He basically wants Eurozone banks to have a single rescue fund, for the ECB to issue bonds, and the EIB to invest into the periphery economies to get out of the crisis.
There's just one problem. Even if they make sense none of those things can be done by Greece alone. I hope he has a Plan B.
You can see him explain his views on the current economic crisis in this video.
For all you know these launches have no insurance.
Outside of governments everyone gets launch insurance unless they are out of their mind. A failed launch can easily cause a commercial company to go bankrupt. A government can afford to chance it but not anyone else.
Most people don't dispute that the original USAF EELV contest was done appropriately. It included more than one launch services provider and was an open competition. But since then Boeing and Lockheed Martin joined their launch operations under the ULA monopoly and stepped up their prices by a large margin. At the same time we have SpaceX as a viable launch operator now. The USAF needed to buy launches this last year and they decided to do a single-source block buy contract with ULA for the next several years. That's the problem.
ULA didn't even exist 50 years ago. Boeing bought their launchers division from Douglas. Atlas was originally built by Convair. People die and institutional knowledge dies with them. Then again Delta IV and Atlas V have little to do with the original rockets. For example they use isogrid manufacturing methods which weren't in common use at the time.
Also you can get a pretty good ideas of the reliability of a rocket with ten launches. Even 3 launches can be good enough for most purposes. Most accidents with a rocket happen in the initial batch of launches and once you get past that hump the rocket is usually pretty reliable.
There are models for this. Given Falcon 9's past launch record it probably has a reliability rate of 90% or more.
If their reliability rate was poor the insurance rate for the satellites they launch would go though the roof and no comsat operator would use them regardless of how cheap the launch price was. But it seems their launch manifest is quite full with orders so it seems the insurance companies disagree with your perspective.
'Impeccable' except for the first Delta IV Heavy launch which put the dummy payload in the wrong orbit. Still did not stop the DoD from launching a really expensive satellite on it right on the next flight. Of course if your name is SpaceX instead of Boeing then you need to conduct dozens of continuous successful launches before being accepted. Fact is Falcon 9 also has an 'impeccable' launch record.
Also there are more companies working on the launch services market like Blue Origin which may eventually enter the market. There are other companies which could launch the US satellites but they're foreign companies so for US national security reasons they can't be used. Even if the company is run by US allies like Arianespace.
A lot of satellites launched by the USAF aren't that large to begin with and were launched on Delta II rockets until quite recently. One example is the GPS constellation satellites. As for the payload capacity problem you talk about once Falcon 9 Heavy is available, possibly this year, SpaceX will be able to launch bigger and heavier payloads than the largest EELV namely Delta IV Heavy.
As for having a proven track record most of the claims spouted by ULA apologists are plain bullshit. The Delta family had a spotty track record regarding new rocket development. The Delta III program was a disaster and the initial Delta IV Heavy launch didn't go along that well either. Atlas V has a solid launch record and it is cheaper than the Delta IV but it uses Russian engines.
Despite the first Delta IV Heavy launch failure the DoD still chanced it and used it to launch a really expensive earth reconnaissance satellite right on the next flight. But because SpaceX isn't Lockheed Martin or Boeing they can't get the same privilege.
Troll uh? Slashdot keeps getting dumber every month. C++ apologists, Apple apologists, NVIDIA apologists. Are you all dumbasses or has this turned into a cesspool of astroturfers and sycophants?
NVIDIA has removed OpenCL support from the debugger, has not updated their OpenCL from version 1.1 for years unlike either AMD or Intel which have had 1.2 and 2.0 releases since then. They removed OpenCL support from their standard Linux dev kit and it has to be installed separately. They want to push everyone into CUDA. They have someone from NVIDIA chairing the OpenCL Khronos committee but then again Microsoft also used to have a big presence in the HTML committee while delivering the worst standard compliant browser in the market.
newer hardware features (such as intra-warp shuffle and floating-point atomics) are not accessible
You can use inline PTX inside OpenCL code on a NVIDIA card. I use it for the popcnt instruction, which is named popc in PTX, since NVIDIA is too lame to implement OpenCL 1.2 support on their driver which would have that as standard even if the hardware has the instruction support for it.
The 'stealing' is basically industrial espionage. It is similar to what the Japanese used to do several decades back. Except the Chinese do it for military technology as well and unlike what the Japanese used to do, which was mostly reverse engineering, the Chinese actually steal design documents and other things like that as well.
Uh. Just ask around how happy people were when Italy designed the VEGA rocket. A solid rocket launcher which can launch satellites to orbit. That's basically military grade technology. The Italians had an ambition to have their own SLBMs in the 1970s called Alfa. Now I am not saying they will use the technology for nukes but if they want to do them in the future the technology will be there.
On a robotic space mission propulsion technology is less likely to be exchanged. But things like autonomous flight software and precision flight which would be quite adaptable to drone technology may end up being exchanged.
Then again the Chinese are almost as advanced as the EU in drone technology now so it probably doesn't matter.
You do know when you get a loan that you owe the lender the price of the house + his profit right?
If you sell your house to buy some other house you will have to buy a cheaper house. Assuming you manage to sell it for the same price you bought it. If you sell it for a lower price. Well I don't need to spell it out for you.
What's likely. Nice joke. Do you think all those excess houses they build have been sold by now? They haven't. Neither are they going to crumble any time soon. Houses are usually designed to last around 20 years without major repairs. Maybe in 5 years they'll be gone.
There has been some uptick in construction but it has mostly been restricted to expensive city centers and other places like that. Houses for the rich not for the middle class.
That's assuming you want to live there at least for the amount of time you need to pay the house. You are also assuming that house prices can't go down.
I always find talk like this laughable. Office supplies. So you pay a bazillion dollars for a worker but you cut on paper and pencil. Yeah like that will work well. Parties and conventions. Kind of doubt they have a lot of those at the IRS.
Plus this being the government it isn't easy for them to lay off anyone.
Basically what it means is that they will cut on on-site tax inspections. That usually works really well. Not.
I think you're exaggerating. Sony loses money while they are ramping up a new console. They also lost money with the Playstation 3 until they did two hardware shrinks. But they did not have consecutive losses for the past 5-6 years on their gaming division.
Nintendo managed to get into the causal gaming niche by selling cheap consoles with poorer hardware specs but making up for it with their own games specifically written for that hardware. If you want third party games a lot of them will be ports or cross-platform games and having worse hardware means your port will likely look like shit. The SNES was a bit of a fluke because the hardware specs were better than most of the competition at the time.
Today people have smartphones and soon a lot will have smart TVs with Android as well so this strategy simply does not work anymore.
And in what the hell sense is the Xbox brand a dismal failure? Ok, it's never taken off in Japan (basically because Japanese consumers are highly protectionist), but it's generally been a surprising success.
Japanese consumers expect their games to be in JAPANESE. That's the problem. A lot of Japanese know perfectly broken English. FWIW it did reasonably well in Japan for a non-Japanese device.
People stopped using all that crap once the Pentium Triton chipset came out with PCI support. PCs back then still had some ISA slots but VLB and EISA basically vanished.
Slashdot Mirror
He basically wants Eurozone banks to have a single rescue fund, for the ECB to issue bonds, and the EIB to invest into the periphery economies to get out of the crisis.
There's just one problem. Even if they make sense none of those things can be done by Greece alone. I hope he has a Plan B.
You can see him explain his views on the current economic crisis in this video.
For all you know these launches have no insurance.
Outside of governments everyone gets launch insurance unless they are out of their mind. A failed launch can easily cause a commercial company to go bankrupt. A government can afford to chance it but not anyone else.
Ever seen century eggs?
Most people don't dispute that the original USAF EELV contest was done appropriately. It included more than one launch services provider and was an open competition. But since then Boeing and Lockheed Martin joined their launch operations under the ULA monopoly and stepped up their prices by a large margin. At the same time we have SpaceX as a viable launch operator now. The USAF needed to buy launches this last year and they decided to do a single-source block buy contract with ULA for the next several years. That's the problem.
ULA didn't even exist 50 years ago. Boeing bought their launchers division from Douglas. Atlas was originally built by Convair. People die and institutional knowledge dies with them. Then again Delta IV and Atlas V have little to do with the original rockets. For example they use isogrid manufacturing methods which weren't in common use at the time.
Also you can get a pretty good ideas of the reliability of a rocket with ten launches. Even 3 launches can be good enough for most purposes. Most accidents with a rocket happen in the initial batch of launches and once you get past that hump the rocket is usually pretty reliable.
There are models for this. Given Falcon 9's past launch record it probably has a reliability rate of 90% or more.
If their reliability rate was poor the insurance rate for the satellites they launch would go though the roof and no comsat operator would use them regardless of how cheap the launch price was. But it seems their launch manifest is quite full with orders so it seems the insurance companies disagree with your perspective.
'Impeccable' except for the first Delta IV Heavy launch which put the dummy payload in the wrong orbit. Still did not stop the DoD from launching a really expensive satellite on it right on the next flight. Of course if your name is SpaceX instead of Boeing then you need to conduct dozens of continuous successful launches before being accepted. Fact is Falcon 9 also has an 'impeccable' launch record.
Also there are more companies working on the launch services market like Blue Origin which may eventually enter the market. There are other companies which could launch the US satellites but they're foreign companies so for US national security reasons they can't be used. Even if the company is run by US allies like Arianespace.
A lot of satellites launched by the USAF aren't that large to begin with and were launched on Delta II rockets until quite recently. One example is the GPS constellation satellites. As for the payload capacity problem you talk about once Falcon 9 Heavy is available, possibly this year, SpaceX will be able to launch bigger and heavier payloads than the largest EELV namely Delta IV Heavy.
As for having a proven track record most of the claims spouted by ULA apologists are plain bullshit. The Delta family had a spotty track record regarding new rocket development. The Delta III program was a disaster and the initial Delta IV Heavy launch didn't go along that well either. Atlas V has a solid launch record and it is cheaper than the Delta IV but it uses Russian engines.
Despite the first Delta IV Heavy launch failure the DoD still chanced it and used it to launch a really expensive earth reconnaissance satellite right on the next flight. But because SpaceX isn't Lockheed Martin or Boeing they can't get the same privilege.
Troll uh? Slashdot keeps getting dumber every month. C++ apologists, Apple apologists, NVIDIA apologists. Are you all dumbasses or has this turned into a cesspool of astroturfers and sycophants?
NVIDIA has removed OpenCL support from the debugger, has not updated their OpenCL from version 1.1 for years unlike either AMD or Intel which have had 1.2 and 2.0 releases since then. They removed OpenCL support from their standard Linux dev kit and it has to be installed separately. They want to push everyone into CUDA. They have someone from NVIDIA chairing the OpenCL Khronos committee but then again Microsoft also used to have a big presence in the HTML committee while delivering the worst standard compliant browser in the market.
newer hardware features (such as intra-warp shuffle and floating-point atomics) are not accessible
You can use inline PTX inside OpenCL code on a NVIDIA card. I use it for the popcnt instruction, which is named popc in PTX, since NVIDIA is too lame to implement OpenCL 1.2 support on their driver which would have that as standard even if the hardware has the instruction support for it.
If you're fine with being stuck with OpenCL 1.1 while AMD has OpenCL 2.0 support sure. NVIDIA treats OpenCL like a bastard stepchild.
The 'stealing' is basically industrial espionage. It is similar to what the Japanese used to do several decades back. Except the Chinese do it for military technology as well and unlike what the Japanese used to do, which was mostly reverse engineering, the Chinese actually steal design documents and other things like that as well.
This guy is one example.
Uh. Just ask around how happy people were when Italy designed the VEGA rocket. A solid rocket launcher which can launch satellites to orbit. That's basically military grade technology. The Italians had an ambition to have their own SLBMs in the 1970s called Alfa. Now I am not saying they will use the technology for nukes but if they want to do them in the future the technology will be there.
On a robotic space mission propulsion technology is less likely to be exchanged. But things like autonomous flight software and precision flight which would be quite adaptable to drone technology may end up being exchanged.
Then again the Chinese are almost as advanced as the EU in drone technology now so it probably doesn't matter.
You do know when you get a loan that you owe the lender the price of the house + his profit right?
If you sell your house to buy some other house you will have to buy a cheaper house. Assuming you manage to sell it for the same price you bought it. If you sell it for a lower price. Well I don't need to spell it out for you.
What's likely. Nice joke. Do you think all those excess houses they build have been sold by now? They haven't. Neither are they going to crumble any time soon. Houses are usually designed to last around 20 years without major repairs. Maybe in 5 years they'll be gone.
There has been some uptick in construction but it has mostly been restricted to expensive city centers and other places like that. Houses for the rich not for the middle class.
So have I. So what. It's still crap.
...by and large I think it's a bad language. It does a lot of things half well and it’s just a garbage heap of ideas...
I said basically the same thing here a couple of days ago and got downmodded for it. Thank God for Ken Thompson.
I think the lottery system worked fairly well actually.
That's assuming you want to live there at least for the amount of time you need to pay the house. You are also assuming that house prices can't go down.
They can sue them for trademark violation that's what they can do.
They could mutate to stop being dependent on it or mutate to produce it by themselves. It would not be the first time something like that happened.
I always find talk like this laughable. Office supplies. So you pay a bazillion dollars for a worker but you cut on paper and pencil. Yeah like that will work well. Parties and conventions. Kind of doubt they have a lot of those at the IRS.
Plus this being the government it isn't easy for them to lay off anyone.
Basically what it means is that they will cut on on-site tax inspections. That usually works really well. Not.
I think you're exaggerating. Sony loses money while they are ramping up a new console. They also lost money with the Playstation 3 until they did two hardware shrinks. But they did not have consecutive losses for the past 5-6 years on their gaming division.
Nintendo managed to get into the causal gaming niche by selling cheap consoles with poorer hardware specs but making up for it with their own games specifically written for that hardware. If you want third party games a lot of them will be ports or cross-platform games and having worse hardware means your port will likely look like shit. The SNES was a bit of a fluke because the hardware specs were better than most of the competition at the time.
Today people have smartphones and soon a lot will have smart TVs with Android as well so this strategy simply does not work anymore.
And in what the hell sense is the Xbox brand a dismal failure? Ok, it's never taken off in Japan (basically because Japanese consumers are highly protectionist), but it's generally been a surprising success.
Japanese consumers expect their games to be in JAPANESE. That's the problem. A lot of Japanese know perfectly broken English. FWIW it did reasonably well in Japan for a non-Japanese device.
People stopped using all that crap once the Pentium Triton chipset came out with PCI support. PCs back then still had some ISA slots but VLB and EISA basically vanished.
So does Linux have i486 support?
The corrupt Starfleet is fine. Just have the Federation collapse into a bunch of feuding warlords kind of like the Chinese Warring States period.
Yeah the interstellar transporters make little sense unless you add some sort of restriction to it.