Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Why send the people? (Score 3, Interesting) 392

by GameMaster (#46663195) Attached to: How Many People Does It Take To Colonize Another Star System?

If it's just genetic diversity you're worried about, why send the people themselves? It seems to me that sending that many people would be a massive over-expenditure of resources. Why not send much more manageable number of people to run the ship and build the initial settlement along with preserved genetic material for a massively larger population. Breed, predominantly, through artificial insemination for the initial generations until you are back to having the desired diversity in the actual living population.

Comment: Passengers (Score 2) 367

by GameMaster (#46598109) Attached to: More Than 1 In 4 Car Crashes Involve Cellphone Use

What I want to know is what percentage of accidents involve at least one vehicle containing at least one passenger beyond the driver of that vehicle. I don't know for certain, but I'd imagine it's something up around 80%-90% or more. I think it's pretty safe to assume that if there is a passenger in the car, the driver probably spends at least some of their concentration paying attention to that person and/or talking to them. Just think of it, we could eliminate almost ALL accidents if we just outlawed the carrying of passengers... /s

Comment: Re:Why? (Score 1) 491

by GameMaster (#46568885) Attached to: How Satellite Company Inmarsat Tracked Down MH370

* Money: I can believe this as a reason. If the government didn't require the existing "black box", I'm sure the airlines wouldn't bother with it either. That's why you make it a government mandate and don't give the airlines a say in the matter.

* Privacy: This is a non-issue. The existing "black box" systems already record all the audio from the airplane's cabin.

* Efficacy: I don't see a reason why this wouldn't be extremely effective. Assuming the airlines were mandated to keep the equipment in running order at all times (as I certainly hope they are already required to do with the existing "black box" technology) I see no reason this wouldn't function, especially at the altitudes above weather that these planes almost always fly (this wouldn't have been this case with this particular flight, but would have dealt with plenty of other flights that have been lost in the past).

Comment: Re:Why? (Score 1) 491

by GameMaster (#46568827) Attached to: How Satellite Company Inmarsat Tracked Down MH370

True, but we've had plenty of cases of either not being able to find the "black box" or having it take a very long time to do so. Heck, we've had plenty of cases of almost not being able to find the plane as a whole. My suggestion that such a system be designed so that the passengers and crew couldn't tamper with it was more of a side-note to the idea as a whole.

Comment: Why? (Score 3, Insightful) 491

by GameMaster (#46565931) Attached to: How Satellite Company Inmarsat Tracked Down MH370

* We've had flight recorders on all major airliners for decades now.

* We've had satellite phone technology for decades now. (since 1979 for Inmarsat)

Remind me again why "black box" style cellular data transmitters aren't required to be transmitting cockpit voice data and full telemetry from every major airliner at all times yet? With a system like that, installed in a way that can't be tampered with by the people in t he plane and runs independently of the rest of the electronics in the aircraft, there's no reason we would know the exact location the plane went down and, most likely, why. Hell, even if they decided to be cheap and only have it transmit the telemetry in once-a-minute updates we'd still would have know where the plane was to withing a handful of miles from the first day it went missing...

Comment: Re:Flight recorder (Score 1) 491

by GameMaster (#46565861) Attached to: How Satellite Company Inmarsat Tracked Down MH370

Yes, this. Searching hundred's of square miles with a fleet of 18-25 planes, traveling at hundreds of miles per hour each, was such a slow process with a poor statistical chance of success. I'm sure things will speed up when you trade in all those aircraft for a single submersible covering the ocean floor at single digit miles per hour...

Comment: Re:Considering that the story is apparently wrong (Score 1) 276

by GameMaster (#46427951) Attached to: Should Newsweek Have Outed Satoshi Nakamoto's Personal Details?

Should be pretty easy for his to work it out. After all, there were two police officers present the entire time he spoke with the reporter. He called them himself for this very reason. I'm sure they're clarify what they heard him say. Of course, I doubt he'll sue like that as my money is on the fact that they'll back up what the reporter says. Personally, I'm pretty certain that he IS the creator of bitcoin and that he just isn't as smart at in-the-moment personal interaction as he is at crypto-currency design. He, almost certainly, just f'd up when talking to the reporter; admitted defeat too early; and is now trying to "close the barn door after the horses have bolted".

Comment: Re:Considering that the story is apparently wrong (Score 1) 276

by GameMaster (#46427915) Attached to: Should Newsweek Have Outed Satoshi Nakamoto's Personal Details?

At the least, he would be referring to Nakamoto if he chose to sue the reporter. Supposedly, his relatives (including his children, clearly identified him as being a strong believer in libertarian-ism to the point of playing some, frankly, nutty children's games with his daughter where he taught her to be afraid of "the man".)

Nothing is rich but the inexhaustible wealth of nature. She shows us only surfaces, but she is a million fathoms deep. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

Working...