Mark G @ 488 Free music huh? Not before the USSA's "Music corporations" have persecuted and crucified a few more people like this Bastards.
]]>☔ We can expect a lot more of those in the future as climate change pumps more energy into storm systems.
]]>That was more than 15 years ago. so figure how much a brand new technology that's never been used before is going to cost in development and testing now, and what the chances of hitting budget estimates is likely to be.
]]>To kick the discussion towards something more plausible, how likely is increased tunneling for rail or cars in 2032? This seems not impossible; while the per-kilometer price will be high, the ability to go underneath obstacles on the surface makes it a useful option. And as the cost comes down it becomes more competitive with bridges. It's not Sexy! New! Technology! though - I don't see any stories seeded by tunnels reducing surface traffic in cities. It's just something that's there in the background. Other comments?
]]>...and the other signatories to the treaty would then be obligated to stop working with them. Which means that all support for their "power generation" programs would stop, supplies and hardware sales would be prevented, and a lot of other restrictions would slam into place.
Speaking of trains, vac or otherwise, I don't see how using nukes to provide base load power for energy intensive activities is avoidable. I'm not interested in yet another iteration of "is not!" "are too!"; I'd rather speculate on how going nuclear plays out internationally as more and more countries make the switchover.
I'll start with the no-brainer surmise that countries like the U.S. will use the NPT as a club to maintain hegemony over their less industrially advanced neighbors. Right now, speculating on Iran's nuclear ambitions seems to be allowable bit of diplomacy. But what happens when a country like Greece says to the rest of the world, "Sorry, but no thanks. Rather than rely on the EU for our nuke fuel we'd rather process the raw ore and make our own"?
I don't see this as a stable situation - especially given the current hypocrisies wrt enforcing NPT.
]]>Estimates are that Asia is thus missing over 163 million women, according to the book Unnatural Selection.
]]>Shorter version is: girl children are suddenly becoming valuable, tolerance of homosexuality is removing the pressure on gay men to marry a beard, and in the longer term (1-2 generations) it should be a self-correcting problem.
]]>I don't think so. Nuclear weapons solved a 1940s problem by being a lot cheaper than a thousand bomber raid (as a tool for taking out strategic targets such as ball bearing factories). But they come with huge political baggage attached. Meanwhile, JDAMs are getting ever cheaper and solve the same problem with 1990s technology at much lower cost and without the same political baggage.
Now, if you said that nuclear terrorism is pretty much inevitable at some point, I'd agree with you -- and argue that it already happened.
]]>And sometimes it means some rights should devolve onto states rather than being hoarded by the federal government. (A topical example is marriage legislation.) Decentralized governance is a valid political preference, and not everything is a code word for something else.
In any case, can we get away from the 19th century and talk about the 21st for a while?
]]>In the wild, the problem with looking at the Sun is that your eyes take time to re-adjust to looking at your surroundings, rendering you easy prey for that time. And rather than evolving eyes that could adjust quickly enough, it's easier just to stop looking at the Sun. (I'm trying not to make evolution sound like a conscious process with plans, which is a trap many fall into.)
(What got me thinking about this is hearing that some creationist was pushing an anti-evolution argument that starts with, "The Earth is a closed system." (I didn't say it! Heck I can't really prove even a creationist was actually dumb and pseudo-scientific enough to have said it sincerely.))
Anyway, if an aversion to looking right at the Sun IS the root of "being unfit to gaze upon the Face of God" sorts of thinking, then a general fear of the sky would be a pretty seamless offshoot of that.
]]>Please explain your reasoning.
]]>