Actually, most consumer vehicles are designed to minimise pedestrian injury these days, particularly given that most impacts occur in urban environments and are therefore comparatively low-speed. There are even standards they test against in Europe.
Yeah, I feel like we missed a step here, but I doubt that Smith and Wesson will be particularly keen on a law fitting a trigger lock to every gun they sell.
S5.1.1Each vehicle must have a starting system which, whenever the key is removed from the starting system prevents: (a) The normal activation of the vehicle's engine or motor; and (b) Either steering, or forward self-mobility, of the vehicle, or both.
Given that the majority of injuries caused by firearms are accidents or non-defensive homicides, I would question your statement that "the most important safety feature of a gun" is its ability to actually shoot. Detroit had about 50 defensive homicides in 2012 against 500 offensive homicides; if the gun literally didn't work half the days out of the year, you would be saving 250 lives at the cost of 25, before you count accidents.
You already have this special secure token that lets you start your vehicle, and by willingly handing that token over to another person you are assumed to have taken some degree of legal responsibility for what they do with said vehicle.
That's plenty of CO2 if all you want to do is photosynthesise, but the whole point of terraforming is to get the atmosphere up to a reasonable partial pressure of oxygen. Whereas pre-photosynthetic Earth had bags of CO2, the amount on Mars has is not going to be sufficient.
No. Proteins simply can't withstand the conformational energy involved in forcing two nuclei together past the coulomb barrier, and even if they could, they'd be promptly atomised by the energy liberated in the reaction.
Given that the physics that this device is based on go back to the '50s and are well-accepted, yes, they do give these ideas good marks in peer review.
Cold fusion most certainly does not "certainly work"! The reason it doesn't scale is that the effects disappear as your data gets better.
If there's a low entry cost, multiple risky options, and a potentially enormous payoff to whoever gets there first, you want to fund as many options as possible. That's why funding agencies and private investors alike take a pretty scatter-shot approach to lab-scale, sub-million-dollar energy research.
Of course, if you have a high cost to entry, and a few high-viability options, as with tokamaks, then you have to be choosy.
You're forgetting that Mars has 0.6% the surface pressure of Earth, which is actually very little CO2 at all. Even Total Recall had the sense to show the Martian terraforming equipment cracking a reservour of water ice to produce the oxygen it would need.
Those smartphones have typically been pretty terrible.* The current crop are actually spec- and performance-competitive with many of the "high-end" phones currently on the market, and at least well beyond the "good enough" mark for the software they're expected to run.
*You have no idea how long I spent waiting for Nokia to make a good cheap S60 phone. They had every technological opportunity, but they would make decisions like releasing three variations of the same phone: one without GPS, one without 3G, and one without Wifi.
One factor is that Ken Kuturagi had big technical aspirations; he's an engineer at heart, and the PS2 and PS3 were his attempts to make a mark on the way consumer computing is done. Unfortunately they were wholly inappropriate for the time they appeared. Ironically GPU compute, which actually is important these days, looks a lot like what he was trying to do. Just not terribly premature and inflexible.
Yet every delay seems to be caused by inadequate funding at the Federal level, to the point where the deadlines have been pushed back beyond the projections for when waste is likely to reach the Columbia River. What's that going to do to the local economy?
You have a talent for understatement. A lot of the waste was essentially throw in the ground and covered over, including a safe containing what turns out to be the oldest extant sample of weapons-grade plutonium:
Which nasty exclusionary tactics? Your coworkers and friends ostracising you because you're joining an organisation that exists to undermine their life's work? That's what happens when you get in bed with a widely-despised organisation.
A paper not being published because it's bad? That's science, baby.
Your example of the problems of climate science is climate scientists correcting Al Gore? Isn't that exactly what you want climate scientists to do in a healthy environment where the science decides the issues?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not an expert on US case law but it's certainly an insurance issue, and I believe that there has been criminal liability in extreme cases.
https://www.google.co.uk/searc...
Actually, most consumer vehicles are designed to minimise pedestrian injury these days, particularly given that most impacts occur in urban environments and are therefore comparatively low-speed. There are even standards they test against in Europe.
Yeah, I feel like we missed a step here, but I doubt that Smith and Wesson will be particularly keen on a law fitting a trigger lock to every gun they sell.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr...
S5.1.1Each vehicle must have a starting system which, whenever the key is removed from the starting system prevents:
(a) The normal activation of the vehicle's engine or motor; and
(b) Either steering, or forward self-mobility, of the vehicle, or both.
Given that the majority of injuries caused by firearms are accidents or non-defensive homicides, I would question your statement that "the most important safety feature of a gun" is its ability to actually shoot. Detroit had about 50 defensive homicides in 2012 against 500 offensive homicides; if the gun literally didn't work half the days out of the year, you would be saving 250 lives at the cost of 25, before you count accidents.
And even if they were, a car is engineered to minimise its ability to cause injury and damage.
You already have this special secure token that lets you start your vehicle, and by willingly handing that token over to another person you are assumed to have taken some degree of legal responsibility for what they do with said vehicle.
It's called a key.
It states that 17 years is the minimum amount of time you would need, not the maximum. This is why you shouldn't read WUWT.
That's plenty of CO2 if all you want to do is photosynthesise, but the whole point of terraforming is to get the atmosphere up to a reasonable partial pressure of oxygen. Whereas pre-photosynthetic Earth had bags of CO2, the amount on Mars has is not going to be sufficient.
When you have organisations like MUFON who are more interested in alien invaders than weather balloons, you can understand the usage.
No. Proteins simply can't withstand the conformational energy involved in forcing two nuclei together past the coulomb barrier, and even if they could, they'd be promptly atomised by the energy liberated in the reaction.
Given that the physics that this device is based on go back to the '50s and are well-accepted, yes, they do give these ideas good marks in peer review.
Cold fusion most certainly does not "certainly work"! The reason it doesn't scale is that the effects disappear as your data gets better.
If there's a low entry cost, multiple risky options, and a potentially enormous payoff to whoever gets there first, you want to fund as many options as possible. That's why funding agencies and private investors alike take a pretty scatter-shot approach to lab-scale, sub-million-dollar energy research.
Of course, if you have a high cost to entry, and a few high-viability options, as with tokamaks, then you have to be choosy.
This isn't to say that the guy's not credible - if he knows anything, it's plasmas - but it's odd to see his name come up in this context.
The company's Chief Scientist is listed as Eric Lerner, a name I thought I recognised. Turns out he's a noted plasma cosmology crank.
You're forgetting that Mars has 0.6% the surface pressure of Earth, which is actually very little CO2 at all. Even Total Recall had the sense to show the Martian terraforming equipment cracking a reservour of water ice to produce the oxygen it would need.
It wasn't part of the review process. It was something pointed out in passing towards the end.
Those smartphones have typically been pretty terrible.* The current crop are actually spec- and performance-competitive with many of the "high-end" phones currently on the market, and at least well beyond the "good enough" mark for the software they're expected to run.
*You have no idea how long I spent waiting for Nokia to make a good cheap S60 phone. They had every technological opportunity, but they would make decisions like releasing three variations of the same phone: one without GPS, one without 3G, and one without Wifi.
One factor is that Ken Kuturagi had big technical aspirations; he's an engineer at heart, and the PS2 and PS3 were his attempts to make a mark on the way consumer computing is done. Unfortunately they were wholly inappropriate for the time they appeared. Ironically GPU compute, which actually is important these days, looks a lot like what he was trying to do. Just not terribly premature and inflexible.
Yet every delay seems to be caused by inadequate funding at the Federal level, to the point where the deadlines have been pushed back beyond the projections for when waste is likely to reach the Columbia River. What's that going to do to the local economy?
You have a talent for understatement. A lot of the waste was essentially throw in the ground and covered over, including a safe containing what turns out to be the oldest extant sample of weapons-grade plutonium:
http://www.newscientist.com/ar...
Which nasty exclusionary tactics? Your coworkers and friends ostracising you because you're joining an organisation that exists to undermine their life's work? That's what happens when you get in bed with a widely-despised organisation.
A paper not being published because it's bad? That's science, baby.
If you say you're going to give someone a one-way ticket to a place they don't want to go to, it's safe to assume you're asking for them to be exiled.
...but enough about the conservative press.
Your example of the problems of climate science is climate scientists correcting Al Gore? Isn't that exactly what you want climate scientists to do in a healthy environment where the science decides the issues?