Finland's population density is less than that of the United States.
Why can't each of the several states, which is about the size of one European country, manage to deploy of high-speed Internet within that state?
They could easily if they just realized what is a free market and what is not. Infrastructure is almost always a shit choice to let a private operator both build and operate. Since it cannot be moved, and it is too expensive to build multiple copies of that infrastructure, you get maybe one or two providers per area. That's a monopoly.
Do like we do in Sweden instead. Let the government pay for the infrastructure, through a non-profit company that lays down optic fibers to all homes. Then let private ISP's hire capacity directly from that and compete. If you live close to Stockholm you have more providers you can count to choose from.
I've had 100 mbit for more than 10 years now, upgraded to 250mbit last year. It costs me 15$ / month and there is no cap what so ever. If you live closer to the city, in a apartment its often given to you for free. Clleagues at work who get 1 Gbit for free provided they sign up with a certain provider. If they don't like that, they can just switch to another.
From an outside perspective it does sound like the problem lies on your end. You don't find that reality matches your beliefs, so you just ignore reality.
The only reason that VR isn't already a huge mainstream success is price.
^--- Exactly this.
We have 3 HTC-Vive at work, with which we develop a high end demo/game with. Everyone I've shown it too are basically blown away by it. It's so powerful.You _are_ someplace else. And it can be super fun or scary depending on...
But since its crazy expensive, very few people will buy it at the moment. Also its a bit too clunky with the cords hanging and such.
Yes, there is a bit truth in that. He can do what he wants with his own money, but he is a very public figure and through that he represents the company. If he had only endorsed Trump by giving campaign money not many would have cared much at all. But this? This pisses people off. Many people gave money to his kick-starter from where his wealth originally came.
Those devs do not want to be associated with shit-posting hate speech or Trump for that matter. Seems fair to me the market will have a field day with Palmer Luckey.
Of world population (market), how many % endorses Trump? Less than 1% I'd say. He is viewed as a scary incoherent constantly lying madman with completely crazy ideas in all places I can think of... except USA.
Oh realy? So what were you doing? Because from where I live, there was a constant shit flood reporting on his corrupted actions and affairs in the news.
The reason that you spent that much money building the cargo has comparatively little to do with the cost of the launch and everything to do with the fact that you really don't get multiple chances to get it right plus the fact that the destination has pretty much the harshest environmental conditions imaginable. Satellites and probes are expensive because they are (usually) one off bespoke products designed from scratch. If Ford could only sell a single Ford Taurus but it needed to be build to the same standards as the production model you can buy from a dealer you better believe it would cost many millions of dollars.
If you build cheap and many because launch costs are low, then you do get multiple chances. If you build one large then it will damn well have to work perfectly for a very long time. Downside of one large satellite working for a long time is that you are stuck with with outdated hardware. You are basically describing old space.
They would have to go down a LOT further for that to be the case. I'm talking almost unrealistically cheaper. Science fiction levels of cheaper. Nothing that is likely to happen in my lifetime cheaper. It isn't the hardware that is the primary cost center in many cases. It's the design and engineering and assembly and test requirements. Those are harder to minimize without having economies of scale. Don't get me wrong, I think it will happen eventually but it's going to take quite a while. Launching stuff into space is so expensive that the pace of progress is necessarily slow. It's going to take decades if not centuries to get a set of standardized products we can launch into space with very low cost.
You are wrong. There are companies building satellites from standard cheap components already today. They send up many smaller ones, instead of one large expensive.
This is one of my favorite podcasts (as an engineer). It is super in-depth in every topic they present, this one is about planet labs, which does exactly this: http://omegataupodcast.net/204...
On the other hand, IF you spent $100 million building the cargo, you might prefer to spend more on the Soyuz due to its proven track record.
Then again, part of the reason that you spent 100m$ on building the cargo, is that the launch was been so darn expensive.
You could propably build a supercheap satelite with the exact same functionallity for a fraction of the cost using standard parts. Then again since the launch costs you 60m$-400m$ depending on vehicle and destination, you really wanna make sure the satellite functions perfectly when arriving.
Just saying that if the launch prices go down far enough we will see a whole another market of cheap hardware, where the reason for building really expensive
satelites or other cargo partly vanishes.
Where I come from ID is mandatory... you cannot exist here w/o it. (Sweden) You get a personal identity number when you are born. Which makes voting simple.
Voting also always takes place on Sundays, when working people are free, and we don't have electronic voting systems because that would be really bad...
1) You should have an ID, and it should be super easy to get it.
2) You should have to prove your identity when voting
3) You should not have to take a day of in order to vote.
4) Electronic voting should never be allowed, since it can always be hacked. Voting over internet is even worse, since then people can buy votes, or coerce others to vote against their will.
From an outside perspective the voting system in the US is insane.
Skill based selection procedures. Not 'who', mr annonomous covard. Can't have direct voting for complex questions, since populistic clowns will the run the show, making the vote into and about something totally different.
In Sweden its called a lumber yard sign, (brädgård). Since on Swedish maps, the symbol marks out lumber yards:) So that's what usually call it;)
Apparently the symbol itself can be traced back to ancient rome, where they used to write lb, short for "Libra Pondo" meaning pound in weight. When handwritten fast in cursive, it morphed the l and b together into the #-sign.
If you want to know more about the GMO, and why information about it is so very skewed, I can highly recommend listening to:
"The Skeptics Guide to the Universe Podcast. They research and talk at length about GMO related topics all the time. They made me go from anti-GMO to the other other camp. Sav the movie Food Inc.before which had me rallied up real good, but now I know it is largely made up bullshit, at least the GMO parts in it.
Most podcasts i listen to are about science or philosophy where i find i cannot/ dont want to speed up at all, since the material is so dense that i need to contemplate while listening. I rewind a few seconds very often. If i listen too quickly i zone out, or find afterwords that i cannot recapilate to myself what was just presented to me. A great way to make sure you understood it is to summerize it in text after lidtening. If you cannot, the what was the point in listening in the first place?
I can listen to Audiobooks at a quicker pace, depending on the reader and how complicated the plot is, usually i do that if the presenter talks glacially slow.
98% of Sweden's energy comes from carbon free or carbon neutral sources. (Hydro, Nuclear, and BIO)
Only 2% of electricity is generated using fossil fuels, and almost all oil plants have been either shut down or relegated to reserve use.
The railway system is already electrified.
So the only thing using carbon sources nowadays is the transport sector on roads. (cars and trucks). Which is why we are electrifying them as well:)
Since your country seems adamant to continue provide ease of access to all sorts of guns and assault rifles, see only one solution:
Lets ramp up production of Ed-209!
Why are we doing things like this? They're a waste of time and money, which could be spent on things like curing HIV and cancer, ending world hunger, or finding a solution to global warming. Spaceflight solves none of these problems and is a complete waste of money. It's also a waste of talent because these scientists could be putting their effort into solving so many more important problems. Why go to space when we need to solve our problems here on Earth? I'll be censored to -1 because this is unpopular with Slashdot users, most of whom don't care about solving the real problems in the world.
It is not a waste of time and money! Spaceflight is a frontier in science and engineering, which is cross pollinated with all other fields of science. From agriculture, environment, communications, astronomy, medicine, meteorology. and so on. Which in turn is about having easy, cheap access to information and education for all humans. Including poor people in remote areas. And tracking and understanding global warming.
And that is only the start. One of Space X's goals is to make access to space real cheap, so that sending up something won't cost 450 million dollars. People seems to have a hard time imagine the opportunities that will arise when launching a rocket will cost 1/100th of the current price. A whole new industry will form. Very small companies, cities, universities will be able to build and operate satellites, even maybe travel up and conduct research in a not too far future.
Solving problems in space means solving problems on earth.The earth is in space after all. If we ignore that we will miss out on endless possibilities and maybe miss serious threats to all of mankind. Including the cures to the problems you mention. If people reasoned like you all the time we would still be stuck in some middle ages like society.
Reality is never simple, and you never know where you will find the next great invention that helps mankind to prosper.
I thought tve whole point of hyperloop systems were that they did not use maglev, but floating on a cusion of air insude a tunnel instead. To radically reduce cost.
Yeah I live, in Stockholm, Sweden. Its the most connected city in the world. It has over 1.25 million km fiber. Fiber is at 90% coverage in the suburbs, basically 100% in the city.
All fiber is owned by the city. They in turn pays many smaller companies to lay down the fibers in the streets. Any operator can then hire access to the net. This means we have over 100 ISP & TV providers that to chose from. And they battle over the customers. So the solution is to let the free market operate in the fiber-net, not let private companies own different parts of a net, because it will not become a free market. Since then as a customer you could not chose provider, you have to pick the one that happens to own the fiber where you live. Hence not free.
I pay 25$/month for 250/250 Mbit, and I live pretty far out in a villa.
The entire city also has 4g coverage for which I pay 20$ for around 25GB/month.
That research was paid by the US government during the Apollo program among other, and earlier by various countries military expenditures.
There's no silver bullet. So tired of people who believes there is one solution that fits all problems. The world is complex and grey scaled. Capitalism is a bottom up self organizing system, which is super good at optimizing (mostly short term) profit. It will also pretty quickly sub-optimize itself without rules of law, and various institutions run by a government. Sometimes problems are so complex and non-profitable in the short term that capitalism can never build it. Like basic science research. Take the Large Hadron Collider for example.
You need both bottom up and top down organization in different amounts to be a peak efficiency depending on what goals need to be accomplished.
Slashdot Mirror
Finland's population density is less than that of the United States.
Why can't each of the several states, which is about the size of one European country, manage to deploy of high-speed Internet within that state?
They could easily if they just realized what is a free market and what is not. Infrastructure is almost always a shit choice to let a private operator both build and operate. Since it cannot be moved, and it is too expensive to build multiple copies of that infrastructure, you get maybe one or two providers per area. That's a monopoly.
Do like we do in Sweden instead. Let the government pay for the infrastructure, through a non-profit company that lays down optic fibers to all homes. Then let private ISP's hire capacity directly from that and compete. If you live close to Stockholm you have more providers you can count to choose from.
I've had 100 mbit for more than 10 years now, upgraded to 250mbit last year. It costs me 15$ / month and there is no cap what so ever. If you live closer to the city, in a apartment its often given to you for free. Clleagues at work who get 1 Gbit for free provided they sign up with a certain provider. If they don't like that, they can just switch to another.
Yes he sues everyone out of love and understanding!
Also the ladder buissiness will be awesome!
Bismarck thought the same thing...
From an outside perspective it does sound like the problem lies on your end. You don't find that reality matches your beliefs, so you just ignore reality.
The only reason that VR isn't already a huge mainstream success is price.
^--- Exactly this.
We have 3 HTC-Vive at work, with which we develop a high end demo/game with. Everyone I've shown it too are basically blown away by it. It's so powerful.You _are_ someplace else. And it can be super fun or scary depending on...
But since its crazy expensive, very few people will buy it at the moment. Also its a bit too clunky with the cords hanging and such.
Yes, there is a bit truth in that.
He can do what he wants with his own money, but he is a very public figure and through that he represents the company. If he had only endorsed Trump by giving campaign money not many would have cared much at all.
But this? This pisses people off. Many people gave money to his kick-starter from where his wealth originally came.
No need, just quote him on any topic. He is after all completely hilarious, in a scary way.
Those devs do not want to be associated with shit-posting hate speech or Trump for that matter.
Seems fair to me the market will have a field day with Palmer Luckey.
Of world population (market), how many % endorses Trump? Less than 1% I'd say. He is viewed as a scary incoherent constantly lying madman with completely crazy ideas in all places I can think of... except USA.
Oh realy? So what were you doing? Because from where I live, there was a constant shit flood reporting on his corrupted actions and affairs in the news.
The reason that you spent that much money building the cargo has comparatively little to do with the cost of the launch and everything to do with the fact that you really don't get multiple chances to get it right plus the fact that the destination has pretty much the harshest environmental conditions imaginable. Satellites and probes are expensive because they are (usually) one off bespoke products designed from scratch. If Ford could only sell a single Ford Taurus but it needed to be build to the same standards as the production model you can buy from a dealer you better believe it would cost many millions of dollars.
If you build cheap and many because launch costs are low, then you do get multiple chances. If you build one large then it will damn well have to work perfectly for a very long time. Downside of one large satellite working for a long time is that you are stuck with with outdated hardware.
You are basically describing old space.
They would have to go down a LOT further for that to be the case. I'm talking almost unrealistically cheaper. Science fiction levels of cheaper. Nothing that is likely to happen in my lifetime cheaper. It isn't the hardware that is the primary cost center in many cases. It's the design and engineering and assembly and test requirements. Those are harder to minimize without having economies of scale. Don't get me wrong, I think it will happen eventually but it's going to take quite a while. Launching stuff into space is so expensive that the pace of progress is necessarily slow. It's going to take decades if not centuries to get a set of standardized products we can launch into space with very low cost.
You are wrong. There are companies building satellites from standard cheap components already today. They send up many smaller ones, instead of one large expensive.
This is one of my favorite podcasts (as an engineer). It is super in-depth in every topic they present, this one is about planet labs, which does exactly this:
http://omegataupodcast.net/204...
On the other hand, IF you spent $100 million building the cargo, you might prefer to spend more on the Soyuz due to its proven track record.
Then again, part of the reason that you spent 100m$ on building the cargo, is that the launch was been so darn expensive.
You could propably build a supercheap satelite with the exact same functionallity for a fraction of the cost using standard parts. Then again since the launch costs you 60m$-400m$ depending on vehicle and destination, you really wanna make sure the satellite functions perfectly when arriving.
Just saying that if the launch prices go down far enough we will see a whole another market of cheap hardware, where the reason for building really expensive satelites or other cargo partly vanishes.
Where I come from ID is mandatory... you cannot exist here w/o it. (Sweden) You get a personal identity number when you are born. Which makes voting simple. Voting also always takes place on Sundays, when working people are free, and we don't have electronic voting systems because that would be really bad...
1) You should have an ID, and it should be super easy to get it.
2) You should have to prove your identity when voting
3) You should not have to take a day of in order to vote.
4) Electronic voting should never be allowed, since it can always be hacked. Voting over internet is even worse, since then people can buy votes, or coerce others to vote against their will.
From an outside perspective the voting system in the US is insane.
Skill based selection procedures. Not 'who', mr annonomous covard. Can't have direct voting for complex questions, since populistic clowns will the run the show, making the vote into and about something totally different.
In Sweden its called a lumber yard sign, (brädgård). Since on Swedish maps, the symbol marks out lumber yards :) So that's what usually call it ;)
Apparently the symbol itself can be traced back to ancient rome, where they used to write lb, short for "Libra Pondo" meaning pound in weight. When handwritten fast in cursive, it morphed the l and b together into the #-sign.
Anti GMO is basically conspiracy theories. GMO leads to a lot less use of pesticides, and much higher yields:
http://www.theskepticsguide.or...
And roundup is not carcinogenic, Its the most used herbicide in the world for a reason:
https://www.reddit.com/r/SGU/c...
If you want to know more about the GMO, and why information about it is so very skewed, I can highly recommend listening to:
"The Skeptics Guide to the Universe Podcast. They research and talk at length about GMO related topics all the time. They made me go from anti-GMO to the other other camp. Sav the movie Food Inc.before which had me rallied up real good, but now I know it is largely made up bullshit, at least the GMO parts in it.
Most podcasts i listen to are about science or philosophy where i find i cannot/ dont want to speed up at all, since the material is so dense that i need to contemplate while listening. I rewind a few seconds very often. If i listen too quickly i zone out, or find afterwords that i cannot recapilate to myself what was just presented to me. A great way to make sure you understood it is to summerize it in text after lidtening. If you cannot, the what was the point in listening in the first place? I can listen to Audiobooks at a quicker pace, depending on the reader and how complicated the plot is, usually i do that if the presenter talks glacially slow.
98% of Sweden's energy comes from carbon free or carbon neutral sources. (Hydro, Nuclear, and BIO) Only 2% of electricity is generated using fossil fuels, and almost all oil plants have been either shut down or relegated to reserve use.
:)
http://www.worldenergy.org/dat...
The railway system is already electrified.
So the only thing using carbon sources nowadays is the transport sector on roads. (cars and trucks). Which is why we are electrifying them as well
Since your country seems adamant to continue provide ease of access to all sorts of guns and assault rifles, see only one solution: Lets ramp up production of Ed-209!
Why are we doing things like this? They're a waste of time and money, which could be spent on things like curing HIV and cancer, ending world hunger, or finding a solution to global warming. Spaceflight solves none of these problems and is a complete waste of money. It's also a waste of talent because these scientists could be putting their effort into solving so many more important problems. Why go to space when we need to solve our problems here on Earth? I'll be censored to -1 because this is unpopular with Slashdot users, most of whom don't care about solving the real problems in the world.
It is not a waste of time and money! Spaceflight is a frontier in science and engineering, which is cross pollinated with all other fields of science. From agriculture, environment, communications, astronomy, medicine, meteorology. and so on. Which in turn is about having easy, cheap access to information and education for all humans. Including poor people in remote areas. And tracking and understanding global warming.
And that is only the start. One of Space X's goals is to make access to space real cheap, so that sending up something won't cost 450 million dollars. People seems to have a hard time imagine the opportunities that will arise when launching a rocket will cost 1/100th of the current price. A whole new industry will form. Very small companies, cities, universities will be able to build and operate satellites, even maybe travel up and conduct research in a not too far future.
Solving problems in space means solving problems on earth.The earth is in space after all. If we ignore that we will miss out on endless possibilities and maybe miss serious threats to all of mankind. Including the cures to the problems you mention. If people reasoned like you all the time we would still be stuck in some middle ages like society.
Reality is never simple, and you never know where you will find the next great invention that helps mankind to prosper.
Its still cheap compared to building hundreds of miles of superconducting magnets.
I thought tve whole point of hyperloop systems were that they did not use maglev, but floating on a cusion of air insude a tunnel instead. To radically reduce cost.
Yeah I live, in Stockholm, Sweden. Its the most connected city in the world. It has over 1.25 million km fiber. Fiber is at 90% coverage in the suburbs, basically 100% in the city.
All fiber is owned by the city. They in turn pays many smaller companies to lay down the fibers in the streets. Any operator can then hire access to the net. This means we have over 100 ISP & TV providers that to chose from. And they battle over the customers. So the solution is to let the free market operate in the fiber-net, not let private companies own different parts of a net, because it will not become a free market. Since then as a customer you could not chose provider, you have to pick the one that happens to own the fiber where you live. Hence not free.
I pay 25$/month for 250/250 Mbit, and I live pretty far out in a villa.
The entire city also has 4g coverage for which I pay 20$ for around 25GB/month.
...and have them stay in the lobby during the movie? It will be great!
That research was paid by the US government during the Apollo program among other, and earlier by various countries military expenditures.
There's no silver bullet. So tired of people who believes there is one solution that fits all problems. The world is complex and grey scaled. Capitalism is a bottom up self organizing system, which is super good at optimizing (mostly short term) profit. It will also pretty quickly sub-optimize itself without rules of law, and various institutions run by a government. Sometimes problems are so complex and non-profitable in the short term that capitalism can never build it. Like basic science research. Take the Large Hadron Collider for example.
You need both bottom up and top down organization in different amounts to be a peak efficiency depending on what goals need to be accomplished.