New Mars Forums

There's more than a few people in my neighborhood who also like to glare whole colonies of lights all night long.  If security is the reason for the lighting, they'd do everyone a favor if they'd use lights tripped by motion detectors.

Australia's political climate has me somewhat confused.  It seems to exist at both extremes.  You have green representatives on one end and, from my impression, a very right wing Prime Minister.   Howard and Bush seem very similiar politically, and Howard even motivated Kim Jong Il to threaten to point nukes at the Aussies, which causes me to ask, do Australians have a generally good opinion of Howard or is he likely going to face defeat at the hands of a more socialist candidate at the next elections?

I think we should be very discreet about landing nuclear powered vehicles on surfaces where people or other life might inhabit.  A few pounds of plutonium might not seem dangerous on a planetary scale, but keep in mind that it's one of the most toxic substances out there.  If you inhale even a few atoms of it, your chances of getting cancer are very near 100%.  Anyhow, RTGs don't develop a whole lot of power, usually a few hundred watts if that.

I just went outside to see if I could see any aurora, but all I saw were thick clouds.  How far south are you?  I'm at roughly 40 degrees latitude, probably too far South.

It's still being debated whether molecular manufacturing is even possible.  All those stocks you're talking about are probably due to structural/materials "nanotech" like better window coatings or whatever.

You can read the book for free at the Foresight website.  Drexler wrote an additional book on nanotech assemblers called  "Nanosystems: Molecular Machinery, Manufacturing, and Computation."  I haven't read it yet but it's gotten good reviews at Amazon.  What's scary is that if this technology becomes possible, disgruntled individuals could potentially wipe out all life on Earth.  Richard Smalley, who got a Nobel in chemistry, thinks nanoassemblers are impossible but some think his reasoning is flawed.

I believe Ayn Rand did give some proper perspectives on the dangers of authoritarian, Stalinist-style "collectivism". 
Have you read the novel Ecotopia by any chance?  The type of collective, de-centralized society presented in that novel is a lot closer to what I think communism should be like, libertarian-communism.

Objectivists like to fashion themselves as being masters of logic and reason, but I agree with you, they seem more blinded by ideology and emotion than the supposedly irrational, tree hugging, pinko-commies they hate so much.  They act as though any way of living that opposes capitalism automatically runs counter to reason and logic.  If the only way to be reasonable and civilized is to have banks, corporations, lawyers, and a$$hole employers, then I'd much rather be an uncivilized savage living out in nature.

I'd go back in time and have dinner with some pre-historic cave dwellers.  Maybe go hunt an elk for dinner and learn how to tan hides and do some flint knapping. 

Shaun, what's the deal with Hitler and Caesar?  You're a right wing fanatic for sure, but I hope your list is just a sign of a warped sense of humor rather than an actual desire to meet those fascists for dinner.  I guess you and Zubrin would be good drinking buddies eh?  You two appear to be very similiar politically wise, unfortunately.

Cindy, I'm surprised Ayn Rand is on your list.  That's the type of right wing fanatic I'd expect to see on Shaun's list.  I think you should invite Karl Marx to dinner also.  At least we could enjoy watching Ayn Rand and Marx go at each other's throats.  Voltaire could weigh the arguments and declare the winner of the bout.  Don't think Rand would stand a chance though.

Clark wants to meet Nero.  Hope it's not because he wants pointers on how to burn down a town when politics aren't going your way.

Cindy's not kidding, there will be no shortage of Marlin steaks to go around tomorrow.  If the spectators wouldn't have screwed up that catch tonight the Marlins would've already been on the grill.  As for the diamondbacks, they're just another mediocre backwoods Mcteam that lacks the rich history of a franchise like the Cubs.  The diamondbacks are a team that few could love or hate.  I do like that new stadium they built though.  I'll visit it sometime when the Cubs arrive to do some baseball practice for the real games.

Some people think that in 100 years nanotech might be so advanced that you wouldn't need to grow food anymore, you'd just create it from a bank of molecules.  If technology like that happens a lot of people might survive.   It could be too that space transportation won't be so reliant on technology like rockets, maybe super massive space tethers or even some totally exotic form of propulsion will make it as easy and cheap to get into outer space as a plane ticket is today.  If tech doesn't advance much I doubt even moving into space will save us from extinction.  Imagine the in-breeding that would occur. I have to say though, living in the promixity of Yellowstone, it didn't exactly cheer me up to read your message.

Well, it is a sign that the government is aware that space technologies are developing rapidly and that people maybe going into space sooner than later in a non-government capacity.  At least it appears that the government is willing to allow private spacefarers to go into space in the first place since the bill specifically mentions adding private human spaceflight to some other regulations.  The bill IS an indication of that.

California always seemed like a very progressive state.  How disappointing that it recalled the governor and put a Republican in the office.  I can see why the upper class and well to do would vote Republican in order to "protect" their wealth as much as they can, but why on Earth would ordinary workers want to risk their benefits, minimum wage, education, etc. by electing a right winger?  Let's hope it's just a temporary bout of insanity.  :angry: