Comment Re:Science is Science. Never political (Score 1) 48
The US *has* been letting them do stupid stuff. Sometimes they get push-back.
The US *has* been letting them do stupid stuff. Sometimes they get push-back.
I vaguely remember hearing of something like that at the time...so I guess the report is accurate.
My question is "How will they implement it?". And a secondary question of "Is that what they're really going to attempt?".
It's not premature. It's either unneeded, or "they should have done this a few years ago". And we won't know which for several years.
Remember, it's not only stuff that can be broken instantly. Coded messages can be recorded, and then broken when it's interesting/convenient.
The motive would be to insult the Russians.
That's possible. My guess was that Glasswing detected a backdoor that the feds had insisted be inserted into some, or much, of the popular commercial software.
Odd. My first suspect was either Ukrainians or some of their sympathizers.
Are they planning on using a hypergolic fuel? If not, I wouldn't expect there to be much explosion risk.
It's NOT the opposite. Both sides are doing it.
If it's still going up, it probably has a very eccentric orbit, and so will decay more quickly. But, yeah, it would be nice if there were some way to solve the problem. All I can think of is shooting the small pieces with lasers to vaporize them.
Orbits don't work that way. If something is in orbit, and you hit it hard, one end of the orbit will go high, and the other end will go low. And it will go through the point of impact once in every orbit. (I think "point of impact" means "some point on the original orbit", but it may be more specific.)
We have VASTLY different ideas of "beautiful".
I'm sorry, but Trump really isn't the worst president possible. The worst since 1780 possibly.
Price of silver has also dropped about 50% since it's peak in January. Yet, silver is valuable as both a monetary metal and industrial metal.
50% drop in the value of an asset is not that unusual.
If you have assets, you are wise to spread them out because anyone of them can underperform or fail. If you want to put 2% of your portfolio into BTC, you can only get burnt by 2% by that decision. If you invest in pre-IPO stock, you should limit percentages because risk of failure is high though returns can be spectacular.
If you think nothing more that betting on a greater fool you're in good company, Warren Buffet said, "Now if you told me you own all of the Bitcoin in the world and you offered it to me for $25, I wouldn't take it because what would I do with it? I'd have to sell it back to you one way or another. It isn't going to do anything."
Personally, I hold no BTC. I do hold some gold and silver, I hold some pre-IPO stocks, but most of my assets are spread around in what is considered low-volatility assets, mostly stocks.
This isn't surprising, but I know what the best offer they're likely to get is.
6 Curses = 1 Hexahex