So, I won't say "You're wrong", but I will say I had a different response on your angles.
I think the pacing was excellent, slow enough lt dragged you along in tension, but fast enough I never even noticed the time pass. The product placement was entirely in line with the canon and the corporate dystopia: Why go invent _all_ new ones? I found leto compelling and creepy.
As for replicants reproducing: didn't you catch that the god-complex evil genius specifically _wanted_ reproduction? That's why it wasn't engineered out, because Mr. messiah-complex didn't want it so. And if you think GodCorp can't commit a murder in LAPD headquarters and get away with it, you need to go check your dystopias.;)
The flying car dogfight was not a dogfight. He was not "fleeing pursuit", that was a luxury limousine and cars with bodyguards, completely confident in their untouchability. Hubris. They absolutely could have run it as a military convoy with high cover if they'd felt like it. But they saw no reason.
I don't know what you mean by focus.:)
Again, this is not to say you're wrong, but the interpretations which so gall you are... not necessary. Others come away with very different perspective.
There's the signature nightmare and PTSD trigger for the next war.
At a few hundred dollars a pop, with a stationkeeping aerostat above them to charge them up, you could have hundreds of screaming mosquitoes blanketing the front line -all- -the- -time-. Relentless.
You don't do it "on the highway"; you do it on some moral equivalent of a rest stop, parking lot, whatever that is conveniently situated... Convenient for the AI to get to, that is.
To your 1): Autonomous vehicles are probably adequate for 90% of situations right now in 2016. 90% is -way- low for broad deployment, but far better than you suggest. You should take a look at the current videos of the Tesla self-driving demo runs. Maneuvers around pedestrians are not fluid an humanlike, which is a problem. But they are pretty safe. I stand by my WAG of 5 years for broad adoption; half a sigfig is fine for squabbling on the internet.
To your 2): You're just whistling in the dark. 3.5 million truck drivers is a steady state, already taking into account additions and departures. We agree that "the transition will be completed"; but I claim it will complete with the result of probably 2.5 million fewer low-skill well-paying stable jobs than before.
The question is not "Will this transition occur", but rather "What is the human impact of the transition, and how can we account for it?".
-ALL- of our jobs are on this block. If you think you're immune because you're a knowledge worker, you've got your head in the sand.
You're right in an economic theory sense. Ask, though: As these changes happen incrementally, to whom does the profit accrue?
Hint: It's not to the truck driver who used to haul the goods.
This is the problem of automation. As we get superbly efficient, it becomes possible to feed the whole world, and administer that process, with a tiny fraction of the population. So: How do we administer giving food to all the people whose labor is not necessary? We've been finding makework for them, for the last half century. Second assistant managers of HR, associate vice president for diversity issues.
We need to find a theory, under which it is not demeaning that people get fed, even though their skills have no net value to society.
This is a bloody hard thing for a libertarian to confront (waves hands)
If you want to try out your analysis of silly, start by trying to answer "What employment sector can absorb the 3.5 million truck drivers who will be replaced with automated vehicles?". Apply your own biases for how quickly this will have to happen; I'm wild guessing ~5-7 years, starting ~5 years from now.
Then add a million bus and taxi drivers, and then add the job count you ascribe to the edges of trucking (convenience stores and such that cater to them)... These are essentially unskilled jobs. All you need is a certain threshold of reliability and discipline; for that, you get a good, heretofore stable, career.
The Neumann thruster is all about saving launch capacity. Most of the ion thrusters we have now work with e.g. Xenon gas; you have to loft their fuel, and your engine mass budget has to include the material handling for the propellant; tanks, valves, etc.
The idea of the neumann thruster is that your reaction mass comes from a simple sold puck which is gradually ionized; so you immediately win on a bunch of hardware you don't have to lift.
And then, you can use as reaction mass the sorts of stuff which is already up there in orbit. Got some excess second stage, which you've lofted to orbit at ruinous cost? Instead of dropping it back into the atmosphere to burn up, melt it into a puck at the focus of some mirrors, and then use it as reaction mass for a few years.
Space junk turned into valuable fuel. Big win..... IF it works.
My suggestion was two kegs, two pigs, and have a block party. That'd get big and cheap. Let the relatives know in advance, and they can bring sides and dessert.:)
Hadas most trenchant point is that governments will oppose Bitcoin if it becomes successful. He's correct, and his analysis is isomorphic with "The neighborhood thugs will rough you up if you conduct business without paying them protection".
This is an important concern; but not a reason to stop.
2) Harbor freight (1.5K mill linked to below) doesn't sell tools, they sell tool _kits_. If you're not prepared to disassemble, align, and otherwise fix all the stuff they busted, you're screwed. I'm a half-owner of one, I know.
3) Tool pathing is still expensive / highly skilled. At your price point, you can't just turn a 3D model into a path that a mill can make.
4) Design constraints are different for the two. You can't mill internal voids.
None of which is to say I think the current batch of filament deposition printers are adequate... I've got one of them too, at our Hackerspace in Gainesville. Once they get the plastic printers sufficiently precise that they can turn out e.g. kitchen appliance replacement parts, we'll have gotten somewhere serious.
But your combo requires a bunch of skill to operate, and skill-less object production is kind of the point.
Makerbot's got way worse resolution, and is a bloody bear to calibrate.
The newer version appears to be better than the one we bought and built, but so far all the depositional printers I've messed with seem good for building other printer parts and little toys.
This laser-based one has far better precision and resolution.
The author of the original article is presumedly no dummy, and I agree with his analysis as far as it goes. But he makes no attempt to discuss travel powered by something other than chemical rockets you bring along.
VASIMIR is one alternative, which will indeed gain efficiencies from Moore's law (extremely rapid adjustments to optmiize magnetic field?).
The juice to run that can come from nukes or solar...
Chemical fuels are a barrier to chemical propulsion, that's all.
Unless the wikipedians explicitly reject this principle, and somehow translate "real world" credentials into sway in the wiki, I don't see why any academic would bother.
They were saying, in July 2009, http://gigaom.com/cleantech/the-solar-biofuel-hybrid-joule-biotechnologies-launches/ that they were going to build a pilot plant in 2010, and have the initial commercial-scale plant up in 2012.
All through 2010, their press releases talk about awards and management, funding and P.R. I would have expected "Pilot plant ground broken", "Pilot plant going online", "Pilot plant now giving free diesel to all plant employees, outside customers can pay $1.00 per gallon at plant filling station...".
Since they demonstrate the tactical capacity to put a bunch of people in a place, at a time, without law enforcement getting a sniff of it beforehand.
Don't think of it as terrorism per se: think of it as a people-organizing toolset, and it ought to terrify any police state who's paying attention. To the extent the US behaves like a police state, this is a threat.
Take a look at Improv Everywhere's Cell Phone Symphony. Heck, much of what IE does is militarily relevant. It says, "We're a bunch of peaceful clowns. But if we'd wanted to get you, you'd have been got". It says "Your security theater is irrelevant".
Slashdot Mirror
So, I won't say "You're wrong", but I will say I had a different response on your angles.
I think the pacing was excellent, slow enough lt dragged you along in tension, but fast enough I never even noticed the time pass. The product placement was entirely in line with the canon and the corporate dystopia: Why go invent _all_ new ones? I found leto compelling and creepy.
As for replicants reproducing: didn't you catch that the god-complex evil genius specifically _wanted_ reproduction? That's why it wasn't engineered out, because Mr. messiah-complex didn't want it so. And if you think GodCorp can't commit a murder in LAPD headquarters and get away with it, you need to go check your dystopias. ;)
The flying car dogfight was not a dogfight. He was not "fleeing pursuit", that was a luxury limousine and cars with bodyguards, completely confident in their untouchability. Hubris. They absolutely could have run it as a military convoy with high cover if they'd felt like it. But they saw no reason.
I don't know what you mean by focus. :)
Again, this is not to say you're wrong, but the interpretations which so gall you are ... not necessary. Others come away with very different perspective.
What are we supposed to be unhappy about? That it wasn't another baygasm?
I've never been so spellbound by a 2+ hour movie ..
There's the signature nightmare and PTSD trigger for the next war.
At a few hundred dollars a pop, with a stationkeeping aerostat above them to charge them up, you could have hundreds of screaming mosquitoes blanketing the front line -all- -the- -time-. Relentless.
Syntactic whitespace makes me twitch, too; but it neatly resolves many of the codestyle hubbub issues you see in other language environments.
If your editor helps you do the right thing, it's just an aesthetic whine, and shouldn't be worth arguing about.
You don't do it "on the highway"; you do it on some moral equivalent of a rest stop, parking lot, whatever that is conveniently situated... Convenient for the AI to get to, that is.
You're dodging.
To your 1): Autonomous vehicles are probably adequate for 90% of situations right now in 2016. 90% is -way- low for broad deployment, but far better than you suggest. You should take a look at the current videos of the Tesla self-driving demo runs. Maneuvers around pedestrians are not fluid an humanlike, which is a problem. But they are pretty safe. I stand by my WAG of 5 years for broad adoption; half a sigfig is fine for squabbling on the internet.
To your 2): You're just whistling in the dark. 3.5 million truck drivers is a steady state, already taking into account additions and departures. We agree that "the transition will be completed"; but I claim it will complete with the result of probably 2.5 million fewer low-skill well-paying stable jobs than before.
The question is not "Will this transition occur", but rather "What is the human impact of the transition, and how can we account for it?".
-ALL- of our jobs are on this block. If you think you're immune because you're a knowledge worker, you've got your head in the sand.
You're right in an economic theory sense. Ask, though: As these changes happen incrementally, to whom does the profit accrue?
Hint: It's not to the truck driver who used to haul the goods.
This is the problem of automation. As we get superbly efficient, it becomes possible to feed the whole world, and administer that process, with a tiny fraction of the population. So: How do we administer giving food to all the people whose labor is not necessary? We've been finding makework for them, for the last half century. Second assistant managers of HR, associate vice president for diversity issues.
We need to find a theory, under which it is not demeaning that people get fed, even though their skills have no net value to society.
This is a bloody hard thing for a libertarian to confront (waves hands)
If you want to try out your analysis of silly, start by trying to answer "What employment sector can absorb the 3.5 million truck drivers who will be replaced with automated vehicles?". Apply your own biases for how quickly this will have to happen; I'm wild guessing ~5-7 years, starting ~5 years from now.
Then add a million bus and taxi drivers, and then add the job count you ascribe to the edges of trucking (convenience stores and such that cater to them) ... These are essentially unskilled jobs. All you need is a certain threshold of reliability and discipline; for that, you get a good, heretofore stable, career.
The Neumann thruster is all about saving launch capacity. Most of the ion thrusters we have now work with e.g. Xenon gas; you have to loft their fuel, and your engine mass budget has to include the material handling for the propellant; tanks, valves, etc.
The idea of the neumann thruster is that your reaction mass comes from a simple sold puck which is gradually ionized; so you immediately win on a bunch of hardware you don't have to lift.
And then, you can use as reaction mass the sorts of stuff which is already up there in orbit. Got some excess second stage, which you've lofted to orbit at ruinous cost? Instead of dropping it back into the atmosphere to burn up, melt it into a puck at the focus of some mirrors, and then use it as reaction mass for a few years.
Space junk turned into valuable fuel. Big win. .... IF it works.
Cheaper, more energy efficient, and before long superior in taste and tone. Slam dunk.
I can just imagine cutting a slice off a 1'x2' meat beam; cover THE ENTIRE GRILL with a fillet. Yums, yums.
My suggestion was two kegs, two pigs, and have a block party. That'd get big and cheap. Let the relatives know in advance, and they can bring sides and dessert. :)
why would they then turn around and be hypocrites by ruining the very reason they're moving intro infrastucture to begin with?
Run like a reformer. Rule like an incumbent.
Not saying that's what they've got in mind, but that's why you'd betray the principles you espoused while trying to gain power.
Most of the folks in IT are Operators of Interfaces.
This thread is useless without pics.
Hadas most trenchant point is that governments will oppose Bitcoin if it becomes successful. He's correct, and his analysis is isomorphic with "The neighborhood thugs will rough you up if you conduct business without paying them protection".
This is an important concern; but not a reason to stop.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you. Then they fight you, then you win.
SIR! TURN YOUR KEY!
1) You can't get something CNC for that.
2) Harbor freight (1.5K mill linked to below) doesn't sell tools, they sell tool _kits_. If you're not prepared to disassemble, align, and otherwise fix all the stuff they busted, you're screwed. I'm a half-owner of one, I know.
3) Tool pathing is still expensive / highly skilled. At your price point, you can't just turn a 3D model into a path that a mill can make.
4) Design constraints are different for the two. You can't mill internal voids.
None of which is to say I think the current batch of filament deposition printers are adequate... I've got one of them too, at our Hackerspace in Gainesville. Once they get the plastic printers sufficiently precise that they can turn out e.g. kitchen appliance replacement parts, we'll have gotten somewhere serious.
But your combo requires a bunch of skill to operate, and skill-less object production is kind of the point.
Makerbot's got way worse resolution, and is a bloody bear to calibrate.
The newer version appears to be better than the one we bought and built, but so far all the depositional printers I've messed with seem good for building other printer parts and little toys.
This laser-based one has far better precision and resolution.
The author of the original article is presumedly no dummy, and I agree with his analysis as far as it goes. But he makes no attempt to discuss travel powered by something other than chemical rockets you bring along.
VASIMIR is one alternative, which will indeed gain efficiencies from Moore's law (extremely rapid adjustments to optmiize magnetic field?).
The juice to run that can come from nukes or solar...
Chemical fuels are a barrier to chemical propulsion, that's all.
A founding principle of Wikipedia is the specific rejection of established credentialing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Anti-elitism
Unless the wikipedians explicitly reject this principle, and somehow translate "real world" credentials into sway in the wiki, I don't see why any academic would bother.
I've been wondering, as we watch this problem evolve, why they didn't insert robotic remote hands ASAP. This is Japan, after all. What am I missing?
They were saying, in July 2009, http://gigaom.com/cleantech/the-solar-biofuel-hybrid-joule-biotechnologies-launches/ that they were going to build a pilot plant in 2010, and have the initial commercial-scale plant up in 2012.
All through 2010, their press releases talk about awards and management, funding and P.R. I would have expected "Pilot plant ground broken", "Pilot plant going online", "Pilot plant now giving free diesel to all plant employees, outside customers can pay $1.00 per gallon at plant filling station...".
What a work bennie that would be!
BIKE SHED.
http://bikeshed.com/
That's what you're remembering.
Since they demonstrate the tactical capacity to put a bunch of people in a place, at a time, without law enforcement getting a sniff of it beforehand.
Don't think of it as terrorism per se: think of it as a people-organizing toolset, and it ought to terrify any police state who's paying attention. To the extent the US behaves like a police state, this is a threat.
Take a look at Improv Everywhere's Cell Phone Symphony. Heck, much of what IE does is militarily relevant. It says, "We're a bunch of peaceful clowns. But if we'd wanted to get you, you'd have been got". It says "Your security theater is irrelevant".