• Apollo 11

    From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to All on Wed Jul 20 19:38:00 2022
    A little late in the day..., but it was on this day in 1969 that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin stepped out for a stroll on the moon.

    "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."

    That was 53 years ago. Doesn't seem possible that it's been that long.



    ... If the #2 pencil is the most popular, why's it still #2?
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Gamgee on Wed Jul 20 19:25:37 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to All on Wed Jul 20 2022 07:38 pm

    A little late in the day..., but it was on this day in 1969 that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin stepped out for a stroll on the moon.

    "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."

    That was 53 years ago. Doesn't seem possible that it's been that long.

    Yep, it's hard to believe it has been that long.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Gamgee on Thu Jul 21 15:06:43 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to All on Wed Jul 20 2022 07:38 pm

    A little late in the day..., but it was on this day in 1969 that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin stepped out for a stroll on the moon.

    "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."

    That was 53 years ago. Doesn't seem possible that it's been that long.



    ... If the #2 pencil is the most popular, why's it still #2?
    What is even more crazy is that it has been about 50 years since anyone's been to the moon. My grandparents witnessed a technological feat that we havne't repated in my lifetime.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Ogg@VERT/CAPCITY2 to Boraxman on Thu Jul 21 08:09:00 2022
    Hello Boraxman!

    ** On Thursday 21.07.22 - 15:06, Boraxman wrote to Gamgee:

    What is even more crazy is that it has been about 50 years
    since anyone's been to the moon. My grandparents witnessed
    a technological feat that we havne't repated in my
    lifetime.

    Why is space the measure? The coordinated attack on the twin
    towers on 9-11 was extraordinary, so was Stuxnet. The man-made
    islands in Dubia and the continued pursuit to build the
    "tallest" buildings in the world require new tech all the time.


    --- OpenXP 5.0.51
    * Origin: Ogg's Dovenet Point (723:320/1.9)
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Gamgee on Thu Jul 21 07:17:00 2022
    Gamgee wrote to All <=-

    A little late in the day..., but it was on this day in 1969 that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin stepped out for a stroll on the moon.

    "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."

    That was 53 years ago. Doesn't seem possible that it's been that long.

    I've been watching "For All Mankind". It's interesting seeing the people
    that were part of the lore during the "space race" and more than a little depressing that we went from walking on the moon to a couple of dedcades
    with a LEO truck called the Space Shuttle.

    Season 3 is interesting - there's a 3-way race to Mars between the Russians, NASA and a private venture backed by a billionaire.


    ... Not building a wall but making a brick
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Boraxman on Thu Jul 21 18:25:00 2022
    Boraxman wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to All on Wed Jul 20 2022 07:38 pm

    A little late in the day..., but it was on this day in 1969 that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin stepped out for a stroll on the moon.

    "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."

    That was 53 years ago. Doesn't seem possible that it's been that long.

    What is even more crazy is that it has been about 50 years since
    anyone's been to the moon. My grandparents witnessed a
    technological feat that we havne't repated in my lifetime.

    Yup, it is crazy indeed. But, in case you hadn't heard... The next step
    is called the Artemis Program, and the first (unmanned) launch is in
    late August or early September. This won't land on the moon, but go
    beyond it and come back. The schedule has actual humans landing on the
    moon again by 2025. Exciting stuff.

    More info here:

    https://www.nasa.gov/specials/artemis/

    https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/20/world/artemis-i-launch-preparations-scn/index.html



    ... All the easy problems have been solved.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to poindexter FORTRAN on Thu Jul 21 18:27:00 2022
    poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Gamgee <=-

    A little late in the day..., but it was on this day in 1969 that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin stepped out for a stroll on the moon.

    "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."

    That was 53 years ago. Doesn't seem possible that it's been that long.

    I've been watching "For All Mankind". It's interesting seeing the
    people that were part of the lore during the "space race" and
    more than a little depressing that we went from walking on the
    moon to a couple of dedcades with a LEO truck called the Space
    Shuttle.

    Season 3 is interesting - there's a 3-way race to Mars between
    the Russians, NASA and a private venture backed by a billionaire.

    Very cool, I hadn't heard of this one but will be looking for it!



    ... A day without sunshine is like night.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to poindexter FORTRAN on Thu Jul 21 23:01:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: poindexter FORTRAN to Gamgee on Thu Jul 21 2022 07:17 am

    Gamgee wrote to All <=-

    A little late in the day..., but it was on this day in 1969 that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin stepped out for a stroll on the moon.

    "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."

    That was 53 years ago. Doesn't seem possible that it's been that long.

    I've been watching "For All Mankind". It's interesting seeing the people that were part of the lore during the "space race" and more than a little depressing that we went from walking on the moon to a couple of dedcades with a LEO truck called the Space Shuttle.

    Season 3 is interesting - there's a 3-way race to Mars between the Russians, NASA and a private venture backed by a billionaire.


    ... Not building a wall but making a brick

    There was a series on the Natgeo channel thatwas a fictional series about the exploration of Mars. Sprinkled in between the story line was short segments
    or commentaries on what is going on at that moment in the story or the importance of something going on at that moment. It starts out with a joint p roject between NASA and an eccentric billionaire, then when water is
    discovered his investment pays off. he has already prepared the required modu les and payloads necessary to establish a permanent colony. Soon afterwards
    a ship owned by a large corporation lands nearby and begins drilling irrespensibly for water, endangering the international base. The science
    base found a sign of previous life in the rocks, then the corporate base gets infected by living microbes in the water they were trying to hide out of fear they'd have to shut their drilling and pumping operation down. The science station realizes none of their ultra modern anti-biotics were designed to
    fight an alien pathogen, so they must secretly trade for penicillin dropped via a probe from the Chinese space station established over Mars.

    Good story, and the central theme was more can be done working together than against each other.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Ogg on Fri Jul 22 07:46:00 2022
    Ogg wrote to MRO <=-

    ** On Thursday 21.07.22 - 15:30, MRO wrote to Ogg:

    also the moon landing was faked.

    It is interesting that there hasn't been one successful
    subsequent successful landing on the near side (even unmanned)
    since the Apollo 11 event.

    Well, you mean besides the Apollo 12, Apollo 14, Apollo 15, Apollo 16,
    and Apollo 17 missions (all manned)? Or were those "faked" too?

    There were also at least SIX unmanned landings by Russia since then, and
    at least THREE unmanned landings by China. Three of the Russian
    landings (the 'Luna' spacecraft series) returned rock samples to the
    Earth.

    So.... your statement above is.... complete bullshit.

    All it takes is ONE successful
    unmanned landing by a 3rd-party or unbiased country/enterprise
    to visit the original landing area. It's almost like every
    attemp has been sabotaged to fail.

    Nobody has visited the original landing area because there's no reason
    to. It's better to land elsewhere to possibly discover something that
    isn't at the original area.

    You should really try to study some science before making such
    ridiculous statements. It makes you look ignorant.



    ... Ignorance can be cured. Stupid is forever.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Ogg on Fri Jul 22 14:27:00 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Ogg to MRO on Thu Jul 21 2022 07:55 pm

    Hello MRO!

    ** On Thursday 21.07.22 - 15:30, MRO wrote to Ogg:

    also the moon landing was faked.

    It is interesting that there hasn't been one successful
    subsequent successful landing on the near side (even unmanned)
    since the Apollo 11 event. All it takes is ONE successful
    unmanned landing by a 3rd-party or unbiased country/enterprise
    to visit the original landing area. It's almost like every
    attemp has been sabotaged to fail.


    If there was evidence it was faked, it wouldn't come from some crackpot
    living in his mother's basement. It would be an official statement by a forie gn nation such as the Russians or the Chinese, who understand the science and have tried to land on the moon. They would be the ones with the assets to credibly debunk NASA's work. Also look at how many thousands of people
    worked on the space program. I can't suspend reality to think they could all keep their mouths shut considering revealing a secret like that could be
    worth millions of dollars.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Belly@VERT/BRAZINET to Ogg on Fri Jul 22 18:17:47 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Ogg to MRO on Thu Jul 21 2022 07:55 pm

    It is interesting that there hasn't been one successful
    subsequent successful landing on the near side (even unmanned)
    since the Apollo 11 event. All it takes is ONE successful
    unmanned landing by a 3rd-party or unbiased country/enterprise
    to visit the original landing area. It's almost like every
    attemp has been sabotaged to fail.

    What are you smoking? No landings since Apollo 11? Seriously?

    (The answer, by the way, is 'crack')

    o
    (O)
    BeLLy

    ---
    Synchronet bbs.brazi.net www.brazi.net WARNING: May contain nuts
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Ogg on Sat Jul 23 09:57:04 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Ogg to Boraxman on Thu Jul 21 2022 08:09 am

    Why is space the measure? The coordinated attack on the twin
    towers on 9-11 was extraordinary, so was Stuxnet. The man-made
    islands in Dubia and the continued pursuit to build the
    "tallest" buildings in the world require new tech all the time.

    The 9/11 attacks were quite low tech. What was "amazing" was the audacity adn creativity.

    Stuxnet, can't comment, maybe. As for Dubai, the Islands and the Burj Khalifa are exercises in absolute stupidity. They might be engineering marvels, and perhaps you could argue that the moon landings were also "for show", but they were the result of major engineering advances and opened up the heavens to us.

    Look at other measures. Travel overseas is as slow as it was in the 80's and earlier. Travelling around the city is SLOWER. If you imagine what someone from the past would think about seeing the world in 40 or 60 years time, I think someone from 1982 would see fewer changes as soemone from 1942 looking at 1982. Someone from 1902 would see a different world in 40-50 years time.

    Space is not THE measure, but for me the measures that matter are the ones that bring life changing improvement and changes. I would say the Internet is the one major advancement now

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Gamgee on Sat Jul 23 10:04:14 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Boraxman on Thu Jul 21 2022 06:25 pm

    What is even more crazy is that it has been about 50 years since anyone's been to the moon. My grandparents witnessed a
    technological feat that we havne't repated in my lifetime.

    Yup, it is crazy indeed. But, in case you hadn't heard... The next step
    is called the Artemis Program, and the first (unmanned) launch is in
    late August or early September. This won't land on the moon, but go
    beyond it and come back. The schedule has actual humans landing on the
    moon again by 2025. Exciting stuff.

    More info here:

    https://www.nasa.gov/specials/artemis/

    https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/20/world/artemis-i-launch-preparations-scn/index .html



    There is a good argument to be had that it is pointless to send humans to the moon, when probes can do most of the work, far cheaper with far less risk. And that is true, but what has also been lost is the dream of using the moon.

    Maybe space travel wasn't really that important for humans after all? Even so, I can't help but think that in many other areas, we still lack the creativity and dynamism that existed before. We make faster and faster computers, but when I go to work and use the OS (Windows), I'm using almost the same paradigms and processes as back in 2002, with the exception I have enough CPU and bandwith to make video calls. Travelling around the city is the same as 50 years ago, albeit a bit safer, but slower and less efficient.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Ogg on Sat Jul 23 10:10:02 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Ogg to MRO on Thu Jul 21 2022 07:55 pm

    also the moon landing was faked.

    It is interesting that there hasn't been one successful
    subsequent successful landing on the near side (even unmanned)
    since the Apollo 11 event. All it takes is ONE successful
    unmanned landing by a 3rd-party or unbiased country/enterprise
    to visit the original landing area. It's almost like every
    attemp has been sabotaged to fail.

    It *IS* very expensive to go there. No one is willing to fork out billions to prove a conspiracy theory which is based on poor reasoning wrong.

    I think there are pictures from a lunar orbiter which show the landing site.

    Most, if not all of the 'evidence' used to argue the landings were fake is fairly easily explained and dismissed. I watched a documentary about how the landings were faked when I was a teenager, and even THEN I could easily tell how the 'proof' was based on a misunderstanding and poor interpretation.

    If the landings were faked, the Soviets would have never let the world hear the end of it. They tracked the mission too.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Moondog on Sat Jul 23 10:17:35 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Ogg on Fri Jul 22 2022 02:27 pm

    If there was evidence it was faked, it wouldn't come from some crackpot living in his mother's basement. It would be an official statement by a forie gn nation such as the Russians or the Chinese, who understand the science and have tried to land on the moon. They would be the ones with the assets to credibly debunk NASA's work. Also look at how many thousands of people
    worked on the space program. I can't suspend reality to think they could all keep their mouths shut considering revealing a secret like that could be worth millions of dollars.


    The 'moon landing was a hoax' thing really pisses me off because people who buy into these theories won't be swayed by evidence. The 9/11 truthers are just as bad. Not even first hand video evidence is enough.

    I mean, to seriously believe that the government and NASA were able to cover such a huge hoax up, for so long? They they managed to avoid any leaks or a "Hunter Biden's laptop" kind of event?

    What is worse is the argument themselves are dumb. "The astronauts moonwalk is just regular walking slowed down" the say, then the show footage of the astronauts walking sped up, which does NOT look anything like walking, and say this is proof. "You can't see the stars" they say. Well, look at all the photos you've taken say at night at a party,a nd tell me how many stars you might see in the sky.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Boraxman on Fri Jul 22 19:36:49 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Moondog on Sat Jul 23 2022 10:17 am

    The 'moon landing was a hoax' thing really pisses me off because people who buy into these theories won't be swayed by evidence. The 9/11 truthers are just as bad. Not even first hand video evidence is enough.

    I mean, to seriously believe that the government and NASA were able to cover such a huge hoax up, for so long? They they managed to avoid any leaks or a "Hunter Biden's laptop" kind of event?

    Yeah.. The moon landing hoax, 9/11 truther, and flat earth conspiracy theorists all seem to just want something to believe in that goes against common knowledge. Many of the arguments in favor of these conspiracy theories seem to be a misunderstanding of the evidence, physics, or just how things work in general.

    What is worse is the argument themselves are dumb. "The astronauts moonwalk is just regular walking slowed down" the say, then the show footage of the astronauts walking sped up, which does NOT look anything like walking, and say this is proof. "You can't see the stars" they say. Well, look at all the photos you've taken say at night at a party,a nd tell me how many stars you might see in the sky.

    Exactly.

    One of my favorites is the Flat Earth conspiracy theory, and some who supposedly believe that gravity is just due to the earth constantly accelerating upward. If that was true, then we'd be well beyond the speed of light by now, with the earth accelerating for the last 4.8(ish?) billion years.. And that also suggests that the stars and our solar system would have to be accelerating in the same direction along with us in order for us to keep obvserving them.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Boraxman on Fri Jul 22 21:40:00 2022
    Boraxman wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Boraxman on Thu Jul 21 2022 06:25 pm

    What is even more crazy is that it has been about 50 years since anyone's been to the moon. My grandparents witnessed a
    technological feat that we havne't repated in my lifetime.

    Yup, it is crazy indeed. But, in case you hadn't heard... The next step
    is called the Artemis Program, and the first (unmanned) launch is in
    late August or early September. This won't land on the moon, but go
    beyond it and come back. The schedule has actual humans landing on the
    moon again by 2025. Exciting stuff.

    More info here:

    https://www.nasa.gov/specials/artemis/


    https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/20/world/artemis-i-launch-preparations-scn/index.html

    There is a good argument to be had that it is pointless to send
    humans to the moon, when probes can do most of the work, far
    cheaper with far less risk. And that is true, but what has also
    been lost is the dream of using the moon.

    I'd counter that argument with this: The human race is doomed if we
    don't find a way to get off of this planet. That's still a long way in
    the future (the extinction), but it's a foregone conclusion, IMHO. The
    only way to get off this planet and establish a new home is to....
    travel in space. You begin that process by traveling to the moon, and
    then Mars, and then.... wherever. The point being that you have to
    "practice" doing it if you want to get better at it. An
    over-simplification, granted, but I think you see my point.

    Maybe space travel wasn't really that important for humans after
    all? Even so, I can't help but think that in many other areas,
    we still lack the creativity and dynamism that existed before.

    I agree that creativity and the "pioneer spirit" seem to be gone. Maybe
    this new space program will re-ignite that rocket. ;-)

    We make faster and faster computers, but when I go to work and
    use the OS (Windows), I'm using almost the same paradigms and
    processes as back in 2002, with the exception I have enough CPU
    and bandwith to make video calls. Travelling around the city is
    the same as 50 years ago, albeit a bit safer, but slower and less efficient.

    That is all true, but it's bigger than that. 50 years ago nobody could
    even *IMAGINE* some of the things that we take for granted today.
    Internet, wireless communications, medicine, etc... With the same
    logic, we can predict that future generations, in 50 or 100 years will
    have things that we can't see right now. Hopefully one of them will be "routine" space travel. Even that isn't really enough, though, in the
    long term picture. We must eventually learn how to travel through space
    at (very near) the speed of light in order to get out of our solar
    system, and probably the imaginary (?) concept of "warp" travel to
    really get anywhere meaningful. I believe that will indeed happen one
    day.


    ... The future's uncertain, the end is always near.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Nightfox on Sat Jul 23 16:51:19 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Boraxman on Fri Jul 22 2022 07:36 pm

    Yeah.. The moon landing hoax, 9/11 truther, and flat earth conspiracy theorists all seem to just want something to believe in that goes against common knowledge. Many of the arguments in favor of these conspiracy theories seem to be a misunderstanding of the evidence, physics, or just how things work in general.

    I've dealt with some 9/11 truthers. They are the same, no amount of evidence will sway them. You can literally see one of the towers starting to collapse from the point of impact, not from the base. There is video footage of it buckling them coming down, not congruent with the explosives. Doesn't matter.

    The thing with conspiracy theories, is that you can always claim any evidence is fake, anyone saying otherwise is brainwashed.

    Exactly.

    One of my favorites is the Flat Earth conspiracy theory, and some who supposedly believe that gravity is just due to the earth constantly accelerating upward. If that was true, then we'd be well beyond the speed of light by now, with the earth accelerating for the last 4.8(ish?) billion years.. And that also suggests that the stars and our solar system would have to be accelerating in the same direction along with us in order for us to keep obvserving them.

    I was at a party with a Flat Earther, and someone showed him footage from the space station showing the curvature of the Earth. He said it was due to a fish eye lens.

    I thought Flat Earthers were trolls, but they are serious!

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Gamgee on Sat Jul 23 17:05:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Boraxman on Fri Jul 22 2022 09:40 pm

    https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/20/world/artemis-i-launch-preparations-scn/index .html

    There is a good argument to be had that it is pointless to send
    I'd counter that argument with this: The human race is doomed if we
    don't find a way to get off of this planet. That's still a long way in
    the future (the extinction), but it's a foregone conclusion, IMHO. The
    only way to get off this planet and establish a new home is to....
    travel in space. You begin that process by traveling to the moon, and
    then Mars, and then.... wherever. The point being that you have to "practice" doing it if you want to get better at it. An over-simplification, granted, but I think you see my point.


    The problem is finding somewhere habitable. That is a much harder problem than we thought. Scientific bases in space make sense, but we can't live there. We are too tied to the specifics on Earth to live anywhere else.

    Extinction is a foregone conclusion anyway, as all stars will burn out, so space colonisation will only delay it. Worthwhile, but doesn't solve the extinction problem.

    The barrier to space colonisation is not getting there, its making it work when we get there. We can't get it right on Earth, so what hope on Mars?

    Consider this. People on Earth, in civilised areas, today, who are working, are finding themselves living out of tents because we just don't seem to be able to get housing affordable. Others are competing hard for space.

    And thats on Earth, in a very hospitable part, with civilisation built up. First world civilisation.

    We can't get it right here. We WON'T get it right on Mars or wherever. It could not possibly work the way we run our society here, and only with a new 'system', which would threaten the status quo here, could there be a chance.

    I agree that creativity and the "pioneer spirit" seem to be gone. Maybe this new space program will re-ignite that rocket. ;-)

    That is all true, but it's bigger than that. 50 years ago nobody could
    even *IMAGINE* some of the things that we take for granted today.
    Internet, wireless communications, medicine, etc... With the same
    logic, we can predict that future generations, in 50 or 100 years will
    have things that we can't see right now. Hopefully one of them will be "routine" space travel. Even that isn't really enough, though, in the
    long term picture. We must eventually learn how to travel through space
    at (very near) the speed of light in order to get out of our solar
    system, and probably the imaginary (?) concept of "warp" travel to
    really get anywhere meaningful. I believe that will indeed happen one
    day.


    I dispute that. 50 years ago was 1972. The early stages of the Internet were already in place then. ARAPANET had been around a little bit, and people were writing about it, science fiction writers. Book from that era described the current world. They got a lot wrong, but things like working from home, doing grocery shopping from home and a world wide network were imagined.

    Maybe the lay person didn't really think about it, but more astute people, people at the forefront of technology saw it. The specifics are different. For example, in the movie 2001 A Space Odysee, we see a video call using a type of phone booth. We got that capability, but in a different format. I think what would impress people is the success in minaturisation, being able to fit so much capability in a small space.

    The great achivement in computing is really just overcoming the technical challenges of making things smaller and faster.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Boraxman on Sat Jul 23 07:56:00 2022
    Boraxman wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Boraxman on Fri Jul 22 2022 09:40 pm

    There is a good argument to be had that it is pointless to send

    I'd counter that argument with this: The human race is doomed if we
    don't find a way to get off of this planet. That's still a long way in
    the future (the extinction), but it's a foregone conclusion, IMHO. The
    only way to get off this planet and establish a new home is to....
    travel in space. You begin that process by traveling to the moon, and
    then Mars, and then.... wherever. The point being that you have to "practice" doing it if you want to get better at it. An over-simplification, granted, but I think you see my point.

    The problem is finding somewhere habitable. That is a much
    harder problem than we thought. Scientific bases in space make
    sense, but we can't live there. We are too tied to the specifics
    on Earth to live anywhere else.

    No argument with that. In order to find somewhere habitable, we need to
    get out there, and look. We can't do that until we get (much) better at
    space travel. We're back to my point - we need to be learning how to do
    space travel.

    Extinction is a foregone conclusion anyway, as all stars will
    burn out, so space colonisation will only delay it. Worthwhile,
    but doesn't solve the extinction problem.

    Ahhhh, but it does! Yes, all stars burn out, and end life on the
    planets orbiting them. But, they don't all burn out at the same time.
    We just keep moving, and expanding. Eventually we reach a point where
    that issue won't cause extinction of the species.

    The barrier to space colonisation is not getting there, its
    making it work when we get there. We can't get it right on
    Earth, so what hope on Mars?

    Getting there is also a huge barrier, for now at least. I'd argue that
    we have got it right on Earth. Sure, it's not perfect, and some have it
    much harder than others, but we're still here. There will always be
    problems when you look at things on a global scale.

    Consider this. People on Earth, in civilised areas, today, who
    are working, are finding themselves living out of tents because
    we just don't seem to be able to get housing affordable. Others
    are competing hard for space.

    Very small percentage of the whole are doing that. Yes, that problem
    exists, but in the BIG PICTURE of things, it's not that relevant. You
    have to think about this on a bigger scale.

    And thats on Earth, in a very hospitable part, with civilisation
    built up. First world civilisation.

    We can't get it right here. We WON'T get it right on Mars or
    wherever. It could not possibly work the way we run our society
    here, and only with a new 'system', which would threaten the
    status quo here, could there be a chance.

    We can't get it "perfect" here, agreed. That isn't the goal. It
    absolutely will not work the same on Mars as it does here, and it
    doesn't need to be the same. Again that's not the goal. We learn and
    adapt to the location as needed.

    I agree that creativity and the "pioneer spirit" seem to be gone. Maybe this new space program will re-ignite that rocket. ;-)

    That is all true, but it's bigger than that. 50 years ago nobody could
    even *IMAGINE* some of the things that we take for granted today.
    Internet, wireless communications, medicine, etc... With the same
    logic, we can predict that future generations, in 50 or 100 years will
    have things that we can't see right now. Hopefully one of them will be "routine" space travel. Even that isn't really enough, though, in the
    long term picture. We must eventually learn how to travel through space
    at (very near) the speed of light in order to get out of our solar
    system, and probably the imaginary (?) concept of "warp" travel to
    really get anywhere meaningful. I believe that will indeed happen one
    day.

    I dispute that. 50 years ago was 1972. The early stages of the
    Internet were already in place then. ARAPANET had been around a
    little bit, and people were writing about it, science fiction
    writers. Book from that era described the current world. They
    got a lot wrong, but things like working from home, doing grocery
    shopping from home and a world wide network were imagined.

    Okay, then use whatever time measure you like. Use 100 years instead of
    50. Use 500 years. Any of those measures are 'microseconds' on the
    time scale of the universe. If it takes us another 1000 years to be
    able to travel to another solar system, that is fine. That accomplishes
    the goal, which is to be able to move off of this planet. You have to
    think differently with topics like this. If it takes 10,000 years,
    that's fine too. Our sun has another 4-5 billion years of life. We
    just need to figure it out by then.

    Maybe the lay person didn't really think about it, but more
    astute people, people at the forefront of technology saw it. The specifics are different. For example, in the movie 2001 A Space
    Odysee, we see a video call using a type of phone booth. We got
    that capability, but in a different format. I think what would
    impress people is the success in minaturisation, being able to
    fit so much capability in a small space.

    The great achivement in computing is really just overcoming the
    technical challenges of making things smaller and faster.

    You're probably right on the above points, but that is largely
    "semantics". When we are talking about something as big as long
    distance space travel, the timeline stretches out. My main point is
    that we have a LONG time still left to us to get it figured out, and I
    believe we will. All of this in spite of the "climate change" worriers wringing their hands and predicting doom. Yes, that is an issue, but
    it's not going to end life on Earth anytime soon.



    ... A day without sunshine is like night.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Nightfox on Sat Jul 23 08:02:00 2022
    Nightfox wrote to Boraxman <=-

    The 'moon landing was a hoax' thing really pisses me off because people who buy into these theories won't be swayed by evidence. The 9/11 truthers are just as bad. Not even first hand video evidence is enough.

    I mean, to seriously believe that the government and NASA were able to cover such a huge hoax up, for so long? They they managed to avoid any leaks or a "Hunter Biden's laptop" kind of event?

    Yeah.. The moon landing hoax, 9/11 truther, and flat earth
    conspiracy theorists all seem to just want something to believe
    in that goes against common knowledge. Many of the arguments in
    favor of these conspiracy theories seem to be a misunderstanding
    of the evidence, physics, or just how things work in general.

    Not so much a "misunderstanding", but a complete "lack of
    understanding". The idiots who believe such things are either
    inherently stupid, or completely uneducated, or both.



    ... Ignorance can be cured. Stupid is forever.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Ogg@VERT/CAPCITY2 to Gamgee on Fri Jul 22 18:25:00 2022
    Hello Gamgee!

    ** On Friday 22.07.22 - 07:46, Gamgee wrote to Ogg:

    Well, you mean besides the Apollo 12, Apollo 14, Apollo 15,
    Apollo 16, and Apollo 17 missions (all manned)? Or were
    those "faked" too?

    There were also at least SIX unmanned landings by Russia
    since then, and at least THREE unmanned landings by China.
    Three of the Russian landings (the 'Luna' spacecraft
    series) returned rock samples to the Earth.

    MOST (not necessarily those) were crash/failed landings.

    [...]


    You should really try to study some science before making
    such ridiculous statements. It makes you look ignorant.

    I don't need to "study science". It seems that I have been
    behind the "news". :/ Those were indeed extraordinary
    accomplishments. I stand corrected. ;)

    --- OpenXP 5.0.51
    * Origin: Ogg's Dovenet Point (723:320/1.9)
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From Dumas Walker@VERT/CAPCITY2 to BORAXMAN on Sat Jul 23 09:34:00 2022
    Space is not THE measure, but for me the measures that matter are the ones tha
    bring life changing improvement and changes. I would say the Internet is the e major advancement now

    Unfortunately, it still brings about changes, but a lot of them are not improvements. I see it as more of a source of potential disinformation,
    scams, fraud, etc., than any source before it.


    * SLMR 2.1a * Tongue-tied & twisted, just an Earth-bound misfit, I!

    ---
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From Dumas Walker@VERT/CAPCITY2 to BORAXMAN on Sat Jul 23 09:36:00 2022
    If the landings were faked, the Soviets would have never let the world hear th
    end of it. They tracked the mission too.

    They had a ship "in the air" over the Moon during the period that Apollo 11
    was on the surface. IIRC, they were trying to beat us to the Moon, but
    their mission was unmanned and (maybe) did not ever land there.


    * SLMR 2.1a * My grubby halo, a vapour trail in the empty air...

    ---
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From Dumas Walker@VERT/CAPCITY2 to OGG on Sat Jul 23 09:53:00 2022
    Well, you mean besides the Apollo 12, Apollo 14, Apollo 15,
    Apollo 16, and Apollo 17 missions (all manned)? Or were
    those "faked" too?

    There were also at least SIX unmanned landings by Russia
    since then, and at least THREE unmanned landings by China.
    Three of the Russian landings (the 'Luna' spacecraft
    series) returned rock samples to the Earth.

    MOST (not necessarily those) were crash/failed landings.

    The Russian and Chinese ones might have been (I don't know enough about
    their programs), but the Apollo missions he lists were all successful
    landings.

    I know there have been failures by all three countries but, IIRC, the only
    US mission that failed after Apollo 11 was Apollo 13. Russia had some
    failures before Apollo 11 for sure. As far as we know, all but possibly
    one were unmanned.

    To my knowledge, most of the US Apollo missions before Apollo 11 did not have landings as part of their mission. There was at least one that was meant
    to orbit only (9 or 10), and it was a success.


    * SLMR 2.1a * A momentary lapse of reason that binds a life to a life..

    ---
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Boraxman on Sat Jul 23 12:08:39 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Nightfox on Sat Jul 23 2022 04:51 pm

    I was at a party with a Flat Earther, and someone showed him footage from the space station showing the curvature of the Earth. He said it was due to a fish eye lens.

    I thought Flat Earthers were trolls, but they are serious!

    Yeah, years ago I ran across the Flat Earth Society web site and I thought it was a joke, but it seems it's not..

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Boraxman on Sat Jul 23 12:24:51 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Gamgee on Sat Jul 23 2022 05:05 pm

    The problem is finding somewhere habitable. That is a much harder problem than we thought. Scientific bases in space make sense, but we can't live

    Is it really harder than we thought? I thought it was fairly well understood that finding a habitable planet would be fairly rare, since it seems all up to chance that the conditions are good enough on a planet to support human life. We've been seeing more and more planets in the galaxy, and I think I've only heard of maybe a couple that they think might be habitable, and they're fairly far out there.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Gamgee on Sat Jul 23 12:26:30 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to MRO on Fri Jul 22 2022 09:43 pm

    i've been to the air and space museum. i have seen all that shit.
    no way did anybody shoot astronaughts into space, land it, have

    You truly are stupid. Moronic. Uneducated. Delusional.

    He can't even spell "astronaut" correctly.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Ogg on Sat Jul 23 14:22:00 2022
    Ogg wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Well, you mean besides the Apollo 12, Apollo 14, Apollo 15,
    Apollo 16, and Apollo 17 missions (all manned)? Or were
    those "faked" too?

    There were also at least SIX unmanned landings by Russia
    since then, and at least THREE unmanned landings by China.
    Three of the Russian landings (the 'Luna' spacecraft
    series) returned rock samples to the Earth.

    MOST (not necessarily those) were crash/failed landings.

    Wrong again. All that I listed above were successful landings by
    unmanned spacecraft. Not all of the Russian ones made it back to Earth,
    and they did have some crash landings. Again, everything above were successful landings. Funny that you don't even mention/acknowledge the
    *FIVE* other *MANNED* Apollo landings, which of course all returned
    safely to Earth. All of this was after Apollo 11, of course.

    You should really try to study some science before making
    such ridiculous statements. It makes you look ignorant.

    I don't need to "study science". It seems that I have been
    behind the "news". :/ Those were indeed extraordinary
    accomplishments. I stand corrected. ;)

    Strike three. None of the above is "news". It happened *FIFTY* years
    ago. Study is indeed what is needed.


    ... He does the work of 3 Men...Moe, Larry & Curly
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Boraxman on Sat Jul 23 14:30:00 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Ogg on Sat Jul 23 2022 09:57 am

    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Ogg to Boraxman on Thu Jul 21 2022 08:09 am

    Why is space the measure? The coordinated attack on the twin
    towers on 9-11 was extraordinary, so was Stuxnet. The man-made
    islands in Dubia and the continued pursuit to build the
    "tallest" buildings in the world require new tech all the time.

    The 9/11 attacks were quite low tech. What was "amazing" was the audacity a

    Stuxnet, can't comment, maybe. As for Dubai, the Islands and the Burj Khali ajor engineering advances and opened up the heavens to us.

    Look at other measures. Travel overseas is as slow as it was in the 80's an would see fewer changes as soemone from 1942 looking at 1982. Someone from

    Space is not THE measure, but for me the measures that matter are the ones t

    I saw a documentary on Stuxnet, and it was very clever how they were able to u se pictures from a technology journal to ascertain the types of cetrifuges
    and IP addresses and possible device names from a partial screenshot, but compared to ravelling to another celestial body, let alone landing and returning, is a major feat. Most of heavy lifting was the math being doen
    by men and women with sliderules.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Boraxman on Sat Jul 23 14:38:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Gamgee on Sat Jul 23 2022 10:04 am

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Boraxman on Thu Jul 21 2022 06:25 pm

    What is even more crazy is that it has been about 50 years since anyone's been to the moon. My grandparents witnessed a technological feat that we havne't repated in my lifetime.

    Yup, it is crazy indeed. But, in case you hadn't heard... The next step is called the Artemis Program, and the first (unmanned) launch is in
    late August or early September. This won't land on the moon, but go beyond it and come back. The schedule has actual humans landing on the moon again by 2025. Exciting stuff.

    More info here:

    https://www.nasa.gov/specials/artemis/

    https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/20/world/artemis-i-launch-preparations-scn/in .html



    There is a good argument to be had that it is pointless to send humans to th

    Maybe space travel wasn't really that important for humans after all? Even d use the OS (Windows), I'm using almost the same paradigms and processes as less efficient.

    Blame culture, not technology. The computer that was on the Apollo module is outclassed by the little throwaway free calculators that companies give away with their names on them. The reason why you have a multi-cpu video phone data device is because of the push for making smaller faster, portable computing platforms. A flip phone from 20 years ago would be the size o f
    the Empire State building if it were made from vacuum tubes. Materials suchg as memory foam came from the space program.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Gamgee on Fri Jul 22 07:34:00 2022
    Gamgee wrote to Boraxman <=-

    Yup, it is crazy indeed. But, in case you hadn't heard... The next
    step is called the Artemis Program, and the first (unmanned) launch is
    in late August or early September. This won't land on the moon, but go beyond it and come back. The schedule has actual humans landing on the moon again by 2025. Exciting stuff.

    Hopefully, this time, people will pay attention. I remember being a kid and being totally excited for Apollo 17, Skylab, and Apollo/Soyuz. It seemed
    like the adults had all moved on after Apollo 11.




    ... The obstinate toy soldier becomes pliant.
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Gamgee on Sat Jul 23 06:31:00 2022
    Gamgee wrote to Ogg <=-

    You should really try to study some science before making such
    ridiculous statements. It makes you look ignorant.

    We all know it was blown out of orbit in 1999, and the fake moon put in its place.



    ... Abandon desire
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Boraxman on Sat Jul 23 06:35:00 2022
    Boraxman wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Maybe space travel wasn't really that important for humans after all?

    We have all of our eggs in one proverbial basket on the Earth. If we don't colonize other planets, sooner or later, if we haven't offed ourselves
    through war or neglect, we're going to see a planetary extinction event like
    a meteor or other body impacting the earth. No where to run.





    ... Are you lost?
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Boraxman on Sat Jul 23 06:36:00 2022
    Boraxman wrote to Ogg <=-

    Most, if not all of the 'evidence' used to argue the landings were fake
    is fairly easily explained and dismissed. I watched a documentary
    about how the landings were faked when I was a teenager, and even THEN
    I could easily tell how the 'proof' was based on a misunderstanding and poor interpretation.

    It did make for an interesting film called "Capricorn One" that came out in the 1970s. The Mars mission was doomed to fail, so they took the crew off at the last minute, shot the rocket into space, and faked the moon landing on a sound stage.


    ... The robots can go off-script?
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Boraxman on Sat Jul 23 06:38:00 2022
    Boraxman wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Extinction is a foregone conclusion anyway, as all stars will burn out,
    so space colonisation will only delay it. Worthwhile, but doesn't
    solve the extinction problem.

    We've got billions of years to figure out how to turn our consciousnesses
    into quantum strings.


    ... The robots can go off-script?
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to poindexter FORTRAN on Sat Jul 23 17:53:00 2022
    poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Yup, it is crazy indeed. But, in case you hadn't heard... The next
    step is called the Artemis Program, and the first (unmanned) launch is
    in late August or early September. This won't land on the moon, but go beyond it and come back. The schedule has actual humans landing on the moon again by 2025. Exciting stuff.

    Hopefully, this time, people will pay attention. I remember being
    a kid and being totally excited for Apollo 17, Skylab, and
    Apollo/Soyuz. It seemed like the adults had all moved on after
    Apollo 11.

    Yup, I hope so too. It's about the coolest thing going, IMHO. Sure
    would like to see things go smoothly and for them to get additional
    funding. We waste so much money on garbage, and this kind of thing
    seems to get overlooked. I think it's very important, perhaps even
    critical, for the future of the entire planet.



    ... You can't save yourselves. But you can save your legacy. -Hari Seldon
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to poindexter FORTRAN on Sat Jul 23 17:55:00 2022
    poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Gamgee <=-

    You should really try to study some science before making such
    ridiculous statements. It makes you look ignorant.

    We all know it was blown out of orbit in 1999, and the fake moon
    put in its place.

    The bastards! ;-)



    ... Strip mining prevents forest fires.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Gamgee on Sun Jul 24 11:01:01 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Boraxman on Sat Jul 23 2022 07:56 am

    No argument with that. In order to find somewhere habitable, we need to
    get out there, and look. We can't do that until we get (much) better at space travel. We're back to my point - we need to be learning how to do space travel.

    From what I have read, it seems the more we are learning about exoplanets and other system, the more unique our system seems to be. While other planets are *very* common, our particular configuration which allowed life to exist on Earth isn't common, and perhaps a freak occurence. The number of habitable planets may be quite small and far apart.

    Ahhhh, but it does! Yes, all stars burn out, and end life on the
    planets orbiting them. But, they don't all burn out at the same time.
    We just keep moving, and expanding. Eventually we reach a point where
    that issue won't cause extinction of the species.

    What I was referring to was the fact that all the hydrogen gets burned up. There will come a point where no new stars can be formed. The universe WILL become devoid of stars and sources of heat energy at some point.

    Getting there is also a huge barrier, for now at least. I'd argue that
    we have got it right on Earth. Sure, it's not perfect, and some have it much harder than others, but we're still here. There will always be problems when you look at things on a global scale.

    Very small percentage of the whole are doing that. Yes, that problem exists, but in the BIG PICTURE of things, it's not that relevant. You
    have to think about this on a bigger scale.

    We can't get it "perfect" here, agreed. That isn't the goal. It
    absolutely will not work the same on Mars as it does here, and it
    doesn't need to be the same. Again that's not the goal. We learn and
    adapt to the location as needed.
    Okay, then use whatever time measure you like. Use 100 years instead of
    50. Use 500 years. Any of those measures are 'microseconds' on the
    time scale of the universe. If it takes us another 1000 years to be
    able to travel to another solar system, that is fine. That accomplishes
    the goal, which is to be able to move off of this planet. You have to
    think differently with topics like this. If it takes 10,000 years,
    that's fine too. Our sun has another 4-5 billion years of life. We
    just need to figure it out by then.


    It could even be 100,000 years, there is no rush I admit. Whether we exist on Earth that lot and don't wipe ourselves out is another matter. Which begs the question, what IS the lifespan of our species? I would rate environmental degradation, or technological accident as a much greater threat than the sun. PRjections are that Earth will dry up in a billion years, and there are many opportunities before that for us to send ourselves back to the stone age.

    The issue I have with the talk of space colonisation is more so it is the wrong focus. Yes, we should, eventually, but people like Musk act as if we must do it NOW, and many others are actually using colonising other planets as a way to argue we don't really need to worry too much about Earth. This is misguided, the possibility of colonising other planets should in no way detract from the urgency to make life here in Earth is sustainable as possible. We should logically be acting as if we wont be able to move off here.

    In other words, it is only worthwhile moving to other planets, it will only really work, when we've eliminated all the problems that we create or exacerbate here which might make us need to move. Human created climate change is the best argument AGAINST seeking to move, as we would just transfer this problem, this disease with up. Colonise new areas when you are free of pathogens.

    You're probably right on the above points, but that is largely
    "semantics". When we are talking about something as big as long
    distance space travel, the timeline stretches out. My main point is
    that we have a LONG time still left to us to get it figured out, and I believe we will. All of this in spite of the "climate change" worriers wringing their hands and predicting doom. Yes, that is an issue, but
    it's not going to end life on Earth anytime soon.


    Climate change won't end life on Earth, but it will make it suck, which is perhaps worse. The solution may not even be space travel, we may discover how to move to parallel universes, or move our consciousness to organised energy structures in the fabric of space, or whatever. We may end up finding out how to create wormholes or fold space. Often we humans get stuck trying to solve a problem one way, when a completely different way to solve things come along.

    Travelling the vast distances of space is what we *THINK* is necessary to move to other planets which is what we *THINK* is necessary, but new knowledge and discoveries could turn all that upside down.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Gamgee on Sun Jul 24 11:02:21 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Nightfox on Sat Jul 23 2022 08:02 am

    Not so much a "misunderstanding", but a complete "lack of
    understanding". The idiots who believe such things are either
    inherently stupid, or completely uneducated, or both.

    It's mostly stupidity. They are usually educated enough to be able to read.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Dumas Walker on Sun Jul 24 11:05:09 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Dumas Walker to BORAXMAN on Sat Jul 23 2022 09:34 am

    Unfortunately, it still brings about changes, but a lot of them are not improvements. I see it as more of a source of potential disinformation, scams, fraud, etc., than any source before it.


    I think this is more a function of how the Internet is organised, and Social Media, which is surveillance driven Capitalism.

    Social Media really amped these problems, and they exist because of a business model, not a technology. A lot of "tech advancements" is really just some 'innovation' of a new business model. Uber, Twitter, Canva, all those online serves.

    the business model is the problem.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Dumas Walker on Sun Jul 24 11:06:21 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Dumas Walker to BORAXMAN on Sat Jul 23 2022 09:36 am

    They had a ship "in the air" over the Moon during the period that Apollo 11 their mission was unmanned and (maybe) did not ever land there.

    They did monitor it, and even contacted the US government and congratulated them on the achievement

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Nightfox on Sun Jul 24 11:13:30 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Boraxman on Sat Jul 23 2022 12:24 pm

    Is it really harder than we thought? I thought it was fairly well understood that finding a habitable planet would be fairly rare, since it seems all up to chance that the conditions are good enough on a planet to support human life. We've been seeing more and more planets in the galaxy, and I think I've only heard of maybe a couple that they think might be habitable, and they're fairly far out there.


    We are understanding more that having rocky planets in the inner part of the system, in a habitable zone is a fairly unique scenario. Planetary systems don't evolve typically to give the arrangement we had, which is what I meant by it would be hard. It isn't just the fact that life arose which makes Earth unique, but also fairly chance encounters which gave the Earth its position in the solar system, relatively free from frequent impacts.

    Also, what supports human life is better understood and is more restrictive than we thought. In the 70's we could only speculate. When we found exoplanets we knew other systems were common, but now that we've looked were back to not just speculating that Earth is unqiue, but KNOWING that it is unique. Life may be supported in many places, but to support human life, mentally as well as physically, that is hard.

    One one hand techonlogy enables us to move to different areas, but on the other hand increased knowledge throws out awareness of all the pitfalls. And just managing to stay alive isn't enough, we need somewhere where we won't fall into depression, develop mental disorders and despondency. That would destroy a civilisation starting out in space.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Gamgee on Sat Jul 23 18:25:09 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to poindexter FORTRAN on Sat Jul 23 2022 05:55 pm

    We all know it was blown out of orbit in 1999, and the fake moon
    put in its place.

    The bastards! ;-)

    You can thank Dr. Evil and his moon base team for that.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Dumas Walker@VERT/CAPCITY2 to BORAXMAN on Sun Jul 24 10:38:00 2022
    I think this is more a function of how the Internet is organised, and Social M
    ia, which is surveillance driven Capitalism.

    Social Media really amped these problems, and they exist because of a business
    odel, not a technology. A lot of "tech advancements" is really just some 'inn
    ation' of a new business model. Uber, Twitter, Canva, all those online serves

    the business model is the problem.

    I would agree with that, to a point. Then you have the dark web, which is
    full of misinformation and fanatics (and fraud). It has little to do with
    the social media craze, advertising, or any business models.


    * SLMR 2.1a * If you chose not to decide, you still have made a choice!

    ---
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Dumas Walker on Sun Jul 24 07:52:00 2022
    Dumas Walker wrote to OGG <=-

    To my knowledge, most of the US Apollo missions before Apollo 11 did
    not have landings as part of their mission. There was at least one
    that was meant to orbit only (9 or 10), and it was a success.


    No, if you look at the mission profiles, NASA took it all very methodically. Apollo 7 tested removing the LM and stayed in orbit as long as a trip to the moon would take. Apollo 8 orbited the moon. Apollo 9 did more tests. Apollo 10, if I remember, sent two astronauts in the LM to the moon, but didn't
    land.

    After Apollo 1, they couldn't afford another accident - and didn't want dead astronauts floating in space somewhere.



    ... Overtly resist change
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Gamgee on Sun Jul 24 08:00:00 2022
    Gamgee wrote to Ogg <=-

    MOST (not necessarily those) were crash/failed landings.

    Wrong again. All that I listed above were successful landings by
    unmanned spacecraft. Not all of the Russian ones made it back to
    Earth, and they did have some crash landings.

    Some, like the early Soviet and US launches were designed to crash into the moon, as we hadn't figured out how to land there yet.


    ... Overtly resist change
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to poindexter FORTRAN on Sun Jul 24 13:14:00 2022
    poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Gamgee <=-

    MOST (not necessarily those) were crash/failed landings.

    Wrong again. All that I listed above were successful landings by
    unmanned spacecraft. Not all of the Russian ones made it back to
    Earth, and they did have some crash landings.

    Some, like the early Soviet and US launches were designed to
    crash into the moon, as we hadn't figured out how to land there
    yet.

    Yes, agreed. I was just trying to convince Ogg that there certainly
    have been successful moon landings *since* Apollo 11, which he was
    claiming there had not been.



    ... Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to poindexter FORTRAN on Sun Jul 24 13:21:00 2022
    poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Dumas Walker <=-

    To my knowledge, most of the US Apollo missions before Apollo 11 did
    not have landings as part of their mission. There was at least one
    that was meant to orbit only (9 or 10), and it was a success.

    No, if you look at the mission profiles, NASA took it all very methodically. Apollo 7 tested removing the LM and stayed in orbit
    as long as a trip to the moon would take. Apollo 8 orbited the
    moon. Apollo 9 did more tests. Apollo 10, if I remember, sent two astronauts in the LM to the moon, but didn't land.

    Yes! I had forgotten that, and had to look it up. Apollo 10 crew flew
    the LM down to 50,000 feet above the moon, and then returned. Freakin awesome.

    Here's a decent summary of the missions:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_program#Mission_summary


    ... All the easy problems have been solved.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Dumas Walker on Mon Jul 25 00:16:00 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Dumas Walker to BORAXMAN on Sat Jul 23 2022 09:36 am

    If the landings were faked, the Soviets would have never let the world hea end of it. They tracked the mission too.

    They had a ship "in the air" over the Moon during the period that Apollo 11 was on the surface. IIRC, they were trying to beat us to the Moon, but their mission was unmanned and (maybe) did not ever land there.


    * SLMR 2.1a * My grubby halo, a vapour trail in the empty air...


    The Russians had booster design issues that prevented them from being even close to sending a manned mission. The Lunokhod missions where they sent a drone to the moon's surface was much later.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Dumas Walker on Mon Jul 25 00:19:00 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Dumas Walker to MRO on Sat Jul 23 2022 09:46 am

    1969. we did NOT have the technology to bring a spacecraft with people, dr m off, let them walk around on the moon and bring them back safely.

    The Nazis were a bad, bad group, but they did a lot to quickly accelerate science, especially when it came to rocketry and other tech. They were intent on using it for future warfare and were desperate to get an edge on the British, Americans, and Soviets. Their immediate goals were rockets that could travel long distances within the Earth's atmosphere or near-orbit but they also had goals for moving beyond into space. They had all sorts
    of ideas, some ludicrous and some with potential, when it came to advancing warfare via space.

    After the war, there were a lot of smart people with new ideas that were liberated/taken prisoner/accepted into the science communities of the US
    and Soviet governments.

    The rocket tech was there as early as the 1940's, but needed refinement to g it resized and working correctly for any goals beyond "near-Earth" space. They took ~20 years to get it there.


    * SLMR 2.1a * A restless eye across a weary room...

    When Von Braun was testing the V2 rockets during WWII, he said the tests
    were a success, exept they were pointing them at the wrong planet.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Dumas Walker on Mon Jul 25 00:21:00 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Dumas Walker to OGG on Sat Jul 23 2022 09:53 am

    Well, you mean besides the Apollo 12, Apollo 14, Apollo 15,
    Apollo 16, and Apollo 17 missions (all manned)? Or were
    those "faked" too?

    There were also at least SIX unmanned landings by Russia
    since then, and at least THREE unmanned landings by China.
    Three of the Russian landings (the 'Luna' spacecraft
    series) returned rock samples to the Earth.

    MOST (not necessarily those) were crash/failed landings.

    The Russian and Chinese ones might have been (I don't know enough about their programs), but the Apollo missions he lists were all successful landings.

    I know there have been failures by all three countries but, IIRC, the only US mission that failed after Apollo 11 was Apollo 13. Russia had some failures before Apollo 11 for sure. As far as we know, all but possibly
    one were unmanned.

    To my knowledge, most of the US Apollo missions before Apollo 11 did not hav landings as part of their mission. There was at least one that was meant
    to orbit only (9 or 10), and it was a success.


    * SLMR 2.1a * A momentary lapse of reason that binds a life to a life..

    The Chinese have only been doing space missions in the last 20 or so years.
    40 years ago they had trouble feeding their people.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Nightfox on Mon Jul 25 00:27:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Boraxman on Sat Jul 23 2022 12:24 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Gamgee on Sat Jul 23 2022 05:05 pm

    The problem is finding somewhere habitable. That is a much harder probl than we thought. Scientific bases in space make sense, but we can't liv

    Is it really harder than we thought? I thought it was fairly well understoo ore and more planets in the galaxy, and I think I've only heard of maybe a c

    Nightfox

    Planets have been detected by the variations or "wobbling" of stars light
    that indicates there are planets orbitting them. Space is so vast, the
    odds improve as they find more and more systems with planets.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Gamgee on Mon Jul 25 00:46:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to poindexter FORTRAN on Sat Jul 23 2022 05:53 pm

    poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Yup, it is crazy indeed. But, in case you hadn't heard... The next step is called the Artemis Program, and the first (unmanned) launch is in late August or early September. This won't land on the moon, but go beyond it and come back. The schedule has actual humans landing on the moon again by 2025. Exciting stuff.

    Hopefully, this time, people will pay attention. I remember being
    a kid and being totally excited for Apollo 17, Skylab, and Apollo/Soyuz. It seemed like the adults had all moved on after
    Apollo 11.

    Yup, I hope so too. It's about the coolest thing going, IMHO. Sure
    would like to see things go smoothly and for them to get additional
    funding. We waste so much money on garbage, and this kind of thing
    seems to get overlooked. I think it's very important, perhaps even critical, for the future of the entire planet.



    ... You can't save yourselves. But you can save your legacy. -Hari Seldon

    Space has to make itself profitable to get past the pure scientific reason
    the leave the planet. The cost of sending items into space is cost
    prohibitve. Last I heard the price was like $10,000 USD a pound. A 200
    pound astronaut by himself is $2 million.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Gamgee on Mon Jul 25 00:47:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to poindexter FORTRAN on Sat Jul 23 2022 05:55 pm

    poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Gamgee <=-

    You should really try to study some science before making such ridiculous statements. It makes you look ignorant.

    We all know it was blown out of orbit in 1999, and the fake moon
    put in its place.

    The bastards! ;-)



    ... Strip mining prevents forest fires.
    That's what you get when you store radioactive waste on the dark side of the moon.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Nightfox on Mon Jul 25 00:51:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Gamgee on Sat Jul 23 2022 06:25 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to poindexter FORTRAN on Sat Jul 23 2022 05:55 pm

    We all know it was blown out of orbit in 1999, and the fake moon
    put in its place.

    The bastards! ;-)

    You can thank Dr. Evil and his moon base team for that.

    Nightfox

    Moon Base Alpha's waste storage facility

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Boraxman on Mon Jul 25 00:54:00 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to MRO on Sun Jul 24 2022 11:30 am

    Re: Apollo 11
    By: MRO to Boraxman on Sat Jul 23 2022 02:31 pm

    they have literal interviews with nasa employees recorded inside of nasa NO. they say they don't understand how it happened and they
    could not duplicate it.

    what i dont understand is how you can lose telemetry data AND the origina recordings.


    Did they lose all the recordings? You can download a lot of them which they

    And which interviews? Have a link?
    They didn't lose all the data, they lost some of the video which exists else

    This wasn't the 2000's, where you would have APOLLO11_TELEMETRY_1.DAT files

    But to believe this somehow proves the entire thing was fake, flies in the f

    It's just insane and your reasoning is shoddy. Apollo 11 was not the only m

    I'm supposed to believe they managed to get away with faking it all over a p

    You have no evidence at all that it was faked. Nothing, only "this doesn't


    I've read about collectors who were able buy old NASA tape drives and comput ers that hooked into them for scrap prices, and set them up in basements and garages. They occasionally get visits from engineers that have tapes that require reading.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Dux@VERT/PATHUNKN to Boraxman on Mon Jul 25 10:35:04 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Gamgee on Sun Jul 24 2022 11:01 am

    In other words, it is only worthwhile moving to other planets, it will only really work, when we've eliminated all t
    problems that we create or exacerbate here which might make us need to move. Human created climate change is the be
    argument AGAINST seeking to move, as we would just transfer this problem, this disease with up. Colonise new areas
    when you are free of pathogens.

    It wouldn't be the first time humans have focused their time, money, and mental energies on vacations while letting
    their homes rot.

    That said, from our point of view there is very little to lose on other celestial bodies we know of and have a
    reasonable capability to reach -- they all appear to be devoid of all forms of life _as we know them_ -- so I'm not too
    worried about screw up the Martian biosphere, but I am worried that in our lust for achievement we're willing to cause
    major damage here in the process (our history is also littered with examples of technological progress at the price of
    ecology).

    ---
    Synchronet pathunknown.net
  • From Dux@VERT/PATHUNKN to Nightfox on Mon Jul 25 10:37:48 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Gamgee on Sat Jul 23 2022 06:25 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to poindexter FORTRAN on Sat Jul 23 2022 05:55 pm

    We all know it was blown out of orbit in 1999, and the fake moon
    put in its place.

    The bastards! ;-)

    You can thank Dr. Evil and his moon base team for that.

    Nightfox


    At least it wiped out the 'CHA' that had been there before...

    (any The Tick fans out there, I hope?)

    ---
    Synchronet pathunknown.net
  • From Dumas Walker@VERT/CAPCITY2 to POINDEXTER FORTRAN on Mon Jul 25 16:18:00 2022
    To my knowledge, most of the US Apollo missions before Apollo 11 did
    not have landings as part of their mission. There was at least one
    that was meant to orbit only (9 or 10), and it was a success.

    No, if you look at the mission profiles, NASA took it all very methodically. Apollo 7 tested removing the LM and stayed in orbit as long as a trip to the moon would take. Apollo 8 orbited the moon. Apollo 9 did more tests. Apollo 10, if I remember, sent two astronauts in the LM to the moon, but didn't land.

    I think we are in agreement on the methodical part. Comparing what you
    said to what I did, it sounds like I just had the numbers wrong (not 9 or
    10). :)


    * SLMR 2.1a * "My therapist was right...God DOES hate me!!!"-J.Sherman

    ---
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From Dumas Walker@VERT/CAPCITY2 to MOONDOG on Mon Jul 25 16:19:00 2022
    The rocket tech was there as early as the 1940's, but needed refinement to it resized and working correctly for any goals beyond "near-Earth" space. They took ~20 years to get it there.

    When Von Braun was testing the V2 rockets during WWII, he said the tests were a success, exept they were pointing them at the wrong planet.

    Indeed. :)


    * SLMR 2.1a * "I am EVIL Homer! I am EVIL Homer!" - Homer

    ---
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to faeempress on Mon Jul 25 20:21:00 2022
    faeempress wrote to MRO <=-

    1969. we did NOT have the technology to bring a spacecraft with people, drop them off, let them walk around on the moon and bring them back safely. no fucking way.

    O.o What the f..? You'd get along great with my stepdad, he
    thought Covid was a hoax. I don't understand the ignorance of
    people...

    I think you're relatively new here... Meet 'MRO', the resident moron of DoveNet. This is what he does. Just laugh at him like everyone else
    does. He's a special case.


    ... Gone crazy, be back later, please leave message.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Dux on Tue Jul 26 20:55:48 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Dux to Boraxman on Mon Jul 25 2022 10:35 am

    It wouldn't be the first time humans have focused their time, money, and mental energies on vacations while letting
    their homes rot.

    That said, from our point of view there is very little to lose on other celestial bodies we know of and have a
    reasonable capability to reach -- they all appear to be devoid of all forms of life _as we know them_ -- so I'm not too
    worried about screw up the Martian biosphere, but I am worried that in our lust for achievement we're willing to cause
    major damage here in the process (our history is also littered with examples of technological progress at the price of
    ecology).


    The thing is if you leave your house to rot, you don't move to another to escape until you've worked out why your original rotted in the first place. People are positing space travel as a way to get away from catastrophes, but some of them are ones we are generating, so we are likely to replicate the problems elsewhere.

    Natures limits will follow us around wherever we go.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Boraxman on Tue Jul 26 07:28:00 2022
    Boraxman wrote to Dux <=-

    It wouldn't be the first time humans have focused their time, money, and mental energies on vacations while letting
    their homes rot.

    That said, from our point of view there is very little to lose on other celestial bodies we know of and have a
    reasonable capability to reach -- they all appear to be devoid of all forms of life _as we know them_ -- so I'm not too
    worried about screw up the Martian biosphere, but I am worried that in our lust for achievement we're willing to cause
    major damage here in the process (our history is also littered with examples of technological progress at the price of
    ecology).

    The thing is if you leave your house to rot, you don't move to
    another to escape until you've worked out why your original
    rotted in the first place.

    I'd argue that point by saying that if a person is the type that would
    leave his house to rot, that's *EXACTLY* what they would do. They don't *CARE* what the reason was, and are not interested in fixing the
    problem.

    People are positing space travel as a
    way to get away from catastrophes, but some of them are ones we
    are generating, so we are likely to replicate the problems
    elsewhere.

    Probably, but that gives them a fairly long interval to have a "fresh
    start", and meanwhile be looking for yet another place to live. It gets
    you down the road a piece, as they say.

    Natures limits will follow us around wherever we go.

    Probably, unless "Nature" has a different definition than we're used to,
    on a different planet... <BOGGLE>



    ... If it weren't for Edison we'd be using computers by candlelight
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Moondog on Mon Jul 25 07:31:00 2022
    Moondog wrote to Gamgee <=-

    That's what you get when you store radioactive waste on the dark side
    of the moon.

    I love the odd programming you can find on the channels on Roku TVs. One of the sci-fi channels has UFO and Space:1999 on, two shows I loved growing up.


    ... How does this work, is there an orientation?
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From faeempress@VERT/SOLARIS to Gamgee on Tue Jul 26 20:25:00 2022
    O.o What the f..? You'd get along great with my stepdad, he people...
    people...

    I think you're relatively new here... Meet 'MRO', the resident moron of DoveNet. This is what he does. Just laugh at him like everyone else does. He's a special case.

    ok, I replied to this on my BBS and it's not showing up anywhere, though it says "sent". -_- My previous message obviously came through... arggh

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/04/26 (Windows/64)
    * Origin: ERROR 404 BBS !
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Gamgee on Tue Jul 26 16:31:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Boraxman on Tue Jul 26 2022 07:28 am

    Boraxman wrote to Dux <=-

    It wouldn't be the first time humans have focused their time, money, and mental energies on vacations while letting
    their homes rot.

    That said, from our point of view there is very little to lose on other celestial bodies we know of and have a
    reasonable capability to reach -- they all appear to be devoid of all for of life _as we know them_ -- so I'm not too
    worried about screw up the Martian biosphere, but I am worried that in ou lust for achievement we're willing to cause
    major damage here in the process (our history is also littered with examp of technological progress at the price of
    ecology).

    The thing is if you leave your house to rot, you don't move to
    another to escape until you've worked out why your original
    rotted in the first place.

    I'd argue that point by saying that if a person is the type that would
    leave his house to rot, that's *EXACTLY* what they would do. They don't *CARE* what the reason was, and are not interested in fixing the
    problem.

    People are positing space travel as a
    way to get away from catastrophes, but some of them are ones we
    are generating, so we are likely to replicate the problems
    elsewhere.

    Probably, but that gives them a fairly long interval to have a "fresh start", and meanwhile be looking for yet another place to live. It gets
    you down the road a piece, as they say.

    Natures limits will follow us around wherever we go.

    Probably, unless "Nature" has a different definition than we're used to,
    on a different planet... <BOGGLE>



    ... If it weren't for Edison we'd be using computers by candlelight

    Even if we found a compatible plkanet, we would be an invasive species. All
    of our germs, bacteria, microbes that live in our lungs, skin, and digestive system will also be invasive. Native plants may be toxic because we were not developed as part of that ecosystem. We'd have to bring more invasive
    species with us. Let us hope they take hold without destroying the current ecosphere of the planet.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to poindexter FORTRAN on Tue Jul 26 16:34:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: poindexter FORTRAN to Moondog on Mon Jul 25 2022 07:31 am

    Moondog wrote to Gamgee <=-

    That's what you get when you store radioactive waste on the dark side of the moon.

    I love the odd programming you can find on the channels on Roku TVs. One of the sci-fi channels has UFO and Space:1999 on, two shows I loved growing up.


    ... How does this work, is there an orientation?

    I missed out on 1999 the first time around. I finally got to binge watch it
    a few years ago. First year was definitely better than the second, but a bit slow in a British sort of way. Brian Johnson's special effects team did an awesome job. You can see his work carry over in Empire Strikes Back withthe AT-AT minitures. When the AT-AT foot nearly steps on Luke, it reacts as if
    it has some weight to it.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Brokenmind@VERT/TIABBS to poindexter FORTRAN on Tue Jul 26 19:44:41 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: poindexter FORTRAN to Moondog on Mon Jul 25 2022 07:31 am

    I love the odd programming you can find on the channels on Roku TVs. One of the sci-fi channels has UFO and Space:1999 on, two shows I loved growing up.

    They were good shows my favorites however were BattleStar Galactica ,
    Babylon 5 and Space Above and Beyound and a few others. I also watch roku tv at times.

    BrokenMind

    ---
    Synchronet The Insane Asylum BBS - tiabbs.synchro.net
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Gamgee on Wed Jul 27 20:05:35 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Boraxman on Tue Jul 26 2022 07:28 am

    I'd argue that point by saying that if a person is the type that would
    leave his house to rot, that's *EXACTLY* what they would do. They don't *CARE* what the reason was, and are not interested in fixing the
    problem.


    I agree, I meant my comment in the sense that that type of person SHOULDN'T do it.

    Probably, but that gives them a fairly long interval to have a "fresh start", and meanwhile be looking for yet another place to live. It gets
    you down the road a piece, as they say.

    Probably, unless "Nature" has a different definition than we're used to,
    on a different planet... <BOGGLE>


    I think we'll see similar limitations. Climate that is affected by atmospheric changes, ecosystems and feedback loops that respond to human induced changes. Any planet that we are going to live on would need to have an ecosystem or ecosystems of sorts, and they too will be affected by our actions.

    Earths ecosystems are quite resilient, with 4 billion years of evolution, and about half a billion of years to establish things on land. Any new planet would have brand new systems that would be quite delicate and the system could easily fall over.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Moondog on Wed Jul 27 07:43:00 2022
    Moondog wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Probably, unless "Nature" has a different definition than we're used to,
    on a different planet... <BOGGLE>

    Even if we found a compatible plkanet, we would be an invasive
    species. All of our germs, bacteria, microbes that live in our
    lungs, skin, and digestive system will also be invasive. Native
    plants may be toxic because we were not developed as part of that ecosystem. We'd have to bring more invasive species with us.
    Let us hope they take hold without destroying the current
    ecosphere of the planet.

    Probably all true, but changes nothing about the need to find another
    place to live. We'll have to deal with those types of things. Adapt
    and overcome.


    ... All hope abandon, ye who enter messages here.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Boraxman on Wed Jul 27 07:46:00 2022
    Boraxman wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Probably, unless "Nature" has a different definition than we're used to,
    on a different planet... <BOGGLE>

    I think we'll see similar limitations. Climate that is affected
    by atmospheric changes, ecosystems and feedback loops that
    respond to human induced changes. Any planet that we are going
    to live on would need to have an ecosystem or ecosystems of
    sorts, and they too will be affected by our actions.

    Sure, of course.

    Earths ecosystems are quite resilient, with 4 billion years of
    evolution, and about half a billion of years to establish things
    on land. Any new planet would have brand new systems that would
    be quite delicate and the system could easily fall over.

    You're making a big assumption that a new planet we might find would be
    "new". Why couldn't it also be 4-5 billion years old? I'm sure it
    wouldn't be exactly like Earth, but maybe very similar?


    ... Press any key to continue or any other key to quit
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Moondog on Wed Jul 27 10:49:20 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Gamgee on Tue Jul 26 2022 04:31 pm

    Even if we found a compatible plkanet, we would be an invasive species. All of our germs, bacteria, microbes that live in our lungs, skin, and digestive system will also be invasive. Native plants may be toxic because we were not developed as part of that ecosystem. We'd have to bring more invasive species with us. Let us hope they take hold without destroying the current ecosphere of the planet.

    I'd think the risk isn't much worse than a group of people moving to a different continent on our planet..?

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Brokenmind on Wed Jul 27 13:52:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Brokenmind to poindexter FORTRAN on Tue Jul 26 2022 07:44 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: poindexter FORTRAN to Moondog on Mon Jul 25 2022 07:31 am

    I love the odd programming you can find on the channels on Roku TVs. On of the sci-fi channels has UFO and Space:1999 on, two shows I loved growing up.

    They were good shows my favorites however were BattleStar Galactica , Babylon 5 and Space Above and Beyound and a few others. I also watch roku tv

    BrokenMind

    Before the FCC changed the guidelines for what is considered "family hour"
    TV, Glenn Larsen was goingto follow a differnt approach regarding a second season of BSG. Galactica 1980 was an abomination due to the new ruling and lower budget.

    In order to get more adult viewers, Larsen was advised to give more depth to his characters. Apollo's son Boxey was going to killed off early, whixh in turn would cause Apollo a falling out with his friends and especially Adama,
    so Starbuck would be forced to become more responsible and act as a proxy son to Adama. This would even further cause a rift between Apollo and Starbuck. Otherwise the story lines would be what most would consider common sci-fi/ fantasy TV. For example, they find a small band of "immortals" that had been to Earth, and know the way, however they can never leave the planet because
    it is the source of their long life. A plot device that would be in nearly ev ery episode would be Apollo find love or a reason to live, only if he stays behind. As the story line goes along, they learn the immortals lost contact with the Earth colony thousand s of years earlier, and fear they will not be
    at a technical level to assist in fending off the cylons.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Gamgee on Wed Jul 27 13:57:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Moondog on Wed Jul 27 2022 07:43 am

    Moondog wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Probably, unless "Nature" has a different definition than we're used to, on a different planet... <BOGGLE>

    Even if we found a compatible plkanet, we would be an invasive
    species. All of our germs, bacteria, microbes that live in our
    lungs, skin, and digestive system will also be invasive. Native
    plants may be toxic because we were not developed as part of that ecosystem. We'd have to bring more invasive species with us.
    Let us hope they take hold without destroying the current
    ecosphere of the planet.

    Probably all true, but changes nothing about the need to find another
    place to live. We'll have to deal with those types of things. Adapt
    and overcome.


    ... All hope abandon, ye who enter messages here.

    It's an ethical dilemma I'm sure some would justify panetary genocide of
    alien pant and animal species in the name of preserving human life. The alter native for long term habitation is genetically altering humans so they can
    eat otherwise inedible or toxic plants.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Dumas Walker@VERT/CAPCITY2 to POINDEXTER FORTRAN on Wed Jul 27 16:11:00 2022
    I love the odd programming you can find on the channels on Roku TVs. One of the sci-fi channels has UFO and Space:1999 on, two shows I loved growing up.

    We used to get COMET here which I think had Space:1999 and I know it had
    the 1990's The Outer Limits. Unfortunately, the TV station that was
    carrying it as a subchannel dropped it in favor of another, non-sci-fi
    network.


    * SLMR 2.1a * "Don't touch me...I'll wound your inner child!" - Beavis

    ---
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Moondog on Wed Jul 27 18:45:00 2022
    Moondog wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Probably all true, but changes nothing about the need to find another
    place to live. We'll have to deal with those types of things. Adapt
    and overcome.

    It's an ethical dilemma I'm sure some would justify panetary
    genocide of alien pant and animal species in the name of
    preserving human life. The alter native for long term habitation
    is genetically altering humans so they can eat otherwise inedible
    or toxic plants.

    Well, honestly, if we went to all the trouble of traveling (however far
    to this new world), wouldn't it be assumed that we'll do what we have to
    in order to survive? The alternative would be to just roll over and
    give up the mission. Pretty standard procedure for an "invading force"
    to try and take over by force if necessary, and let the strongest
    survive. Top of the food chain kind of thing. <SHRUG>



    ... Nothing is so smiple that it can't get screwed up.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Moondog on Wed Jul 27 18:49:00 2022
    Moondog wrote to MRO <=-

    How would you explain the tracks left by the astronauts? They're observa by probes sent to the moon. In later missions they brougt along a moon buggy. There are tracks left by that as well. Way more than would've be possible trying to drive a remote vehicle would've done.

    our own probes and tests say it's legit. sounds legit.

    Other nations sent probes to orbit the moon. why aren't they
    calling foul?

    More actual factual evidence like that will only confuse MRO more than
    he already is (if that's possible). He's got his story and he's
    sticking to it, regardless of what anyone says.

    Probably not worth wasting your time on the buffoon.



    ... Strip mining prevents forest fires.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Nightfox on Wed Jul 27 23:46:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Moondog on Wed Jul 27 2022 10:49 am

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Gamgee on Tue Jul 26 2022 04:31 pm

    Even if we found a compatible plkanet, we would be an invasive species. All of our germs, bacteria, microbes that live in our lungs, skin, and digestive system will also be invasive. Native plants may be toxic beca we were not developed as part of that ecosystem. We'd have to bring mor invasive species with us. Let us hope they take hold without destroying the current ecosphere of the planet.

    I'd think the risk isn't much worse than a group of people moving to a diffe

    Nightfox

    The ingredients for life will be the same, except the measurements of such ingredients will affect the recipe. Plants may be harder to digest,
    miccrobes that are otherwise benign in their ecosystem may be more aggressive when dealing with Earth organisms.

    When explorers travelled to other continents, some plants and animals were different, but they all evolved from the same origin specie as what was back
    in Europe, Africa, wherever. There were variations and mutations over time, but they were all based from the same primordial goo that everything else was derived from. If a planet has all the ingredients for life, yet no life exists, that may be a red flag warning there might be a reason the right chemicals and enzymes never mixed. Even in our ecosystem, we have virii and bacteria our bodies ahve little or no defense from. Imagine going to another planet, then having to write a new rule book regarding how Earthboorne life interacts with alien ecosystems? If you think introducing a type of vine or flower or a species such as rabbits could devastate a continent, just imagine if the microbes in your stomach (and eventually your feces) kills or consumes everything it touches? Turn it the other way, and imagine an alien bird
    poops on your cornfield, and is consumed by microbes from their guts?

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Dumas Walker on Thu Jul 28 00:11:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Dumas Walker to POINDEXTER FORTRAN on Wed Jul 27 2022 04:11 pm

    I love the odd programming you can find on the channels on Roku TVs. One o the sci-fi channels has UFO and Space:1999 on, two shows I loved growing u

    We used to get COMET here which I think had Space:1999 and I know it had
    the 1990's The Outer Limits. Unfortunately, the TV station that was carrying it as a subchannel dropped it in favor of another, non-sci-fi network.


    * SLMR 2.1a * "Don't touch me...I'll wound your inner child!" - Beavis

    I got Comet on my Dish. The channel that used to by TechTV/G4/ Esquire/ and other re-toolings showed Space: 1999 before it dropped off the schedule.
    There was another channel that would show blocks of old shows. I nearly
    forgot about a live action series from the 70's called Space Academy. It was
    a Saturday morning show that ran for one season, then was replaced with a
    more action oriented spinoff called Jason of Star Command. Sapce Academy reused the fiberglas body of the Earth 2 truck as the external for their shuttlecraft. In the story, the characters were students on a space station built in an asteroid. They all had some special skills or paranormal abilities, and they could combine their concentration and boost each other's skills. Jonathan Harris (Dr Smithof Lost in Space) played the headmaster of the academy. His character also had an incomplete back story about his
    actual age. In his quarters or office he had items dating back to the 20th century, and the show takes place in the 24th century or something like that.

    Jason of Star Command was more of a swashbuckler action series. They
    recycled sets and sometimes Space Academy (the station, not the cast) would make an appearance. Bad guy was big hairy dude with one good eye and the
    other is covered by an eyepiece that glows red. Each week Jason would thwart the bad guy's plan to control the universe.

    The writers probably didn't think much of it, but one of the alien species
    that was the bad guy of the week were known as the Vegans.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Gamgee on Thu Jul 28 00:18:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Moondog on Wed Jul 27 2022 06:45 pm

    Moondog wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Probably all true, but changes nothing about the need to find another place to live. We'll have to deal with those types of things. Adapt
    and overcome.

    It's an ethical dilemma I'm sure some would justify panetary
    genocide of alien pant and animal species in the name of
    preserving human life. The alter native for long term habitation
    is genetically altering humans so they can eat otherwise inedible
    or toxic plants.

    Well, honestly, if we went to all the trouble of traveling (however far
    to this new world), wouldn't it be assumed that we'll do what we have to
    in order to survive? The alternative would be to just roll over and
    give up the mission. Pretty standard procedure for an "invading force"
    to try and take over by force if necessary, and let the strongest
    survive. Top of the food chain kind of thing. <SHRUG>



    ... Nothing is so smiple that it can't get screwed up.

    Agreed, there is no turning back. But lets go one step further and disocover we brought along something that creates massive kill offs of life down to the viral or microbial level, when in turn affects the planet's ability to
    recycle CO2 into oxygen? Entire jungles die off. Animals run out of food. P rairies with wind resilient grass turn into arid desert. Oceans becoime
    devoid of life. Whatever replaces it must grow pretty damn quick, if
    possible. Plants will have to be adapted to grow in the alien soil. in that case, the microbes may be essential for the conversion.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Moondog on Thu Jul 28 07:41:00 2022
    Moondog wrote to Gamgee <=-

    It's an ethical dilemma I'm sure some would justify panetary
    genocide of alien pant and animal species in the name of
    preserving human life. The alter native for long term habitation
    is genetically altering humans so they can eat otherwise inedible
    or toxic plants.

    Well, honestly, if we went to all the trouble of traveling (however far
    to this new world), wouldn't it be assumed that we'll do what we have to
    in order to survive? The alternative would be to just roll over and
    give up the mission. Pretty standard procedure for an "invading force"
    to try and take over by force if necessary, and let the strongest
    survive. Top of the food chain kind of thing. <SHRUG>

    Agreed, there is no turning back. But lets go one step further
    and disocover we brought along something that creates massive
    kill offs of life down to the viral or microbial level, when in
    turn affects the planet's ability to recycle CO2 into oxygen?
    Entire jungles die off. Animals run out of food. P rairies with
    wind resilient grass turn into arid desert. Oceans becoime
    devoid of life. Whatever replaces it must grow pretty damn
    quick, if possible. Plants will have to be adapted to grow in
    the alien soil. in that case, the microbes may be essential for
    the conversion.

    I suppose that could happen. Seems like it would take a little while
    for that scale of destruction - enough time for us to realize what was happening and *TRY* to counter-act it. If it seems we'd be unable to do
    that then you'd have to step back and remember the "big-picture"...
    There are probably millions of inhabitable planets. If this one is a
    failure, then we move on and try another one. It's "survival of the
    fittest" on a galactic scale. When you look at it like that..., how
    important is any one planet? Including our native Earth...



    ... All the easy problems have been solved.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Gamgee on Thu Jul 28 10:45:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Moondog on Thu Jul 28 2022 07:41 am

    Moondog wrote to Gamgee <=-

    It's an ethical dilemma I'm sure some would justify panetary genocide of alien pant and animal species in the name of
    preserving human life. The alter native for long term habitation
    is genetically altering humans so they can eat otherwise inedible
    or toxic plants.

    Well, honestly, if we went to all the trouble of traveling (however far to this new world), wouldn't it be assumed that we'll do what we have to in order to survive? The alternative would be to just roll over and
    give up the mission. Pretty standard procedure for an "invading force" to try and take over by force if necessary, and let the strongest survive. Top of the food chain kind of thing. <SHRUG>

    Agreed, there is no turning back. But lets go one step further
    and disocover we brought along something that creates massive
    kill offs of life down to the viral or microbial level, when in
    turn affects the planet's ability to recycle CO2 into oxygen?
    Entire jungles die off. Animals run out of food. P rairies with
    wind resilient grass turn into arid desert. Oceans becoime
    devoid of life. Whatever replaces it must grow pretty damn
    quick, if possible. Plants will have to be adapted to grow in
    the alien soil. in that case, the microbes may be essential for
    the conversion.

    I suppose that could happen. Seems like it would take a little while
    for that scale of destruction - enough time for us to realize what was happening and *TRY* to counter-act it. If it seems we'd be unable to do that then you'd have to step back and remember the "big-picture"...
    There are probably millions of inhabitable planets. If this one is a failure, then we move on and try another one. It's "survival of the fittest" on a galactic scale. When you look at it like that..., how important is any one planet? Including our native Earth...



    ... All the easy problems have been solved.

    If travelling to to colonize a planet was as easy as driving to a new town to buy a house, why move somewhere you may have problems with the neighborhood? For some time it may a one shot attempt, and the ship that gets you there will be expended and act as construction materials to build your new colony. If there is no sentient life detectable, it may be ok to kill everything off as part of the terraforming process. I think it will be tragic if a colony disappears because it had no contingency plan for a planet being toxic or so frail it cannot accomodate Earthlings and all the germs they bring with them.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Dumas Walker@VERT/CAPCITY2 to MOONDOG on Thu Jul 28 16:50:00 2022
    The writers probably didn't think much of it, but one of the alien species that was the bad guy of the week were known as the Vegans.

    LOL, that is a good one. :) I never saw any of those Space Academy or
    Jason of Star Command episodes. They sound interesting.

    Most of what I watch lately are the original Twilight Zone, original The
    Outer Limits, Night Gallery, One Step Beyond, and Tales of Tomorrow. :)
    Those, and the British dramas that PBS shows on Thursday and Sunday nights.


    * SLMR 2.1a * The number you have dailed...9-1-1...has been changed...

    ---
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Dumas Walker on Thu Jul 28 23:33:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Dumas Walker to MOONDOG on Thu Jul 28 2022 04:50 pm

    The writers probably didn't think much of it, but one of the alien species that was the bad guy of the week were known as the Vegans.

    LOL, that is a good one. :) I never saw any of those Space Academy or Jason of Star Command episodes. They sound interesting.

    Most of what I watch lately are the original Twilight Zone, original The Outer Limits, Night Gallery, One Step Beyond, and Tales of Tomorrow. :) Those, and the British dramas that PBS shows on Thursday and Sunday nights.


    * SLMR 2.1a * The number you have dailed...9-1-1...has been changed...

    Add Ray Bradbury Theatre to your watch list. the series I mistook for Earth
    II was Ark II. It was a live action show about a team of scientist/
    explorers and their portable lab and motor home. The early jetpack design known as the rocket belt appeared on several episodes. Their prupose was to travel outside the civilized zone into the wasteland and attempt to restore order and rebuild society. Looks like it was filmed around the boneyard
    areas on Paramount Ranch.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Gamgee on Fri Jul 29 20:14:28 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Boraxman on Wed Jul 27 2022 07:46 am

    You're making a big assumption that a new planet we might find would be "new". Why couldn't it also be 4-5 billion years old? I'm sure it
    wouldn't be exactly like Earth, but maybe very similar?

    Well by "new" I obviously mean new to us. If it can support life, it seem probably it would have unicellular life. Biochemistries may be different which could cause issues, potentially major ones.

    One of the biggest mass extiction events on Earth was caused by microorganisms generating Oxygen.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Nightfox on Fri Jul 29 20:17:39 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Moondog on Wed Jul 27 2022 10:49 am

    I'd think the risk isn't much worse than a group of people moving to a different continent on our planet..?

    Nightfox

    No, but America is falling apart after a few hundred years. Australia was settled a bit over 200 years ago, but climate change may make it far less hospitable in the next 200 years.

    A millenia is a blink of an eye at the timescales we are talking about. Hell, human history is about 6,000 years old and we're in peril, again, when we are talking about continuation for millions of years, that is a fraction of time.

    We went to the moon, and can't now. What if we sent people to Mars, but then lost the ability to go back, and offer support, and the colonists were stranded. Or the terraforming project, which was supposed to take decades, just failed due to political/economic issues.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Gamgee on Fri Jul 29 20:20:46 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Moondog on Thu Jul 28 2022 07:41 am

    I suppose that could happen. Seems like it would take a little while
    for that scale of destruction - enough time for us to realize what was happening and *TRY* to counter-act it. If it seems we'd be unable to do that then you'd have to step back and remember the "big-picture"...
    There are probably millions of inhabitable planets. If this one is a failure, then we move on and try another one. It's "survival of the fittest" on a galactic scale. When you look at it like that..., how important is any one planet? Including our native Earth...

    We wouldn't. We already have a good case study, Anthropogenic Global Warming. We're not fixing it, its too far in the future for us to act.

    The humans that go to other planets will be the same. They won't care about problems that are 100 years ahead. We don't care about that here with billions of peoples welfare at stake.

    We're stuffed.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Dux@VERT/PATHUNKN to Boraxman on Fri Jul 29 12:44:57 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Dux on Tue Jul 26 2022 08:55 pm

    The thing is if you leave your house to rot, you don't move to another to escape until you've worked out why your original rotted in the first place.

    You've made an assumption here that logic and thought is being put into this... another potential analogy:

    You live in a big house w/ a lot of family... the ones in charge don't care what's going on, they're fine with it rotting as long as they have their booze and TV... others can see the problem but refuse to be part of the solution... others would be part of the solution but the problem is beyond what they can handle alone--but they can move out.

    I just think it's more likely the booze and TV ones will be buying the rockets to Mars and allow all new terrible problems to occur.

    ---
    Synchronet pathunknown.net
  • From Dux@VERT/PATHUNKN to Moondog on Fri Jul 29 12:57:09 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Gamgee on Thu Jul 28 2022 10:45 am

    For some time it may a one shot attempt, and the ship that gets you there wi be expended and act as construction materials to build your new colony. If there is no sentient life detectable, it may be ok to kill everything off as part of the terraforming process. I think it will be tragic if a colony disappears because it had no contingency plan for a planet being toxic or so frail it cannot accomodate Earthlings and all the germs they bring with them

    Given our current ethics, I can't imagine a trip somewhere that we haven't planned for every contigency -- up to an including "you'll live out the rest of your lives orbiting that star in this ship".

    I would guess that before any human missions go on any one way trips we'll have thoroughly probed the area and planned for the likely situations faced.

    We might at some point change our collective opinion and decide that being the first human to each another star system is worth the risk of finding it a wasteland and having insufficient supplies to return... those Apollo folks seemed to be pretty darn close to that level of risk, but even they had a reasonable return plan.

    I think our collected opinion of tragic has, and will, continue to change over the decades. Things that would tragic here on Earth 50-60 years ago barely register as newsworthy. We may find that in 150 years it's not considered unbearbly tragic for a group to die trying to pioneer new places in space, just as folks lost in the 1700s-1800s to treks across the united states trying to find new homesteads (and they often had established destinations!)

    ---
    Synchronet pathunknown.net
  • From Dumas Walker@VERT/CAPCITY2 to MOONDOG on Fri Jul 29 15:00:00 2022
    Most of what I watch lately are the original Twilight Zone, original The Outer Limits, Night Gallery, One Step Beyond, and Tales of Tomorrow. :) Those, and the British dramas that PBS shows on Thursday and Sunday nights.

    Add Ray Bradbury Theatre to your watch list. the series I mistook for Earth

    I am not sure if I have a station here that shows that one now. I am
    watching the non-PBS shows above on DVD, except Tales of Tomorrow, which can
    be found on youtube.

    If I can find it I will give it a watch!


    * SLMR 2.1a * IBM = Institute of Black Magic

    ---
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Dux on Sat Jul 30 09:54:07 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Dux to Boraxman on Fri Jul 29 2022 12:44 pm


    You've made an assumption here that logic and thought is being put into this...
    another potential analogy:

    You live in a big house w/ a lot of family... the ones in charge don't care what's going on, they're fine with it rotting as long as they have their booze
    and TV... others can see the problem but refuse to be part of the solution...
    others would be part of the solution but the problem is beyond what they can handle alone--but they can move out.

    I just think it's more likely the booze and TV ones will be buying the rockets to
    Mars and allow all new terrible problems to occur.

    I think so too. Now that Billionaires are running these projects, they WILL stuff it up and create Dystopia's. A future built by Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos? It would make exctinction seem the better option for humanity.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Dux on Fri Jul 29 22:44:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Dux to Moondog on Fri Jul 29 2022 12:57 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Gamgee on Thu Jul 28 2022 10:45 am

    For some time it may a one shot attempt, and the ship that gets you there be expended and act as construction materials to build your new colony. there is no sentient life detectable, it may be ok to kill everything off part of the terraforming process. I think it will be tragic if a colony disappears because it had no contingency plan for a planet being toxic or frail it cannot accomodate Earthlings and all the germs they bring with t

    Given our current ethics, I can't imagine a trip somewhere that we haven't planned for every contigency -- up to an including "you'll live out the rest your lives orbiting that star in this ship".

    I would guess that before any human missions go on any one way trips we'll h thoroughly probed the area and planned for the likely situations faced.

    We might at some point change our collective opinion and decide that being t first human to each another star system is worth the risk of finding it a wasteland and having insufficient supplies to return... those Apollo folks seemed to be pretty darn close to that level of risk, but even they had a reasonable return plan.

    I think our collected opinion of tragic has, and will, continue to change ov the decades. Things that would tragic here on Earth 50-60 years ago barely register as newsworthy. We may find that in 150 years it's not considered unbearbly tragic for a group to die trying to pioneer new places in space, j as folks lost in the 1700s-1800s to treks across the united states trying to find new homesteads (and they often had established destinations!)

    Probes can tell you only so much, and even then there may be signs we don't recognize, like 100 year flood plains, or gravitational changes that create seisimic events every couple of decades. How long do you expect a planet to
    be observed when it is looking like a sweet deal? It's like buying a house as
    part of a property auction, and you have a narrow window of time to check it out before the auction.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Dumas Walker on Fri Jul 29 23:11:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Dumas Walker to MOONDOG on Fri Jul 29 2022 03:00 pm

    Most of what I watch lately are the original Twilight Zone, original Th Outer Limits, Night Gallery, One Step Beyond, and Tales of Tomorrow. : Those, and the British dramas that PBS shows on Thursday and Sunday nig

    Add Ray Bradbury Theatre to your watch list. the series I mistook for Ear

    I am not sure if I have a station here that shows that one now. I am watching the non-PBS shows above on DVD, except Tales of Tomorrow, which can be found on youtube.

    If I can find it I will give it a watch!


    * SLMR 2.1a * IBM = Institute of Black Magic

    Ray Bradbury Theatre was a show like Outer Limits or Twilight Zone, with different stories each week. One story involved the 50th anniversary of the launch of a time ship which travels into the future, then returns. since the flight, major advances in technology and society happen which lead to a model sosciety. Everyone is excited, hacving parties up tto he pint of the appearani ce of the time ship, because the pilot sees this ideal society, and tells everyone things are going to be alright. The time pilot is in his 80's or
    90's and agrees on one interview. During the interview he explains the technology looked good on paper, but didn't work in reality. The ship disappears, but didn't go to through time. He made up everything to justify the costs of the experiment, and to give people the faith to belive they can improve. By this time, holograms are so convincing, people will be seeing a h ologram instead a of the time ship. He explains to folk the ship in it's temporal flux cannot be talked to or even show up on sensors, which also
    covers up it is a fake. When the reporter asks why he tells him all this,
    then decides to go on with the hoax, technicians bring out a box, which is a cryogenic container. As part of the interview contract, he cannot speak of
    any of this for another 50 years.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Moondog on Sat Jul 30 21:49:52 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to MRO on Fri Jul 29 2022 10:53 pm

    Hydroponics work in space. If terraforming fails, then people must live in pressurized structures. Hydroponics do not require dirt. Before any colony is created, a source of water would have to be discovered. From water you sustain life, create oxygen, rocket fuel, and fuel for hydrogen cells to produce electricity.


    I would expect that people would trial this on Earth first. Making a sustainable community in the middle of the Sahara desert which is cut off completely from the rest of the world.

    All this is quite theortical. The closest we've come was the BioDome.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Phigan@VERT/TACOPRON to Moondog on Sat Jul 30 10:17:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to MRO on Fri Jul 29 2022 10:53 pm

    is created, a source of water would have to be discovered. From water you

    Recycled urine, of course!

    ---
    Synchronet TIRED of waiting 2 hours for a taco? GO TO TACOPRONTO.bbs.io
  • From Phigan@VERT/TACOPRON to Boraxman on Sat Jul 30 10:20:40 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Moondog on Sat Jul 30 2022 09:49 pm

    All this is quite theortical. The closest we've come was the BioDome.

    I think you mean BioSphere II. BioDome was a comedy movie.

    In some ways BioSphere II was successful giving us a glimpse of things required to have such a colony. In most other ways, though, it was a failure, showing us we are nowhere near ready to launch such an endeavor.

    At least that's what I got out of it :D

    ---
    Synchronet TIRED of waiting 2 hours for a taco? GO TO TACOPRONTO.bbs.io
  • From Dux@VERT/PATHUNKN to Moondog on Sat Jul 30 15:25:43 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Dux on Fri Jul 29 2022 10:44 pm

    Probes can tell you only so much, and even then there may be signs we don't recognize, like 100 year flood plains, or gravitational changes

    Totally agree, I think the initial pioneers colonizing space will end up doing far worse than the average pioneer settling parts of the US/Canada.

    It's more likely the majority will fail unless the plan includes a return trip... but without the ability to have significantly FTL movement even a return trip will be costly for those adventurers.


    What would also be an interesting twist of sort is if there is ultimately a parallel to the original colonization efforts that happened -- arrival at a place there there is already intelligent life. It might even be welcoming life that will help us. I just hope that humanity doesn't repeat the same atrocities the Europeans did.

    ---
    Synchronet pathunknown.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Boraxman on Sat Jul 30 14:25:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Moondog on Sat Jul 30 2022 09:49 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to MRO on Fri Jul 29 2022 10:53 pm

    Hydroponics work in space. If terraforming fails, then people must live pressurized structures. Hydroponics do not require dirt. Before any col is created, a source of water would have to be discovered. From water y sustain life, create oxygen, rocket fuel, and fuel for hydrogen cells to produce electricity.


    I would expect that people would trial this on Earth first. Making a sustai

    All this is quite theortical. The closest we've come was the BioDome.

    That was an interesting experiment and many dosciveries were made, such as trying to create discrete arid zones and tropical zones in such a small place. Whatever was dry, didn't stay dry, and insects did not stay where they were supposed to be. In a pressurized colony, you would have to be religious in wiping down equipment to keep mold and mildew and other decay causing
    elements from taking root, so to speak.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Phigan on Sat Jul 30 20:18:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Phigan to Moondog on Sat Jul 30 2022 10:17 am

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to MRO on Fri Jul 29 2022 10:53 pm

    is created, a source of water would have to be discovered. From water y

    Recycled urine, of course!

    lol. Recycling can get you only so far. To make rocket fuel or break down into hydrogren for a hydrogen fuel cell, you'll need way more than the crew
    can process. I'm not sure if all moisture could be extracted and replenished without diminishing returns. It is not a lossless system.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Phigan on Sun Jul 31 20:36:46 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Phigan to Boraxman on Sat Jul 30 2022 10:20 am

    I think you mean BioSphere II. BioDome was a comedy movie.

    In some ways BioSphere II was successful giving us a glimpse of things required to have such a colony. In most other ways, though, it was a failure, showing us we are nowhere near ready to launch such an endeavor.

    At least that's what I got out of it :D


    I wrote that on little sleep. You're right, I feel a bit dumb. BioDome was that crappy Pauly Shore movie.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Dux on Sun Jul 31 09:47:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Dux to Moondog on Fri Jul 29 2022 12:57 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Gamgee on Thu Jul 28 2022 10:45 am

    For some time it may a one shot attempt, and the ship that gets you there be expended and act as construction materials to build your new colony. there is no sentient life detectable, it may be ok to kill everything off part of the terraforming process. I think it will be tragic if a colony disappears because it had no contingency plan for a planet being toxic or frail it cannot accomodate Earthlings and all the germs they bring with t

    Given our current ethics, I can't imagine a trip somewhere that we haven't planned for every contigency -- up to an including "you'll live out the rest your lives orbiting that star in this ship".

    I would guess that before any human missions go on any one way trips we'll h thoroughly probed the area and planned for the likely situations faced.

    We might at some point change our collective opinion and decide that being t first human to each another star system is worth the risk of finding it a wasteland and having insufficient supplies to return... those Apollo folks seemed to be pretty darn close to that level of risk, but even they had a reasonable return plan.

    I think our collected opinion of tragic has, and will, continue to change ov the decades. Things that would tragic here on Earth 50-60 years ago barely register as newsworthy. We may find that in 150 years it's not considered unbearbly tragic for a group to die trying to pioneer new places in space, j as folks lost in the 1700s-1800s to treks across the united states trying to find new homesteads (and they often had established destinations!)


    Go back 500 years ago to the Columbus expedition, they knew the Earth was a sphere, but they didn't know how round it was nor if anything existed in between. They were looking for an alternate path to India and Asia. If the americas didn't exist, I doubt they would've had enough supplies to make it
    to China, or the crew would've mutiny'd at some point during the trip.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Ogg@VERT/CAPCITY2 to Moondog on Mon Aug 1 08:35:00 2022
    Hello Moondog!

    ** On Sunday 31.07.22 - 19:00, Moondog wrote to MRO:

    i totally forgot about biodome/biosphere i guess it all
    fell apart, but they still learned a few things.

    [...] Earth's atmosphere is 21% oxygen, and theirs dropped to 14.2.
    [...] People became lethargic, had trouble concentrating,..
    [...] crew also had morale issues ..
    [...] The crew felt like zoo animals from all the tourists
    tapping on the glass to t ake pictures of them.

    Any real human trip to Mars will most certainly be a suicide
    mission.

    Re: the latter element, allowing people to access the location
    and take pictures.. seemed in contrevention to emulate
    isolation from outside contact.

    The basic elements for sustaining life (oxygene, food, shelter)
    on another planet are NOT likely to be met at all. So, why
    bother?

    --- OpenXP 5.0.51
    * Origin: Ogg's Dovenet Point (723:320/1.9)
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From Belly@VERT/BRAZINET to Moondog on Tue Aug 2 18:54:57 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Dumas Walker on Thu Jul 28 2022 12:11 am

    Jason of Star Command was more of a swashbuckler action series. They recycled sets and sometimes Space Academy (the station, not the cast) would make an appearance. Bad guy was big hairy dude with one good eye and the other is covered by an eyepiece that glows red. Each week Jason would thwar the bad guy's plan to control the universe.

    Don't forget about James Doohan as the commander! Not his finest hour, I'm sure :)

    o
    (O)
    BeLLy

    ---
    Synchronet bbs.brazi.net www.brazi.net WARNING: May contain nuts
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Ogg on Tue Aug 2 19:48:00 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Ogg to Moondog on Mon Aug 01 2022 08:35 am

    Hello Moondog!

    ** On Sunday 31.07.22 - 19:00, Moondog wrote to MRO:

    i totally forgot about biodome/biosphere i guess it all
    fell apart, but they still learned a few things.

    [...] Earth's atmosphere is 21% oxygen, and theirs dropped to 14.2. [...] People became lethargic, had trouble concentrating,..
    [...] crew also had morale issues ..
    [...] The crew felt like zoo animals from all the tourists
    tapping on the glass to t ake pictures of them.

    Any real human trip to Mars will most certainly be a suicide
    mission.

    Re: the latter element, allowing people to access the location
    and take pictures.. seemed in contrevention to emulate
    isolation from outside contact.

    The basic elements for sustaining life (oxygene, food, shelter)
    on another planet are NOT likely to be met at all. So, why
    bother?


    I think the objective was to build a sustainable environnment we can bring along
    with us rather than adapt one.

    The concept of terraforming is to take an environent incapable of sustaining life, then re-engineer it so it could sustain life. This may take centuries even if we have all the ingredients. In scifi, terraforming is usually portrayed as being done on arid, lifeless rocks. In the 2014 series
    Defiance, Earth was devasted by probes designed to alter the planet for refugees escaping a dying star system.

    I was watching a PBS series where they reviewed different planets, and Venus could have been a sister planet to Earth if it had an organic moderator to regulate co2 and other chemical buildups in their thicker atmosphere. Even though they are in a position where the temperature should be 100 dgrees warmer, their thicker atmosphere could've kept the planet cooler instead of ma. king it a pressure cooker.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Belly on Wed Aug 3 10:16:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Belly to Moondog on Tue Aug 02 2022 06:54 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Dumas Walker on Thu Jul 28 2022 12:11 am

    Jason of Star Command was more of a swashbuckler action series. They recycled sets and sometimes Space Academy (the station, not the cast) wou make an appearance. Bad guy was big hairy dude with one good eye and the other is covered by an eyepiece that glows red. Each week Jason would th the bad guy's plan to control the universe.

    Don't forget about James Doohan as the commander! Not his finest hour, I'm s :)

    o
    (O)
    BeLLy

    I did forget! Afew years earlier Doohan and thmost of the TOS cast worked on the Star Trek animated series. Some of the dialog sounds flat, and the
    reason I heard why was because the studio would mail scripts to the actors, th en they would record their lines on a tape and send it back to the studio. Doohan and Nichols had additional work doing voice acting for additional characters.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Moondog on Fri Aug 5 08:25:10 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Ogg on Tue Aug 02 2022 07:48 pm


    I think the objective was to build a sustainable environnment we can bring along
    with us rather than adapt one.

    The concept of terraforming is to take an environent incapable of sustaining life, then re-engineer it so it could sustain life. This may take centuries even if we have all the ingredients. In scifi, terraforming is usually portrayed as being done on arid, lifeless rocks. In the 2014 series Defiance, Earth was devasted by probes designed to alter the planet for refugees escaping a dying star system.

    I was watching a PBS series where they reviewed different planets, and Venus could have been a sister planet to Earth if it had an organic moderator to regulate co2 and other chemical buildups in their thicker atmosphere. Even though they are in a position where the temperature should be 100 dgrees warmer, their thicker atmosphere could've kept the planet cooler instead of ma. king it a pressure cooker.


    A private for-profit company is going to embark on a project which takes centuries?

    When people talk of terraforming, I wonder how it is that others don't burst out in riotous laughter. Companies want profit NOW. Who is going to invest in something that won't generate a return in their lifetime, let alone a century?
    The company will have to remain solvent, and not decide to refocus.
    I'm sick and tired of techno-utopians who talk out of their ass, and Elon is one of those. We can't even house people here in affordable housing, nor commit to any long term goals to save our own asses from climate change. The markets wants returns it can bank on.

    Building companies here in Australia are all folding because of the speculative boom coming to an end.

    Keep dreaming though...

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Boraxman on Fri Aug 5 01:13:00 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Moondog on Fri Aug 05 2022 08:25 am

    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Ogg on Tue Aug 02 2022 07:48 pm


    I think the objective was to build a sustainable environnment we can brin along
    with us rather than adapt one.

    The concept of terraforming is to take an environent incapable of sustain life, then re-engineer it so it could sustain life. This may take centur even if we have all the ingredients. In scifi, terraforming is usually portrayed as being done on arid, lifeless rocks. In the 2014 series Defiance, Earth was devasted by probes designed to alter the planet for refugees escaping a dying star system.

    I was watching a PBS series where they reviewed different planets, and Venus could have been a sister planet to Earth if it had an organic moderator to regulate co2 and other chemical buildups in their thicker atmosphere. Even though they are in a position where the temperature sho be 100 dgrees warmer, their thicker atmosphere could've kept the planet cooler instead of ma. king it a pressure cooker.


    A private for-profit company is going to embark on a project which takes cen

    When people talk of terraforming, I wonder how it is that others don't burst The company will have to remain solvent, and not decide to refocus.
    I'm sick and tired of techno-utopians who talk out of their ass, and Elon i
    can bank on.

    Building companies here in Australia are all folding because of the speculat

    Keep dreaming though...

    A friend of mine moved to the US from Zimbabwe. He and his wife sold off everything they had except for clothes and a few personal items. In an interplanetary venture, where's the money? It's in people trading their fortunes and possessions in turn for a trip to another world. It's in the price per pound it costs to transport heavy equipment and materials into
    orbit to place on a colony ship. In space and on the moon, the money is in mining materials to smelted in foundries and forged into a medium that
    orbital and moon based factories can craft into ships and shipyards. It's
    not much different than the ship yards that made ocean going ships, and the ou tfitter services that guided pioneers to new lands.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Moondog on Thu Aug 4 07:30:00 2022
    Moondog wrote to Belly <=-

    I did forget! Afew years earlier Doohan and thmost of the TOS cast
    worked on the Star Trek animated series. Some of the dialog sounds
    flat, and the reason I heard why was because the studio would mail
    scripts to the actors, th en they would record their lines on a tape
    and send it back to the studio. Doohan and Nichols had additional work doing voice acting for additional characters.


    Apparently, Leonard Nimoy threatened to walk if they didn't bring in some of the minor talents to share the voice stage. Majel Barrett would have ended
    up doing Uhura and Doohan would have had to do Sulu. A class act, he was.




    ... Onward, to meatspace!
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Boraxman on Fri Aug 5 07:28:00 2022
    Boraxman wrote to Moondog <=-

    When people talk of terraforming, I wonder how it is that others don't burst out in riotous laughter. Companies want profit NOW.

    I think terraforming is on the next scale of human civilization. We'll need
    to be one people and focused on survival of the species to make it happen.


    ... Good {$Greeting_Time}, $User!
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to poindexter FORTRAN on Sat Aug 6 13:14:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: poindexter FORTRAN to Boraxman on Fri Aug 05 2022 07:28 am

    Boraxman wrote to Moondog <=-

    When people talk of terraforming, I wonder how it is that others don't burst out in riotous laughter. Companies want profit NOW.

    I think terraforming is on the next scale of human civilization. We'll need to be one people and focused on survival of the species to make it happen.


    ... Good {$Greeting_Time}, $User!

    Part of terraforming may require altering what we consider "human." There
    was a short-lived BBC series, I think it was called Outcasts, and it was
    about a colony on a very Earthlike world. Among the colonists were a group known as "pioneers" who came early on and were genetically altered so they could live off the land, while the other residents in "the fence" required greenhouses and livestock in pens and cages fed withstrains of grains from Earth. When the series begins, we learn the colony has been there for about ten years, and pioneers pretty much live off the reservation, and the impression is they're no longer welcome in the fence. Eventually we learn there was a plague that killed off several hundred inhabitants, and the pioneers were immune. The populace is told the disease was a side effect of
    the pioneers modification. The colony administrator seems to know much more than he leads others to believe, and there's alot that goes in the back
    alleys and under the table.

    The story progresses at a slow burn, but does progress in that we learn as
    time goes by, however it was cancelled before the 13 or so partial season episodes were aired. it aired in the mid 2000's so there were ere several
    oter slow burn mystery shows it had to compete with.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to poindexter FORTRAN on Sun Aug 7 11:12:33 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: poindexter FORTRAN to Boraxman on Fri Aug 05 2022 07:28 am

    When people talk of terraforming, I wonder how it is that others don't burst out in riotous laughter. Companies want profit NOW.

    I think terraforming is on the next scale of human civilization. We'll need to be one people and focused on survival of the species to make it happen.

    Dude, we haven't changed! We're still focused on profit, ego, acquisition, short term gains. Sure, we may actually develop technologies that may make it possible, but the political/sociological/economic realities won't make it happen.

    Technophiles (like Musk) always overlook this. We have the means to house everyone. WE have the means to feed everyone. The problem isn't that we don't know how to build houses, the problem is that our social functioning creates the deficiencies.

    So it is with terraforming. I cannot see how it is possible for us HUMANS to actually fund and support that project. It doesn't reconcile with what I observe here.

    Which company is going to pay for it? Who is going to stump up the cash and take a risk? And if they do go ahead, how are they going to recoup their costs? From colonists who'll be earning nothing? Or they'll be mining and forever in debt, debt peons in space?

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Moondog on Sun Aug 7 07:53:00 2022
    Moondog wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-

    Part of terraforming may require altering what we consider "human."
    There was a short-lived BBC series, I think it was called Outcasts, and
    it was about a colony on a very Earthlike world. Among the colonists
    were a group known as "pioneers" who came early on and were genetically altered so they could live off the land, while the other residents in
    "the fence" required greenhouses and livestock in pens and cages fed withstrains of grains from Earth.

    I watched that show - took a while to get going, but I liked it.

    Netflix had a movie where Earth had a limited amount of time left before it would be uninhabitable, and they were trying to genetically modify people
    to be able to live on Titan unassisted. If memory serves, the program ended poorly and they realized that by changing humanity, they lost what it meant
    to be human.


    ... DON'T EAT CABBAGE
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Boraxman on Sun Aug 7 13:55:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to poindexter FORTRAN on Sun Aug 07 2022 11:12 am

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: poindexter FORTRAN to Boraxman on Fri Aug 05 2022 07:28 am

    When people talk of terraforming, I wonder how it is that others don burst out in riotous laughter. Companies want profit NOW.

    I think terraforming is on the next scale of human civilization. We'll ne to be one people and focused on survival of the species to make it happen

    Dude, we haven't changed! We're still focused on profit, ego, acquisition,

    Technophiles (like Musk) always overlook this. We have the means to house e

    So it is with terraforming. I cannot see how it is possible for us HUMANS t

    Which company is going to pay for it? Who is going to stump up the cash and
    in space?

    Since companies are not bound to treaties that nations make regarding colonization and claiming other worlds as territory, whoever establishes a colony and gets industry going is going to live like a king in that sphere of influence. Think of the overseas mining industry and the company store
    concept from the late 19th century and early 20th century. The only way to knock down these fiefdoms was to make the islands into US controlled territories. I doubt any nation would spend the money to manage or regulate
    a corporate colony. This might result in corporate controlled worlds. The
    map may not say it, but when you land you are breathing corporate air.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to poindexter FORTRAN on Sun Aug 7 20:35:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: poindexter FORTRAN to Moondog on Sun Aug 07 2022 07:53 am

    Moondog wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-

    Part of terraforming may require altering what we consider "human." There was a short-lived BBC series, I think it was called Outcasts, and it was about a colony on a very Earthlike world. Among the colonists were a group known as "pioneers" who came early on and were genetically altered so they could live off the land, while the other residents in "the fence" required greenhouses and livestock in pens and cages fed withstrains of grains from Earth.

    I watched that show - took a while to get going, but I liked it.

    Netflix had a movie where Earth had a limited amount of time left before it would be uninhabitable, and they were trying to genetically modify people
    to be able to live on Titan unassisted. If memory serves, the program ended poorly and they realized that by changing humanity, they lost what it meant to be human.


    ... DON'T EAT CABBAGE

    Funny how that is a recurring theme in in some lines of scifi. I hadn't
    read it, but recall being told of a story where alines are coming to Earth to visit, and ahead of time they send us a message to inform us they will arrive in ten of our years. Like anyone who has a messy house, the residents of
    Earth begin cleaning up the place, hoping the visitors will not think they
    are not worthy of being part of a larger federation. Also during this time, they do what they can to end wars and starvation, and make progress in trying to make a better world for everyone.

    When the aliens arrive, they are somewhat disappointed. For years they've wat ched our TV and listend to radio signals that escaped the Earth, and were hoping for a challenging planet to help. They prided themselves in their charity to lesser species told us if all it takes for us to clean up our act
    is to impress another species, they no longer have a reason to give us all
    the gifts, medicine, technology and advice they had to offer.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Moondog on Mon Aug 8 20:43:32 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Boraxman on Sun Aug 07 2022 01:55 pm

    Dude, we haven't changed! We're still focused on profit, ego, acquisition,

    Technophiles (like Musk) always overlook this. We have the means to house e

    So it is with terraforming. I cannot see how it is possible for us HUMANS t

    Which company is going to pay for it? Who is going to stump up the cash and
    in space?

    Since companies are not bound to treaties that nations make regarding colonization and claiming other worlds as territory, whoever establishes a colony and gets industry going is going to live like a king in that sphere of influence. Think of the overseas mining industry and the company store concept from the late 19th century and early 20th century. The only way to knock down these fiefdoms was to make the islands into US controlled territories. I doubt any nation would spend the money to manage or regulate a corporate colony. This might result in corporate controlled worlds. The map may not say it, but when you land you are breathing corporate air.


    I don't believe they would be allowed to claim planets and asteroid as their own, and I hope they don't.

    If the future of space colonisation is that companies will essentially become interplantery dicatatorships, lording it over thier colonists, then I would prefer we stayed on Earth and prevented this dystopian future from developing. But I don't think it is economically viable, you will have exploit labour awfully to get away with it, and a lot of people will not volunteer when they realise what they are giving up to go into space.

    For the moment, space will be for tourists like Bezos. Lets hope next time he goes up, he doesn't come back down.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Moondog on Mon Aug 8 08:07:00 2022
    Moondog wrote to Boraxman <=-

    Since companies are not bound to treaties that nations make regarding colonization and claiming other worlds as territory, whoever
    establishes a colony and gets industry going is going to live like a
    king in that sphere of influence.

    That reminds me of a bit from Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars series.
    Corporations because multi-national when they crossed international borders, then became "transnational". One of the megacorps ended up "buying" a
    pacific rim island, which caused some legal conundrums.



    ... Fear is the mind killer. - Paul Muad'Ib
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Boraxman on Tue Aug 9 13:44:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Moondog on Mon Aug 08 2022 08:43 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Boraxman on Sun Aug 07 2022 01:55 pm

    Dude, we haven't changed! We're still focused on profit, ego, acquisition,

    Technophiles (like Musk) always overlook this. We have the means to house e

    So it is with terraforming. I cannot see how it is possible for us HUMANS t

    Which company is going to pay for it? Who is going to stump up the ca and
    in space?

    Since companies are not bound to treaties that nations make regarding colonization and claiming other worlds as territory, whoever establishes colony and gets industry going is going to live like a king in that spher of influence. Think of the overseas mining industry and the company stor concept from the late 19th century and early 20th century. The only way knock down these fiefdoms was to make the islands into US controlled territories. I doubt any nation would spend the money to manage or regul a corporate colony. This might result in corporate controlled worlds. T map may not say it, but when you land you are breathing corporate air.


    I don't believe they would be allowed to claim planets and asteroid as their

    If the future of space colonisation is that companies will essentially becom
    is economically viable, you will have exploit labour awfully to get away wi

    For the moment, space will be for tourists like Bezos. Lets hope next time


    Unless there's a board or shareholders, a company is a dictatorship. There
    are such things as benevolent dictators who provide a level of comfort and opportunity to make profits to their people. I agree being a complete despot will not bring in the talented people needed to maintain and improve a
    colony. As a colony grows it may appear to be less of a dictatorship,
    however in the end there will be someone who is either active or silent in
    the colony's affairs that is getting their piece of the action.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to Boraxman on Tue Aug 9 17:12:33 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Moondog on Fri Aug 05 2022 08:25 am

    A private for-profit company is going to embark on a project which takes cen

    Wine production, and by that I mean _good_ wine production (not what most English speakers consider wine these days) is pretty much just that.

    In Spain we have this saying that one sets a winery so his descendants make a profit from it. Vines take quite a long time to get mature enough to produce top tier grapes. Before that point they kind of suck. If I plant vines today, I will be dead before they start producing their A grapes.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Arelor on Tue Aug 9 20:06:00 2022
    In Spain we have this saying that one sets a winery so his descendants make a profit from it. Vines take quite a long time to get mature enough to produce top tier grapes. Before that point they kind of suck. If I plant vines today, I will be dead before they start producing their A grapes.

    In California we say "Opening a winery is a great way to take a large fortune and turn it into a small fortune" haha.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Arelor on Wed Aug 10 21:01:00 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to Boraxman on Tue Aug 09 2022 05:12 pm

    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Moondog on Fri Aug 05 2022 08:25 am

    A private for-profit company is going to embark on a project which takes

    Wine production, and by that I mean _good_ wine production (not what most English speakers consider wine these days) is pretty much just that.

    In Spain we have this saying that one sets a winery so his descendants make profit from it. Vines take quite a long time to get mature enough to produce top tier grapes. Before that point they kind of suck. If I plant vines today will be dead before they start producing their A grapes.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken


    Good comparison. I live in Soutwest Michigan, and the soil, hills, and
    weather off of Lake Michigan is ideal for growing standard grapes and wine grapes. One small town near me has close to 12 wineries in it's proximity. The beer brewers are growing hops here as well, and there are tour bus
    services that drive over from Chicago to perform "grape and grain" tours.

    When my parents bought their house, there were already Conchord grapes on the property. The previous renter was not a farmer, and let the grapes grow out
    of control. My father worked a full time factory job, and farmed part of our land and his parent's land after work. The orchards and grapes were all bulldozed away, and I would spend my afternoons digging and pulling steel
    fence posts that were left over. We did produce one barrel of wine before getting rid of them. Conchord grapes are better suited for grape juice, so
    the wine did not turn out well.

    Another neighbor planned to grow grapes, and bought some vine chutes from France. He must not have read up on what needs to be done, because he
    directly planted them. When the first settlers brought European grapes to
    the US, they would die during the first season. An insect species native to t he US would devour the roots. The grapes native to the US did not suffer
    from these bugs. The trick was to raise native species, then graft the European species to their roots or stalks. A friend from school found out
    some of the hilly sandy land that wouldn't grow corn or beans well was
    perfect for grapes. He owns a winery, but his prime income is selling grapes and juices to other wineries.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to esc on Wed Aug 10 21:11:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Arelor on Tue Aug 09 2022 08:06 pm

    In Spain we have this saying that one sets a winery so his descendants make a profit from it. Vines take quite a long time to get mature enoug to produce top tier grapes. Before that point they kind of suck. If I plant vines today, I will be dead before they start producing their A grapes.

    In California we say "Opening a winery is a great way to take a large fortun

    In SW Michigan it is opening a micro brewery. Up the road from someone purchased a plot of land overlooking a small lake, and built a brwery and tasting room. I heard he invested $4 million. His brew master was a wine making dropout which foundbeer making was less season dependent. They
    offered a good product with a decent price, however they lacked the
    marketting skills and their tasting room was on the edge of the grape an grains
    tour route. They sold it off to someone local who brought in a more local crowd and more promotion and live music on weekends. The neighbor had them shut down due to the township noise ordinance on weekends. They will
    continue tasting, but are planning on opening another tasting room in a place with friendlier neighbors. From the road, the music in not that loud. The lake reflects some sound though.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Moondog on Thu Aug 11 21:45:49 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Boraxman on Tue Aug 09 2022 01:44 pm

    Unless there's a board or shareholders, a company is a dictatorship. There are such things as benevolent dictators who provide a level of comfort and opportunity to make profits to their people. I agree being a complete despot will not bring in the talented people needed to maintain and improve a
    colony. As a colony grows it may appear to be less of a dictatorship, however in the end there will be someone who is either active or silent in the colony's affairs that is getting their piece of the action.


    This is the odd thing about Capitalism. People say it belongs in a Democratic Free Society, but Capitalist Companies are about as close to a Communistic syste as you can get today.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Arelor on Thu Aug 11 21:48:53 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to Boraxman on Tue Aug 09 2022 05:12 pm

    Wine production, and by that I mean _good_ wine production (not what most English speakers consider wine these days) is pretty much just that.

    In Spain we have this saying that one sets a winery so his descendants make a profit from it. Vines take quite a long time to get mature enough to produce top tier grapes. Before that point they kind of suck. If I plant vines today, I will be dead before they start producing their A grapes.

    --

    That is a pretty specific small scale case, where the goal is to benefit your descendants. Nevertheless we often see later generations screwing it up.

    Terraforming a planet is of a vastly different scale.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Boraxman on Thu Aug 11 17:16:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Moondog on Thu Aug 11 2022 09:45 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Boraxman on Tue Aug 09 2022 01:44 pm

    Unless there's a board or shareholders, a company is a dictatorship. The are such things as benevolent dictators who provide a level of comfort an opportunity to make profits to their people. I agree being a complete despot will not bring in the talented people needed to maintain and impro a
    colony. As a colony grows it may appear to be less of a dictatorship, however in the end there will be someone who is either active or silent i the colony's affairs that is getting their piece of the action.


    This is the odd thing about Capitalism. People say it belongs in a Democrat

    In the case of China, their social system is communist, but their economic system is hybrid capitalism. Companies are allowed to act as a free enterprise, however the government is a silent partner that shaves their
    share no matter how well you do.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to Gamgee on Tue Aug 16 13:06:11 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Ogg on Fri Jul 22 2022 07:46 am

    Ogg wrote to MRO <=-

    ** On Thursday 21.07.22 - 15:30, MRO wrote to Ogg:

    also the moon landing was faked.

    It is interesting that there hasn't been one successful
    subsequent successful landing on the near side (even unmanned)
    since the Apollo 11 event.

    Well, you mean besides the Apollo 12, Apollo 14, Apollo 15, Apollo 16,
    and Apollo 17 missions (all manned)? Or were those "faked" too?

    He did say "near side".
    --
    digital man (rob)

    Breaking Bad quote #38:
    Don't drink and drive, but when you do, call Saul.
    Norco, CA WX: 93.8F, 30.0% humidity, 5 mph S wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
    ---
    Synchronet Vertrauen Home of Synchronet [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to Belly on Tue Aug 16 13:06:48 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Belly to Ogg on Fri Jul 22 2022 06:17 pm

    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Ogg to MRO on Thu Jul 21 2022 07:55 pm

    It is interesting that there hasn't been one successful
    subsequent successful landing on the near side (even unmanned)
    since the Apollo 11 event. All it takes is ONE successful
    unmanned landing by a 3rd-party or unbiased country/enterprise
    to visit the original landing area. It's almost like every
    attemp has been sabotaged to fail.

    What are you smoking? No landings since Apollo 11? Seriously?

    He did say "near side".
    --
    digital man (rob)

    Sling Blade quote #3:
    Karl (re: killing Doyle): That second one just plum near cut his head in two. Norco, CA WX: 93.8F, 30.0% humidity, 5 mph S wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
    ---
    Synchronet Vertrauen Home of Synchronet [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Digital Man on Tue Aug 16 15:18:00 2022
    Digital Man wrote to Gamgee <=-

    ** On Thursday 21.07.22 - 15:30, MRO wrote to Ogg:

    also the moon landing was faked.

    It is interesting that there hasn't been one successful
    subsequent successful landing on the near side (even unmanned)
    since the Apollo 11 event.

    Well, you mean besides the Apollo 12, Apollo 14, Apollo 15, Apollo 16,
    and Apollo 17 missions (all manned)? Or were those "faked" too?

    He did say "near side".

    Yes.... <confused look> All manned and unmanned landings (except for
    maybe one Chinese in 2019-ish) have been on the near side.



    ... Gone crazy, be back later, please leave message.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Digital Man on Tue Aug 16 15:53:06 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Digital Man to MRO on Tue Aug 16 2022 01:14 pm

    Just because *you* don't understand how it was possible and accomplished doesn't make it impossible. It wasn't impossible and we did it.

    I think it's a little weird that people think we didn't and there was a conspiracy to fake it, and kept secret for this long. I've heard some people say Russia was watching, and they would have noticed if we didn't make it to the moon. Surely they would have made a big deal out of it if we hadn't made it.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Digital Man@VERT to Gamgee on Tue Aug 16 17:18:49 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Digital Man on Tue Aug 16 2022 03:18 pm

    Digital Man wrote to Gamgee <=-

    ** On Thursday 21.07.22 - 15:30, MRO wrote to Ogg:

    also the moon landing was faked.

    It is interesting that there hasn't been one successful
    subsequent successful landing on the near side (even unmanned)
    since the Apollo 11 event.

    Well, you mean besides the Apollo 12, Apollo 14, Apollo 15, Apollo 16, and Apollo 17 missions (all manned)? Or were those "faked" too?

    He did say "near side".

    Yes.... <confused look> All manned and unmanned landings (except for
    maybe one Chinese in 2019-ish) have been on the near side.

    I didn't know that. I thought there was some significance to the specificity of "near side". Moon landings are clearly something I know very little about. But they did happen. :-)
    --
    digital man (rob)

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #34:
    The back-up synchro.net nameserver and CVS repository is hosted by Deuce
    Norco, CA WX: 92.6F, 24.0% humidity, 15 mph SSE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs ---
    Synchronet Vertrauen Home of Synchronet [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to Nightfox on Tue Aug 16 17:19:38 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Digital Man on Tue Aug 16 2022 03:53 pm

    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Digital Man to MRO on Tue Aug 16 2022 01:14 pm

    Just because *you* don't understand how it was possible and accomplished doesn't make it impossible. It wasn't impossible and we did it.

    I think it's a little weird that people think we didn't and there was a conspiracy to fake it, and kept secret for this long. I've heard some people say Russia was watching, and they would have noticed if we didn't make it to the moon. Surely they would have made a big deal out of it if we hadn't made it.

    Yup. And the thousands of Americans that were involved in these massive projects would have made a big deal too.
    --
    digital man (rob)

    Breaking Bad quote #33:
    This guy [Gale], it's like scarface had sex with Mr. Rogers. - Hank Schrader Norco, CA WX: 92.6F, 24.0% humidity, 15 mph SSE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs ---
    Synchronet Vertrauen Home of Synchronet [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Digital Man on Tue Aug 16 21:43:00 2022
    Digital Man wrote to Gamgee <=-

    It is interesting that there hasn't been one successful
    subsequent successful landing on the near side (even unmanned)
    since the Apollo 11 event.

    Well, you mean besides the Apollo 12, Apollo 14, Apollo 15, Apollo 16, and Apollo 17 missions (all manned)? Or were those "faked" too?

    He did say "near side".

    Yes.... <confused look> All manned and unmanned landings (except for
    maybe one Chinese in 2019-ish) have been on the near side.

    I didn't know that. I thought there was some significance to the specificity of "near side". Moon landings are clearly something I
    know very little about. But they did happen. :-)

    Indeed they did! Yes, the "near side" is the part we can see from
    Earth, it's always lit by the sun (moon doesn't spin in relation to
    Earth). The other side of the moon is always dark (and cold) and never
    sees the light of the sun. It would be very difficult to see you on the
    Dark Side of the Moon, regardless of Pink Floyd's promise... ;-)



    ... If it weren't for Edison we'd be using computers by candlelight
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Digital Man on Tue Aug 16 23:10:00 2022
    Yup. And the thousands of Americans that were involved in these massive projects would have made a big deal too.

    That's the biggest problem with conspiracy theories. There would need to be reams of people all colluding with one another to keep a secret this big.

    How would they find people to agree to do this? How would they vet these people? How would they conduct interviews and keep this massive secret under wraps?

    The inability of humans to keep secrets is all the evidence anyone needs to debunk conspiracy theories.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Nightfox on Wed Aug 17 19:41:41 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Digital Man on Tue Aug 16 2022 03:53 pm

    I think it's a little weird that people think we didn't and there was a conspiracy to fake it, and kept secret for this long. I've heard some people say Russia was watching, and they would have noticed if we didn't make it to the moon. Surely they would have made a big deal out of it if we hadn't made it.

    Nightfox

    The Russians were watching, and further to this, contacted the USA to congratulate them on their achievement.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From DaiTengu@VERT/ENSEMBLE to Gamgee on Wed Aug 17 10:33:50 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Digital Man on Tue Aug 16 2022 09:43 pm

    Indeed they did! Yes, the "near side" is the part we can see from
    Earth, it's always lit by the sun (moon doesn't spin in relation to Earth). The other side of the moon is always dark (and cold) and never sees the light of the sun. It would be very difficult to see you on the Dark Side of the Moon, regardless of Pink Floyd's promise... ;-)

    That's not true. at all.

    The moon has phases as it orbits earth, in which only part of the near side of the moon is lit, and part of the far side of the moon is lit. during a new moon, the far side of the moon is lit, and the near side is not.

    Same with a solar eclipse.

    DaiTengu

    ... Average is as close to the bottom as it is to the top.

    ---
    Synchronet War Ensemble BBS - The sport is war, total war - warensemble.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Gamgee on Wed Aug 17 09:23:55 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Digital Man on Tue Aug 16 2022 09:43 pm

    Earth). The other side of the moon is always dark (and cold) and never sees the light of the sun.

    Never sees the light of the sun? Wouldn't the far side of the moon get light from the sun during a solar eclipse (or other times when the moon is anywhere between the earth and the sun)?

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Ogg@VERT/CAPCITY2 to Gamgee on Wed Aug 17 07:37:00 2022
    Hello Gamgee!

    ** On Tuesday 16.08.22 - 21:43, Gamgee wrote to Digital Man:

    [..] The other side of the moon is always dark (and cold) and never
    sees the light of the sun.

    Only true during a full moon.

    --- OpenXP 5.0.51
    * Origin: Ogg's Dovenet Point (723:320/1.9)
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From Belly@VERT/BRAZINET to Digital Man on Wed Aug 17 13:34:55 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Digital Man to Belly on Tue Aug 16 2022 01:06 pm

    What are you smoking? No landings since Apollo 11? Seriously?

    He did say "near side".

    What about Apollo 12, Apollo 14, Apollo 15, Apollo 16, Apollo 17, Chang'e 3, and Chang'e 5? Did those not count? Chang'e 5 even lifted off and returned samples.

    o
    (O)
    BeLLy

    ---
    Synchronet bbs.brazi.net www.brazi.net WARNING: May contain nuts
  • From Belly@VERT/BRAZINET to Gamgee on Wed Aug 17 13:36:01 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Digital Man on Tue Aug 16 2022 03:18 pm

    Yes.... <confused look> All manned and unmanned landings (except for
    maybe one Chinese in 2019-ish) have been on the near side.

    Absolutely. That one was Chang'e 4.

    o
    (O)
    BeLLy

    ---
    Synchronet bbs.brazi.net www.brazi.net WARNING: May contain nuts
  • From Belly@VERT/BRAZINET to Gamgee on Wed Aug 17 13:39:34 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Digital Man on Tue Aug 16 2022 09:43 pm

    Indeed they did! Yes, the "near side" is the part we can see from
    Earth, it's always lit by the sun (moon doesn't spin in relation to
    Earth). The other side of the moon is always dark (and cold) and never sees the light of the sun. It would be very difficult to see you on the Dark Side of the Moon, regardless of Pink Floyd's promise... ;-)

    No, no, no! There is no 'dark side' of the Moon. Just a near and far side. The Moon is tidally locked to Earth, so the same side always faces us, but the far side gets just as much sunlight as the near side does, as it orbits Earth. One might even argue that the far side gets MORE sunlight, since it is never eclipsed by Earth, as occasionally happens to the near side.

    o
    (O)
    BeLLy

    ---
    Synchronet bbs.brazi.net www.brazi.net WARNING: May contain nuts
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to DaiTengu on Wed Aug 17 14:43:00 2022
    DaiTengu wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Indeed they did! Yes, the "near side" is the part we can see from
    Earth, it's always lit by the sun (moon doesn't spin in relation to Earth). The other side of the moon is always dark (and cold) and never sees the light of the sun. It would be very difficult to see you on the Dark Side of the Moon, regardless of Pink Floyd's promise... ;-)

    That's not true. at all.

    The moon has phases as it orbits earth, in which only part of
    the near side of the moon is lit, and part of the far side of the
    moon is lit. during a new moon, the far side of the moon is lit,
    and the near side is not.

    You're absolutely right, not sure where my mind was when I wrote that...
    It would be correct to say though, that we never can see the "far side"
    of the moon from Earth. Thanks for correcting that.



    ... Gone crazy, be back later, please leave message.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Nightfox on Wed Aug 17 14:44:00 2022
    Nightfox wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Earth). The other side of the moon is always dark (and cold) and never sees the light of the sun.

    Never sees the light of the sun? Wouldn't the far side of the
    moon get light from the sun during a solar eclipse (or other
    times when the moon is anywhere between the earth and the sun)?

    Yes, absolutely. My brain was malfunctioning there for a minute. ;-)



    ... Gone crazy, be back later, please leave message.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Belly on Wed Aug 17 14:46:00 2022
    Belly wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Indeed they did! Yes, the "near side" is the part we can see from
    Earth, it's always lit by the sun (moon doesn't spin in relation to
    Earth). The other side of the moon is always dark (and cold) and never
    sees the light of the sun. It would be very difficult to see you on the Dark Side of the Moon, regardless of Pink Floyd's promise... ;-)

    No, no, no! There is no 'dark side' of the Moon. Just a near and
    far side. The Moon is tidally locked to Earth, so the same side
    always faces us, but the far side gets just as much sunlight as
    the near side does, as it orbits Earth. One might even argue that
    the far side gets MORE sunlight, since it is never eclipsed by
    Earth, as occasionally happens to the near side.

    Yes, agreed completely. I may have been listening to Pink Floyd when I
    wrote that, and all reason left me for a bit... ;-)



    ... Gone crazy, be back later, please leave message.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Gamgee on Fri Aug 19 23:12:30 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to MRO on Fri Aug 19 2022 08:32 pm

    there's tons of evidence.

    And yet..... you can't provide any.

    We all know it's enough to just say there's evidence. His philosophy is you can Google it yourself.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Tracker1@VERT/TRN to DaiTengu on Sun Aug 21 21:17:23 2022
    On 8/17/22 08:33, DaiTengu wrote:
    That's not true. at all.

    The moon has phases as it orbits earth, in which only part of the
    near side of the moon is lit, and part of the far side of the moon is
    lit. during a new moon, the far side of the moon is lit, and the near
    side is not.

    Same with a solar eclipse.

    The part that is shown in a "full moon" is the only part that ever gets sunlight... the moon rotates on its own access at the same rate it
    travels around the earth. When you see part of the moon in darkness,
    it's the Earth's shadow on the moon.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com
    ---
    Synchronet Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com
  • From Tracker1@VERT/TRN to Tracker1 on Sun Aug 21 21:19:07 2022
    On 8/21/22 21:17, Tracker1 wrote:
    On 8/17/22 08:33, DaiTengu wrote:
    That's not true. at all.

    The moon has phases as it orbits earth, in which only part of the
    near side of the moon is lit, and part of the far side of the moon is
    lit. during a new moon, the far side of the moon is lit, and the near side is not.

    Same with a solar eclipse.

    The part that is shown in a "full moon" is the only part that ever gets sunlight... the moon rotates on its own access at the same rate it
    travels around the earth. When you see part of the moon in darkness,
    it's the Earth's shadow on the moon.

    NM... I was mixing near/far with solar position.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com
    ---
    Synchronet Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com
  • From DaiTengu@VERT/ENSEMBLE to Tracker1 on Mon Aug 22 09:29:01 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Tracker1 to DaiTengu on Sun Aug 21 2022 09:17 pm

    The part that is shown in a "full moon" is the only part that ever gets sunlight... the moon rotates on its own access at the same rate it travels around the earth. When you see part of the moon in darkness,
    it's the Earth's shadow on the moon.

    What?

    When we have a "new moon" the other side of the moon is getting sunlight. the whole moon gets lit up over the course of a month, but because it's tidally locked we only see one side of it.

    How would moon phases work if only the front side of the moon were getting lit up?

    DaiTengu

    ... Nationalise crime, and make sure it doesn't pay.

    ---
    Synchronet War Ensemble BBS - The sport is war, total war - warensemble.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Tracker1 on Mon Aug 22 08:36:03 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Tracker1 to DaiTengu on Sun Aug 21 2022 09:17 pm

    the moon rotates on its own access

    I think you mean axis?

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Ogg@VERT/CAPCITY2 to Tracker1 on Mon Aug 22 07:47:00 2022
    Hello Tracker1!

    ** On Sunday 21.08.22 - 21:17, Tracker1 wrote to DaiTengu:

    .. When you see part of the moon in darkness, it's the
    Earth's shadow on the moon.

    Wrong.

    The shadow is due to the sun, not the earth. The only time the
    earth's shadow hits the moon is during a lunar eclipse.

    --- OpenXP 5.0.51
    * Origin: Ogg's Dovenet Point (723:320/1.9)
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From Digital Man@VERT to Tracker1 on Mon Aug 22 11:59:29 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Tracker1 to DaiTengu on Sun Aug 21 2022 09:17 pm

    On 8/17/22 08:33, DaiTengu wrote:
    That's not true. at all.

    The moon has phases as it orbits earth, in which only part of the
    near side of the moon is lit, and part of the far side of the moon is lit. during a new moon, the far side of the moon is lit, and the near side is not.

    Same with a solar eclipse.

    The part that is shown in a "full moon" is the only part that ever gets sunlight... the moon rotates on its own access at the same rate it
    travels around the earth. When you see part of the moon in darkness,
    it's the Earth's shadow on the moon.

    https://www.yalescientific.org/2015/05/mythbusters-is-there-really-a-dark-side-of-the-moon/
    --
    digital man (rob)

    Breaking Bad quote #30:
    Damn, chick's got an ass like an onion - makes me want to cry. - Hank Schrader Norco, CA WX: 80.0F, 64.0% humidity, 5 mph SSW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs ---
    Synchronet Vertrauen Home of Synchronet [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Digital Man on Mon Aug 22 21:00:00 2022
    Digital Man wrote to MRO <=-

    you might find out in your life time or maybe your grandchildren will find out that something fishy happend there and it was probably faked entirely or partially. there's too many odd occurances that don't add up.

    I won't be holding my breath.

    More likely, in my life time, we'll return to the moon again and
    locate and broadcast many of the artifacts we left behind the
    last time we were there.

    Well, you don't have to wait long. The Artemis I flight is scheduled
    for about a week from now. That is unmanned, and will orbit the moon,
    and return (a 42 day mission). Then, in May 2024, a manned flight
    (Artemis II) will do the same (a 10 day mission). Sometime in 2025, a 4-person crew (Artemis III) will land 2 people (one of them a woman) on
    the surface of the moon, and return (a 30 day mission).

    Since MRO likely doesn't believe this, here are some links:

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

    https://www.nasa.gov/specials/artemis/

    I know.... they're probably all faked websites. ;-)



    ... Pros are those who do their jobs well, even when they don't feel like it. --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Dr. What@VERT/OLDSCH to Ogg on Tue Aug 23 09:13:00 2022
    Ogg wrote to Tracker1 <=-

    The shadow is due to the sun, not the earth. The only time the
    earth's shadow hits the moon is during a lunar eclipse.

    Um... No. I wonder if out school systems are worse than I expect now.

    By the time I was 5 (keep in mind that I was always interested in space exploration), I understood how all this worked.

    Sun -> Earth -> Moon - in this configuration, depending on where the moon is in relation to the Earth, the moon will move from waxing crescent to full to waning crescent to New. This is due to the Earth blocking the sunlight. So the shadow on the Moon is caused by the Earth.

    Sun -> Moon -> Earth - in this configuration, depdending on where the moon is in relation to the Earth, is where we get eclipses. The moon, blocks the light from the Sun. In this case, she Moon is casting a shadow on the Earth.


    ... Insanity is just a state of mind.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Sent from the Old School BBS
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to esc on Tue Aug 23 15:04:09 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Digital Man on Tue Aug 16 2022 11:10 pm

    Yup. And the thousands of Americans that were involved in these massive projects would have made a big deal too.

    That's the biggest problem with conspiracy theories. There would need to be reams o

    How would they find people to agree to do this? How would they vet these people? Ho

    The inability of humans to keep secrets is all the evidence anyone needs to debunk

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M

    Actually, the issue with conspiracy theories is that they are usually non-falsable.
    ie. there is no easy way to prove they are wrong.

    I can formulate the hipothesis that the Spanish Socialist Party promised the ETA
    terrorist organization they would have political representation if the Socialist Party
    won the next election, and that is the reason why ETA announced they were laying down
    arms just before the election (to help the Socialists make it). It is not an unreasonable theory and laymen cannot prove the hipothesis wrong easily. I cannot
    prove it right either, but when formulated it may cast doubts on events.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Nightfox on Tue Aug 23 15:47:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to MRO on Tue Aug 23 2022 08:54 am

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: MRO to DaiTengu on Mon Aug 22 2022 08:46 pm

    so why havent we had a man on the moon since the 70s? makes no sense.

    I don't think we've had a real need to go back to the moon. Makes sense to

    if we had the ability we would be up there playing around all the time.

    Why? What would we need to be doing on the moon all the time?

    Nightfox

    Other than the fact we could go to the moon, we could not sustain a colony there at that time. We spent billions of dollars, and discovered we have
    more to learn before we could place even a short term colony in place. Moon dust over an extended period of time would act as microscopic razor blades, w earing away at fabrics, damaging seals, and would be detrimental if inhaled
    in larger quantities. In the long run Mars would be less harsh to live on.


    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Moondog on Tue Aug 23 16:18:27 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Nightfox on Tue Aug 23 2022 03:47 pm

    Other than the fact we could go to the moon, we could not sustain a colony there at that time. We spent billions of dollars, and discovered we have more to learn before we could place even a short term colony in place. Moon dust over an extended period of time would act as microscopic razor blades, w earing away at fabrics, damaging seals, and would be detrimental if inhaled in larger quantities. In the long run Mars would be less harsh to live on.

    I think we're far from needing a colony on another planet right now, and even being able to get to the moon or Mars, I'm not sure we have the technology to make the environment more livable and safe for us.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Dr. What on Wed Aug 24 22:07:27 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Dr. What to Ogg on Tue Aug 23 2022 09:13 am

    The shadow is due to the sun, not the earth. The only time the
    earth's shadow hits the moon is during a lunar eclipse.

    Um... No. I wonder if out school systems are worse than I expect now.

    By the time I was 5 (keep in mind that I was always interested in space exploration), I understood how all this worked.

    Sun -> Earth -> Moon - in this configuration, depending on where the moon is in relation to the Earth, the moon will move from waxing crescent to full to waning crescent to New. This is due to the Earth blocking the sunlight. So the shadow on the Moon is caused by the Earth.

    Sun -> Moon -> Earth - in this configuration, depdending on where the moon is in relation to the Earth, is where we get eclipses. The moon, blocks the light from the Sun. In this case, she Moon is casting a shadow on the Earth.


    Ironic. The person complaining about the school system get basic science wrong.

    Am I reading this right? Are you seriously suggesting that when the moon is almost between the Earth and the Sun, and you only see a sliver, that it is the Earth shadow, which somehow is pointing TOWARDS the sun which makes most of the moon dark?

    You've never seen or heard of a Lunar eclipse?

    The level of ignorance displayed by people here is astonishing.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Dr. What@VERT/CFBBS to Nightfox on Wed Aug 24 08:31:00 2022
    Nightfox wrote to MRO <=-

    Why? What would we need to be doing on the moon all the time?

    Mining. The moon is rich in resources.
    Ore processing. No atmosphere makes solar energy actually useful.
    Low-G pharmacuticals. Gravity makes it harder to make some drugs.
    And more.

    The issue still is the amount of resources it takes to get off Earth and they need to figure out how to get the processed materials back on Earth (without breaking them).


    ... I was on a roll, till I slipped on the butter.
    ___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

    --- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
    * Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Nightfox on Wed Aug 24 10:27:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Moondog on Tue Aug 23 2022 04:18 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Nightfox on Tue Aug 23 2022 03:47 pm

    Other than the fact we could go to the moon, we could not sustain a col there at that time. We spent billions of dollars, and discovered we hav more to learn before we could place even a short term colony in place. Moon dust over an extended period of time would act as microscopic razo blades, w earing away at fabrics, damaging seals, and would be detrimen if inhaled in larger quantities. In the long run Mars would be less har to live on.

    I think we're far from needing a colony on another planet right now, and eve

    Nightfox


    The Space Race was essential to the Cold War. In 12 years of the USSR
    putting a satllite in space, the US put a man on the mmon and repeated it several times. True, we did not need a colony. The only motive to do it
    back then is if the Soviets put a man there, and to flex our econmic and techn ologicial might. Most of studies we need to perform in microgravity can be done from the ISS.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Ogg@VERT/CAPCITY2 to Dr. What on Tue Aug 23 19:16:00 2022
    Hello Dr. What!

    ** On Tuesday 23.08.22 - 09:13, Dr. What wrote to Ogg:

    ... So the shadow on the Moon is caused by the Earth.

    A popular misconception. You seem to be among those popular.

    ;)


    --- OpenXP 5.0.51
    * Origin: Ogg's Dovenet Point (723:320/1.9)
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to DaiTengu on Wed Aug 24 12:24:48 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: DaiTengu to MRO on Wed Aug 24 2022 01:15 pm

    The Apollo missions followed the standard "Fast, Cheap, Good: Pick 2" rule. They were done fast and .. somewhat good, at great expense in order to beat Russia. The missions were "good enough" to get people to the moon and back safely a handful of times, but a lot of things weren't documented, a lot of parts were hacked together or custom fit for each mission. Thousands and thousands of parts were custom built in a very compartmentalized manner. many of the people who built those parts are long dead, and didn't document the process very well, if at all. The Apollo missions were incredibly expensive. the government wanted to stop throwing so much money at it, and NASA wanted to move on to other projects. In hindsight, after the issues both Apollo 13 and 15 had, we were incredibly lucky no one was killed.

    Yes, I remember hearing part of a speech from John F. Kennedy in the early 1960s where he said he'd like the US to put a man on the moon by the end of the 1960s; I imagine NASA probably found themselves in a time crunch and were probably doing their best to accomplish that, to finally do it in 1969.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Dr. What@VERT/CFBBS to Boraxman on Thu Aug 25 07:41:00 2022
    Boraxman wrote to Dr. What <=-

    Ironic. The person complaining about the school system get basic
    science wrong.

    It's only ironic to someone who can't even do a simple experiment with a light bulb and a basketball.

    Am I reading this right?

    No. I can assure you that you aren't since you have demonstrated over many messages that you are incapable of reading something you disagree with and actually comprehending the message.


    ... Today is cancelled due to lack of interest!
    ___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

    --- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
    * Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi
  • From faeempress@VERT/KUMPUTE to Gamgee on Thu Aug 25 11:28:00 2022
    (Artemis II) will do the same (a 10 day mission). Sometime in 2025, a 4-person crew (Artemis III) will land 2 people (one of them a woman) on
    First woman on the moon! Awesome! I love it!



    ... Great minds think alike; small minds run together

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: Kumpute Nation BBS
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to DaiTengu on Thu Aug 25 14:32:00 2022
    DaiTengu wrote to MRO <=-

    i'm not into conspiracies. i just see a lot of holes in information and odd things. you are blindly putting faith, believing people took that junk, went to the moon, landed and did all that junk and made it back alive. and nasa people were on camera saying we could not do it again if we wanted to.

    Context matters. We could not do it again with the same
    equipment if we wanted to, because we don't have the capability
    to recreate that equipment. Things were poorly documented. For
    example, The hundreds holes for the injector plate on the F-1
    rocket engine were hand-drilled. Many bits and pieces were
    assembled like that, and the people that have the knowledge to
    recreate those pieces are either long dead, or have forgotten
    most of it. reverse engineering 50+ year old technology to
    recreate it is a step backwards. That said, a group of young
    NASA engineers did reverse engineer the F-1 engine about 10 years
    ago. That's where they found the hand-drilled injector plates.

    Rocket technology has advanced a lot since then. Much more
    complex, multi-stage combustion chambers provide a greater thrust-to-weight ratio. The Saturn V was powered by 5 F1 engines, providing 7.5 million pounds of thrust at sea level,

    The SLS that's scheduled to launch monday is powered by 4 RS-254
    engines, along with the solid rocket boosters, that give it 8.8
    million pounds of thrust at takeoff. The SLS can carry over 50%
    more weight to the moon that the Saturn V could, all while being
    smaller and lighter. The price tag on the SLS's full develpment
    is about 1/2 of what we spent on development of the Saturn V,
    ($23 billion vs $51.8 billion adjusted for inflation).

    When it comes down to it, you're arguing semantics. The evidence
    that we went to the moon, landed people there and brought them
    home is overwhelming. The "holes in information" and "odd
    things" have logical, reasonable explanations. Of course you'll
    say they aren't "reasonable" because you simply don't want to
    believe it. You want to believe that there's been a 50 year
    conspiracy, and that governments and space agencies all over the
    world have kept the secret that no one landed on the moon. That
    thousands and thousands of people who worked on these projects
    (and still work on these projects) all over the world kept that
    secret. That, somehow, is far more believable to you.

    No, you're not a conspiracy theorist at all.

    Well written. I think it's pretty obvious to all of us participating in
    this discussion, that 'MRO' is indeed a conspiracy nut-job, and that
    he's probably laughing his ass off as he trolls everybody to drag this
    out longer.

    It's not possible for a (semi) mature adult to be as stupid as he is attempting to pass himself off as. He won't listen and we're wasting
    our time trying to convince him of anything. Suggest we all stop
    feeding the troll...



    ... Ignorance can be cured. Stupid is forever.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From DaiTengu@VERT/ENSEMBLE to Gamgee on Thu Aug 25 16:12:34 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to DaiTengu on Thu Aug 25 2022 02:32 pm

    Well written. I think it's pretty obvious to all of us participating in this discussion, that 'MRO' is indeed a conspiracy nut-job, and that
    he's probably laughing his ass off as he trolls everybody to drag this out longer.

    The thought that he was trolling us has crossed my mind as I was writing out paragraphs worth of information, but I got to flex a few brain muscles I hadn't used in awhile, so it felt nice.

    It's not possible for a (semi) mature adult to be as stupid as he is attempting to pass himself off as. He won't listen and we're wasting
    our time trying to convince him of anything. Suggest we all stop
    feeding the troll...

    Oh it is. I've had conversations with actual adult humans who really believe the earth is flat. Who believe that space doesn't exist, and no matter what information I pepper them with, they claim it's either "faked" or "done some other way" or that I'm "lying".

    I recently did a youtube video where I reacted to someone claiming the earth was flat because of ... radio waves.

    https://youtu.be/jZzLBwOFi0E

    DaiTengu

    ... I must follow them. I am their leader.

    ---
    Synchronet War Ensemble BBS - The sport is war, total war - warensemble.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Gamgee on Thu Aug 25 14:21:42 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to DaiTengu on Thu Aug 25 2022 02:32 pm

    It's not possible for a (semi) mature adult to be as stupid as he is attempting to pass himself off as. He won't listen and we're wasting
    our time trying to convince him of anything. Suggest we all stop
    feeding the troll...

    I don't think I've ever seen anyone convince MRO of anything. The longer you try to debate with him, the higher the chances of him going off and calling you a retard, autistic, or similar. Then he'll likely say something like he's tired of talking about it and wants to move on.

    He has talked about this fake moon landing conspiracy before, and it's all the same stuff again this time. I think it has dragged out longer this time than last time.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to DaiTengu on Thu Aug 25 15:05:56 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: DaiTengu to Gamgee on Thu Aug 25 2022 04:12 pm

    I recently did a youtube video where I reacted to someone claiming the earth was flat because of ... radio waves.

    https://youtu.be/jZzLBwOFi0E

    People who come up with that kind of reasoning seem to have the thinking that if they don't understand something, then it must not be true, and their misunderstanding and misinterpretation of reality leads them to believe what they believe.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to DaiTengu on Thu Aug 25 21:06:00 2022
    DaiTengu wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Well written. I think it's pretty obvious to all of us participating in this discussion, that 'MRO' is indeed a conspiracy nut-job, and that
    he's probably laughing his ass off as he trolls everybody to drag this
    out longer.

    The thought that he was trolling us has crossed my mind as I was
    writing out paragraphs worth of information, but I got to flex a
    few brain muscles I hadn't used in awhile, so it felt nice.

    Understood, and appreciated.

    It's not possible for a (semi) mature adult to be as stupid as he is attempting to pass himself off as. He won't listen and we're wasting
    our time trying to convince him of anything. Suggest we all stop
    feeding the troll...

    Oh it is. I've had conversations with actual adult humans who
    really believe the earth is flat. Who believe that space doesn't
    exist, and no matter what information I pepper them with, they
    claim it's either "faked" or "done some other way" or that I'm
    "lying".

    I recently did a youtube video where I reacted to someone
    claiming the earth was flat because of ... radio waves.

    https://youtu.be/jZzLBwOFi0E

    Wow. Staggering. Just can't really comprehend that somebody is
    actually that stupid and can still breathe.

    Thanks. ;-)



    ... Gone crazy, be back later, please leave message.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Nightfox on Thu Aug 25 21:07:00 2022
    Nightfox wrote to Gamgee <=-

    It's not possible for a (semi) mature adult to be as stupid as he is attempting to pass himself off as. He won't listen and we're wasting
    our time trying to convince him of anything. Suggest we all stop
    feeding the troll...

    I don't think I've ever seen anyone convince MRO of anything.
    The longer you try to debate with him, the higher the chances of
    him going off and calling you a retard, autistic, or similar.
    Then he'll likely say something like he's tired of talking about
    it and wants to move on.

    Yep, same thing I've seen from him.

    He has talked about this fake moon landing conspiracy before, and
    it's all the same stuff again this time. I think it has dragged
    out longer this time than last time.

    Probably so, there have been a few more people involved so he's had a
    harder time "convincing" anybody. LOL.



    ... Gone crazy, be back later, please leave message.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From DaiTengu@VERT/ENSEMBLE to Gamgee on Fri Aug 26 08:48:45 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to DaiTengu on Thu Aug 25 2022 09:06 pm

    I recently did a youtube video where I reacted to someone
    claiming the earth was flat because of ... radio waves.

    https://youtu.be/jZzLBwOFi0E

    Wow. Staggering. Just can't really comprehend that somebody is
    actually that stupid and can still breathe.

    There's a couple flat earthers that argued with me in the comments section. It was hilarious.

    DaiTengu

    ... Old fishermen never die, they just smell that way.

    ---
    Synchronet War Ensemble BBS - The sport is war, total war - warensemble.com
  • From DaiTengu@VERT/ENSEMBLE to Digital Man on Fri Aug 26 09:15:48 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Digital Man to MRO on Thu Aug 25 2022 11:58 pm



    The movie was based on the non-fiction book ("Lost Moon") written by the commander of the Apollo 13 mission and the major events in the film are undisputed facts. Going to and landing on the moon was not "easy" by any measurement. --

    "We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too"

    - John F Kennedy Sept 12. 1962

    DaiTengu

    ... If you don't go to people's funerals, they won't come to yours.

    ---
    Synchronet War Ensemble BBS - The sport is war, total war - warensemble.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to DaiTengu on Fri Aug 26 09:03:50 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: DaiTengu to Gamgee on Fri Aug 26 2022 08:48 am

    There's a couple flat earthers that argued with me in the comments section. It was hilarious.

    Several years ago, there was a guy on AgoraNet who asked what people thought about flat earth theory (he seemed to be a flat earther). Nobody else agreed, and he quickly stopped posting about it.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Jared@VERT/JUMPLEFT to DaiTengu on Fri Aug 26 09:12:15 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: DaiTengu to Gamgee on Thu Aug 25 2022 16:12:34

    I recently did a youtube video where I reacted to someone claiming the earth was flat because of ... radio waves.

    *facepalm*

    Jared

    ---
    Synchronet It's just a jump to the left (and a step the right)...
  • From Hustler@VERT/DMINE to Nightfox on Mon Aug 29 07:41:26 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Gamgee on Thu Aug 25 2022 02:21 pm

    He has talked about this fake moon landing conspiracy before, and it's all the same stuff again this time. I think it has dragged out longer this time than last time.

    The thing is if you use a computer the technology all started with NASA and Appolo. So I guess we all use "fake" PC's. huh??

    ---
    Synchronet Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Hustler on Mon Aug 29 10:26:59 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Hustler to Nightfox on Mon Aug 29 2022 07:41 am

    He has talked about this fake moon landing conspiracy before, and
    it's all the same stuff again this time. I think it has dragged out
    longer this time than last time.

    The thing is if you use a computer the technology all started with NASA and Appolo. So I guess we all use "fake" PC's. huh??

    Huh? As far as I know, computer technology didn't start with NASA.. For modern computers, Alan Turing has been considered one of the first people to contribute ideas, with his Turing Machine. And I just checked online (as I don't remember all the details), and it looks like the first programmable computer was the 'Colossus', in 1943.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Nightfox on Thu Sep 1 00:18:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to MRO on Wed Aug 31 2022 08:41 am

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: MRO to DaiTengu on Wed Aug 31 2022 03:17 am

    i have just seen cut and paste stuff from people that are blind believe these people aren't fit to educate anybody.

    You seem to be repeating a lot of the same stuff I've heard from other peopl

    Nightfox

    I never put much faith in moon landing conspiricists. Even before History Channel and Natgeo existed, news show such as 60 minutes or dateline would int erview the conspiracy theory folks. Not sure why, but most of them lived in what looked like a scrap yard or a futue filming site for Hoarders, and they had built elaborate devices out of scrap materials to prove their hypothesis'.

    One such device was to prove the cameras used by the astronauts could not have
    been operable with the gloves the astronauts wore. The device was a
    plexiglas box witha rubber glove heavily wrapped in duct tape, and it used a hand operated bellows to extract the air from the box. Supposedly the duct tape covered glove would react the same way a real space glove would in a vacuum, and be too inflexible to push buttons or move levers. It all sounded plausible until a former NASA employee who owned an actual moon suit glove built his own vacuum box and used an actual NASA modified camera to debunk
    the debunker.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Irish_Monk@VERT/WARPED to Digital Man on Thu Sep 1 08:38:00 2022
    cost and risk associated. Instead, we've been sending robots to Mars and

    Isnt the Robot technology just amazing!! I have watched tons of youtube videos on Robots and AI and its almost scary a little bit... Really cool stuff though..

    |10I|02rish_|10M|02onk

    ... I think I am, therefore, I am... I think.
  • From DaiTengu@VERT/ENSEMBLE to Moondog on Thu Sep 1 10:04:08 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Nightfox on Thu Sep 01 2022 12:18 am

    a hand operated bellows to extract the air from the box. Supposedly the duct tape covered glove would react the same way a real space glove would in a vacuum, and be too inflexible to push buttons or move levers. It all sounded plausible until a former NASA employee who owned an actual moon suit glove built his own vacuum box and used an actual NASA modified camera to debunk the debunker.

    Yeah, the problem is that the conspiracy theorists won't watch that video, and they'll just go on believing what they want.

    They conviently ignore the mountains of evidence that refute their hypothesis, and will jump up and down, and shout loudly about the tiny little bit that does.

    DaiTengu

    ... Some men are discovered; others are found out.

    ---
    Synchronet War Ensemble BBS - The sport is war, total war - warensemble.com
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Nightfox on Thu Sep 1 16:39:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to MRO on Thu Sep 01 2022 08:53 am

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: MRO to Nightfox on Thu Sep 01 2022 03:55 am

    the only thing i cut and pasted was the list of technological advanceme that we had thanks to space exploration.

    DISPROVING your statement that there was no reason to go back.

    Yes, we can get technological advancements with space missions, but (as has

    Nightfox

    In order to learn and grow, one can only do so much while viewing from
    inside a cradle. Ships sit safely moored in harbors. That is not ships are for.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to Irish_Monk on Thu Sep 1 21:18:34 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Irish_Monk to Digital Man on Thu Sep 01 2022 08:38 am

    cost and risk associated. Instead, we've been sending robots to Mars and

    Isnt the Robot technology just amazing!! I have watched tons of youtube videos on Robots and AI and its almost scary a little bit... Really cool stuff though..

    It is. I actually work on the develpoment of a robot taxi for my occupation. Shit's getting real.
    --
    digital man (rob)

    Rush quote #51:
    Suddenly you were gone from all the lives you left your mark upon
    Norco, CA WX: 81.2F, 52.0% humidity, 0 mph ESE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs ---
    Synchronet Vertrauen Home of Synchronet [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From bex@VERT/CONCHAOS to faeempress on Thu Sep 1 21:14:00 2022
    faeempress said to Gamgee: <=-

    (Artemis II) will do the same (a 10 day mission). Sometime in 2025, a 4-person crew (Artemis III) will land 2 people (one of them a woman) on
    First woman on the moon! Awesome! I love it!

    Hooray! I knew we would get there eventually.


    -- Bex <3
    Friendship that insists upon agreement on all matters is not worth the name. Friendship to be real must ever sustain the weight of honest differences, however sharp they be. -Mahatma Gandhi
    -*- ASTG 1.8

    * Q-Blue 2.4 *

    ---
    Synchronet -=[ conchaos.synchro.net | ConstructiveChaos BBS ]=-
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Arelor on Fri Sep 2 00:05:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to MRO on Thu Sep 01 2022 12:03 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: MRO to Irish_Monk on Thu Sep 01 2022 08:22 am

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Irish_Monk to Digital Man on Thu Sep 01 2022 08:38 am

    cost and risk associated. Instead, we've been sending robots to M and

    Isnt the Robot technology just amazing!! I have watched tons of youtub videos on Robots and AI and its almost scary a little bit... Really co stuff though..

    that dog shaped robot is scarey as hell. the one that can shoot.
    that's going to be our terminators.
    ---
    Synchronet ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

    There is already a non-profit advocating for the permanent ban of robot sold think it is called "Stop Killer Robots" or something of the sort.

    I don't think they are going to have any success since we humans love to pro to kill humans faster. And automated machine for killing humans is the gover wet dream.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken


    There used to be a Discovery network TV program from 2007 caled Future
    Weapons, and they highlighted a tracked robot intended to carry an M-249 SAW o r a M24 rifle system. IIRC they took examples of the product to test in IRaq or Afghanistan without the rifle mounted, and ran into other porblems they didn't anticipate. Truck convoys run radio jammers to prevent IEDS form
    being remotely detonated. Between the jammers other RF sources, the tracked platform could not be reliably piloted without other sources of RF
    interfering with it.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Digital Man on Thu Sep 1 23:15:00 2022
    It is. I actually work on the develpoment of a robot taxi for my occupation. Shit's getting real.

    Really? Which one?

    I work in autonomy simulation. My company supports most of the major OEMs doing everything from basic ADAS to full autonomy. We're entering a pretty cool era. In fact I think in 20 years we'll think back in horror to the fact that all these people were hurtling around with tons of metal at 70mph while playing with their phones. It'll feel like the wild west.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Moondog on Thu Sep 1 23:17:00 2022
    There used to be a Discovery network TV program from 2007 caled Future Weapons, and they highlighted a tracked robot intended to carry an M-249 SAW o r a M24 rifle system. IIRC they took examples of the product to test in IRaq or Afghanistan without the rifle mounted, and ran into
    other porblems they didn't anticipate. Truck convoys run radio jammers
    to prevent IEDS form being remotely detonated. Between the jammers
    other RF sources, the tracked platform could not be reliably piloted without other sources of RF interfering with it.

    This is the problem with "leader follower" technology. Which is what a lot of folks in government seem to think we need to build. Ugh, don't get me started haha.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From Irish_Monk@VERT/WARPED to esc on Fri Sep 2 07:42:00 2022
    pretty cool era. In fact I think in 20 years we'll think back in horror
    to the fact that all these people were hurtling around with tons of
    metal at 70mph while playing with their phones. It'll feel like the wild west.

    You get passed only doing 70mph around here!! Hopefully that time comes soon. Will hopefully save a lot of lives.

    |10I|02rish_|10M|02onk

    ... Read messages, not taglines
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to bex on Fri Sep 2 08:42:00 2022
    bex wrote to Mro <=-

    Yes, that's how progress works. We didn't have the technology,
    knowledge,
    progress??? wake up and smell what you are shoveling

    Nice "Die Hard" But seriously, how do you think that science and technology progress? Ever heard of the phrase "standing on the
    shoulders of giants"?

    ___________________
    /| /| | |
    ||__|| | Please do |
    / O O\__ NOT |
    / \ feed the |
    / \ \ trolls |
    / _ \ \ ______________|
    / |\____\ \ ||
    / | | | |\____/ ||
    / \|_|_|/ \ __||
    / / \ |____| ||
    / | | /| | --|
    | | |// |____ --|
    * _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
    *-- _--\ _ \ // |
    / _ \\ _ // | /
    * / \_ /- | - | |
    * ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________



    ... So easy, a child could do it. Child sold separately.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to bex on Fri Sep 2 09:34:05 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: bex to Mro on Thu Sep 01 2022 08:42 pm

    [2] I do disagree that we don't have a reason to go back. Eventually, we will need to set up at least a base on the moon to make it easier to strike out, whether it is to Mars, one of Jupiter's moons, or to another solar system. We need to survey what's there and find a good place to

    I think it is a good goal to go to the moon. When I said I didn't think we had a reason to go back, I just meant within the last 50 years (in response to the conspiracy people asking why we haven't gone back yet). I don't think it has had much importance in the past 50 years, but I think it will have more importance and benefit in the future.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to bex on Fri Sep 2 08:58:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: bex to Mro on Thu Sep 01 2022 08:42 pm

    Mro said to Digital Man: <=-

    so apparently most people have been brainwashed
    [1] yes we did go to the moon in the 70s
    [2] there is NO reason to go back and it's too dangerous to try.

    It's strange that you have three points but only numbered two of them. I'm going to fix the numbering and giving my own thoughts:

    [1] Yes, we went to the moon. Multiple times. This is an established historical FACT, one that is documented including photos *and* videos.

    [2] I do disagree that we don't have a reason to go back. Eventually, we will need to set up at least a base on the moon to make it easier to strike out, whether it is to Mars, one of Jupiter's moons, or to another solar system. We need to survey what's there and find a good place to eventually build a foundation. We aren't talking about something that can be done in years, nor decades. We are talking about time in centuries, we should already be moving forward on this.

    [3] Yes, it is damned dangerous to strap a rocket to anything. You're talking about millions of tons of literal explosives. Hell, it's dangerous to put an airplane up into the sky, but we still put up hundreds per hour. Things that put us into (or above) the sky are filled with danger. It's a matter of mitigating the risk.


    -- Bex <3
    Walter, I love you, but sooner or later, you're going to have to realize
    the fact that you're a god damn moron.
    - The Dude, "The Big Lebowski"
    -*- ASTG 1.8

    * Q-Blue 2.4 *

    The word "propellant" is used for fuel. That is when it is properly metered and the burn rate is predictable. When something changes these parameters,
    it becomes an explosive.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to esc on Fri Sep 2 09:31:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Moondog on Thu Sep 01 2022 11:17 pm

    There used to be a Discovery network TV program from 2007 caled Future Weapons, and they highlighted a tracked robot intended to carry an M-24 SAW o r a M24 rifle system. IIRC they took examples of the product to test in IRaq or Afghanistan without the rifle mounted, and ran into other porblems they didn't anticipate. Truck convoys run radio jammers to prevent IEDS form being remotely detonated. Between the jammers other RF sources, the tracked platform could not be reliably piloted without other sources of RF interfering with it.

    This is the problem with "leader follower" technology. Which is what a lot o

    In the movies and video games the idea of autonomous weapons ranges from cool to horrifying. In reality I find it horrifying because the ways used to identify an enemy can be false positives. If your friend or foe
    identification system can be jammed or confused, or if you rely on visual clues, I hope the robot is smart enough to ask for help if it is not 100% certain. In the Ukraine, both sides share common hardware ranging from
    trucks to armor to fighter jets. The only way to knwo where the enemy is is know where your people aren't. As the enemy approaches, an enemy on the
    wrong side of the lines can be very dangerous. An armor unit that is ahead
    of it'sgoal may appear to be retreating enemies.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Irish_Monk on Fri Sep 2 09:49:52 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Irish_Monk to esc on Fri Sep 02 2022 07:42 am

    You get passed only doing 70mph around here!! Hopefully that time comes soon. Will hopefully save a lot of lives.

    Sometimes I'll be going 80mph on the highways here and there are occasionally people who will pass, and some that weave in and out of the traffic, just trying to get further ahead.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Digital Man@VERT to esc on Fri Sep 2 18:53:58 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Digital Man on Thu Sep 01 2022 11:15 pm

    It is. I actually work on the develpoment of a robot taxi for my occupation. Shit's getting real.

    Really? Which one?

    Yes, really, zoox.com :-)
    --
    digital man (rob)

    Sling Blade quote #16:
    Karl Childers (to Doyle, re: lawn mower blade): I aim to kill you with it. Mmm. Norco, CA WX: 92.2F, 40.0% humidity, 5 mph S wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
    ---
    Synchronet Vertrauen Home of Synchronet [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Moondog on Fri Sep 2 19:07:00 2022
    In the movies and video games the idea of autonomous weapons ranges from cool to horrifying. In reality I find it horrifying because the ways
    used to identify an enemy can be false positives. If your friend or foe identification system can be jammed or confused, or if you rely on visual clues, I hope the robot is smart enough to ask for help if it is not 100% certain. In the Ukraine, both sides share common hardware ranging from trucks to armor to fighter jets. The only way to knwo where the enemy
    is is know where your people aren't. As the enemy approaches, an enemy on the wrong side of the lines can be very dangerous. An armor unit
    that is ahead of it'sgoal may appear to be retreating enemies.

    I suspect we as a species will never agree to fully autonomous weapon systems. We will always have a human in the loop for these reasons.

    The one exception is those systems that acquire incoming and try shooting it out of the sky, but naturally I could be completely wrong here haha.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Digital Man on Fri Sep 2 21:26:00 2022
    Yes, really, zoox.com :-)

    Interesting! I may hit you up on DM on Facebook if that's ok :)

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From Irish_Monk@VERT/WARPED to DaiTengu on Sat Sep 3 15:39:00 2022
    I'll bet $50 that asshole had Illinois plates.

    Thats too funny right there!!

    |10I|02rish_|10M|02onk

    ... I'm not a complete idiot... Several parts are missing!
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to esc on Sat Sep 3 14:10:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Moondog on Fri Sep 02 2022 07:07 pm

    In the movies and video games the idea of autonomous weapons ranges fro cool to horrifying. In reality I find it horrifying because the ways used to identify an enemy can be false positives. If your friend or fo identification system can be jammed or confused, or if you rely on visu clues, I hope the robot is smart enough to ask for help if it is not 10 certain. In the Ukraine, both sides share common hardware ranging from trucks to armor to fighter jets. The only way to knwo where the enemy is is know where your people aren't. As the enemy approaches, an enem on the wrong side of the lines can be very dangerous. An armor unit that is ahead of it'sgoal may appear to be retreating enemies.

    I suspect we as a species will never agree to fully autonomous weapon system

    The one exception is those systems that acquire incoming and try shooting it

    I can see that happening in that situation. Some items do not belong in no
    fly zones or sensitive areas, or multiple safeguards are in place to reduce
    the chances of a friendly fire. If an AI detects a cruise missile flying towards a government building, it would know that shouldn't be there. If Cessna wanders into protected airspace in a non-aggressive flight path, it would allow an attempt to contact the pilot to change course before firing.


    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to DaiTengu on Sat Sep 3 14:18:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: DaiTengu to MRO on Sat Sep 03 2022 10:48 am

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: MRO to Irish_Monk on Fri Sep 02 2022 07:40 am

    You get passed only doing 70mph around here!! Hopefully that time
    comes soon. Will hopefully save a lot of lives.

    i'm doing like 90 to work and some asshole is driving up my ass like he going to hit me and flashing his brights on me. ---

    I'll bet $50 that asshole had Illinois plates.

    DaiTengu

    ... Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

    Damn FIPS! I had one in a Hellcat coming close to a bumper impact, weaving back and forth in the lane trying to pass me on either the shoulder or other l ane which is solid with cars and no passing. Dude tried to make his move and neary hit a box truck. He pulled hard right and bashed in the guard rail.
    His steering was really wobbly now, and when he pulled into a drive to a
    gated community, he crashed nose first into a barrier wall made of railroad ties and cinder blocks. By the time I found a spot I could pull over and
    call the police, a car had already arrived. Chances are the police was
    chasing him, hence the wreckless driving.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to Irish_Monk on Sun Sep 4 05:03:35 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Irish_Monk to esc on Fri Sep 02 2022 07:42 am

    pretty cool era. In fact I think in 20 years we'll think back in horror to the fact that all these people were hurtling around with tons of metal at 70mph while playing with their phones. It'll feel like the wil west.

    You get passed only doing 70mph around here!! Hopefully that time comes soon

    |10I|02rish_|10M|02onk

    ... Read messages, not taglines

    The point is moot. We are past peak oil since 2019 so I predict in the near future people won t be able to afford private transport. Governments worldwide are forcing the situation to explode faster because scarcity of transport would mean the government would get more powerful (ie. chances for taxed licenses for industrial transport and the like).

    Besides, given the current state of self-driving technology, I would consider the imposition of self-driving cars a step backwards, since it would place transport in the hands of corporations which would run your car from a network of edge servers. If you have heard complaints about corporations owning your computer instead of you owning your computer, this is just the same idea.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to Moondog on Sun Sep 4 05:10:43 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to esc on Fri Sep 02 2022 09:31 am

    In the movies and video games the idea of autonomous weapons ranges from coo to horrifying. In reality I find it horrifying because the ways used to identify an enemy can be false positives. If your friend or foe identification system can be jammed or confused, or if you rely on visual clues, I hope the robot is smart enough to ask for help if it is not 100% certain. In the Ukraine, both sides share common hardware ranging from trucks to armor to fighter jets. The only way to knwo where the enemy is is know where your people aren't. As the enemy approaches, an enemy on the wrong side of the lines can be very dangerous. An armor unit that is ahead of it'sgoal may appear to be retreating enemies.


    The South Korean experimental ones walk around with the safeties on. If they find something that looks like an enemy, they will acquire a lock on it but will only open fire if set to hot mode.

    They are currently using them for border patrol. The idea is that if they find something, somebody in HQ will decide whether to switch the safeties off or not on the spot.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Irish_Monk@VERT/WARPED to Arelor on Sun Sep 4 09:04:00 2022
    Besides, given the current state of self-driving technology, I would consider the imposition of self-driving cars a step backwards, since it would place transport in the hands of corporations which would run your car from a network of edge servers. If you have heard complaints about corporations owning your computer instead of you owning your computer, this is just the same idea.

    Good point, Didnt think about it that way. Even though I might not be one to believe every "conspiracy," I also dont trust the government very much, and thats why I believe people should be able to ask questions and research things they dont believe the government is being honost with us.

    Im definitely not as smart as most people on these NETS, but I did get into watching Documentarys, (its actually all I really can watch even to this day) and the thing that I believe that caused more problems than anything, is when they allowed Corporate companies to give money to parties they basically want to invest in. All this causes, is now the elected person "owes" that company, which I believe should be a conflict of interest.

    And allowing people to be in government and flip flop from government positions right back over to the Corporate company they actually worked for the whole time changing laws for them in the first place.

    |10I|02rish_|10M|02onk

    ... Great minds think alike; small minds run together
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Arelor on Sun Sep 4 08:25:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to Irish_Monk on Sun Sep 04 2022 05:03 am

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Irish_Monk to esc on Fri Sep 02 2022 07:42 am

    pretty cool era. In fact I think in 20 years we'll think back in hor to the fact that all these people were hurtling around with tons of metal at 70mph while playing with their phones. It'll feel like the west.

    You get passed only doing 70mph around here!! Hopefully that time comes s

    |10I|02rish_|10M|02onk

    ... Read messages, not taglines

    The point is moot. We are past peak oil since 2019 so I predict in the near future people won t be able to afford private transport. Governments worldwi are forcing the situation to explode faster because scarcity of transport wo mean the government would get more powerful (ie. chances for taxed licenses industrial transport and the like).

    Besides, given the current state of self-driving technology, I would conside the imposition of self-driving cars a step backwards, since it would place transport in the hands of corporations which would run your car from a netwo of edge servers. If you have heard complaints about corporations owning your computer instead of you owning your computer, this is just the same idea.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    Can a corporation do a better job maintaining a fleet of autonomous vehicles compare to a city or county government? The rent a car industry seems to always have more modern cars in good shape.

    Personally, I like having a personal car that won't get shut off because the company's network can't see it due to poor cell reception or lack of related cell partnerships.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Arelor on Sun Sep 4 08:40:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to Moondog on Sun Sep 04 2022 05:10 am

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to esc on Fri Sep 02 2022 09:31 am

    In the movies and video games the idea of autonomous weapons ranges from to horrifying. In reality I find it horrifying because the ways used to identify an enemy can be false positives. If your friend or foe identification system can be jammed or confused, or if you rely on visual clues, I hope the robot is smart enough to ask for help if it is not 100% certain. In the Ukraine, both sides share common hardware ranging from trucks to armor to fighter jets. The only way to knwo where the enemy is know where your people aren't. As the enemy approaches, an enemy on the wrong side of the lines can be very dangerous. An armor unit that is ahe of it'sgoal may appear to be retreating enemies.


    The South Korean experimental ones walk around with the safeties on. If they find something that looks like an enemy, they will acquire a lock on it but will only open fire if set to hot mode.

    They are currently using them for border patrol. The idea is that if they fi something, somebody in HQ will decide whether to switch the safeties off or on the spot.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    In situations such as gruard duty or watching checkpoints, and AI would have
    to be situationally aware of everything around it. Something that looks like
    a main threat could easily be a distraction or diversion to what is really happening. One car parked suspiciously could tie up an AI trying to figure
    out it's next move while another vehicle or people set up an ambush or push
    on the checkpoint.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Arelor on Sun Sep 4 14:39:00 2022
    The point is moot. We are past peak oil since 2019 so I predict in the near future people won t be able to afford private transport.

    Is this so terrible? What's the point? A car is typically the second biggest investment someone will make (after the home) and it's one that is exceedingly likely to be a financial loss, and it's something people spend a trivial amount of time actually using (vs other large expenses).

    I think we've grown used to being in a world where everyone owns their own transportation but I don't think that's because it's needed...a future where I can press a button on my phone and the car shows up, I get in, and take a nap or use my computer or something and then arrive at my destination later, without having to worry about licensing/taxes/maintenance/etc, seems like a home run.

    I say this as a "car guy" that has several cars, it's one of my biggest hobbies.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to Moondog on Sun Sep 4 17:39:32 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Arelor on Sun Sep 04 2022 08:25 am

    Can a corporation do a better job maintaining a fleet of autonomous vehicles compare to a city or county government? The rent a car industry seems to always have more modern cars in good shape.

    Personally, I like having a personal car that won't get shut off because the company's network can't see it due to poor cell reception or lack of related cell partnerships.

    I use plenty rental vehicles, so my opinion would be that a private rental fleet is more likely to be maintained than one operated by the administration. owever, that is not what I am talking about.

    I am talking about the day in which manually driven vehicles become forbidden to the public for general use, and the public is expected to use automatic cars instead. The pretext would be simple: "Automatic cars are safer and manual cars get people killed." It is a very easy sell from the political point of view (asuming they can make autonomous cars that actually work).

    However, the only thing you need to realize how disasterous such a thing would be for the end consumer is to have a look at how the software industry and the whole Whatever-as-a-Service model is faring. Software and hardware developed by actors hostile to the nations using them. Mission critical code written by identured workers in countries you would be uncapable of pointing at in a map. Functions the hardware includes which are locked behind paywalls and license agreements.

    It is said that a technophile is a guy who likes to put microchips everywhere in his life, and loves the idea that his fridge, toaster and lightbulbs are automated. It is also said that engineers know how really shitty this stuff gets so they have the toaster in chains just in case it decides to act funky. When you see professional misson critical code written as:

    if (true) {

    statement
    statement

    }

    or as

    while (true) {

    if (condition()) { break }

    statement

    }

    then nobody is going to convince you that the people writing that code is going to be better at driving your car automatically than you XD


    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to esc on Sun Sep 4 17:54:06 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Arelor on Sun Sep 04 2022 02:39 pm

    The point is moot. We are past peak oil since 2019 so I predict in the near future people won t be able to afford private transport.

    Is this so terrible? What's the point? A car is typically the second biggest ing (vs other large expenses).


    You are not going to be able to afford even Transport-as-a-Service, by the look of it.

    It is not the vehicle itself which is gonna become insanely expensive (actually, it _might_), but the power to move you from point A to point B, and that is something you are going to have to pay regardless of who owns the vehicle.

    Also, for a number of people, lacking a privately owned vehicle would be absolutely terrible. To this day I have seen no offer from any Transport-as-a-Service agency that would lend me a car to deliver orders made to my store without eating all my profit away. Not to mention I cannot get a pizza delivered to my house, so my bet is nobody would deliver a car to my place either.


    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to esc on Sun Sep 4 16:08:54 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Arelor on Sun Sep 04 2022 02:39 pm

    I think we've grown used to being in a world where everyone owns their own transportation but I don't think that's because it's needed...a future where I can press a button on my phone and the car shows up, I get in, and take a nap or use my computer or something and then arrive at my destination later, without having to worry about licensing/taxes/maintenance/etc, seems like a home run.

    I'd be curious to see (or make) a cost analysis of owning a car vs. not owning one and using ride/taxi services. I wonder how it would cost to continually use ride services and public transportation vs. owning a car. Owning your own car is very convenient; I like being able to get in my car and go wherever I want, when I want.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to esc on Mon Sep 5 21:55:51 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Arelor on Sun Sep 04 2022 02:39 pm

    Is this so terrible? What's the point? A car is typically the second biggest investment someone will make (after the home) and it's one that is exceedingly likely to be a financial loss, and it's something people spend a trivial amount of time actually using (vs other large expenses).

    I think we've grown used to being in a world where everyone owns their own transportation but I don't think that's because it's needed...a future where I can press a button on my phone and the car shows up, I get in, and take a nap or use my computer or something and then arrive at my destination later, without having to worry about licensing/taxes/maintenance/etc, seems like a home run.

    I say this as a "car guy" that has several cars, it's one of my biggest hobbies.

    The mass production of cars, and the design of cities around that assumption that everyone has, or should have, a car was one of the biggest urban design mistakes that humanity has ever made. An utter disaster.

    The car is overrated, a pain the ass and did to transportation what Windows did to computing. Popularised it but also retarded it.

    The car's days are numbered, and electric cars are not the solution. We need to rethink transportation, and make cities human centric and not car centric.

    You have to remember, autonomous vehicles will still need all the space and infrastructure that cars require.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to Nightfox on Mon Sep 5 06:30:26 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to esc on Sun Sep 04 2022 04:08 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Arelor on Sun Sep 04 2022 02:39 pm

    I think we've grown used to being in a world where everyone owns their transportation but I don't think that's because it's needed...a future where I can press a button on my phone and the car shows up, I get in, take a nap or use my computer or something and then arrive at my destination later, without having to worry about licensing/taxes/maintenance/etc, seems like a home run.

    I'd be curious to see (or make) a cost analysis of owning a car vs. not owni nt; I like being able to get in my car and go wherever I want, when I want.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

    They ran one in Spain already. Bottom line is:

    * It is cheaper to own your own means of transport as long as it is modest (used car, low end car, motorbike).
    * Public transport and transport-as-a-service is the middle of the road option. * Any private car that is not a budget car is more expensive than the alternatives.

    I have done the numbers myself. With my current car + insurance + maintenance, and asuming the car survives 10 years (likely) I am paying less per day for my car use than what a single taxi trip would cost for any of the regular trips I do.


    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to esc on Mon Sep 5 09:41:00 2022
    esc wrote to Arelor <=-

    The point is moot. We are past peak oil since 2019 so I predict in the near future people won t be able to afford private transport.

    Is this so terrible? What's the point? A car is typically the
    second biggest investment someone will make (after the home) and
    it's one that is exceedingly likely to be a financial loss, and
    it's something people spend a trivial amount of time actually
    using (vs other large expenses).

    Yes, I think it is so terrible.

    I think we've grown used to being in a world where everyone owns
    their own transportation but I don't think that's because it's
    needed...a future where I can press a button on my phone and the
    car shows up, I get in, and take a nap or use my computer or
    something and then arrive at my destination later, without having
    to worry about licensing/taxes/maintenance/etc, seems like a home
    run.

    I say this as a "car guy" that has several cars, it's one of my
    biggest hobbies.

    Strange. For most any "car guy" that I ever knew, doing at least *some*
    of the maintenance, and actually *DRIVING* the car were major points in
    *being* a car guy. I generally enjoy driving, a lot.

    Also, your scenario above makes one a slave to the entity that owns and operates the automatic car, whether that's a private enterprise or a government. Either way is a scary thing, to me. I'm not eager to give
    away still more of my freedom and become dependent on something else.



    ... All hope abandon, ye who enter messages here.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Arelor on Mon Sep 5 12:21:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to MRO on Sun Sep 04 2022 05:26 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: MRO to Arelor on Sun Sep 04 2022 08:14 am

    in my country that shit wont fly. people only take so much bullshit until

    americans love to take their cars out and drive around like idiots. i don

    when i was at my old job, for a number of years i took public transportat my employer paid for it so i was like what the hell. in the morning i wo

    that city supposely won awards for its great public transportation.

    There is certainly a point there.

    Government here has been pushing for people to give up private transport for ages, but the alternatives they offer just don't cut it. By this, I don't me they work worse, but that they just don't function - ie. the Junta would hav you give your car up and take the bus when you want a trip from the village the city, except there is no bus line for the trip to begin with.

    Since they have made no progress erradicating cars, what they are doing inst is making private vehicless less usable so people turns to other means of transport. Ideas such as taxing certain roads so you don't dream of driving them down, closing streets to vehicles, etc. are thrown around. Still they don't offer a working alternative once the routes are closed to cars so the result isn't that people takes public transport, but that people stops circulating through afected areas.

    I think it is no coincidence that the war on cars has become more gruesome j after BP's announcement that peak oil has been reached. I suspect administrations worthwhile are smelling the coffee and that they know they can't manage protestors on the streets angry because diesel prices have multiplied by two or three, so their plan is to get people used not to have transport before fuel becomes unaffordable. I don't even think electric cars are a planned substitute - they know they cannot replace combustion engines *everybody* with those - but they happen to be the carrot on the horizon to keep people walking forward as affordable cars are extinguished.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    Public transportation doesn't work well in the country. My area has a
    service called Dial-a-ride, but it is only practical if you live in town.
    they have a rural route driver, and charge extra if they have to drive off of that route to pick up or drop off a rider. They run 7am to 3:30pm, so
    there's no way to factor in working an 8 hr job and trasport to and from it.

    It is more suitable for older folks who can't drive yet still want to be indep endent of family driving them around. Too bad it wasn't around in a usable form by me when I was a pre-teen. I think they used radio dispatch to tell route drivers about passengers, but trying to reach DAR required a phone wherever you were. I would jump on the bus, go to town and visit friends in town, or see an early matinee, then ride the bus home.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Arelor on Mon Sep 5 12:33:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to Moondog on Sun Sep 04 2022 05:39 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Arelor on Sun Sep 04 2022 08:25 am

    Can a corporation do a better job maintaining a fleet of autonomous vehic compare to a city or county government? The rent a car industry seems to always have more modern cars in good shape.

    Personally, I like having a personal car that won't get shut off because company's network can't see it due to poor cell reception or lack of rela cell partnerships.

    I use plenty rental vehicles, so my opinion would be that a private rental fleet is more likely to be maintained than one operated by the administratio owever, that is not what I am talking about.

    I am talking about the day in which manually driven vehicles become forbidde to the public for general use, and the public is expected to use automatic c instead. The pretext would be simple: "Automatic cars are safer and manual c get people killed." It is a very easy sell from the political point of view (asuming they can make autonomous cars that actually work).

    However, the only thing you need to realize how disasterous such a thing wou be for the end consumer is to have a look at how the software industry and t whole Whatever-as-a-Service model is faring. Software and hardware developed actors hostile to the nations using them. Mission critical code written by identured workers in countries you would be uncapable of pointing at in a ma Functions the hardware includes which are locked behind paywalls and license agreements.

    It is said that a technophile is a guy who likes to put microchips everywher in his life, and loves the idea that his fridge, toaster and lightbulbs are automated. It is also said that engineers know how really shitty this stuff gets so they have the toaster in chains just in case it decides to act funky When you see professional misson critical code written as:

    if (true) {

    statement
    statement

    }

    or as

    while (true) {

    if (condition()) { break }

    statement

    }

    then nobody is going to convince you that the people writing that code is go to be better at driving your car automatically than you XD


    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken


    If there are any accidents the company that makes the car would be
    responsible, because they wrote the code. On the highway, cars will be able
    to go as fast as their hardware can keep up. Every car is evenly spaced for safety, and cars could run at higher speeds because they could react faster than humans. No more reckless drivers, or old ladies that driver 30mph on
    the freeway with the right signal on.

    I mentioned in other threads I live in the country, and road conditions
    involve uneven roads due to potholes and repaired potholes. Some roads are partial paved, and transistions from dirt to pavement or gravel canplace a
    car out of control if you're going too fast. i imagine conditions like these would make autonomous driving difficult. Same applies of there is a coat of snow on the road, and the ditches are covered so there's no telling where the sides of the road begin or end. GPS would be very important then, and bad weather would impair it's accuracy.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Boraxman on Mon Sep 5 13:49:27 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to esc on Mon Sep 05 2022 09:55 pm

    The car is overrated, a pain the ass and did to transportation what Windows did to computing. Popularised it but also retarded it.

    The car's days are numbered, and electric cars are not the solution. We need to rethink transportation, and make cities human centric and not car centric.

    Without a car, I think it would be a lot more difficult to get groceries, unless I used grocery delivery services to deliver grocies to my house (which add costs to buying groceries). I also like picking out my own fruits & vegetables & such, most of the time. There will also still be a need for larger vehicles for transporting large items such as furniture, home appliances, etc..

    Also, currently I have a fairly short drive to work. If I were to take public transportation to work, it would certainly also take longer for me to get to work.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Boraxman on Mon Sep 5 17:23:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to esc on Mon Sep 05 2022 09:55 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Arelor on Sun Sep 04 2022 02:39 pm

    Is this so terrible? What's the point? A car is typically the second bigg investment someone will make (after the home) and it's one that is exceedingly likely to be a financial loss, and it's something people spen trivial amount of time actually using (vs other large expenses).

    I think we've grown used to being in a world where everyone owns their ow transportation but I don't think that's because it's needed...a future wh I can press a button on my phone and the car shows up, I get in, and take nap or use my computer or something and then arrive at my destination lat without having to worry about licensing/taxes/maintenance/etc, seems like home run.

    I say this as a "car guy" that has several cars, it's one of my biggest hobbies.

    The mass production of cars, and the design of cities around that assumption

    The car is overrated, a pain the ass and did to transportation what Windows

    The car's days are numbered, and electric cars are not the solution. We nee

    You have to remember, autonomous vehicles will still need all the space and


    Everything in life is somewhere else, and you need a car to get there.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Boraxman on Mon Sep 5 22:59:00 2022
    The mass production of cars, and the design of cities around that assumption that everyone has, or should have, a car was one of the
    biggest urban design mistakes that humanity has ever made. An utter disaster.

    I agree now more than ever. The whole "work from home" thing should really put a nail in the coffin of much of the need for scores of people to commute for work. Fewer people commuting is a benefit to everyone, if only we could get management from previous generations to just accept remote work as a reality and move on :)

    The car is overrated, a pain the ass and did to transportation what Windows did to computing. Popularised it but also retarded it.

    Eh, I dunno. I love cars, I will probably always own cars. But for a lot of people, particularly young people, a car is more of a nuisance than anything else at this point. The rideshare app thing is an interesting interim solution, though I believe the markets will likely push us into a world where autonomous vehicles pick people up and drop people off more than traditional cars at some point.

    The car's days are numbered, and electric cars are not the solution. We need to rethink transportation, and make cities human centric and not
    car centric.

    The only reason I am doubtful here is because of the amount of infrastructure that would be required to rethink transportation to this degree. Having roads, highways, etc., will probably be a big consideration for how things evolve.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Gamgee on Mon Sep 5 23:05:00 2022
    Yes, I think it is so terrible.

    Fair enough. I don't. Guess we equal each other out? *shrug*

    Strange. For most any "car guy" that I ever knew, doing at least *some* of the maintenance, and actually *DRIVING* the car were major points in *being* a car guy. I generally enjoy driving, a lot.

    I enjoy driving when doing it for fun, but I certainly don't enjoy driving to the airport or the office in rush hour. I'd gladly sit in an autonomous car in those circumstances.

    There's no way I'm driving my 67 GTO or my 68 Mustang in rush hour traffic in 90 degree heat. But, those are cars that I have for actual enjoyment driving.

    Also, your scenario above makes one a slave to the entity that owns and operates the automatic car, whether that's a private enterprise or a government. Either way is a scary thing, to me. I'm not eager to give away still more of my freedom and become dependent on something else.

    You already have to pay for gas, insurance, licensing, not to mention the cost of a car that will (with infrequent exceptions) only ever depreciate in value. But I digress. The markets will decide all of this and the markets will belong to the next generation before long. And the next generation grew up spoiled with Uber and Lyft and has less of a need for owning a car. They have an entirely different frame of reference. The rate of actually getting a driver's license is on a significant decline. It's fascinating to watch.

    Nevertheless, neither you nor I will decide any of this, the markets will.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Moondog on Mon Sep 5 23:08:00 2022
    I mentioned in other threads I live in the country, and road conditions involve uneven roads due to potholes and repaired potholes. Some roads are partial paved, and transistions from dirt to pavement or gravel canplace a car out of control if you're going too fast. i imagine conditions like these would make autonomous driving difficult. Same applies of there is a coat of snow on the road, and the ditches are covered so there's no telling where the sides of the road begin or end. GPS would be very important then, and bad weather would impair it's accuracy.

    You may be interested to know that the military is investing heavily into offroad autonomy use cases and research. Not saying this will cover everything, just mentioning it as an interesting anecdote.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Arelor on Sun Sep 4 08:22:00 2022
    Arelor wrote to Irish_Monk <=-

    Besides, given the current state of self-driving technology, I would consider the imposition of self-driving cars a step backwards, since it would place transport in the hands of corporations which would run your car from a network of edge servers. If you have heard complaints about corporations owning your computer instead of you owning your computer, this is just the same idea.

    my uncle has a country place
    that no one knows about
    he says it used to be a farm
    before the motor law
    on sundays i elude the eyes
    and hop the turbine freight
    to fall outside the wire
    where my white haired uncle waits...

    i strip away the old debris
    that hides a shining car
    a brilliant red barchetta
    from a better, vanished time
    fire up the willing engine
    responding with a roar
    tires spitting gravel
    i commit my weekly crime...



    ... Abandon desire
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Nightfox on Tue Sep 6 22:32:56 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Boraxman on Mon Sep 05 2022 01:49 pm

    Without a car, I think it would be a lot more difficult to get groceries, unless I used grocery delivery services to deliver grocies to my house (which add costs to buying groceries). I also like picking out my own fruits & vegetables & such, most of the time. There will also still be a need for larger vehicles for transporting large items such as furniture, home appliances, etc..

    Also, currently I have a fairly short drive to work. If I were to take public transportation to work, it would certainly also take longer for me to get to work.

    Nightfox
    Of course the car is useful, it just sucks when used as a universal means of transport. Sure, transporting furniture, driving to the country, this is best done by a car. Groceries, sometimes, but we have terrible urban design where the avialability of groceries is centralised to a few large supermarkets in commercial areas. Why not intersperce residential areas with commercial? More smaller corner general stores? I look at the new suburbs and weep. Houses laid out like carpet with a central "shopping centre" where all the shops are. A traffic snarl, shops lost in a sea of car park which you have to drive to get to because its a bit too far to walk. Wouldn't a store a couple of blocks away, evne if smaller, be easier?

    We're sold on a fake efficiency. We don't really see the costs involved in cars. My wife and I both have cars, and when I calcuate the cost of ownership, it really is quite remarkable. Add to that the fact the streets are made deadly, we have to worry about our children outside the house. The car has many shortcomings that we just overlook because we just take it as a necessary evil. But is it really that necessary?

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to esc on Tue Sep 6 22:49:46 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Boraxman on Mon Sep 05 2022 10:59 pm

    I agree now more than ever. The whole "work from home" thing should really put a nail in the coffin of much of the need for scores of people to commute for work. Fewer people commuting is a benefit to everyone, if only we could get management from previous generations to just accept remote work as a reality and move on :)


    Work from home is isolating though, but yes, a lot of people don't need to commute to the office everyday. That we spend billions on roads so that people can just sit infront of a different screen doesn't make sense. Complete waste of resources to move the human from place to place, when we can move electrical signals at a tiny fraction of the cost at thousands of times the speed.

    The car is overrated, a pain the ass and did to transportation what Windows did to computing. Popularised it but also retarded it.

    Eh, I dunno. I love cars, I will probably always own cars. But for a lot of people, particularly young people, a car is more of a nuisance than anything else at this point. The rideshare app thing is an interesting interim solution, though I believe the markets will likely push us into a world where autonomous vehicles pick people up and drop people off more than traditional cars at some point.


    I used to love cars, but have grown to dislike them. Mainly due to having wasted so much of my life in traffic, having experience so much constant aggrivation. Having to spend so much of my time trapped in a metal cage, stuck on the road, with no option to complete the trip as traffic dictates. Driving to the mountain is freedom, but most of the experience is the miserable experience of being trapped.

    I will always want to own a car, but I wish I could make it an exception. I used to live near a train station ,and be able to walk to the pub and nearby source of entertainment. I'd catch the train to the city instead of driving, walk to the pub, it felt far freer.

    Ridesharing is a poor solution, as we still need the car. We need to stop thinking of the problem as one of how to make the trip, but how to design things so the trip is no longer necessary.

    The car's days are numbered, and electric cars are not the solution.
    We need to rethink transportation, and make cities human centric and not
    car centric.

    The only reason I am doubtful here is because of the amount of infrastructure that would be required to rethink transportation to this degree. Having roads, highways, etc., will probably be a big consideration for how things evolve.

    We are going to have to move away from fossil uels, and electric cars have their own issues. They are better, but still generally poor. I don't see a good long term future for cars. Eventually, cities which are car based will die, it just doesn't seem sustainable. It will be VERY costly to fix this, but that is the price we pay for servicing this vehicle for far longer than it deserved. We just didn't think long term. Knowing that fossil fuels, that oil would eventually be on their way out, we still designed cities around vehicles which really are products of the oil age. Short sightedness at its finest.

    I think we'll see the well serviced areas, where everything is close, jobs are close will prosper and the urban wastelands will languish and drop socio-economically. I'm already seeing this in Melbourne, especially as younger people are turning their back on the surburban hellscape. People are seeing the writing on the wall for the car based suburban model.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to esc on Tue Sep 6 07:52:00 2022
    esc wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Strange. For most any "car guy" that I ever knew, doing at least *some* of the maintenance, and actually *DRIVING* the car were major points in *being* a car guy. I generally enjoy driving, a lot.

    I enjoy driving when doing it for fun, but I certainly don't
    enjoy driving to the airport or the office in rush hour. I'd
    gladly sit in an autonomous car in those circumstances.

    Not everybody lives in a large city. That's not an issue for many
    folks.

    Also, your scenario above makes one a slave to the entity that owns and operates the automatic car, whether that's a private enterprise or a government. Either way is a scary thing, to me. I'm not eager to give away still more of my freedom and become dependent on something else.

    You already have to pay for gas, insurance, licensing, not to
    mention the cost of a car that will (with infrequent exceptions)
    only ever depreciate in value.

    Yes, all true. But.... I own the car, and I can use it whenever and
    wherever I want to, and enjoy doing it. Freedom. Independence. In the
    end, probably cheaper, too.

    But I digress. The markets will
    decide all of this and the markets will belong to the next
    generation before long. And the next generation grew up spoiled
    with Uber and Lyft and has less of a need for owning a car. They
    have an entirely different frame of reference. The rate of
    actually getting a driver's license is on a significant decline.
    It's fascinating to watch.

    See above regarding "not everybody lives in a metropolis".


    ... He does the work of 3 Men...Moe, Larry & Curly
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Boraxman on Tue Sep 6 08:43:26 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Nightfox on Tue Sep 06 2022 10:32 pm

    is best done by a car. Groceries, sometimes, but we have terrible urban design where the avialability of groceries is centralised to a few large supermarkets in commercial areas. Why not intersperce residential areas with commercial? More smaller corner general stores? I look at the new

    That depends on the area. I'm about a 5 minute drive from my nearest grocery store, and in the past, I've generally lived fairly close to a grocery store, so I think a lot of places are designed where that's the case. Where I live, many times when I've seen residential areas far from a grocery store, it has usually been very rural areas where things are spread out fairly far, or people living in farm communities where there isn't much around them but farm land, and that sort of thing.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to esc on Tue Sep 6 08:46:14 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Boraxman on Mon Sep 05 2022 10:59 pm

    I agree now more than ever. The whole "work from home" thing should really put a nail in the coffin of much of the need for scores of people to commute for work. Fewer people commuting is a benefit to everyone, if only we could get management from previous generations to just accept remote work as a reality and move on :)

    If I mainly worked from home, I think I'd feel stir-crazy after a while. Sometimes I just like getting out in order to do something (such as work). However, lately I do feel like I wouldn't mind working from home more often. I could do that with my job, but my employer prefers people to be in the office when possible.

    Eh, I dunno. I love cars, I will probably always own cars. But for a lot of people, particularly young people, a car is more of a nuisance than anything else at this point. The rideshare app thing is an interesting

    How are cars a nuisance to young people?

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to esc on Tue Sep 6 08:47:59 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Gamgee on Mon Sep 05 2022 11:05 pm

    I enjoy driving when doing it for fun, but I certainly don't enjoy driving to the airport or the office in rush hour. I'd gladly sit in an autonomous car in those circumstances.

    I don't like driving in rush hour either. An autonomous car would make it easier, but I'd still rather not sit in a car during rush hour. I feel like being stuck in traffic is a waste of time.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to poindexter FORTRAN on Tue Sep 6 08:49:43 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: poindexter FORTRAN to Arelor on Sun Sep 04 2022 08:22 am

    i strip away the old debris
    that hides a shining car
    a brilliant red barchetta
    from a better, vanished time
    fire up the willing engine
    responding with a roar
    tires spitting gravel
    i commit my weekly crime...


    Wind, in my hair..
    Shifting and drifting..
    Mechanical music..
    Adrenalin surge..

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Gamgee on Tue Sep 6 08:52:17 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to esc on Tue Sep 06 2022 07:52 am

    I enjoy driving when doing it for fun, but I certainly don't
    enjoy driving to the airport or the office in rush hour. I'd
    gladly sit in an autonomous car in those circumstances.

    Not everybody lives in a large city. That's not an issue for many
    folks.

    Yes, but many people do live in large urban areas, so it is an issue for those people.

    Even the area I live in isn't really considered very large compared to other cities, but traffic still sucks pretty bad here sometimes.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From DaiTengu@VERT/ENSEMBLE to Moondog on Tue Sep 6 11:44:48 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Arelor on Sun Sep 04 2022 08:25 am

    Personally, I like having a personal car that won't get shut off because the company's network can't see it due to poor cell reception or lack of related cell partnerships.

    Which reminds me. I bought a Lexus in 2018 (my wife's vehicle). It has a ton of features, like the ability to monitor it via my phone, remote start, lock doors, track it if it's stolen, etc all via cellular networks.

    3G cellular networks.

    3G is getting shut off in a few months, so all those features will just no longer work as of November 1st. Remote start is really the big one, and trying to do it from the keyfob is unreliable at best.

    Toyota (The Lexus parent company) thus far has refused to even offer any kind of upgrade so these services could continue to be used. I'm told that some other companies that have similar issues have either issued free updates (apparently OnStar/Chevy was able to do it via software) or hardware upgrades, others have a solution that you may have to pay for. But Toyota's done absolutely nothing. We just lose access to those features.

    I shit you not, the cars that use 2G networks (older 2004-2010 models) will still work through the end of this year.

    I can't imagine how something like this would wreak havoc on an atonomous vehicle system.

    DaiTengu

    ... The time to relax is when you don't have time for it.

    ---
    Synchronet War Ensemble BBS - The sport is war, total war - warensemble.com
  • From DaiTengu@VERT/ENSEMBLE to Moondog on Tue Sep 6 11:51:44 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to MRO on Mon Sep 05 2022 12:09 pm

    i have no idea what a fucking fip is.

    F*cking Illinois Person. Not everybody from Illinois is one. You'll know them as soon you seen them driving on the road or when they open their mouths. They address the locals as if they were slack jawed yokels, and act like they own everything. In the movie The Great Outdoors, there is a scene where they introduce Dan Akroyd's character by showing the Illinois plate on the front of a Mercedes. Nearly everybody on the crowd yelled, "FIP!"

    FIPS are Illinois tourists of the worst degree. It seems like everyone has at least one next door whose kids set off fireworks during work nights starting halfway through June until halfway through August. When the FIPS are in town, the prices all go up. The overpriced antiques stores along Red Arrow Hwy down by New Buffalo love them.

    On the other side of the lake from you, we call thim "FIBs" or "FIBTABs"
    Fucking Illinois Bastards or Fucking Illinois Bastards Towing A Boat

    Autumn in Door County is a goddamn nightmare. I'm pretty sure everyone from the north and northwest sides of Chicago drive up here over the course of a couple weeks.

    DaiTengu

    ... A hunch is creativity trying to tell you something.

    ---
    Synchronet War Ensemble BBS - The sport is war, total war - warensemble.com
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to esc on Tue Sep 6 08:21:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Boraxman on Mon Sep 05 2022 10:59 pm

    The mass production of cars, and the design of cities around that assumption that everyone has, or should have, a car was one of the biggest urban design mistakes that humanity has ever made. An utter disaster.

    I agree now more than ever. The whole "work from home" thing should really p us generations to just accept remote work as a reality and move on :)

    The car is overrated, a pain the ass and did to transportation what Windows did to computing. Popularised it but also retarded it.

    Eh, I dunno. I love cars, I will probably always own cars. But for a lot of markets will likely push us into a world where autonomous vehicles pick peop

    The car's days are numbered, and electric cars are not the solution. W need to rethink transportation, and make cities human centric and not car centric.

    The only reason I am doubtful here is because of the amount of infrastructur

    I've tried car pooling or ride sharing over the years, but he people who need to leave their car with their spouse on occasion lived far enough away it wasn't cost effective, or I ended up doinga ll the driving out of my way to pick up the other person. I didn't save anything.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to esc on Tue Sep 6 08:30:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Moondog on Mon Sep 05 2022 11:08 pm

    I mentioned in other threads I live in the country, and road conditions involve uneven roads due to potholes and repaired potholes. Some roads are partial paved, and transistions from dirt to pavement or gravel canplace a car out of control if you're going too fast. i imagine conditions like these would make autonomous driving difficult. Same applies of there is a coat of snow on the road, and the ditches are covered so there's no telling where the sides of the road begin or end. GPS would be very important then, and bad weather would impair it's accuracy.

    You may be interested to know that the military is investing heavily into of

    Miltary GPS runs at a higher strength signal than commercial GPS. it is less
    a victim to really bad weather.

    To the military, autonomous diving would be a great improvement. Imagine a convo that is automonous. No drivers to be killed. Imagine an ambulance
    thaty could run with the driver injured. Smaller utility vehicles could haul injured or more ammo to troops.

    It's too bad the tests on the big dog have been halted. A more quiet power source has to be created. The gas or diesel that ran the generator was
    really lound. It was cool because it could be loaded up like a pack mule and take trails and climb rocks a utility vehicle couldn't.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Thumper@VERT/THEWASTE to Moondog on Tue Sep 6 09:17:00 2022
    Moondog wrote to MRO <=-

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: MRO to Moondog on Sun Sep 04 2022 01:38 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to MRO on Sun Sep 04 2022 08:12 am

    th
    I'm in SW Michigan. From the shore of Lake Michigan we can see Chicago least Sears Tower and city skyline) from 60 miles away due west.

    SWM is a tourist area. Wineries and Micro Breweries and Distillerys have taken over. FIPS have summer homes and invade every weekend. I94 is loaded with FIP cars and there is a long line going into Waren Dunes Stat Park.

    i have no idea what a fucking fip is.

    F*cking Illinois Person. Not everybody from Illinois is one. You'll
    know them as soon you seen them driving on the road or when they open their mouths. They address the locals as if they were slack jawed
    yokels, and act like they own everything. In the movie The Great Outdoors, there is a scene where they introduce Dan Akroyd's character
    by showing the Illinois plate on the front of a Mercedes. Nearly everybody on the crowd yelled, "FIP!"

    FIPS are Illinois tourists of the worst degree. It seems like everyone has at least one next door whose kids set off fireworks during work
    nights starting halfway through June until halfway through August.
    When the FIPS are in town, the prices all go up. The overpriced
    antiques stores along Red Arrow Hwy down by New Buffalo love them.

    We have what we call BATS here (I still call them "Flatlanders). "Bay Area Transfers". Just went through a long weekend of dealing with them. Even shooting off firework"s up here in the hills where the fire danger is extreme. Can't get near the lake or beaches as they take over everything. Those that move up here bring their stupidity with them and want to treat the hills like the Bay Area. During the Covid lockdowns it was like a huge party up here for weeks and weeks. Stores were emptied, fights at the gas stations....





    ... It's best to be judged by twelve than carried by six.
    --- MultiMail/Win v0.52
    Synchronet -=The Wastelands BBS=- -=Since 1990=-
  • From Tracker1@VERT/TRN to Nightfox on Tue Sep 6 09:14:16 2022
    On 9/4/22 16:08, Nightfox wrote:

    I'd be curious to see (or make) a cost analysis of owning a car
    vs. not owning one and using ride/taxi services. I wonder how
    it would cost to continually use ride services and public
    transportation vs. owning a car. Owning your own car is very
    convenient; I like being able to get in my car and go wherever I
    want, when I want.

    If you don't have to work in an office every day, or if you live near
    your work, then it's better to not have a car and ride share. If you
    commute over 30 minutes each way, and take road trips through the year
    or travel more, you're better off having transportation.

    There's the freedom matter as well, not to mention shopping becomes more constrained if you like to shop in stores.

    Personally, I'd rather keep my car(s)... although most likely my vision
    will eventually get bad enough that driving isn't as safe for me. Which
    is a concern for my work as much as anything else.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com
    ---
    Synchronet Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Nightfox on Tue Sep 6 14:24:00 2022
    Nightfox wrote to Gamgee <=-

    I enjoy driving when doing it for fun, but I certainly don't
    enjoy driving to the airport or the office in rush hour. I'd
    gladly sit in an autonomous car in those circumstances.

    Not everybody lives in a large city. That's not an issue for many
    folks.

    Yes, but many people do live in large urban areas, so it is an
    issue for those people.

    Agreed! But... my statement above is still true.


    ... Gone crazy, be back later, please leave message.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to esc on Tue Sep 6 15:05:09 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Gamgee on Mon Sep 05 2022 11:05 pm

    You already have to pay for gas, insurance, licensing, not to mention the co tion before long. And the next generation grew up spoiled with Uber and Lyft cinating to watch.

    Nevertheless, neither you nor I will decide any of this, the markets will.

    The markets are not an abstract entity floating in the sky. They are no Monopoly boards being played in an alternate dimension. The markets are US buying and selling, plain and simple.

    The new generations around here are not giving up on cars because of infrastructure concerns or because they are using transport-as-a-service. They are not getting cars because they can't afford transport and it is therefore much more cost efficient for them to borrow uncle Francisco's van when needed.

    But then they cannot afford housing either and have to borrow it, and we don't say it is the end of houses.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to Boraxman on Tue Sep 6 15:16:32 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to MRO on Tue Sep 06 2022 10:25 pm

    transport because we can just be lazy and assume everyone will drive everywh rban model. Urban sprawl and isolation.

    People are rejecting this, preferring to live in the denser inner city, with


    It seems to me that your problem comes from living in an overpopulated area rather than because cars exist.

    MOst people complaining about traffic issues and having to drive to work live in big cities. In Madrid so many people live in suburbs and bedroom-neighbourhoods but they all decide to drive to the center of Madrid at once for work at dawn.

    Mid and small sized towns just don't generate this environment. If you take the capitals of the Autonomies surrounding Madrid, they are very much navegable without their administrations having taken any effort to make them navegable. In fact, some are very navegable despite the fact their autonomies have worsened traffic by trying to manipulate it. Heck, Toledo features middle-age style streets which are barely wide enough for a car, but there are not bad traffic issues because the place is not massificated.


    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Tracker1 on Tue Sep 6 13:21:13 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Tracker1 to Nightfox on Tue Sep 06 2022 09:14 am

    If you don't have to work in an office every day, or if you live near your work, then it's better to not have a car and ride share. If you commute over 30 minutes each way, and take road trips through the year
    or travel more, you're better off having transportation.

    There's the freedom matter as well, not to mention shopping becomes more constrained if you like to shop in stores.

    If you order your groceries & everything online, I'd think the delivery fees and tips could add up significantly.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to Boraxman on Tue Sep 6 15:22:08 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Nightfox on Tue Sep 06 2022 10:32 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Boraxman on Mon Sep 05 2022 01:49 pm

    Without a car, I think it would be a lot more difficult to get groceries, unless I used grocery delivery services to deliver grocies to my house (which add costs to buying groceries). I also like picking out my own fru & vegetables & such, most of the time. There will also still be a need f larger vehicles for transporting large items such as furniture, home appliances, etc..

    Also, currently I have a fairly short drive to work. If I were to take public transportation to work, it would certainly also take longer for me get to work.

    Nightfox
    Of course the car is useful, it just sucks when used as a universal means of roceries is centralised to a few large supermarkets in commercial areas. Wh g centre" where all the shops are. A traffic snarl, shops lost in a sea of

    We're sold on a fake efficiency. We don't really see the costs involved in
    about our children outside the house. The car has many shortcomings that w

    ---

    The car is not necessary. During Spanish fascism there were lots of people who could not afford a car. If they wanted to go to the market next town they just took a donkey and dedicated a whole day for the trip.

    Places such as Madrid have convenience stores, grocery's and markets conveniently placed, but this does not void the need for proper transport at all. In fact Madrid competes with Barcelona for the position as the Most Hostile City to Human Life in Spain.


    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to Tracker1 on Tue Sep 6 15:44:41 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Tracker1 to Nightfox on Tue Sep 06 2022 09:14 am

    If you don't have to work in an office every day, or if you live near
    your work, then it's better to not have a car and ride share. If you commute over 30 minutes each way, and take road trips through the year
    or travel more, you're better off having transportation.


    The real issue with ridesharing is that oftentimes you end up waiting for the other rideshares to show up. Sometimes they don't show up and they don't bother to notify you. I used to rideshare a lot in the past and, while it cuts costs, it is such a pain in the ass at times. A regular bus line is so much better (if
    it exists) despite the fact bus lines have a tendency to be poor solutions.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Irish_Monk@VERT/WARPED to Nightfox on Tue Sep 6 15:56:00 2022
    I've heard that since the covid lockdowns, some companies have actually wanted to go to working from home permanently, because it could save the company money since they wouldn't have to pay a lease on an office building & related costs anymore. But some companies do prefer their employees to come into the office.

    Yeah, I work out in the field but I know people who work for the company I work for that had an "office job," most of them work from home and I guess they meet every so often in person at the office. I know my company in the years even before Covid started to get rid of the bldgs they rent and moved everyone into bldgs they own for the most part. At least in the region Im in.

    |10I|02rish_|10M|02onk

    ... Redundant book title: DOS For Dummies
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Boraxman on Tue Sep 6 19:01:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to MRO on Tue Sep 06 2022 10:25 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: MRO to Boraxman on Mon Sep 05 2022 10:05 am

    you're very wrong. infact, cars changed and improved society for the better. in the usa we even have our weekend due to car manufacturing.

    The car is overrated, a pain the ass and did to transportation what Windows did to computing. Popularised it but also retarded it.

    cars made everyting easier and better.


    The car's days are numbered, and electric cars are not the solution. need to rethink transportation, and make cities human centric and not centric.

    our entire world revolves around oil production, much of that going into vehicles.

    You have to remember, autonomous vehicles will still need all the spac and infrastructure that cars require.

    we already have that. we can also dedicate a lane just to autonomous vehicles. they did that in my region anyways for foxcon.

    so i take it you don't OWN a vehicle?

    I do own a car. I'm not against cars completely, I'm saying that they have ransport and amenities nearby.

    Cars made things easier? All things? Consider the cost of the car, fuel, in alculation as to how many hours you would need to work to pay for the car an ic transport because we can just be lazy and assume everyone will drive ever an urban model. Urban sprawl and isolation.

    People are rejecting this, preferring to live in the denser inner city, with

    Without mass production and mass adoption of the car, we'd have better urban


    The US is way too open in space for public transportation. About every five
    or six miles there is a deserted building or collection of buildings that used
    to be a town or a small general store. These little towns dried up because you could buy more for less at supermarkets. the ssmall stores that had gas pumps could not compete with gas stations with multiple pumps. The town dodownn the road from me only existed because a rail line went through, and they had to move the existing town a half mile down to acces the railroad. Whien the private line dried up, the rails were pulled and people would not stop any more in the town. Progress killed small towns and travelling to a larger town for better services didn't require an all day trip. Cars made
    that longer distance travel possible.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Boraxman on Tue Sep 6 19:09:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Nightfox on Tue Sep 06 2022 10:32 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Boraxman on Mon Sep 05 2022 01:49 pm

    Without a car, I think it would be a lot more difficult to get groceries, unless I used grocery delivery services to deliver grocies to my house (which add costs to buying groceries). I also like picking out my own fru & vegetables & such, most of the time. There will also still be a need f larger vehicles for transporting large items such as furniture, home appliances, etc..

    Also, currently I have a fairly short drive to work. If I were to take public transportation to work, it would certainly also take longer for me get to work.

    Nightfox
    Of course the car is useful, it just sucks when used as a universal means of groceries is centralised to a few large supermarkets in commercial areas. W ing centre" where all the shops are. A traffic snarl, shops lost in a sea o

    We're sold on a fake efficiency. We don't really see the costs involved in y about our children outside the house. The car has many shortcomings that

    Supermarkets killed the general stores, and the big box stores and malls
    killed downtown. why go to the overpriced store with limited inventory when the specialty stores at the mall or plaza have better prices and better variety? the little stores can only compete if they are more than just a retailer. They have to offer services the big stores don't have. i would go to a local gun shop over going to a Cabelas or Dunhams for getting better information or gunsmithing services. If i wanted cheap ammo that only a
    giant corporation could offer because it could buy in larger volumes than mom and pop could ever afford, the big box is my choice.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Boraxman on Tue Sep 6 19:12:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to MRO on Tue Sep 06 2022 10:35 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: MRO to Nightfox on Mon Sep 05 2022 04:22 pm

    Without a car, I think it would be a lot more difficult to get groceri unless I used grocery delivery services to deliver grocies to my house (which add costs to buying groceries). I also like picking out my own fruits & vegetables & such, most of the time. There will also still b need for larger vehicles for transporting large items such as furnitur home appliances, etc..


    yeah, imagine carrying a case of bottled water and all your groceries fro the bus stop to your door. it's a good workout, but tedious.

    I often do that, walk home with bags of groceries. I suppose we could all d

    The nearest store to me is a Dollar General, and it is 7 miles away. Walking would take forever.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Nightfox on Tue Sep 6 17:16:00 2022
    If I mainly worked from home, I think I'd feel stir-crazy after a while. Sometimes I just like getting out in order to do something (such as
    work). However, lately I do feel like I wouldn't mind working from home more often. I could do that with my job, but my employer prefers people to be in the office when possible.

    To each his own, and I agree that full time WFH is not doable for a lot of people for a variety of reasons, not least of which you mention above. But the other side of the coin is that many people prefer WFH or some sort of hybrid schedule. Hopefully the businesses evolve to give employees more of a choice.

    How are cars a nuisance to young people?

    You have to buy them, they cost a lot and are typically a horrible financial investment, you have to maintain them, license/pay taxes, insure them, gas, etc...young people grew up in a world where a ride is given on demand when you use an app on your phone.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Nightfox on Tue Sep 6 17:17:00 2022
    I don't like driving in rush hour either. An autonomous car would make
    it easier, but I'd still rather not sit in a car during rush hour. I
    feel like being stuck in traffic is a waste of time.

    Yep, you and me both. I hate traffic. It's time I could be working or spending time with my family. To me a huge WFH/hybrid work schedule advantage is decreasing traffic...during the beginning of the pandemic lockdowns, driving anywhere at any time was an absolute joy lol.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Moondog on Tue Sep 6 17:20:00 2022
    Miltary GPS runs at a higher strength signal than commercial GPS. it is less a victim to really bad weather.

    GPS is also frequently denied to military vehicles due to circumstances like jamming. So an autonomous vehicle augmenting a manned convoy needs to operate without GPS.

    To the military, autonomous diving would be a great improvement.
    Imagine a convo that is automonous. No drivers to be killed. Imagine
    an ambulance thaty could run with the driver injured. Smaller utility vehicles could haul injured or more ammo to troops.

    The only problem is that militaries exist to fight wars, and a robot fleet fighting a war is a slippery slope. All the conversations happening now regarding military autonomy is that for anything kinetic, you'll need to have a human in the loop.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Arelor on Tue Sep 6 17:24:00 2022
    The markets are not an abstract entity floating in the sky. They are no Monopoly boards being played in an alternate dimension. The markets are
    US buying and selling, plain and simple.

    Correct. And autonomy is the next major shift in markets, followed by significant changes to transportation in urban areas, decreasing the need for individual people to own cars. The markets respond to the consumers, not vice versa. Emerging markets demonstrate that fewer people see car ownership as a meaningful investment than in times past.

    Thanks for the lesson, though ;) For what it's worth, I work in this industry and am happy to speak about it from a somewhat informed basis.

    The new generations around here are not giving up on cars because of infrastructure concerns or because they are using
    transport-as-a-service. They are not getting cars because they can't afford transport and it is therefore much more cost efficient for them
    to borrow uncle Francisco's van when needed.

    Interesting, but that's not the overwhelming trend. The overwhelming trend is that young people are less interested in car ownership because getting from point a to point b with all the hassle of car ownership is achievable.

    But then they cannot afford housing either and have to borrow it, and we don't say it is the end of houses.

    Housing is a smart investment; car ownership is not. This is not apples to apples.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From Irish_Monk@VERT/WARPED to esc on Tue Sep 6 20:43:00 2022
    You have to buy them, they cost a lot and are typically a horrible financial investment, you have to maintain them, license/pay taxes,
    insure them, gas, etc...young people grew up in a world where a ride is given on demand when you use an app on your phone.

    Im sure there could be a lot of different outcomes. But it would be interesting if someone bought/used a car for a certain amount a time. Added that all up. And then for the same amount of time just used services like UBER or whatever and added that up.Trying to stick to the same routine roughly. I wonder what would actually cost more? My kids have used UBER quite a bit, I have never, So I dont really know the costs, sometimes when they would tell me real quick about the ride and how much it cost, I thought it was expensive, but then sometimes it seemed they got a really good deal. Not sure why. Cars are very expensive, like you said, when adding _EVERYTHING_ up, its more than you think..

    |10I|02rish_|10M|02onk

    ... A program is used to turn data into error messages.
  • From Irish_Monk@VERT/WARPED to esc on Tue Sep 6 20:48:00 2022
    Yep, you and me both. I hate traffic. It's time I could be working or spending time with my family. To me a huge WFH/hybrid work schedule advantage is decreasing traffic...during the beginning of the pandemic lockdowns, driving anywhere at any time was an absolute joy lol.

    One of the very few positives of my job is I have a company vehicle. Yes, it has a GPS and some other device that tracks speeds and probably everything else. But the good thing is, I work what we call 2nd shift, 1030am-7pm. My work truck leaves my driveway at 1030am and usually is pulling in my driveway at 7:01pm. So like you said, its more family time etc... and less miles on my personal truck....

    |10I|02rish_|10M|02onk

    ... My tagline could eat your tagline for breakfast
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to esc on Tue Sep 6 18:46:55 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Nightfox on Tue Sep 06 2022 05:16 pm

    How are cars a nuisance to young people?

    You have to buy them, they cost a lot and are typically a horrible financial investment, you have to maintain them, license/pay taxes, insure them, gas, etc...young people grew up in a world where a ride is given on demand when you use an app on your phone.

    Those same things apply to many things.. And regarding having to buy them - Do young people these days expect to get things for free?

    Also, I only remember the app-based ride services appearing within the last 10 years or so.. Unless they've been around longer, if someone is used to app-based ride services, they might not even be old enough to drive yet? Besides, taxi services have been around a lot longer and we haven't seen a bunch of people want to take taxis instead of owning their own car. Taxis and things like Uber, Lyft, etc. can be expensive.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Moondog on Tue Sep 6 18:49:14 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Boraxman on Tue Sep 06 2022 07:12 pm

    I often do that, walk home with bags of groceries. I suppose we could
    all d

    The nearest store to me is a Dollar General, and it is 7 miles away. Walking would take forever.

    He was talking about taking public transportation. Does your town not have any public transportation?

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to esc on Tue Sep 6 18:51:01 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Arelor on Tue Sep 06 2022 05:24 pm

    Housing is a smart investment; car ownership is not. This is not apples to apples.

    I don't think you can even really talk about a car as an investment. If you're buying a car to try to invest, then that's just a bad idea. A car is meant to be used - The usefulness is in transportation, and if you can make use of it, then I think you'll get its money's worth.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to esc on Tue Sep 6 20:41:00 2022
    esc wrote to Nightfox <=-

    How are cars a nuisance to young people?

    You have to buy them, they cost a lot and are typically a
    horrible financial investment, you have to maintain them,
    license/pay taxes, insure them, gas, etc...young people grew up
    in a world where a ride is given on demand when you use an app on
    your phone.

    You are somehow equating *YOUR* experience/knowledge, which seems to be
    solely based on huge metropolitan areas (the Bay Area?). I can assure
    you that young people in my world do/did not grow up in a world where
    they get a ride with an app on their phone.

    I say again: NOT EVERYONE LIVES IN A FREAKIN URBAN CRAP-HOLE!!!



    ... He does the work of 3 Men...Moe, Larry & Curly
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From bex@VERT/CONCHAOS to Moondog on Tue Sep 6 11:32:00 2022
    Moondog wrote to Boraxman <=-

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to esc on Mon Sep 05 2022 09:55 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Arelor on Sun Sep 04 2022 02:39 pm

    The car's days are numbered, and electric cars are not the solution. We nee

    You have to remember, autonomous vehicles will still need all the space and

    Everything in life is somewhere else, and you need a car to get there.

    Indeed. We live close enough to one of my kiddos schools that she could
    walk, but the other school is 15 miles away. My wife's work place is
    almost 22 miles away. I pay to have our groceries delivered, but we need
    to have at least two vehicles to get to the places we need to go.

    I work remotely, so I don't have to worry 'bout getting to work. :)



    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet -=[ conchaos.synchro.net | ConstructiveChaos BBS ]=-
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Irish_Monk on Tue Sep 6 21:11:00 2022
    One of the very few positives of my job is I have a company vehicle.
    Yes, it has a GPS and some other device that tracks speeds and probably everything else. But the good thing is, I work what we call 2nd shift, 1030am-7pm. My work truck leaves my driveway at 1030am and usually is pulling in my driveway at 7:01pm. So like you said, its more family time etc... and less miles on my personal truck....

    Ah, nice. I live 45 mins (give or take) from my office and I work at a tech company which doesn't have traditional "hours" but there is some sentiment from upper level management that we should be present at the office. Today my first meeting was 6:30am, and my final meeting was 4:30pm, and there were no 45+ minute gaps between meetings for me to drive to work. Someone gave me grief about it today. It's frustrating. Granted he had his first meeting at 7am and he lives an hour from the office, but he also is young and doesn't have a family and he thinks that type of pace/commitment is acceptable.

    I'll continue to act in defiance out of what I believe to be correct and am happy to defend my position if push comes to shove.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Nightfox on Tue Sep 6 21:14:00 2022
    Those same things apply to many things.. And regarding having to buy
    them - Do young people these days expect to get things for free?

    Nope. The services they use are ones that cost money.

    Also, I only remember the app-based ride services appearing within the last 10 years or so.. Unless they've been around longer, if someone is used to app-based ride services, they might not even be old enough to drive yet? Besides, taxi services have been around a lot longer and we haven't seen a bunch of people want to take taxis instead of owning
    their own car. Taxis and things like Uber, Lyft, etc. can be expensive.

    People graduating from college now are people that aren't as interested in car ownership, to put it in perspective. People that came of age during an era when it was cheaper and easier to spend your minimum wage on carpooling with folks in an Uber vs spending all your cash on owning a car, basically.

    Taxis can be expensive, sure, as can Ubers, but a car is typically the second biggest investment a person will make, and it's one that will be a money pit every single time. *shrug*

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Nightfox on Tue Sep 6 21:17:00 2022
    I don't think you can even really talk about a car as an investment. If you're buying a car to try to invest, then that's just a bad idea. A
    car is meant to be used - The usefulness is in transportation, and if
    you can make use of it, then I think you'll get its money's worth.

    Any financial advisor would tell you that purchasing a car is the single stupidest thing most people do with their money. It is an investment when you consider how much it costs, and the fact that it's typically the second biggest purchase a person will make (after purchasing a house). The difference is, the house will appreciate, the car will depreciate. The car is useful for transportation but there are alternatives, which is I think the thing I'm trying to convey that the market is trending toward supporting.

    You may think you get your money's worth, but more and more people are disagreeing with that position each day. Anyway I'm not here trying to convince you not to buy a car, merely relaying what is happening in an industry that is highly relevant to my day to day work.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Gamgee on Tue Sep 6 21:19:00 2022
    You are somehow equating *YOUR* experience/knowledge, which seems to be solely based on huge metropolitan areas (the Bay Area?). I can assure you that young people in my world do/did not grow up in a world where they get a ride with an app on their phone.

    I'm equating data, because in the world where I work, data is what drives things, not anecdotes from me or you or anyone else. Young people in your world will probably still buy cars, young people in urban environments are trending in the opposite direction, and there are more young people in urban environments than anywhere else.

    I say again: NOT EVERYONE LIVES IN A FREAKIN URBAN CRAP-HOLE!!!

    Why are you being so combative, anyway? Nobody attacked you or where you live. Don't be such a snowflake ;)

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to DaiTengu on Tue Sep 6 19:34:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: DaiTengu to Moondog on Tue Sep 06 2022 11:44 am

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Arelor on Sun Sep 04 2022 08:25 am

    Personally, I like having a personal car that won't get shut off becaus the company's network can't see it due to poor cell reception or lack o related cell partnerships.

    Which reminds me. I bought a Lexus in 2018 (my wife's vehicle). It has a t

    3G cellular networks.

    3G is getting shut off in a few months, so all those features will just no l

    Toyota (The Lexus parent company) thus far has refused to even offer any kin s able to do it via software) or hardware upgrades, others have a solution t

    I shit you not, the cars that use 2G networks (older 2004-2010 models) will

    I can't imagine how something like this would wreak havoc on an atonomous ve

    DaiTengu

    ... The time to relax is when you don't have time for it.


    It sounds like you may have to pursue a third party alternative service, if such a thing exists.

    My 2009 Scion has an Ipod ready stereo that won't connect to an Iphone
    through the supplied cable. i doubt Scion/ Toyota will help unless I buy a
    new car.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to esc on Wed Sep 7 04:00:04 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Nightfox on Tue Sep 06 2022 05:16 pm


    You have to buy them, they cost a lot and are typically a horrible financial

    I think you are overestimating the reach of transport-as-a-service by a long shot.

    Transport-as-a-service has been available for decades on your phone. We used to call it "taxi cab". It didn't make much of a dent on private transport.

    Everybody here is talking about transport-as-a-service killing private transport, but here is this:

    * I am one of those filthy millennials who are supposed to live glued to their electronic devices.
    * My friends are of those filthy millennials who are supposed to live glued to their devices.
    * Every single one of my friends has a private car for work, with one exception.
    * The guy who has no car lacks it because he decided to invest heavily in a house near his workplace instead. He can barely afford it.
    * None of us uses transport-as-aservice as a substitute for private transport. We may use non-private transport for recreational trips in which we don't expect to use a car on destination (ie. we go on a trip somewhere, we take the bus to reach that place).

    The government is also on a crusade against non-taxi transport as a service, so I really don't see it gaining much traction out of big, big, big cities (which should be avoided like the plague anyway).





    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to esc on Wed Sep 7 04:18:10 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Nightfox on Tue Sep 06 2022 09:14 pm


    Taxis can be expensive, sure, as can Ubers, but a car is typically the secon


    Something that saves you money is not a money pit if it saves you from throwing even more money at different money pits.

    If a car allows you to grab a job at a location you could not reach, a car is both a smart investment and a money generating machine (since it allows you to generate a salary).

    If a car allows you to make order deliveries, it is a money generating machine and a smart investment.

    For anything that sees regular use, ownership is usually a smarter investment than rental. If I throw money at owning a building for setting a business in, after the money disappears I am left with a building. If I throw money at renting it, after the money disappears I am left with... nothing.

    This is the danger of Stuff-as-a-service models: they are abyssal value propositions. After you spend a year paying your Netflix subscription, once the service goes down or you stop paying, the money has disappeared into a hole and nothing is left. If you spend the money in building a money library instead, once you are finished spending you'll have a library instead of your money.

    Well, with transportation services it is pretty much the same. Once you are done with a car you own, you can pass it to your kids. Try doing that with a public transport service.


    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to esc on Wed Sep 7 04:28:15 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Nightfox on Tue Sep 06 2022 09:17 pm

    I don't think you can even really talk about a car as an investment. I you're buying a car to try to invest, then that's just a bad idea. A car is meant to be used - The usefulness is in transportation, and if you can make use of it, then I think you'll get its money's worth.

    Any financial advisor would tell you that purchasing a car is the single stu ake (after purchasing a house). The difference is, the house will appreciate orting.

    You may think you get your money's worth, but more and more people are disag
    to day work.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M

    Finantial advisors here usually tell you to own your main means of production instead of renting them. A fleet of trucks you own may devaluate. A fleet of trucks you rent is worth nothing at all after the money is gone.

    Transport renting is something firms here do when their accountant tells them they need to get rid of money with expenses that can be justified.

    Besides, I doubt a car is the second biggest investment people makes since mid-to-high level education is more expensive, setting a corner business is more expensive, and healthcare that actually works is also more expensive (in the long run). I certainly spend more keeping my business up, in housing and in taxes than I spend in the car (and I am talking orders of magnitude here).

    /S
    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Nightfox on Wed Sep 7 20:33:35 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Boraxman on Tue Sep 06 2022 08:43 am

    is best done by a car. Groceries, sometimes, but we have terrible urban design where the avialability of groceries is
    centralised to a few large supermarkets in commercial areas. Why not intersperce residential areas with commercial?
    More smaller corner general stores? I look at the new

    That depends on the area. I'm about a 5 minute drive from my nearest grocery store, and in the past, I've generally lived
    fairly close to a grocery store, so I think a lot of places are designed where that's the case. Where I live, many times
    when I've seen residential areas far from a grocery store, it has usually been very rural areas where things are spread out
    fairly far, or people living in farm communities where there isn't much around them but farm land, and that sort of thing.

    Nightfox


    Corner stores used to be more prevalent in my home city in previous generations. You can still see in some suburbs the remnants of these stores, now closed up. In many areas there was the corner store, or "Milk Bar" as we called them. We had one around the corner from where I grew up. I could run and get milk and come back during an ad break!

    Rural areas are of course different, but Australia is quite urbanised. In fact, I don't think I've ever lived anywhere which wasn't a walk from the shops, or at least a short walk from what used to be a corner store.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Nightfox on Wed Sep 7 20:38:36 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to esc on Tue Sep 06 2022 08:47 am

    I enjoy driving when doing it for fun, but I certainly don't enjoy driving to the airport or the office in rush hour.
    I'd gladly sit in an autonomous car in those circumstances.

    I don't like driving in rush hour either. An autonomous car would make it easier, but I'd still rather not sit in a car
    during rush hour. I feel like being stuck in traffic is a waste of time.

    Nightfox

    One time I had a 1 hour plus commute to work each day, up and back. Two hours plus a day. I calculated that each year, I spend the equivalent of almost ONE MONTH in the car. Literally one entire MONTH per year, stuck in a box, frustrated. Not one month of working days, but a full 24/7 month.

    That is truly a waste of time.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Arelor on Wed Sep 7 20:55:41 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to Boraxman on Tue Sep 06 2022 03:16 pm

    transport because we can just be lazy and assume everyone will drive everywh rban model. Urban sprawl and isolation.

    People are rejecting this, preferring to live in the denser inner city, with


    It seems to me that your problem comes from living in an overpopulated area rather than because cars exist.

    MOst people complaining about traffic issues and having to drive to work live in big cities. In Madrid so many people live
    in suburbs and bedroom-neighbourhoods but they all decide to drive to the center of Madrid at once for work at dawn.

    Mid and small sized towns just don't generate this environment. If you take the capitals of the Autonomies surrounding
    Madrid, they are very much navegable without their administrations having taken any effort to make them navegable. In fact,
    some are very navegable despite the fact their autonomies have worsened traffic by trying to manipulate it. Heck, Toledo
    features middle-age style streets which are barely wide enough for a car, but there are not bad traffic issues because the
    place is not massificated.

    I do live in an overpopulated area. Melbourne (and Australia in general) has seen very, very rapid population growth, above world average, mostly due to the government maintaining a high immigration rate. This has resulted in vast urban sprawl, infrastructure stretched and clogged roads. One now faces "peak traffic" every day, including weekends.

    Smaller cities are far better in this regard, and my wife and I have contemplated moving. But cities wouldn't grow this large if it wasn't viable at all. The typical pattern is that new suburbs spring up, with little to no train connectivity, poor bus services (buses kind of suck) and no light rail. Melbourne does have a light rail system, but that is limited to the inner suburbs. The road in and out (there is often just one) becomes a bottle neck, and there are few services nearby. One suburb we looked at buying had few primary schools and NO secondary schools nearby. The closest were a fairly long drive away.

    This is exacerbated by urban planning which prioritises the car above all else. It will have to come to an end. Cars are reliant on oil, oil made the car what it is. After peak oil it will be an inferior model. Electric cars won't save it.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Arelor on Wed Sep 7 21:00:48 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to Boraxman on Tue Sep 06 2022 03:22 pm

    Without a car, I think it would be a lot more difficult to get groceries, unless I used grocery delivery services to
    deliver grocies to my house (which add costs to buying groceries). I also like picking out my own fru & vegetables &
    such, most of the time. There will also still be a need f larger vehicles for transporting large items such as
    furniture, home appliances, etc..

    Also, currently I have a fairly short drive to work. If I were to take public transportation to work, it would
    certainly also take longer for me get to work.

    Nightfox
    Of course the car is useful, it just sucks when used as a universal means of roceries is centralised to a few large
    supermarkets in commercial areas. Wh g centre" where all the shops are. A traffic snarl, shops lost in a sea of

    We're sold on a fake efficiency. We don't really see the costs involved in
    about our children outside the house. The car has many shortcomings that w

    ---

    The car is not necessary. During Spanish fascism there were lots of people who could not afford a car. If they wanted to go
    to the market next town they just took a donkey and dedicated a whole day for the trip.

    Places such as Madrid have convenience stores, grocery's and markets conveniently placed, but this does not void the need
    for proper transport at all. In fact Madrid competes with Barcelona for the position as the Most Hostile City to Human Life
    in Spain.


    I think it is necessary, but it is like the floppy disk when USB and CD-ROM were on the rise. They were clearly on the way out, but there were things that the USB stick and CD-ROM couldn't do, which is why the floppy stick around for a while longer. t just wasn't AS necessary as it used to be.

    I should be clear, that I'm not saying we should eliminate the car, but rather reduce it. Make it less necessary. Make long trips less necessary. Traffic is eased simply by reducing the distance people need to drive.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Moondog on Wed Sep 7 21:12:05 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Boraxman on Tue Sep 06 2022 07:09 pm

    Without a car, I think it would be a lot more difficult to get groceries, unless I used grocery delivery services to
    deliver grocies to my house (which add costs to buying groceries). I also like picking out my own fru & vegetables &
    such, most of the time. There will also still be a need f larger vehicles for transporting large items such as
    furniture, home appliances, etc..

    Also, currently I have a fairly short drive to work. If I were to take public transportation to work, it would
    certainly also take longer for me get to work.

    Nightfox
    Of course the car is useful, it just sucks when used as a universal means of groceries is centralised to a few large
    supermarkets in commercial areas. W ing centre" where all the shops are. A traffic snarl, shops lost in a sea o

    We're sold on a fake efficiency. We don't really see the costs involved in y about our children outside the house. The
    car has many shortcomings that

    Supermarkets killed the general stores, and the big box stores and malls killed downtown. why go to the overpriced store with limited inventory when the specialty stores at the mall or plaza have
    better prices and better variety? the little stores can only compete if they are more than just a retailer. They have to
    offer services the big stores don't have. i would go to a local gun shop over going to a Cabelas or Dunhams for getting
    better information or gunsmithing services. If i wanted cheap ammo that only a
    giant corporation could offer because it could buy in larger volumes than mom and pop could ever afford, the big box is my
    choice.


    And the Internet is going to replace those stores, as you can buy things online rather than having to waltz down to the store. Supermarkets are able to really drop prices to a degree the corner store can't. Part of that is because these giant stores can really turn the screws and screw over producers. Local stores here are closing because they don't have the option of ripping off farmers, and they have high rents. High rents have closed many stores here. We no longer have a fresh fruit and veg store due to obstinate landlords. Not the only business i've seen go to the wall for that reason.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Irish_Monk on Wed Sep 7 21:15:45 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Irish_Monk to esc on Tue Sep 06 2022 08:43 pm

    Im sure there could be a lot of different outcomes. But it would be interesting if someone bought/used a car for a certain
    amount a time. Added that all up. And then for the same amount of time just used services like UBER or whatever and added
    that up.Trying to stick to the same routine roughly. I wonder what would actually cost more? My kids have used UBER quite a
    bit, I have never, So I dont really know the costs, sometimes when they would tell me real quick about the ride and how much
    it cost, I thought it was expensive, but then sometimes it seemed they got a really good deal. Not sure why. Cars are very
    expensive, like you said, when adding _EVERYTHING_ up, its more than you think..

    |10I|02rish_|10M|02onk

    ... A program is used to turn data into error messages.

    A friend of mine made it far into his adult life without a car. He said he already had access to a car. They were yellow with "taxi" written on it. He did get a car, but still didn't use the car heavily. I'm sure he doesn't own one now. This guy isn't a bum, he's financially successful,travels the world.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Nightfox on Wed Sep 7 21:26:46 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to esc on Tue Sep 06 2022 06:51 pm

    I don't think you can even really talk about a car as an investment. If you're buying a car to try to invest, then that's
    just a bad idea. A car is meant to be used - The usefulness is in transportation, and if you can make use of it, then I
    think you'll get its money's worth.

    Nightfox

    Our family car cost $37K. Have that for 20 years, max, that is nearly $2000 a year amortised. Add to that $1000 per year for insurance, $800 per year registration. Add parking fees, servicing, approx $500 - $1000 a year, depending if there are repairs, damange to fix. Petrol, I estimate $30 a week. 52 weeks a year that is about $1500.

    That is, what, $5,800 a year, conservatively speaking. That is just one car, we have another. That car is cheaper, but we still at several thousand dollars sunk cost a year, not too far inside $10,000 per annum.

    Excluded from this is our tax dollars going to fund roads and car infrastructure.

    Are we getting our moneys worth? How long do I spend at work to earn that money? The car saves me time here and there, but I have to spend a LOT of time to earn the money to pay for it.

    Based on this, it doesn't seem that great after all.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to Boraxman on Wed Sep 7 07:53:39 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Nightfox on Wed Sep 07 2022 09:26 pm


    Nightfox

    Our family car cost $37K. Have that for 20 years, max, that is nearly $2000

    Are those American Dollar, or Australian Dollar?

    I am paying around 400 eur per year for full-risk insurance for my car. It is not particularly old. Also no parking fees since I just station it in front of a corn field next to my house XD

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to esc on Wed Sep 7 07:42:00 2022
    esc wrote to Gamgee <=-

    You are somehow equating *YOUR* experience/knowledge, which seems to be solely based on huge metropolitan areas (the Bay Area?). I can assure
    you that young people in my world do/did not grow up in a world where
    they get a ride with an app on their phone.

    I'm equating data, because in the world where I work, data is
    what drives things, not anecdotes from me or you or anyone else.
    Young people in your world will probably still buy cars, young
    people in urban environments are trending in the opposite
    direction, and there are more young people in urban environments
    than anywhere else.

    LOL at 'anecdotes'. It's actually called 'reality'. I don't doubt that
    young people who live in downtown SF, or downtown LA, or downtown
    Chicago, or downtown NYC... don't need or buy cars. Yes. But I think
    you must seperate the SUBURBAN areas from the ultra-downtown areas. To
    put it in your Bay Area terms - how about those that live in Alameda, Pleasanton, Walnut Creek.... do they need a car? How can they get to
    work or go shopping, without a car? That's right, they can't. Not realistically, anyway. Please don't mention the bus system...

    Now expand that thinking a little, and place yourself on a long straight
    road running as far as the eye can see alongside a cornfield in Iowa, or
    the brown farmland in Idaho, or a white winter in Nowhere, North Dakota.
    Do you think you might need a car there?

    I say again: NOT EVERYONE LIVES IN A FREAKIN URBAN CRAP-HOLE!!!

    Why are you being so combative, anyway? Nobody attacked you or
    where you live. Don't be such a snowflake ;)

    Not being combative, just trying to get you to open your eyes wide
    enough to see past the concrete and glass skyscrapers. There's more to
    the world than that.


    ... The future's uncertain, the end is always near.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Nightfox on Wed Sep 7 07:45:00 2022
    Nightfox wrote to Moondog <=-

    The nearest store to me is a Dollar General, and it is 7 miles away. Walking would take forever.

    He was talking about taking public transportation. Does your
    town not have any public transportation?

    Nearly any small town in America, let's say those under 10,000
    population, does not have any public transportation.



    ... The world is full of surprises, very few of which are pleasant.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Boraxman on Wed Sep 7 08:57:26 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Nightfox on Wed Sep 07 2022 08:33 pm

    Rural areas are of course different, but Australia is quite urbanised. In fact, I don't think I've ever lived anywhere which wasn't a walk from the shops, or at least a short walk from what used to be a corner store.

    I live in an urban area as well, but I think it is fairly rare that I've seen anyone live close enough to a store where they could get all they need and walk there & back. We do have 'convenience stores' here, which may be in walking distance, but those typically are fairly small and mainly offer snacks & drinks.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to esc on Wed Sep 7 09:08:21 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Nightfox on Tue Sep 06 2022 09:17 pm

    Any financial advisor would tell you that purchasing a car is the single stupidest thing most people do with their money. It is an investment when you consider how much it costs, and the fact that it's typically the second biggest purchase a person will make (after purchasing a house). The difference is, the house will appreciate, the car will depreciate. The car is useful for transportation but there are alternatives, which is I think the thing I'm trying to convey that the market is trending toward supporting.

    I've heard people say buying a brand-new car might not be worth it because cars drop in value as soon as you drive it off the lot, but I've never heard people talk about cars being the "stupidest thing most people do with their money". Most people need a method of transportation to get where they need to go on a daily basis, and I always thought a car made a lot of sense. I used to take public transit (mainly busses) before I drove, and although I appreciated that public transit is available, it can also be inconvenient and doesn't serve every purpose well (such as transporting groceries, going on road trips, etc.).

    There are costs involved with owning a car, but my car is something I use almost every day, so I feel like I'm getting a lot of value from owning a car.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Arelor on Wed Sep 7 09:10:23 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to esc on Wed Sep 07 2022 04:00 am

    Transport-as-a-service has been available for decades on your phone. We used to call it "taxi cab". It didn't make much of a dent on private transport.

    Yes. If owning a car is such a bad investment, then why isn't everyone taking taxis, Uber, Lyft, and public transit?

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Arelor on Wed Sep 7 10:25:00 2022
    Transport-as-a-service has been available for decades on your phone. We used to call it "taxi cab". It didn't make much of a dent on private transport.

    Market share of ridesharing services like Uber and Lyft have exceeded taxis...it's not even close. And ridesharing /has/ made a dent on private transport.

    Everybody here is talking about transport-as-a-service killing private transport, but here is this:

    I appreciate everything that you share, but respectfully these are anecdotes and the world works in data :)

    The government is also on a crusade against non-taxi transport as a service, so I really don't see it gaining much traction out of big, big, big cities (which should be avoided like the plague anyway).

    The government has been on a crusade against rideshare drivers being contractors (vs being employees). The government lost, in this case. However autonomous rideshare services won't have anything to do with these drivers so the point is moot.

    Anyway, I'm not here to argue the virtues of living in one place vs another, I don't know why people keep injecting their opinion here. It's a very bizarre topic for people to be so triggered by.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Arelor on Wed Sep 7 10:26:00 2022
    Something that saves you money is not a money pit if it saves you from throwing even more money at different money pits.

    Again in this thread you provide several anecdotes which are interesting but unsupported by overall trends which is demonstrated by data.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Arelor on Wed Sep 7 10:30:00 2022
    Finantial advisors here usually tell you to own your main means of production instead of renting them. A fleet of trucks you own may devaluate. A fleet of trucks you rent is worth nothing at all after the money is gone.

    Sure, but we're talking about everyday people and not someone dealing with a fleet of trucks?

    Besides, I doubt a car is the second biggest investment people makes
    since mid-to-high level education is more expensive, setting a corner business is more expensive, and healthcare that actually works is also more expensive (in the long run). I certainly spend more keeping my business up, in housing and in taxes than I spend in the car (and I am talking orders of magnitude here).

    Regarding education, fair point. But I was speaking in terms of an investment that can either appreciate or depreciate, naturally there are ways to adapt education into this type of logical construct but I think you get the point of what I'm saying?

    Again I'm talking about data here, "health care that actually works" and "keeping my business up" are anecdotes which are not representative of overall trends.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to esc on Wed Sep 7 10:55:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Nightfox on Tue Sep 06 2022 05:16 pm

    If I mainly worked from home, I think I'd feel stir-crazy after a while Sometimes I just like getting out in order to do something (such as work). However, lately I do feel like I wouldn't mind working from hom more often. I could do that with my job, but my employer prefers peopl to be in the office when possible.

    To each his own, and I agree that full time WFH is not doable for a lot of p
    businesses evolve to give employees more of a choice.

    How are cars a nuisance to young people?

    You have to buy them, they cost a lot and are typically a horrible financial ne.

    Owning my own car was my first big responsibility on my own, and was the most liberating. I did not have to rely on a relative or friend to go somewhere, and could go places i wanted to go. If I want to go to a comics shop or a hobby shop, I didn't have to hear some BS from a friend who gets bored at places like that.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Nightfox on Wed Sep 7 11:18:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Moondog on Tue Sep 06 2022 06:49 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Boraxman on Tue Sep 06 2022 07:12 pm

    I often do that, walk home with bags of groceries. I suppose we could
    all d

    The nearest store to me is a Dollar General, and it is 7 miles away. Walking would take forever.

    He was talking about taking public transportation. Does your town not have

    Nightfox

    My town doesn't have it's own service but it shares Dial a ride with two
    other towns. They have routes in between towns, and will pick up people
    along their routes. My home is not along their route, but it may be possible to get a driver to come out for extra fees. This will be based on the
    driver's schedule, and that may vary from day to day based on customer load
    and other off-route travel. Time getting home is also at the mercy of deviation from existing route, and how many "deviants" are aboard and where they live. The window of operation is like 7am-3:30pm, so it's a service more
    or less for people who don't work or have part time jobs that fall within
    the operating time.

    When I was in school, the high school was 30 miles away. At one time the original school district merged with two other small districts and shared one middle and high school. I was on a bus route that took 45 minutes or more sitting on a bus. Every day an hour and a half was taken from me because I lived on the wrong side of the road from the school district that was 7 miles away. I'm not a fan of driving all over the countryside in buses.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to esc on Wed Sep 7 11:37:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Irish_Monk on Tue Sep 06 2022 09:11 pm

    One of the very few positives of my job is I have a company vehicle. Yes, it has a GPS and some other device that tracks speeds and probably everything else. But the good thing is, I work what we call 2nd shift, 1030am-7pm. My work truck leaves my driveway at 1030am and usually is pulling in my driveway at 7:01pm. So like you said, its more family tim etc... and less miles on my personal truck....

    Ah, nice. I live 45 mins (give or take) from my office and I work at a tech
    and my final meeting was 4:30pm, and there were no 45+ minute gaps between o is young and doesn't have a family and he thinks that type of pace/commitm

    I'll continue to act in defiance out of what I believe to be correct and am

    Earlier this year I heard a quote from some big company exec saying working from home is for those who want a job, but people who travel to the
    office are the ones who seek careers. It takes some effort to climb in a car and travel to work to sit in a cube and have people stare at you, but I don't see that as being ground breaking with regards to being more upwardly mobile.

    On NPR I heard an itnerview with a sci-fi writer who wrote a story about a young man from a poor little town in Mexico reading about job opportunities
    in Mexico city. He shows up at the office, takes some comprehensive and technicl tests, then is told to show up at another office the next day. He
    is sat in a crane simulator that is a completely submersive environment. he can see and hear like he is on the real jobsite. He passes the training and told he would be working on a building in the United Arab Emirates. He tells them he has no passport, but they tell his that is ok. Just show up at the office on time. He shows up, and they put him in the simulator room he
    trained in. This time it is for real. When dealing with other employees, he hears their voices in a synthesized spanish voice. he can also text to each other crane or loader. he wants to speak with another crane operator off the system, and gives him his phone number. It turns out the other operator is working out of Pakistan and the loader operator is from Australia. Nobody running equipment is from the place they are working.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Arelor on Wed Sep 7 11:44:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to esc on Wed Sep 07 2022 04:28 am

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Nightfox on Tue Sep 06 2022 09:17 pm

    I don't think you can even really talk about a car as an investment. you're buying a car to try to invest, then that's just a bad idea. car is meant to be used - The usefulness is in transportation, and i you can make use of it, then I think you'll get its money's worth.

    Any financial advisor would tell you that purchasing a car is the single ake (after purchasing a house). The difference is, the house will appreci orting.

    You may think you get your money's worth, but more and more people are di
    to day work.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M

    Finantial advisors here usually tell you to own your main means of productio instead of renting them. A fleet of trucks you own may devaluate. A fleet of trucks you rent is worth nothing at all after the money is gone.

    Transport renting is something firms here do when their accountant tells the they need to get rid of money with expenses that can be justified.

    Besides, I doubt a car is the second biggest investment people makes since mid-to-high level education is more expensive, setting a corner business is more expensive, and healthcare that actually works is also more expensive (i the long run). I certainly spend more keeping my business up, in housing and taxes than I spend in the car (and I am talking orders of magnitude here).

    /S
    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken


    Most of the places I worked at leased their IT assets and leased vehicles so
    we could move equipment from site to site. We were paying more to lease the machines than if we owned them, but the financial folks were looking at
    capital gains if we owned the equipment. Of course the firm we leased out assets from was a subsidiary of the company, but it was a legal form of workar ound.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Gamgee on Wed Sep 7 10:36:00 2022
    Not being combative, just trying to get you to open your eyes wide
    enough to see past the concrete and glass skyscrapers. There's more to the world than that.

    Fair enough, but I'll say again that the overall data and trends are what drives the markets to change, and the data overwhelmingly points to a decline for desire of car ownership :)

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Nightfox on Wed Sep 7 10:41:00 2022
    Yes. If owning a car is such a bad investment, then why isn't everyone taking taxis, Uber, Lyft, and public transit?

    Use in these types of services are on a significant rise

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to Gamgee on Wed Sep 7 13:48:27 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to esc on Wed Sep 07 2022 07:42 am

    Now expand that thinking a little, and place yourself on a long straight road running as far as the eye can see alongside a cornfield in Iowa, or
    the brown farmland in Idaho, or a white winter in Nowhere, North Dakota.

    So much stuff to see, so little time. If they had an advertisement like that in some travel agency, I would fall for it :-)

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to esc on Wed Sep 7 14:07:14 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Arelor on Wed Sep 07 2022 10:25 am

    The government has been on a crusade against rideshare drivers being contrac

    Anyway, I'm not here to argue the virtues of living in one place vs another,


    The argument against living in a Big City pops up because most issues raised around regarding urbanism apply only to Big Cities.

    People gets very angry with this subject because decisions regarding transport management are regularly taken by Big City folk with disregard to the needs of anybody living in a smaller city than Barcelona. It is not even a Big City vs Rural Villages struggle. They'd wreck mid-sized Cities if left unchecked.

    OFC the plural of anecdote is not data, but when my observation is that everybody with a job (but very few exceptions) owns a car for professional purposes (or borrows one) I am skeptical to claims that the opposite is true at an Universal scale.

    /S


    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to esc on Wed Sep 7 14:19:08 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Arelor on Wed Sep 07 2022 10:26 am

    Something that saves you money is not a money pit if it saves you from throwing even more money at different money pits.

    Again in this thread you provide several anecdotes which are interesting but


    No anecdote in the argument. It is formal reasoning. Big difference.

    The proof is in the pudding. When COVID-19 hit, it was businesses which heavily relied in rented assets which got wiped. If you owned the emplacement where your bar was located, you closed up and looked for something else to do, expecting to reopen the bar once the crisis was over. If you didn't own the emplacement, you closed the bar for good because you didn't have an emplacement to go back to, yet you could not afford to keep paying the rent.

    It applies to so many assets. Lots of IT firms have gone down the drain because they ussed rented cloud assets which they lost to ToS conflicts, or whose conditions were changed by the provider, and they didn't have the resources to bounce back.

    People paying rent were pouring resources in stuff that disappeared. People purchasing stuff poured resources in things that stayed.

    This is the reason why the place I work for has everything important in premises and only has stuff we don't mind losing in the cloud :-)



    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to esc on Wed Sep 7 14:40:33 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Arelor on Wed Sep 07 2022 10:30 am

    Finantial advisors here usually tell you to own your main means of production instead of renting them. A fleet of trucks you own may devaluate. A fleet of trucks you rent is worth nothing at all after the money is gone.

    Sure, but we're talking about everyday people and not someone dealing with a

    Besides, I doubt a car is the second biggest investment people makes since mid-to-high level education is more expensive, setting a corner business is more expensive, and healthcare that actually works is also more expensive (in the long run). I certainly spend more keeping my business up, in housing and in taxes than I spend in the car (and I am talking orders of magnitude here).

    Regarding education, fair point. But I was speaking in terms of an investmen

    Again I'm talking about data here, "health care that actually works" and "ke

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M

    The argument that a fleet of trucks you own won't disappear the same way as one you rent is adjustable to different scopes. A bicycle you own will still be useful ages after you have paid for it. A bicycle you don't own will vanish in a puff smoke, taking all your money with it, once you stop paying the rent.

    Education is an investment and it also has a big potential to devaluate if you are unlucky. If some folk from the government decides your degree is no longer good enough for the tasks you are performing, your degree devaluates. That stuff happens. If the education is actually good then it might still be useful, but the papers themselves are only as valuable as the Guild Mafias and politicians allow them to be.

    Healthcare that works is far from being an anecdote and I know for a fact patients at $workplace are paying much more for their insurance policies than my friends or I (and most people I know) pay for a car. Hint: social security taxes are also an insurance policy (by the look of trends since last year, it looks like it is a scammy one, but that is a different subject).


    People building upo their own business is far from being anecdotic. There are more family businesses on street level than there are big franchises and surfaces, by orders of magnitude. Plus, many instances of a franchise are
    paid by the entepreneour opening the instance anyway.

    But let's keep the argument further and assume that purchasing assets that devaluate is stupid. In that case, I will let you know that bananas devaluate quite quickly. Therefore, according to your logic, purchasing a banana and extracting value out of it before it becomes useless is stupid and everybody should be purchasing foods that gain in value (such as wine).

    Good luck feeding of wine only. DOing that, however, would be stupid: it is wiser to let the wine go up in price instead of drinking it. You'll starve to death but the investment will be very smart.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to Moondog on Wed Sep 7 14:55:50 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Arelor on Wed Sep 07 2022 11:44 am

    Most of the places I worked at leased their IT assets and leased vehicles so we could move equipment from site to site. We were paying more to lease the machines than if we owned them, but the financial folks were looking at capital gains if we owned the equipment. Of course the firm we leased out assets from was a subsidiary of the company, but it was a legal form of work ound.


    TBH it is quite fine to lease stuff you can afford to lose. If an IT company does not rely heavily on something it might make sense to rent instead. Most of the times I see it done it is for tax engineering, which is quite an artificial reason IMO.

    There is a reason why some healthcare services I know have leased cars and leased IT, but they don't lease the surgery rooms or the radiodiagnostics equipment.

    This reminds me of a firm which was delivering spam in order to promote their products. I contacted their email provider (which was outsourced) and they lost ALL their email infrastructure when the email provider kicked them out. It turns out that delivering advertisements was so importantr for this company that they kept phoning into my office for a whole week asking me to tell the email provider it had been a misunderstanding - and they eventually had to go with a different provider, whose prices were much worse by the look of their websites.


    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Digital Man@VERT to Moondog on Wed Sep 7 13:35:46 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Boraxman on Mon Sep 05 2022 05:23 pm

    Everything in life is somewhere else, and you need a car to get there.

    Not necessarily. Many people in dense urban environments (big cities) live their lives very fully without needing to own their own car.
    --
    digital man (rob)

    Sling Blade quote #6:
    Karl: he should've had a chance to grow up. He would had fun some time.
    Norco, CA WX: 101.8F, 31.0% humidity, 0 mph E wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
    ---
    Synchronet Vertrauen Home of Synchronet [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to poindexter FORTRAN on Wed Sep 7 13:39:43 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: poindexter FORTRAN to Arelor on Sun Sep 04 2022 08:22 am

    my uncle has a country place
    that no one knows about
    he says it used to be a farm
    before the motor law
    on sundays i elude the eyes
    and hop the turbine freight
    to fall outside the wire
    where my white haired uncle waits...

    i strip away the old debris
    that hides a shining car
    a brilliant red barchetta
    from a better, vanished time
    fire up the willing engine
    responding with a roar
    tires spitting gravel
    i commit my weekly crime...

    Nice reference. One correction: "To *far* outside the Wire".
    --
    digital man (rob)

    Rush quote #13:
    Cast in this unlikely role, ill-equipped to act, with insufficient tact
    Norco, CA WX: 101.8F, 31.0% humidity, 0 mph E wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
    ---
    Synchronet Vertrauen Home of Synchronet [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Tracker1@VERT/TRN to esc on Wed Sep 7 13:28:16 2022
    On 9/6/22 14:17, esc wrote:

    Any financial advisor would tell you that purchasing a car is
    the single stupidest thing most people do with their money. It
    is an investment when you consider how much it costs, and the
    fact that it's typically the second biggest purchase a person
    will make (after purchasing a house).

    A car should not be thought of as an investment, at least not regarding
    how people think about investments. It's better to think of it as a
    tool that will wear, break and (usually) depreciate in value over time
    until it's only worth scrap or salvage.

    It's about the opportunity that a car gives you, and the entertainment
    value, assuming you enjoy driving. It allows you to have flexibility in
    terms of when/where/how you do things that are outside your immediate
    area. It also allows you to calculate the costs in a more consistent
    way than service/delivery fees on demand. The absolute costs are not
    always better than the alternatives.

    My car is now paid off, my fiance's and daughter's vehicles aren't. At
    this point, I could probably do without, sharing my fiance's and my
    daughter definitely couldn't do without given the area's relative lack
    of good public transport and how spread out the Phoenix area is.

    That said, I like my car and I enjoy driving. I also like road/weekend
    trips and find value in that. Since it's "paid for" and in good
    operating condition, there's marginal extra cost for the insurance over
    the other two cars, and registration is less than half what a single
    month's payment was.

    I do think we need better/alternative vehicle designs at this point...
    given the number of autonomous vehicles that will be on the road for packages/delivery and for the likes of Uber/Lift/Waymo, etc. The
    classic driver/passenger design is likely not going to be needed. For packages, I think something in the form factor used in Japan, where no
    driver compartment is needed will become the norm for most of what's on
    the road during the day, with a smaller drone inside for doorstep drops.
    I can see this working with a mobile hive carrier... where a larger
    vehicle has larger units that are swapped to/from the smaller wheeled
    drones nearer last mile delivery.

    For passenger travel, I'm thinking more cargo-van size where the base
    can be as low and flat as reasonable, and seating can be effective and comfortable. Also better for shopping or airport trips with more space.

    Larger cargo/semi trucks aren't going anywhere... I also don't think
    diesel fuel is going anywhere either, though may get displaced by
    different sources (seed/peanut oil, etc).

    In general, it's probably better to see a few more varieties of options.
    I think efforts to force all-electric are really ignorant in the near
    term and only serve to make the grid suffer in general. EU is learning
    the lessons the hard way of moving away from nuclear power without
    sufficient domestic options. California in particular is going to suffer
    badly in the next decade without a significant shift in mindset.

    All of that said, I plan to continue driving until I'm either no longer physically able, or I'm dead.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com
    ---
    Synchronet Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com
  • From Tracker1@VERT/TRN to Nightfox on Wed Sep 7 13:30:03 2022
    On 9/7/22 09:10, Nightfox wrote:
    Transport-as-a-service has been available for decades on your phone.
    We used to call it "taxi cab". It didn't make much of a dent on
    private transport.

    Yes. If owning a car is such a bad investment, then why isn't
    everyone taking taxis, Uber, Lyft, and public transit?

    I think it's mostly about population density... it makes more sense in
    areas with greater density and lower ground travel necessary. In more sprawling cities like CA, TX, AZ it's much harder to persist on ride
    services and public transit.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com
    ---
    Synchronet Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com
  • From Tracker1@VERT/TRN to Moondog on Wed Sep 7 13:44:48 2022
    On 9/7/22 08:44, Moondog wrote:

    Most of the places I worked at leased their IT assets and leased
    vehicles so we could move equipment from site to site. We were paying
    more to lease the machines than if we owned them, but the financial
    folks were looking at capital gains if we owned the equipment. Of
    course the firm we leased out assets from was a subsidiary of the
    company, but it was a legal form of workaround.

    There's lots of reasons to do things like this... by keeping assets off
    the books in a given company. There's also sometimes some real crappy
    moves going on behind the scenes (see K-Mart/Sears) regarding the second company that owns the equipment/debt etc. The leasing company takes on
    debt to buy the equipment, and this protects that other company from
    having that risk on the books... worst case scenario, the leasing
    company folds, and the creditors are left holding the bag.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com
    ---
    Synchronet Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com
  • From Tracker1@VERT/TRN to esc on Wed Sep 7 13:52:02 2022
    On 9/7/22 03:36, esc wrote:

    Fair enough, but I'll say again that the overall data and trends are
    what drives the markets to change, and the data overwhelmingly points
    to a decline for desire of car ownership :)

    Of course.. you can get most of what you need delivered to you the same
    or next day at marginal additional cost (Amazon). I think the likes of Grubhub/Uber-Eats and similar are in a tough spot short of autonomous
    vehicles and drones for doorstep drop-off by comparison.

    That said, there's a cost to society for these things and people not
    leaving their homes. The increase in "social anxiety" is palpable to
    say the least, and by all metrics the only way around it is to actually
    get out and do things, not drugs, not therapy.

    I think if I were the likes of Walmart/Amazon, I'd actually be investing
    in larger/denser construction projects, using pod/floor systems like
    high rises in the middle east. Building with a few hundred apartments,
    Whole Foods and Starbucks in the building including amazon returns/drop.
    Get that population density up, own/control the market and increase dependency. While reducing last mile delivery costs. For western US
    cities, sprawling parking lot.. for other locations, multi-floor
    garage... developed with 1.8 spaces per unit, each rented separately.

    Not that it's what I want personally, just where my mind would be if I
    had the funds to make such a thing happen.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com
    ---
    Synchronet Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com
  • From Tracker1@VERT/TRN to esc on Wed Sep 7 13:56:08 2022
    On 9/7/22 03:38, esc wrote:

    Yeah, I have been doing so and continue to. It's frustrating but it's
    not forever. Once this company IPOs I'll begin looking at other
    options in earnest.
    ...
    Totally. I'm sticking around here for now in spite of any frustrations really because I want a big payout, so I'm holding out hope that it
    happens sooner rather than later hehe. I think after this I'm going to
    work for myself, I'm growing sick of working for other people.

    I'm kind of in a similar boat... took a job last year that includes a
    healthy amount of RSUs that are granted over the next few years... until
    IPO, really doesn't mean anything... if there's a 10x growth by the time
    I cash out, it could be retirement money and I could work on stuff I
    want to do. I'd probably still do work for/with other people, just less concerned about the money and more about the job/satisfaction.

    Right now, I'm very well paid for far less flexibility and autonomy than
    I'm used to and it's beyond frustrating and disheartening.

    I don't ever plan to stop working, even if I had the money to do so...
    I'd be more inclined to focus on what I want to do and less on what
    others want.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com
    ---
    Synchronet Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com
  • From Tracker1@VERT/TRN to Arelor on Wed Sep 7 13:58:33 2022
    On 9/7/22 11:53, Arelor wrote:

    A finantial advisor I used to know would advise you not to won the car, but to
    build a phantom company that owned the car, so you could get tax deductions for
    the car \o/

    Similar for owning a home... have an LLC for the house, with shares of
    that company in a trust. Isolates risk, offsets costs and maximize deductions. For those renting houses, having each house in an LLC to
    limit liability as well... nobody can sue you directly.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com
    ---
    Synchronet Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to esc on Wed Sep 7 19:57:00 2022
    esc wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Not being combative, just trying to get you to open your eyes wide
    enough to see past the concrete and glass skyscrapers. There's more to the world than that.

    Fair enough, but I'll say again that the overall data and trends
    are what drives the markets to change, and the data
    overwhelmingly points to a decline for desire of car ownership :)

    Also fair enough, and I don't doubt that car sales will decrease in
    coming times. That will be due to the big-city population's decline in desire, but will not affect "country" folk in any significant way,
    because there isn't any realistic alternative for them.



    ... All the easy problems have been solved.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Arelor on Wed Sep 7 20:01:00 2022
    Arelor wrote to Gamgee <=-

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to esc on Wed Sep 07 2022 07:42 am

    Now expand that thinking a little, and place yourself on a long straight road running as far as the eye can see alongside a cornfield in Iowa, or
    the brown farmland in Idaho, or a white winter in Nowhere, North Dakota.

    So much stuff to see, so little time. If they had an
    advertisement like that in some travel agency, I would fall for
    it :-)

    Hahaha! I have seen all of those things, and more! But I do agree with
    you, there is still plenty not seen (yet). I have not yet been to
    Spain, although my daughter lived there (Sevilla and Rota) for 2-3 years
    and loved it. I'll get there one day.



    ... A woman drove me to drink, and I never had the courtesy to thank her.
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to Nightfox on Wed Sep 7 20:09:00 2022
    Nightfox wrote to Arelor <=-

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to esc on Wed Sep 07 2022 04:00 am

    Transport-as-a-service has been available for decades on your phone. We used to call it "taxi cab". It didn't make much of a dent on private transport.

    Yes. If owning a car is such a bad investment, then why isn't
    everyone taking taxis, Uber, Lyft, and public transit?

    I know it wasn't you who said a car is a bad investment... But that's
    all wrong anyway. A car is not an investment at all. It's a TOOL that
    is used to make life easier, like any other tool. Like a pair of
    pliers, or a smartphone, or a piece of software. It's not *MEANT* to
    increase in value. When it wears out, you buy a new one. Just like you
    would with a coffee maker, or a toaster.

    Oh, and the reason people (other than inner city folks) aren't using
    those services is that they are ridiculously expensive over time.
    You're throwing money down the toilet with that, because when your ride
    is completed, you have......... nothing to show for it. No car, no
    tool, no nothing. Well, except the need to hire another one to get home later...


    ... Pros are those who do their jobs well, even when they don't feel like it. --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Gamgee@VERT/PALANT to esc on Wed Sep 7 20:14:00 2022
    esc wrote to Nightfox <=-

    Yes. If owning a car is such a bad investment, then why isn't everyone taking taxis, Uber, Lyft, and public transit?

    Use in these types of services are on a significant rise

    In big city/inner city locations.... just to clarify. Not so in
    suburbia and country environments.

    Before you say "that's just an anecdote"... it isn't. It's DATA that I
    see with my own eyes, and get from my own conversations and interactions
    with people. It's not made up, and it's not hearsay. It's fact.



    ... Can you tell me how to get, how to get to Sesame Street?
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Arelor on Wed Sep 7 19:44:00 2022
    So much stuff to see, so little time. If they had an advertisement like that in some travel agency, I would fall for it :-)

    Ha yeah, my wife and I are about to take an RV trip. We love getting out and disconnecting. The US is such a beautiful country to explore.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Arelor on Wed Sep 7 19:45:00 2022
    A finantial advisor I used to know would advise you not to won the car, but to build a phantom company that owned the car, so you could get tax deductions for the car \o/

    I need this guy's help on taxes this year, please hehe

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Arelor on Wed Sep 7 19:52:00 2022
    The proof is in the pudding. When COVID-19 hit, it was businesses which heavily relied in rented assets which got wiped. If you owned the emplacement where your bar was located, you closed up and looked for something else to do, expecting to reopen the bar once the crisis was over. If you didn't own the emplacement, you closed the bar for good because you didn't have an emplacement to go back to, yet you could not afford to keep paying the rent.

    I believe the research demonstrated that brick and mortar stores (not bars or restaurants) were already trending toward obsolescence due to things like Amazon, and COVID merely sped this up. But yeah, as far as restaurants and bars, COVID really must have been shitty. I can't imagine.

    It applies to so many assets. Lots of IT firms have gone down the drain because they ussed rented cloud assets which they lost to ToS conflicts, or whose conditions were changed by the provider, and they didn't have
    the resources to bounce back.

    Interesting, I hadn't heard of this. Naturally the perspective I get is from people that actually work at places like AWS so I only ever heard the rosy side of the story. That said, I've had nothing but positive experiences with Digital Ocean, granted they're a bit pricier than some other options. Then again, I store things myself that are important, and really only put things in cloud instances that I intend to open up to the broader internet (i.e., my BBS).

    People paying rent were pouring resources in stuff that disappeared. People purchasing stuff poured resources in things that stayed.

    In the US we have a big problem with foreign investors "safely" parking their money in American real estate. I don't have any issues with people diversifying their assets or helping invest in communities, but the problem is that it ends up forcing American people to rent since they become priced out of buying (how can someone try to get a mortgage and compete for someone offering cash 20% over asking price, for example). In a perfect world, everyone would buy, but I don't think that's always possible.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Tracker1 on Wed Sep 7 19:58:00 2022
    A car should not be thought of as an investment, at least not regarding how people think about investments. It's better to think of it as a
    tool that will wear, break and (usually) depreciate in value over time until it's only worth scrap or salvage.

    This is basically why I lease cars. The reason I put it in terms of being an investment is because people that advocate for car ownership do so because of an idea of owning something after paying for it, and not treating it like a consumable.

    It's about the opportunity that a car gives you, and the entertainment value, assuming you enjoy driving. It allows you to have flexibility in terms of when/where/how you do things that are outside your immediate area. It also allows you to calculate the costs in a more consistent
    way than service/delivery fees on demand. The absolute costs are not always better than the alternatives.

    I'd differ with you a bit on your final point. The market is trending to a place where much of industry predicts a rideshare subscription service...you pay x amount per month and you have on-demand service from its fleet of autonomous vehicles. /That/ is the predictable model IMO. We lease new cars to avoid any maintenance surprises and accept a bit of additional expense to defer any extra hassle.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Tracker1 on Wed Sep 7 20:04:00 2022
    I'm kind of in a similar boat... took a job last year that includes a healthy amount of RSUs that are granted over the next few years... until IPO, really doesn't mean anything... if there's a 10x growth by the time I cash out, it could be retirement money and I could work on stuff I
    want to do. I'd probably still do work for/with other people, just less concerned about the money and more about the job/satisfaction.

    Yep, this exactly. My last gig was a pre-IPO gig and there was a substantial payout which was pretty life changing. One more of these and I don't think I'll have to work for anyone else ever again. It's not early retirement money for me but definitely some "F*** You" money if I'm unhappy.

    Something that was frustrating for me at my last company was the realization that no matter how hard I worked, no matter how many outcomes I helped achieve, I was really doing all of that simply to make someone else rich. I'm doing that again now, and granted while my payout is significant, it's not something I'm willing to do again.

    Right now, I'm very well paid for far less flexibility and autonomy than I'm used to and it's beyond frustrating and disheartening.

    Yes, same, this, 10000%. You're tugging on my heartstrings here.

    I don't ever plan to stop working, even if I had the money to do so... I'd be more inclined to focus on what I want to do and less on what others want.

    My wife and I would like to retire somewhat early. My dad retired at 66 and now he's too old to really do the things he had wanted to do throughout his life, and prior to this, he was too busy working to do the things he wanted to do. This isn't the retirement I want. That's not to say I'll stop working necessarily but the definition of "work" may look a bit different (i.e., volunteering at an animal shelter or something).

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Gamgee on Wed Sep 7 20:08:00 2022
    Also fair enough, and I don't doubt that car sales will decrease in coming times. That will be due to the big-city population's decline in desire, but will not affect "country" folk in any significant way, because there isn't any realistic alternative for them.

    Yeah, true. We have business in Germany and it's interesting how different parts of Europe are to the US in this regard. We actually have a rather distributed population. Working on autonomy projects in places like Germany is different due to how their urban centers are structured, and how populations are distributed.

    I am sad to say that autonomy is going to render a lot of country work redundant...we are headed to a place where work sites (construction, mining, large scale farming) will be comprised mainly of machines that operate without human interaction, and a small proportion of people will reap the majority of any financial upside. All the companies building machines to do this type of work (think of all the chief players in farming equipment) are investing heavily in autonomy. They treat it like a foregone conclusion.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Gamgee on Wed Sep 7 20:09:00 2022
    Hahaha! I have seen all of those things, and more! But I do agree with you, there is still plenty not seen (yet). I have not yet been to
    Spain, although my daughter lived there (Sevilla and Rota) for 2-3 years and loved it. I'll get there one day.

    Dude! I got arrested in Rota! Pro-tip - don't take Ambien on a flight back to the US from the Middle East if it has to stop and refuel somewhere. Murphy's Law dictates that the aircraft will absolutely break down and you'll be wandering around during siesta like a crazy person. Hehe.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From esc@VERT/MONTEREY to Gamgee on Wed Sep 7 20:10:00 2022
    Before you say "that's just an anecdote"... it isn't. It's DATA that I see with my own eyes, and get from my own conversations and interactions with people. It's not made up, and it's not hearsay. It's fact.

    Respectfully, that's basically the definition of anecdotal information ;)

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Arelor on Thu Sep 8 23:45:01 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to Boraxman on Wed Sep 07 2022 07:53 am

    Our family car cost $37K. Have that for 20 years, max, that is nearly $2000

    Are those American Dollar, or Australian Dollar?

    I am paying around 400 eur per year for full-risk insurance for my car. It is not particularly old. Also no parking fees since I just station it in front of a corn field next to my house XD

    This is in Australian dollars. Registration is costly here, most of it is a type of insurance, the TAC. This is money which is paid out to accident victims. Someone has to pay to support all the people crippled in accidents, and those who have lost breadwinners.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Arelor on Fri Sep 9 00:01:24 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to MRO on Wed Sep 07 2022 01:53 pm

    Any financial advisor would tell you that purchasing a car is the single stupidest thing most people do with their money. It is an investment when you consider how much it costs, and the fact that it's typically the seco biggest purchase a person will make (after purchasing a house). The difference is, the house will appreciate, the car will depreciate. The ca is useful for transportation but there are alternatives, which is I think the thing I'm trying to convey that the market is trending toward supporting.

    i'm in a big urban area and to make good money i need to have a car. I'm no ---
    Synchronet ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

    A finantial advisor I used to know would advise you not to won the car, but to build a phantom company that owned the car, so you could get tax deductions for the car \o/

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    I have always purchased (for myself anyway) cheap cars. I am on my second car, after 25 years of driving. It *IS* stupid financially to spend a dollar more on a car than what is necessary. Luxury cars have virtually no return. They offer the same function and unless it is a Lamborghini or something, are bad investments.

    So yes, I can see why this financial advice would be given. Buying a bigger house than you need isn't a bad investment, you'll see its value rise, get more utility. Buying a bigger car, you still lose heaps of value, but get little in return.

    Put it this way, if you are going to spend $60K on a car (and people do), you're better off putting $10-$15 on the car, and investing the rest in shares.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Gamgee on Thu Sep 8 08:31:21 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Gamgee to Nightfox on Wed Sep 07 2022 08:09 pm

    I know it wasn't you who said a car is a bad investment... But that's
    all wrong anyway. A car is not an investment at all. It's a TOOL that
    is used to make life easier, like any other tool. Like a pair of
    pliers, or a smartphone, or a piece of software. It's not *MEANT* to increase in value. When it wears out, you buy a new one. Just like you would with a coffee maker, or a toaster.

    Yes, that's exactly what I was thinking. People buy cars because they're a tool, and their usefulness is transportation (not as an investment).

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Arelor on Thu Sep 8 09:13:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to esc on Wed Sep 07 2022 02:40 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Arelor on Wed Sep 07 2022 10:30 am

    Finantial advisors here usually tell you to own your main means of production instead of renting them. A fleet of trucks you own may devaluate. A fleet of trucks you rent is worth nothing at all after money is gone.

    Sure, but we're talking about everyday people and not someone dealing wit

    Besides, I doubt a car is the second biggest investment people makes since mid-to-high level education is more expensive, setting a corne business is more expensive, and healthcare that actually works is al more expensive (in the long run). I certainly spend more keeping my business up, in housing and in taxes than I spend in the car (and I talking orders of magnitude here).

    Regarding education, fair point. But I was speaking in terms of an invest

    Again I'm talking about data here, "health care that actually works" and

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/07/11 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M

    The argument that a fleet of trucks you own won't disappear the same way as you rent is adjustable to different scopes. A bicycle you own will still be useful ages after you have paid for it. A bicycle you don't own will vanish a puff smoke, taking all your money with it, once you stop paying the rent.

    Education is an investment and it also has a big potential to devaluate if y are unlucky. If some folk from the government decides your degree is no long good enough for the tasks you are performing, your degree devaluates. That stuff happens. If the education is actually good then it might still be usef but the papers themselves are only as valuable as the Guild Mafias and politicians allow them to be.

    Healthcare that works is far from being an anecdote and I know for a fact patients at $workplace are paying much more for their insurance policies tha my friends or I (and most people I know) pay for a car. Hint: social securit taxes are also an insurance policy (by the look of trends since last year, i looks like it is a scammy one, but that is a different subject).


    People building upo their own business is far from being anecdotic. There ar more family businesses on street level than there are big franchises and surfaces, by orders of magnitude. Plus, many instances of a franchise are paid by the entepreneour opening the instance anyway.

    But let's keep the argument further and assume that purchasing assets that devaluate is stupid. In that case, I will let you know that bananas devaluat quite quickly. Therefore, according to your logic, purchasing a banana and extracting value out of it before it becomes useless is stupid and everybody should be purchasing foods that gain in value (such as wine).

    Good luck feeding of wine only. DOing that, however, would be stupid: it is wiser to let the wine go up in price instead of drinking it. You'll starve t death but the investment will be very smart.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken


    I see a car or other asset that devaluates over time as a comsumable. It's good to a certain point, than it begins costing as much as it's worth to susta in. That's not a problem because a business plan should factor in wear and tear and replacement of vehicles, computers, pens, pads of paper, servers,
    etc.

    Big companies lease their desktop and laptop devices for at least these reasons: leasing keeps them from being taxed as captial gains, and the lease cycle and life cycle usually sync up. If a machine becomes dedicated for a ce rtain purpose, the option to buy is there. Some lease vehicles for the same reason. It's a disposable or consumable resource, and if you take it in and service it regularly, it will run until the lease is up. At that time, you lease another new vehicle with no miles. When the time comes, return and get credit for old stuff and get new stuff.

    I considered leasing, but living in the country I would acquire more miles
    than accounted for in that lease period. and pay extra when the lease is
    done. I run vehicles as long term consumables. For a work car, all it has
    to do is get me to work and back reliably and cost effectively. I also hate
    to make payments, so at some time in my vehicle's life I only require insurance, registration and costs of consumables such as tire, oil, brakes, et c.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Arelor on Thu Sep 8 09:30:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to Moondog on Wed Sep 07 2022 02:55 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Arelor on Wed Sep 07 2022 11:44 am

    Most of the places I worked at leased their IT assets and leased vehicles we could move equipment from site to site. We were paying more to lease machines than if we owned them, but the financial folks were looking at capital gains if we owned the equipment. Of course the firm we leased ou assets from was a subsidiary of the company, but it was a legal form of w ound.


    TBH it is quite fine to lease stuff you can afford to lose. If an IT company does not rely heavily on something it might make sense to rent instead. Most the times I see it done it is for tax engineering, which is quite an artific reason IMO.

    There is a reason why some healthcare services I know have leased cars and leased IT, but they don't lease the surgery rooms or the radiodiagnostics equipment.

    This reminds me of a firm which was delivering spam in order to promote thei products. I contacted their email provider (which was outsourced) and they l ALL their email infrastructure when the email provider kicked them out. It turns out that delivering advertisements was so importantr for this company that they kept phoning into my office for a whole week asking me to tell the email provider it had been a misunderstanding - and they eventually had to g with a different provider, whose prices were much worse by the look of their websites.


    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    It makes sense to own long term resources. Surgical and med tech equipment
    has a longer life cycle than desktop computing resources. The same applies
    at the manufacturing level. In 2018 I was at a place with robotic arms assembling car bodies and it's software ran on Win98. The robotic arms were made in 1999-2000 when Win98 was the current operating system. It doesn't matter because the manufacturing lan is isolated from the business lan, and th e robots do the same thing they did 20 years ago when first purchased. In
    that application it is no longer viewed as a desktop OS with a short life cycle, and is viewed as equipment firmware or part of an entire system.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Digital Man on Thu Sep 8 10:12:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Digital Man to Moondog on Wed Sep 07 2022 01:35 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Boraxman on Mon Sep 05 2022 05:23 pm

    Everything in life is somewhere else, and you need a car to get there.

    Not necessarily. Many people in dense urban environments (big cities) live t --
    digital man (rob)

    Sling Blade quote #6:
    Karl: he should've had a chance to grow up. He would had fun some time. Norco, CA WX: 101.8F, 31.0% humidity, 0 mph E wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    That happens as well, but in my case if I want to shop at a big box store, i have to drive 15-20 miles at least. If i wanted to shop at a mall or
    shopping center that doesn't look like it has been ransacked I have to drive 35 miles. Large tech store and large sporting good stores are further away. Cabelas is 60 miles away and there's nothing closer that compares to thier inventory. An IMAX movie is 64 miles away. Until recently the nearest
    Costco was 50 miles away (now it's 35 miles).

    Living in th emiddle of nowhere has it's adavantages and disadvantages,
    however variety of product and services are far away. Some stores or
    services can only be found in large cities or population centers, and if
    you're in an area where the larger cities nearby are considered small by
    larger city standards. The nearest big cities to me are South Bend, IN, and Elkhart, IN and they're limited to what they offer. Michigan City is
    somewhat limited in choices. Next big jump takes me 70 north to Kalamazoo or across the lake to Chicago. The folks I know who shop in Chicago area rent charter buses to go to the outlet malls to avoid traffic. there is some variety in Kzoo and Grand Rapids, however they're better for things you can't find on the internet or want to try on personally.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Tracker1 on Thu Sep 8 10:18:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Tracker1 to Nightfox on Wed Sep 07 2022 01:30 pm

    On 9/7/22 09:10, Nightfox wrote:
    Transport-as-a-service has been available for decades on your phone.
    We used to call it "taxi cab". It didn't make much of a dent on
    private transport.

    Yes. If owning a car is such a bad investment, then why isn't
    everyone taking taxis, Uber, Lyft, and public transit?

    I think it's mostly about population density... it makes more sense in
    areas with greater density and lower ground travel necessary. In more sprawling cities like CA, TX, AZ it's much harder to persist on ride services and public transit.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com

    In a city the size of Detroit a car is necessary. The physical size could
    fit 3 cities of similar population. It opens up into urban sprawl and decay once you leave downtown.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Tracker1 on Thu Sep 8 10:44:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Tracker1 to esc on Wed Sep 07 2022 01:52 pm

    On 9/7/22 03:36, esc wrote:

    Fair enough, but I'll say again that the overall data and trends are
    what drives the markets to change, and the data overwhelmingly points
    to a decline for desire of car ownership :)

    Of course.. you can get most of what you need delivered to you the same
    or next day at marginal additional cost (Amazon). I think the likes of Grubhub/Uber-Eats and similar are in a tough spot short of autonomous vehicles and drones for doorstep drop-off by comparison.

    That said, there's a cost to society for these things and people not
    leaving their homes. The increase in "social anxiety" is palpable to
    say the least, and by all metrics the only way around it is to actually
    get out and do things, not drugs, not therapy.

    I think if I were the likes of Walmart/Amazon, I'd actually be investing
    in larger/denser construction projects, using pod/floor systems like
    high rises in the middle east. Building with a few hundred apartments, Whole Foods and Starbucks in the building including amazon returns/drop.
    Get that population density up, own/control the market and increase dependency. While reducing last mile delivery costs. For western US cities, sprawling parking lot.. for other locations, multi-floor
    garage... developed with 1.8 spaces per unit, each rented separately.

    Not that it's what I want personally, just where my mind would be if I
    had the funds to make such a thing happen.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com


    The concept of self-contained cities has been around for as long as I can reme mber. A poor example would be the building in the movie Dredd, but the
    concept is there. Imagine a large self-contained complex with all the stores yoi'd want to visit, a health clinic, a gym, police and fire, and several buisnesses along with housing. Throw in a school as well, and a person can live and work their entire live in one building. Well, that's the idea...

    Let's say the demand for jobs or variety of job skills surpasses what is offered and can possibly be staffed internally. That means working outside
    the complex. How about the clinic needs an MRI tech and cannot source one internally. Someone is drving or riding in from somewhere else. It's not
    too big a deal since each mega complex has it's own transit station. It
    draws away from the convenience of being all in one building.

    On the down side, let's go back to the example in the movie Dredd. A
    criminal element moves in, or the place becomes a shithole that is not well maintained. The folks who can afford to leave and the good shops and industries pull out, which forces the police force to get defunded and cannot keep up with the crime level in the complex. You can offer incentives for police to get cheap housing, but who with a family will want to bring their family there?

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to esc on Thu Sep 8 10:53:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: esc to Gamgee on Wed Sep 07 2022 08:08 pm

    Also fair enough, and I don't doubt that car sales will decrease in coming times. That will be due to the big-city population's decline in desire, but will not affect "country" folk in any significant way, because there isn't any realistic alternative for them.

    Yeah, true. We have business in Germany and it's interesting how different p rban centers are structured, and how populations are distributed.

    I am sad to say that autonomy is going to render a lot of country work redun all proportion of people will reap the majority of any financial upside. All nclusion.

    Farming automation is a big business already. GPS helped improve on planting
    a harvesting. When my family used to farm, the way the guy driving the tractor would find a tree along the tree line on the opposite end of the field, and
    use it as a reference to plant straight lines. With GPS the tractor does it itself. Planting and harvest time are the busiest times and somefarmers with huge operations would keep the planters or harvesters running 24/7, only stopping for refueling and change of drivers.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Digital Man on Thu Sep 8 07:06:00 2022
    Digital Man wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-

    on sundays i elude the eyes
    and hop the turbine freight
    to fall outside the wire

    Nice reference. One correction: "To *far* outside the Wire".

    Oh, my god - I've been mishearing that for 40+ years!


    ... What context would look right?
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From Tracker1@VERT/TRN to Moondog on Thu Sep 8 20:10:53 2022
    On 9/8/22 07:44, Moondog wrote:

    I think if I were the likes of Walmart/Amazon, I'd actually be investing
    in larger/denser construction projects, using pod/floor systems like
    high rises in the middle east. Building with a few hundred apartments,
    Whole Foods and Starbucks in the building including amazon returns/drop.
    Get that population density up, own/control the market and increase
    dependency. While reducing last mile delivery costs. For western US
    cities, sprawling parking lot.. for other locations, multi-floor
    garage... developed with 1.8 spaces per unit, each rented separately.

    Not that it's what I want personally, just where my mind would be if I
    had the funds to make such a thing happen.

    The concept of self-contained cities has been around for as long as I can reme
    mber. A poor example would be the building in the movie Dredd, but the concept is there. Imagine a large self-contained complex with all the stores yoi'd want to visit, a health clinic, a gym, police and fire, and several buisnesses along with housing. Throw in a school as well, and a person can live and work their entire live in one building. Well, that's the idea...

    It's actually pretty much what a "Mall" was supposed to be. The concept
    was to include housing and offices.


    Let's say the demand for jobs or variety of job skills surpasses what is offered and can possibly be staffed internally. That means working outside the complex. How about the clinic needs an MRI tech and cannot source one internally. Someone is drving or riding in from somewhere else. It's not too big a deal since each mega complex has it's own transit station. It draws away from the convenience of being all in one building.

    Assuming rail/car between megaplexes work... I'm thinking much smaller
    scale though.


    On the down side, let's go back to the example in the movie Dredd. A criminal element moves in, or the place becomes a shithole that is not well maintained. The folks who can afford to leave and the good shops and industries pull out, which forces the police force to get defunded and cannot keep up with the crime level in the complex. You can offer incentives for police to get cheap housing, but who with a family will want to bring their family there?

    It would largely depend on a lot of variables... if you look at
    Baltimore or Detroit that aren't megaplexes but generally shitty in
    terms of the level of crime.
    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com
    ---
    Synchronet Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Nightfox on Sat Sep 10 00:01:31 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Nightfox to Gamgee on Thu Sep 08 2022 08:31 am

    I know it wasn't you who said a car is a bad investment... But that's all wrong anyway. A car is not an investment at all. It's a TOOL that is used to make life easier, like any other tool. Like a pair of pliers, or a smartphone, or a piece of software. It's not *MEANT* to increase in value. When it wears out, you buy a new one. Just like you would with a coffee maker, or a toaster.

    Yes, that's exactly what I was thinking. People buy cars because they're a tool, and their usefulness is transportation (not as an investment).
    Cost benefit ratio is ALWAYS a considering. The fact it is a tool makes little difference.

    You are making a trade. Is what you recieve commensurate with what you give? Is there a more efficient way to achive the same results with less investment? Is there an investment which pays off better?

    Consider the billions spent on roads, and they only ever get SLOWER. Is that a good investment?

    I think this talk of treating it as a "tool" and you're not meant to look at cost/benefit is an attempt to avoid the fact that the car is less and less a worthwhile value propostion.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Boraxman on Fri Sep 9 20:07:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to MRO on Sat Sep 10 2022 12:13 am

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: MRO to Boraxman on Thu Sep 08 2022 04:55 pm

    So yes, I can see why this financial advice would be given. Buying a bigger house than you need isn't a bad investment, you'll see its valu rise, get more utility. Buying a bigger car, you still lose heaps of value, but get little in return.


    well it depends on where you live. in my region they keep accessing the properties higher and higher. that's how they make money. they jack up t property taxes.

    if you keep paying so much per year in property taxes, your investment devalues unless your gameplan is to flip it and sell it.

    Houses generally don't go down in value. Cars almost always go down in valu l part of the investment too. We have to pay for all that as well.

    A car is a consumable product. A house is not unless you own a trailer home.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Moondog on Sat Sep 10 16:12:27 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Boraxman on Fri Sep 09 2022 08:07 pm

    So yes, I can see why this financial advice would be given. Buying a bigger house than you need isn't a bad investment, you'll see its valu rise, get more utility. Buying a bigger car, you still lose heaps of value, but get little in return.


    well it depends on where you live. in my region they keep accessing the properties higher and higher. that's how they make money. they jack up t property taxes.

    if you keep paying so much per year in property taxes, your investment devalues unless your gameplan is to flip it and sell it.

    Houses generally don't go down in value. Cars almost always go down in valu l part of the investment too. We have to pay for all that as well.

    A car is a consumable product. A house is not unless you own a trailer home.

    A consumable product is one that is used up or transformed during use. Food, glue, nails, cleaning products, sandpaper.

    A car is not consumable. It is a durable good. Parts of the car are consumable, such as the fuel, brake fluid, tyres, wipers, but the car, no.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Moondog on Sat Sep 10 16:13:32 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to MRO on Fri Sep 09 2022 08:13 pm

    By: Boraxman to MRO on Fri Sep 09 2022 11:57 pm

    move someplace where you can accomplish this.

    Why should I move? If there is a problem, it should be fixed.
    Running a from problems doesn't solve them.

    that's probably what the ethiopians think.

    Even if I move, the same issue will follow me there.

    i think you are correct. you can't ditch yourself.
    Moving doesn't solve a problem. The problem remains if you live there or not. I live in an area where there are less than 10 houses per mile. Cable will
    not run lines where there are less than 10 houses per half mile. People tell me to move, however the problem remains for those who live out there.

    That and I like civilisation. "Going bush" isn't an option for me. I make good money working in the city, money I would never make if I ran away from the problems of the city.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Boraxman on Sat Sep 10 11:40:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Moondog on Sat Sep 10 2022 04:12 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Boraxman on Fri Sep 09 2022 08:07 pm

    So yes, I can see why this financial advice would be given. Buy a bigger house than you need isn't a bad investment, you'll see valu rise, get more utility. Buying a bigger car, you still los heaps of value, but get little in return.


    well it depends on where you live. in my region they keep accessin the properties higher and higher. that's how they make money. they jack up t property taxes.

    if you keep paying so much per year in property taxes, your investm devalues unless your gameplan is to flip it and sell it.

    Houses generally don't go down in value. Cars almost always go down i valu l part of the investment too. We have to pay for all that as wel

    A car is a consumable product. A house is not unless you own a trailer home.

    A consumable product is one that is used up or transformed during use. Food

    A car is not consumable. It is a durable good. Parts of the car are consum

    Eventually the car will encounter such a major expense to maintain, and
    become no-longer reliable or safe to drive without considerable labor and expense. Unless I'm a collector or have the time, money, skills and parts, it's next owner is the scrap yard.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to Boraxman on Sat Sep 10 11:44:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to Moondog on Sat Sep 10 2022 04:13 pm

    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to MRO on Fri Sep 09 2022 08:13 pm

    By: Boraxman to MRO on Fri Sep 09 2022 11:57 pm

    move someplace where you can accomplish this.

    Why should I move? If there is a problem, it should be fixed. Running a from problems doesn't solve them.

    that's probably what the ethiopians think.

    Even if I move, the same issue will follow me there.

    i think you are correct. you can't ditch yourself.
    Moving doesn't solve a problem. The problem remains if you live there or not. I live in an area where there are less than 10 houses per mile. Cab will
    not run lines where there are less than 10 houses per half mile. People tell me to move, however the problem remains for those who live out there

    That and I like civilisation. "Going bush" isn't an option for me. I make


    Any place you go will introduce it's own unique problems.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Irish_Monk on Sun Sep 11 21:35:15 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Irish_Monk to MRO on Sat Sep 10 2022 09:07 am

    well it depends on where you live. in my region they keep accessing the properties higher and higher. that's how they make money. they jack up the property taxes.

    if you keep paying so much per year in property taxes, your investment devalues unless your gameplan is to flip it and sell it.

    Almost like you cant win either way. Value goes up, taxes go up. I try not to be negative, but man, it just seems like the system is setup where cant succeed.

    One thing Ive been working on in my life, is just wanting less. For some reason I have been following a lot of people on youtube who live out of RV's, some even Vans/cars. For one, I like seeing the inventions they come up with to be able to live like this. And also, most seem so happy to not be part of the "rat race." Most live off of like 500 bucks a month. And say they live very comfortable.

    I think the system is set up to keep us in line, keep is chained and in debt so we don't get too much independence of power.

    We will never ever get to be free. We will never get to enjoy the massive productivity improvements for financial freedom. It is designed to keep us in a position where others can have power over us because we have to submit to earn money.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Moondog on Sun Sep 11 21:43:38 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Boraxman on Sat Sep 10 2022 11:40 am

    A car is not consumable. It is a durable good. Parts of the car are consum

    Eventually the car will encounter such a major expense to maintain, and become no-longer reliable or safe to drive without considerable labor and expense. Unless I'm a collector or have the time, money, skills and parts, it's next owner is the scrap yard.


    Yes, but that doesn't make it a consumable. All equipment will do that eventually, but they are not consumables. Highly specialised packing equipment will also do that, but no business will classify this equipment as a consumable.

    There is nothing special about a car, as compared to any other machine or equipment.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Irish_Monk@VERT/WARPED to Boraxman on Sun Sep 11 10:19:00 2022
    I think the system is set up to keep us in line, keep is chained and in debt so we don't get too much independence of power.

    We will never ever get to be free. We will never get to enjoy the
    massive productivity improvements for financial freedom. It is designed to keep us in a position where others can have power over us because we have to submit to earn money.

    I definitely agree with you there!! No doubt about it!!

    |10I|02rish_|10M|02onk

    ... What was the best thing before sliced bread?
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Tracker1 on Fri Sep 9 07:33:00 2022
    Tracker1 wrote to Moondog <=-

    It's actually pretty much what a "Mall" was supposed to be. The concept was to include housing and offices.

    Fsacebook has been pretty quiet about their "campus" approach. They've been working on a combined housing/office campus in Silicon Valley, where you'd live in on-campus housing, dine with your co-workers in local cafes, and I'm sure they offered the same suite of amenities that all the other tech companies offered.

    What do you do when there's a pandemic, or when you're laid off? I couldn't imagine losing my job and having to a) live where I was just laid off, and
    b) be forced to look for new housing while I was unemployed.

    If you were fresh out of college, it might be an easy transition, and kinda cool. The last thing tech companies need are new workers thinking it's
    college all over again.


    ... Meaningless in the absence of time. What never was is never again.
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    Synchronet .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to poindexter FORTRAN on Sun Sep 11 22:08:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: poindexter FORTRAN to Tracker1 on Fri Sep 09 2022 07:33 am

    Tracker1 wrote to Moondog <=-

    It's actually pretty much what a "Mall" was supposed to be. The concept was to include housing and offices.

    Fsacebook has been pretty quiet about their "campus" approach. They've been working on a combined housing/office campus in Silicon Valley, where you'd live in on-campus housing, dine with your co-workers in local cafes, and I'm sure they offered the same suite of amenities that all the other tech companies offered.

    What do you do when there's a pandemic, or when you're laid off? I couldn't imagine losing my job and having to a) live where I was just laid off, and b) be forced to look for new housing while I was unemployed.

    If you were fresh out of college, it might be an easy transition, and kinda cool. The last thing tech companies need are new workers thinking it's college all over again.


    ... Meaningless in the absence of time. What never was is never again.

    You never know. Housing may be part of the compensation/ benefits, just like how some companies help assist new employees move and find homes near work.
    if you want more than the standard issue apartment, then it's on your dime.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to Boraxman on Mon Sep 12 17:06:12 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Boraxman to MRO on Fri Sep 09 2022 11:57 pm

    Why should I move? If there is a problem, it should be fixed. Running away

    Even if I move, the same issue will follow me there.


    You can't have your cake and eat it.

    Here is the thing: if you live in a rural area, you have worse than average Internet coverage and less diversity of services. It is not realistic to think you can fix those in a short ammount of time. In real life, if the place you live in has issues that really do bother you, you move to a place which does not bother you.

    I'd love to have better Internet, but I love the fact I can grab my dinner from a bush anytime I feel like it better. If you live in a big city you get access to lots of services but you eat crap which has been stored in refrigerators for too long and your logistics are impaired and cut to serve the smaller common denominator. It comes with the package. You can't really have the benefits without the drawbacks.

    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Arelor@VERT/PALANT to Moondog on Mon Sep 12 17:25:56 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Moondog to Boraxman on Sat Sep 10 2022 11:44 am

    Any place you go will introduce it's own unique problems.

    The point is finding a place you like enough and whose problems you can put up with. It is really that simple.

    See, if you live in the middle of nowhere, there is less people, less crime, more freedom... but also no girls to date. If peace and quiet is more important than getting laid every other day then you'll be fine in that place. If not, it is just that that place's drawbacks are just too much for you to handle and you need somewhere else where you can find what you want.


    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

    ---
    Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
  • From Boraxman@VERT/MINDS3 to Arelor on Wed Sep 14 22:18:45 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: Arelor to Boraxman on Mon Sep 12 2022 05:06 pm

    Why should I move? If there is a problem, it should be fixed. Running away

    Even if I move, the same issue will follow me there.


    You can't have your cake and eat it.

    Here is the thing: if you live in a rural area, you have worse than average Internet coverage and less diversity of services. It is not realistic to think you can fix those in a short ammount of time. In real life, if the place you live in has issues that really do bother you, you move to a place which does not bother you.

    I'd love to have better Internet, but I love the fact I can grab my dinner from a bush anytime I feel like it better. If you live in a big city you get access to lots of services but you eat crap which has been stored in refrigerators for too long and your logistics are impaired and cut to serve the smaller common denominator. It comes with the package. You can't really have the benefits without the drawbacks.


    Life when you grew up must have been very different for you than it was for me.

    I grew up in Melbourne, and we had access to good food. Fresh food was available at markets easily. We went every weekend as a family when I was a child.

    It is greed which saw them all dissapear. I KNOW we can make things works, because I saw it working.

    We know how, we just have to deal with parasites who won't let us have nice things.

    ---
    Synchronet MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to bex on Wed Sep 14 12:29:10 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: bex to MRO on Tue Sep 13 2022 04:39 pm

    *Some* companies don't want their people to work from home. Other companies (like the one I work at) love that their employees work remotely and provides all the resources necessary for those remote employees. My last three employers all preferred people work remotely, I haven't worked full-time in an office since 2010.

    I think I might start to feel stir-crazy if I worked from home too long, but there are times when I'd like to work from home rather than go into the office.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Moondog@VERT/CAVEBBS to bex on Wed Sep 14 23:17:00 2022
    Re: Re: Apollo 11
    By: bex to MRO on Tue Sep 13 2022 04:39 pm

    MRO wrote to esc <=-

    I agree now more than ever. The whole "work from home" thing should reall put a nail in the coffin of much of the need for scores of people to comm for work. Fewer people commuting is a benefit to everyone, if only we cou

    yeah but companies don't want people to work from home.
    the middle managment needs something to do.

    *Some* companies don't want their people to work from home. Other companies (like the one I work at) love that their employees work remotely and provides all the resources necessary for those remote employees. My last three employers all preferred people work remotely, I haven't worked full-time in an office since 2010.


    -+- Brightening your day. -Bex <3

    ... "Hello, rock-stupid cop!" -- Crow T. Robot

    Last year I was working for a health care system that was doing an EPIC software suite migration. The departments that didn't deal directly with patients or were developers or clerical in nature cleared out entire floors
    of employees by having them work from home. In order to upgrade any non-compl iant hardware they had required making an appointment or knowing which days
    an employee was scheduled to come into the office. The work at home people didn't all have laptops. Some preferred a desktop and dual displays over a laptop and docking station. They all had webcams for meetings no matter what they used.

    ---
    Synchronet The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net
  • From bex@VERT/CONCHAOS to Nightfox on Mon Sep 19 16:11:00 2022
    Nightfox wrote to bex <=-

    and provides all the resources necessary for those remote employees. My last three employers all preferred people work remotely, I haven't worked full-time in an office since 2010.

    I think I might start to feel stir-crazy if I worked from home too
    long, but there are times when I'd like to work from home rather than
    go into the office.

    There are definitely periods of feeling stir-crazy on my side. But I think
    back to being in the office for those first two or so hours after lunch
    when things get sooooo boring and I just want to take a nap, but I can't because my boss would come by and say "Rebecca, WAKE UP!!!!" and then all
    of my teammates would laugh at me and...

    Yeah, I'm not in a hurry to go back into an office anywhere.



    -+- Brightening your day. -Bex <3

    ... "Jules, if you give that fuckin' nimrod fifteen hundred dollars, I'm gonna s
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.49
    Synchronet -=[ conchaos.synchro.net | ConstructiveChaos BBS ]=-
  • From Porosz@VERT/AMIGAC to Ogg on Sun Sep 25 12:56:06 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Ogg to Tracker1 on Mon Aug 22 2022 07:47:00


    .. When you see part of the moon in darkness, it's the
    Earth's shadow on the moon.

    Wrong.

    The shadow is due to the sun, not the earth. The only time the
    earth's shadow hits the moon is during a lunar eclipse.

    Are you sure? I think it is the reflection of the sun and the shadow of the earth that you see. The earth is just blocking the rays.

    ---
    Synchronet Amiga City - The BBS for the Amiga - more than 4,000+ files
  • From Charles Blackburn@VERT/FBOBBS to Porosz on Sun Sep 25 19:28:41 2022
    Re: Apollo 11
    By: Porosz to Ogg on Sun Sep 25 2022 12:56:06

    .. When you see part of the moon in darkness, it's the
    Earth's shadow on the moon.
    The shadow is due to the sun, not the earth. The only time the
    earth's shadow hits the moon is during a lunar eclipse.
    Are you sure? I think it is the reflection of the sun and the shadow of the earth that you see. The earth is just blocking
    the rays.

    yes it's not the earths shadow that causes the dark side of the moon.

    you ever tried shining a light on a ball from one side.. the other side is devoid of light lol

    regards
    ---

    Charles Blackburn
    The F.B.O BBS 21:1/221 618:250/36
    bbs.thefbo.us IPV4/V6
    DOVE-Net FSX-Net MicroNET USENET
    ---
    Synchronet The FBO BBS - bbs.thefbo.us - A place for aviation fun....