Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 68 results by qbg
Why bother with LFTR when coal is cheaper? Coal is cheaper than regular nuclear too.
LFTR has the potential to be cheaper than coal, though more development needs to happen first to determine if it is the case.Then come back to me and explain why the "Free Market" or "Private Enterprise" or "Free Enterprise" hasn't been able to build another one of these, after the prototype, in the past 40-ish years.
Take a look at all of the government invention in LFTR's area. Look at all of the hoops that would have to be jumped to privately bring it to market.Quote
You can do that after you admit that the technology also solely exists because of Government funded research to begin with.
Weinberg new that the aircraft reactor was a joke, but he was able to use those funds to research something more socially useful.Perhaps when we speak of capitalism we are not meaning the same thing.
This. It is a collusion between the state and business along with perverse circumstances that is the issue anarcho-socialists have with what they call 'Capitalism'. See Roderick Long's discussion on this topic.When I go to a store and find it is employee owned, I really stay away from the place. If they don't offer you a job, and they don't offer stock, why would anyone shop in the place?
Because you want to buy something?Rich people invest, and investment creates jobs. Employees need to be worth the capital to be hired, but ultimately the investment creates the jobs ergo rich create jobs.
This is mistaking the effect with the cause. The markets create jobs, and investment realizes them. Without a favorable market, the investment would not happen in the first place.
I like the science of breeder reactors, but it would be better if we can wait to use them off-planet.
Why generate the power off planet? You would be greatly increasing the transmissions costs with no gain.If Fukushima was a LFTR, there would've been nothing news worth to report there. You cut power, the freeze plug melts, and the fuel drains into a container that passively cools the fuel.
I used to be pro-nuclear, but this is starting to scare the crap out of me.
This.Thoriumsalt sounds interesting. India is building one, right? I hope they pull it off.
Taxes may take half of your earnings, but you'd spend that much providing the same services the government does (at least).
Prove it.
This is an old concept but good one. This used to apply in this nation and I certainly preferred it.
Why should people with little to nothing be allowed to vote away and steal the property of others? Shouldn't the law that regulates property only be handled by the property owners that the law mainly affects in the first place?
Is your labor not significant enough?Why should people with little to nothing be allowed to vote away and steal the property of others? Shouldn't the law that regulates property only be handled by the property owners that the law mainly affects in the first place?
If people had nothing else but the current world to pattern their new world on, I'd strongly suspect that we would see the same conditions develop again (although possibility with different winners and losers).
Unicomp SpaceSaver PC (Buckling spring, black with metallic gray, USB).
Have you had a chance to test it againt a IBM manufactured model m for comparison i've been thinking of buying one of those for the family pc and was curious how they compared.
It would probably be best done by creating a new block chain. The genesis block would pay you the total amount of GoldBits (which could be more than you would initially distribute, assuming you want room to add more gold to the network later) that there will ever be and every block after that would generate none.
Alternatively, you could Open Transactions to create your gold backed currency.
Alternatively, you could Open Transactions to create your gold backed currency.
Let's person A has a lot of money, so he buys 1 million or so bitcoins. After he buys those he goes out and buys a load of iPods, for which he flips at 0.5 bitcoins. So by doing this he drives up the price of bitcoins to $100+ and then proceeds to dump the amassed bitcoins at a large profit. Legal and would this work?
You would run into massive problems at every stage of that plan. First buying that many Bitcoins would take a very long time and/or drive up the price very high. Second, if an iPod isn't already worth 0.5 Bitcoins, you would be taking a massive loss in trying to boost the price of Bitcoins. Finally, assuming you do get the price you want, cashing out is going to be an issue. You would have to do it slowly or else you would crash the market, and at the same time continue to offer the deal or else the price would fall (if that is the only thing supporting it).Its practically a given that you would lose a ton of money, so it doesn't matter if it is legal or not.
2. all encryption can be broken with enough time AFAIK
Except the one time pad.Mutual mistrust between buyer and seller needs to be supported. This is the toughest problem. Right now, sending Bitcoins is not tied to receiving something in return, and is irrevocable.
This is cryptographically solved in Bitcoin by use of a trusted third party. However, it is not widely implemented yet. (see: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Contracts)Quote
The double-spending check system has to be as least as fast as normal credit card processing. Waiting minutes for the block chain to update is unacceptable.
This can be solved by having the coins come from a trusted source.Quote
Some price stability is needed. Value shouldn't change more than 1% per week, worst case. 1% per month would be better.
Any new currency not tacked to an existing one will suffer this; I don't consider it an issue.Quote
A better way of launching the currency needs to be developed.
What do you mean by this?"noise" can still be compressed to reduce the size...
Good encryption should be indistinguishable from random strings. What is the chance that it could be compressed by at least one byte? There are 256^n strings with a length of n bytes. Since we want to be able to recover the original string, each compressed string must decompress to one decompressed string. There are 256^(n-1) strings of length n-1 bytes. This means that only (256^(n-1))/(256^n) = 1/256 strings of length n can be compressed by one byte. For more highly compressed strings, the chances get worse. This is why trying to compress the data would be useless.