That it was a private military force that did the attacking, not a governmental one. Presumably, the government on Earth was not willing to allow any military attack on the Natives, hence their attempts for 5+ years for a diplomatic solution.
Also it should be noted that a statement such as "no greenery left on Earth" is an exaggeration at best, considering life would die on the planet without the Oxygen Cycle. Unless the Humans attempted to develop machines to replace the functions of the plants.
.3nm would be about 13 generations from now if they keep scaling down transistors at 2^.5, which would be at least 20+ years from now in everyday usage.
"I didn't watch it and I don't like the idea of it, so anyone who does like it is obviously a moron and is a sign of things to come for our society. Why can't people be intelligent like me and like some obscure movie by some obscure director???"
BooHoo, get off your high horse. The movie is visual excellence, nothing compares to it in that department.
Re:Why would you want to go with other people?
on
The Science of Avatar
·
· Score: 1
There's a difference, the article is ranting about free software. What you are referring to is open source software, there is a difference. There is of course a convergence of the two with FOSS, but that doesn't seem to be what the article was implying.
Or the non obvious answer that many will resort to: Pirate it.
Of course this is just an excuse from someone complaining that software costs money. Software should be free of course! It's not like it costs anything to make high quality software!
How do solar panels replace hydrocarbons? The fact of the matter is that as it currently stands, the hydrocarbon reserves we are using(oil) have taken billions of years to form. Once they are used up, they will be gone and we will need a new source because we can't wait billions of years to have new reserves.
Also why would you say that the only significant value of resources in space is to use them in space? Getting resources from space back down to Earth is a trivial matter as gravity does all the work for you... It wouldn't be very different from the cargo containers currently manufactured and used for international shipping. In fact the containers themselves could be made in space out of a material such as steel that can be recycled on Earth.
Secondly, while it's nice that Jay Leno did some 3D printing for prototyping a part, at the end of the day he still had to run the part through a CNC machine and cut the flange nut out of metal. There is no way you are going to use a plastic nut on a vehicle on a stress bearing member, plastic is extremely weak compared to metal.
Again, I'm fully aware of the capabilities of these 3D printers, we have 2 of them at work and we use rapid prototyping machines on a daily basis for part testing/verification before manufacture.
I should add, I don't think anyone necessarily disagrees with the premise of your idea. In the future it will happen and it will be wonderful, but as far as the practicality of it goes, it's simply not practical now.
Also, many would disagree with you that we are sending a probe to a useless rock. There exist significant deposits of hydrocarbons on Titan and those could prove immeasurably useful to Earth in the future. Not to mention that there is a possibility for life to exist on the planet.
Manufacturing will never have a net zero impact because that would imply that goods could be produced with no expenditure of energy. There will ALWAYS be an energy cost in manufacturing.
The 3D printers are very good for short run productions, but they are significantly more expensive when one gets into runs of even 100's of pieces if the parts are large enough. Time is also a cost because of labor, not just materials and energy. Another problem with the 3D printers however is that they only deal with plastics usually...
There do exist 3D laser sintering machines which are capable of creating 3D metallic parts, however the power requirements of those machines are enormous, let alone the fact that only a few dozen exist in the USA and the machines cost on the order of $500,000+ each. The other problem is that those 3D sintering machines still require finishing operations which have to performed generally with carbide tooling... There is not much you can do to negate the cost of that carbide tooling... You can make it cheaper by making even more tools, but by it's very nature it is hard to recycle which means resources will always be scarce.
In fact, the only way to solve resource problems is to move into space and acquire natural resources from Asteroids.
As it is now, nanotech is just a pipe dream. Yes we have real world examples in the form of biology, but when it comes to dealing with metals, you're in an entirely different league. I don't believe nanotech will become practical for the manufacturing of macroscale parts anytime within the next 200 years.
You have no idea what manufacturing actually is...
Those 3D printers are toys, for prototyping only and HIGHLY inefficient for mass manufacturing.
The biggest reason for joblessness in the western world in manufacturing is the rise of China, not automation.
Even if you have smart robots and a source of energy(in this case, a LOT of energy negating any and all green movements), you still need tools, lots and lots of tools. These are expensive and require a lot of capital.
Automation is what allows Western companies to be competitive with Chinese ones. However that only works to a point as the Chinese aren't stupid and do heavily make use of automation technologies themselves. The difference comes in the fact that they use 2-3x more people to do the same job someone in the West might do but they also pay them 3-4x less than an equivalent Western worker.
Slashdot Mirror
They mentioned several times throughout the film the idea of returning back to Earth.
That it was a private military force that did the attacking, not a governmental one. Presumably, the government on Earth was not willing to allow any military attack on the Natives, hence their attempts for 5+ years for a diplomatic solution.
Also it should be noted that a statement such as "no greenery left on Earth" is an exaggeration at best, considering life would die on the planet without the Oxygen Cycle. Unless the Humans attempted to develop machines to replace the functions of the plants.
This just in, Employee Time Off costs the world $60+ Trillion a year, analyst suggests 16 hour work days.
Newsflash JWSmythe, they don't care what you want.
So some young whippersnappers decide to change things around and this is news?
Get off my lawn!
.3nm would be about 13 generations from now if they keep scaling down transistors at 2^.5, which would be at least 20+ years from now in everyday usage.
Last a long time? Are you kidding? That's exactly what the corporations want, things that expire naturally after 5 years!
So what happens when the Benzene evaporates away? Does it take your bits with it?
We've been using Guns for hundreds of years, what makes you think that's going to change anytime soon?
"I didn't watch it and I don't like the idea of it, so anyone who does like it is obviously a moron and is a sign of things to come for our society. Why can't people be intelligent like me and like some obscure movie by some obscure director???"
BooHoo, get off your high horse. The movie is visual excellence, nothing compares to it in that department.
But then you miss the 3D imagery!
That's unfortunate, while the story is ho-hum the 3D visual effects are simply amazing.
No, humans do it for resources...
Almost every single war ever fought was due to resources.
Nope, a Cosine wave is just a phase shifted Sine wave.
Yep, unless Intel gives Nvidia a DMI license, that's pretty much the only way.
They're cheap, that's the point behind them.
Also, it seems like ION will still be usable, but in a slightly revised form for the Pinetrails.
Don't exaggerate, the Atom isn't THAT bad.
Correction, the top of the line is currently the Snap Dragon.
ASUS isn't too bad in this regard as a lot of their other eee's are done in a matte finish.
There's a difference, the article is ranting about free software. What you are referring to is open source software, there is a difference. There is of course a convergence of the two with FOSS, but that doesn't seem to be what the article was implying.
Or the non obvious answer that many will resort to: Pirate it.
Of course this is just an excuse from someone complaining that software costs money. Software should be free of course! It's not like it costs anything to make high quality software!
How do solar panels replace hydrocarbons? The fact of the matter is that as it currently stands, the hydrocarbon reserves we are using(oil) have taken billions of years to form. Once they are used up, they will be gone and we will need a new source because we can't wait billions of years to have new reserves.
Also why would you say that the only significant value of resources in space is to use them in space? Getting resources from space back down to Earth is a trivial matter as gravity does all the work for you... It wouldn't be very different from the cargo containers currently manufactured and used for international shipping. In fact the containers themselves could be made in space out of a material such as steel that can be recycled on Earth.
Secondly, while it's nice that Jay Leno did some 3D printing for prototyping a part, at the end of the day he still had to run the part through a CNC machine and cut the flange nut out of metal. There is no way you are going to use a plastic nut on a vehicle on a stress bearing member, plastic is extremely weak compared to metal.
Again, I'm fully aware of the capabilities of these 3D printers, we have 2 of them at work and we use rapid prototyping machines on a daily basis for part testing/verification before manufacture.
I should add, I don't think anyone necessarily disagrees with the premise of your idea. In the future it will happen and it will be wonderful, but as far as the practicality of it goes, it's simply not practical now.
Also, many would disagree with you that we are sending a probe to a useless rock. There exist significant deposits of hydrocarbons on Titan and those could prove immeasurably useful to Earth in the future. Not to mention that there is a possibility for life to exist on the planet.
In the far far far future, yes.
Anytime in the next 200-300 years, no.
Manufacturing will never have a net zero impact because that would imply that goods could be produced with no expenditure of energy. There will ALWAYS be an energy cost in manufacturing.
The 3D printers are very good for short run productions, but they are significantly more expensive when one gets into runs of even 100's of pieces if the parts are large enough. Time is also a cost because of labor, not just materials and energy. Another problem with the 3D printers however is that they only deal with plastics usually...
There do exist 3D laser sintering machines which are capable of creating 3D metallic parts, however the power requirements of those machines are enormous, let alone the fact that only a few dozen exist in the USA and the machines cost on the order of $500,000+ each. The other problem is that those 3D sintering machines still require finishing operations which have to performed generally with carbide tooling... There is not much you can do to negate the cost of that carbide tooling... You can make it cheaper by making even more tools, but by it's very nature it is hard to recycle which means resources will always be scarce.
In fact, the only way to solve resource problems is to move into space and acquire natural resources from Asteroids.
As it is now, nanotech is just a pipe dream. Yes we have real world examples in the form of biology, but when it comes to dealing with metals, you're in an entirely different league. I don't believe nanotech will become practical for the manufacturing of macroscale parts anytime within the next 200 years.
You have no idea what manufacturing actually is...
Those 3D printers are toys, for prototyping only and HIGHLY inefficient for mass manufacturing.
The biggest reason for joblessness in the western world in manufacturing is the rise of China, not automation.
Even if you have smart robots and a source of energy(in this case, a LOT of energy negating any and all green movements), you still need tools, lots and lots of tools. These are expensive and require a lot of capital.
Automation is what allows Western companies to be competitive with Chinese ones. However that only works to a point as the Chinese aren't stupid and do heavily make use of automation technologies themselves. The difference comes in the fact that they use 2-3x more people to do the same job someone in the West might do but they also pay them 3-4x less than an equivalent Western worker.
Are you kidding? Resources will always be scarce as long as we use only the resources on the Earth.
Besides that, someone has to do the work, and work isn't free or cheap.