Interstellar travel is wildly impractical. It makes for interesting fiction, but unless our understanding of physics is TOTALLY messed up (*way* more flawed than we currently think pure Newtonian physics was), there's absolutely zero practical application, ever.
Given the fact that we don't really understand how 95% of the universe works (dark energy/dark matter) is it really safe to leap to such conclusions? Even if our physics understanding is completely accurate, there are hypothesized FTL methods that don't break relativity -- the cubierre drive comes to mind.
Although, given the hypothesis as put forth in the article, I sense there's a pipeline for good B.C. bud running down there too.
If only that was the case. When I went out West we couldn't find anything other than Mexican schwag. Stems and seeds. It was garbage. Made me realize how spoiled I am living in a state that borders Canada.
a single century of consumerist society in the presence of industrial technology has brought us to the most rapid phase of extinction in the history of the world.
I don't think you've studied the history of this planet very well if you've concluded that this is the most rapid phase of extinction in history.
what are the chances that the agricultural resources of the planet will be able to continue to feed us?
They will feed us just fine. Even discounting the fact that there is untapped arable land out there, the agricultural system as it exists now is riddled with inefficiencies. The simple act of cutting our meat intake would result a sizable expansion of calories available for human consumption.
We now face a decision: become rational really fast, or die.
How many times in history have we heard some variant of this prediction? We are still here.
ut I'm going to assume that a good majority of us are not qualified to make the judgment of whether or not the girl's light sensitivity is serious enough that holding a particular light source near her face will cause any pain and/or injury
Yes we are. Those scanners operate in the milliwatt range. I had one when I was a member of the ACNeilsen Homescan panel -- it ran on batteries. The florescent bulbs in the store would have exposed her to more light than the scanner -- yet she isn't claiming that they caused her any harm.
I thougt all left-wing speakers had been silenced long ago?
The left wing would like you to believe that, but it's not the case. Hell, to be fair, the right wing would also make the same claim. I'm skeptical of both. There are media outlets in the US that tilt in either direction (Fox News and MSNBC being the easiest to single out) and which may well muzzle opposing viewpoints -- but there are ample other media outlets that will allow those viewpoints to be heard.
The claim that one side or the other has been silenced is just partisan posturing.
Actually it would be a bit more than that. For the data to be meaningful you would also need to log the time (1x4 bytes), the port numbers (2x2 bytes), URL (variable size, let's call it 100 bytes of text to account for sites that pass variables in the URL), etc.
Secondly, there are no laws preventing a server or service owner from keeping records of other people using their equipment.
New York State Penal Law, Section 250.05, Eavesdropping:
A person is guilty of eavesdropping when he unlawfully engages in wiretapping, mechanical overhearing of a conversation, or intercepting or accessing of an electronic communication. Eavesdropping is a class E felony.
Definition from Penal Law 250.00:
"Intercepting or accessing of an electronic communication" and
"intentionally intercepted or accessed" mean the intentional acquiring,
receiving, collecting, overhearing, or recording of an electronic
communication, without the consent of the sender or intended receiver
thereof
Canada pretty much retained the British definitions and conditions. They've made their bed.
Well, where do you suppose all the British Loyalists went after we kicked them and the Redcoats out of our country? Of course Canada hasn't caught up completely to the mother country. AFAIK they have less cameras than people, can still own firearms and haven't lost their right to remain silent.
but all website access IP's are logged somewhere. Either on the server, the router, or the ISP.
Huh? Why would an ISP log website visits? That's an awful lot of data you are talking about and even if they were inclined to collect it they'd probably run afoul of wiretapping and/or privacy laws in most western countries.
But as long as we are 'holding people to account', let's go all the way. Grab the CEOs of MPAA and RIAA and talk to them about the erosion of the public domain. Talk to Cheney about torture and the warcrimes tribunal. Let's get Albright, Kissinger, Bzhezinsky and talk about imperialism. And don't forget the fine folks from Arthur Anderson and Enron. The list goes on. Why don't you get THOSE people and hold THEM to account, you self-righteous prig!
C'mon dude, you had a really great post until this last paragraph. I think you made the point about free and anonymous speech quite well without this rant....
How is retiring the only platform we have that's capable of manned space flight without a suitable replacement anything but gutting the manned space program?
Constellation was going to return to the Moon and eventually go to Mars.
or do you want to give money to lean and mean engineers and entrepreneurs like Space-X and Scaled Composites? We need to get some new eyes on the problems to get some innovative solutions!
Innovative solutions to problems that NASA solved decades ago?
I didn't attribute my Star Trek quote either. I figured anybody geeky enough to be on/. in an article about the space program would know where they came from.
okay by your reasoning then we should approve any project that falls under say 1% of the total US budget because it's insignificant compared to the total?
No, by my reasoning we shouldn't mindlessly gut a program that has paid handsome technological/military/diplomatic dividends.
but obviously if i need to reduce the weight i need to start taking some things out.
Maybe we should start with the entitlement programs that are going to bankrupt our country regardless of what we do with NASA?
Ask ten different scientists about the environment, population control, genetics and you'll get ten different answers, but there's one thing every scientist on the planet agrees on. Whether it happens in a hundred years or a thousand years or a million years, eventually our Sun will grow cold and go out. When that happens, it won't just take us. It'll take Marilyn Monroe and Lao-Tzu and Einstein and Morobuto and Buddy Holly and Aristophenes.. and all of this.. all of this was for nothing unless we go to the stars.
It seems silly to think we wouldn't benefit from some other country's space program
So, their space program is going to employ American citizens, whom spend their wages in American communities and generate tax revenue for American Government? They will let their space program benefit our military, in the form of communications and recon capabilities? They will share all technologies developed for their space program without charging us for them?
so why not let them foot the research bill while we work on coming up with a sensible financial strategy
The 2009 Federal Budget included $3,100,000,000,000 of spending. NASA's 2009 fiscal year budget was $17,614,200,000. That amounts to 0.5682% of Federal spending. In reality it's considerably less than that, when you account for appropriations that weren't part of the budget (war spending, bailouts, stimulus, etc.)
I repeat my statement from another thread: Gutting the manned space program to save money is shortsighted and idiotic policy. NASA is not the reason that Federal red ink is spiraling out of control.
So the space program not only killed seven people, but needlessly killed seven people.
If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires, both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid.
Slashdot Mirror
Interstellar travel is wildly impractical. It makes for interesting fiction, but unless our understanding of physics is TOTALLY messed up (*way* more flawed than we currently think pure Newtonian physics was), there's absolutely zero practical application, ever.
Given the fact that we don't really understand how 95% of the universe works (dark energy/dark matter) is it really safe to leap to such conclusions? Even if our physics understanding is completely accurate, there are hypothesized FTL methods that don't break relativity -- the cubierre drive comes to mind.
Although, given the hypothesis as put forth in the article, I sense there's a pipeline for good B.C. bud running down there too.
If only that was the case. When I went out West we couldn't find anything other than Mexican schwag. Stems and seeds. It was garbage. Made me realize how spoiled I am living in a state that borders Canada.
Hypothetically speaking of course ;)
a single century of consumerist society in the presence of industrial technology has brought us to the most rapid phase of extinction in the history of the world.
I don't think you've studied the history of this planet very well if you've concluded that this is the most rapid phase of extinction in history.
what are the chances that the agricultural resources of the planet will be able to continue to feed us?
They will feed us just fine. Even discounting the fact that there is untapped arable land out there, the agricultural system as it exists now is riddled with inefficiencies. The simple act of cutting our meat intake would result a sizable expansion of calories available for human consumption.
We now face a decision: become rational really fast, or die.
How many times in history have we heard some variant of this prediction? We are still here.
Snarkiness does not make this lawsuit any less absurd.
ut I'm going to assume that a good majority of us are not qualified to make the judgment of whether or not the girl's light sensitivity is serious enough that holding a particular light source near her face will cause any pain and/or injury
Yes we are. Those scanners operate in the milliwatt range. I had one when I was a member of the ACNeilsen Homescan panel -- it ran on batteries. The florescent bulbs in the store would have exposed her to more light than the scanner -- yet she isn't claiming that they caused her any harm.
Sometimes a spade is a spade.
I thougt all left-wing speakers had been silenced long ago?
The left wing would like you to believe that, but it's not the case. Hell, to be fair, the right wing would also make the same claim. I'm skeptical of both. There are media outlets in the US that tilt in either direction (Fox News and MSNBC being the easiest to single out) and which may well muzzle opposing viewpoints -- but there are ample other media outlets that will allow those viewpoints to be heard.
The claim that one side or the other has been silenced is just partisan posturing.
We are talking 4 octets per visit here
Actually it would be a bit more than that. For the data to be meaningful you would also need to log the time (1x4 bytes), the port numbers (2x2 bytes), URL (variable size, let's call it 100 bytes of text to account for sites that pass variables in the URL), etc.
Secondly, there are no laws preventing a server or service owner from keeping records of other people using their equipment.
New York State Penal Law, Section 250.05, Eavesdropping:
A person is guilty of eavesdropping when he unlawfully engages in wiretapping, mechanical overhearing of a conversation, or intercepting or accessing of an electronic communication.
Eavesdropping is a class E felony.
Definition from Penal Law 250.00:
"Intercepting or accessing of an electronic communication" and "intentionally intercepted or accessed" mean the intentional acquiring, receiving, collecting, overhearing, or recording of an electronic communication, without the consent of the sender or intended receiver thereof
They should get a copy of the internet archive while they're at it.
And alt.binaries too. Think of the "research" potential there... ;)
Wouldn't it be interesting to see what someone else, normal people, said about Shakespeare or some kings 1000 years from now?
They were probably too busy watching Medieval Idol to even realize who Shakespeare or the King was ;)
All we have now is what was archived - popular writings that governments agreed to.
Which is all we'll have in the future, unless you think the United States Government is liable to be around in a thousand years.
Canada pretty much retained the British definitions and conditions. They've made their bed.
Well, where do you suppose all the British Loyalists went after we kicked them and the Redcoats out of our country? Of course Canada hasn't caught up completely to the mother country. AFAIK they have less cameras than people, can still own firearms and haven't lost their right to remain silent.
but all website access IP's are logged somewhere. Either on the server, the router, or the ISP.
Huh? Why would an ISP log website visits? That's an awful lot of data you are talking about and even if they were inclined to collect it they'd probably run afoul of wiretapping and/or privacy laws in most western countries.
Canadian law about hate speech is very different from the US.
Out of curiosity, why should speech cease to be free just because it's hateful? Isn't it more logical to draw the line at threats?:
"I hate niggers." <-- free speech
"I hate niggers, let's go kill one." <-- not free speech
Or are you one of those people who think Canada is the 51st state?
No, you are actually the 57th state. Didn't you listen to our President when he was running for office? ;)
But as long as we are 'holding people to account', let's go all the way. Grab the CEOs of MPAA and RIAA and talk to them about the erosion of the public domain. Talk to Cheney about torture and the warcrimes tribunal. Let's get Albright, Kissinger, Bzhezinsky and talk about imperialism. And don't forget the fine folks from Arthur Anderson and Enron. The list goes on. Why don't you get THOSE people and hold THEM to account, you self-righteous prig!
C'mon dude, you had a really great post until this last paragraph. I think you made the point about free and anonymous speech quite well without this rant....
How is retiring the only platform we have that's capable of manned space flight without a suitable replacement anything but gutting the manned space program?
How hard is it to get to LEO?
Constellation was going to return to the Moon and eventually go to Mars.
or do you want to give money to lean and mean engineers and entrepreneurs like Space-X and Scaled Composites? We need to get some new eyes on the problems to get some innovative solutions!
Innovative solutions to problems that NASA solved decades ago?
I didn't attribute my Star Trek quote either. I figured anybody geeky enough to be on /. in an article about the space program would know where they came from.
okay by your reasoning then we should approve any project that falls under say 1% of the total US budget because it's insignificant compared to the total?
No, by my reasoning we shouldn't mindlessly gut a program that has paid handsome technological/military/diplomatic dividends.
but obviously if i need to reduce the weight i need to start taking some things out.
Maybe we should start with the entitlement programs that are going to bankrupt our country regardless of what we do with NASA?
we aren't living in the pre- and cold war era where we can spend seemingly infinite $ simply to say "we did it first".
NASA's budget amounts to around 0.5% of the total Federal budget. I wasn't aware that was a "seemingly infinite" amount of money.
But my question remains valid, why do you have to invest in space travel now, when you have all those empty oceans?
Well, if you want a less dreamy response, what killed the dinosaurs again?
et china, russia starve their populations in order to put a man on mars, while we benefit from the real science being done through robotic missions.
I wasn't aware that spending 0.5% of the total US Federal Budget was causing people to starve.
Ask ten different scientists about the environment, population control, genetics and you'll get ten different answers, but there's one thing every scientist on the planet agrees on. Whether it happens in a hundred years or a thousand years or a million years, eventually our Sun will grow cold and go out. When that happens, it won't just take us. It'll take Marilyn Monroe and Lao-Tzu and Einstein and Morobuto and Buddy Holly and Aristophenes .. and all of this .. all of this was for nothing unless we go to the stars.
It seems silly to think we wouldn't benefit from some other country's space program
So, their space program is going to employ American citizens, whom spend their wages in American communities and generate tax revenue for American Government? They will let their space program benefit our military, in the form of communications and recon capabilities? They will share all technologies developed for their space program without charging us for them?
so why not let them foot the research bill while we work on coming up with a sensible financial strategy
The 2009 Federal Budget included $3,100,000,000,000 of spending. NASA's 2009 fiscal year budget was $17,614,200,000. That amounts to 0.5682% of Federal spending. In reality it's considerably less than that, when you account for appropriations that weren't part of the budget (war spending, bailouts, stimulus, etc.)
I repeat my statement from another thread: Gutting the manned space program to save money is shortsighted and idiotic policy. NASA is not the reason that Federal red ink is spiraling out of control.
Well said!
So the space program not only killed seven people, but needlessly killed seven people.
If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires, both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid.