Comment Who cares? (Score 0) 573
All I can say is, I hope his checks cashed.
All I can say is, I hope his checks cashed.
Could not compact nuclear engines (eg. similar to those on submarines or on earlier probes like Voyager) not solve the energy problem for Mars? Are we so superstitious of nuclear power that we'd give up a perfectly good, long-term, powerful source without even considering it as an option? Nuclear power can and has been launched into space before, and as long as the risks of launch failure are mitigated (eg. launch over open ocean) then dry ice sublimation engines are not needed.
The SNAP 10A reactor weighed 300 kg, was flown in 1965, and produced 30 kW of heat power. In the Apollo days, there were serious plans to power lunar bases through the long lunar night with CANDLE type reactors, also known as traveling wave reactors, which have no moving parts and could be just stuck in a hole in the ground to provide 10's or 100's of kW for decades. These reactors are not particularly "hot" before they are turned on, and shouldn't produce an unusual launch risk (as they would not be launched hot).
Most of our technologies aren't that efficient - anything running on electricity is typically 70% waste heat.
Those losses are mostly in the long haul transmission of power, which Mars bases / colonies would presumably avoid for the near term.
Water is heavy and mars doesn't have any.
Mars has lots of water, enough to cover its entire surface with maybe 50 meters of water, it's just mostly frozen. Now, that is a good deal less than the Earth (which has enough to cover its surface with 2.3 km of water), but it is still a lot of water by human standards.
So you are working on the assumption that the person that setup her server and maintained was vetted, had security clearance?
They might have been. I am sure Bill Clinton, as former POTUS, has access to the SIPRnet if he wants it, and so does the Secretary of State. People at that level commonly have secure lines into their house, etc.; if there is a crisis, and the President wants to call you at three AM, you can bet he also wants to use a secure line to do so.
So, the question is not, could she have?, the question is, did she?, and I don't think we know the answer to that.
I had someone who did SECRET-grade e-mails setup in the military write the following to me:
So, if for example Clinton only dealt with SECRET materials and they were sent or received in her email, all of the equipment (routers, switches, etc.) would have to be rated for that SIPRNet connection. Also, the space in which the equipment and servers and client computers resided in would also have to meet the specifications for SECRET material. This would include various forms of physical access to the space in the form of secure cards, biometrics, etc. No space rated for SECRET opens with a key from the local hardware store. . .
. The biggest issue I see here would be is if the server was connected to the public Internet and it resided in a non-DoD-approved space.
Not sure there are biometrics installed in the Clinton home in Chappaqua.
Precisely. You or I (I am assuming that you are not at the SoS level; I am not) could never do this for a job that involved secret discussions, as we could never get SIPRNet at our house, the servers secured, etc. Now, I am sure either the SoS or a former President can get SIPRNET at their house - they may need to take a call at 3:00 AM, after all, and that call may be secret in nature. (The current POTUS may well want to call a former POTUS in a crisis to ask about something mission critical, send him pictures etc. as part of the call, and I am sure they would not want to have to use an unsecured network to do this.) So, to me, the real question is, was this done properly, by properly vetted personnel with security clearances, training, etc.? It might have been (she certainly had access to these resources, and so did Bill), but if it wasn't, she IMO isn't fit to be President (and some network security guys need to be fired).
In my humble opinion, this is the real "nut" here - the rest is just a false crisis (turning over records is fixed once the records are turned over*), but if Vladimir Putin (or Rupert Murdoch) was reading all of her emails, that is a real issue. (Note that she could fix this today by simply saying "I just took advantage of the security structure set up for my husband after he left the White House," if something like that were true, this goes away.)
* Her opponents can of course use this against her, but, really, it's not going to go anywhere without evidence of other malfeasance.
SpaceX is using fake fake competitors to disrupt opposition to its Space Internet Plan. Musk must be a big Animal House fan.
I think they could get away with no streaming the audio -- that is what the blackbox is for, just telemetry data (and doesn't need to be every second, hell maybe once a minute) saying "I {plane_id} am right here (lat, lng, altitude)"
There were for a long time two "black boxes," with one, the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR), specifically for cockpit audio (which is frequently essential in crash investigations). Now-a-days, they are likely to be combined into one solid state Flight Data Recorder (FDR) unit, but the CVR capability is still there.
These units are generally mounted in the tail of the airplane, and are of course sealed while in use. I think it is highly unlikely that the pilot messed with the FDR before flight, and impossible that he did it during flight.
Ah, but doesn't everyone go through at least a mildly awkward adolescence? You'd see all their "crappy poetry written in blood' moments, too.
Yes, and what that means is that, while the youthful indiscretions of those favored by the system will be ignored, those of anyone who stands in the way of powerful interests will be used to persecute them.
It sounds to me like ANL pissed someone off, either a higher up at DOE, or in Congress.
the U.S. should be able to craft a policy that allows the NSA and law enforcement agencies to read encrypted data when they need to.
I don't know how someone so ignorant got to be so high in the bureaucracy, but there is a mechanism for this. It's called a warrant. One of the reasons we have this system is as a failsafe precisely in case that someone so ignorant does happen to get so high in the bureaucracy.
Anyone who is surprised by this has really not been paying attention (or has been paid not to pay attention).
'He has accepted more than $1.2 million in money from the fossil-fuel industry over the last decade while failing to disclose that conflict of interest in most of his scientific papers. Im a little curious if it is standard practice to not disclose this type of relationship. If it is, it is wrong. I see an ethics issue at hand
Id like to see a breakdown on which scientists are getting paid and by whom in all their works.
Most of the scientists I know make a salary and that's it. A $ 100 honorarium (say for giving a talk to the public) is regarded as a big deal.
When will people get it through their heads that this is really all about the acceleration of the transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy, and is fundamentally a political matter, not a technical matter?
From TFA "The report calls for a long-term plan to make economic growth inclusive." We had that. It was called the New Deal, and it was dismantled in the 1980's by the Reagan Administration.
8 Catfish = 1 Octo-puss
