Doesn't the parliamentary system give *some* power to other policital groups which are somewhat left-leaning?
No, it does not. The UK's first past the past system does not cater for what is very much a minority today in the UK.
The closest thing to a "left-leaning" group is "Old Labour" - a relatively small group of 30-40 left wing Labour MPs: remnents of what the Labour party was prior to Thatcher and neoliberalism. With age, Old Labour are gradually retiring to graze - thus leaving no real "left-wing" force within Parliament - save a few radical Lib Dem/New Labour MPs. There was talk of an Old Labour revival that might come after Blair, but not many people really want a leftist government anymore, and theres no leader to bring Labour left again. The flock is there, but the shephard is missing. Basically Parliament is a centre to moderate right institution now, and looks to be that way for a long time to come.
The Lib Dems are perhaps the most centrist of the parties, with moderate policies such as increases in direct taxation plus a cogent, long standing environmentalist program. But this is nowhere near to the real left - who would want the rail nationalized, aswell as keeping a strong hold on Royal Mail, as opposed to its current impending privatization. But with an aging, lacklustre leader they lack much chance of gains next election - they spent much of the local election campaign complimenting two things; their progressive environmental policy...and Menzies Campbell, their leader. Why should a party have to attempt to justify a leader in a local election?
Actually, his implied posit is that private enterprise can also provide for state education. As to your assumption that anarchic systems won't be able to provide healthcare - any Anarcho-capitalist will gladly tell you otherwise. Civilizations, especially in the west, rarely fall into anarchic states anyway, thus it seems that private enterprise's provision of healthcare as a merit good is the most realistic future model.
The documentary fails to address the fact that no one tried to expose these plans beforehand.
Actually 9/11 conspiracy theories have been around since 9/11. Its only now that they've risen to a relative prominence. A French author released a best selling book in early 2002 which alleges a plane never crashed into the Pentagon. Not to mention the thousands of discussions regarding alleged inconsistancies floating around Usenet, BBSs, IRC etc.
Thank god I didn't put that in the article summary! Apologies for the mishap. The Boeing 757 plane is still very much too large to fit the plane depicted in the video though.:)
For those interested, here is an extremely cogent flash clip analyzing the suspicious events revolving around the supposed crash of Flight 77 at the Pentagon. At one point it closely analyzes the Pentagon's camera video. The plane in the first frame of the video looks nothing like an 80 ton 757.
True, the original "lower quality" version of this tape was released in early 2002. Infact, according to this BBC article, the French had claimed the video a fraud by April 2002. The book regarding the incident was a best seller over there.
On reflection I'll briefly go over the chief inconsistancy within the video. The alleged 747 plane is too small - the guys who made the 911 Loose Change video have a more in depth analysis regards this. The upshot is that the actual cockpit of the plane does not match that of a Boeing 747 - nor does the overall frame of the aircraft. With the video now released at a somewhat higher quality, this ought to be even more in evidence - which is why the Pentagon was reluctant to release the tape.
Further to my article posting...it appears the "new" video is no more than a slightly higher quality and lenghtier version of the Pentagon's CCTV camera tape - released less than six months after 9/11 itself. I won't go in to the inconsistancies here - spot them for yourself at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4987716. stm> the BBC's page.
Will it put the conspiracy theories to rest? No. Did the US government want this footage retained as it simply fuels speculations of foul play; what with a higher quality image of a false looking 747 revealed?
If anything, this new higher definition tape just fans the flames of speculation. What about the CCTV confiscated from nearby establishments such as a high rise hotel? These too are in possession of the US government - yet haven't been released. If they give (as they will, given their position overlooking the Pentagon) clearer pictures, then why haven't these been released as well, to utterly cement US claims of Flight 77's actual crash?
Michael Johnson's is by far the most ambitious - the page header is too curvacious for me. Also there are several viewing issues - judging by the article dates on the other two this has likely been submitted much more recently. It could work, and most of us would get used to it - however it seems a little too flashy/flamboyant for a geek news site. A robust 7/10 in its current state.
Jason Porritt's is very sleek too - but without the flamboyancy showcased within Michael's. It is an attractive, modern design, and my own initial reaction was enthusiasm and recognition - this IS the revamped Slashdot, said the instinct. My single gripe with it however is the logo size, were the logo close to/the same size as it is now, then the theme would be practically perfect. An enthusiastic 8.5/10.
Peter Lada's design is also strong, and (lets be under no illusions), quite similar to Jason's. However unlike Jason's his design has several issues - the slogan is too phased out, it must be seen, as is it iconic of the geek's attitude. Our news is what matters, not bullshit about africanized bees or whatever. The default text size is also too small - and I bet most Slashdotter's would be pissed having to change to "larger" each time they visit/. . Lastly, the catagory icons are obtrusive in comparison to the writing - the icons don't need to be large for use to construe what the article is about. Heck, most of the time the title suffices. A hopeful 6.5/10.
So yeah, Taco has done a fine job with this shortlist, though to conclude I'd say Jason Porritt's design is far and away the most promising, a few aesthetic modifications and preparation of catagory templates and it could be the ideal new Slashdot. It isn't hip or flamboyant - but possesses a reserved style we geeks all like beholding.
Actually, I didn't post this topic as troll bait - peculiarly enough this is one of the very few sources stating Thompson's actions, and we all knew there would be some actions out of Oblivion's rerating. Simply put, whenever a popular game is rerated upwards, then Jack Thompson will be there, waiting to spew his trash on whatever TV station will accept him.
I posted this topic to raise awareness of what may develop into something we have to take attention of, a la the Penny Arcade incident. Sure nobody wants Thompson acheiving his aims - but topics that inform people of this lunatic's actions, which can and have damaged the gaming industry, are justified and in no way troll bait; I haven't seen a decent (ie. modded up) troll thusfar.
The more people know how inanely crazy he is (evident from most of his writings/appearances) the better. As other posters have said, there will always be the ignorant "mass" - the internet, as a source of information, should technically shrink that mass.
Come to think of it, banks work that way, too; they lend out most of what they take in so they actually have relatively little cash on hand. If a run starts on the bank, then they run out of cash very quickly.
Excellent analogy - banks have roughly 1-2% of their total assets in coin and notes stored in ATMs or at counters, rising somewhat during the Holiday season. If many persons rushed to their bank to draw out money, then it would go bankrupt, unless it could sell some assets extremely fast. Same thing would occur if everyone suddenly got tech-savvy and geeky, and thus began using BT a lot - ISPs would simply not be able to afford additional servers for all this load, hence bankruptcy.
Its intriguing, practically every business thrives on the human condition, our emotions, the many niches, and indeed the "masses" for want of a better term - if the human condition were changed somehow Ie. through gene modification, the world could become dramatically different.
The English language cannot possibly express how amazingly incredible the next massively multiplayer game from Blizzard is going to be.
But unless the game has ponies, WITH glitter option, and WITH several special shades of pink also optional - then it simply won't be "amazingly incredible"...it will simply be "incredible."
The game will retain incredible status due to an innovative "Zerg mating game" - basically new Zerg characters can only be created when two Zergs engage in an amusing mating ceremony minigame, the Revolution version requires a "thrusting" motion using the cool new pad. Sadly PC gamers have to make do with simple button-combo pressing, a la Parappa the Rapper.
HOWEVER due to the conservative nature of Blizzard devs/GMs, mating is only possible when married, a long...long process requiring much commitment. AND while Zerg/Protoss nudity is commended, Terran nudity is discouraged - all we are treated to are a few "moaning noises" with the screen fading to black for 1-60 minutes depending on your "intercourse" skill.:(
Yes, and I wonder if the people buying also realize that today, there are virtually zero movies available in that format...
Dude, the virtually zero series totally rocks - I'd rate it alongside Firefly any day of the week. I mean OK, its marketing has been fairly weak, and the movies came out too soon after the TV series, traits it shares with Firefly - but the geek niche hunting out the HD-DVD players will certainly have heard of it!!!!
I had anticipated this sort of response from one of the thousands of slashbots frequenting articles. Addressing your cynicism, firstly I never used the word "coincidence" in my post, rather you inferred that from my praise regards the innovative minds present in SF literature, or indeed SF at large.
What else should it be useful for? Grilling steaks?
Now, Timmy, theres a little institution in most developed nations called the "Military-industrial complex", which involves that nation's armed forces using its allocated funds to buy weapons from the private sector. Now...ultra fast scramjet jets...hmmmmm...WHOA HOLY SCHMOKES. They could be used as weaponry!
I'll make my own prediction: Some time in the future we will have unbelievably fast ocean-going vessels.
Practically from the time of Brunel it has been easily predictable that sea going vehicles would become faster, probably since the age of the first caravels when sails began to be applied ultra-effectively (1400's). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_speed_record/. 511km/h is the current record, if that isn't fast, what is?
It's not very difficult to foresee that strong propulsion engines would be used to transport things and people from Alice to Bob at high speed, flying at a high altitude due to advantages in air resistance. Not even for a writer in pre-airtravel times.
By pre-airtravel times I assume you mean before 1783, that is, the first hot air balloon's flight? Modern physics had still a long way to go, and certainly had not come to terms with air resistance. Most believed a 10T weight fell faster than a bag of feathers until last century. If you meant the era prior to the first powered flight in 1903, even then we'd be working at a push, again for the reason you mentioned.
For an author to constructively postulate something resembling scramjet tech we would probably have to fast forward to when rocketry began looking like a pheasable technology. That is, during the 1920's - 30's, and further (like PKD did) to WW2, when the Nazis launched hundreds of Doodlebugs at Britain from northern France. Note that in War of the Worlds, Wells fails to specify the propulsion methods of the Martians' spacecraft - though it is implied they are launched by means of a cannon. Again the notion of rocketry has not occured to him, simply due to the fact it is unheard of - some technologies arrive, and then the possibilities of such tech are written about extensively, both in non-fictional and fictional works. Non-SF or SF.
Indeed, the British Comet jet airliner came into being even earlier than that. Prototypes were in existence by the late 1940's. However the Comet was plagued with safety issues, culminating in several air crashes and its eventual withdrawal, allowing Boeing to enter the fray with a much better design. But thats another story altogether.
My postule was that scramjet technology was utterly unheard of at the time, not your conventional jet airliner technology which practically everyone east or west of Suez had heard of by 1962.
It is remarkable how similar the intended future use for scramjet technology is to that described in a Philip K Dick novel by the name of Man in the High Castle, namely passenger airliners and space travel. The extremely fast ascent, followed by a relatively brief period in the lower stratosphere, and finally another period of intense speed, this time descending towards the relevant destination. Of course, in the novel the "Rocket ships" described are probably intended as an evolution of the V1/V2 bombs used in World War 2, a technology very different from scramjets - and completely neglectful of the potentially massive chemical costs per launch far outweighing even the most ostentatious of passenger fares:) . But even so, the similarity in timeframe description and such is remarkable considering the V2 was little more than a predecessor to the SCUD missile, and that scramjet tech was unheard of at the time of writing (1962).
He wasn't the first of course, H.G. Wells predicted something resembling an atomic bomb, together with tanks during Edwardian times. It would be interesting to examine trends in developing technology, to see whether the cause and effect correlation with sci fiction predictions is beyond the aesthetic. We can already observe that many aesthetic features of say, some of Star Trek's technology, has made its way into the modern technology of today. Eg. The flip communicators -> mobile phones etc. It is a testament to the human imagination that much of the technology posited in past fiction is coming to fruition today.
It is remarkable how similar the intended future use for scramjet technology is to that described in a Philip K Dick novel by the name of Man in the High Castle, namely passenger airliners and space travel. The extremely fast ascent, followed by a relatively brief period in the lower stratosphere, and finally another period of intense speed, this time descending towards the relevant destination. Of course, in the novel the "Rocket ships" described are probably intended as an evolution of the V1/V2 bombs used in World War 2, a technology very different from scramjets - and completely neglectful of the potentially massive chemical costs per launch far outweighing even the most ostentatious of passenger fares:) . But even so, the similarity in timeframe description and such is remarkable considering the V2 was little more than a predecessor to the SCUD missile, and that scramjet tech was unheard of at the time of writing (1962).
Once again, sci fi has "predicted" a potential new technology, though it isn't surprising as it has occured since the dawn of the genre. H.G. Wells predicted something resembling an atomic bomb, aswell as tanks during Edwardian times. It would be interesting to examine trends in developing technology, to see whether the cause and effect correlation with sci fiction predictions is beyond the aesthetic. We can already observe that many aesthetic features of say, some of Star Trek's technology, has made its way into the modern technology of today. Eg. The flip communicators -> mobile phones etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Doesn't the parliamentary system give *some* power to other policital groups which are somewhat left-leaning?
No, it does not. The UK's first past the past system does not cater for what is very much a minority today in the UK.
The closest thing to a "left-leaning" group is "Old Labour" - a relatively small group of 30-40 left wing Labour MPs: remnents of what the Labour party was prior to Thatcher and neoliberalism. With age, Old Labour are gradually retiring to graze - thus leaving no real "left-wing" force within Parliament - save a few radical Lib Dem/New Labour MPs. There was talk of an Old Labour revival that might come after Blair, but not many people really want a leftist government anymore, and theres no leader to bring Labour left again. The flock is there, but the shephard is missing. Basically Parliament is a centre to moderate right institution now, and looks to be that way for a long time to come.
The Lib Dems are perhaps the most centrist of the parties, with moderate policies such as increases in direct taxation plus a cogent, long standing environmentalist program. But this is nowhere near to the real left - who would want the rail nationalized, aswell as keeping a strong hold on Royal Mail, as opposed to its current impending privatization. But with an aging, lacklustre leader they lack much chance of gains next election - they spent much of the local election campaign complimenting two things; their progressive environmental policy...and Menzies Campbell, their leader. Why should a party have to attempt to justify a leader in a local election?
Actually, his implied posit is that private enterprise can also provide for state education. As to your assumption that anarchic systems won't be able to provide healthcare - any Anarcho-capitalist will gladly tell you otherwise. Civilizations, especially in the west, rarely fall into anarchic states anyway, thus it seems that private enterprise's provision of healthcare as a merit good is the most realistic future model.
Thanks dude, let's hope whoever modded it redundant gets metamodded into outer space. :)
The documentary fails to address the fact that no one tried to expose these plans beforehand.
Actually 9/11 conspiracy theories have been around since 9/11. Its only now that they've risen to a relative prominence. A French author released a best selling book in early 2002 which alleges a plane never crashed into the Pentagon. Not to mention the thousands of discussions regarding alleged inconsistancies floating around Usenet, BBSs, IRC etc.
Thank god I didn't put that in the article summary! Apologies for the mishap. The Boeing 757 plane is still very much too large to fit the plane depicted in the video though. :)
For those interested, here is an extremely cogent flash clip analyzing the suspicious events revolving around the supposed crash of Flight 77 at the Pentagon. At one point it closely analyzes the Pentagon's camera video. The plane in the first frame of the video looks nothing like an 80 ton 757.
True, the original "lower quality" version of this tape was released in early 2002. Infact, according to this BBC article, the French had claimed the video a fraud by April 2002. The book regarding the incident was a best seller over there.
On reflection I'll briefly go over the chief inconsistancy within the video. The alleged 747 plane is too small - the guys who made the 911 Loose Change video have a more in depth analysis regards this. The upshot is that the actual cockpit of the plane does not match that of a Boeing 747 - nor does the overall frame of the aircraft. With the video now released at a somewhat higher quality, this ought to be even more in evidence - which is why the Pentagon was reluctant to release the tape.
Further to my article posting...it appears the "new" video is no more than a slightly higher quality and lenghtier version of the Pentagon's CCTV camera tape - released less than six months after 9/11 itself. I won't go in to the inconsistancies here - spot them for yourself at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4987716. stm> the BBC's page.
Will it put the conspiracy theories to rest? No. Did the US government want this footage retained as it simply fuels speculations of foul play; what with a higher quality image of a false looking 747 revealed?
If anything, this new higher definition tape just fans the flames of speculation. What about the CCTV confiscated from nearby establishments such as a high rise hotel? These too are in possession of the US government - yet haven't been released. If they give (as they will, given their position overlooking the Pentagon) clearer pictures, then why haven't these been released as well, to utterly cement US claims of Flight 77's actual crash?
Who knows...maybe I'm just a paranoid android.
Michael Johnson's is by far the most ambitious - the page header is too curvacious for me. Also there are several viewing issues - judging by the article dates on the other two this has likely been submitted much more recently. It could work, and most of us would get used to it - however it seems a little too flashy/flamboyant for a geek news site. A robust 7/10 in its current state.
/. . Lastly, the catagory icons are obtrusive in comparison to the writing - the icons don't need to be large for use to construe what the article is about. Heck, most of the time the title suffices. A hopeful 6.5/10.
Jason Porritt's is very sleek too - but without the flamboyancy showcased within Michael's. It is an attractive, modern design, and my own initial reaction was enthusiasm and recognition - this IS the revamped Slashdot, said the instinct. My single gripe with it however is the logo size, were the logo close to/the same size as it is now, then the theme would be practically perfect. An enthusiastic 8.5/10.
Peter Lada's design is also strong, and (lets be under no illusions), quite similar to Jason's. However unlike Jason's his design has several issues - the slogan is too phased out, it must be seen, as is it iconic of the geek's attitude. Our news is what matters, not bullshit about africanized bees or whatever. The default text size is also too small - and I bet most Slashdotter's would be pissed having to change to "larger" each time they visit
So yeah, Taco has done a fine job with this shortlist, though to conclude I'd say Jason Porritt's design is far and away the most promising, a few aesthetic modifications and preparation of catagory templates and it could be the ideal new Slashdot. It isn't hip or flamboyant - but possesses a reserved style we geeks all like beholding.
Bill Gates' entrance!
:-D
"What is that in Bill's hands? He's holding a tiny white object and can't stop fiddling with it."
Finally! News that Bill truly is one of us - except hes probably more compulsive about the whole thing.
Actually, I didn't post this topic as troll bait - peculiarly enough this is one of the very few sources stating Thompson's actions, and we all knew there would be some actions out of Oblivion's rerating. Simply put, whenever a popular game is rerated upwards, then Jack Thompson will be there, waiting to spew his trash on whatever TV station will accept him.
I posted this topic to raise awareness of what may develop into something we have to take attention of, a la the Penny Arcade incident. Sure nobody wants Thompson acheiving his aims - but topics that inform people of this lunatic's actions, which can and have damaged the gaming industry, are justified and in no way troll bait; I haven't seen a decent (ie. modded up) troll thusfar.
The more people know how inanely crazy he is (evident from most of his writings/appearances) the better. As other posters have said, there will always be the ignorant "mass" - the internet, as a source of information, should technically shrink that mass.
"the picture was still juddering as it came onto the screen"
:)
So it was a GIF?
I'm really eager about this new possible top level domain! Please, .tel me more!
Come to think of it, banks work that way, too; they lend out most of what they take in so they actually have relatively little cash on hand. If a run starts on the bank, then they run out of cash very quickly.
Excellent analogy - banks have roughly 1-2% of their total assets in coin and notes stored in ATMs or at counters, rising somewhat during the Holiday season. If many persons rushed to their bank to draw out money, then it would go bankrupt, unless it could sell some assets extremely fast. Same thing would occur if everyone suddenly got tech-savvy and geeky, and thus began using BT a lot - ISPs would simply not be able to afford additional servers for all this load, hence bankruptcy.
Its intriguing, practically every business thrives on the human condition, our emotions, the many niches, and indeed the "masses" for want of a better term - if the human condition were changed somehow Ie. through gene modification, the world could become dramatically different.
The English language cannot possibly express how amazingly incredible the next massively multiplayer game from Blizzard is going to be.
:(
But unless the game has ponies, WITH glitter option, and WITH several special shades of pink also optional - then it simply won't be "amazingly incredible"...it will simply be "incredible."
The game will retain incredible status due to an innovative "Zerg mating game" - basically new Zerg characters can only be created when two Zergs engage in an amusing mating ceremony minigame, the Revolution version requires a "thrusting" motion using the cool new pad. Sadly PC gamers have to make do with simple button-combo pressing, a la Parappa the Rapper.
HOWEVER due to the conservative nature of Blizzard devs/GMs, mating is only possible when married, a long...long process requiring much commitment. AND while Zerg/Protoss nudity is commended, Terran nudity is discouraged - all we are treated to are a few "moaning noises" with the screen fading to black for 1-60 minutes depending on your "intercourse" skill.
[ob]Mod insightful!![/ob]
Just kidding, April Fools!!
MOD UP...do it for the ponies.
Yes, and I wonder if the people buying also realize that today, there are virtually zero movies available in that format...
Dude, the virtually zero series totally rocks - I'd rate it alongside Firefly any day of the week. I mean OK, its marketing has been fairly weak, and the movies came out too soon after the TV series, traits it shares with Firefly - but the geek niche hunting out the HD-DVD players will certainly have heard of it!!!!
"Silence! Let the fool make his judgment." ....hmm....
"Let me have a little taste..."
I had anticipated this sort of response from one of the thousands of slashbots frequenting articles. Addressing your cynicism, firstly I never used the word "coincidence" in my post, rather you inferred that from my praise regards the innovative minds present in SF literature, or indeed SF at large.
What else should it be useful for? Grilling steaks?
Now, Timmy, theres a little institution in most developed nations called the "Military-industrial complex", which involves that nation's armed forces using its allocated funds to buy weapons from the private sector. Now...ultra fast scramjet jets...hmmmmm...WHOA HOLY SCHMOKES. They could be used as weaponry!
I'll make my own prediction: Some time in the future we will have unbelievably fast ocean-going vessels.
Practically from the time of Brunel it has been easily predictable that sea going vehicles would become faster, probably since the age of the first caravels when sails began to be applied ultra-effectively (1400's). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_speed_record/. 511km/h is the current record, if that isn't fast, what is?
It's not very difficult to foresee that strong propulsion engines would be used to transport things and people from Alice to Bob at high speed, flying at a high altitude due to advantages in air resistance. Not even for a writer in pre-airtravel times.
By pre-airtravel times I assume you mean before 1783, that is, the first hot air balloon's flight? Modern physics had still a long way to go, and certainly had not come to terms with air resistance. Most believed a 10T weight fell faster than a bag of feathers until last century. If you meant the era prior to the first powered flight in 1903, even then we'd be working at a push, again for the reason you mentioned.
For an author to constructively postulate something resembling scramjet tech we would probably have to fast forward to when rocketry began looking like a pheasable technology. That is, during the 1920's - 30's, and further (like PKD did) to WW2, when the Nazis launched hundreds of Doodlebugs at Britain from northern France. Note that in War of the Worlds, Wells fails to specify the propulsion methods of the Martians' spacecraft - though it is implied they are launched by means of a cannon. Again the notion of rocketry has not occured to him, simply due to the fact it is unheard of - some technologies arrive, and then the possibilities of such tech are written about extensively, both in non-fictional and fictional works. Non-SF or SF.
Indeed, the British Comet jet airliner came into being even earlier than that. Prototypes were in existence by the late 1940's. However the Comet was plagued with safety issues, culminating in several air crashes and its eventual withdrawal, allowing Boeing to enter the fray with a much better design. But thats another story altogether.
My postule was that scramjet technology was utterly unheard of at the time, not your conventional jet airliner technology which practically everyone east or west of Suez had heard of by 1962.
It is remarkable how similar the intended future use for scramjet technology is to that described in a Philip K Dick novel by the name of Man in the High Castle, namely passenger airliners and space travel. The extremely fast ascent, followed by a relatively brief period in the lower stratosphere, and finally another period of intense speed, this time descending towards the relevant destination. Of course, in the novel the "Rocket ships" described are probably intended as an evolution of the V1/V2 bombs used in World War 2, a technology very different from scramjets - and completely neglectful of the potentially massive chemical costs per launch far outweighing even the most ostentatious of passenger fares :) . But even so, the similarity in timeframe description and such is remarkable considering the V2 was little more than a predecessor to the SCUD missile, and that scramjet tech was unheard of at the time of writing (1962).
He wasn't the first of course, H.G. Wells predicted something resembling an atomic bomb, together with tanks during Edwardian times. It would be interesting to examine trends in developing technology, to see whether the cause and effect correlation with sci fiction predictions is beyond the aesthetic. We can already observe that many aesthetic features of say, some of Star Trek's technology, has made its way into the modern technology of today. Eg. The flip communicators -> mobile phones etc. It is a testament to the human imagination that much of the technology posited in past fiction is coming to fruition today.
It is remarkable how similar the intended future use for scramjet technology is to that described in a Philip K Dick novel by the name of Man in the High Castle, namely passenger airliners and space travel. The extremely fast ascent, followed by a relatively brief period in the lower stratosphere, and finally another period of intense speed, this time descending towards the relevant destination. Of course, in the novel the "Rocket ships" described are probably intended as an evolution of the V1/V2 bombs used in World War 2, a technology very different from scramjets - and completely neglectful of the potentially massive chemical costs per launch far outweighing even the most ostentatious of passenger fares :) . But even so, the similarity in timeframe description and such is remarkable considering the V2 was little more than a predecessor to the SCUD missile, and that scramjet tech was unheard of at the time of writing (1962).
Once again, sci fi has "predicted" a potential new technology, though it isn't surprising as it has occured since the dawn of the genre. H.G. Wells predicted something resembling an atomic bomb, aswell as tanks during Edwardian times. It would be interesting to examine trends in developing technology, to see whether the cause and effect correlation with sci fiction predictions is beyond the aesthetic. We can already observe that many aesthetic features of say, some of Star Trek's technology, has made its way into the modern technology of today. Eg. The flip communicators -> mobile phones etc.
ROFL, good one.
That is, at more than one household -_- ... haven't had my evening dose of caffiene, sorry.