All you need then, is someone who can stand a single round in the ring and isn't a complete moron. Your pure bruiser fails the knockout, then gets suckered into a scholars mate.
I have seen the future of sports and it says 'I took a lot of body-blows in the fourth round and that affected my concentration. That's why I made a big mistake in the fifth round: I did not see him coming for my king,'
Hate to point this out, but Ares I is also just a bigger version of a current booster combined with a slightly improved old engine (all had been fully tested in LOADS of production). IOW, spacex AND NASA are doing the same thing.
What utter bullshit. There has not been a previous NASA vehicle that involved mounting a liquid fuelled second stage on top of a shuttle SRB.
The real difference is that the comparison is false since it is between a spacecraft in the lowest of orbits vs. a rocket that goes to at least leo.
But I would say that there is no reason to get snarky about it. Many of us who believe in NASA also believe in private enterprise. It is not one vs. the other. I will say that while I am not sold on ares I, I am a fan of the Ares V. We will need that kind of tonnage if we are really shooting for the moon (or mars) again. In addition, it will enable us to launch major sats across the solar system. Now, I just hope that we can afford to do it.
There is a need to get snarky, because you are wrong yet you speak arrogantly about being wrong. NASA is unlikely to succeed in its bold visions because it isn't trusted anymore. In these days of private-enterprise-for-the-win a government agency such as NASA cannot reach the sufficient level of size and complexity to pull of the missions asked for. Even the first time around, NASA ended up being accused of being excessively socialist.
The space shuttle, for all its faults, was a far more sophisticated machine than anything that 'alt.space' has produced so far and the vast majority of its missions were a success. Rutan has managed to kill three people with a faulty nitrous oxide tank. Musk has so far tlaunched nothing that hasn't blown up in mid air.
I am glad these historic buildings have been saved - the disrespect they had been shown drew uncomfortable parallels with what happened to Alan Turing after the war (a war which almost certainly wouldn't have been won without him)
I've been assembling satellite parts for a fairly small-time (on a space scale) project, and our work area looks far more professional than that, and I can definitely concur.
As for using cardboard boxes for weights on the ends of the wings - not exactly scientific is it? I think a lot of these new space entrepreneurs have got the idea into their head that precision and accuracy in space engineering was just due to overzealous government bureaucracy, and that lean, efficient private companies didn't need to bother with it.
For a start, SpaceShipTwo is simple a bigger version of an already tested craft, which was in development for longer than Ares I has. Second, Ares I is a much, much bigger vehicle. It will be able to heft 25t into orbit (not a pissy little suborbital trajectory)
If you are trying to make some point about private space flight being better, you should save it until they actually manage, 50 years behind those government agencies you think are so inefficient, to put men into orbit.
Anything which doesn't make a profit will be purged. Its inevitable. We will end up being a society that churns out nothing but burgers and shit movies because those are the most profitable things.
And you, all of your, helped make it happen. Give yourselves a pat on the back.
I thought the French had (marginally) more sense than the anglosphere in their choice of politician. Sarkozy just strikes me as a neoconservative dick.
Its just another part of the creeping trend towards your computer not being your computer anymore. The big boys love how you can use it to buy crap off them, but the fact you can also do your own thing with it annoys them, because it wastes time you could be buying crap.
I've felt that way as well; they've the majority of power over information so why shouldn't people do the one thing that tips the balance the other way a bit?
One day perhaps, there will be something analogous to Gandhi's salt march, where people break bullshit copyright laws publicly and in large groups as an act of civil disobedience to draw attention to the fact they are bullshit.
True, but for the most part the massive number of uploaders compensates for that (almost certainly temporary) deficiency.
Increases in the size of media files have slowed down, due to better compression algorithms and the limiting factor of what human senses can actually appreciate, whilst the next generation of broadband is set to give us another big jump in speed. This should overcome any leeching problems.
People compare the current actions of the US with the Nazis and on that basis it is far from unreasonable to extend the analogy and compare the EU to Communists.
We do much the same stuff, except instead of invoking national pride and military glory we simply tell you we are doing whats best for you, and you will understand one day, you poor deluded child.
You can't steal data. Its a physically nonsensical concept. The only way I can see actual theft working is if you were to use quantum teleportation to extract the electrons from one persons computer and place them in your own.
Distribution of trash media is part of what helps level the playing field. It means that people used to getting their data through conventional means now get it through the new medium, and thus are looking in the right place to find user generated content.
All our models for running a society and an economy use scarcity as a starting point; there is more demand for something than supply, and thus there must be a strong rule of law to make sure the resource is distributed properly (although I think its fair to say plenty of people disagree on the definition of 'properly')
Data is not scare though. In a P2P network, every person who demands also by definition supplies, thus demand can never outstrip supply.
They will lose this battle for mathematical rather than political reasons (the level of control they desire is impossible, and if they understood the technology they would know that) - but it interests me as a foreshadowing of a possible future.
Our society could well die from a resources shortage, but we might be able to save ourselves. Three technologies currently being researched, controlled nuclear fusion, autonomous robots, and universal fabrication, could conceivably bring the abundance we see in data to the majority of physical products and services. I listed them in order of the maturity of each field, but I believe that in my lifetime (I am 27 for reference) we could see them all reach a point where want can be effectively eliminated.
Of course, there are some people, the same people we are complaining about now, who don't want to see that. Desperate people are controllable people.
They aren't missing the point at all. The understand the point perfectly and that is why they don't like it.
P2P, especially torrenting, massively decentralises the process of distributing information. For centuries such technology has been held only be a self-selecting elite, who have appointed themselves as gatekeepers for societies discourse, believing they know what is best for us mere plebs to think. People using their bandwidth to help each other broadcast information instead of just downloading it from corporate and government sources scare the EU parliament. They can't be controlled, you see.
It is part of a wider move to reshape society that has been going on for at least a century.
If you imagine society as a tree structure, with the leaders at the top and the citizens at the bottom, and connections between members of society. Some of these are vertical ones that transcend the 'levels' of the tree, and represent the unequal relationships we have with those more powerful than us or less powerful. Some connections are horizontal ones between peers and equals. The method of control that has been preferred by western civilisation is the elimination of horizontal connections in society to make people more dependent on vertical ones.
In terms of the Internet, this is reflected by the constant legislation aimed at eliminating the Internet as a global communication network with a low barrier for entry for those wishing to transmit, and turning it into a mere conduit for delivering products and services of those in power. That is what the Internet has been to these people for the past 15 years - the fact we can use it for our own needs is to them a fault which needs to be corrected.
Rant over. Seems you caught me at a philosophical moment.
Because conscious beings, and all the things they value, are indistinguishable from non-sentient lumps as matter as far as the laws of physics are concerned.
Just preempting what a disturbing number of slashdotters will say based on the response to the metal shortage thread. What you are suggesting is blasphemy to the gods of neoliberalism.
Slashdot Mirror
All you need then, is someone who can stand a single round in the ring and isn't a complete moron. Your pure bruiser fails the knockout, then gets suckered into a scholars mate.
I have seen the future of sports and it says 'I took a lot of body-blows in the fourth round and that affected my concentration. That's why I made a big mistake in the fifth round: I did not see him coming for my king,'
What utter bullshit. There has not been a previous NASA vehicle that involved mounting a liquid fuelled second stage on top of a shuttle SRB.
There is a need to get snarky, because you are wrong yet you speak arrogantly about being wrong. NASA is unlikely to succeed in its bold visions because it isn't trusted anymore. In these days of private-enterprise-for-the-win a government agency such as NASA cannot reach the sufficient level of size and complexity to pull of the missions asked for. Even the first time around, NASA ended up being accused of being excessively socialist.
It must be a tiresome existence not being able to appreciate metaphor.
The space shuttle, for all its faults, was a far more sophisticated machine than anything that 'alt.space' has produced so far and the vast majority of its missions were a success. Rutan has managed to kill three people with a faulty nitrous oxide tank. Musk has so far tlaunched nothing that hasn't blown up in mid air.
I am glad these historic buildings have been saved - the disrespect they had been shown drew uncomfortable parallels with what happened to Alan Turing after the war (a war which almost certainly wouldn't have been won without him)
I've been assembling satellite parts for a fairly small-time (on a space scale) project, and our work area looks far more professional than that, and I can definitely concur.
As for using cardboard boxes for weights on the ends of the wings - not exactly scientific is it? I think a lot of these new space entrepreneurs have got the idea into their head that precision and accuracy in space engineering was just due to overzealous government bureaucracy, and that lean, efficient private companies didn't need to bother with it.
That is probably why their shit keeps blowing up.
Just out of interest, how long is the great wall of China?
We as a society have simply lost the capacity for large projects.
Apples and motherfucking Oranges!
For a start, SpaceShipTwo is simple a bigger version of an already tested craft, which was in development for longer than Ares I has. Second, Ares I is a much, much bigger vehicle. It will be able to heft 25t into orbit (not a pissy little suborbital trajectory)
If you are trying to make some point about private space flight being better, you should save it until they actually manage, 50 years behind those government agencies you think are so inefficient, to put men into orbit.
Anything which doesn't make a profit will be purged. Its inevitable. We will end up being a society that churns out nothing but burgers and shit movies because those are the most profitable things.
And you, all of your, helped make it happen. Give yourselves a pat on the back.
I thought the French had (marginally) more sense than the anglosphere in their choice of politician. Sarkozy just strikes me as a neoconservative dick.
Its just another part of the creeping trend towards your computer not being your computer anymore. The big boys love how you can use it to buy crap off them, but the fact you can also do your own thing with it annoys them, because it wastes time you could be buying crap.
I've felt that way as well; they've the majority of power over information so why shouldn't people do the one thing that tips the balance the other way a bit?
One day perhaps, there will be something analogous to Gandhi's salt march, where people break bullshit copyright laws publicly and in large groups as an act of civil disobedience to draw attention to the fact they are bullshit.
True, but for the most part the massive number of uploaders compensates for that (almost certainly temporary) deficiency.
Increases in the size of media files have slowed down, due to better compression algorithms and the limiting factor of what human senses can actually appreciate, whilst the next generation of broadband is set to give us another big jump in speed. This should overcome any leeching problems.
You know what, its a fair cop.
People compare the current actions of the US with the Nazis and on that basis it is far from unreasonable to extend the analogy and compare the EU to Communists.
We do much the same stuff, except instead of invoking national pride and military glory we simply tell you we are doing whats best for you, and you will understand one day, you poor deluded child.
You can't steal data. Its a physically nonsensical concept. The only way I can see actual theft working is if you were to use quantum teleportation to extract the electrons from one persons computer and place them in your own.
Distribution of trash media is part of what helps level the playing field. It means that people used to getting their data through conventional means now get it through the new medium, and thus are looking in the right place to find user generated content.
All our models for running a society and an economy use scarcity as a starting point; there is more demand for something than supply, and thus there must be a strong rule of law to make sure the resource is distributed properly (although I think its fair to say plenty of people disagree on the definition of 'properly')
Data is not scare though. In a P2P network, every person who demands also by definition supplies, thus demand can never outstrip supply.
They will lose this battle for mathematical rather than political reasons (the level of control they desire is impossible, and if they understood the technology they would know that) - but it interests me as a foreshadowing of a possible future.
Our society could well die from a resources shortage, but we might be able to save ourselves. Three technologies currently being researched, controlled nuclear fusion, autonomous robots, and universal fabrication, could conceivably bring the abundance we see in data to the majority of physical products and services. I listed them in order of the maturity of each field, but I believe that in my lifetime (I am 27 for reference) we could see them all reach a point where want can be effectively eliminated.
Of course, there are some people, the same people we are complaining about now, who don't want to see that. Desperate people are controllable people.
They aren't missing the point at all. The understand the point perfectly and that is why they don't like it.
P2P, especially torrenting, massively decentralises the process of distributing information. For centuries such technology has been held only be a self-selecting elite, who have appointed themselves as gatekeepers for societies discourse, believing they know what is best for us mere plebs to think. People using their bandwidth to help each other broadcast information instead of just downloading it from corporate and government sources scare the EU parliament. They can't be controlled, you see.
It is part of a wider move to reshape society that has been going on for at least a century.
If you imagine society as a tree structure, with the leaders at the top and the citizens at the bottom, and connections between members of society. Some of these are vertical ones that transcend the 'levels' of the tree, and represent the unequal relationships we have with those more powerful than us or less powerful. Some connections are horizontal ones between peers and equals. The method of control that has been preferred by western civilisation is the elimination of horizontal connections in society to make people more dependent on vertical ones.
In terms of the Internet, this is reflected by the constant legislation aimed at eliminating the Internet as a global communication network with a low barrier for entry for those wishing to transmit, and turning it into a mere conduit for delivering products and services of those in power. That is what the Internet has been to these people for the past 15 years - the fact we can use it for our own needs is to them a fault which needs to be corrected.
Rant over. Seems you caught me at a philosophical moment.
I'm free for raid tonight at 8pm GMT. Bagsie not tanking Merkel.
Because conscious beings, and all the things they value, are indistinguishable from non-sentient lumps as matter as far as the laws of physics are concerned.
Wrong. There is still a substantial delta-V seperating us from these asteroids. As for 'if we can put a man on the moon...' please read my sig
If you want to kill everyone on a particular planet, vapourising its surface is way more efficient than trying to blow apart the planet.
Charging for incoming as well!? That is like someone arse-raping you and then charging you for their dick.
But... but... teh market is better!!!111
Just preempting what a disturbing number of slashdotters will say based on the response to the metal shortage thread. What you are suggesting is blasphemy to the gods of neoliberalism.
Thanks for doing the actual legwork for me :) I'm so lazy with citing my sources