You are correct, of course. I haven't claimed otherwise. All I said is that there's a volunteer-run effort to process various sorts of plastic. Check out this website (may be with automated translate tools).
Yes, there are different plastic types, which needs to be gathered separately. We do that in Russia already.
Well, not everyone. But those who participate in voluntary recycling.
Actually you learn about different types of plastic fairly quickly, just need a bit of practice.
A shameless plug.
Being able to choose between "yes" and "no" answers allows one to communicate. That approach can be adapted to depth psychology, where you can seek to communicate with autonomous parts of your mind, who can share with you their emotions that can be used as "yes" or "no" signals. After that it's fairly easy to establish some communication.
It brings in mind Russian sci-fi duology "Worm" by Lazarevich, published in 1992.
It goes like that... Russians have sent to Mars two armies of self-evolving robots who fought each other and produced valuable military designs as a byproduct. But the experiment spiraled out of control. Then, the Russians have built a spaceship loaded with nuclear warheads, to nuke the entire surface of Mars and destroy the robot armies. It's only a fraction of the plot synopsys. The entire novel is a sort of an apocalyptic dystopia, the story of an escape of the people constituting the creative potential of the former Soviet Union from the confines of the new repressive governments.
In 1992, shortly after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, those novels made an impact, by bringing even people impervious to fiction to read, giving them the hope for a better future.
Engines that run off nuclear power have already been developed. You either directly run the compressed air over the rods and leave a trail of fallout behind you or indirectly do it through a heat exchanger, with an efficiency loss. The major problem is shielding everyone from the reactor, which no one has figured out yet. Fusion is still off the table until we have a known working reactor, so yeah. Unless there's an efficiency gain to using the air plasma, we might as well just use a glorified hair dryer as an engine. Batteries are still limited in terms of power density, and don't have the benefit of decreasing in weight as energy is consumed. There's an electric DHC-2 Beaver in Vancouver soon to run low passenger commercial flights - it has about 30 minutes of flight with 30 minutes of reserve charge. The article talks about the power density increasing, so that's encouraging, but we still have a ways to go.
Thanks, it's really insightful! One minor correction is that while DHC-2 Beaver is indeed a workable concept, to fly for 30 minutes it still needs those improved 400Wh/kg batteries which are better than today best batteries... at least that's what I have figured out from the language of the article. So it just isn't there for a moment. Although it's a quite impressive achievement, indeed.
But sorry, nice with a "fossil free" engine, but could you perhaps be a bit more clear what this is about?
Such engines are going to be really useful for a nuclear-powered aircraft. It's a nice concept, let's see how it develops.
Indeed, increased political competition and more diverse and free media are the tools typically used by a civil society to curb the corruption. Now, the real question is, why do Russian people by and large do not want all those goodies and prefer to stick with Putin's Government.
Western media seem to believe that that's because Russia is a totalitarian state which controls all the media so the people are essentially told what to believe. However, that's totally missing the point.
The real answer is the trauma of the economical crisis of 1990s, which happened on the scale that no Western country has recently endured, so you guys simply do not have the point of reference.
Now, the collapse of the Russian economy in 1990s is not your fault, so you shouldn't feel any guilt about that. But simply recognizing why Russians are very sensitive about it, why do they believe that criticism of their political system is a quite sensitive issue, and why many of them feel aversion to change, would help to get things along.
That said, you might very well feel aversion to Putin's Government or to the ordinary Russians for supporting it. But don't expect Russians to reciprocate your feelings, that's all I'm saying.
Do you not understand what a discussion site is designed for?
No, I have a pretty good idea what a discussion site is designed for.
I would love to see more Russians online, but there are very few. There are many Chinese online surprisingly enough... which is nice.
There's a good reason why you don't see a lot of Russians around.
For example, I believe that the OP is needlessly alarmist and Russia isn't going to disconnect itself from the rest of the Internet. However, there would be three issues with that point. First, there are actually Russians who are afraid that the authorities might introduce a white list of websites accessible from our country. I don't believe that is going to happen, but I can only speak for myself. Not for all Russians in general. Second, suppose that I argued against the OP. Wouldn't that be interpreted as a proof that I would rather see the Russian segment of the Internet disconnected from the rest of the world? Although that's the last thing I'd like to happen. Third -- and most importantly -- no one has asked for my opinion. Wouldn't it be rude and inappropriate to introduce my own opinion regarding the OP, when no one has explicitly asked for it?
Thanks for having a civil discussion!
For what it's worth I used to be a firm believer in the Swedish model. What changed is that I spent four years in Sweden and became aware of the effect that welfare has on motivation. Refugees are particularly disadvantaged by it, but the effect on native Swedes is dire too.
Thank you, too! Europeans' concerns about immigration help put into perspective their attitudes towards Russia. For example, consider 2004 report by Alvaro Gil-Robles on human rights in Russia. Section V ("Rights of national minorities") almost looks like he was desperate to find a good model which could be useful for Europe, too.
Well none of those states claim to be socialist. They're multiparty democracies with a social democratic party.
And they don't have 'perfect human rights records'. All of them ban hate speech for example and defined hate speech widely enough that disagreeing with the groupthink is potentially illegal. E.g. disagreeing with state policies on mass immigration, or welfare.
They do all have high taxes though. Which is ironic as a society which taxes people heavily but grants them lots of benefits when they're unemployed is probably only possible with a small and culturally homogenous population. E.g. in a great article from Rosengard, an immigrant ghetto in Sweden...
Of course dissenting on immigration is basically impossible in Sweden. Same in Germany. Unfortunately as Engels' article points out high welfare combined with a generous asylum policy means you end up with a lot of people who will probably never work. And they'll have children who will also never work. This is not good for social stability.
What you said makes sense. Thanks for the articles; that's high-quality reporting.
In Marxism-Leninism you need to take away human rights from opponents of the regime in order to build socialism, otherwise those regime opponents will overthrow the regime and reinstate capitalism.
Owing to that indoctrination, conflating economy with human rights was natural for Soviet dissidents. However, in the year of 2017, Marxism-Leninism has no viability as a concept. Contemporary socialism is associated with European welfare states such as Germany, France, Sweden, Norway, etc., in which massive state interventions into the economy are accompanied with a perfect situation with human rights.
I've noticed several design suggestions in your code.
