Just saying the US has not had to deal with autocratic kings
Indeed, because it was autocratic Governors answering to nobody other than the King that resulted in a revolt and let to the United State in the first place! So America has had plenty of it.
Just about everything in that post was wrong. If we can build some decent nukes based on current or developing technology instead of 1970s dinosaurs painted green like the AP1000 then why not keep them running for a quarter century or more so that they can make back their capital costs?
That's a huge-ass assumption we've been living with for the last century
The assumption that increased chances of cancer sucks? Not so huge an assumption IMHO.
So we drew a straight line interpolating it down to zero
Now there is a "huge-ass assumption" that turns out to be totally wrong, especially with the "down to zero" bit. Below a certain level nobody really gives a shit other than people who want to start arguments. When dosage badges indicate something but a long way below a threshold nobody cares.
It is a very new thing to many readers because so little investment has been put in that development has taken decades. We've heard of things ten years ago but they have not - it just hasn't made it into the press much lately. It sounds dumbed down because even here it is difficult to underestimate the technical background of the readers - when a space story comes up most seem to think in terms or orbits as fixed one dimensional circles and anything about electricity generation degenerates into a grade school sandpit fight over "one true energy".
And in the dictionary you will find that "state" can also apply to "nation state" - but it's all moot because the guy who said he was mistaken was only making a joke.
Since it's been a more than a couple of hundred years since the USA has had to deal with a King I suppose a reminder of how petty and spiteful autocrats can be was due:( From the link above:
The questionnaire requests a list of those individuals who have taken part in international climate talks over the past five years
How you recover from that level of a flop I have no idea.
It's written off as part of a portfolio of other losses to avoid paying tax.
On a funny note the original "Mad Max" (Road Warrior was the title of the US dub) was financed as part of a tax evasion scheme, which is why the director was allowed full control, and the investors were initially horrified when it started making money. Once it started making a LOT of money they were not so horrified.
It seems to result in a wider range of choice where it is done. Plus that "force" is typically an empty threat of a possible small fine, but that's enough in some places to get most people to turn up.
I think if people can't be bothered to vote you don't want their vote
That way eventually leads to revolt once those people whose votes you do not want build up into a majority and decide to involve themselves in the political process by force. Of course the gun nuts have wet dreams about that sort of stuff, but they don't understand that most of them would be among the corpses if things go that far to shit.
Trump declared war on the media and some of them have accepted his challenge. An MIT journalism professor had a lot of interesting things to say about it in a radio interview but I've lost track of details (no summary or transcript on the net). I'm sure more on this topic will turn up.
Wrong on every point anarchist, even your definition of religion. It has to be deliberate to get everything so wrong so why are you deliberately lying so much to the readers? What are your really doing with this? I know you hate the United States, but this different - WTF are you up to with trying to turn the kiddies against reality?
Very true but when most of your potential customers are in geostationary orbit and you have months to work your way from one to the other it's not so ugly. Readers, think in ellipses not one dimensional thinking with concentric circles. Not easy maybe but that's how it's done.
What can a hypothetical servicing robot do about dead batteries
I very strongly suspect that the complete mission plan will worked out on ground before launch and the thing will be sent to work on X number of known satellites with specific known tasks to complete and specific parts. The alternative - if it's going to be a general purpose thing working for years it's going to have to get fuel and parts shipped to it anyway.
Back in the 1970s one of the selling points/excuses for giving up on the Saturn V etc and going for the Space Shuttle was that it could be used to refuel satellites and do repair on them - which did happen with spectacular success with the Hubble telescope. One of several major reasons that such missions were very rare is that the Space Shuttle was limited to doing missions in low earth orbit and it's a very long way to geostationary orbit from there.
A robot craft could potentially get to that distant orbit and could have a mission time far longer than the Space Shuttle ever had. Also such a mission is incredibly dangerous - if the speeds are not very closely matched the impact energy would be enormous. Accidents will happen and it's better to lose a robot and a satellite than a manned mission.
Here's a little bit of homework debate boy since you brought in the irrelevant political shit. I can remember it but you'll probably have to look it up or ask your Dad. How many nuclear reactors were approved (not built after being approved earlier, but approved) in the terms of Reagan, Bush and Bush's idiot unemployable draft dodging son? Work out that number and you'll see that the Republicans have nothing but empty words on the issue.
Meanwhile, back in the real world a left winger, George Orwell, wrote the longest lasting criticism of Stalinist states in the forms of the novels "1984" and "Animal Farm".
Australia has a lot of people in politics pushing a very strong anti-migrant line to the point of outright xenophobia in some cases. It was chosen as a point of difference between two parties so the current ruling party has the ridiculous, expensive and cruel policy of keeping refugees locked up in camps indefinitely. It was a quickly done back of the envelope policy and they have no idea what to do next with a few thousand people, any change would be admitting that they were wrong. The anti-refugee thing has spilled over into migration in general.
There is so much hate being stirred up by people in politics an radio shock jocks that Australia is not a good place to migrate to at this point especially if you get a reasonable job. You will be accused of taking the jobs away from the locals even if it's a technical position that is hard to fill, or even if you start your own business. It really sucks at the moment and I don't think it's been this bad for decades (not so many decades back being Jewish was a reason for visas to be refused as an example).
Slashdot Mirror
Here is a much better one that will hopefully never play out in the USA:
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/
Indeed, because it was autocratic Governors answering to nobody other than the King that resulted in a revolt and let to the United State in the first place! So America has had plenty of it.
Which is exactly what I meant FFS!
Just about everything in that post was wrong. If we can build some decent nukes based on current or developing technology instead of 1970s dinosaurs painted green like the AP1000 then why not keep them running for a quarter century or more so that they can make back their capital costs?
That's not a real banana, that's the artificial "banana dose" where every atom of potassium is the rare radioactive isotope.
The assumption that increased chances of cancer sucks? Not so huge an assumption IMHO.
Now there is a "huge-ass assumption" that turns out to be totally wrong, especially with the "down to zero" bit. Below a certain level nobody really gives a shit other than people who want to start arguments. When dosage badges indicate something but a long way below a threshold nobody cares.
It is a very new thing to many readers because so little investment has been put in that development has taken decades. We've heard of things ten years ago but they have not - it just hasn't made it into the press much lately.
It sounds dumbed down because even here it is difficult to underestimate the technical background of the readers - when a space story comes up most seem to think in terms or orbits as fixed one dimensional circles and anything about electricity generation degenerates into a grade school sandpit fight over "one true energy".
I forgot that free speech is now a crime. What other bits of the Constitution are going to be criminal now in your opinion?
Colonies.
See also the Belgian Congo under King Leopold for an example only a hundred years old.
If you think Obama was autocratic you are in for a massive shock.
And in the dictionary you will find that "state" can also apply to "nation state" - but it's all moot because the guy who said he was mistaken was only making a joke.
From the link above:
How petty is that?
I stand corrected that the stupid retitle thing started with the second movie, but yes, the first movie was dubbed!
It should, especially in petty and vexatious copyright disputes with things pretending to be legal documents distributed via spambots.
It's written off as part of a portfolio of other losses to avoid paying tax.
On a funny note the original "Mad Max" (Road Warrior was the title of the US dub) was financed as part of a tax evasion scheme, which is why the director was allowed full control, and the investors were initially horrified when it started making money. Once it started making a LOT of money they were not so horrified.
It seems to result in a wider range of choice where it is done. Plus that "force" is typically an empty threat of a possible small fine, but that's enough in some places to get most people to turn up.
That way eventually leads to revolt once those people whose votes you do not want build up into a majority and decide to involve themselves in the political process by force.
Of course the gun nuts have wet dreams about that sort of stuff, but they don't understand that most of them would be among the corpses if things go that far to shit.
Trump declared war on the media and some of them have accepted his challenge. An MIT journalism professor had a lot of interesting things to say about it in a radio interview but I've lost track of details (no summary or transcript on the net). I'm sure more on this topic will turn up.
Wrong on every point anarchist, even your definition of religion. It has to be deliberate to get everything so wrong so why are you deliberately lying so much to the readers? What are your really doing with this? I know you hate the United States, but this different - WTF are you up to with trying to turn the kiddies against reality?
The slick salesguy promised? Were the operators standing by? Do you get a free set of steak knives with your order?
You thought there wasn't enough of it or something and voted for obvious scum?
I think compulsory voting would make room for a third party and avoid such obvious mistakes in the future.
Very true but when most of your potential customers are in geostationary orbit and you have months to work your way from one to the other it's not so ugly.
Readers, think in ellipses not one dimensional thinking with concentric circles. Not easy maybe but that's how it's done.
I very strongly suspect that the complete mission plan will worked out on ground before launch and the thing will be sent to work on X number of known satellites with specific known tasks to complete and specific parts. The alternative - if it's going to be a general purpose thing working for years it's going to have to get fuel and parts shipped to it anyway.
Back in the 1970s one of the selling points/excuses for giving up on the Saturn V etc and going for the Space Shuttle was that it could be used to refuel satellites and do repair on them - which did happen with spectacular success with the Hubble telescope. One of several major reasons that such missions were very rare is that the Space Shuttle was limited to doing missions in low earth orbit and it's a very long way to geostationary orbit from there.
A robot craft could potentially get to that distant orbit and could have a mission time far longer than the Space Shuttle ever had. Also such a mission is incredibly dangerous - if the speeds are not very closely matched the impact energy would be enormous. Accidents will happen and it's better to lose a robot and a satellite than a manned mission.
Here's a little bit of homework debate boy since you brought in the irrelevant political shit. I can remember it but you'll probably have to look it up or ask your Dad.
How many nuclear reactors were approved (not built after being approved earlier, but approved) in the terms of Reagan, Bush and Bush's idiot unemployable draft dodging son?
Work out that number and you'll see that the Republicans have nothing but empty words on the issue.
Meanwhile, back in the real world a left winger, George Orwell, wrote the longest lasting criticism of Stalinist states in the forms of the novels "1984" and "Animal Farm".
Democrats are not typically what the world would refer to as "left".
Australia has a lot of people in politics pushing a very strong anti-migrant line to the point of outright xenophobia in some cases. It was chosen as a point of difference between two parties so the current ruling party has the ridiculous, expensive and cruel policy of keeping refugees locked up in camps indefinitely. It was a quickly done back of the envelope policy and they have no idea what to do next with a few thousand people, any change would be admitting that they were wrong. The anti-refugee thing has spilled over into migration in general.
There is so much hate being stirred up by people in politics an radio shock jocks that Australia is not a good place to migrate to at this point especially if you get a reasonable job. You will be accused of taking the jobs away from the locals even if it's a technical position that is hard to fill, or even if you start your own business. It really sucks at the moment and I don't think it's been this bad for decades (not so many decades back being Jewish was a reason for visas to be refused as an example).
Lumping water quality in with climate is playing into the hands of the science deniers.