Of course the public wants to know military secrets, that doesnt make it any less against the law, and any less deserving of a military trial.
Yes it does. Laws are written around public opinion. Also, there's whistleblower protection. If you are uncovering corruption, rather than giving aid to the enemy, your actions are not criminal. That may well be the case here. The information released was not of a tactical nature. It didn't disclose troop strengths and numbers, positions, weaknesses, or anything like that. Rather, it exposed a bunch of dirty laundry. Information that shouldn't be classified.
Actually, it's easier to land on mars because you can use the atmosphere to slow down. Incidentally, the falcon heavy is supposed to cost $2,000/kg to orbit. That's half way to an order of magnitude reduction. If they can get the boosters to be reusable they'll be all the way there.
What you'd do is put the reactor on a boom, out away from the ship. You'd want to do that in order to shield the crew from the radiation anyway. It's really one of the best situations for it. Any terrestrial reactor has to be inside the biosphere. On a spacecraft, this is not true.
There aren't really a lot of people who are pro-slavery. So you may need to revisit some of your basic assumptions about this debate. The thing people find disagreeable about unions is they tend to make it difficult to get rid of ineffective teachers. There are a lot of documentaries and websites about this, go have a look.
What does that mean to you? Does that mean that it absolutely contains the deadliest substances by any measure? Is there a material which would fit that description? Making up your own definitions is fun and all, but it doesn't mean anything to me.
I never said that all nuclear power generation should be shut down, nor did I claim that they contained the deadliest materials known to man. I'm sure most people would recognize that a power plant using smallpox as it's fuel would be incredibly dangerous. You are arguing against yourself.
They all suffered catastrophic accidents. The problem with all nuclear reactors is that they all contain tons of some of the deadliest materials known to man, and they work by heating it up to extreme temperatures. It's an accident waiting to happen. No matter what precautions you take, things that you haven't thought of can still go wrong. If it was the same thing that went wrong in all three accidents, maybe you could say "well we'll just fix that one thing" but that's not what's going on.
The relevant issue here is cost. If we wanted to, we could build enough windmills to supply twice the power we need. Then we could user the power to generate hydrogen, which we could store and burn in combined cycle plants when the power is needed. It is absolutely possible to do this. But we'd need to spend time and effort doing it, and people don't seem to want to.
Molten salts store energy thermally, it depends how long you store the salt for and how well insulated it is, but that's solar only, and you're right about the limited capacity. You could electrolyze water, then store and burn the resulting hydrogen in a combined cycle plant. It would only be about 50% efficient for electricity, but that's good enough. Plus, you could distribute the hydrogen like natural gas for heating and whatnot, then you'd be about 80% efficient.
Yes, but an iPhone 4 still has a screen and a battery, so most of the cost is still there. I guess it's like the MIB quote "just because something is very important doesn't mean it's not very small" or however they said it. People think it should cost less just because it is smaller, even though all of the underlying complexity is still there.
People will usually stick with it for a few minutes. Just until their curiosity is satisfied. There's nothing wrong with that. The more people know about this kind of thing the better.
Clinical trials?! Developing such a drug would be much more dangerous than simply doing without. Who decided to spend all this money, and what the hell is their problem?
When I mention database programming, people's eyes gloss over. When I say I'm making a game for the iPad, they're like "really? can you show me how you do that." It's like night and day. It's not that programming is cool, it's that the iOS devices are cool, and their coolness has somehow managed to extend to developing software for them. Maybe because apps are such a huge part of the user experience.
It depends what you mean when you say "intervene." There really is nowhere in the Bible where Jesus advocated violence as a solution to anything. But the problem with that was that Jesus' message was directed at powerful members of the establishment, and the poor people who were oppressed and excluded by them.
Other aspects for a civil society are laid out alongside these core principles in the Law, but for some reason these principle of not oppressing people is repeated by itself in the profits and again in the new testament. It's almost like people are deliberately misunderstanding this one part of an overall message that's over 3,000 years old. Even today, people who claim to idolize Jesus spend a lot of time rationalizing away his message and saying "did he really mean that?!" Strange.
Thanks to the way phones are sold, people have unrealistic expectations about the price of cellphones. Of course, $600 is right in line with what a smartphone actually costs. It is basically a full fledged computer with a built in cellphone after all. But people lose sight of that when you sell them for $100 and then subsidize it by raising wireless subscription rates. The same computing hardware is in an iPhone 4S and an iPad 2, the only difference is the screen and the battery. Yet for some reason people pay $630 for the cellular enabled iPad 2 but only $200 for the 4S.
Hiding true cost from customers is how the economy (doesn't) work these days, unfortunately. And for some reason there are a lot of people wondering why everything seems to be falling apart.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes it does. Laws are written around public opinion. Also, there's whistleblower protection. If you are uncovering corruption, rather than giving aid to the enemy, your actions are not criminal. That may well be the case here. The information released was not of a tactical nature. It didn't disclose troop strengths and numbers, positions, weaknesses, or anything like that. Rather, it exposed a bunch of dirty laundry. Information that shouldn't be classified.
Actually, it's easier to land on mars because you can use the atmosphere to slow down. Incidentally, the falcon heavy is supposed to cost $2,000 /kg to orbit. That's half way to an order of magnitude reduction. If they can get the boosters to be reusable they'll be all the way there.
What you'd do is put the reactor on a boom, out away from the ship. You'd want to do that in order to shield the crew from the radiation anyway. It's really one of the best situations for it. Any terrestrial reactor has to be inside the biosphere. On a spacecraft, this is not true.
Yes, but Uranium could.
There aren't really a lot of people who are pro-slavery. So you may need to revisit some of your basic assumptions about this debate. The thing people find disagreeable about unions is they tend to make it difficult to get rid of ineffective teachers. There are a lot of documentaries and websites about this, go have a look.
You don't have to reply to do that.
What does that mean to you? Does that mean that it absolutely contains the deadliest substances by any measure? Is there a material which would fit that description? Making up your own definitions is fun and all, but it doesn't mean anything to me.
Well, when it's in the atmosphere it's filled with air.
I never said that all nuclear power generation should be shut down, nor did I claim that they contained the deadliest materials known to man. I'm sure most people would recognize that a power plant using smallpox as it's fuel would be incredibly dangerous. You are arguing against yourself.
They all suffered catastrophic accidents. The problem with all nuclear reactors is that they all contain tons of some of the deadliest materials known to man, and they work by heating it up to extreme temperatures. It's an accident waiting to happen. No matter what precautions you take, things that you haven't thought of can still go wrong. If it was the same thing that went wrong in all three accidents, maybe you could say "well we'll just fix that one thing" but that's not what's going on.
You just put it out away from everything. That way if it explodes, there isn't much harm done.
The relevant issue here is cost. If we wanted to, we could build enough windmills to supply twice the power we need. Then we could user the power to generate hydrogen, which we could store and burn in combined cycle plants when the power is needed. It is absolutely possible to do this. But we'd need to spend time and effort doing it, and people don't seem to want to.
I can think of at least two things these three places all have in common . . .
Molten salts store energy thermally, it depends how long you store the salt for and how well insulated it is, but that's solar only, and you're right about the limited capacity. You could electrolyze water, then store and burn the resulting hydrogen in a combined cycle plant. It would only be about 50% efficient for electricity, but that's good enough. Plus, you could distribute the hydrogen like natural gas for heating and whatnot, then you'd be about 80% efficient.
Lame.
Yes, but an iPhone 4 still has a screen and a battery, so most of the cost is still there. I guess it's like the MIB quote "just because something is very important doesn't mean it's not very small" or however they said it. People think it should cost less just because it is smaller, even though all of the underlying complexity is still there.
People will usually stick with it for a few minutes. Just until their curiosity is satisfied. There's nothing wrong with that. The more people know about this kind of thing the better.
Clinical trials?! Developing such a drug would be much more dangerous than simply doing without. Who decided to spend all this money, and what the hell is their problem?
It'd be cheaper not to use it in the first place.
Yeah, being against teachers unions is really out there.
Like Deep Impact, perhaps?
I'm thinking Samsung, HTC, and RIM.
When I mention database programming, people's eyes gloss over. When I say I'm making a game for the iPad, they're like "really? can you show me how you do that." It's like night and day. It's not that programming is cool, it's that the iOS devices are cool, and their coolness has somehow managed to extend to developing software for them. Maybe because apps are such a huge part of the user experience.
It depends what you mean when you say "intervene." There really is nowhere in the Bible where Jesus advocated violence as a solution to anything. But the problem with that was that Jesus' message was directed at powerful members of the establishment, and the poor people who were oppressed and excluded by them.
Other aspects for a civil society are laid out alongside these core principles in the Law, but for some reason these principle of not oppressing people is repeated by itself in the profits and again in the new testament. It's almost like people are deliberately misunderstanding this one part of an overall message that's over 3,000 years old. Even today, people who claim to idolize Jesus spend a lot of time rationalizing away his message and saying "did he really mean that?!" Strange.
Thanks to the way phones are sold, people have unrealistic expectations about the price of cellphones. Of course, $600 is right in line with what a smartphone actually costs. It is basically a full fledged computer with a built in cellphone after all. But people lose sight of that when you sell them for $100 and then subsidize it by raising wireless subscription rates. The same computing hardware is in an iPhone 4S and an iPad 2, the only difference is the screen and the battery. Yet for some reason people pay $630 for the cellular enabled iPad 2 but only $200 for the 4S.
Hiding true cost from customers is how the economy (doesn't) work these days, unfortunately. And for some reason there are a lot of people wondering why everything seems to be falling apart.