As was mentioned above, the cost of the fuel is a non-starter. Currently SpaceX uses a Kerosene / Liquid Oxygen fuel mix.

After the anomaly (the space industries way of saying accident) in June SpaceX did a complete vehicle review. They are now using a more advanced technique to cool the LOX which means for a denser LOX liquid in their tanks, which ultimately means they have more oxidizer on board for their flights now.

Coupled with the LOX improvements they have made upgrades to the engines which means 30% greater efficiency. Basically the horsepower per engine has increased.

This means they can get their payloads to orbit plus have more then enough fuel left over in stage 1 to return it to land.

The greatest efficiency comes from returning the stage(s) and then reusing them in future launches (not proven yet). ALL launchers (u.s, soviet, indian, ESA, Japan, etc) ditch ALL of their hardware into the ocean when getting payload to orbit. Bye, bye multi million dollars worth of engines and hardware.

If SpaceX can turn that scenario on its head and reuse those stages and MORE importantly the engines they will cut their costs per launch by a substantial amount. Ultimately that means cheaper per pound cost to get material into orbit.

All of the media uses the word "explosion" when describing the June anomaly which is funny because there was never an ignition of onboard fuels.

The LOX tanks have smaller Helium tanks inside them. The helium is released during launch. The helium rises in the LOX quickly, expands and pressurizes the tank to ensure the LOX is "squeezed" into the pipes in order to keep up with the turbo pumps.

One of the struts holding a helium tank inside the LOX tank failed. The helium tank shot up and blew threw the top of the LOX tank and took a good part of the top of the stack off. The engines actually fired for a few seconds after the anomaly and then sputtered out. The rest of the vehicle at this point is still fairly intact.

Without proper structural integrity the vehicle started to veer off course, dynamic pressures built up and the vehicle was essentially ripped apart by those forces.

At 3:20 the Helium tank rips off its struts. At 3:27 the remainder of the vehicle disintegrates:

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

SpaceX mentioned that in June, the dragon capsule continued to relay telemetry until it smacked into the ocean. If the Dragon had better software onboard it would have detected the anomaly and recovered with chutes. Elon said that software would be active on Dragons from now on.

Well, it's a true statement, and since you only said "Clinton: Lying, manipulative...", it was reasonable to assume you were singling her out as the only manipulative liar in the field, when in fact she's far from the biggest manipulative liar in the field...that would be Trump...and he's actually said so about himself in his own books and sees it as a good thing that people like.
It was perfectly reasonable to dissuade you (or other readers) of the false idea that she's the only, or biggest liar. Had you said 'Hillary; a bigger liar than most other candidates listed', you would have something to complain about with his correction, but since she was the only one you called a liar and manipulative, it certainly implies that you think she's the only one.

They are all liars and manipulators (yes, even Sanders, but he's far more honest, at least on the surface, than any other candidate)...a few of them are incapable of actually telling the 'truth' or correctly relaying facts at any time though, and with all her flaws, Clinton is not one of those.

The pause and eye contact definitely relayed that it was personal...this one's for you.

Congratulations. You've managed to capture the entire diversity of the US by visiting several times and not get shot or had a gun pointed at you. This is like forming an opinion about whether sharks will bite humans after you've laid on the beach once or twice and have never been bitten. Searching for some relevance here... and ... nope, none.

Agreed, if your gun is in a traditional safe, it's not much good when the burglars or home invasion psychos kick in your front door at 2 a.m. Jim Jeffries is indeed a funny guy, but like many who don't understand what "for protection" means to some homeowners here in the US, you might want to cite a bit more credible source or at least educate yourself.

Thanks to biometric safes and locking devices, it is quite easy to have a secured gun in a safe at arms reach, accessible to only one person, that can be unsecured, ready to fire in about 4 seconds. I know this to be true, because I have such a setup, and we practice what to do when the home alarm goes off just like we practice fire drills.

The distressing part is I absolutely hate having to be in such a situation. I'm no cowboy and this isn't the wild west, but when families around me are having their doors kicked in in the middle of the night by armed thugs, or having one or two fuckheads follow them up the driveway for an easy push-in robbery accompanied by beatings, shootings, molestation and sometimes killing, I decided that there would be no way I could live with myself if something tragic ever happened to my family at the hands of these nut jobs, knowing I might have been able to do something to stop it. And no, one can't relay on the local police to take care of these crimes. Around here, even with a top notch alarm system in the house that goes directly to dispatch, the cops usually arrive to clean up the blood and take statements, and almost never in time to stop the crime or catch the criminals.

Do you have house, car, fire or life insurance? Sure, but you hope you'll never have to use it. So, what's so unbelievable about a gun for protection? What do you suggest? You appear to think it's silly to state it's for protection... so does one simply relying on hope, faith or good luck in never having to witness your wife or child being duct taped to a chair while criminals rummage through your house, or having their head kicked in or bloodied on the end of a baseball bat?

Just a suggestions, but try to spend some time as an actual resident in a country before you pretend to understand it, consider yourself fortunate that you don't live in such a situation, and for fucks sake stop with the snide, morally superior judgement of those who do. If you can muster that, on a guess that you might be from NZ but really don't know, I'll stop telling everyone that Kiwi's really do fuck sheep, especially on National Lamb Day when it's a competition rather than just a hobby.

Have fun.

@artician
you always have the same criticisms.
with the same conclusions and yet you never offer an alternative.
now i understand your criticisms and they are not exactly wrong,but rather too over-simplified in my opinion.

what i DON'T understand is how you can bring that same criticism for a trailer.this is a small sniglet to get people to watch this movie.a glimpse of the content using dramatic music and flashy visual imagery all with the specific intent:to get people to watch this movie.

this tactic is used for every trailer,every commercial for a tv show or reality series,it is even used to sell BOOKS!

and to postulate that the mere appearance of manipulation invalidates the content,even if true,is illogic made manifest.

of course a documentary is going to have a certain bias,they are trying to make a point,but if the facts are solid and the logic reasonable..who cares if they use dramatic music to set the tone?

chomsky relays some of the most in-depth criticisms of american hegemony but he also is soft spoken and monotone.he puts many people to sleep.so it doesnt matter that his facts are backed by reams and reams of data,he simply bores many people.

see what im saying? because it appears to me,THAT is what you would prefer.no music,no dramatic production,just straight facts delivered in a monotone voice.

meh../shrugs.guess we just disagree on this point.and that's fine.

When composer Eric Serra showed soprano Inva Mula (who dubs the voice of the Diva) the sheet music for the Diva Dance, she reportedly smiled and relayed to him that some of the notes written were not humanly possible to achieve because the human voice cannot change notes that fast. Hence, she performed the notes in isolation - one by one, as opposed to consecutively singing them all together and they digitized the notes to fit the music. There are a few moments when you can hear the differences in the vocal tones of The Diva's voice.

/imdb

Agreed on most points. This one is pretty variable though.

For the next decade or two, prosthetics will continue to be sub-optimal replacements for human limbs and only used in cases of extreme trauma. I think these will continue to be the preserve of the rich (they pretty much already are in terms of 1st vs 3rd world).

Eventually, we will get to a point where prosthetics are actually better than the equivalent human limb. That's several decades away IMO (accurate control is doable, but getting to the point of have a prosthetic that relay sensory information is a Really Hard Problem).

At that point, I think we'll very quickly see adoption of prosthetics become mainstream, but it will still be geared towards the relatively wealthy (see present day adoption of smartphones).

But once you get to that point, even the most basic model prosthetic will outperform a human limb. I believe it's almost certain that these kinds of limbs will be "smart", i.e. instead of accepting simple commands from the brain of "contract tricep", "grip fingers", etc, you'll see an arm that draw a perfect circle. And they'll be stronger than a human arm almost by default (not picking up cars strong, support structures aren't there for that, but certainly stronger than an olympic athlete)

So either way, I still don't think we'll see a "prosthetic underclass".

You remind me of David Mitchell on "Would I Lie to You?" when he pointed out that often people will think that something sounds so out-of-place and rehearsed that it inevitably has to be true.

Do you perhaps think that might be something you're doing? Would this shit really be satisfactory, based on your logic, to a grieving family? He wasn't a saint, neither are you, neither am i... but no one deserves to die for that, especially at such a young age... none of us know who we are by that age.. he had not made the decisions that would shape his life yet. Who does it benefit to have the rehearsed official police story relayed to us by the only man who could explain what really happened? It's more of a slap in the face to the family, is my point.

I tell you what i'd want if i was American - not to have to fear the American police. Because at this point it doesn't even matter if Darren was "rightfully killed" - because the arse-covering propaganda had already started; which is an admission to racism by way of feeling guilty.

And that SHOULD be enough for Americans to demand change - i.e. not every cop should be carrying a gun, because quite clearly not everyone is capable of knowing when to use it. But if it isn't enough, there's Trayvon Martin too. And another, and another, and another.

This isn't a one-off thing, so don't try to suggest that people should judge the video independently of the track history of American police which is to kill young black men, hurting the communities and individuals that they are designed to protect.

At the very least, the protection system is not working for the black community and needs fixing. At the most, there is a tendency towards racism and wild-west-justice in the American police, and that's not just a problem for black people.

P.S. American prison statistics for black people is a serious indictment of how black people are not treated equally in the eyes of the law. Who is really going to try and argue that black people are naturally, statistically more likely to be criminals to the tune of the prison imbalance? There is absolutely no way i am buying into that. The prison statistics remind me of this John Oliver video, perhaps police are being "fair" and stop/searching black people exactly as much as they do white people.. but that is an imbalance because they are not exactly 50% of the population.

(For the record: 60% of all prisoners are black but only 25% of total population. Incarceration at six times that of white people. 12% of the drug-using population are black, but account for 40% arrested for drugs and 60% in prison for drugs. Taken from the NAACP website, i've got to assume they're right. Don't get me started on antiquated drugs policies, or the history of slavery's affect on money/power in the modern world - meaning crimes committed in boardrooms and government go unpunished - let's not forget white leaders have led this world to the brink of complete collapse and we're not out of the woods - but let's stick to the issue.)

I don't know this for certain, but I think it so likely I'll just make a categorical statement: They have to push a button to transmit. There were probably quite a few literal fucks given before that button was pushed and orders relayed.

One of their best albums...
Also like Tormato , Drama and Relayer.
But then again I like all their albums.

I would say that Tales is the least of my favorites.

@Trancecoach - respectfully leaving this discussion based on the following:

"You are actually going a long way to make my point that those who are "believers" in climate change are missing the value and indeed necessity for ongoing skepticism"

I don't understand how you can say that after i was the person that investigated the source of the first link you gave out. You hadn't even bothered to look into it, so i did, and you can say with a straight face that i'm a "believer" who has lost his scepticism?

You didn't even check completely through the second lot of links you posted, because the one i did check (on YOUR ultimate recommendation) ended up being written by a guy who saw climate change as one of mankind's top 10 problems. You've shown yourself twice now to be using sources that you haven't even fucking looked at, evidenced by a half hour investigation by me! You didn't even put a half hour into it!?

I remain open to evidence that climate change is not a man-made concern, or that it is not a concern. I'm not going to sit here and relay exactly how each of us think the scientific community works. You can read how it works on the scientific method and scientific consensus pages i linked earlier, anyone can. It's not open for debate; there is an overwhelming majority of scientific evidence in favour and there is not enough and not significant enough scientific evidence against. It isn't a coincidence that ~99% of the research points in one direction, and it isn't some conspiracy.... that isn't how science works. It's not perfect, a lot of shit science gets through because it's so hard to read and so relatively few people want to trawl through shite, but that's why it's better to look at the consensus - what is the AVERAGE opinion of ALL the clever people? It's a community that i consider incorruptible - because even if you paid off 10 research centres, there's still millions of individual scientists, individual institutions, so many people dedicated to keeping it pure because we know that's the only way we get the most from it. And ... the science and maths speaks for itself, the models are not "just models" as the moron associated with your latest link says. They are the best representations we have and they do represent parts of physical reality, and by using carefully considered techniques we can extract information about things. The alternative is to consult a Ouija board!?

By the way, nice 240 page pdf document for me to refer to. I didn't ask for a single link, i asked for a single point about which we were in disagreement... usually papers are cited to reinforce a point. You don't just cite something and go "there you go, read all of that, whatever you see that agrees with me; that's what i'm talking about!"

*relayed=http://videosift.com/video/Motorcycles-in-the-future-will-not-tip-over-Lit-Motors

According to the American Road and Transport Builders Association, the upfront costs of current construction are pretty significant already:

"Construct a new 2-lane undivided road – about $2-$3 million per mile in rural areas, about $3-5 million in urban areas.

Mill and resurface a 4-lane road – about $1.25 million per mile.

Expand an Interstate Highway from 4 lanes to 6 lanes – about $4 million per mile."

So really you'd have to look at the replacement costs of a technology like this rather than just assigning all those initial costs to the category of boondoggle.

But this really points to a larger issue that makes this question very hard to quantify and is actually addressed by the Solar Roadways people:

"For an accurate cost comparison between current systems and the Solar Roadways system, you'd have to combine the costs of current roads (including snow removal, line repainting, pothole repair, etc.), power plants (and the coal or nuclear material to run them), and power and data delivery systems (power poles and relay stations) to be comparable with the Solar Roadway system, which provides all three. So the comparison is more like an apple to a fruit basket."

One further interesting note from their website is that the numbers they used for electricity generation of the solar roadway system came out of their testing. In Northern Idaho. In the dead of winter. In other words, the worst possible conditions for solar panel systems.

The father-in-law of a fellow Toastmaster actually participated in the Great Escape. He was a penguin... responsible for distributing the dirt dug from the tunnels throughout the prison yard via pockets built into their pants. Fortunately, he was NOT one of the ones chosen to escape. Aside from the fact there were no Americans at the POW camp, he said the movie was reasonably accurate, i.e. three tunnels, the one used came up short of the treeline...
The camp commander was imprisoned after the war. Some of his POWs went to visit him to let him know that they bore him no ill will. They were all soldiers and they considered the base commander to be a fair man who treated them well under the circumstances.
He refused to see them. Via an intermediary he relayed to them that he simply couldn't face them. He said that he never felt more ashamed to be a Nazi as when he heard that the SS had executed the 50 escapees from his camp.
The most fascinating part of Jim Lang's story though was the story BEFORE he arrived at the POW camp. Too long to relay here but he was shot out of the sky when returning from an air raid. Spent a few weeks on the run in the Belgium countryside.
He has since died but I fortunately recorded his presentation... just a great slice of history.

Wow, he's the most overpaid news anchor in the world, totally incapable of conceiving of or relaying a genuine thought without a teleprompter.