Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:For Guys Who Are About 40th in Political Contri (Score 1) 524

by laird (#47788785) Attached to: Net Neutrality Is 'Marxist,' According To a Koch-Backed Astroturf Group

Perhaps you should have done more research than 5 seconds in Google.

Democrat donors are at the top of the list of reported donations because they are more likely to report their donations. The whole point of how the Koch brothers route their money, and money funneled through their network of PACs, "think tanks", etc., is to hide the fact that they are funding it, so that their organizations all sound like "independent" supports of the Koch agenda. So they route it through "non-profits" or by providing non-cash benefits (e.g. providing a free vacation / educational conference), and of course pumping a fortune into "independent" issue campaigns, which are unregulated and whose funding sources are largely unreported. And, of course, the un-reported money flow is much larger than the reported money flow.

And you really can't equate the two.

In terms of assets, the Koch Brothers have 20x as much as Soros. So that's not even close.

And in terms of tactics, the Soros' political donations are well documented and transparent - be is open about what he supports, and he lobbies and promotes it in an open fashion. The Koch Brothers' money flow is generally hidden, and goes to subversive organizations like ALEC that literally write legislation, give it to legislators, who they give free vacations and political donations to, and has them pass it, sometimes literally in the middle of the night behind locked doors so nobody can see what they're doing. So you can't equate their tactics.

Comment: Re:Time to travel 11 light years (Score 3, Interesting) 86

by goombah99 (#47785495) Attached to: Astronomers Find What May Be the Closest Exoplanet So Far

Let's see if I can work this out correctly;
First assume the spaceships weight negligibly different than the mass of the fuel. The thrust needed to push the weight at a steady 1g will be proportional to the mass of the ship at each interval of time. SO the rate of mass burn is proportional to the mass which means the mass is a decaying exponential.

M = Mo * exp( -g * time / thrust_to_weight )

If you think about this for a moment it becomes clear that any amount of mass would do since as the mass gets lighter it takes less fuel so the ship could go indefinitely at 1g. The problem is the assumption that the ship weighs nothing. so let's fix that.

dM/dt = -g*(M+Ms)/thrust_to_weight.

where Ms = mass of ship and M = mass of fuel.

I'm spacing on how to solve that equation so I'll approximate it by saying that until M = Ms we can mostly ignore the ship mass. therfore for a 6.6 year flight time the fuel required is about:

Mfuel = Ms * exp( g* (6.6 years)/thrust_to_weight )

Mfule = Ms * exp( +303,800,000/thrust_to_weight).

So you need a rather high thrust to weight ratio due to the coefficient in the exponetial.

Let the pillory for my "obvious" math errors begin!

Comment: Re:Not worth it. (Score 1) 48

by Rei (#47785193) Attached to: How the World's Fastest Electric Car Is Pushing Wireless Charging Tech

Electric cars wouldn't use half the country's electricity, passenger vehicles' share of total energy consumption is much smaller than that. But I don't disagree with you that it's bad to waste power. Still, for a potential EV consumer whose turned off from EVs because they're lazy, if the choice is between "waste 20% more electricity" and "keep driving a gasoline car", the wireless EV is still the much better option.

Comment: Time to travel 11 light years (Score 3, Interesting) 86

by goombah99 (#47785183) Attached to: Astronomers Find What May Be the Closest Exoplanet So Far

traveling with a 1G acceleration:
1/2g t^2 = 1/2*11*3E8

so t = 3.3 years to half way. 6.6 years to go all the way and thus 13.2 years for the round trip.

Thus you could easily go there and come back in your lifetime.

Note that this is also Faster than light can make the round trip. However that is not any violation of relativity. THe people on earth would have aged a lot more than 13.3 years during your trip. But you would only have aged 13.3 years.

Comment: Re:Just stop it with the 'zero emissons' claims (Score 3, Informative) 48

by Rei (#47783897) Attached to: How the World's Fastest Electric Car Is Pushing Wireless Charging Tech

You act like there's no research papers on this subject. There have been tons, and the conclusions in each case are the same:

1) CO2 emissions would decline even on the US's current grid (which is, I should add, getting cleaner every year, while the amount of emissions associated with oil production keep rising)

2) On a generation basis, every region in the US has enough space capacity for a full switchover of the passenger fleet today, without any new plant construction, except the Pacific Northwest. Most charging is done at night when most power plants lie idle, but the Pacific Northwest is an exception because their heavy use of hydro means time of use isn't important, only net consumption.

3) The only thing that there's not enough of at present is simply local distribution capacity, to peoples' homes.

Of course, that's for a complete, instantaneous switchover, which is of course an impossiblity. Your average car is driven for about two decades before it goes to scrap, only a small fraction rotate out of service every year. And that's assuming that everyone bought EVs as replacement, which if course is an impossiblity because even if everyone was suddenly sold on the concept of EVs it'd take a decade or more to ramp up production to that level. And of course everyone is not suddenly sold on the concept of EVs. You're looking at maybe a 30-40 year transition time period here. If power companies can't keep up with a trend that's stretched out over the scale of several decades, they deserve to fail.

Comment: Re:When they don't blame the Chinese ... (Score 2) 97

by Rei (#47773799) Attached to: FBI Investigates 'Sophisticated' Cyber Attack On JP Morgan, 4 More US Banks

Yeah, what evildoers, giving Russia a slap on the wrist for the petty offense of invading and taking over part of another country that had insolently decided to no longer be under Russia's thumb. Next up, the evil tyrants in American and Europe will send Putin a sternly worded letter! Maybe he won't even get a Christmas card from Biden this year!

See: US to sanction Russia over annexation of Virginia

Comment: Re:Lame.. (Score 1) 157

by Yaztromo (#47771747) Attached to: A Horrifying Interactive Map of Global Internet Censorship

For example, this week I saw a video of a beheading. Now after watching it I probably wish that somebody had filtered that for me.

If it makes you feel any better, unless you watched a completely different video than I did (something other the what has been in the news recently), you didn't see a beheading. Did you see the blood spurt/drain out as the carotid/jugular were severed? Did you see the disarticulation of the spine? Those weren't in any version of the video I saw. It moves from a guy making a sawing motion with a knife in front of a guy throat, to a picture of the disembodied head sitting atop the body.

That's not to say that the guy is any less dead, or that it was any less horrific. But there was a lot of somewhat creative editing going on in that video. Shadows seem to shift at different points relative to the background, indicating that some of the later parts may have been recorded an hour or two after the earlier parts. There is some analysis that seems to indicate the "terrorist" may have been two different people at different points in the video. There are a lot of cuts, and quite a bit you don't see.

I'm not saying the video is a complete fake. The guy obviously suffered a horrific death, and the perpetrators need the full weight of the western worlds power brought down upon them. But don't beat yourself up about watching a beheading -- what was shown was both sad and shocking, but it left out the actual beheading part (again, unless there is some special uncut version out there I haven't heard about).

Yaz

Comment: the purpose is tracking cars (Score 1, Insightful) 256

by Catbeller (#47770863) Attached to: DoT Proposes Mandating Vehicle-To-Vehicle Communications

Forget the happy horseshit about super-safe robot cars. We don't have those, and they won't work when we do. This is about the ability to track all the vehicles in the world, either by private entities who will backdoor the info to government and political groups, or straight-up security force tracking. Not just here, but all over the world. We are building turnkey police state infrastructure. If you can't grasp this, you might want to contemplate how privileged you are not to ever feel endangered by cops or polical opponents like Scientology or the Moonies. Do not give the monkeys the key to the banana plantation. Once you are in a worldwide prison, there is no escape.

You can measure a programmer's perspective by noting his attitude on the continuing viability of FORTRAN. -- Alan Perlis

Working...