…seems to be taking the loss well.
Category Archives: Technology and Society
The Fragility Of Complex Technology
This is amazing.
[Update a while later]
Note that this seemed to be an accident of inadvertent file naming, but FM subcarriers carry all sorts of info (like real-time traffic, weather, or alerts). Imagine the kinds of malicious things one could do with this, because the automakers haven’t bullet proofed their code. Particularly with self-driving cars and kill switches. There should be a firewall between a car’s radio and the rest of the avionics (as I think they do for aircraft entertainment systems).
The Gun Grabbers
…are losing the culture war.
Good.
Being Dragged Into The 21st Century
The Pentagon is still too reluctant to rely on commercial space services.
Electron Band Structure In Germanium
…my ass.
It’s an oldie, but a goodie.
SSTO Hype
I missed this from a couple weeks ago.
They say it’s SSTO, but they talk about it as point to point. Hard to believe that it could handle noise restrictions at most airports.
I haven’t talked to Livingston in years, but maybe worth a call to find out more.
Hard To Believe It’s Been Four Years
Moonfall
Fact checking what sounds like a monumentally dumb flick.
Aerojet
An interesting report on the internecine battle within the company in the wake of the FTC disallowing the acquisition by Lockmart. I found this amusing:
Aerojet has traditionally structured itself as an engineering company with high fixed costs and low margins, Thompson said. But if private equity buys the company, it will want to see more robust financial returns, which could come at the cost of innovation.
“This really comes down to whether the financial interests or the engineering interests within Aerojet prevail in the struggle,” he said. “My heart is with the engineering interests. My brain, which knows the history of these types of struggles, assumes the financial interests will ultimately prevail.”
Yes, for me, the first word that comes to mind when I hear the word “Aerojet” is “innovation.” Not.
To Mars Or Not To Mars?
That is the question at this Oxford debate this evening (in a couple hours, sorry about the short notice).
[Update toward the end of the debate]
As I’ve noted in the past, debates like this are pointless, because they are a false choice based on a false premise. We don’t have to choose between populating Mars and saving the planet; we have abundant resources for both. The false premise is that this is going to be a collective decision whose outcome will be determined by an Oxford debate. People who go to Mars will be doing so with their own money, so people on Earth who oppose it are going to have to make it illegal to prevent it. There is a word for people like that: jailers.