"I fully believe the switches in that cabinet are still sitting there attempting to send 20Gbit/sec of traffic out trying to do something. I just don't know what yet."
In 2025, 20 Gbit/sec is probably just a fraction of a plain old holographic vidphone call (not to mention those newsfangled neural interface thingies), so what's the big deal again?
Both conditions would have to be true for it to be excluded.
I'm sorry, but that Boole guy wasn't even born when the bill of rights was ratified. I very much doubt that any of the people who drafted the bill of rights had heard about Boolean logic for that reason, and normal usage of language does not conform to Boolean logic.
By the same logic, the government could search and seize all it wants, as long as it doesn't do both at the same time.
They need two pictures (preferably a measured amount of time apart) to prove that a car running the red light was moving and not just broken down in a bad spot.
Exactly. And if they do things right, they can check for speed limit violations as well.
You don't need a big freakin' rocket....the first successful ASAT was a missile launched from an F-15.
You may want to refer to GGP post. It's not about ASAT weapons, but about putting enough nuclear weapons into orbit that raining them down at one point will take out the other sides command structure and retaliation capability. That probably means a couple of hundred warheads, and will either require _lots_ of launches with small launch vehicles (which will alert everyone else about your plan), or a couple of launches with more powerful launch vehicles (aka big freakin' rocket).
Maybe the better solution would be to provide an immediate response to the FIRST satellite being destroy by destroying one of theirs.
Brilliant. Litter the orbit with even more debris.
If anything, the sensible response to the first satellite being knocked out is to take their ability to knock out another one away. This may or may not involve creating more debris (it won't if it's a ground-based anti-satellite weapon), but it's more sensible than a dumb act of revenge (and more effective, especially if the other side doesn't _have_ any significant satellite assets).
The weapons are virtually undetectible until it's too late.
Yes, because launching a big freakin' rocket (big enough to put stuff in orbit) will go unnoticed. Especially when you already have satellites in orbit looking for events like that. Do you really think that the militaries all over the world aren't keeping track of the stuff the other side has put up there?
So if you target a countries known military bases/silos/leadership from space you can prevent them from retaliating.
Yes, if you can orchestrate that one, magnificent strike that will take out a few hundred targets in fifteen minutes or less (with weapons coming from satellites that are scattered over several orbits all around the globe). Oh, and don't forget bagging all those missile subs, too, because each one you missed will mean a dozen nukes coming your way.
Conventional methods could mean a missile will take an hours to get there.
If an ICBM (or any other ballistic missile, for that matter) takes longer than an hour, it's probably not going to come down at all anymore.
Most people are allergic. Why do you think they itch when you get bit?
Because that's a normal immune reaction to an antigen entering the body? Now, if you start itching all over your body from a single mosquito bite and/or have trouble breathing because your airways are swelling shut... then you have an actual allergic reaction.
Whenever they last drafted a "rules of war" treaty, they deemed it against honor or something to shoot at someone attempting to save lives.
That's what they _said_, anyway. In reality, they _know_ that medics and wounded soldiers are a huge drain on the resources of the side they're on, so why not encourage the other side to allocate their resources in ways that are not all that effective at actually winning?
you could even equip them with a highly energetic self termination device...
Good plan. I'd recommend something in the single-digit kiloton range. And keep in mind that it's only a nuke if it's intended to be used as one, as a self-termination device, it's perfectly okay.
A friend of mine who is a mathematician told me he rad an article that showed that the total amount of energy required to create a windmill would never be recovered by the device.
... and that's exactly why you pick an engineer or physicist if you need to solve real-world problems.;)
Oh, and he "read an article"? I can write lots of articles that show all kinds of things. Did the article pass any plausibility checks?
Do you mean the "Opel" cars that are still being built and sold by GM Australia under the name "Astra" - plus built in a few other places?
Yes, the OP does. In the 90s, these things did have a reputation for being notoriously unreliable and prone to rusting (even while still in the prospectus, as the saying went). However, since then, the guys at Opel got their act together and are now making decent cars again.
I have ZERO issue w/ foreigners coming to US soil for a better life. But if you're doing that, emmigrate!
I'm sure the majority of the H1B visa holders would happily accept that offer. After all, immigrant visas are even harder to come by than temporary work visas. You did know that, right?
Become a citizen, Work, spend money, pay taxes, vote!
You don't need to do the first in order to do one of the three things in the middle. Heck, the fourth is pretty much mandatory if you do the second or the third.
4) Public Health - while there is currently no such thing as a Public healthcare system like Canada and Europe have, You won't be denied treatment because you can't pay for it.
If it's an emergency, maybe. If it's a chronic condition that's not an emergency just yet, good luck.
You might, however, have to quit your job if you don't make enough or the employment benefits are woefully inadequate...
Don't worry, your employer is quite likely to fire you, so you don't have to quit your job when you're sick.
What science teachers have been teaching in science class is wrong.
Yes, and the sun isn't shining outside, since it can't make helium out of hydrogen and give off a whole bunch of energy. Duh.
Since you didn't understand what your science teacher tried to convey back then, why don't you look it up on wikipedia how the fusion reactions work? Hint: It's easier to make helium from deuterium and trition then from plain hydrogen.
If at any point in this process (say you stop it at 50%) the 'waste' is now weapons grade this will never be allowed in the US.
Producing weapons-grade enrichment (as in "can be used to build nuke") is _frikkin'_ expensive. You don't do that unless you _want_ to build a nuke, since it's a waste of money for any other purpose.
If it's still 'radioactive' you can still get energy from it. You can refine it, clean it up and shove it back through again.
Radioactivity is not a criterion for a nuclear fuel used in fusion or fission processes (but due to the mass of the atoms used in the latter, fission fuels are usually also radioactive). Maybe if you want to build a RTG (which isn't fusion or fission), but those are used only in space since they're beaten by pretty much any other power source in terrestrial applications.
In fact, nuclear waste is way more radioactive than nuclear fuel.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but it's not like they were actually at war, right? There's no reason to use passive unless you're trying to sneak around,
A SSBN that doesn't "sneak around" during peacetime survives exactly as long as it takes a torpedo to cross a few hundred meters once peacetime ends.
Phew. I guess it's not time to head to the vault just yet.
Okay ... how much would you _bet_ on the temperature six months from being colder than today, north of the equator?
I am happy to report, however, no exploding trees.
Yes, because your trees have (been intelligently designed/evolved/been blessed by his noodly appendage) to withstand temperatures like that.
That's the main mistake here.
Here it is:
"I fully believe the switches in that cabinet are still sitting there attempting to send 20Gbit/sec of traffic out trying to do something. I just don't know what yet."
In 2025, 20 Gbit/sec is probably just a fraction of a plain old holographic vidphone call (not to mention those newsfangled neural interface thingies), so what's the big deal again?
More and more software that includes "anti-virus" functionality, such as media players, web browsers, email clients, etc ...
The 50s called. They want their slogans back.
Both conditions would have to be true for it to be excluded.
I'm sorry, but that Boole guy wasn't even born when the bill of rights was ratified. I very much doubt that any of the people who drafted the bill of rights had heard about Boolean logic for that reason, and normal usage of language does not conform to Boolean logic.
By the same logic, the government could search and seize all it wants, as long as it doesn't do both at the same time.
They need two pictures (preferably a measured amount of time apart) to prove that a car running the red light was moving and not just broken down in a bad spot.
Exactly. And if they do things right, they can check for speed limit violations as well.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner. Liberty is a well-armed lamb."
And certainly liberty means that the wolves are well-armed as well, right? Anything else wouldn't be liberty.
Unless the lamb is the only well-armed party (a.k.a. the tyrant), it is dinner.
You may want to refer to GGP post. It's not about ASAT weapons, but about putting enough nuclear weapons into orbit that raining them down at one point will take out the other sides command structure and retaliation capability. That probably means a couple of hundred warheads, and will either require _lots_ of launches with small launch vehicles (which will alert everyone else about your plan), or a couple of launches with more powerful launch vehicles (aka big freakin' rocket).
If it's "normal", then it's not an allergic reaction. An allergy always refers to an immune reaction that is more severe than "normal".
Maybe the better solution would be to provide an immediate response to the FIRST satellite being destroy by destroying one of theirs.
Brilliant. Litter the orbit with even more debris.
If anything, the sensible response to the first satellite being knocked out is to take their ability to knock out another one away. This may or may not involve creating more debris (it won't if it's a ground-based anti-satellite weapon), but it's more sensible than a dumb act of revenge (and more effective, especially if the other side doesn't _have_ any significant satellite assets).
Yes, because launching a big freakin' rocket (big enough to put stuff in orbit) will go unnoticed. Especially when you already have satellites in orbit looking for events like that. Do you really think that the militaries all over the world aren't keeping track of the stuff the other side has put up there?
So if you target a countries known military bases/silos/leadership from space you can prevent them from retaliating.
Yes, if you can orchestrate that one, magnificent strike that will take out a few hundred targets in fifteen minutes or less (with weapons coming from satellites that are scattered over several orbits all around the globe). Oh, and don't forget bagging all those missile subs, too, because each one you missed will mean a dozen nukes coming your way.
Conventional methods could mean a missile will take an hours to get there.
If an ICBM (or any other ballistic missile, for that matter) takes longer than an hour, it's probably not going to come down at all anymore.
Most people are allergic. Why do you think they itch when you get bit?
Because that's a normal immune reaction to an antigen entering the body? Now, if you start itching all over your body from a single mosquito bite and/or have trouble breathing because your airways are swelling shut ... then you have an actual allergic reaction.
get goosebumps all over the place when I read that. I really can't imagine the Taliban will freeze and not shoot a medic.
They won't. Since they're not a regular army, they don't really give a damn about international treaties..
But it boggles my mind why it's illegal to shoot a medic?
Because there's an international treaty on that.
What if you are at war with a unit that are all medics, with guns.
In that case, they're valid targets.
What if you drop a megaton tnt on a unit, with 2 medics walking by them?
As long as you weren't aiming for the medics, that's perfectly fine.
That's what they _said_, anyway. In reality, they _know_ that medics and wounded soldiers are a huge drain on the resources of the side they're on, so why not encourage the other side to allocate their resources in ways that are not all that effective at actually winning?
Good plan. I'd recommend something in the single-digit kiloton range. And keep in mind that it's only a nuke if it's intended to be used as one, as a self-termination device, it's perfectly okay.
A friend of mine who is a mathematician told me he rad an article that showed that the total amount of energy required to create a windmill would never be recovered by the device.
Oh, and he "read an article"? I can write lots of articles that show all kinds of things. Did the article pass any plausibility checks?
Yes, the OP does. In the 90s, these things did have a reputation for being notoriously unreliable and prone to rusting (even while still in the prospectus, as the saying went). However, since then, the guys at Opel got their act together and are now making decent cars again.
I have ZERO issue w/ foreigners coming to US soil for a better life. But if you're doing that, emmigrate!
I'm sure the majority of the H1B visa holders would happily accept that offer. After all, immigrant visas are even harder to come by than temporary work visas. You did know that, right?
Become a citizen, Work, spend money, pay taxes, vote!
You don't need to do the first in order to do one of the three things in the middle. Heck, the fourth is pretty much mandatory if you do the second or the third.
4) Public Health - while there is currently no such thing as a Public healthcare system like Canada and Europe have, You won't be denied treatment because you can't pay for it.
If it's an emergency, maybe. If it's a chronic condition that's not an emergency just yet, good luck.
You might, however, have to quit your job if you don't make enough or the employment benefits are woefully inadequate ...
Don't worry, your employer is quite likely to fire you, so you don't have to quit your job when you're sick.
Yes, and the sun isn't shining outside, since it can't make helium out of hydrogen and give off a whole bunch of energy. Duh.
Since you didn't understand what your science teacher tried to convey back then, why don't you look it up on wikipedia how the fusion reactions work? Hint: It's easier to make helium from deuterium and trition then from plain hydrogen.
If at any point in this process (say you stop it at 50%) the 'waste' is now weapons grade this will never be allowed in the US.
Producing weapons-grade enrichment (as in "can be used to build nuke") is _frikkin'_ expensive. You don't do that unless you _want_ to build a nuke, since it's a waste of money for any other purpose.
If it's still 'radioactive' you can still get energy from it. You can refine it, clean it up and shove it back through again.
Radioactivity is not a criterion for a nuclear fuel used in fusion or fission processes (but due to the mass of the atoms used in the latter, fission fuels are usually also radioactive). Maybe if you want to build a RTG (which isn't fusion or fission), but those are used only in space since they're beaten by pretty much any other power source in terrestrial applications.
In fact, nuclear waste is way more radioactive than nuclear fuel.