Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 13 Dec 2021 @ 12:49am
Re: Re: Re:
"Now while I think the US will take a lot less time than the 20-odd years you predicted to regain the manufacturing edge, that's more a political will thing."
If anything 20 years is on the shorter side. US universities and colleges long ceased offering the needed education because industry offered few such jobs. So there are no teachers, few experts, no knowledge base, no interest. The first decade would have to be subsidized by state money paying universities to acquire and retain teachers - and guarantee well-paid jobs using those skills to lure talents to go for those courses rather than BMA's, medicine or Law. Then you'd have to offer incentives to make corporations build new factories at home - ones they won't be able to use until the production line stops churning out duds.
Before that new mechanism starts working properly and the costs start coming down this will be an expensive exercise. And the only one able to pay it will in the end be the taxpayer.
I can't see any US administration surviving more than one term after trying to implement that and said policy will be dismantled by the next administration.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 13 Dec 2021 @ 12:38am
Re: Re: Re: You got your dates wrong
"Chairman Mao kept China poor with famine (Great Leap Forward, 1958-1961) and chaos (Cultural Revolution, 1966-1976). China's embrace of World markets and economic growth only started in 1980, under Deng Xiaoping."
Mao and his merry gang managed to plug progress for a long time...however, China beginning to kowtow to hyper-industrialization and manufacturing was one of Mao's core ideas. The concept was formulated back then.
That Xiaoping was the first office holder not to be utterly incompetent at making that vision a reality doesn't mean that's the point where they laid the plan. Xiaoping's contributed amendments to the policy made it a game changer - most notably shifting the focus from China being a world leader in manufacturing to China becoming the world manufacturing center. The whole "Golden Shield" project began at that time as well, to fend off the sudden influx of western culture concomitant with the globalized economy.
I'd say split the difference and put the concrete emergence of the chinese plan of world domination at 1970.
"The most serious wrong turn in US economic policy toward China came with a bi-partisan free trade agreement ("Permanent Normal Trade Relations") in year 2000."
I'll assert the iceberg hit the titanic way before then. Around the 2000's, western industry had already to large extent outsourced most of their supply chain.
"There were hopes that as China became richer, it would become more mellow and democratic like Taiwan and South Korea."
Such was the public screed. From a more cynical perspective any nation will always liberally extend in trade agreements any advantages which the opposition already possesses in reality.
From the pov of every corporate lobby in the US normalizing trade with China was something only foolish cold warriors in need of swift replacement would oppose. And so trade relations were normalized, because the US body politic is nothing if not a faithful dog to the holders of its leash.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 13 Dec 2021 @ 12:19am
Re: Re: Re:
"The researchers are not saying that the light pollution is threatening to interfere with ability to detect civilization-killing asteroids, are they?"
They are, in fact. Google; "Harvard astronomer says Starlink could affect hunt for near-Earth asteroids".
"So your FUD scenario is just made up."
Kind of you to prove your dunning-kruger by making solid assertions debunked by about five seconds on a search engine.
"There's plenty of desolate places like Antarctica where one wouldn't expect any flying over satellites to interfere with asteroid-detecting or regular science, would it?"
That's not how it works. I suggest a grade school course in celestial mechanics - notably how the poles will give the least arc coverage of the night sky possible on the globe.
Also, is pushing astronomy budgets by about three orders of magnitude coming out of your paycheck?
"And then there are space-based telescopes where light pollution wouldnt be an issue."
A space-based telescope is great for looking at discrete points of interest far away. They suck at sweeping long distance. Once again the argument of a five year old not understanding why dad refuses to buy the family a horse.
"So yes, the researchers can suck it up. The world doesn't revolve around them. "
Says the man who owes his entire life to the world actually revolving around science.
I'm honestly inclined to think everyone who makes that sort of bullshit assertion should have to spend one year of their lives living in a cave without the benefits of technology better than flint and wood. Just so they can put into perspective why the world does indeed revolve around scientific progress.
"They also can go to space or the moon where they can do their precious science and leave Earth for the rest of us free for internet service."
The rest of us who don't live in the fantasy world of Star Trek beg to differ. I'd say you were just trolling here but if the internet has taught me anything it would be there's always that one moron whose statements make you wonder how on earth they ever got around to learning language.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 10 Dec 2021 @ 7:51am
Re: Step 4 - Profits
"...that's not how the fake news trick works, you not only don't have to specify what is fake you very much don't want to as that gives the other side a specific target to attack. Rather all you do is insist that the other person is lying, refuse to accept the possibility that you might be wrong and double/triple/quadruple down any time someone tries to challenge you and/or tries to present contradictory evidence."
Goebbel's playbook around the lügenpresse or, as the alt-right echo chambers first to dig up a proper translation for an old scam has it - fake news.
I'd call it disheartening that the whole damn republican party has gone hook, line and sinker into using old nazi rhetoric tricks...if I didn't know their dogwhistles to the neo-nazi crowd had been replaced with bullhorns lately.
Considering they held a god damn CPAC literally on top of a winged odal-shaped podium - the symbol the US neo-nazi movement just replaced the swastika with...they were never good at being subtle but these days I wouldn't be surprised to see a republican walking around with a swastika armband in red, white and black, trying to pass it off as a "korean fortune wheel".
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 10 Dec 2021 @ 7:41am
Re: Re: Re: Liars
"...Bernie Sanders is the Senate Budget Chair."
...where his job isn't as a decisionmaker but as an executor of other people's policy. In the pursuit of which he is free to exercize his remaining energy to hold great speeches persuading people the democratic party has a conscience.
The problem is that Bernie wanted socialist reforms and was unscrupulously honest. He was dead in the water long before the primaries.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 10 Dec 2021 @ 7:35am
Re: Two problems
"The fact that politicians are using social media for official business is a joke and needs to stop. That is not the proper place to communicate with your population. "
Indeed. If a politician starts a blog and painstakingly divorces his private life from his official job, then sure. Off the clock his rights are, with caveats, the same as any other citizen.
"But I also have a serious problem with courts saying they can’t block people on a social service because of opinion. It opens it up to trolling and stalking and all sorts of crimes and should-be-crimes."
It depends on what I asserted right above; If a judge makes the case said politician is using that blog for political purposes then that politician, being government, can only see people tossed from it for the same reasons those people could be evicted from a public gathering.
"It opens it up to trolling and stalking and all sorts of crimes and should-be-crimes."
Which is still less bad than the alternative. This is one of those choices where the options to select from is "bad" or "really bad".
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 10 Dec 2021 @ 6:56am
Re:
"All while the world casually ignores Xinjiang because none of them have actual spines and are more than happy to spread their legs for an awful, abusive customer solely because he has the money."
An old 18th-century german word for this is Realpolitik.
Back in 1950-1960 China planned this end game and spent half a century with their economy at rock bottom, being the joke of the world as they painstakingly transformed themselves into the manufacturing hub of the world.
And every US administration just stood blindly by while the larger part of their industrial base moved to China.
Now it's too late. China's prosperity flows through an american and european jugular. Any harm done to them instantly rebounds to the west in harsher measure.
And undoing this will in turn require western nations to eat the same penalty China accepted - tanking their economies and growth for decades on end while they rebuild and reeducate their manufacturing infrastructure and skilled labor pool.
That's...not going to happen. Ever. No US administration after FDR has been able to plan for longer than four years in a row, and no such plan which harms the economy at home will survive four years in a row.
The US won every battle and then went on to lose the war because playing checkers won't help you when the game the opposition plays is chess.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 10 Dec 2021 @ 6:47am
Re:
"The researchers can suck it up. They dont own the sky. I'll say internet service is more important than their research. "
You realize we're way overdue another yucatan event? Statistically a large, civilization-killing rock should have hit again long ago. Eventually it will. And when it does, human civilization is over.
The only option to avert one such is by observing it and measuring its approach in time to do anything about it. Ignoring that in favor of internet is just the citizens of Pompeii telling themselves that OK, the surroundings are full of evidence of what happened to the dumbasses settling ther in times long past but where else could they find so much volcanic ash and fertile soil for their roman concrete and wine industry?
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 10 Dec 2021 @ 6:41am
Re: Re: Fanbois....?
[Addendum]
the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the province of all mankind;
outer space shall be free for exploration and use by all States;
outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means;
States shall not place nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies or station them in outer space in any other manner;
the Moon and other celestial bodies shall be used exclusively for peaceful purposes;
astronauts shall be regarded as the envoys of mankind;
States shall be responsible for national space activities whether carried out by governmental or non-governmental entities;
States shall be liable for damage caused by their space objects; and
States shall avoid harmful contamination of space and celestial bodies.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 10 Dec 2021 @ 6:38am
Re: Fanbois....?
"ESA is run by Nationalized &/or Corporate telcos."
Not that simple. The EU isn't the US and the ESA has to accommodate a lot more than just market economics. Bluntly put, the ESA is what Nasa would be if it was run by a committee consisting of 51 US governors.
This is a bit more sensitive and hearkens back to before the first moon landings when every player involved was a national entity. At the time it was agreed by every participant in the space race that space was no one's private preserve. It would be freely accessible to every nation equally.
THAT is what prompts caution visavi Musk. Every potential infringement on that old "gentleman's agreement" is considered crossing the line drawn in sand.
This is not about competition at all, it's about how private interests should never be allowed to stake a claim for space, it having been agreed that outside of Earth is public land.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 9 Dec 2021 @ 8:11am
Re: Musk Starlink Issues
"...but we should take Musk's statements with a grain of salt (as with many/most of his pronouncements). There are clearly alternative launch vehicles, albeit more expensive, that can accomplish the task...and the Starlink/SpaceX ramifications will likely be more expensive service to absorb the added launch costs."
There are alternatives, sure. But where Musk can muscle up the amount of lift slots he'll need? That's more dubious.
The issue here seems to be that Musk planned to push the envelope every step of the way and failed to consider even the slightest setback. Crashing, as it were, his whole plan.
"...the dismissive view of LEO satellite delivery vs fiber."
There are plenty of reasons to doubt cubesat constellations as Musk envisioned it.
1) Environmental - the footprint of any single launch is significant. Musk is planning on a launch schedule rich enough that it can replace the full planned starlink constellation every five years or so. In case you'd missed the IPCC memo, as things stand right now we're already looking at a future where within fifty years or so the economy might very well not exist. He'd have done better going for the SpinLaunch method of using a flywheel launcher rather than propellant rockets.
2) Sensory. Satellite constellations get in the way of astronomy. To whit, pure science aside, we already don't have enough eyes on the sky and are as is statistically overdue for another yucatan event.
3) Sustainability. We're talking about a project which requires constant and massive maintenance by replacing older cubesats. Meanwhile well-placed fiber can sit in the ground for a century or more which in the long run renders it a vastly more cost-effective option. Even for rural areas.
The thing is, satellite communications already exists for emergency situations and similar. Starlink is a gimmick which offers a fast resolution at a far higher long-term cost than just subsidizing fiber.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 9 Dec 2021 @ 7:15am
Re: Re: Re: subject left blank
It's a problem people like Musk, Ford, Gates and Jobs have - their success comes over the burnouts of most of the people working with them.
Bluntly put it isn't healthy to run your day job as if each day was the god damn Olympics. What comes out of those jobs are people who decided every other part of their lives take a back seat. And a lot of broken people who found out the hard way that continually pushing the envelope means every unexpected setback is that straw breaking the camel's back.
"For some this is worth the brutal work and sometimes capricious boss."
The problem being when that capricious boss decides HSSE is an optional extra he doesn't need and starts pushing out the beta version of his shit into the consumer market.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 9 Dec 2021 @ 6:55am
Re:
I think that's what really gets to me.
Sure, we've got a moron with a badge. He hits someone with his car. He and his passenger procrastinate over what to do, what to do, going away and coming back to the body multiple times.
Then decides to drive it back home to his actual mom??
Just how high on the entitled shitwit scale of outrageous douchebaggery do you need to be if you view a dead body as something within the purview of good ol' mum? WHAT the actual fuck? Who is this paragon of motherhood that her sons believes her sage advice includes the disposition of bodies?
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 9 Dec 2021 @ 6:43am
Re:
"And to think, we used to go all the way to North Korea to find the insane reality-denying public officials."
Or the USSR. Actually I'd say the current GOP propaganda machine has much more in common with the old soviet union than it does to North Korea. Although the commissars were a lot more polished about their message.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 9 Dec 2021 @ 6:41am
Re: Re: Re:
"This was done if the full knowledge that all those authors could do was sell their copyright to a publisher."
...which is almost exactly the wording used to push the original statute of copyright back in the 1700's, in a time when the publisher guilds were a bit more upfront about their business model.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
There really is no excuse for copyright to remain in todays era. I maintain it would have been better by far if what artists gained was to have their works inextricably linked to their name and brand instead, giving them the equivalent of trademark protection. That would shield them from commercial exploitation a lot more effectively while not rendering anyone making a copy a criminal.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 9 Dec 2021 @ 1:34am
Re: Liars
"Are not all politicians liars? Literally all of them?"
No, only the successful ones. Bernie Sanders is likely the textbook example of the honest politician.
Rare animals such as those are often included as "mascots" of a sort and brought into the fold because they're usually supported by an enthusiastic and motivated base...but they are never allowed any real power. Only given a place where they can talk often and look like the "conscience" of the party.
So if you want to find an honest politican look for the one who talks a lot, is very popular, and who is always shoved out of any real candidacy by the party leadership. Al Gore, Brnie Sanders, etc. People like that.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 9 Dec 2021 @ 1:28am
Re: Re:
"They're nothing without their perpetual martyrdom."
It'd be sad if the strongest authority being a permanent victim wasn't also one of the 14 bullet points of actual fascism.
As I keep saying, with 25% of the US voting citizenry being all on board with fascist ideology the future doesn't look too good. Hitler had to make do with 12% in 1932.
So let's all just hope the GOP doesn't produce someone more competent than Trump in 2024.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 9 Dec 2021 @ 1:23am
Re: Re: Re: Hindeing your own apprehension
"Wouldn't not turning yourself in both show intent to obstruct and impede the investigation?"
Burden of proof.
Intent to obstruct is harder to prove. All the accused needs to do is to make the claim they were so upset they couldn't think straight - therefore they had no "intent" to obstruct, but it's clearly provable their actions hindered the investigation.
It's the same difference as that between murder one and manslaughter. In one case you assaulted with intent to kill, in the other intent to kill can not be proven but there's still a dead body as the result of the assault.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 9 Dec 2021 @ 1:18am
Re:
"The copyright industry has gone insane and even with the evidence from the dancing baby case the government can't/won't admit perhaps its all gone horribly wrong."
What are you talking about? The copyright industry has always operated this way and the system of copyright works exactly as designed. If anything the only bugs to be found is that it's still possible to dispute the claim made by a major publisher.
Because copyright, ever since it's original inception, was ever only built to accommodate the major publishing houses.
The idea that it somehow benefits artists and creators is a propaganda blurb tacked on far, far later to make draconian copyright enforcement gain more public backing. And as has been demonstrated for decades, a laughably inaccurate one.
On the post: An Unplanned, Ad-Hoc Collaboration Reveals The On-The-Ground Truth About China's Internment Camps For Uyghurs
Re: Re: Re:
"Now while I think the US will take a lot less time than the 20-odd years you predicted to regain the manufacturing edge, that's more a political will thing."
If anything 20 years is on the shorter side. US universities and colleges long ceased offering the needed education because industry offered few such jobs. So there are no teachers, few experts, no knowledge base, no interest. The first decade would have to be subsidized by state money paying universities to acquire and retain teachers - and guarantee well-paid jobs using those skills to lure talents to go for those courses rather than BMA's, medicine or Law. Then you'd have to offer incentives to make corporations build new factories at home - ones they won't be able to use until the production line stops churning out duds.
Before that new mechanism starts working properly and the costs start coming down this will be an expensive exercise. And the only one able to pay it will in the end be the taxpayer.
I can't see any US administration surviving more than one term after trying to implement that and said policy will be dismantled by the next administration.
On the post: An Unplanned, Ad-Hoc Collaboration Reveals The On-The-Ground Truth About China's Internment Camps For Uyghurs
Re: Re: Re: You got your dates wrong
"Chairman Mao kept China poor with famine (Great Leap Forward, 1958-1961) and chaos (Cultural Revolution, 1966-1976). China's embrace of World markets and economic growth only started in 1980, under Deng Xiaoping."
Mao and his merry gang managed to plug progress for a long time...however, China beginning to kowtow to hyper-industrialization and manufacturing was one of Mao's core ideas. The concept was formulated back then.
That Xiaoping was the first office holder not to be utterly incompetent at making that vision a reality doesn't mean that's the point where they laid the plan. Xiaoping's contributed amendments to the policy made it a game changer - most notably shifting the focus from China being a world leader in manufacturing to China becoming the world manufacturing center. The whole "Golden Shield" project began at that time as well, to fend off the sudden influx of western culture concomitant with the globalized economy.
I'd say split the difference and put the concrete emergence of the chinese plan of world domination at 1970.
"The most serious wrong turn in US economic policy toward China came with a bi-partisan free trade agreement ("Permanent Normal Trade Relations") in year 2000."
I'll assert the iceberg hit the titanic way before then. Around the 2000's, western industry had already to large extent outsourced most of their supply chain.
"There were hopes that as China became richer, it would become more mellow and democratic like Taiwan and South Korea."
Such was the public screed. From a more cynical perspective any nation will always liberally extend in trade agreements any advantages which the opposition already possesses in reality.
From the pov of every corporate lobby in the US normalizing trade with China was something only foolish cold warriors in need of swift replacement would oppose. And so trade relations were normalized, because the US body politic is nothing if not a faithful dog to the holders of its leash.
On the post: EU, US Start To Realize Letting Elon Musk Dictate Global Space Rules Might Not Be The Brightest Idea
Re: Re: Re:
"The researchers are not saying that the light pollution is threatening to interfere with ability to detect civilization-killing asteroids, are they?"
They are, in fact. Google; "Harvard astronomer says Starlink could affect hunt for near-Earth asteroids".
"So your FUD scenario is just made up."
Kind of you to prove your dunning-kruger by making solid assertions debunked by about five seconds on a search engine.
"There's plenty of desolate places like Antarctica where one wouldn't expect any flying over satellites to interfere with asteroid-detecting or regular science, would it?"
That's not how it works. I suggest a grade school course in celestial mechanics - notably how the poles will give the least arc coverage of the night sky possible on the globe.
Also, is pushing astronomy budgets by about three orders of magnitude coming out of your paycheck?
"And then there are space-based telescopes where light pollution wouldnt be an issue."
A space-based telescope is great for looking at discrete points of interest far away. They suck at sweeping long distance. Once again the argument of a five year old not understanding why dad refuses to buy the family a horse.
"So yes, the researchers can suck it up. The world doesn't revolve around them. "
Says the man who owes his entire life to the world actually revolving around science.
I'm honestly inclined to think everyone who makes that sort of bullshit assertion should have to spend one year of their lives living in a cave without the benefits of technology better than flint and wood. Just so they can put into perspective why the world does indeed revolve around scientific progress.
"They also can go to space or the moon where they can do their precious science and leave Earth for the rest of us free for internet service."
The rest of us who don't live in the fantasy world of Star Trek beg to differ. I'd say you were just trolling here but if the internet has taught me anything it would be there's always that one moron whose statements make you wonder how on earth they ever got around to learning language.
On the post: Missouri Governor Still Lying About Reporters Who Uncovered Ridiculous Bad State Computer Security; Still Insists They Were Hackers
Re: Step 4 - Profits
"...that's not how the fake news trick works, you not only don't have to specify what is fake you very much don't want to as that gives the other side a specific target to attack. Rather all you do is insist that the other person is lying, refuse to accept the possibility that you might be wrong and double/triple/quadruple down any time someone tries to challenge you and/or tries to present contradictory evidence."
Goebbel's playbook around the lügenpresse or, as the alt-right echo chambers first to dig up a proper translation for an old scam has it - fake news.
I'd call it disheartening that the whole damn republican party has gone hook, line and sinker into using old nazi rhetoric tricks...if I didn't know their dogwhistles to the neo-nazi crowd had been replaced with bullhorns lately.
Considering they held a god damn CPAC literally on top of a winged odal-shaped podium - the symbol the US neo-nazi movement just replaced the swastika with...they were never good at being subtle but these days I wouldn't be surprised to see a republican walking around with a swastika armband in red, white and black, trying to pass it off as a "korean fortune wheel".
On the post: Missouri Governor Still Lying About Reporters Who Uncovered Ridiculous Bad State Computer Security; Still Insists They Were Hackers
Re: Re: Re: Liars
That I'll grant you. Mea maxima culpa.
On the post: Missouri Governor Still Lying About Reporters Who Uncovered Ridiculous Bad State Computer Security; Still Insists They Were Hackers
Re: Re: Re: Liars
"...Bernie Sanders is the Senate Budget Chair."
...where his job isn't as a decisionmaker but as an executor of other people's policy. In the pursuit of which he is free to exercize his remaining energy to hold great speeches persuading people the democratic party has a conscience.
The problem is that Bernie wanted socialist reforms and was unscrupulously honest. He was dead in the water long before the primaries.
On the post: Rep. Thomas Massie Seems To Have Skipped Over The 1st Amendment In His Rush To 'Defend' The 2nd
Re: Two problems
"The fact that politicians are using social media for official business is a joke and needs to stop. That is not the proper place to communicate with your population. "
Indeed. If a politician starts a blog and painstakingly divorces his private life from his official job, then sure. Off the clock his rights are, with caveats, the same as any other citizen.
"But I also have a serious problem with courts saying they can’t block people on a social service because of opinion. It opens it up to trolling and stalking and all sorts of crimes and should-be-crimes."
It depends on what I asserted right above; If a judge makes the case said politician is using that blog for political purposes then that politician, being government, can only see people tossed from it for the same reasons those people could be evicted from a public gathering.
"It opens it up to trolling and stalking and all sorts of crimes and should-be-crimes."
Which is still less bad than the alternative. This is one of those choices where the options to select from is "bad" or "really bad".
On the post: An Unplanned, Ad-Hoc Collaboration Reveals The On-The-Ground Truth About China's Internment Camps For Uyghurs
Re:
"All while the world casually ignores Xinjiang because none of them have actual spines and are more than happy to spread their legs for an awful, abusive customer solely because he has the money."
An old 18th-century german word for this is Realpolitik.
Back in 1950-1960 China planned this end game and spent half a century with their economy at rock bottom, being the joke of the world as they painstakingly transformed themselves into the manufacturing hub of the world.
And every US administration just stood blindly by while the larger part of their industrial base moved to China.
Now it's too late. China's prosperity flows through an american and european jugular. Any harm done to them instantly rebounds to the west in harsher measure.
And undoing this will in turn require western nations to eat the same penalty China accepted - tanking their economies and growth for decades on end while they rebuild and reeducate their manufacturing infrastructure and skilled labor pool.
That's...not going to happen. Ever. No US administration after FDR has been able to plan for longer than four years in a row, and no such plan which harms the economy at home will survive four years in a row.
The US won every battle and then went on to lose the war because playing checkers won't help you when the game the opposition plays is chess.
On the post: EU, US Start To Realize Letting Elon Musk Dictate Global Space Rules Might Not Be The Brightest Idea
Re:
"The researchers can suck it up. They dont own the sky. I'll say internet service is more important than their research. "
You realize we're way overdue another yucatan event? Statistically a large, civilization-killing rock should have hit again long ago. Eventually it will. And when it does, human civilization is over.
The only option to avert one such is by observing it and measuring its approach in time to do anything about it. Ignoring that in favor of internet is just the citizens of Pompeii telling themselves that OK, the surroundings are full of evidence of what happened to the dumbasses settling ther in times long past but where else could they find so much volcanic ash and fertile soil for their roman concrete and wine industry?
On the post: EU, US Start To Realize Letting Elon Musk Dictate Global Space Rules Might Not Be The Brightest Idea
Re: Re: Fanbois....?
[Addendum]
On the post: EU, US Start To Realize Letting Elon Musk Dictate Global Space Rules Might Not Be The Brightest Idea
Re: Fanbois....?
"ESA is run by Nationalized &/or Corporate telcos."
Not that simple. The EU isn't the US and the ESA has to accommodate a lot more than just market economics. Bluntly put, the ESA is what Nasa would be if it was run by a committee consisting of 51 US governors.
This is a bit more sensitive and hearkens back to before the first moon landings when every player involved was a national entity. At the time it was agreed by every participant in the space race that space was no one's private preserve. It would be freely accessible to every nation equally.
THAT is what prompts caution visavi Musk. Every potential infringement on that old "gentleman's agreement" is considered crossing the line drawn in sand.
This is not about competition at all, it's about how private interests should never be allowed to stake a claim for space, it having been agreed that outside of Earth is public land.
On the post: Space X Engine Production Woes Could Screw Up Musk's Starlink Broadband Play
Re: Musk Starlink Issues
"...but we should take Musk's statements with a grain of salt (as with many/most of his pronouncements). There are clearly alternative launch vehicles, albeit more expensive, that can accomplish the task...and the Starlink/SpaceX ramifications will likely be more expensive service to absorb the added launch costs."
There are alternatives, sure. But where Musk can muscle up the amount of lift slots he'll need? That's more dubious.
The issue here seems to be that Musk planned to push the envelope every step of the way and failed to consider even the slightest setback. Crashing, as it were, his whole plan.
"...the dismissive view of LEO satellite delivery vs fiber."
There are plenty of reasons to doubt cubesat constellations as Musk envisioned it.
1) Environmental - the footprint of any single launch is significant. Musk is planning on a launch schedule rich enough that it can replace the full planned starlink constellation every five years or so. In case you'd missed the IPCC memo, as things stand right now we're already looking at a future where within fifty years or so the economy might very well not exist. He'd have done better going for the SpinLaunch method of using a flywheel launcher rather than propellant rockets.
2) Sensory. Satellite constellations get in the way of astronomy. To whit, pure science aside, we already don't have enough eyes on the sky and are as is statistically overdue for another yucatan event.
3) Sustainability. We're talking about a project which requires constant and massive maintenance by replacing older cubesats. Meanwhile well-placed fiber can sit in the ground for a century or more which in the long run renders it a vastly more cost-effective option. Even for rural areas.
The thing is, satellite communications already exists for emergency situations and similar. Starlink is a gimmick which offers a fast resolution at a far higher long-term cost than just subsidizing fiber.
On the post: Space X Engine Production Woes Could Screw Up Musk's Starlink Broadband Play
Re: Re: Re: subject left blank
It's a problem people like Musk, Ford, Gates and Jobs have - their success comes over the burnouts of most of the people working with them.
Bluntly put it isn't healthy to run your day job as if each day was the god damn Olympics. What comes out of those jobs are people who decided every other part of their lives take a back seat. And a lot of broken people who found out the hard way that continually pushing the envelope means every unexpected setback is that straw breaking the camel's back.
"For some this is worth the brutal work and sometimes capricious boss."
The problem being when that capricious boss decides HSSE is an optional extra he doesn't need and starts pushing out the beta version of his shit into the consumer market.
On the post: New Jersey Cop Facing Charges After Hitting A Man With His Car And Driving His Body To His Mom's House
Re:
I think that's what really gets to me.
Sure, we've got a moron with a badge. He hits someone with his car. He and his passenger procrastinate over what to do, what to do, going away and coming back to the body multiple times.
Then decides to drive it back home to his actual mom??
Just how high on the entitled shitwit scale of outrageous douchebaggery do you need to be if you view a dead body as something within the purview of good ol' mum? WHAT the actual fuck? Who is this paragon of motherhood that her sons believes her sage advice includes the disposition of bodies?
Ma Baker?
On the post: Missouri Governor Still Lying About Reporters Who Uncovered Ridiculous Bad State Computer Security; Still Insists They Were Hackers
Re:
"And to think, we used to go all the way to North Korea to find the insane reality-denying public officials."
Or the USSR. Actually I'd say the current GOP propaganda machine has much more in common with the old soviet union than it does to North Korea. Although the commissars were a lot more polished about their message.
On the post: YouTube Copyright Transparency Report Shows The Absurd Volume Of Copyright Claims It Gets
Re: Re: Re:
"This was done if the full knowledge that all those authors could do was sell their copyright to a publisher."
...which is almost exactly the wording used to push the original statute of copyright back in the 1700's, in a time when the publisher guilds were a bit more upfront about their business model.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
There really is no excuse for copyright to remain in todays era. I maintain it would have been better by far if what artists gained was to have their works inextricably linked to their name and brand instead, giving them the equivalent of trademark protection. That would shield them from commercial exploitation a lot more effectively while not rendering anyone making a copy a criminal.
On the post: Missouri Governor Still Lying About Reporters Who Uncovered Ridiculous Bad State Computer Security; Still Insists They Were Hackers
Re: Liars
"Are not all politicians liars? Literally all of them?"
No, only the successful ones. Bernie Sanders is likely the textbook example of the honest politician.
Rare animals such as those are often included as "mascots" of a sort and brought into the fold because they're usually supported by an enthusiastic and motivated base...but they are never allowed any real power. Only given a place where they can talk often and look like the "conscience" of the party.
So if you want to find an honest politican look for the one who talks a lot, is very popular, and who is always shoved out of any real candidacy by the party leadership. Al Gore, Brnie Sanders, etc. People like that.
On the post: Missouri Governor Still Lying About Reporters Who Uncovered Ridiculous Bad State Computer Security; Still Insists They Were Hackers
Re: Re:
"They're nothing without their perpetual martyrdom."
It'd be sad if the strongest authority being a permanent victim wasn't also one of the 14 bullet points of actual fascism.
As I keep saying, with 25% of the US voting citizenry being all on board with fascist ideology the future doesn't look too good. Hitler had to make do with 12% in 1932.
So let's all just hope the GOP doesn't produce someone more competent than Trump in 2024.
On the post: New Jersey Cop Facing Charges After Hitting A Man With His Car And Driving His Body To His Mom's House
Re: Re: Re: Hindeing your own apprehension
"Wouldn't not turning yourself in both show intent to obstruct and impede the investigation?"
Burden of proof.
Intent to obstruct is harder to prove. All the accused needs to do is to make the claim they were so upset they couldn't think straight - therefore they had no "intent" to obstruct, but it's clearly provable their actions hindered the investigation.
It's the same difference as that between murder one and manslaughter. In one case you assaulted with intent to kill, in the other intent to kill can not be proven but there's still a dead body as the result of the assault.
On the post: YouTube Copyright Transparency Report Shows The Absurd Volume Of Copyright Claims It Gets
Re:
"The copyright industry has gone insane and even with the evidence from the dancing baby case the government can't/won't admit perhaps its all gone horribly wrong."
What are you talking about? The copyright industry has always operated this way and the system of copyright works exactly as designed. If anything the only bugs to be found is that it's still possible to dispute the claim made by a major publisher.
Because copyright, ever since it's original inception, was ever only built to accommodate the major publishing houses.
The idea that it somehow benefits artists and creators is a propaganda blurb tacked on far, far later to make draconian copyright enforcement gain more public backing. And as has been demonstrated for decades, a laughably inaccurate one.
Next >>