The tea party have joined neo-cons in pushing SLS (a communist approach to space) while fighting against helping private enterprise into space. America sits on the edge of our next 'Internet style economy', but neo-cons and tea* alike are stopping it.
Elon Musk would never take money from Gates. Paul allen perhaps, but not Gates. Gates has a LONG history of screwing everybody that he does deals with.
NASA is NOT spending much money at all. And they get far more returns than any single other group.
Really? Please show me what advanced R&D do you see coming from private enterprise on their own?
1) SpaceX's rockets? The engines were developed by NASA in the 90's, but squelced by 1996 CONgress.
2) Perhaps SpaceX's tank's? Again development by NASA, but squelced by 2001 W/CONgress destruction of X-33.
3) Inflatable space stations? Transhab that was crush by 1996 CONgress, but allowed into private enterprise by Clinton
4) Laser Drilling? Crushed by 1996 CONgress, but allowed to go to Colorado Mines by Clinton.
5) VASIMR? Crushed by 1996 CONgress, but allowed to go private by Clinton.
The list goes on and on and on. NASA does a LOT of R&D, but it is CONgress and typically short-sighted pres (nixon and W being the worst 2) that destroy it. You will be hard pressed to find any ORIGINAL SPACE R&D by private enterprise that is NOT an off branch of something that NASA came up with and funded.
That is exactly what ppl like Obama and Bolden are pushing. NASA was actually built to be an R&D for Aerospace. Now, it has been turned into a jobs bill by the likes of Shelby, Wolf, Hutchinson, Hatch, Coffman, etc. We need to allow private space to do these launches and then have NASA focus on doing R&D like this.
In a distributed environment (such as multiple ppl working from home), this makes good sense. In addition, you do not have to deal with admining much, etc. There is a decent use for this. However, Office 365 will NOT be a good choice. It will no doubt be designed to lock you into MS and only MS (though it may support apple with an inferior approach just to keep the FTC goons off their back).
Were you unable to get your data out of these? Nope. You got ALL of your data that you put in and said that you wanted. OTH, with other services, such as facebook or MS, you can NOT pull them out easily.
Nope. The neo-cons and tea* are far right (bordering on fascism along the lines of NAZIs), but the core of US is not rightwing. We are right of center, but not that much. However, it will come back as the economy comes back. I think that more and more Americans are learning that neo-cons and possible tea* do not have America's best interest at heart.
is that all reactors should have waste heat generators. Seriously. This issue would not have happened had they simply had attached one or more waste heat generators that could use the heat coming from the piles to run the pumps. Amazingly, they can only run when the nukes are running above 90C or more, which would then require cooling. Oddly, nobody is thinking that way. They put in diesel generators that require zero issues, but are likely to have more issues. Sad, sad, sad.
America has had multiple thorium reactors, the most famous and largest being Ft. St Vrain. The only real issue with is that GA took short cuts during construction (because it was 'safe'), and that lead to issues with alarms. After 15 years of that, PSC gave up on it and closed it.
Right now, if General Atomic chose to get back into the game, they could re-do this intelligently and be the big winners on this in under 5 years.
USA is NOT going to abandon our nukes. Simple as that. Hopefully, we will spend more on THorium R&D and soon. Likewise, we need to spend more on building a new IFR, but this time, make them SMALL (as in 300-500 MWe). By doing that, they can be constructed in a factory and then transported. In addition, rather than building brand new power plants all over the place, we simply enhance the current and shutdown ones with this new equipment. Then we are able to 'burn' all of this 'waste' fuel and simply bury it in the old reactors for 200 years. Or the true waste can go to WIPP. Regardless, new IFR's burning the current 'waste' would last about 100 years. Well worth it.
Not all wars are stupid. For example, we are in Afghanistan because AQ was based there and now is in Pakistan. I would argue that W screwed up by NOT going into pakistan. We should have chased them into there and let it be known that AQ will NOT be given safe haven ANYWHERE on this planet. Sadly, what W just told the world is that even if you are a backwards nation, harbor terrorists, and attack western nations, BUT have a nuke, then you can do anything that you want (real bad lesson). Thankfully, Obama/Biden allowed the DOD/CIA into there, but W was a massive screw up.
Iraq? Libya? We have ZERO business in EITHER nation. As it is, Iraq is going to switch to supporting Iran. When Iran decides to try and destabilize Saudi Arabia or openly attack Israel, we will end up being pulled into that BS.
Darpa's job is NOT to teach pols anything. Their job is to focus on the needs of the military. And up until W, it used to spend a lot of effort at keeping us OUT of wars. For example, DARPA spent a lot of money on AE. Far more than is realized. They have no desire to depend on a nation such as Saudi Arabia, nor a desire to have to fight to protect them. The best way is to avoid wars all together. With W, they changed the focus of DARPA as well as who gets the funding (they send a lot to businesses who waste, waste, waste; They also send a lot of Research to Chinese owned businesses which should terrify any normal person). Since I am no longer in the Research world, I am not sure if DARPA has gone back to what they were doing.
we can do better. AC is needed because the troops do better when rested. They are less likely to get killed or kill the wrong ppl due to faster reaction time.
Our problem is that transportation costs money and time. And all of this power is supplied by transported diesel. In parts of Afghanistan, it was calculated that it costs us ~$400/gal for transportation costs. The efficiency of this is HORRIBLE.
DARPA should be doing an X-Prize for BEAMING as well as storage of energy. That would enable us to provide power not just to troops, but also to provide power to ships in the middle of a battle. An X-Prize approach would only pay for results.
Actually, it does somewhat work here. For example, when I read articles about KDE, I still track the ppl that I knew for the KDE site as well as other OSS advocates have good comments. Likewise, another area of interest is space, so, I have to know about 5 ppl here that are not just tuned in, but work the industry.
/. solves this by allowing moderaters. This new site will hopefully give more weight to those that are within a field as opposed to allowing just anybody to comment with equal weight. But/. solves this DIFFERENTLY. We have meta-mods that can moderate the mods. That is not a bad idea. It allows for us to overall track ppl that have intelligent comments. What it does not do, is discern the difference amongst posters/moderators, but that also has advantages.
Take the example of one guy (we will call Q) in the space arena. Normally, he is pretty good, but that is because he is working int he field. Yet, I spotted a time when Q was going through some personal issues and was just plain HARSH on ppl. His comments went off-topic and were just slamming ppl. With time, he settled back into his usual good comments, but for a while there, I was AC talking to him (telling him to log out or go to sleep), or even modding him down. I did not want to, but Q's attacks were WAY off base. But the anonymous moderator allowed this feature. Yet, you could see that the guy had been up 24 hours straight, yet, that was not his normal pattern (I had never seen him post every couple of hours before).
Point is, that this system DOES work, but it has its flaws. The real question are, how will this science journal do this, which scientists will use it, which will moderate, and who will read it? It really COULD be decent. It could also be like Faux news, Pravada, National Enquirer, China Daily, etc and just plain sux by targeting idiots with propaganda (welcome trust came to my attention)..
Slashdot Mirror
For how long? MS has a long history of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. And they are now in Embrace.
SOB, do you still have my email? if so, flip me yours again.
We partner with well-regarded ISO-9002 certified US based PCB manufacturers and Assemblers to provide you outstanding quality at low prices.
They are a middle man. They send it out. Do yourself a favor and go elsewhere to save money.
I think that you would have to be the FIRST person to consider that part of social networking.
True. It is time to roll back all those expense that the neo-cons saddle us with. They are destroying America.
I go to GDI's website and all I see is Windows. When I search for android, I get nothing. SCAM?
The tea party have joined neo-cons in pushing SLS (a communist approach to space) while fighting against helping private enterprise into space. America sits on the edge of our next 'Internet style economy', but neo-cons and tea* alike are stopping it.
Elon Musk would never take money from Gates. Paul allen perhaps, but not Gates. Gates has a LONG history of screwing everybody that he does deals with.
NASA is NOT spending much money at all. And they get far more returns than any single other group.
Really? Please show me what advanced R&D do you see coming from private enterprise on their own?
1) SpaceX's rockets? The engines were developed by NASA in the 90's, but squelced by 1996 CONgress.
2) Perhaps SpaceX's tank's? Again development by NASA, but squelced by 2001 W/CONgress destruction of X-33.
3) Inflatable space stations? Transhab that was crush by 1996 CONgress, but allowed into private enterprise by Clinton
4) Laser Drilling? Crushed by 1996 CONgress, but allowed to go to Colorado Mines by Clinton.
5) VASIMR? Crushed by 1996 CONgress, but allowed to go private by Clinton.
The list goes on and on and on. NASA does a LOT of R&D, but it is CONgress and typically short-sighted pres (nixon and W being the worst 2) that destroy it. You will be hard pressed to find any ORIGINAL SPACE R&D by private enterprise that is NOT an off branch of something that NASA came up with and funded.
That is exactly what ppl like Obama and Bolden are pushing. NASA was actually built to be an R&D for Aerospace. Now, it has been turned into a jobs bill by the likes of Shelby, Wolf, Hutchinson, Hatch, Coffman, etc. We need to allow private space to do these launches and then have NASA focus on doing R&D like this.
In a distributed environment (such as multiple ppl working from home), this makes good sense. In addition, you do not have to deal with admining much, etc. There is a decent use for this. However, Office 365 will NOT be a good choice. It will no doubt be designed to lock you into MS and only MS (though it may support apple with an inferior approach just to keep the FTC goons off their back).
I seriously doubt it. ANd if it does, my bet is that it will fail within 2 years.
wave was not about social networking. Buzz was their first real entry into it. It failed.
Were you unable to get your data out of these? Nope. You got ALL of your data that you put in and said that you wanted. OTH, with other services, such as facebook or MS, you can NOT pull them out easily.
Could this be useful on the moon?
Nope. The neo-cons and tea* are far right (bordering on fascism along the lines of NAZIs), but the core of US is not rightwing. We are right of center, but not that much. However, it will come back as the economy comes back. I think that more and more Americans are learning that neo-cons and possible tea* do not have America's best interest at heart.
I seriously doubt that.
is that all reactors should have waste heat generators. Seriously. This issue would not have happened had they simply had attached one or more waste heat generators that could use the heat coming from the piles to run the pumps. Amazingly, they can only run when the nukes are running above 90C or more, which would then require cooling. Oddly, nobody is thinking that way. They put in diesel generators that require zero issues, but are likely to have more issues. Sad, sad, sad.
America has had multiple thorium reactors, the most famous and largest being Ft. St Vrain. The only real issue with is that GA took short cuts during construction (because it was 'safe'), and that lead to issues with alarms. After 15 years of that, PSC gave up on it and closed it.
Right now, if General Atomic chose to get back into the game, they could re-do this intelligently and be the big winners on this in under 5 years.
USA is NOT going to abandon our nukes. Simple as that. Hopefully, we will spend more on THorium R&D and soon. Likewise, we need to spend more on building a new IFR, but this time, make them SMALL (as in 300-500 MWe). By doing that, they can be constructed in a factory and then transported. In addition, rather than building brand new power plants all over the place, we simply enhance the current and shutdown ones with this new equipment. Then we are able to 'burn' all of this 'waste' fuel and simply bury it in the old reactors for 200 years. Or the true waste can go to WIPP. Regardless, new IFR's burning the current 'waste' would last about 100 years. Well worth it.
Yes, I am sure that it will never dawn on the french to build storage once the price drops.
France, Spain and Iceland will control this.
Not all wars are stupid. For example, we are in Afghanistan because AQ was based there and now is in Pakistan. I would argue that W screwed up by NOT going into pakistan. We should have chased them into there and let it be known that AQ will NOT be given safe haven ANYWHERE on this planet. Sadly, what W just told the world is that even if you are a backwards nation, harbor terrorists, and attack western nations, BUT have a nuke, then you can do anything that you want (real bad lesson). Thankfully, Obama/Biden allowed the DOD/CIA into there, but W was a massive screw up.
Iraq? Libya? We have ZERO business in EITHER nation. As it is, Iraq is going to switch to supporting Iran. When Iran decides to try and destabilize Saudi Arabia or openly attack Israel, we will end up being pulled into that BS.
Darpa's job is NOT to teach pols anything. Their job is to focus on the needs of the military. And up until W, it used to spend a lot of effort at keeping us OUT of wars. For example, DARPA spent a lot of money on AE. Far more than is realized. They have no desire to depend on a nation such as Saudi Arabia, nor a desire to have to fight to protect them. The best way is to avoid wars all together. With W, they changed the focus of DARPA as well as who gets the funding (they send a lot to businesses who waste, waste, waste; They also send a lot of Research to Chinese owned businesses which should terrify any normal person). Since I am no longer in the Research world, I am not sure if DARPA has gone back to what they were doing.
we can do better. AC is needed because the troops do better when rested. They are less likely to get killed or kill the wrong ppl due to faster reaction time.
Our problem is that transportation costs money and time. And all of this power is supplied by transported diesel. In parts of Afghanistan, it was calculated that it costs us ~$400/gal for transportation costs. The efficiency of this is HORRIBLE.
DARPA should be doing an X-Prize for BEAMING as well as storage of energy. That would enable us to provide power not just to troops, but also to provide power to ships in the middle of a battle. An X-Prize approach would only pay for results.
Actually, it does somewhat work here. For example, when I read articles about KDE, I still track the ppl that I knew for the KDE site as well as other OSS advocates have good comments. Likewise, another area of interest is space, so, I have to know about 5 ppl here that are not just tuned in, but work the industry.
/. solves this by allowing moderaters. This new site will hopefully give more weight to those that are within a field as opposed to allowing just anybody to comment with equal weight. But /. solves this DIFFERENTLY. We have meta-mods that can moderate the mods. That is not a bad idea. It allows for us to overall track ppl that have intelligent comments. What it does not do, is discern the difference amongst posters/moderators, but that also has advantages.
Take the example of one guy (we will call Q) in the space arena. Normally, he is pretty good, but that is because he is working int he field. Yet, I spotted a time when Q was going through some personal issues and was just plain HARSH on ppl. His comments went off-topic and were just slamming ppl. With time, he settled back into his usual good comments, but for a while there, I was AC talking to him (telling him to log out or go to sleep), or even modding him down. I did not want to, but Q's attacks were WAY off base. But the anonymous moderator allowed this feature. Yet, you could see that the guy had been up 24 hours straight, yet, that was not his normal pattern (I had never seen him post every couple of hours before).
Point is, that this system DOES work, but it has its flaws. The real question are, how will this science journal do this, which scientists will use it, which will moderate, and who will read it? It really COULD be decent. It could also be like Faux news, Pravada, National Enquirer, China Daily, etc and just plain sux by targeting idiots with propaganda (welcome trust came to my attention)..