To be honest I cannot even afford 1% of a mollier skycar.
But even if I could, I really prefer that the sky over my house not be broadcasting commuter noise down at me.
I have to ask how much noise pollution the things make. I suspect it would suck (in a major way) for rush hour traffic to be a bunch of molliers booming over my house.
Here in California, it seems like the highways broadcast noise for a mile or two sometimes - although obstructed by buildings and trees. So there is a perfect example of a technology that suits the individual driver (and GM of course), meanwhile causing harm to everybody else, driver or not. And that's after they've had 100 YEARS to get it right.
Then I ask if they would be under airplane regulations. Would they only be able to land in helipads and airports?
DOS, windows 3.1, 3.11, 95, NT -- There's five vesions of microsoft OS from the same era. (even more if you count the different versions of DOS, and perhaps we should)
So how does your "so many versions of unix" argument jibe with that?
CARS BURN GAS. HORSES LIVE ON GRASS. And it doesnt take a pack of genii to figure out that a colt is free when you own 2 horses. NOW THAT'S EFFICIENT.
the car:
must be manufactured, weighs 1500 lbs to move a 150 lb person around, ties your mobility to exon, burns arab blood, costs you insurance, costs you monthly payment, registration, tickets, mantenance, repairs, makes so much noise pollution that many neighborhoods have had to build walls against them, RESULTS in added commuter time (since people would live near their jobs or use mass transit if they didnt drive cars), RESULTS in the LOSS of roughly 20% of urban land (which is the most expensive) being converted into parking and roads, RESULTS in the destruction of urban human habitat (via billboards) drivethrougs neon signs,
What's so difficult about that? RIAA wants to be greedy and use the law (in "merciless?" ways) to bolster greed.
Share only free music and they cannot hurt you. With free music you give free publicity to unknown's and locals, and, more importantly, to those who are giving their stuff for free.
There is enough free music out there that we simply don't need "big media" record industry or anything that it sells.
If people would wake up to that, the RIAA would deservedly die off like the embodiment of greed that it is.
"I've said it before: Technology is not a solution to social, political, or legal problems."
To some extent I agree with you. A paradigm shift is needed too, but the right technologies can facilitate freedom-oriented paradigm shifts.
Personally I believe that true Christianity is the best cure for all social ills.
Back to your comment: Perhaps technology ISN'T the solution, but it CAN BE. And not just for sponsoring liberty and privacy, but also for curing a myriad of other social ills.
For instance the biggest problems with capitalism are: environmental destruction, wasted land, chemical pollution, noise pollution, advertising (aka "mind pollution") wasted time and suppressed human spirit, unpredictable health care for the poor, in america: the automobile and all it's ills, dishonest business strategies, "money-planned commercial neon car lot communities" (as opposed to life affirming people-planned communities). in so many ways, capitalism has served the world with reduced quality of life.
I think the first step away from capitalism is learning to say "I just don't need that much" and "I don't have to buy that thing/service I can just make/do it myself." Whenever they offer overtime, offer loans, offer junkie commercial goods or replacement furniture made from lumber chopped from a remote, pristine forest, just say no.
But I believe that there are technological innovations which would facilitate a cure for many of capitalism's kindred social ills.
Basically, capitalism is backwards. It seeks technologies which MAKE MONEY and CREATE MARKET SECTORS. However, technology can also ELIMINATE market sectors, thereby improving lives. A market sector is basically a money hole. A work hole. A time hole. If there is a way to provide something for free (or eliminate the need for same thing) which capitalism has been forcing us to work for then the market sector which WAS a money hole should be converted into its free alternative.
Consider how much creative effort towards improving mankind's plight would be unlocked if we managed to get technology to make food medicine and transportation free. How much better off we'd be making homes from materials like mud and grass than pine from clear cut forests. Oil? Simplify the problem by using the stuff we CAN'T run out of. So many people would then be free to pursue their own dreams rather than slave under the capitalist dream of taking their time away in order to make a dollar.
The right technologies could and should be used to motivate that shift to uncapitalism. But you're right, if innovators aren't sharing the mindset of giving to the good of mankind then it's not likely that the human betterment technologies would surface.
Goodwill must coexist with technology and ideas for the best outcome.
Don't you remember the good old LRP?! It was an open source implementation of a firewall router that fitted onto a floppy, ran on an old 486 with 2 network cards, no cooling fan, no monitor. Most importantly, NO BACKDOORS.
Barring that there would always the option of circumventing the commercial "spook" internet with a homespun wireless routing or "pringles can" internet.
There is no way that the spooks can bypass determined ingenuity for freedom.
>The Christian faith (who's political wing is the >Republican party) for some reason believe that >sex is bad and that pornography is somehow >immoral.
I take issue with the generalization that the Christian faith has ANY political wing, much less the right wing.
Jesus advocated loving our neighbors as ourselves; I see very little love reflected in the right wing's policies.
Jesus said that the love of money is the root of all evil. From the right wing, I see ONLY a love of money.
Christianity says "Thou shallt not kill" and "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God." -- yet the right wing rallied behind GW's unjustified war in Iraq.
Christianity says "Thou shallt not bear false witness" -- yet GW used false witness to JUSTIFY the war in iraq.
Christianity says "Thou shallt not steal" -- yet the right wing has been guilty of so much corporate welfare, and then asking us to look the other way.
Christianity carries the parable of the good samaritan who takes in an injured traveller who's been beaten by thugs, and tends to his wounds. Meanwhile GW has been fighting to justify torture in Guantanamo.
The contrast between true christian faith and right wing policy is indisputable. It's not the religion which was wrong; it's the party, and the self proclaimed Christians who don't practice what they've been preached.
Meanwhile, yes, Christianity does teach lessons and give instruction regarding sexual morality: The 10 Commandments, Noah's Ark, Sodom and Gomora. I know how I'll conduct myself, and I would not hesitate to tell a person what I believe is appropriate. That does NOT mean I hope to solve iniquity with a police state.
>A random site says that Americans use on average >80-100 gallons per day, which means that water >would supply a colony of 10,000 for 11,000 years.
well actually that means it would sustain 10,000 average americans for 11,000 years. but in europe the toilets dont use nearly as much water, and i suppose the martian colonists won't dump water on their lawns or take daily showers. probly no golf courses, bathtubs or car washes either!
on the other hand, a colony's agricultural greenhouse water useage comes to mind, and i wonder how efficient a greenhouse could be, if really necessary.
i wonder if the ice was brought to mars by the very same meteor which caused the crater. many meteors are, in fact, made of ice. so it seems logical (to my layman's mind) that ice could pool into a lake in its very own impact crater.
I don't go to church so I wouldn't know. I keep the sabbath in my own way. Due to personal experience I try to keep the commandments as best I can, and I take that quest seriously.
I can say this for sure, that if the people of the world kept the commandments as best they could it wouldn't be such a hellish place. Wars would stop. Most disputes would stop. Divorce rates would drop. Kids would have both parents to learn from. Resources would stop being wasted building prisons, police forces and armies. Highways would stop roaring with mallbound customers on weekends. I daresay even the gluttony of consumer waste would drop. People would be in touch with God, and have His guidance in all things. I've learned never to underestimate how much of a difference that can make.
The Lord promised that honoring your father and mother would result in a long life. I take that to mean that doctor bills would drop as well.
Doesnt' anyone on the SCO legal team or board of directors, or executive staff care about the 10 commandments?
"Thou shallt not bear false witness against thy neighbor." It is one of the 10 commandments given by the Lord to the Isrealites in the desert. It means that the Lord told them not give false testimony, or render false accusations.
Now dear slashdot mod me down another 2. After 2 years and 100 posts, "Thou shallt not kill" costed me the only mod points i had.
"Thou shalt not kill" is in the religious cannons of Christians, Jews and Muslims -- Muslims through Abraham (it is in their sharia ?sp? law, from the Hadith), Jews (Torah), and Christians by Old Testament. So. All from Moses. And Moses was guided by God. Ultimately, the 10 Commandments came from God, not Moses. The very definition of sin for 3 major world religions all comes from the same source.
Jesus was a Jew, and instructed his students not to sin.
When GW Bush says he is guided by the question "What would Jesus do?" apparently GW thinks Jesus "Turn-the-other-cheek" Christ would bear false witness against Saddam Hussein for the 911 attacks, bear false witness a second time regarding Iraq having wmd's, and then bear false witness a third time regarding Saddam's intention to use them. Then GW-Jesus would commit murder 20,000 times against Iraqi civilians, among others, and then he'd steal the oil under their graves.
My question is how the Christian coalition could possibly be deceived by such a monster. GW's clearly not guided by anything Jesus ever did, or said.
ps. It's sad, to me, that slashdot has so much anti religious tendency that it cannot even see the strength of the christian religion AGAINST a GW Bush. I got downmodded to flamebait just for using religious doctrine to emphasize GW's hypocracy in the draft policy.
If you call yourselves open minded then stop being so narrow.
Article [IV] The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Article [VIII] Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Article [IX] The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
My religion is against taking anything akin to the mark of the beast. RFID chips used in such a manner are close enough that, unto death, I would resist the implant.
Article [I]13 Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
If I'd said "1 watt-hour" and "a lb of lawn clippings at earth's sea level," (pre global warming) that would have been a more precise description of the hypothetical case described.
Meanwhile the point I was making remains untouched. My point was that the article didn't provide the right information to warrant too much excitement about the new method of hydrogen production.
It's too bad about your "-1 tone," or more people would have read your informative amending post. Your factual correction was appropriate. The hostility was not.
Slashdot Mirror
From the article: "The Skycar
But that doesn't sound very safe. What is the mileage while the driver is sober? =D
To be honest I cannot even afford 1% of a mollier skycar.
But even if I could, I really prefer that the sky over my house not be broadcasting commuter noise down at me.
I have to ask how much noise pollution the things make. I suspect it would suck (in a major way) for rush hour traffic to be a bunch of molliers booming over my house.
Here in California, it seems like the highways broadcast noise for a mile or two sometimes - although obstructed by buildings and trees. So there is a perfect example of a technology that suits the individual driver (and GM of course), meanwhile causing harm to everybody else, driver or not. And that's after they've had 100 YEARS to get it right.
Then I ask if they would be under airplane regulations. Would they only be able to land in helipads and airports?
I'm not familiar with that name but here's a link to something that suggests it is the same as windows 3.11. It was the precursor to Windows NT.
http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery;jsessionid=wf
DOS, windows 3.1, 3.11, 95, NT -- There's five vesions of microsoft OS from the same era. (even more if you count the different versions of DOS, and perhaps we should)
So how does your "so many versions of unix" argument jibe with that?
http://www.anvilstudio.com/
its free and it works well.
CARS BURN GAS. HORSES LIVE ON GRASS. And it doesnt take a pack of genii to figure out that a colt is free when you own 2 horses. NOW THAT'S EFFICIENT.
the car:
must be manufactured,
weighs 1500 lbs to move a 150 lb person around,
ties your mobility to exon,
burns arab blood,
costs you insurance,
costs you monthly payment,
registration,
tickets,
mantenance, repairs,
makes so much noise pollution that many neighborhoods have had to build walls against them,
RESULTS in added commuter time (since people would live near their jobs or use mass transit if they didnt drive cars),
RESULTS in the LOSS of roughly 20% of urban land (which is the most expensive) being converted into parking and roads,
RESULTS in the destruction of urban human habitat (via billboards) drivethrougs neon signs,
http://www.scifimovies.com/movies/mov0009.shtml
i've met lots of intelligent athletes. i was merely making a joke.
meanwhile your comment is a total cheap shot. do you wear that hostility everywhere you go? is it working out for you?
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/
What's so difficult about that? RIAA wants to be greedy and use the law (in "merciless?" ways) to bolster greed.
Share only free music and they cannot hurt you. With free music you give free publicity to unknown's and locals, and, more importantly, to those who are giving their stuff for free.
There is enough free music out there that we simply don't need "big media" record industry or anything that it sells.
If people would wake up to that, the RIAA would deservedly die off like the embodiment of greed that it is.
what's the melting point of the modified polyethelene? that would certainly bear into my deciding whetheer to make a space hull from the material.
"I've said it before: Technology is not a solution to social, political, or legal problems."
To some extent I agree with you. A paradigm shift is needed too, but the right technologies can facilitate freedom-oriented paradigm shifts.
Personally I believe that true Christianity is the best cure for all social ills.
Back to your comment: Perhaps technology ISN'T the solution, but it CAN BE. And not just for sponsoring liberty and privacy, but also for curing a myriad of other social ills.
For instance the biggest problems with capitalism are: environmental destruction, wasted land, chemical pollution, noise pollution, advertising (aka "mind pollution") wasted time and suppressed human spirit, unpredictable health care for the poor, in america: the automobile and all it's ills, dishonest business strategies, "money-planned commercial neon car lot communities" (as opposed to life affirming people-planned communities). in so many ways, capitalism has served the world with reduced quality of life.
I think the first step away from capitalism is learning to say "I just don't need that much" and "I don't have to buy that thing/service I can just make/do it myself." Whenever they offer overtime, offer loans, offer junkie commercial goods or replacement furniture made from lumber chopped from a remote, pristine forest, just say no.
But I believe that there are technological innovations which would facilitate a cure for many of capitalism's kindred social ills.
Basically, capitalism is backwards. It seeks technologies which MAKE MONEY and CREATE MARKET SECTORS. However, technology can also ELIMINATE market sectors, thereby improving lives. A market sector is basically a money hole. A work hole. A time hole. If there is a way to provide something for free (or eliminate the need for same thing) which capitalism has been forcing us to work for then the market sector which WAS a money hole should be converted into its free alternative.
Consider how much creative effort towards improving mankind's plight would be unlocked if we managed to get technology to make food medicine and transportation free. How much better off we'd be making homes from materials like mud and grass than pine from clear cut forests. Oil? Simplify the problem by using the stuff we CAN'T run out of. So many people would then be free to pursue their own dreams rather than slave under the capitalist dream of taking their time away in order to make a dollar.
The right technologies could and should be used to motivate that shift to uncapitalism. But you're right, if innovators aren't sharing the mindset of giving to the good of mankind then it's not likely that the human betterment technologies would surface.
Goodwill must coexist with technology and ideas for the best outcome.
Don't you remember the good old LRP?! It was an open source implementation of a firewall router that fitted onto a floppy, ran on an old 486 with 2 network cards, no cooling fan, no monitor. Most importantly, NO BACKDOORS.
Barring that there would always the option of circumventing the commercial "spook" internet with a homespun wireless routing or "pringles can" internet.
There is no way that the spooks can bypass determined ingenuity for freedom.
>The Christian faith (who's political wing is the
>Republican party) for some reason believe that
>sex is bad and that pornography is somehow
>immoral.
I take issue with the generalization that the Christian faith has ANY political wing, much less the right wing.
Jesus advocated loving our neighbors as ourselves; I see very little love reflected in the right wing's policies.
Jesus said that the love of money is the root of all evil. From the right wing, I see ONLY a love of money.
Christianity says "Thou shallt not kill" and "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God." -- yet the right wing rallied behind GW's unjustified war in Iraq.
Christianity says "Thou shallt not bear false witness" -- yet GW used false witness to JUSTIFY the war in iraq.
Christianity says "Thou shallt not steal" -- yet the right wing has been guilty of so much corporate welfare, and then asking us to look the other way.
Christianity carries the parable of the good samaritan who takes in an injured traveller who's been beaten by thugs, and tends to his wounds. Meanwhile GW has been fighting to justify torture in Guantanamo.
The contrast between true christian faith and right wing policy is indisputable. It's not the religion which was wrong; it's the party, and the self proclaimed Christians who don't practice what they've been preached.
Meanwhile, yes, Christianity does teach lessons and give instruction regarding sexual morality: The 10 Commandments, Noah's Ark, Sodom and Gomora. I know how I'll conduct myself, and I would not hesitate to tell a person what I believe is appropriate. That does NOT mean I hope to solve iniquity with a police state.
>A random site says that Americans use on average >80-100 gallons per day, which means that water >would supply a colony of 10,000 for 11,000 years.
well actually that means it would sustain 10,000 average americans for 11,000 years. but in europe the toilets dont use nearly as much water, and i suppose the martian colonists won't dump water on their lawns or take daily showers. probly no golf courses, bathtubs or car washes either!
on the other hand, a colony's agricultural greenhouse water useage comes to mind, and i wonder how efficient a greenhouse could be, if really necessary.
i wonder if the ice was brought to mars by the very same meteor which caused the crater. many meteors are, in fact, made of ice. so it seems logical (to my layman's mind) that ice could pool into a lake in its very own impact crater.
Good idea, but I propose it be used as a prison island FOR Bush.
Sort of like corsica for napolean. =)
I don't go to church so I wouldn't know. I keep the sabbath in my own way. Due to personal experience I try to keep the commandments as best I can, and I take that quest seriously.
I can say this for sure, that if the people of the world kept the commandments as best they could it wouldn't be such a hellish place. Wars would stop. Most disputes would stop. Divorce rates would drop. Kids would have both parents to learn from. Resources would stop being wasted building prisons, police forces and armies. Highways would stop roaring with mallbound customers on weekends. I daresay even the gluttony of consumer waste would drop. People would be in touch with God, and have His guidance in all things. I've learned never to underestimate how much of a difference that can make.
The Lord promised that honoring your father and mother would result in a long life. I take that to mean that doctor bills would drop as well.
Doesnt' anyone on the SCO legal team or board of directors, or executive staff care about the 10 commandments?
"Thou shallt not bear false witness against thy neighbor." It is one of the 10 commandments given by the Lord to the Isrealites in the desert. It means that the Lord told them not give false testimony, or render false accusations.
Now dear slashdot mod me down another 2. After 2 years and 100 posts, "Thou shallt not kill" costed me the only mod points i had.
advice from a pacifist
h utchinson/m0004884.html
http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/
"Thou shalt not kill" is in the religious cannons of Christians, Jews and Muslims -- Muslims through Abraham (it is in their sharia ?sp? law, from the Hadith), Jews (Torah), and Christians by Old Testament. So. All from Moses. And Moses was guided by God. Ultimately, the 10 Commandments came from God, not Moses. The very definition of sin for 3 major world religions all comes from the same source.
Jesus was a Jew, and instructed his students not to sin.
When GW Bush says he is guided by the question "What would Jesus do?" apparently GW thinks Jesus "Turn-the-other-cheek" Christ would bear false witness against Saddam Hussein for the 911 attacks, bear false witness a second time regarding Iraq having wmd's, and then bear false witness a third time regarding Saddam's intention to use them. Then GW-Jesus would commit murder 20,000 times against Iraqi civilians, among others, and then he'd steal the oil under their graves.
My question is how the Christian coalition could possibly be deceived by such a monster. GW's clearly not guided by anything Jesus ever did, or said.
ps. It's sad, to me, that slashdot has so much anti religious tendency that it cannot even see the strength of the christian religion AGAINST a GW Bush. I got downmodded to flamebait just for using religious doctrine to emphasize GW's hypocracy in the draft policy.
If you call yourselves open minded then stop being so narrow.
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
Thou shalt not kill.
That's a commandment, is it not?
Why is Bush's gov't looking for more young people to train as professional mass murderers?
What would Jesus do?
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
excellent. before they reinstall the brain dump they can then scan for pesky viruses.
"republican national socialism has been detected. would you like to uninstall?"
What would be the implication of more diamonds? I've heard of ruby lasers. Are there also diamond lasers?
Is there anything else that mass produced diamonds would be useful for? (Aside from lowering the price of getting hitched =)
These are in the U.S. Bill of Rights:
Article [IV]
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Article [VIII]
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Article [IX]
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
My religion is against taking anything akin to the mark of the beast. RFID chips used in such a manner are close enough that, unto death, I would resist the implant.
Article [I]13
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
http://www.stlplaces.com/constitution/
The bill of rights pertains to ALL citizens. That DOES include people who have been convicted of crimes. We should be thankful for that.
http://www.aclu.org/
"Why, yes, I AM a card carrying member of the ACLU." =)
If I'd said "1 watt-hour" and "a lb of lawn clippings at earth's sea level," (pre global warming) that would have been a more precise description of the hypothetical case described.
Meanwhile the point I was making remains untouched. My point was that the article didn't provide the right information to warrant too much excitement about the new method of hydrogen production.
It's too bad about your "-1 tone," or more people would have read your informative amending post. Your factual correction was appropriate. The hostility was not.