Comment Re:This again? (Score 1) 480
To an outside observer. I don't think it's the same in the inertial frame.
To an outside observer. I don't think it's the same in the inertial frame.
Before we call this real, we need to put one on some object in orbit, leave it in continuous operation, and use it to raise the orbit by a measurable amount large enough that there would not be argument regarding where it came from. The Space Station would be just fine. It has power for experiments that is probably sufficient and it has a continuing problem of needing to raise its orbit.
And believe me, if this raises the orbit of the Space Station they aren't going to want to disconnect it after the experiment. We spend a tremendous amount of money to get additional Delta-V to that thing, and it comes down if we don't.
It is a requirement that you know they're bad people. So in the case of your charity example, you'd have to show that whomever you wanted to charge with this knew the money was going to terrorists.
Actually, I didn't give any examples, I gave a bunch of links. In the case of Holder vs. Humanitarian Law Project, the Supreme Court held that
As to the particular speech plaintiffs propose to undertake, it is wholly foreseeable that directly training the PKK on how to use international law to resolve disputes would provide that group with information and techniques that it could use as part of a broader strategy to promote terrorism, and to threaten, manipulate, and disrupt. Teaching the PKK to petition international bodies for relief also could help the PKK obtain funding it would redirect to its violent activities.
so that even trying to help a designated terrorist organization solve problems without blowing shit up could help them "promote terrorism" and "threaten, manipulate, and disrupt".
Perhaps 18 U.S. Code 2339A and 2339B could use a little work here, especially given the chilling effects on donations mentioned in some of the links in my previous post.
If someone is providing "material support" to terrorists then fuck them. Lets say Osama bin ladin is living in my house and I know it is him... and I and feeding him and giving him cover. That is an example of material support. If you're doing that... then allow me to say on behalf of the American people, that you can eat all the fucking dicks.
Exactly why is this a bad thing? I don't get it. Someone explain this to me?
Does material support not mean what I think it means? I don't understand.
Well, here's what it means according to law.
However, whether something counts as "material support" or not is, well, up to interpretation, as has been noted by a number of people.
Thanks!
Brian Webb isn't listing this on his Vandenberg AFB Launch Schedule yet. I think he's going to wait until someone official tells him a date.
With some optimism that might only be thousands of years rather than hundreds of Millions.
But it's only necessary for Earth to be uninhabitable for a short time to end the Human race. And that can happen due to man or nature, today. If people aren't somewhere else during that process, that's the end.
What are you talking about? Steven Wozniak built the first Apple computer.
That's not something you hear often...
...but you know what?
Especially as the name of a rock band.
Actually I was thinking nuclear power rather than magic.
I agree with the other commenter, there will be lots of people living in space if they can only get there. Mars is a good start.
Obviously I am missing something, then. Please fill me in on your better information sources. Email to bruce at perens dot com if you don't want to put them on Slashdot.
It's time to start planning another trip to Lompoc. The Motel 6 was sort of yukky last time. Maybe I'll try something else. There was an official visitor observation site that I found and got into last time, but that was for the Delta, and it was on Pad 4 if I remember correctly. This one is all the way on the other side of the base on Pad 7 or 8, isn't it? There are some farm roads that might be good observation sites if they are open.
I am not confident that the world will remain a hospitable place for life until we are ready by your standard.
Getting the resources and people there is very close to being within our technical capability. The task ourselves, if we perform it, will take care of the remaining gaps.
Creating a self-sustaining colony outside of the Earth's environment is going to need a lot of work, but it is not work that can ever be achieved on this earth. We have to actually put people in space to achieve this. Our best experience so far is with submarines. Academic research has so far yielded only farcial frauds like Biosphere II.
Technically, making transceivers work when there are 30 of them in vehicles next to each other can get difficult. People wonder why you can buy a dual-band walkie talkie for $60 but the one in the police car costs much more. If it's well engineered, the one in the police car has some RF plumbing that isn't in the $60 walkie talkie.
You are exactly right. One thing though, it's "Ham" or even "ham". It's not an acronym. Thanks!
You do know that science isn't the only reason to go to space, don't you?
There is the issue of continuing the existence of the Human race, and whatever other life we choose to bring with us.
Planets and suns aren't sure things, you know. We sort of take ours for granted, but there is the evidence of the sky around us. And the ominous silence of a galaxy that should be filled with intelligent life...
Is anyone still taking June 7 seriously? And where is it supposed to happen now? Cape Caneveral instead of Vandenberg? I would certiainly drive down if they held it at Vandenberg. I was there for the first try on DISCOVR.
The first test was supposed to come off much earlier than May. There are both commercial launches and government ones in the way, and there was the Helium pressurization issue which put some things off schedule.
Real Programmers don't write in FORTRAN. FORTRAN is for pipe stress freaks and crystallography weenies. FORTRAN is for wimp engineers who wear white socks.