations that existed for heaters and lanterns.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that is a good question. I would like to think that it can. But, I do not know.
However, I DO know that they can be held personally liable.
Yes, they CAN go if people would SUE.
I make a habit to never put my CC in stores that run windows or that outsource to India, or any nation where the coders are paid a pitance of western coders. As such, I have not had my CC's stolen.
People need to put together mass lawsuits against companies and their CEO/CIO personally. Once that starts happening, then and only then, will things change.
Even here, it would be nice to see a lawyer step up and state that they are willing to do a class action against these companies.
The company, along with the CEO and CIO need to be held accountable. Once these ppl realize that they can be held PERSONALLY responsible for their bad actions, then and only then, will we see real issues solved.
Look, everybody is ignoring the common things. Instead, they see what the crackers WANT them to see, which is other doorways than what was initially used.
Look, the problem here is that ALL OF THESE COMPANIES THAT WERE CRACKED have 3 things in common:
1) they run windows.
2) they outsourced to India.
3) the company is not allowed to operate in India.
Basically, Indians are being bought off to leave backdoors on the production system.
That happened at Target. And yes, they got CCs, but they also got medical info.
The problem is, that they are no different than any of the others that have been cracked. Every last one of them is running windows and have outsourced to India. Now, 30 years ago, when considering security clearences, payrolls were looked at. Why? Because if somebody was on clearence and had too low of a salary, they could be bought.
Well, the Indian coders are paid less than $10K / year back in India. All it takes is somebody from china, Russia, North Korea, Venezuela, Iran, etc to offer just ONE of them 100k (or 10 years worth of their salaries) to release a bug in the production systems. Of course, it is happening.
This is how and why these companies are getting cracked. What is really needed is for customers and banks to SUE these companies, and NOW. And not just the company, but the CIO and CEO for putting their data at this much risk. Once CEO/CIOs are looking being held personally responsible for their actions, well, things will change.
Issue solved.
Hey, is anybody noticing a trend that Windows combined with outsourcing == cracked systems.
When will managers learn to think?
Not likely. One of the large costs with any of these missions is launch. With SpaceX pushing re-usable systems, and about to drop their prices a great deal in about 3 years, it will make missions like this possible.
In addition, keep in mind that Musk is now looking at building a satellite factory. Once he starts that, he will be after all sat manufacturing to make them cheap. While this is an airship, the guts will be satellite based.
This actually makes sense for an interesting science mission. Not sure if it makes sense for humans to go there, but loads of science can be done from above.
First off, B&W already has a reactor that could be up within 5 years. They are nervous about demand. What is needed is a guaranteed number of reactor buys (say 10 ) to get them moving again.
BUT, what is really needed is to focus on gen IV reactors esp. using thorium. They can burn up the old waste.
Now, with the last congress, I would have agreed with you. And IMHO, this coming CONgress is going to be a major fuck-up. HOWEVER, the GOP supports nukes. In addition, so does O. As such, I think that we will see an energy bill that will push new reactors.
Actually, Audi, GM, Ford, BMW, etc are all going to push FC cars. They are doing the EVs currently because California as well as Tesla forces the issue. But, other than nissan, all of the major car companies have said that the battery is dead and that FC are the way to the future.
That is why Gen 3 is so very important. When it comes out at say 35K and the owners have access to the Super Chargers AND Tesla is building out the new battery exchange mechanism, well, at that point, I think that the FCs makers will look foolish since relatively few cars will be sold while Tesla (and hopefully nissan) will be backed up.
BTW, I have issues with Nissan. The leaf is a POS. In fact, IMHO, all of the EVs are poorly designed except for Tesla. The leaf does not deal with heating/cooling of the batteries. The range SUX.
Uhhh, you realise that Ariane 5 has launched many many many missions successfully, and has a better reliability record than the US's launch vehicles, right?
That was the original quote from beelsebob. He made it Europe vs. US, not me.
Look at the original discussion. It was about European vs. American rockets. It was not Ariane vs. F9.
While what you wrote is 100% accurate (as pertains to the efficiency), economics and regulations play major parts in deciding winners.
H2 is a disaster. BUT, if oil companies, along with all of the top 10 major car companies push it, it is POSSIBLE for them to win.
Now, with that said, I think that when Tesla releases Gen 3, I believe that it is all over. I think that the majority of buyers will INSIST on cars to be built like a tesla. And sales will slide for the top 10 companies.
FH is not really vaporware. It consists of 3 cores, which are fully flight tested. These are tied together via plumbing that is software controlled. Well, that part is fully tested as well. Remember those 6-12x where spacex announced louder than normal testing? Those were FH testing. What remains to test can only be tested in flight, which is the side separation. OTOH, explosive bolts are well known and tested. Iow, slim chance of issue there. What is holding back FH testing is that spacex is focused on stage recovery, along with dragon2 and that Kennedy needs to be modified for FH.
so, u can claim that it is vaporware, but, Russia, Europe, China, japan, american, and Indian launch groups say that it is close enough to reality that they can not compete. And I will trust their opinion, over yours.
He can also punish the company with lose of subsidies, contracts, etc.
And Boeing has recommended Ariane at times.
No, it was canceled and restarted because it was awarded wrong based on the stated criteria. Airbus out and out lost the contract based on what was the stated criteria. However, Airbus had other side offerings that was considered but should not have been.
Had the procurement officer done things correctly, then Boeing NEVER would have had a second chance at it, even had airbus won it.
This case has nothing in common with the other.
Ariane is NOT ahead and that is what has them scared.
The only way for Ariane 5 to be profitable is by launching 2 sats at once. The smaller sat is now much cheaper to fly on the current F9. When FH comes out this summer, it will be capable of launch multiple sats in 1 launch that will costs less than what Ariane 5 charges for just 1 of the 2 sats.
Keep in mind that Ariane gets an annual subsidy to do 5-7 launches / year. And this year, because SpaceX ate into their meal, Europe had to double it. If SpaceX successfully returns a first stage, I have no doubt that they will be offering much lower costs to future launches, which will guarantee that Ariane loses all commercial space. At that point, to remain viable, it will take several billion euros / year of subsidies to keep them afloat.
Oh, I am a believer in converting our coal into methane (great point energy). As you said, we can not have a monoculture. As it is, it was the fact that we allowed coal to grow to 60% of our electricity that is leaving America in its current situation.
BUT, if we allow coal to go to methane, and add nukes, and other AE, etc, well, that makes good sense.
not enough to matter. Far more important is to focus on changing the vehicles, not the source.
I did not characterize the best solution as right vs left. I said that both of you fools are just that: fools.
You can NOT stall out anything. Economics forces the issues. Tar Sands are economical at 40 / bl. As such, they are viable RIGHT NOW.
The right strategy is to move the west from oil to EVs, but use nat gas as the extender. Like H2, and electricity, Nat gas or Methane can be CARRIERS of energy.
yeah, the far right is not much better. However, the far left screams about Nat gas and says that it hurts things, when in reality, it is the smartest way to go.
Wether it is developed or not, does not change the emissions. The same amount of oil will be burned if it comes from tar sands or from a well. RIght now, you are making the issue one of tar sand vs. pumped oil. That is a no win situation. At best, it is a tactical issue.
HOWEVER, if you let keystone go through, while getting all NEW COMMERCIAL VEHICLES (that burn that tar sand) to be using nat gas, and then doing EV with 'range extender' (basically serial hybrid), you start dropping the demand for diesel or tar sands. In addition, it will move the commercial vehicles into EVs
the far left need to quit thinking tactical and start thinking strategically. Otherwise, CO2 emissions will NOT drop.
in fact, the cars from before about 1950's burned gasoline, ethanol, diesel, or ..... kerosene. As such, they worked with the fueling stations that existed for heaters and lanterns.
And yet, most car makers and oil companies want to push H2
while Musk continues to push plain old electricity.
I wonder who is likely to win considering that in another 3 years, the Tesla model 3 will costs around 35K and they will be making 250K cars / year? That will put them in ~ top 25 car makers.