On a related note, isn't it funny to see how some geeks who complain about having their privacy violated actually want to do the whole "record everything 24/7", not thinking about the privacy of those they meet?
There's still a big difference between recording everything locally for your own use and uploading everything to Google where it will be catalogued, stored and used to funnel ads to people.
$12bn for the entire project, and $970/kg versus $4,100 for the Falcon 9.
You presumably missed the part about a reusable Falcon. That Skylon number is higher than I've seen before, and if it can really only achieve a factor of four over a current expendable rocket, it's a lost cause. Particularly when that's a paper number vs a real cost and the real Skylon number would probably be higher.
Not everything is developed a business first, remember.
So you just need to find a philanthropist to give you $12,000,000,000 with no guarantee of success, and then cover the almost inevitable multi-billion dollar cost overruns before anything flies.
A lot depends on whether you can land downrange or have to turn around and return to the launch site. The former takes very little fuel as you just have to survive aerobraking and land, the latter takes quite a bit more as you have to cancel all velocity, launch yourself back toward the place you came from, then land.
But still, the mass of the first stage does not have a huge impact on the payload. Adding a ton of structure or fuel might cut 100kg off your payload, and even if you have to add enough return fuel that you cut the payload in half, you'd only need to save half the launch cost by reusing that stage to break even. Reduce the launch cost by 60% and you'd be ahead.
You really think people wouldn't be lining up to spend a week's vacation in space if they could buy it for the cost of a week-long cruise?
The big problem with spaceflight is that there's enough of a market at $10,000 a pound to keep several rocket companies in business, and there's a much bigger market below $100 a pound as mass tourism becomes viable. But there's no clear new market between those two, so an existing rocket company is likely to make less money as costs drop.
Anyway, Skylon seems to be a far better launch vehicle for us here on Earth. Entirely reusable, and very efficient.
Except I can't see any business case for Skylon that makes any sense. You'd have to invest ten billion dollars or more to develop a flyable vehicle, and if it worked, it would launch cargo to orbit for about the same cost as SpaceX expect for a reusable Falcon which can be making money as an expendable or semi-reusable launcher while it's in development.
Any business plan which starts with 'first spend tens of billions before we bring in a cent of income' is pretty precarious.
Um, ACTUAL, REAL electric cars have been 'around for a while', if you count over a hundred years as 'a while'.
They sucked so bad that our ancestors dumped them as soon as the internal combustion engine came along, and they still suck for the same reasons. They still need a 10x improvement in battery technology and a 50% reduction in cost to be competitive with ICE cars.
SpaceX are taking an established, profitable technology and making it better and cheaper. Tesla are taking a sucky technology that we abandoned over a hundred years ago and trying to make it work.
By nicely you mean very little content compared to today.
Yes. By nicely we mean that when we did a web search we got actual useful information rather than having to hunt through hundreds of web sites which only exist in order to bring in advertising income when people click on them.
I've never, ever bought anything from a web ad, so advertisers who try to push them to me are just wasting money. And given the amount of malware spread from ad sites, not blocking them is a huge security liability.
Realistically, if you have no other income than self publishing, you are dead broke and you should get a job flipping burgers and write on your time off.
I know a couple of dozen people making their living from self-publishing, none of them the 'best-sellers' you see stories about on the web. That's a small fraction of the number of people who've self-published, but they're doing much better than a new trade-published writer with a $5,000 advance... or the hordes of wannabe trade-published writers sending out their books for years hoping that someone will eventually give them that $5,000 advance.
It's very expensive when you consider that ISBNs are free in many countries. Canada, for example, just requires you to register as a publisher, and then you can get as many ISBNs as you can use from a web site.
being "government" does not do anything magical to the money.
Yes, it does, because the government taking that money and spending it means I work less hard because I know that if I become one of the 'evil 1%', the government will do whatever it can to take all my money.
Certainly there's a level of government spending that is required, but beyond that it's a drain on the economy even if they're taking money from me to spend on things you would otherwise have bought and taking money from you to spend on things I would otherwise have bought.
"Tesla Motors *Intends* To Pay Off Government Loan 5 Years Early" is a statement of intent. The headline makes it sound as though they're just about to sign the check.
I've switched to XFCE on my Ubuntu laptop, mostly because I don't want the hassle of moving to Mint yet. It's OK, but there are things I miss about Gnome 2.
I can leave my girlfriend at a Gnome 2 machine forever and not get any questions about how anything is supposed to work, because it's functionally very similar to Windows.
Put her in front of a machine running Unity and she's continually asking 'why is this doing this?', 'how do I do this?', 'where did that window go and how can I get it back?', and 'what is this crap anyway?'
So I would say that Canonical has gone out of its way to make Linux hard to use.
I was hoping that too but the following quote seems to indicate there is some access from the ground.
Fault data is already sent over ACARS (a low-bandwidth text-message-like protocol) from existing aircraft. When the avionics detects a fault it sends a message so the maintenance staff will be ready to fix it after the plane lands.
Slashdot Mirror
Bullshit. There is more innovation now than there has ever been.
Most people aren't really impressed by 'innovation' in tracking you better to stuff more ads down your web browser.
They'd rather have those flying cars, which patents and lawyers make a near-impossibility even if the tech was affordable.
No there isn't. Everything on your Google SpyGlass will be uploaded to Google.
Maybe you should try reading my posts before responding to them since, duh, that was my whole point.
You change time twice a year?
You're kidding, right? That's the funniest idea I've heard today.
On a related note, isn't it funny to see how some geeks who complain about having their privacy violated actually want to do the whole "record everything 24/7", not thinking about the privacy of those they meet?
There's still a big difference between recording everything locally for your own use and uploading everything to Google where it will be catalogued, stored and used to funnel ads to people.
...when ocular implants that are as inconspicuous as contact lenses grant all the same functionality as these glasses do?
We'll all be wearing burqas.
Or the 'scramble suits' from 'A Scanner Darkly'.
Or stay at home and rent bots to go outside.
$12bn for the entire project, and $970/kg versus $4,100 for the Falcon 9.
You presumably missed the part about a reusable Falcon. That Skylon number is higher than I've seen before, and if it can really only achieve a factor of four over a current expendable rocket, it's a lost cause. Particularly when that's a paper number vs a real cost and the real Skylon number would probably be higher.
Not everything is developed a business first, remember.
So you just need to find a philanthropist to give you $12,000,000,000 with no guarantee of success, and then cover the almost inevitable multi-billion dollar cost overruns before anything flies.
Good luck with that.
Just because you don't want one (Tesla) doesn't make it suck.
There are several electric cars on the market. People have been conspicuously lining up to not buy them, because they suck.
Electric cars are interesting, potentially awesome
So are unicorns.
A lot depends on whether you can land downrange or have to turn around and return to the launch site. The former takes very little fuel as you just have to survive aerobraking and land, the latter takes quite a bit more as you have to cancel all velocity, launch yourself back toward the place you came from, then land.
But still, the mass of the first stage does not have a huge impact on the payload. Adding a ton of structure or fuel might cut 100kg off your payload, and even if you have to add enough return fuel that you cut the payload in half, you'd only need to save half the launch cost by reusing that stage to break even. Reduce the launch cost by 60% and you'd be ahead.
You really think people wouldn't be lining up to spend a week's vacation in space if they could buy it for the cost of a week-long cruise?
The big problem with spaceflight is that there's enough of a market at $10,000 a pound to keep several rocket companies in business, and there's a much bigger market below $100 a pound as mass tourism becomes viable. But there's no clear new market between those two, so an existing rocket company is likely to make less money as costs drop.
Anyway, Skylon seems to be a far better launch vehicle for us here on Earth. Entirely reusable, and very efficient.
Except I can't see any business case for Skylon that makes any sense. You'd have to invest ten billion dollars or more to develop a flyable vehicle, and if it worked, it would launch cargo to orbit for about the same cost as SpaceX expect for a reusable Falcon which can be making money as an expendable or semi-reusable launcher while it's in development.
Any business plan which starts with 'first spend tens of billions before we bring in a cent of income' is pretty precarious.
Um, ACTUAL, REAL electric cars have been 'around for a while', if you count over a hundred years as 'a while'.
They sucked so bad that our ancestors dumped them as soon as the internal combustion engine came along, and they still suck for the same reasons. They still need a 10x improvement in battery technology and a 50% reduction in cost to be competitive with ICE cars.
SpaceX are taking an established, profitable technology and making it better and cheaper. Tesla are taking a sucky technology that we abandoned over a hundred years ago and trying to make it work.
Yeah, i totally want to knock on the door of Cannibal Redneck Cabin and ask if I can borrow a cup of electrons.
By nicely you mean very little content compared to today.
Yes. By nicely we mean that when we did a web search we got actual useful information rather than having to hunt through hundreds of web sites which only exist in order to bring in advertising income when people click on them.
I've never, ever bought anything from a web ad, so advertisers who try to push them to me are just wasting money. And given the amount of malware spread from ad sites, not blocking them is a huge security liability.
Realistically, if you have no other income than self publishing, you are dead broke and you should get a job flipping burgers and write on your time off.
I know a couple of dozen people making their living from self-publishing, none of them the 'best-sellers' you see stories about on the web. That's a small fraction of the number of people who've self-published, but they're doing much better than a new trade-published writer with a $5,000 advance... or the hordes of wannabe trade-published writers sending out their books for years hoping that someone will eventually give them that $5,000 advance.
It's very expensive when you consider that ISBNs are free in many countries. Canada, for example, just requires you to register as a publisher, and then you can get as many ISBNs as you can use from a web site.
Sure, why not, at least the roads would be a better place.
That is true.
Why would the oil industry be opposed to a scare that's mostly been used to close down coal mining?
Temperatures were higher than today for 2,800 of the last 11,300 years! Clearly we're all about to die if we don't ban SUVs!
being "government" does not do anything magical to the money.
Yes, it does, because the government taking that money and spending it means I work less hard because I know that if I become one of the 'evil 1%', the government will do whatever it can to take all my money.
Certainly there's a level of government spending that is required, but beyond that it's a drain on the economy even if they're taking money from me to spend on things you would otherwise have bought and taking money from you to spend on things I would otherwise have bought.
"Tesla Motors *Intends* To Pay Off Government Loan 5 Years Early" is a statement of intent. The headline makes it sound as though they're just about to sign the check.
I've switched to XFCE on my Ubuntu laptop, mostly because I don't want the hassle of moving to Mint yet. It's OK, but there are things I miss about Gnome 2.
I can leave my girlfriend at a Gnome 2 machine forever and not get any questions about how anything is supposed to work, because it's functionally very similar to Windows.
Put her in front of a machine running Unity and she's continually asking 'why is this doing this?', 'how do I do this?', 'where did that window go and how can I get it back?', and 'what is this crap anyway?'
So I would say that Canonical has gone out of its way to make Linux hard to use.
On a side note, how I wish we'd standardized on ATM-to-the-premises!
We pretty much did: DSL mostly seems to be ATM to the ISP.
But ATM really, really, really sucks for anything other than phone company to phone company connections, which is why we use TCP/IP over ATM instead.
I was hoping that too but the following quote seems to indicate there is some access from the ground.
Fault data is already sent over ACARS (a low-bandwidth text-message-like protocol) from existing aircraft. When the avionics detects a fault it sends a message so the maintenance staff will be ready to fix it after the plane lands.
One of the other reasons for the always-on requirement is probably the fact that some computations are offloaded to EA-servers.
Because my 3.6GHz i7 is clearly incapable of such a 'massive amount of computing' when it sits about 70% idle in most games I play.