The spectrum is worth more to AT&T because they have customers to fill it. There are markets where service is spotty and they can't add new customers because they don't have the bandwidth. I'm thinking specifically NYC, but there are others.
It may be too good to be true, but how is an average consumer supposed to know that?
The same way you know that stereo you bought off the back of a truck is stolen. There's a limit to how stupid you're allowed to be before it gets you into legal trouble.
These kinds of stories piss me off. When I need over-limit money from the ATM I'm SOL. But I know that if somebody stole my card they'd be able to clean out my entire account in, like, ten minutes.
I still go back to C++ now and then to feel a breadth of fresh air.
Well, okay, I suppose, as long as you don't have to maintain other peoples' code. I spent years chasing intermittent memory bugs in C++, and I'll be forever grateful to the java designers for freeing me from that task. About six months ago in a C++ project at my company someone found, by accident, one such bug. They'd been looking for it for more than a decade, finally giving up and writing a bunch of code to detect when it occurred and clean up the mess. I've never seen that in a java project, even one with junior and/or incompetent programmers.
The situation in California is kind of odd. I don't understand the legal details, but for some reason in L.A. the city wasn't legally entitled to collect money from the red-light cameras. So if you got a ticket in the mail and just didn't pay it there was nothing they could do. On the other hand, if you paid it they wouldn't give your money back (surprise).
I don't know if that's the case in other cities. Cameras are nothing but a revenue source anyway - the statistics say adding a camera to an intersection makes it a tiny bit more dangerous than it was. I've always sort of suspected cities are taking them out because they're worried someone would get creamed in a newly-camera'd intersection and then take that year's budget in court.
How does any of this relate to a duty to "protect the U.S.'s interests and protect our borders"? Manned space flight is a jobs program. We don't need to be doing it at all. It doesn't advance the security interests of the country and it doesn't advance science. There's no obligation on the part of Congress to fund it at all.
Japan's research into robotics is a long time frame project. The Japanese population is shrinking and getting older, and they won't have enough young people to fill all the mundane, low-skilled work that needs to get done. The skating robots and robots that serve ice cream are just demonstrators. What they're really after is robots that can take care of old people in their homes and robots that can do mundane jobs in facilities that were designed for humans. It's not really about the quest for something neat.
So they're both ahead of the US and behind it. They're ahead of us when it comes to cutting-edge androids that move like humans in human spaces. But they're behind us in robots that do practical things right now. The US has had more incentive to develop along those lines because these kinds of robots are getting very useful in war.
Should be far more energy efficient (->cheaper) than boat as well.
Shipping freight by boat is quite a bit cheaper and more energy efficient than rail. Also, ships can accommodate much larger and heavier items. From the Russian perspective this railway makes sense because Siberia is loaded with raw materials, and it's just as much trouble to get them to a warm water port in Russia (they only have three) by rail as it would be to get them to Alaska by rail. Might even make sense for finished goods going both directions.
You still need to ask whether or not any of this could have happened at all without research he doesn't approve of over religious grounds that aren't even that well founded in doctrine to begin with. (thus the problem of embedding religious doctrine in public policy)
The problem with this statement is embryonic stem cells have been pretty much a dead end, clinically. And what, exactly, have we learned from them we couldn't just as easily have learned from adult stem cells?
China has a huge labor inflation problem, which is going to make Chinese goods uncompetitive over time once you factor in lag and transportation costs.
Also, they're not going to be able to push the RMB down forever, and even if they could the US can burn them by printing dollars (which we're doing).
It wasn't theft. It's not like the scammers broke into their account and transferred ISK to another account. It was a scam, and scams are part of the game.
I'm not sure if you can build (conventional) jet planes big enough to carry a rocket large enough to reach escape velocity even after being released at high altitudes and speed.
We've been doing it for more than 20 years, and could launch much bigger rockets with a purpose-built carrier.
Jets only work up to a certain altitude and speed, problems rockets don't have at all.
But jets use atmospheric oxygen as an oxidizer, so they're much more efficient. That's the whole reason we're spending money on scramjets at all. Jet engines are more complicated than rocket engines, but as long as you're in the atmosphere the extra complication is a small price to pay for not having to drag around a tank full of LOX.
There are other advantages, too. With a jet carrier you have maneuverability, and can fly to where you'd like to launch the rocket. Launching satellites into geostationary orbit is much more efficient if you can start at the equator. Also, with a jet carrier as your first stage, a first stage abort is no more complicated than turning the jet around and landing without launching the rocket.
Slashdot Mirror
The spectrum is worth more to AT&T because they have customers to fill it. There are markets where service is spotty and they can't add new customers because they don't have the bandwidth. I'm thinking specifically NYC, but there are others.
This is more about buying spectrum than buying customers.
It may be too good to be true, but how is an average consumer supposed to know that?
The same way you know that stereo you bought off the back of a truck is stolen. There's a limit to how stupid you're allowed to be before it gets you into legal trouble.
Sixty bucks and she didn't know it was stolen? Oh please.
Seems like a legitimate complaint and the plaintiffs are especially sympathetic in not realizing the device was stolen.
Nope. Seems like a good reason not to put naked pictures of yourself on someone else's laptop.
Forget it, Jake. It's China.
These kinds of stories piss me off. When I need over-limit money from the ATM I'm SOL. But I know that if somebody stole my card they'd be able to clean out my entire account in, like, ten minutes.
Well, okay, I suppose, as long as you don't have to maintain other peoples' code. I spent years chasing intermittent memory bugs in C++, and I'll be forever grateful to the java designers for freeing me from that task. About six months ago in a C++ project at my company someone found, by accident, one such bug. They'd been looking for it for more than a decade, finally giving up and writing a bunch of code to detect when it occurred and clean up the mess. I've never seen that in a java project, even one with junior and/or incompetent programmers.
Damn you, selection bias!
When the time is upon you it will probably be a bigger deal.
I doubt they would have, but it's irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion. What does that have to do with manned space flight?
After using java for a decade or so I can't go back to C++. It would be hard to program anything after gouging my eyes out.
The situation in California is kind of odd. I don't understand the legal details, but for some reason in L.A. the city wasn't legally entitled to collect money from the red-light cameras. So if you got a ticket in the mail and just didn't pay it there was nothing they could do. On the other hand, if you paid it they wouldn't give your money back (surprise).
I don't know if that's the case in other cities. Cameras are nothing but a revenue source anyway - the statistics say adding a camera to an intersection makes it a tiny bit more dangerous than it was. I've always sort of suspected cities are taking them out because they're worried someone would get creamed in a newly-camera'd intersection and then take that year's budget in court.
How does any of this relate to a duty to "protect the U.S.'s interests and protect our borders"? Manned space flight is a jobs program. We don't need to be doing it at all. It doesn't advance the security interests of the country and it doesn't advance science. There's no obligation on the part of Congress to fund it at all.
Japan's research into robotics is a long time frame project. The Japanese population is shrinking and getting older, and they won't have enough young people to fill all the mundane, low-skilled work that needs to get done. The skating robots and robots that serve ice cream are just demonstrators. What they're really after is robots that can take care of old people in their homes and robots that can do mundane jobs in facilities that were designed for humans. It's not really about the quest for something neat.
So they're both ahead of the US and behind it. They're ahead of us when it comes to cutting-edge androids that move like humans in human spaces. But they're behind us in robots that do practical things right now. The US has had more incentive to develop along those lines because these kinds of robots are getting very useful in war.
Should be far more energy efficient (->cheaper) than boat as well.
Shipping freight by boat is quite a bit cheaper and more energy efficient than rail. Also, ships can accommodate much larger and heavier items. From the Russian perspective this railway makes sense because Siberia is loaded with raw materials, and it's just as much trouble to get them to a warm water port in Russia (they only have three) by rail as it would be to get them to Alaska by rail. Might even make sense for finished goods going both directions.
So you think the rest of us should too, then?
Wow, you managed to write all that without making a single substantive criticism.
The problem with this statement is embryonic stem cells have been pretty much a dead end, clinically. And what, exactly, have we learned from them we couldn't just as easily have learned from adult stem cells?
China has a huge labor inflation problem, which is going to make Chinese goods uncompetitive over time once you factor in lag and transportation costs.
Also, they're not going to be able to push the RMB down forever, and even if they could the US can burn them by printing dollars (which we're doing).
MadMartigan2001 writes with a pretty crazy article on a project involving floating libertarian paradises.
Slashdot should really start an editorial page so the editors don't feel the need to stamp their opinion into news articles.
It's entertainment. If you're getting your entertainment value for the money it's worth it. Otherwise not.
You can buy two months worth of EVE game time for the price of taking someone to the movies, so we're not talking a lot of money here.
It wasn't theft. It's not like the scammers broke into their account and transferred ISK to another account. It was a scam, and scams are part of the game.
My first response would be "how could you patent a syntactical gloss over troff?", but I guess you can patent pretty much anything these days.
My bullshit detector is beeping silently in the background...
My bullshit detector is flashing darkly at your bullshit detector.
We've been doing it for more than 20 years, and could launch much bigger rockets with a purpose-built carrier.
But jets use atmospheric oxygen as an oxidizer, so they're much more efficient. That's the whole reason we're spending money on scramjets at all. Jet engines are more complicated than rocket engines, but as long as you're in the atmosphere the extra complication is a small price to pay for not having to drag around a tank full of LOX.
There are other advantages, too. With a jet carrier you have maneuverability, and can fly to where you'd like to launch the rocket. Launching satellites into geostationary orbit is much more efficient if you can start at the equator. Also, with a jet carrier as your first stage, a first stage abort is no more complicated than turning the jet around and landing without launching the rocket.