Undefined discussion subject.

Malmesbury said:

Sandpit said:

BigRich said:

rcs1000 said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Nope.
Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.

If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.

That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.

Question for the technical nerds: does star-link make 5G irreverent? That is if it happens and it works.

Not really, they have different applications and are quite complementary.

5G will be good for very high speed data connections, and for connections between devices such as autonomous cars. It will roll out initially in cities, as the masts need to be closer together than current 4G masts.

Starlink will, with a few exceptions such as city traders, initially roll out in rural areas, and will give broadband connections to those who are still using slow ADSL over copper wires, or even dial-up. This is interesting if you're in the UK, but life-changing if you're in rural USA, Canada, Australia etc - which is *really* rural.

You don't have to go far in the UK, from the big cities, for broadband to be crap.

Same for much of Europe, really.

What Starlink will offer is that every remote, picturesque hamlet can have 1Gb symmetrical. Which means that a big hurdle to WFH is removed - 4K video conferencing plus the kids watching Netflix would be a doddle...

It's definitely one of the most amazing projects going on at the moment, very much looking forward to watching it testing later this year.

If it works as described, they won't be able to make the receivers fast enough - they'll outsell iPhones for the first couple of years.

Anabobazina said:

SandyRentool said:

Watching Look North. Plenty of dickheads out and about in Wharfedale this weekend.

Presumably you luxuriated in your self-incarceration as per.

Absolutely. Had to mow the lawn, mind. And heard some coughing in a neighbouring garden.

In theory my in-laws could turn up mob-handed tomorrow, but I'm doubtful.

IshmaelZ said:

Nigelb said:

IshmaelZ said:

rcs1000 said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Nope.
Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.

If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.

That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.

BluestBlue said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...

Voyager 1 was launched in 1977. It is now 20 odd light hours away. The nearest possible planet is 4.2 light years away, and the chances of that planet being in any way human habitable are at least 1m to 1 against. We ain't going nowhere, and this is not a Yeah, but they said heavier then air flight was impossible kind of point. And if we were, the relative distances and levels of technology are such that you going upstairs in your house and saying Yay, I'm in space is about as useful for hypothetical extra solar system exploration as sending more bods to the iss.

The potential resources of the solar system are quite enough for now,
The stars will have to wait for our descendants.

Getting more stuff from elsewhere to be consumed on earth exacerbates rather than ameliorates our long term problems.

What long term problems?

If there's more stuff to consume then great, humanity has a voracious appetite and more stuff can be consumed better.

Sandpit said:

Malmesbury said:

Sandpit said:

BigRich said:

rcs1000 said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Nope.
Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.

If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.

That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.

Question for the technical nerds: does star-link make 5G irreverent? That is if it happens and it works.

Not really, they have different applications and are quite complementary.

5G will be good for very high speed data connections, and for connections between devices such as autonomous cars. It will roll out initially in cities, as the masts need to be closer together than current 4G masts.

Starlink will, with a few exceptions such as city traders, initially roll out in rural areas, and will give broadband connections to those who are still using slow ADSL over copper wires, or even dial-up. This is interesting if you're in the UK, but life-changing if you're in rural USA, Canada, Australia etc - which is *really* rural.

You don't have to go far in the UK, from the big cities, for broadband to be crap.

Same for much of Europe, really.

What Starlink will offer is that every remote, picturesque hamlet can have 1Gb symmetrical. Which means that a big hurdle to WFH is removed - 4K video conferencing plus the kids watching Netflix would be a doddle...

It's definitely one of the most amazing projects going on at the moment, very much looking forward to watching it testing later this year.

If it works as described, they won't be able to make the receivers fast enough - they'll outsell iPhones for the first couple of years.

Probably not too much in this country though. As much as people moan about broadband most of this country has quite good and cheap broadband options.

Our broadband is a lot better quality and cheaper than what many Americans are used to.

FrancisUrquhart said:

The egg heads from the start said people wouldn't stick to a rigid lockdown for very long. Even before the Cummings story we all saw people were increasingly ignoring aspects of it.

One big thing one i think the government have made an error with this loosening, not putting a cap on distanced travel. You can't really enforce it, but the message is go as far as you like, and resulted people all heading to same places en masse.

This is what France rather sensibly did.

The Scottish Government is recommending no more than 5 miles from home.

Nigelb said:

Philip_Thompson said:

IshmaelZ said:

rcs1000 said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Nope.
Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.

If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.

That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.

BluestBlue said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...

Voyager 1 was launched in 1977. It is now 20 odd light hours away. The nearest possible planet is 4.2 light years away, and the chances of that planet being in any way human habitable are at least 1m to 1 against. We ain't going nowhere, and this is not a Yeah, but they said heavier then air flight was impossible kind of point. And if we were, the relative distances and levels of technology are such that you going upstairs in your house and saying Yay, I'm in space is about as useful for hypothetical extra solar system exploration as sending more bods to the iss.

Exploration is entirely possible within our solar system. Not only is space very useful for satellites (like Starlink etc) but its entirely probable our first proper offworld bases will be for mining purposes. Which matches a lot of why people moved to other continents etc too - looking for resources was a desire then.

A number of rare earth elements are available within our solar system in space. Asteroid mining certainly could be a real thing this century.

Extra solar exploration is entirely possible, though the practical payoffs are likely considerably more distant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Starshot

Certainly possible, though I expect to see mining within the solar system within my lifetime. Extra solar might not even be within my childrens lifetime.

Peter_the_Punter said:

another_richard said:

Andy_JS said:

Good news that swimming polls may be able to open in July, according to the Sunday Times.

Swimming is one of the few things I've missed.

You're not trying hard enough, Richard. Just back from a delicious splash in the River Avon, near Pershore. Plenty of fresh water around if you look for it!

I've been thinking along those lines but I grew up in the era of 'dark and lonely water'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sg6IVUvVsAs

So unless the proper open water swimming areas open I'll have to make do with the 'joys' of Cleethorpes.

IanB2 said:

BBC: Man dies after being attacked by cows in Yorkshire Dales

I like to go for country walks. I have no qualms about walking in a field containing sheep, but no way will I enter one containing cattle.

Philip_Thompson said:

IshmaelZ said:

Nigelb said:

IshmaelZ said:

rcs1000 said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Nope.
Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.

If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.

That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.

BluestBlue said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...

Voyager 1 was launched in 1977. It is now 20 odd light hours away. The nearest possible planet is 4.2 light years away, and the chances of that planet being in any way human habitable are at least 1m to 1 against. We ain't going nowhere, and this is not a Yeah, but they said heavier then air flight was impossible kind of point. And if we were, the relative distances and levels of technology are such that you going upstairs in your house and saying Yay, I'm in space is about as useful for hypothetical extra solar system exploration as sending more bods to the iss.

The potential resources of the solar system are quite enough for now,
The stars will have to wait for our descendants.

Getting more stuff from elsewhere to be consumed on earth exacerbates rather than ameliorates our long term problems.

What long term problems?

If there's more stuff to consume then great, humanity has a voracious appetite and more stuff can be consumed better.

21st century conquistadors. Wearing silly helmets and pissing in their pants.

Pulpstar said:

BluestBlue said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...

Voyager 1 was launched in 1977. It is now 20 odd light hours away. The nearest possible planet is 4.2 light years away, and the chances of that planet being in any way human habitable are at least 1m to 1 against. We ain't going nowhere, and this is not a Yeah, but they said heavier then air flight was impossible kind of point. And if we were, the relative distances and levels of technology are such that you going upstairs in your house and saying Yay, I'm in space is about as useful for hypothetical extra solar system exploration as sending more bods to the iss.

Indeed, interstellar travel is going to be hardest thing humanity's ever done, albeit not _quite_ impossible, if we manage to build something that can accelerate to a reasonable fraction of light speed and support several generations of humans as they travel. But exploring and exploiting the solar system is far more feasible, and there's an awful lot we could do with the resources it contains.

Here's a video on that, narrated by the immortal Carl Sagan. Not Peter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YH3c1QZzRK4

Very nice indeed. It really puts its finger on why it's our destiny to explore space - if we didn't have that innate urge to visit distant horizons, see things unseen and do things yet undone by humans, then we wouldn't be the species that we are. We'd never have left our caves.

No_Offence_Alan said:

IanB2 said:

BBC: Man dies after being attacked by cows in Yorkshire Dales

I like to go for country walks. I have no qualms about walking in a field containing sheep, but no way will I enter one containing cattle.

These usually involve dogs and cows protecting their calves.

Also, people can panic around cows that approach them en-masse when they are just being inquisitive. That aggravates them as they pick up on it.

You should calmly turn towards the cows and walk away slowly and calmly. Never turn your back and never run.

But people do.

No_Offence_Alan said:

IanB2 said:

BBC: Man dies after being attacked by cows in Yorkshire Dales

I like to go for country walks. I have no qualms about walking in a field containing sheep, but no way will I enter one containing cattle.

Been chased by bullocks. Didn't think Wor Lass would be able to jump over a 5 foot wall, but she did.

Also attacked by a horse while walking. Bit me on the shoulder.

IshmaelZ said:

Philip_Thompson said:

IshmaelZ said:

Nigelb said:

IshmaelZ said:

rcs1000 said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Nope.
Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.

If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.

That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.

BluestBlue said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...

Voyager 1 was launched in 1977. It is now 20 odd light hours away. The nearest possible planet is 4.2 light years away, and the chances of that planet being in any way human habitable are at least 1m to 1 against. We ain't going nowhere, and this is not a Yeah, but they said heavier then air flight was impossible kind of point. And if we were, the relative distances and levels of technology are such that you going upstairs in your house and saying Yay, I'm in space is about as useful for hypothetical extra solar system exploration as sending more bods to the iss.

The potential resources of the solar system are quite enough for now,
The stars will have to wait for our descendants.

Getting more stuff from elsewhere to be consumed on earth exacerbates rather than ameliorates our long term problems.

What long term problems?

...

Christ on a bike.

Do you feel that the earth is underpopulated, short of micro plastics and cooling at an alarming rate?

No, no and no. Nor is the earth overpopulated either though. Not see how any of that is related to what I wrote though.

Resources from offworld can help with the population that is here and help with clean, green technologies too.

If we can eliminate net carbon emissions and micro plastics and better provide for the population of the world how is that a bad thing?

DougSeal said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

IanB2 said:

BBC: Man dies after being attacked by cows in Yorkshire Dales

I like to go for country walks. I have no qualms about walking in a field containing sheep, but no way will I enter one containing cattle.

A dangerously complacent attitude towards sheep IMHO.

I once while walking alone was entirely encircled by sheep up close leaving me nowhere to move. It was very intimidating. I stood still until they moved.

DougSeal said:

Anabobazina said:

The attitudes of the authoritarian left scare me

DougSeal said:

stodge said:

Malmesbury said:

Same here - the reasoning is, why do we need to go in? A few people might need to be physically present every now and then...

In the longer run, yes, the issues about cross-pollination of ideas, meeting other groups, careers etc may have some effect. But in the 6 month range? No.

The only really issue is some people being sick of working from home.

The problem with WAH is you need to create the same distractions that are present in every office - conversations about work or more often not about work, the gossip, the banter, the social aspects of the working experience.

Many companies have tried to replicate that via "virtual cuppas" or the "virtual corridor" but you can't structure an unstructured activity and hope it has the same effect. Other companies think because their employees are at home they can and should work harder and longer.

WAH doesn't work for everyone - I have a colleague who has four school aged daughters. He is desperate to get back to the office.

Some call it working from home, others call it bringing your work into your home. If the office is dead it could, counterintuitively, be a massive setback for women’s equality in the workplace because...erm...there won’t be one. Women are to be asked to share their workspace with their childcare space and they will, in all likelihood, have to prioritise the latter. Men will not have that pressure. Being able to get out of the house was to half our population the liberating event of the twentieth century. If we pressure everyone to stay home the effects on that half will be quite different.

Well - yet again - it’s not going to be all or nothing is it? People will end up working at home 2-3 days a week and in the office 2-3 days a week, I should think.

Working in the office five days is daft - you need some time to focus without distractions, which is impossible in the crazy open plan offices of today.

But, some collaborative time is great. So be flexible, work 2-5 days a fortnight at home, and enjoy the best of all worlds.

Not sure how you get “authoritarian left” from that post. I thought it a bit wet myself

What post? I was referring to Sandy’s nightly “dickhead” reports.

“Dickheads”, AKA human beings who are sick of being incarcerated by a clueless clown-based government.

I’d probably be cast as a left-libertarian compared to most PBers, although I always considered myself very moderate.

The ‘lock ‘em up’ stuff is pretty nauseating.

IshmaelZ said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Well you'll be pleased to know that's there's a massive amount of science being done on the ISS, including monitoring of this here big blue planet.

With this mission, the cost of that science just reduced dramatically, thanks to the unprecedented use of a privately-developed rocket from SpaceX by NASA.

It's also a great diplomatic tool, the one project in which the USA and Russia co-operate fully and share all their data. Much better that they put their resources into exploring the universe together, than in pointing thousands of nukes at each other.

Science on the space station. Can we grow cress in zero gravity?

Pointless.

Unhuh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_research_on_the_International_Space_Station

And a complete misunderstanding of the value of research science.

From that article:

"Research on the ISS improves knowledge about the effects of long-term space exposure on the human body." Pointless. We live on earth, not in space.

"Researchers are investigating the effect of the station's near-weightless environment on the evolution, development, growth and internal processes of plants and animals." Like I said, growing cress. Pointless.

Utterly misunderstanding the value of research science.
Take a look at the actual list of experiments, and its breadth, and explain why that might not, at some time in the future, be of value.

You are basically arguing that all large scale fundamental science experiments are worthless. That is just silly.

No, but some are. The whole of the Apollo project gave us cordless screwdrivers and a decent REM song. Not much ROI there.

That's just not true. So much of the modern world came from the space race. Everyday life has been changed by it.

IshmaelZ said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Well you'll be pleased to know that's there's a massive amount of science being done on the ISS, including monitoring of this here big blue planet.

With this mission, the cost of that science just reduced dramatically, thanks to the unprecedented use of a privately-developed rocket from SpaceX by NASA.

It's also a great diplomatic tool, the one project in which the USA and Russia co-operate fully and share all their data. Much better that they put their resources into exploring the universe together, than in pointing thousands of nukes at each other.

Science on the space station. Can we grow cress in zero gravity?

Pointless.

Unhuh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_research_on_the_International_Space_Station

And a complete misunderstanding of the value of research science.

From that article:

"Research on the ISS improves knowledge about the effects of long-term space exposure on the human body." Pointless. We live on earth, not in space.

"Researchers are investigating the effect of the station's near-weightless environment on the evolution, development, growth and internal processes of plants and animals." Like I said, growing cress. Pointless.

Utterly misunderstanding the value of research science.
Take a look at the actual list of experiments, and its breadth, and explain why that might not, at some time in the future, be of value.

You are basically arguing that all large scale fundamental science experiments are worthless. That is just silly.

No, but some are. The whole of the Apollo project gave us cordless screwdrivers and a decent REM song. Not much ROI there.

And kickstarted the chip industry.
Huge ROI.

another_richard said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

another_richard said:

Andy_JS said:

Good news that swimming polls may be able to open in July, according to the Sunday Times.

Swimming is one of the few things I've missed.

You're not trying hard enough, Richard. Just back from a delicious splash in the River Avon, near Pershore. Plenty of fresh water around if you look for it!

I've been thinking along those lines but I grew up in the era of 'dark and lonely water'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sg6IVUvVsAs

So unless the proper open water swimming areas open I'll have to make do with the 'joys' of Cleethorpes.

Wild swimming is the most lovely of experiences. Buy the book and enjoy the country you were born to.

Fox now showing police abandoned scores of police vehicles in Philadelphia. Mob all over them.

SandyRentool said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Well you'll be pleased to know that's there's a massive amount of science being done on the ISS, including monitoring of this here big blue planet.

With this mission, the cost of that science just reduced dramatically, thanks to the unprecedented use of a privately-developed rocket from SpaceX by NASA.

It's also a great diplomatic tool, the one project in which the USA and Russia co-operate fully and share all their data. Much better that they put their resources into exploring the universe together, than in pointing thousands of nukes at each other.

Science on the space station. Can we grow cress in zero gravity?

Pointless.

Unhuh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_research_on_the_International_Space_Station

And a complete misunderstanding of the value of research science.

From that article:

"Research on the ISS improves knowledge about the effects of long-term space exposure on the human body." Pointless. We live on earth, not in space.

"Researchers are investigating the effect of the station's near-weightless environment on the evolution, development, growth and internal processes of plants and animals." Like I said, growing cress. Pointless.

Utterly misunderstanding the value of research science.
Take a look at the actual list of experiments, and its breadth, and explain why that might not, at some time in the future, be of value.

You are basically arguing that all large scale fundamental science experiments are worthless. That is just silly.

This so-called cutting-edge science is used as a fig leaf to justify the load of nonsense that is the space station.

I have nothing against fundamental research. But pissing goodness knows how much on a vanity project isn't best use of the research budget.

And as for the notion we have some sort of divine right to the resources on other planets and asteroids, if I was ever going to do a philosophy PhD, this would be the topic.

It’s there; sunk cost.
Critiquing SpaceX, even if you’re right about the space station (which I doubt), on that basis, is just silly.

Anabobazina said:

DougSeal said:

Anabobazina said:

The attitudes of the authoritarian left scare me

DougSeal said:

stodge said:

Malmesbury said:

Same here - the reasoning is, why do we need to go in? A few people might need to be physically present every now and then...

In the longer run, yes, the issues about cross-pollination of ideas, meeting other groups, careers etc may have some effect. But in the 6 month range? No.

The only really issue is some people being sick of working from home.

The problem with WAH is you need to create the same distractions that are present in every office - conversations about work or more often not about work, the gossip, the banter, the social aspects of the working experience.

Many companies have tried to replicate that via "virtual cuppas" or the "virtual corridor" but you can't structure an unstructured activity and hope it has the same effect. Other companies think because their employees are at home they can and should work harder and longer.

WAH doesn't work for everyone - I have a colleague who has four school aged daughters. He is desperate to get back to the office.

Some call it working from home, others call it bringing your work into your home. If the office is dead it could, counterintuitively, be a massive setback for women’s equality in the workplace because...erm...there won’t be one. Women are to be asked to share their workspace with their childcare space and they will, in all likelihood, have to prioritise the latter. Men will not have that pressure. Being able to get out of the house was to half our population the liberating event of the twentieth century. If we pressure everyone to stay home the effects on that half will be quite different.

Well - yet again - it’s not going to be all or nothing is it? People will end up working at home 2-3 days a week and in the office 2-3 days a week, I should think.

Working in the office five days is daft - you need some time to focus without distractions, which is impossible in the crazy open plan offices of today.

But, some collaborative time is great. So be flexible, work 2-5 days a fortnight at home, and enjoy the best of all worlds.

Not sure how you get “authoritarian left” from that post. I thought it a bit wet myself

What post? I was referring to Sandy’s nightly “dickhead” reports.

“Dickheads”, AKA human beings who are sick of being incarcerated by a clueless clown-based government.

I’d probably be cast as a left-libertarian compared to most PBers, although I always considered myself very moderate.

The ‘lock ‘em up’ stuff is pretty nauseating.

For the avoidance of doubt, under current rules, sitting on a quiet patch of riverbank is not dickhead behaviour. 100 folk all sat cheek by jowl and leaving all their crap behind is.

IshmaelZ said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Well you'll be pleased to know that's there's a massive amount of science being done on the ISS, including monitoring of this here big blue planet.

With this mission, the cost of that science just reduced dramatically, thanks to the unprecedented use of a privately-developed rocket from SpaceX by NASA.

It's also a great diplomatic tool, the one project in which the USA and Russia co-operate fully and share all their data. Much better that they put their resources into exploring the universe together, than in pointing thousands of nukes at each other.

Science on the space station. Can we grow cress in zero gravity?

Pointless.

Unhuh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_research_on_the_International_Space_Station

And a complete misunderstanding of the value of research science.

From that article:

"Research on the ISS improves knowledge about the effects of long-term space exposure on the human body." Pointless. We live on earth, not in space.

"Researchers are investigating the effect of the station's near-weightless environment on the evolution, development, growth and internal processes of plants and animals." Like I said, growing cress. Pointless.

Utterly misunderstanding the value of research science.
Take a look at the actual list of experiments, and its breadth, and explain why that might not, at some time in the future, be of value.

You are basically arguing that all large scale fundamental science experiments are worthless. That is just silly.

No, but some are. The whole of the Apollo project gave us cordless screwdrivers and a decent REM song. Not much ROI there.

Have a list of more than 40 inventions that came about from NASA:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spinoff_technologies

There will also be a lot more from private companies and universities, for whom space was the necessity that mothered invention.

In recent times SpaceX have even managed to recycle their rockets, landing them back on Earth to be used again!

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1267129644228247552?s=20

Philip_Thompson said:

IshmaelZ said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Well you'll be pleased to know that's there's a massive amount of science being done on the ISS, including monitoring of this here big blue planet.

With this mission, the cost of that science just reduced dramatically, thanks to the unprecedented use of a privately-developed rocket from SpaceX by NASA.

It's also a great diplomatic tool, the one project in which the USA and Russia co-operate fully and share all their data. Much better that they put their resources into exploring the universe together, than in pointing thousands of nukes at each other.

Science on the space station. Can we grow cress in zero gravity?

Pointless.

Unhuh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_research_on_the_International_Space_Station

And a complete misunderstanding of the value of research science.

From that article:

"Research on the ISS improves knowledge about the effects of long-term space exposure on the human body." Pointless. We live on earth, not in space.

"Researchers are investigating the effect of the station's near-weightless environment on the evolution, development, growth and internal processes of plants and animals." Like I said, growing cress. Pointless.

Utterly misunderstanding the value of research science.
Take a look at the actual list of experiments, and its breadth, and explain why that might not, at some time in the future, be of value.

You are basically arguing that all large scale fundamental science experiments are worthless. That is just silly.

No, but some are. The whole of the Apollo project gave us cordless screwdrivers and a decent REM song. Not much ROI there.

That's just not true. So much of the modern world came from the space race. Everyday life has been changed by it.

Non-stick pans. Of course!

RobD said:

SandyRentool said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Well you'll be pleased to know that's there's a massive amount of science being done on the ISS, including monitoring of this here big blue planet.

With this mission, the cost of that science just reduced dramatically, thanks to the unprecedented use of a privately-developed rocket from SpaceX by NASA.

It's also a great diplomatic tool, the one project in which the USA and Russia co-operate fully and share all their data. Much better that they put their resources into exploring the universe together, than in pointing thousands of nukes at each other.

Science on the space station. Can we grow cress in zero gravity?

Pointless.

Unhuh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_research_on_the_International_Space_Station

And a complete misunderstanding of the value of research science.

From that article:

"Research on the ISS improves knowledge about the effects of long-term space exposure on the human body." Pointless. We live on earth, not in space.

"Researchers are investigating the effect of the station's near-weightless environment on the evolution, development, growth and internal processes of plants and animals." Like I said, growing cress. Pointless.

Utterly misunderstanding the value of research science.
Take a look at the actual list of experiments, and its breadth, and explain why that might not, at some time in the future, be of value.

You are basically arguing that all large scale fundamental science experiments are worthless. That is just silly.

This so-called cutting-edge science is used as a fig leaf to justify the load of nonsense that is the space station.

I have nothing against fundamental research. But pissing goodness knows how much on a vanity project isn't best use of the research budget.

And as for the notion we have some sort of divine right to the resources on other planets and asteroids, if I was ever going to do a philosophy PhD, this would be the topic.

Has someone else claimed it or something?

That would be the topic of one of the chapters.

SandyRentool said:

Philip_Thompson said:

IshmaelZ said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Well you'll be pleased to know that's there's a massive amount of science being done on the ISS, including monitoring of this here big blue planet.

With this mission, the cost of that science just reduced dramatically, thanks to the unprecedented use of a privately-developed rocket from SpaceX by NASA.

It's also a great diplomatic tool, the one project in which the USA and Russia co-operate fully and share all their data. Much better that they put their resources into exploring the universe together, than in pointing thousands of nukes at each other.

Science on the space station. Can we grow cress in zero gravity?

Pointless.

Unhuh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_research_on_the_International_Space_Station

And a complete misunderstanding of the value of research science.

From that article:

"Research on the ISS improves knowledge about the effects of long-term space exposure on the human body." Pointless. We live on earth, not in space.

"Researchers are investigating the effect of the station's near-weightless environment on the evolution, development, growth and internal processes of plants and animals." Like I said, growing cress. Pointless.

Utterly misunderstanding the value of research science.
Take a look at the actual list of experiments, and its breadth, and explain why that might not, at some time in the future, be of value.

You are basically arguing that all large scale fundamental science experiments are worthless. That is just silly.

No, but some are. The whole of the Apollo project gave us cordless screwdrivers and a decent REM song. Not much ROI there.

That's just not true. So much of the modern world came from the space race. Everyday life has been changed by it.

Non-stick pans. Of course!

Indeed they did come from it.

As did CAT scans, the computer mouse, portable computers, baby formula and more.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1267185107980496896?s=19

https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1267186138818785280?s=19

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Nope.
Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.

If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.

That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.

Starlink if it works will be utterly transformational.

Proposals to invest in Fibre etc seem utterly moot if Starlink works.

Starlink will not be great for really dense places, like big cities. Partly, that's because your Starlink antenna will need a clear view of as much of the sky as possible. And partly that's because each satellite will only have so much bandwidth to share. If one satellite has (say) ten gigabits of bandwidth and right now it's over the Highlands of Scotland, that will be more than enough. But if it's over London or New York, it won't be sufficient.

SandyRentool said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SandyRentool said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SandyRentool said:

Philip_Thompson said:

IshmaelZ said:

Nigelb said:

IshmaelZ said:

rcs1000 said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Nope.
Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.

If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.

That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.

BluestBlue said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...

Voyager 1 was launched in 1977. It is now 20 odd light hours away. The nearest possible planet is 4.2 light years away, and the chances of that planet being in any way human habitable are at least 1m to 1 against. We ain't going nowhere, and this is not a Yeah, but they said heavier then air flight was impossible kind of point. And if we were, the relative distances and levels of technology are such that you going upstairs in your house and saying Yay, I'm in space is about as useful for hypothetical extra solar system exploration as sending more bods to the iss.

The potential resources of the solar system are quite enough for now,
The stars will have to wait for our descendants.

Getting more stuff from elsewhere to be consumed on earth exacerbates rather than ameliorates our long term problems.

What long term problems?

If there's more stuff to consume then great, humanity has a voracious appetite and more stuff can be consumed better.

21st century conquistadors. Wearing silly helmets and pissing in their pants.

"Conquistadors"?

You're worried we might enslave the Martians?

I'm thinking more of the appropriation of gold and silver.

So long as its economically viable why shouldn't we be mining valuable minerals from asteroids? What good argument is there against it?

The argument is that they have rights. The right to exist unmolested by a species from another planet.

Of course, our species has trampled over the rights of every other species on this planet and huge swathes of the landscape, so I fully expect us to extend this behaviour beyond the earth. Sadly.

What gives them that right? Why?

FrancisUrquhart said:

https://twitter.com/jpegjoshua/status/1267184728412770306?s=19

Rioters wearing plastic gloves and medical-style facemasks.

SandyRentool said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SandyRentool said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SandyRentool said:

Philip_Thompson said:

IshmaelZ said:

Nigelb said:

IshmaelZ said:

rcs1000 said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Nope.
Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.

If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.

That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.

BluestBlue said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...

Voyager 1 was launched in 1977. It is now 20 odd light hours away. The nearest possible planet is 4.2 light years away, and the chances of that planet being in any way human habitable are at least 1m to 1 against. We ain't going nowhere, and this is not a Yeah, but they said heavier then air flight was impossible kind of point. And if we were, the relative distances and levels of technology are such that you going upstairs in your house and saying Yay, I'm in space is about as useful for hypothetical extra solar system exploration as sending more bods to the iss.

The potential resources of the solar system are quite enough for now,
The stars will have to wait for our descendants.

Getting more stuff from elsewhere to be consumed on earth exacerbates rather than ameliorates our long term problems.

What long term problems?

If there's more stuff to consume then great, humanity has a voracious appetite and more stuff can be consumed better.

21st century conquistadors. Wearing silly helmets and pissing in their pants.

"Conquistadors"?

You're worried we might enslave the Martians?

I'm thinking more of the appropriation of gold and silver.

So long as its economically viable why shouldn't we be mining valuable minerals from asteroids? What good argument is there against it?

The argument is that they have rights. The right to exist unmolested by a species from another planet.

Of course, our species has trampled over the rights of every other species on this planet and huge swathes of the landscape, so I fully expect us to extend this behaviour beyond the earth. Sadly.

There is, as far as we know, no life at all on the asteroids.

Thus far we’ve made considerable efforts (for example) not to contaminate Mars.

We've dumped a load of shite on Mars, the moon, and elsewhere. All in the name of science, of course.

Next time somebody lobs an old mattress or fridge in a layby they just need to say it is part of a scientific research project, and they'll get a grant for it.

Laters - I've a litter tray to clean...

Mostly sterile shit though.

SandyRentool said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SandyRentool said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SandyRentool said:

Philip_Thompson said:

IshmaelZ said:

Nigelb said:

IshmaelZ said:

rcs1000 said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Nope.
Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.

If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.

That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.

BluestBlue said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...

Voyager 1 was launched in 1977. It is now 20 odd light hours away. The nearest possible planet is 4.2 light years away, and the chances of that planet being in any way human habitable are at least 1m to 1 against. We ain't going nowhere, and this is not a Yeah, but they said heavier then air flight was impossible kind of point. And if we were, the relative distances and levels of technology are such that you going upstairs in your house and saying Yay, I'm in space is about as useful for hypothetical extra solar system exploration as sending more bods to the iss.

The potential resources of the solar system are quite enough for now,
The stars will have to wait for our descendants.

Getting more stuff from elsewhere to be consumed on earth exacerbates rather than ameliorates our long term problems.

What long term problems?

If there's more stuff to consume then great, humanity has a voracious appetite and more stuff can be consumed better.

21st century conquistadors. Wearing silly helmets and pissing in their pants.

"Conquistadors"?

You're worried we might enslave the Martians?

I'm thinking more of the appropriation of gold and silver.

So long as its economically viable why shouldn't we be mining valuable minerals from asteroids? What good argument is there against it?

The argument is that they have rights. The right to exist unmolested by a species from another planet.

Of course, our species has trampled over the rights of every other species on this planet and huge swathes of the landscape, so I fully expect us to extend this behaviour beyond the earth. Sadly.

Sandy me old mucker at least you can rest assured that if they have any sense at all and don't want to be eeyored to death none of your in laws will be popping in to see you tomorrow and in the coming days.

Fishing said:

rcs1000 said:

Black_Rook said:

kinabalu said:

anotherex_tory said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

anotherex_tory said:

eadric said:

anotherex_tory said:

Sandpit said:

Stark_Dawning said:

DougSeal said:

https://twitter.com/TheEconomist/status/1267097270727651328

But don't we still have to fork out for this fund anyway if the transition period is extended, and all the stuff with Cummings is just a Remainer plot to ensure that happens? (I think I'm following this correctly.)

Yes, extending the transition period comes complete with our ‘share’ of the €750bn bill attached to it, as well as the usual £350m a week. Why do you think Barnier is so desparate for the extension?

Well the bill has already been split across all the payers and all the recpients and has been agreed in that form. Barnier has been explaining to the UK what its options are nothing more. Fortunately the UK government and the whisky salesman who is representing it are keen for the country's economy to get to the bottom of the cliff as quickly as possible.

It certainly has not been agreed in the EU

https://twitter.com/EUwatchers/status/1264792337546346496?s=20

The frugal states have been given what they wanted: EUR250BN has been added as loans with the original EUR500BN in grants retained. I anticipate that it will get to 1trn by the end. In any case the countries which need the money will get it and the countries that want a yield will get theirs.

You seem to ignore eadric explanation altogether

Because he hasn't explained anything and referred to an old article. The original plan was EUR500BN of grants. The frugals didn't like it and so the new proposal adds EUR250BN of loans. The end deal could be up at a EUR1TRN. The bottom line is that the two biggest members of the EU want this and so it is what is going to happen.

People tend to underestimate the political will underpinning the EU and the Euro. It's huge. So whatever fate throws at it Gloria Gaynor applies. There is much to be gained from realising this.

Yep. It's perfectly legitimate to question whether or not the Euro in particular is wise or worth the bother, but the determination to keep it going is immense (and nobody has left the single currency yet, despite regular predictions of collapse since at least 2008.)

It might yet fall apart, but I'll believe it when I see it and not before.

That's because of the law of "path of least resistance".

Imagine you are the Italian government. Now, you will almost certainly perform better economically if your country leaves the Euro. Just one small problem: tens of millions of pensioners with Euros in the bank (which are converted to Lira) will get absolutely destroyed. And the oldies vote, while the youngsters who'd benefit don't.

Untangling the Euro is an incredible complex, because it creates lots of losers. And even if it creates more winners than losers, then those who lost out will be incredibly angry.

The path of least resistance (for now) is to kick the can, and hope things improve.

(And, by the way, this is not as stupid as it looks. Fundamentally, the EU economy is in much better shape today, in terms of dramatically lower structural imbalances, than it was in 2007.)

I'm not sure that's true at all. It depends what you count as "structural" imbalances, of course, but imho they are at least as bad, if not worse, now than in 2007.

Corporate and personal indebtedness, current account, personal savings rates were all showing extreme stress back in 2007. The combined balance sheets of the EZ banks have dramatically shrunk, more than a hundred billion of bad loans have been recognised and written off.

Back in 2007, the EZ looked healthy: it had low unemployment, and inflation, and relatively robust economic growth. But that hid massive structural issues. Growth was the consequence of Spaniards borrowing on their houses to buy German cars.

Note, I'm not saying the EZ has a healthy economy. I'm saying that the hidden unbalances have largely been unwound.

I might also suggest the UK has much worse structural imbalances than the Eurozone. (We have many, many things that are better than the EZ. But lots of the things the EZ was guilty of in 2007, we are now guilty of.)

FrancisUrquhart said:

https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1267186138818785280?s=19

Considering the increase in testing that has taken place, over that time, that's fairly impressive.

But, the same thing has happened across Europe and North America.

Just tried clicking on the Archbishop Cranmer link on the right-hand side of the page. It isn't working. Does anyone know why it was discontinued?

kle4 said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

It may feel more inclined to do so if it is allowed to dream from time to time. By its nature (near)space exploits may help foster a sense of intra-humanity.

It's harmless at worst.

Money could be better spent on Covid research.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

kle4 said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

It may feel more inclined to do so if it is allowed to dream from time to time. By its nature (near)space exploits may help foster a sense of intra-humanity.

It's harmless at worst.

Money could be better spent on Covid research.

Given that it's only been around for a few months, probably not.

Andy_JS said:

Just tried clicking on the Archbishop Cranmer link on the right-hand side of the page. It isn't working. Does anyone know why it was discontinued?

Hilton moved it to a new domain:

https://archbishopcranmer.com/

SandyRentool said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

IanB2 said:

BBC: Man dies after being attacked by cows in Yorkshire Dales

I like to go for country walks. I have no qualms about walking in a field containing sheep, but no way will I enter one containing cattle.

Been chased by bullocks. Didn't think Wor Lass would be able to jump over a 5 foot wall, but she did.

Also attacked by a horse while walking. Bit me on the shoulder.

That’s just a love bite

https://twitter.com/jonathanchait/status/1267167341818806275

SandyRentool said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SandyRentool said:

Philip_Thompson said:

IshmaelZ said:

Nigelb said:

IshmaelZ said:

rcs1000 said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Nope.
Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.

If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.

That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.

BluestBlue said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...

Voyager 1 was launched in 1977. It is now 20 odd light hours away. The nearest possible planet is 4.2 light years away, and the chances of that planet being in any way human habitable are at least 1m to 1 against. We ain't going nowhere, and this is not a Yeah, but they said heavier then air flight was impossible kind of point. And if we were, the relative distances and levels of technology are such that you going upstairs in your house and saying Yay, I'm in space is about as useful for hypothetical extra solar system exploration as sending more bods to the iss.

The potential resources of the solar system are quite enough for now,
The stars will have to wait for our descendants.

Getting more stuff from elsewhere to be consumed on earth exacerbates rather than ameliorates our long term problems.

What long term problems?

If there's more stuff to consume then great, humanity has a voracious appetite and more stuff can be consumed better.

21st century conquistadors. Wearing silly helmets and pissing in their pants.

"Conquistadors"?

You're worried we might enslave the Martians?

I'm thinking more of the appropriation of gold and silver.

To be fair they used to wear silly helmets and piss their pants too

Andy_JS said:

Just tried clicking on the Archbishop Cranmer link on the right-hand side of the page. It isn't working. Does anyone know why it was discontinued?

He is active on Twitter, and there is a link to his blog. Cummings is the subject,though mostly saying how like France we are.

https://archbishopcranmer.com/dominic-cummings-and-the-blaze-disproportionate-significance/

Guardian writer loves this....white girl loots cheesecake factory...has so much to do with police killing unarmed black man....

https://twitter.com/ladyhaja/status/1267110585428303877?s=19

FrancisUrquhart said:

Police in Philadelphia have surrendered.

Philadelphia cheese-eating surrender monkeys?

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

Nigelb said:

SandyRentool said:

Sandpit said:

Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.

https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073

Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.

Nope.
Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.

If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.

That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.

Starlink if it works will be utterly transformational.

Proposals to invest in Fibre etc seem utterly moot if Starlink works.

Starlink will not be great for really dense places, like big cities. Partly, that's because your Starlink antenna will need a clear view of as much of the sky as possible. And partly that's because each satellite will only have so much bandwidth to share. If one satellite has (say) ten gigabits of bandwidth and right now it's over the Highlands of Scotland, that will be more than enough. But if it's over London or New York, it won't be sufficient.

Considering existing technology works to serve London etc quite well that's not a bad thing.

Both broadband and mobile phone reception are fairly crappy in some bits of London.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1267197835067502592?s=19

Charles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1267186138818785280?s=19

So where does the 8000 number people are citing come from?

This is only numbers from pillar 1 testing. Rough rule of thumb the government eggheads use is about x5 number positive tests, not just pillar 1.