"I have this idea about a machine that would transport matter instantly from one place to another, but I don't know much about physics, can someone flesh it out for me"
No shit, Sherlock. Of course they are trying to find out everything possible about every potential consumer. They have always done that, from the invention of commerce in maybe 8000 BC. It's just that a lot more information that is easily available (for a pittance) than ever before.
It is worth pointing out that everyone was perfectly happy with Facebook's extensive data mining business - until it was used to (marginally) aid a politician they didn't like. Then, and only then, did it become a big problem.
That's the real issue. They and everybody else, with a few exceptions, were and probably are fine with the idea of instrusive and inescapable tracking and the exploitation of other people's information for (astonishing) profit. That's the problem with having no sense of values or principles - everything is a conditional cost/benefit instead of a core concept.
Moreover, this "debate" is like most others - the so-called champions of science have long since abandoned any attempt to convince people about their theories or prove them - and instead simply want to decide amongst themselves and then coerce everyone else by force of law to go along. That's the left's way - have elite chosen few (in this case, with *no claim to credentials whatsoever* like a morbidly obese failed politician) simply decide what to do, everyone else be damned, freedom or independence be damned, everyone is stupid but me so I will just do what I feel like doing. Unchecked, it *always*, repeat, *always* results in totalitarian government. It must.
Considering that the design was at least an order of magnitude ore complex, more than twice as capable, and it was done at a time 60 years ago when no one had any idea if it would work or not, it's an impressive achievement.
My point was a little different, anyway, but part of it was "ha-ha look at the stupid americans/NASA!" and the old bullcrap about Soyuz and how Russian steam-locomotive engineering is superior. When in fact we have made VASTLY more complex and capable systems, right from the beginning, and the Shuttle in particular is pointed to as a failure. By the standards posited, the Shuttle is quite superior to anything the Russians have ever. or ever likely will do.
If Musk and company had managed to screw up, with the benefit of the absolutely *vast* amount of nearly-free-for-anyone information from NASA and others, it would have been embarrassing. They are solving a much simpler problem, and only their own arrogance has made it even slightly challenging.
The much-maligned Space Shuttle had a 98.5% record of success, and exactly the same number of fatal accidents as Soyuz. The Saturn 1B has a 100% record of success and no fatalities. So far, the Falcon is pretty good and in line with a lot of other launch vehicle records.
We have "Trump is a Russian Agent" stories 24/7, and people screeching about "millions of people will die" from the sea level going up by an inch over a hundred years. Those are precisely as plausible and responsible as David Ickes lizard people, yet we are intentionally indoctrinating kids about it on a daily basis as a matter of policy
It is obvious how to proceed, get an actual law passed by Congress. Stop screwing around with unelected bodies. Yes, the same entities will lobby congress heavily, but right now the matter will always be subject to the whims of the FCC.
Scratch any socialist, and you will find a totalitarian. It can't work any other wa. You more-or-less have to compel people to work against their own interests by coercion or force.
This reads like a shocking expose'. But if you have trouble with signalling systems, it makes absolutely perfect sense to slow the trains down until the problem is corrected.
OK, yes, they could be fixing it faster, but this seems like a perfectly responsible choice.
Living so many years with the fear of humanity being wiped out entirely and in so many different ways. No generation before us lived with that fear...
Holy crap, you *don't actually believe that* do you? EVERY generation has had the same fear, some far more realistic than now. Basically, you are living in the lap of opulent, bordering on vulgar, luxury and wealth, with minimal actual threat of ANY harm coming to you, or your children. This is reflected by the fact that most of the current supposed threats are strawmen.
For all intents and purpose, the human race is far and away better off, more safe, and more secure than at any time since h. sapiens evolved.
You appear to be caught up in the histrionics of the current social environment. Learn some history, for Christ's sake!
Very clever. The EPA has had little to do with science in a long time. Otherwise, why would a farm drainage ditch be treated like a "navigable waterway"?
This is in no way related to science, either the panel, or the Trump administration. It's about regulatory politics.
I expected no one here to grasp the concept of liberty, and mod the post into oblivion, but most of you also think there are Russians behind every tree, too - the Full McCarthy.
Science now holds no place at the table with this latest administration. Liberal or conservative, this should not be accepted in ANY form of governance.
Indeed - it shouldn't even be called an actual government anymore. What we have is a largely sleeping body where representation of the United States, it's scientific community, and its ideas should be.
Bullshit. The entire concept of the United States is to promote *individual action* and when necessary *local control* over government. The intent is to *prevent* an all-powerful central government. "Sleeping" is one description, it should be, essentially, *non-existent" aside from the described duties.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it say anything about unelected groups of masterminds, essentially immune to public opinion and unaccountable to the voters, churning out regulation after regulation with only one agenda, chosen by political elites (in this case, a hyper-leftist/Marxist former president). That is the EPA right now.
It's not about gasoline. It's about the astronomical costs of building and maintaining it, particularly over a vastly larger area. You spend an inconceivable (it's really $98 billion and it;s still 10+ years away - meaning if it ever gets built at all (which is extremely doubtful) it will really be $250 billion) amount of money to build something that is definitively and will always be a secondary choice to better solutions. Better solutions that already exist and take a fraction of the time and cost to use.
Not that many people are "screaming for gun control". Lot of people who are "able to get on TV with histrionic appeals" are "screaming for gun control" and the politically-driven media lap it up.
You can get all the gun control you want - you just have to alter the constitution. There's perfectly well-described process for that, but you know for certain that it will fail, so you are trying to do it with an administrative end run, like so many other illegal things you want done.
I can take an airplane from San Jose to Burbank for $121 and even with security, it takes about 2 hours I can drive to Shafter (about halfway) in about 2.5 hours and cost about $23. Why do I need a train that takes twice as long and is *certain* to cause $300-400, not to mention bankrupting the state in the process? Who gives a crap what happens in Europe, why does *this* train and the astonishing and ever-growing cost make sense?
Slashdot Mirror
I think its more like:
"I have this idea about a machine that would transport matter instantly from one place to another, but I don't know much about physics, can someone flesh it out for me"
Google and its customers (hint: you are NOT the customer) will still have full access, only users will be inconvenienced.
Exactly on point
Correct, unilateral disarmament is the goal, because, if we stopped being such a threat, everyone would love us.
No shit, Sherlock. Of course they are trying to find out everything possible about every potential consumer. They have always done that, from the invention of commerce in maybe 8000 BC. It's just that a lot more information that is easily available (for a pittance) than ever before.
It is worth pointing out that everyone was perfectly happy with Facebook's extensive data mining business - until it was used to (marginally) aid a politician they didn't like. Then, and only then, did it become a big problem.
That's the real issue. They and everybody else, with a few exceptions, were and probably are fine with the idea of instrusive and inescapable tracking and the exploitation of other people's information for (astonishing) profit. That's the problem with having no sense of values or principles - everything is a conditional cost/benefit instead of a core concept.
Moreover, this "debate" is like most others - the so-called champions of science have long since abandoned any attempt to convince people about their theories or prove them - and instead simply want to decide amongst themselves and then coerce everyone else by force of law to go along. That's the left's way - have elite chosen few (in this case, with *no claim to credentials whatsoever* like a morbidly obese failed politician) simply decide what to do, everyone else be damned, freedom or independence be damned, everyone is stupid but me so I will just do what I feel like doing. Unchecked, it *always*, repeat, *always* results in totalitarian government. It must.
Coming from an AC, that's really pretty amazing.
Considering that the design was at least an order of magnitude ore complex, more than twice as capable, and it was done at a time 60 years ago when no one had any idea if it would work or not, it's an impressive achievement.
My point was a little different, anyway, but part of it was "ha-ha look at the stupid americans/NASA!" and the old bullcrap about Soyuz and how Russian steam-locomotive engineering is superior. When in fact we have made VASTLY more complex and capable systems, right from the beginning, and the Shuttle in particular is pointed to as a failure. By the standards posited, the Shuttle is quite superior to anything the Russians have ever. or ever likely will do.
If Musk and company had managed to screw up, with the benefit of the absolutely *vast* amount of nearly-free-for-anyone information from NASA and others, it would have been embarrassing. They are solving a much simpler problem, and only their own arrogance has made it even slightly challenging.
The much-maligned Space Shuttle had a 98.5% record of success, and exactly the same number of fatal accidents as Soyuz. The Saturn 1B has a 100% record of success and no fatalities. So far, the Falcon is pretty good and in line with a lot of other launch vehicle records.
Even been to Houston in August?
We have "Trump is a Russian Agent" stories 24/7, and people screeching about "millions of people will die" from the sea level going up by an inch over a hundred years. Those are precisely as plausible and responsible as David Ickes lizard people, yet we are intentionally indoctrinating kids about it on a daily basis as a matter of policy
It is obvious how to proceed, get an actual law passed by Congress. Stop screwing around with unelected bodies. Yes, the same entities will lobby congress heavily, but right now the matter will always be subject to the whims of the FCC.
Scratch any socialist, and you will find a totalitarian. It can't work any other wa. You more-or-less have to compel people to work against their own interests by coercion or force.
And there you have all you need to know about Slashdot.
This reads like a shocking expose'. But if you have trouble with signalling systems, it makes absolutely perfect sense to slow the trains down until the problem is corrected.
OK, yes, they could be fixing it faster, but this seems like a perfectly responsible choice.
Very clever. The EPA has had little to do with science in a long time. Otherwise, why would a farm drainage ditch be treated like a "navigable waterway"?
This is in no way related to science, either the panel, or the Trump administration. It's about regulatory politics.
I expected no one here to grasp the concept of liberty, and mod the post into oblivion, but most of you also think there are Russians behind every tree, too - the Full McCarthy.
Bullshit. The entire concept of the United States is to promote *individual action* and when necessary *local control* over government. The intent is to *prevent* an all-powerful central government. "Sleeping" is one description, it should be, essentially, *non-existent" aside from the described duties.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it say anything about unelected groups of masterminds, essentially immune to public opinion and unaccountable to the voters, churning out regulation after regulation with only one agenda, chosen by political elites (in this case, a hyper-leftist/Marxist former president). That is the EPA right now.
Brett
It's not about gasoline. It's about the astronomical costs of building and maintaining it, particularly over a vastly larger area. You spend an inconceivable (it's really $98 billion and it;s still 10+ years away - meaning if it ever gets built at all (which is extremely doubtful) it will really be $250 billion) amount of money to build something that is definitively and will always be a secondary choice to better solutions. Better solutions that already exist and take a fraction of the time and cost to use.
Not that many people are "screaming for gun control". Lot of people who are "able to get on TV with histrionic appeals" are "screaming for gun control" and the politically-driven media lap it up.
You can get all the gun control you want - you just have to alter the constitution. There's perfectly well-described process for that, but you know for certain that it will fail, so you are trying to do it with an administrative end run, like so many other illegal things you want done.
I can take an airplane from San Jose to Burbank for $121 and even with security, it takes about 2 hours I can drive to Shafter (about halfway) in about 2.5 hours and cost about $23. Why do I need a train that takes twice as long and is *certain* to cause $300-400, not to mention bankrupting the state in the process? Who gives a crap what happens in Europe, why does *this* train and the astonishing and ever-growing cost make sense?
No.
Research the phrase "protected class", which appears to comprise about 75% of the US population.
2.0 is boring. How about Beta?