... but at the same time, where is the spirit NASA used to have?
Gone. That's what happens when politicians dictate scientists what they have to do.
These days it always seems about money & more money,
Actually, it's money and less money.
I wonder how much it would cost to launch a few more Voyager-like probes?
Lots (as with launching anything). However, do we _want_ Voyager-like probes that just zip past a few scenic views and then leave the solar system for good ? Missions along the line of Cassini or JIMO that actually stick around interesting objects for a while are far more interesting.
BTW, one of the first missions in any war is to achieve air superiority as quickly as possible, as the US did in both Iraq wars. Long range bombers are useless in achieving this objective.
Why... are runways, hangars, fuel dumps and aircraft on the ground immune to bombs ?
Thus, by the time of the Gulf War, a single strike airplane carrying two smart bombs could function as effectively as 108 World War II B-17 bombers carrying 648 bombs and crewed by 1,080 airmen.
Sorry, but, um... I call BS. In WWII, the enemy was technologically at least equal, while in the Gulf War, it was a frickin' third world country. Would that one single strike airplane still be as effective if Iraq had been, training/equipment/technology-wise, at a comparable level as the US ?
Also, in WWII, the effect of all the bombs that didn't hit the power plant, but something else close by, was not really undesired.
In extensive tests were conducted at Bikini Atoll after WWII, certain types of ships (most notably battleships -- occasionally even a heavy cruiser) frequently survived, not even taking much damage in many cases.
Great. So the "hardware" survived. How radioactive was it, though, and how large a dose of radiation would anyone on board have suffered ? Ships are no good if the crew is suffering from various degrees of radiation sickness.
A nuclear sub can stay submerged for months, but can be detected by reactor pump noise. A diesel can only spend a couple days submerged before it runs out of air.
Ask the Germans. They've got fuel-cell powered subs now.
Ther are people who smoke for 30 years and don't develop cancer.
Yes. They're called "lucky".
Smoked 20 years, and got skin cancer, but not lung cancer.
Smoking increases your chances of develeoping all kinds of cancer, lung cancer being just the most prominent one. Still, some lucky smokers manage to die of smoking-related heart disease (which, in most cases, is a lot less lingering and painful than dying from cancer).
Since the world is quite deterministic in any large enough scale,
A simple three-body-problem is completely deterministic, but since no exact solution has been found, predicting the behavior of the system is limited by the accuracy of the simulation (which will never be 100%). So, while you may be able to quite accurately predict what the system will be doing for a short time, your predictions will become more and more inaccurate as they go farther into the future.
At least with G.W. Bush you know he'll be gone after 2008.
Always remember the ancient story about the old woman who was praying at the temple that the local tyrant might live a very long life. Said tyrant heard about that and (knowing that he wasn't really the most popular guy in town) asked her why she was doing this. She answered: "In my life, I have seen many tyrants, and each one was worse than his predecessors."
Re:Posession of a controlled substance
on
Cocaine Biosensor
·
· Score: 1
Looking at it from a cold and pragmatic standpoint, it's better to pass it flaws and all because while you can always restore liberties that might be temporarily infringed upon, terrorists cause permanent damage.
Unfortunately, it worked exactly the other way round in history.
Terrorists can kill people and blow stuff up, but unless they also have widespread support in the population, do not pose more of a danger to a _nation_ than any other criminals do.
However, once civil rights are taken away, they are very hard to restore. If enough rights are taken away, it becomes impossible to restore any of them by legal means, since the legal means to do so have been removed themselves.
100 mph? Well, just under two years transit on freight wouldn't be too bad, I guess.
If anything, the space elevator is going to take stuff to a place in geosynchronous orbit (~30000 km, iirc), but of course it could be possible to leave early.
After that, it's rockets all the way, and they go a lot faster than 100 mph.
The fact is there's an organ shortage - so why not open up a market for them and see if monetary incentive helps?
Two words:
Pandoras Box
"Monetary incentives" sometimes make people do weird things, especially people who are greedy (basically everyone to some degree) or desperate.
In this case, one thing they would do is reduce your chances of your actual wishes (for example, if you want your organs to go to the person with the greatest medical need for them, or if you don't want to be a donor) getting respected. When you are dead and some far-off relative (or angry ex-wife) has to chose between the piece of paper that says "don't cut me up for parts, please" and the green pieces of paper that have numbers of them, there's not much guesswork involved in what is going to happen.
Another thing is that there still is a large number of "ethical" doctors out there who would probably be quite concerned if a life-or-death decision that should be based on the medical needs of their patients is instead made based on the financial status of their patients.
Yet another thing is that monetary incentives also provide added incentives for being "inventive", for example in opening up, erm, alternative sources of organs and being a bit creative when it comes to the necessary paper trail and documentation of origin.
Paying for organ transplants would be the proper role of a private health insurance plan, or charity for those who can't pay up front.
Right. So your kidney would go to the guy (who could still live for four years without a transplant) with the private health insurance plan that will pay $10k for the thing, instead of the other guy (who is probably going to die within four weeks if he doesn't get a transplant) whose plan can only cough up $500 ?
Oh, and do you know the meaning of the word "charity" ? Probably, you don't, because it's clear from what you write that charity means "other people, not me". If you want to be charitable, donate your organs. Don't expect some mysterious far-off "charity" to cough up money for them.
As it is now, there are probably a lot of people like me who won't donate because there's simply nothing in it for us.
Hate to break it to you, but in most cases you're _D_E_A_D_ when you donate your organs. If you want your survivors to make some money off your passing, get a frickin' life insurance. It's much more profitable and you don't need to worry about chosing a way of dying that leaves your organs in a salvageable condition.
. But Problem is the health care system CHARGED you for that blood (unless it was your own)which they got almost FREE so they should PAY you for the blood you give back or refund the fees paid.
Dude, um, do you want blood from "someone" taken by "someone else" with a rusty knife, and that has been sitting out in the sun for the last four weeks, or do you want blood that actually has been taken by medically trained people, tested for various diseases, type-checked, and handled, stored and shipped properly, hm ? It's the last parts that make blood cost a lot, even if the stuff itself was "free" in the beginning.
Slashdot Mirror
Gone. That's what happens when politicians dictate scientists what they have to do.
These days it always seems about money & more money,
Actually, it's money and less money.
I wonder how much it would cost to launch a few more Voyager-like probes?
Lots (as with launching anything). However, do we _want_ Voyager-like probes that just zip past a few scenic views and then leave the solar system for good ? Missions along the line of Cassini or JIMO that actually stick around interesting objects for a while are far more interesting.
Yeah. Nowaday, God logs in as a user instead of as root. It's so much more secure.
*sigh* You just missed your chance of selling a used Geiger counter (with a hefty profit).
No. The guy probably never existed in the first place. The company that sells $1,000 placebo black boxes probably does, though.
Why ... are runways, hangars, fuel dumps and aircraft on the ground immune to bombs ?
Sorry, but, um
Also, in WWII, the effect of all the bombs that didn't hit the power plant, but something else close by, was not really undesired.
Great. So the "hardware" survived. How radioactive was it, though, and how large a dose of radiation would anyone on board have suffered ? Ships are no good if the crew is suffering from various degrees of radiation sickness.
21 days (3 weeks), actually.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_212_submarine
A nuclear sub can stay submerged for months, but can be detected by reactor pump noise. A diesel can only spend a couple days submerged before it runs out of air.
Ask the Germans. They've got fuel-cell powered subs now.
Make the flight expensive enough and eventually you'll find enough rich human civilians who will actually pay for it. Good marketing helps, too.
Yes. They're called "lucky".
Smoked 20 years, and got skin cancer, but not lung cancer.
Smoking increases your chances of develeoping all kinds of cancer, lung cancer being just the most prominent one. Still, some lucky smokers manage to die of smoking-related heart disease (which, in most cases, is a lot less lingering and painful than dying from cancer).
A simple three-body-problem is completely deterministic, but since no exact solution has been found, predicting the behavior of the system is limited by the accuracy of the simulation (which will never be 100%). So, while you may be able to quite accurately predict what the system will be doing for a short time, your predictions will become more and more inaccurate as they go farther into the future.
Always remember the ancient story about the old woman who was praying at the temple that the local tyrant might live a very long life. Said tyrant heard about that and (knowing that he wasn't really the most popular guy in town) asked her why she was doing this. She answered: "In my life, I have seen many tyrants, and each one was worse than his predecessors."
Actually, that's atropine, not cocaine.
Think of it as a hot spare. It helps keep the mental capacity above the level of a turnip even if you get drunk once or twice.
Looking at the national debt
Check out books from the library knowing that my choice of books cannot and will not be used against me ?
Quizzes. Don't forget quizzes. Anyone who scores too badly gets replaced.
Unfortunately, it worked exactly the other way round in history.
Terrorists can kill people and blow stuff up, but unless they also have widespread support in the population, do not pose more of a danger to a _nation_ than any other criminals do.
However, once civil rights are taken away, they are very hard to restore. If enough rights are taken away, it becomes impossible to restore any of them by legal means, since the legal means to do so have been removed themselves.
If anything, the space elevator is going to take stuff to a place in geosynchronous orbit (~30000 km, iirc), but of course it could be possible to leave early.
After that, it's rockets all the way, and they go a lot faster than 100 mph.
Two words:
Pandoras Box
"Monetary incentives" sometimes make people do weird things, especially people who are greedy (basically everyone to some degree) or desperate.
In this case, one thing they would do is reduce your chances of your actual wishes (for example, if you want your organs to go to the person with the greatest medical need for them, or if you don't want to be a donor) getting respected. When you are dead and some far-off relative (or angry ex-wife) has to chose between the piece of paper that says "don't cut me up for parts, please" and the green pieces of paper that have numbers of them, there's not much guesswork involved in what is going to happen.
Another thing is that there still is a large number of "ethical" doctors out there who would probably be quite concerned if a life-or-death decision that should be based on the medical needs of their patients is instead made based on the financial status of their patients.
Yet another thing is that monetary incentives also provide added incentives for being "inventive", for example in opening up, erm, alternative sources of organs and being a bit creative when it comes to the necessary paper trail and documentation of origin.
Right. So your kidney would go to the guy (who could still live for four years without a transplant) with the private health insurance plan that will pay $10k for the thing, instead of the other guy (who is probably going to die within four weeks if he doesn't get a transplant) whose plan can only cough up $500 ?
Oh, and do you know the meaning of the word "charity" ? Probably, you don't, because it's clear from what you write that charity means "other people, not me". If you want to be charitable, donate your organs. Don't expect some mysterious far-off "charity" to cough up money for them.
As it is now, there are probably a lot of people like me who won't donate because there's simply nothing in it for us.
Hate to break it to you, but in most cases you're _D_E_A_D_ when you donate your organs. If you want your survivors to make some money off your passing, get a frickin' life insurance. It's much more profitable and you don't need to worry about chosing a way of dying that leaves your organs in a salvageable condition.
Dude, um, do you want blood from "someone" taken by "someone else" with a rusty knife, and that has been sitting out in the sun for the last four weeks, or do you want blood that actually has been taken by medically trained people, tested for various diseases, type-checked, and handled, stored and shipped properly, hm ? It's the last parts that make blood cost a lot, even if the stuff itself was "free" in the beginning.
You mean
Or would you also leave them for someone who needs them but can't afford to pay for them ?
... if their pirated movie "only" has a resolution of 900x500-something ?