Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Trust the World's Fastest VPN with Your Internet Security & Freedom - A Lifetime Subscription of PureVPN at 88% off. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:Great idea... But there is a problem... (Score 2) 243

How would the money be well spent?

If the money is spent paying Google, Netflix, Verizon, or other engineers, we end up with newer infrastructure, better services, and the like. If it's spent building rockets to circle the moon, then we still pay this (not just "we pay it in taxes", but the labor is spent and the labor is compensated--we work and we exchange our time for this), and what do we receive?

Wasteful spending reduces the amount of stuff you receive for the work you do. That's true across an entire economy for obvious reasons (if half the farmers instead make war machines, half the food doesn't get made, and you pay for war machines that only go out to get blown up). What are we gaining by spending $23 billion here?

You cannot be serious... Do you have any idea what kinds of technology advancement NASA has been a primary driver of? The list is long, varied and many things invented for our space programs of the 1960-70's are ubiquitous now. Ever used Velcro? Ceramics? Digital cameras? Miniaturized solid state RF communications devices? Anything that depends on something in orbit (GPS, Most Syndicated Radio programs, most remote Sports TV coverage...). Need I go on?

One would expect a new space program would have similar benefits to humanity, consider it an infrastructure project. So YES, money well spent.

Comment Re:Why not land on the moon? (Score 2) 243

Been there... Done that.... Plus, it's a whole new kettle of fish when you start trying to land on return and surviving the trip.

Maybe if we billed it as a "dress rehearsal" for a Mars mission.... Go out and orbit the moon for the duration of a Mars trip, go to the surface, return and orbit the moon some more to simulate the trip home.... All within a quick (a couple of days) return distance of home... Maybe that would sell the PR better?

Comment Great idea... But there is a problem... (Score 1) 243

We've already done this a couple of times... The public will just throw up their hands and say "Nothing new to see here! Move along!" Even landing on the moon wouldn't be enough here.

Where I applaud the effort here and believe the money would be well spent doing this, In order to get this kind of thing funded at NASA, we are going to need a better narrative for the press to run with. Something that seems new and exciting. Sadly, because we have been running NASA on less than a shoestring budget for over a decade now, this is about as new and exciting as we can get. Look at our new space craft! It can circle the moon like we did 50 years ago, only with modern technology...

I can see it now... (slow hand clap)...

Comment Re:You ignorant slut (Score 1) 83

Are you with a long term partner and don't have kids?

If not then stfu because I am and I get shit all the time including from strangers about why I'm so selfish and horrible for not having children.

You're an ignorant ass.

I am? For agreeing that you should do what you want to you call me names? LOL, the old "I'm rubber and you are glue" saying comes to mind here. PLEASE don't have kids.... Thanks!

Comment Re:"Can it work?" is not the question... (Score 2) 81

Satellites already exist for data connections and are quasi profitable. However there are technical issues with satellites for broad band internet service, and the biggest is the available spectral space is quite limiting for vast tracts of the developed world. Basically the issues with satellites are more than just cost

But that begs the question here really.. Is this new approach of using temporary balloon based distribution with the effort? I'm not so sure. Where I see the advantage of this idea, how's the operating cost of such a system going to be less than the existing cell network? What spectrum space are they planning to use? How will they obtain the rights to that space unless they buy it? Perhaps they plan to use 802.11 A/N spectrum under what ever passes as FCC part 15 in the UK?

If they are buying spectrum, they will go broke before they begin because the will be bidding with the Cell companies for the same space... If they are using unlicensed 802.11 a/n, then I wish them luck but I don't support their effort. 802.11 a/n is congested bad enough now, we don't need more emitters floating around making matters worse. Plus as a Amateur radio licensee, I have rights to a lot of that spectrum and thus have priority over part 15 users, and I actually do use some of that space and would not welcome their unlicensed intrusion.

Comment Re:So the cost with two to four lines is the same. (Score 2) 83

It's amazing how much this country hates normal people that refuse to become breeders. Sprint is screwing us for not having the American-expected hateful two parents and two children. It is hate that drives corporations to screw us like this. Pure hate. Dealing with things like this every day as a nonbreeder just makes me want to die. Everyone that rules our lives hates us.

Nobody hates you for not having kids. You must be from the shallow end of the gene pool with an attitude like that. However, Please keep genes out of the pool going forward if you don't mind...

Comment Re: Incorrect! (Score 1) 382

Cleaner than Fossil fuels eh? In what way cleaner?

Natural Gas is clean, nearly squeaky clean actually. The worst part is getting the wells punched and the distribution pipes buried. After that, you are pretty much going to get CO2 and water as a byproduct of energy production.

OH... I'm guessing you mean CO2 emissions means it's dirty.... Which is a whole pack of lies and points to what I consider an unfair description "Clean Energy" in trying to advocate we not use fossil fuels. "Clean Energy" is more of a PR campaign than reality or even a possibility. Which, if you read between the lines on my posts here, is my actual point.

Comment Re: Incorrect! (Score 1) 382

But we where discussing "Clean Energy" and I was making the point that there is no such thing, especially on an industrial scale....

Making and recycling batteries is a huge environmental mess.... Photovoltaic Solar is it's own kind of environmental nightmare as are other solar technologies (to a lesser degree). Wind is more of an environmental problem than most people imagine, with huge fiberglass assemblies we will eventually need to get rid of not to mention the impacts of building towers and the birds that die..

Nothing is 100% clean.... Some things are cleaner than others, but all have their issues.

Comment Re:Incorrect! (Score 2) 382

You DO understand that battery recycling is a messy dangerous and toxic business right?

You are dealing with an input that is a mixture of corrosive electrolytes, metal parts and plastic which is not easily disassembled in a safe way. Once you manage to separate the stuff, you have to then refine the metals, neutralize the corrosive materials and deal with the huge amounts of industrial waste all this creates in a safe and environmentally responsible manner. It's not usually easy..

For instance, lead acid batteries are often recycled for two reasons. First, lead is expensive, second it is REALLY bad to dispose of bad lead acid batteries directly into land fills. Sulfuric acid and lead are both bad bad bad for the environment. The process goes something like this.. Pulverize batteries into itty bitty pieces in a big hammer mill..... Separate metal from plastic by dumping battery chips into a tank of water, lead sinks, plastic floats while the acid dissolves into the water. Treat the water to neutralize the acid being careful to capture any vapors to make sure they are not toxic and of neutral PH. Scrape the plastic off the top of the water and dispose of it, scrape the bottom of the tank to recover lead chips which are then refined in the normal way. Oh, and eventually you will want to change the water in that tank, which will need to be properly treated to remove as much lead as you can...All your employees will need to wear full protective gear including respirators and heavy gloves because it's REALLY dangerous in your factory. Remember all that hazards waste you will be creating will need to go someplace safe and not just buried in your back yard...

Someday, you will also want to shut down that factory too.. Trust me, even knowing in advance, it's a horrible mess to clean up something like this...

It's a similar problem when building new batteries from the recycled lead.. It's a little cleaner, but it still produces toxic wastes, fumes and is a danger to your employees and the local environment...

Batteries are *really* messy sir.

Slashdot Top Deals

You're at Witt's End.

Working...