There may well be a solution and it may well be more expensive than alternative methods of generating power. By the way the problem of corrosion in molten salt reactors was suggested, but neither tested or qualified. It was also very expensive.
That does not fix the bio fouling problem and is not maintenance free. You are always stuck with both high capitol costs and high maintenance costs. This translates into expensive power.
That is not a citation. You assert that *machine* autonomy is more dangerous that the current nuclear arsenal. Of course in reality your just a Luddite pulling stuff out of your arse. Driver less cars are autonomous by the way.
Nuclear is carbon free to very low carbon footprint yes. But it is not clear that it is all that economical. And politically it is always a hard sell, and that itself makes it more expensive over the normal very high initial capital costs.
It didn't have a Hollywood ending. So most people are going to hate it. Of course if it did have a Hollywood ending they would all complain about boring boilerplate Hollywood plots.
Despite all of this, all these people will still be queuing up for the next movie with the fist fulls of cash required for a ticket. Movies are making good money.
Some people like to drive quite dangerously. Whats your point. Have your classic car and tow it to the track. The rest of us don't need you on the road with us. With your wet computer reflexes, borderline delusional software that overestimates its capabilities and frequent soft resets of sleepiness. And we haven't even got to the fact that your fleshy wet computer has very limited abilities in off design conditions.
Well there is also the Chinese room thing. Just because a machine can translate a language, does it know that language? Just because it maximizes some utility function (we don't seem to be doing that at all), does not mean "it" "knows" anything about wants, or what it is doing.
There is a reason high end machines rarely have these designs. Its not because all the engineers working on it are stupid either. When you get down to the details that matter, like getting.01mm repeatably, vibration and flexure analisis. Basic Cartesian systems win out over large numbers of joins and hinges. The few machines that have been developed are not better nor are they cheaper. Which is why there really are not many of them.
How do you refute a polygraph result? Some guy doesn't like you and just says that this set of wiggly lines means your lying. While what it really means is the guy interpreting wiggly lines for a job is just an asshole.
There is no theory on a polygraph. It is made up. Completely. Nothing about a polygraph is based on science. The guy that came up with this bullshit, also starting hooking these things up to plants and claimed they could tell what your thinking.
You don't need CNC and learning machining is not that hard. You don't make a mold for a one off part either. I got a mill and lathe setup for only 2k. Consider that high end 3d printers are more expensive than that its not bad. These days CNC and high end 3d printers are similar in price. As for cheap 3d printers. Well they are crap. We had one at a maker space, and you basically end up "machining" it afterwards anyway, its weak, inaccurate with an awful finish and the plastic is not exactly cheap.
Normal mechanical design can and does easily deal with this. You may not be able to make it fast with 8020 and crappy 3d printed plastic. But you get what you pay for.
Right now the stereolithography method has become much more viable for this sort of thing. The UV curing resins are now much cheaper and are comparable in price to to plastics used in FDM machines. With modern UV LEDs or laser didoes and a over simpler mechanical construction as well as better resolution. Personally i am looking at making one with a hacked tablet and a UV led array.
Commercial models are still a bit pricey. But the DIY market is starting to get stuck in.
We do know what radiation does. We do know the dose is insignificant compared to want you received from space. It really doesn't accumulate much at all. To be a concern it would need to accumulate trillions of fold increase. It can't do that. And these things have decay profiles on the order of a human life, not geological time scales.
It really is something we do know. For example that bad diet is *way* more of a risk. Driving ever in your life is more risk. We *know* from the *data* that this does not pose any measurable risk at all at these levels.
You guys are getting all your facts out of kilter. Iodine is the one that does the Thyroid thing and it doesn't bio accumulate at all (just take lots of non radioactive Iodine). Caesium-137 get distributed throughout the body and also does not bio accumulate (70 day half life), this can be reduced to a 30 day half life with treatment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C....
There is a lot of data for the threshold model with ionizing radiation exposure, but because of liability reasons no one is going to make policy with it.
If its a great book, then it won't translate to a movie well at all. Good movies are either written that way from the start, heavily adapted, or only a short story.
Slashdot Mirror
That is not qualified nor properly tested. Pop quiz how many hours in a year. How long do you want your reactor to last?
No it doesn't. It like all 2 party systems. You between shit and syphilis.
Tidal power is not wave power. It really is quite a different problem.
There may well be a solution and it may well be more expensive than alternative methods of generating power. By the way the problem of corrosion in molten salt reactors was suggested, but neither tested or qualified. It was also very expensive.
That does not fix the bio fouling problem and is not maintenance free. You are always stuck with both high capitol costs and high maintenance costs. This translates into expensive power.
That is not a citation. You assert that *machine* autonomy is more dangerous that the current nuclear arsenal. Of course in reality your just a Luddite pulling stuff out of your arse. Driver less cars are autonomous by the way.
It is a d20. We are rolling for damage.
Why worry about ocean acidification. The fish will/are all long gone before that is going to be a problem.
Nuclear is carbon free to very low carbon footprint yes. But it is not clear that it is all that economical. And politically it is always a hard sell, and that itself makes it more expensive over the normal very high initial capital costs.
It didn't have a Hollywood ending. So most people are going to hate it. Of course if it did have a Hollywood ending they would all complain about boring boilerplate Hollywood plots.
Despite all of this, all these people will still be queuing up for the next movie with the fist fulls of cash required for a ticket. Movies are making good money.
Some people like to drive quite dangerously. Whats your point. Have your classic car and tow it to the track. The rest of us don't need you on the road with us. With your wet computer reflexes, borderline delusional software that overestimates its capabilities and frequent soft resets of sleepiness. And we haven't even got to the fact that your fleshy wet computer has very limited abilities in off design conditions.
Don't use a meat bag to do a machines job.
Well there is also the Chinese room thing. Just because a machine can translate a language, does it know that language? Just because it maximizes some utility function (we don't seem to be doing that at all), does not mean "it" "knows" anything about wants, or what it is doing.
Autonomous tools are even less inherently safe.
Citation required.
Well predict what a dice roll will be. Yet that *is* based 100% on nothing but deterministic physics.
any net charge would be trivially detectable to have any effect on the interstellar scale. Run the numbers for gods sake.
There is a reason high end machines rarely have these designs. Its not because all the engineers working on it are stupid either. When you get down to the details that matter, like getting .01mm repeatably, vibration and flexure analisis. Basic Cartesian systems win out over large numbers of joins and hinges. The few machines that have been developed are not better nor are they cheaper. Which is why there really are not many of them.
How do you refute a polygraph result? Some guy doesn't like you and just says that this set of wiggly lines means your lying. While what it really means is the guy interpreting wiggly lines for a job is just an asshole.
There is no theory on a polygraph. It is made up. Completely. Nothing about a polygraph is based on science. The guy that came up with this bullshit, also starting hooking these things up to plants and claimed they could tell what your thinking.
You don't need CNC and learning machining is not that hard. You don't make a mold for a one off part either. I got a mill and lathe setup for only 2k. Consider that high end 3d printers are more expensive than that its not bad. These days CNC and high end 3d printers are similar in price. As for cheap 3d printers. Well they are crap. We had one at a maker space, and you basically end up "machining" it afterwards anyway, its weak, inaccurate with an awful finish and the plastic is not exactly cheap.
Normal mechanical design can and does easily deal with this. You may not be able to make it fast with 8020 and crappy 3d printed plastic. But you get what you pay for.
Right now the stereolithography method has become much more viable for this sort of thing. The UV curing resins are now much cheaper and are comparable in price to to plastics used in FDM machines. With modern UV LEDs or laser didoes and a over simpler mechanical construction as well as better resolution. Personally i am looking at making one with a hacked tablet and a UV led array.
Commercial models are still a bit pricey. But the DIY market is starting to get stuck in.
We do know what radiation does. We do know the dose is insignificant compared to want you received from space. It really doesn't accumulate much at all. To be a concern it would need to accumulate trillions of fold increase. It can't do that. And these things have decay profiles on the order of a human life, not geological time scales.
It really is something we do know. For example that bad diet is *way* more of a risk. Driving ever in your life is more risk. We *know* from the *data* that this does not pose any measurable risk at all at these levels.
You guys are getting all your facts out of kilter. Iodine is the one that does the Thyroid thing and it doesn't bio accumulate at all (just take lots of non radioactive Iodine). Caesium-137 get distributed throughout the body and also does not bio accumulate (70 day half life), this can be reduced to a 30 day half life with treatment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C....
There is a lot of data for the threshold model with ionizing radiation exposure, but because of liability reasons no one is going to make policy with it.
If its a great book, then it won't translate to a movie well at all. Good movies are either written that way from the start, heavily adapted, or only a short story.
The problem with this idea, is that it would make a great food source to the much faster replicating, and therefor evolving traditional life forms.