So it does not surprise me at all to hear that some people can see E&M fields
I also don't want to come across as delusional, and I don't really see EM fields like a lot of people claim. It's just that when I was younger, and (confirmation bias maybe) in the presence of transformers. I saw a slight wavy blackness at the edge of my vision.
It's possible that more people get this all the time, and just don't notice it. It is very slight, and very transient. The transformer I walked past to check it out was also later determined to be malfunctioning (it began arcing electricity a year later).
It could be a completely benign aspect as well, and thus not really influenced by evolutionary pressures. I'm sure that until the 20th century, the chances of someone being exposed to a strong EM field were pretty low (Excepting thunderstorms perhaps), and since getting struck by lightning often has other warning signs (Like a giant ass thundercloud), being able to slightly see/feel the EM field isn't that advantageous.
For all I know, I could have just ingested too much iron as a kid and a strong field messes with something in my retina.
I don't even know if my vision is still good enough to produce the effect again. I think I am going to go take a walk past some places where I remember it happened and see if it occurs again. If it does, I'll definately contact Randi.
I'd have to think of some test conditions too. Maybe a bright room with no variation in the lighting or colors. Incandescent bulbs or sunlight would be nice for producing light with no extra EM fields. Some sort of wall housing the equipment to produce a field that I can't see. A computer randomly generating a control signal for the equipment. Maybe give me a dial that I can turn to indicate how strong the waves I'm seeing are.
You should actually be tested. What you describe seem suspiciously like confirmation bias.
I agree with you. For a while that's why I discounted it until I got the shock from what was effectively an AC current running through my body to ground (literally). I was collecting worms to go fishing and an idiot friend of mine gave the chair I was in a kick and caused me to fall and have my elbow sink into the soft soil. It went from my hand through my right arm to my elbow. Just weak enough not to damage, but strong enough that I couldn't let go without extreme effort. During that time I definately experienced the black waves.
Now, it is also possible that it is related to a blood pressure issue. That is certainly possible especially given the AC power grounding situation I experienced. I did chalk it up to confirmation bias when I was younger until that moment. Still certainly possible, but since the 'effect' was a much more obvious manifestation of something that I earlier suspected, it removed some of the doubt in my mind. (Could have just been fluctuations in my blood pressure since I'm sure my heart behaved differently during that period, but would it behave differently in a weaker field like from a transformer is the real question).
I'm going to start documenting (should have earlier) when this occurs before looking for causes. Not that it will prove anything until I sit myself in an anechoic chamber, have someone else manipulate the fields while recording my observations. I am curious to find out, since the black waves are definitely there, and it would be interesting to know the cause, and not just the correlation.
Go ahead, let them cheat. They'll be paying for it once they get a job based on their "degree" and suddenly realize they don't know fuckall about what they're doing.
And the company goes: "Well I'm not hiring anyone from THAT university again".
The schools do have an incentive to curtail cheating.
As a child, I found that if I were to walk under/near certain transformers, I started to see black waves at the very edge of my vision. I couldn't really describe it as they tended to be fairly quick, and explaining to somone just what waves of black at the edge of your vision would look like was/is difficult.
I grew up near a steel mill, and their furnaces were electric, and on a hill near where I lived there was this MASSIVE collection of electrical equipment (Transformers, relays, etc). If I were to walk along the outer perimiter of this area, I would see those waves again.
I've noticed this my entire life, and it happens rarely, but is always associated with electrical equipment. I also got the same 'waves' when I accidentally grabbed a makeshift fishing worm extractor (essentially an AC cord attached to a long metal rod you stick in the ground) I DEFINITELY saw the waves in my vision then (and nearly was electrocuted).
Now, is this something that other people have in the presence of very large em fields? Or did I stick a nail up my nose when I was a toddler and forgot about it?
It's not magic in any case, so I don't think I could go for Randi's offer right?
The advantage of PCs running Windows is that it has multiple walled gardens: Battle.net, Steam, etc. You can start your own if you don't like the console maker's, or you can join someone's even if the console maker thinks your business is too small.
And then you get sued for violating the DMCA because you needed to 'circumvent' activision's walled garden.
Though I would very much wish for Activision to shoot itself in the foot by disconnecting games which are using a third party service. But knowing our courts, they would win.
And I want a flying car and a teleporter, but that doesn't meant I would go out and buy something that didn't work because I like the concept of what they claim they want to do.
Wishful thinking becomes dangerous to the point where you are tempted to sink money in to something that so obviously will not work.
We would all *love* the free energy pseudoscience crazies to actually make good on their claims, that doesn't mean it is a worthwile endeavour that we should waste money on.
And I'd like people on Slashdot to pay attention to the context of the people they reply to. Of course there are technical hurdles that may or may not be surmountable.
The point wasn't that he was worried a technical issue would stop this, but a policy issue in the form of bandwidth caps.
It really would suck for a new service to fail not because of any real technical limitation but the greed of third parties.
So who owns the patent, how much extra does it cost, are there any materials not normally used in concrete that we should be concerned about.
With the way things are going, it will probably work out like this:
Monsanto owns the patent, it costs less than what we use now, but it has asbestos, and 10 years after installation if we don't treat it with a special chemical (patented by Monsanto) the asbestos is released spontaneously.
this will just lead to the escalator effect... Rather then continuing to walk up or down the stairs as they move, people just get on and stand still. The same will happen with these walkways, rather then getting on and adding their own walking pace to the 9km/h, they will stand still and get in everyone elses way.
I invite you to the DC metro. While on heavy tourist days you do get people standing there, for the most part Stand Right, Walk Left seems to work.
So you disagree with me.. by immediately stating the EXACTLY the same thing that I did?
You agree that it can stand a century without care. But that century takes a toll on the structure (which I also stated), and probably would prevent it from standing another century in the same fashion.
I'm sorry I wasn't more clear. I said that wooden buildings may survive a century without care. I didn't mean to imply that they would be habitable after a century without care except in very rare circumstances.
The whole point of this conversation was someone wondering why we don't build things to last 1000 years before the first major repairs are necessary. A log home that survives (again, survives is the key word there) for 100 years isn't in the same order of magnitude of the millenium timeframe he was calling for.
Again, a wood structure may survive a centry, but it would take a hell of a lot of work to bring it back to something usable as a home. I basically meant that you could probably use the same logs if you took it down, gave them a serious borate treatment, cut out rotten or weathered sections and replaced them with plugs and patches, then rebuilt the house.
That's what I meant by survive. The same way in which someone who gets their arms and legs removed due to extreme frostbite survives.
Yes, the library is a more free and open system than steam. Congratulations. You have shown a free government funded system allows more ease of access than a business model.
Irrelevant to the point. Neither the library nor Steam are required to do what Steam is doing. Private libraries are able to do so as well.
And I have never heard of anyone losing their account for letting someone else play it so unless you can find that provision you're just being cynical for the sake of making your point.
Yeah just being cynical. These sorts of statements are practically boilerplate for accounts these days. But since you asked: From section freaking ONE of the Steam user agreement: You may not reveal, share or otherwise allow others to use your password or Account.... Valve has the right to terminate or cancel your Account or a particular Subscription at any time....
So there it is, black and white, from Valve's own website. You are NOT allowed to let someone else access your account, and Valve may terminate your account at any time for whatever reason it so decides.
For insulation I'd recommend using sprayed on expanding foam on the exterior. Then cover that with a rubberized coating akin to rhino truck bed liner. The insulation will not sustain a flame in case of fire. When it's protected from UV and water it should last a very very long time and provide superb insulation compared to batting or pretty much anything else.
I'm not sure of the expanding foam, but polystyrene (untreated) is known for housing insects when used outdoors (or underground)
Wooden buildings can commonly stand a century or so without care,
That is simply not true. Wooden buildings may survive a century without care, but they certainly cannot be left to the elements without major work over the years.
I know this because I lived in Upstate NY in a log cabin for several years. Every 20 years or so a log home requires a good once over, treatment for insects/mold, rechinking, etc. The wood itself may survive, but it requires maintenance and certainly won't last 100 years without care except in the most rare cases.
I also grew up down the road from one of the oldest log homes built in the United States (1705) That required major restoration. While some of these things may last a while, it is usually under ideal circumstances.
And let's not forget the major point here, I'm not arguing that things can't last long, I'm saying that trying to design homes that last for 1000 years without serious renovations is an exercise in folly.
I disagree with that statement. The Pantheon has been used, altered, gutted, and refitted several times. I'm sure that during that period refurbishment has been performed.
That said, yes, concrete will last a while. I should have been more clear and now I regret not specifically mentioning concrete when I said stonework in my original post. (I initially mentioned it, but deleted it when I felt it was covered by the more general stonework).
Countertops might not be too bad, but for an example of an area with a lot of granite, take a geiger counter to a graveyard.
I don't know how stainless steel would hold up over 500 years of use. I do, however, have a scrapyard full of stainless steel parts that have worn out and are replaced every couple of years in industrial manufacturing. I'm certain that it would wear out through simple erosion if used as plumbing in a short timeframe (100 years or less)
Glass would have to be thick enough and the frame designed with extreme tolerance to keep from fracturing the glass as the foundation settles. Unless of course, you are building into the bedrock, but then you should just not have glass at all because it definately wouldn't survive even a mild earthquake. And even in geologically 'dead' Pennsylvania, I think there were at least 10 at glass breaking levels within 200km of Harrisburg since 1974.
I'm not sure how true this is these days, but I always had the impression that, overall, European houses were of the built to last category, while US houses were rather faster and cheaper in construction. 1000 years without any kind of rework sounds a bit overengineered to me, though.
I think there is a difference between built to last, and built so that it's 1000 years before major renovations are required.
Many buildings in the US were built just as well as their European counterparts, but we lose a LOT to people who want something bigger or more modern. There are also few homes that have a succession of owners who have the financial means to perform the maintenance on an aging home. Mount Vernon, George Washington's home, was near collapse before it was purchased with the intent to renovate it.
Modern US homes do suffer from the problems that you are referring to, and I refuse to purchase (or rent) any of the homes in modern developments. I won't reward the developers or the enablers who continue to turn our countryside into throw-away cookiecutter landscape (Personal rant concluded)
But back on point, there are simply parts of homes that wear out. Plastics degrade, roofing is subjected to continuous weather (Stick a stone outside in the sun/wind/rain/snow for 500 years and see what happens). Technologies change (Anyone renovating even a 75 yr old house will know). Every known material will wear out during use.
Take a look at the stairs in some of buildings in DC. These stone staircases have significant indentations worn into them from people simply walking on them for less than 300 years. (I'm not sure if they have been repaired or replaced, so it could even be less) And of course, this ignores some of the issues with the environment changing. Rivers and streams change course even over such short times. Consider how much the Capitol of the Aztec empire has changed over a mere 500 years.
A better approach might not be to design things to last 500-1000 years, but design things to be easily repaired and replaced when they inevitably need to be.
Bedrock. Dynamite. Wheelbarrow. Hammer and chisel.
Other than that, I think you're right.
My only issue is that Great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-granddad had horrible architectural style.
- i.e. 1000 years without major rework (i.e. replacement of siding, roof, or interior).
You would be hard pressed to find a nation that lasts nearly that long. It would be incredibly hard to design for as there are no modern materials that have been around long enough for us to know conclusively how they would behave after even 200 years of weathering. Our first hand experience would be limited to stonework as I don't know of any other structures that have lasted that long. Perhaps there are a few, but certainly not without major rework.
I don't think it's even close to possible to do what you suggest.
No, that was just the estimated amount of time before dust accumulation on the solar panels would prevent it from receiving adequate power. The rovers and their components were never designed, estimated to last, or "warrantied" for 90 days, even as a low-ball minimum-guarantee.
Wow. You really are taking issue with the statement, "amount of time they were expected to operate", and suggesting that 'estimated amount of time' before they ceased to receive adequate power is that necessary of a distinction?
Of course, this is slashdot. I should expect the pedantry.
First off, build a list of local electricians and plumbers, and the name of whomever is going to sign off on this house with regard to permits and other legal issues. IE: People who know your local regulations.
Get their opinion and evaluate their willingness to work with you, because the last thing you want is a finished project that gets condemned.
Because of it's rarity it costs much more than helium right now. That, it would seem, could change soon enough.
If we ramp up production of Neon it could even drop in price. I doubt that there is even a fraction of the production capability for neon as there is for other more 'useful' gases. The process itself is no more expensive, and we currently aren't extracting enough to even marginally alter the atmospheric percentage of neon.
*Groan* Ok, so the safe recommended distance on highways is roughly 100 feet. What is the worst that can happen if you cross that limit, and what will happen if the police catches you?
What's the worst that could happen? You kill or maim someone, the police arrest you for manslaughter or reckless endangerment.
65' in the ocean is NOT far. So lets say you get close and your craft loses its propulsion? (Hell, a smart person keeps oars as backup even for a simple bass boat in a lake because it happens a lot.) You aren't going to row your ocean-going craft to safety, it's too large. Your craft is drifting and could end up in the boom or colliding with the other ship.
You should also realize that the reason that sailors have been historically portrayed as maimed is because it happens a LOT. It's dangerous out there, and part of the reason you keep your ships a certain distance apart is because doing otherwise is a good way to get people hurt or killed.
Let's not forget that the people most likely to be killed or injured on the job are fishermen. You know, those guys that operate boats and booms in the gulf and the ocean.
isn't surprising. Between Ticketmaster, promoters, sponsors, concert hall "renovation fees", parking fees, etc ad nauseum, and the fact that we're in a recession, most bands large enough to tour have been priced right out of the largest target market for concerts - teens and young adults
Further down in the thread someone mentioned 'cheap' seats for a Prince concert going for $200.
The uber-famous have reached a level where their own lack of competition has hurt them. If I'm interested in music, it is going to take a lot for me to justify a $170 price jump from a moderately successful band that plays music I like to this 'elite' level of concert.
For $200 I can get parquet box seats for my wife and I at a major theater for all but the most popular shows. Hell I had tickets on the first row balcony to the original cast of Spam-A-Lot for $75
But all the additional fees, you are correct about that. Ticketmaster is a ripoff, and all the processing fees added onto it are outrageous.
There is no reason that a $25 ticket should cost you $40 after all the fees are applied.
That must be why my father spends his time sculpting stone. I never knew that being an elderly man covered in dust and mud made one such a chick magnet.
Boy will those ladies be pissed when they find out about the side effects of prostate-cancer surgery.
Slashdot Mirror
So it does not surprise me at all to hear that some people can see E&M fields
I also don't want to come across as delusional, and I don't really see EM fields like a lot of people claim. It's just that when I was younger, and (confirmation bias maybe) in the presence of transformers. I saw a slight wavy blackness at the edge of my vision.
It's possible that more people get this all the time, and just don't notice it. It is very slight, and very transient. The transformer I walked past to check it out was also later determined to be malfunctioning (it began arcing electricity a year later).
It could be a completely benign aspect as well, and thus not really influenced by evolutionary pressures. I'm sure that until the 20th century, the chances of someone being exposed to a strong EM field were pretty low (Excepting thunderstorms perhaps), and since getting struck by lightning often has other warning signs (Like a giant ass thundercloud), being able to slightly see/feel the EM field isn't that advantageous.
For all I know, I could have just ingested too much iron as a kid and a strong field messes with something in my retina.
I don't even know if my vision is still good enough to produce the effect again. I think I am going to go take a walk past some places where I remember it happened and see if it occurs again. If it does, I'll definately contact Randi.
I'd have to think of some test conditions too. Maybe a bright room with no variation in the lighting or colors. Incandescent bulbs or sunlight would be nice for producing light with no extra EM fields. Some sort of wall housing the equipment to produce a field that I can't see. A computer randomly generating a control signal for the equipment. Maybe give me a dial that I can turn to indicate how strong the waves I'm seeing are.
Heh, as a test engineer, this could be fun.
You should actually be tested. What you describe seem suspiciously like confirmation bias.
I agree with you. For a while that's why I discounted it until I got the shock from what was effectively an AC current running through my body to ground (literally). I was collecting worms to go fishing and an idiot friend of mine gave the chair I was in a kick and caused me to fall and have my elbow sink into the soft soil. It went from my hand through my right arm to my elbow. Just weak enough not to damage, but strong enough that I couldn't let go without extreme effort. During that time I definately experienced the black waves.
Now, it is also possible that it is related to a blood pressure issue. That is certainly possible especially given the AC power grounding situation I experienced. I did chalk it up to confirmation bias when I was younger until that moment. Still certainly possible, but since the 'effect' was a much more obvious manifestation of something that I earlier suspected, it removed some of the doubt in my mind. (Could have just been fluctuations in my blood pressure since I'm sure my heart behaved differently during that period, but would it behave differently in a weaker field like from a transformer is the real question).
I'm going to start documenting (should have earlier) when this occurs before looking for causes. Not that it will prove anything until I sit myself in an anechoic chamber, have someone else manipulate the fields while recording my observations. I am curious to find out, since the black waves are definitely there, and it would be interesting to know the cause, and not just the correlation.
Go ahead, let them cheat. They'll be paying for it once they get a job based on their "degree" and suddenly realize they don't know fuckall about what they're doing.
And the company goes: "Well I'm not hiring anyone from THAT university again".
The schools do have an incentive to curtail cheating.
As a child, I found that if I were to walk under/near certain transformers, I started to see black waves at the very edge of my vision. I couldn't really describe it as they tended to be fairly quick, and explaining to somone just what waves of black at the edge of your vision would look like was/is difficult.
I grew up near a steel mill, and their furnaces were electric, and on a hill near where I lived there was this MASSIVE collection of electrical equipment (Transformers, relays, etc). If I were to walk along the outer perimiter of this area, I would see those waves again.
I've noticed this my entire life, and it happens rarely, but is always associated with electrical equipment. I also got the same 'waves' when I accidentally grabbed a makeshift fishing worm extractor (essentially an AC cord attached to a long metal rod you stick in the ground) I DEFINITELY saw the waves in my vision then (and nearly was electrocuted).
Now, is this something that other people have in the presence of very large em fields? Or did I stick a nail up my nose when I was a toddler and forgot about it?
It's not magic in any case, so I don't think I could go for Randi's offer right?
Proof via ad-absurdium that IQ does not properly reflect one's intelligence
Feynman: IQ = 120
GWB: IQ = 135
Just because you disagree with someone's actions doesn't mean that person isn't intelligent.
The advantage of PCs running Windows is that it has multiple walled gardens: Battle.net, Steam, etc. You can start your own if you don't like the console maker's, or you can join someone's even if the console maker thinks your business is too small.
And then you get sued for violating the DMCA because you needed to 'circumvent' activision's walled garden.
Though I would very much wish for Activision to shoot itself in the foot by disconnecting games which are using a third party service. But knowing our courts, they would win.
And I want a flying car and a teleporter, but that doesn't meant I would go out and buy something that didn't work because I like the concept of what they claim they want to do.
Wishful thinking becomes dangerous to the point where you are tempted to sink money in to something that so obviously will not work.
We would all *love* the free energy pseudoscience crazies to actually make good on their claims, that doesn't mean it is a worthwile endeavour that we should waste money on.
And I'd like people on Slashdot to pay attention to the context of the people they reply to. Of course there are technical hurdles that may or may not be surmountable.
The point wasn't that he was worried a technical issue would stop this, but a policy issue in the form of bandwidth caps.
It really would suck for a new service to fail not because of any real technical limitation but the greed of third parties.
So who owns the patent, how much extra does it cost, are there any materials not normally used in concrete that we should be concerned about.
With the way things are going, it will probably work out like this:
Monsanto owns the patent, it costs less than what we use now, but it has asbestos, and 10 years after installation if we don't treat it with a special chemical (patented by Monsanto) the asbestos is released spontaneously.
this will just lead to the escalator effect... Rather then continuing to walk up or down the stairs as they move, people just get on and stand still. The same will happen with these walkways, rather then getting on and adding their own walking pace to the 9km/h, they will stand still and get in everyone elses way.
I invite you to the DC metro. While on heavy tourist days you do get people standing there, for the most part Stand Right, Walk Left seems to work.
So you disagree with me .. by immediately stating the EXACTLY the same thing that I did?
You agree that it can stand a century without care. But that century takes a toll on the structure (which I also stated), and probably would prevent it from standing another century in the same fashion.
I'm sorry I wasn't more clear. I said that wooden buildings may survive a century without care. I didn't mean to imply that they would be habitable after a century without care except in very rare circumstances.
The whole point of this conversation was someone wondering why we don't build things to last 1000 years before the first major repairs are necessary. A log home that survives (again, survives is the key word there) for 100 years isn't in the same order of magnitude of the millenium timeframe he was calling for.
Again, a wood structure may survive a centry, but it would take a hell of a lot of work to bring it back to something usable as a home. I basically meant that you could probably use the same logs if you took it down, gave them a serious borate treatment, cut out rotten or weathered sections and replaced them with plugs and patches, then rebuilt the house.
That's what I meant by survive. The same way in which someone who gets their arms and legs removed due to extreme frostbite survives.
Plus, it breaks the convention of naming things after the person who discovered them.
Yeah, Mr. Liter, Dr. Meter, and Reginald the Second are going to be really steamed if this is adopted.
Yes, the library is a more free and open system than steam. Congratulations. You have shown a free government funded system allows more ease of access than a business model.
Irrelevant to the point. Neither the library nor Steam are required to do what Steam is doing. Private libraries are able to do so as well.
And I have never heard of anyone losing their account for letting someone else play it so unless you can find that provision you're just being cynical for the sake of making your point.
Yeah just being cynical. These sorts of statements are practically boilerplate for accounts these days. But since you asked:
... ...
From section freaking ONE of the Steam user agreement:
You may not reveal, share or otherwise allow others to use your password or Account.
Valve has the right to terminate or cancel your Account or a particular Subscription at any time.
So there it is, black and white, from Valve's own website. You are NOT allowed to let someone else access your account, and Valve may terminate your account at any time for whatever reason it so decides.
For insulation I'd recommend using sprayed on expanding foam on the exterior. Then cover that with a rubberized coating akin to rhino truck bed liner. The insulation will not sustain a flame in case of fire. When it's protected from UV and water it should last a very very long time and provide superb insulation compared to batting or pretty much anything else.
I'm not sure of the expanding foam, but polystyrene (untreated) is known for housing insects when used outdoors (or underground)
Wooden buildings can commonly stand a century or so without care,
That is simply not true. Wooden buildings may survive a century without care, but they certainly cannot be left to the elements without major work over the years.
I know this because I lived in Upstate NY in a log cabin for several years. Every 20 years or so a log home requires a good once over, treatment for insects/mold, rechinking, etc. The wood itself may survive, but it requires maintenance and certainly won't last 100 years without care except in the most rare cases.
I also grew up down the road from one of the oldest log homes built in the United States (1705) That required major restoration. While some of these things may last a while, it is usually under ideal circumstances.
And let's not forget the major point here, I'm not arguing that things can't last long, I'm saying that trying to design homes that last for 1000 years without serious renovations is an exercise in folly.
(unlike the Pantheon)
I disagree with that statement. The Pantheon has been used, altered, gutted, and refitted several times. I'm sure that during that period refurbishment has been performed.
That said, yes, concrete will last a while. I should have been more clear and now I regret not specifically mentioning concrete when I said stonework in my original post. (I initially mentioned it, but deleted it when I felt it was covered by the more general stonework).
You can build everything out of rock (granite) and stainless steel. Use very thick materials. Glass lasts centuries.
Granite might not be the best choice:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granite#Natural_radiation
Countertops might not be too bad, but for an example of an area with a lot of granite, take a geiger counter to a graveyard.
I don't know how stainless steel would hold up over 500 years of use. I do, however, have a scrapyard full of stainless steel parts that have worn out and are replaced every couple of years in industrial manufacturing. I'm certain that it would wear out through simple erosion if used as plumbing in a short timeframe (100 years or less)
Glass would have to be thick enough and the frame designed with extreme tolerance to keep from fracturing the glass as the foundation settles. Unless of course, you are building into the bedrock, but then you should just not have glass at all because it definately wouldn't survive even a mild earthquake. And even in geologically 'dead' Pennsylvania, I think there were at least 10 at glass breaking levels within 200km of Harrisburg since 1974.
I'm not sure how true this is these days, but I always had the impression that, overall, European houses were of the built to last category, while US houses were rather faster and cheaper in construction. 1000 years without any kind of rework sounds a bit overengineered to me, though.
I think there is a difference between built to last, and built so that it's 1000 years before major renovations are required.
Many buildings in the US were built just as well as their European counterparts, but we lose a LOT to people who want something bigger or more modern. There are also few homes that have a succession of owners who have the financial means to perform the maintenance on an aging home. Mount Vernon, George Washington's home, was near collapse before it was purchased with the intent to renovate it.
Modern US homes do suffer from the problems that you are referring to, and I refuse to purchase (or rent) any of the homes in modern developments. I won't reward the developers or the enablers who continue to turn our countryside into throw-away cookiecutter landscape (Personal rant concluded)
But back on point, there are simply parts of homes that wear out. Plastics degrade, roofing is subjected to continuous weather (Stick a stone outside in the sun/wind/rain/snow for 500 years and see what happens). Technologies change (Anyone renovating even a 75 yr old house will know). Every known material will wear out during use.
Take a look at the stairs in some of buildings in DC. These stone staircases have significant indentations worn into them from people simply walking on them for less than 300 years. (I'm not sure if they have been repaired or replaced, so it could even be less) And of course, this ignores some of the issues with the environment changing. Rivers and streams change course even over such short times. Consider how much the Capitol of the Aztec empire has changed over a mere 500 years.
A better approach might not be to design things to last 500-1000 years, but design things to be easily repaired and replaced when they inevitably need to be.
Bedrock. Dynamite. Wheelbarrow. Hammer and chisel.
Other than that, I think you're right.
My only issue is that Great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-granddad had horrible architectural style.
- i.e. 1000 years without major rework (i.e. replacement of siding, roof, or interior).
You would be hard pressed to find a nation that lasts nearly that long. It would be incredibly hard to design for as there are no modern materials that have been around long enough for us to know conclusively how they would behave after even 200 years of weathering. Our first hand experience would be limited to stonework as I don't know of any other structures that have lasted that long. Perhaps there are a few, but certainly not without major rework.
I don't think it's even close to possible to do what you suggest.
No, that was just the estimated amount of time before dust accumulation on the solar panels would prevent it from receiving adequate power. The rovers and their components were never designed, estimated to last, or "warrantied" for 90 days, even as a low-ball minimum-guarantee.
Wow. You really are taking issue with the statement, "amount of time they were expected to operate", and suggesting that 'estimated amount of time' before they ceased to receive adequate power is that necessary of a distinction?
Of course, this is slashdot. I should expect the pedantry.
(Sorry, I meant to say this is http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=....)
First off, build a list of local electricians and plumbers, and the name of whomever is going to sign off on this house with regard to permits and other legal issues. IE: People who know your local regulations.
Get their opinion and evaluate their willingness to work with you, because the last thing you want is a finished project that gets condemned.
Because of it's rarity it costs much more than helium right now. That, it would seem, could change soon enough.
If we ramp up production of Neon it could even drop in price. I doubt that there is even a fraction of the production capability for neon as there is for other more 'useful' gases. The process itself is no more expensive, and we currently aren't extracting enough to even marginally alter the atmospheric percentage of neon.
*Groan* Ok, so the safe recommended distance on highways is roughly 100 feet. What is the worst that can happen if you cross that limit, and what will happen if the police catches you?
What's the worst that could happen?
You kill or maim someone, the police arrest you for manslaughter or reckless endangerment.
65' in the ocean is NOT far. So lets say you get close and your craft loses its propulsion? (Hell, a smart person keeps oars as backup even for a simple bass boat in a lake because it happens a lot.) You aren't going to row your ocean-going craft to safety, it's too large. Your craft is drifting and could end up in the boom or colliding with the other ship.
You should also realize that the reason that sailors have been historically portrayed as maimed is because it happens a LOT. It's dangerous out there, and part of the reason you keep your ships a certain distance apart is because doing otherwise is a good way to get people hurt or killed.
Let's not forget that the people most likely to be killed or injured on the job are fishermen. You know, those guys that operate boats and booms in the gulf and the ocean.
isn't surprising. Between Ticketmaster, promoters, sponsors, concert hall "renovation fees", parking fees, etc ad nauseum, and the fact that we're in a recession, most bands large enough to tour have been priced right out of the largest target market for concerts - teens and young adults
Further down in the thread someone mentioned 'cheap' seats for a Prince concert going for $200.
The uber-famous have reached a level where their own lack of competition has hurt them. If I'm interested in music, it is going to take a lot for me to justify a $170 price jump from a moderately successful band that plays music I like to this 'elite' level of concert.
For $200 I can get parquet box seats for my wife and I at a major theater for all but the most popular shows. Hell I had tickets on the first row balcony to the original cast of Spam-A-Lot for $75
But all the additional fees, you are correct about that. Ticketmaster is a ripoff, and all the processing fees added onto it are outrageous.
There is no reason that a $25 ticket should cost you $40 after all the fees are applied.
The purpose of being an artist is to get laid.
That must be why my father spends his time sculpting stone. I never knew that being an elderly man covered in dust and mud made one such a chick magnet.
Boy will those ladies be pissed when they find out about the side effects of prostate-cancer surgery.