Tri-Alpha Rumor

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

Art Carlson
Posts: 794
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:56 am
Location: Munich, Germany

Post by Art Carlson »

KitemanSA wrote:Oh, and for those who huff and argue that "fair" means equitable, whoever said forcing life to be equitable was a good thing? Only those who wish to define the "game of life" to be that way. I repeat, my life is not a game for you to make up arbitrary rules about. Forget "fair", work with "voluntary". You get somewhere good with that.
Every time I hear statements like this I cringe. The way KitemanSA stated it, the sentence is typical libertarian claptrap.

Sure. Go ahead and dump your sewage in the river. We won't mind, as long as you do it voluntarily.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

[/quote]
alexjrgreen wrote: When you add together everybody's "voluntary" position, it typically consumes more resources than the community as a whole has access to. So something has to give - either by increasing resources or limiting consumption.
Not quite sure what you mean here. How does one "add up" voluntary positions? Are you talking about adding up their desires? If so, the socialists have done an even better job on you than I had previously thought!
alexjrgreen wrote: As it happens I'm not a socialist, but socialist is a modern term. You need to go back to Plato and Aristotle.
Do you mean that bool about ants he called The Republic?
alexjrgreen wrote: Individual notions of "fair" take into account the needs of the individual. If you live in a community then you need to consider the needs of the community as well.
"Communities" are made of voluntary groups of individuals, otherwise they are herds. The former is the moral way, the right way, the second is the socialist way.
Stealing from one to benefit another is NEVER a good way to do things.
Johansen's Three Laws
  • * People have the right to voluntary action.
    * You can't do good by doing wrong.
    * Like all toxic substances, government programs are subject to the J-Curve.
Learn them.

Skipjack
Posts: 6051
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

Stealing from one to benefit another is NEVER a good way to do things.
Well actually, if people realized the benefits they have from it and if governments were finally able to work more effciently, people would probably give their share more freely.
If you look at the history of Europe, you will see that very often the poorest would cause riots and uprisings due to their bad living conditions.
If I dont have anything to loose I might just as well try to fight my way into a better life. This caused many deaths among the rich people too. Unnecessary deaths either way.
Today if you have a father that is faced with not being able to pay the life savin treatment for his dying child, you might be looking at the next bank robber.
If you have a sufficiently large amount of poor people in a simillar situation, you might end up with a riot, or even a revolution.
It is amazing what you can get people to do if they feel that they have nothing to loose anyway. Anyway in that case the rich usually loose more than just a small share of their wealth.

In addition to this, we all can have accidents, or life chaning events that can turn us from a wealthy capable person into a poor bastard with no perspective whatsoever. In that case it can be good to have some support that allows you to get back on your feet again. Heck I am eternally grateful for the health care system that we have here, since it did save my life and that without ruining me financially (if you had a heart attack, financial worries are not beneficial for your recovery).

So donating some of your money to society can actually be in your own best interest.
The former is the moral way, the right way, the second is the socialist way.
In a democracy the majority of voters gets to decide. If you dont like that, you have to live in a dictatorship (though it is unlikely that you will be happier there unless it is your own and then -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damocles).
So if the majority wants socialism, they may have it.
It is democratic to bow to the will of the majority, though you can critizise it of course and try to pave the way for a political change one way or the other. Obamas election was possible because sufficiently many voters were unhappy with the current situation.
However, as you should be able to see as well, in a democracy things usually end up somewhere in the middle. Even in a country with a socialist majority, you dont have a Sovient Union communism model.
Everybody gives up a little bit for a compromise that allows everyone to have as much of his will without having to give up to much in return.
It is a bit of a pendulum effect that will go one way or the other.
If the pendulum swings to far into one direction it will swing back further in the other. So keeping a good moderate climate is desireable.

alexjrgreen
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: UK

Post by alexjrgreen »

KitemanSA wrote:Johansen's Three Laws
  • * People have the right to voluntary action.
    * You can't do good by doing wrong.
    * Like all toxic substances, government programs are subject to the J-Curve.
Learn them.
I'm puzzled. Why do you want to infringe my "right to voluntary action"?
Ars artis est celare artem.

Aero
Posts: 1200
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 4:36 am
Location: 92111

Post by Aero »

People - If you were browsing the web with an interest in fusion and ended up here, do you think you would become a member of this forum, or even book mark this page?

I know that it is a slow news season, but this conversation really doesn't belong on the news forum.

Just my opinion.
Aero

Art Carlson
Posts: 794
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:56 am
Location: Munich, Germany

Post by Art Carlson »

Aero wrote:I know that it is a slow news season, but this conversation really doesn't belong on the news forum.
Hear, hear! Since I am guilty myself, I apologize. Please, lead me not into temptation again.

alexjrgreen
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: UK

Post by alexjrgreen »

Art Carlson wrote:
Aero wrote:I know that it is a slow news season, but this conversation really doesn't belong on the news forum.
Hear, hear! Since I am guilty myself, I apologize. Please, lead me not into temptation again.
Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa....
Ars artis est celare artem.

Skipjack
Posts: 6051
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

My fault as well, sorry for that. Was provoqued ;)

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

Art Carlson wrote: Every time I hear statements like this I cringe. The way KitemanSA stated it, the sentence is typical libertarian claptrap.

Sure. Go ahead and dump your sewage in the river. We won't mind, as long as you do it voluntarily.
Are you lying here? You state that "we won't mind". Is that true? I think your tone sounds a bit facetious based on your lead in, so I am guessing you actually do mind.

And if you were permitted to own said river, then the fact that you DO mind means that you DON'T volunteer to have me dump my sewage into the river. So I guess if I did so, I would be involving YOU (via your river) in an action involuntarily. That would be wrong. Simple, no?

You seem to have run afoul of the fallacy that MOST folks get over in their early years, that of believing that they are the only "person" in the world. So they can do whatever they want.

For those that have not yet reached moral maturity, the converse of Johansen's first law is often an aid to understanding.

First Law:
People have the right to voluntary action.
Corolary:
It is WRONG to involve another person in an action involuntarily.

So if YOU owned the river, I would be doing you wrong by dumping my sewage in it, unless you don't mind.

Unfortunately, many libertarians don't seem to get that either, so you should consider yourself in their company.

I guess if I had read from the end up rather than the beginning down, I wouldn't have posted this, but such is life.
Last edited by KitemanSA on Mon Dec 28, 2009 2:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

alexjrgreen wrote: I'm puzzled. Why do you want to infringe my "right to voluntary action"?
I'm puzzled. In what way do I infringe on your right to voluntary action? Or are you just being an ass and implying you read "Learn them", which is a REAL good suggestion, as equivilent to "Learn them or I will kill you", an attempt to force you into involunatry action? If that is the case, I have another great suggestion for you.

Grow up!

IBID

Art Carlson
Posts: 794
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:56 am
Location: Munich, Germany

Post by Art Carlson »

Naughty KitemanSA! You are not only continuing a discussion inapproriate to this forum, you are tempting poor, weak alexjrgreen to relapse. Please send him a PM if you want to further discuss which one of you is an ass or to enrich his life with additional great suggestions.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

Art Carlson wrote:Naughty KitemanSA! You are not only continuing a discussion inapproriate to this forum, you are tempting poor, weak alexjrgreen to relapse. Please send him a PM if you want to further discuss which one of you is an ass or to enrich his life with additional great suggestions.
Yup. That is the problem with this particular rendition of Forum software. If one reads from beginning to end, as I do, one will sometimes respond to postings before reading well considered pleas to cease and desist. I do agree with said plea, but I also don't just delete stuff I have posted. I did however edit my post to include an apology of sorts for having posted it.'

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Post by TallDave »

Every time I hear statements like this I cringe. The way KitemanSA stated it, the sentence is typical libertarian claptrap.

Sure. Go ahead and dump your sewage in the river. We won't mind, as long as you do it voluntarily.
I don't know where people get this idea libertarians want to let people dump sewage in the river (except a few fringey ultra-Randians who think the market will punish them more efficiently than gov't). We generally don't object to the notion of external goods, or government mandates per se; in fact both are quite proper and necessary in our worldview. We only object to government intrusion in areas where no one is being harmed or private industry can supply the same services. There is vast empirical evidence to support both objections.
Swedes live, on average, more than two and half years longer than North Dakotans.
Maybe. LE comparison between countries are complicated by the fact infant mortality (a fairly major component of LE) is measured differently; Nordic countries define "live birth" a lot more strictly than we do (we don't have low birthweight limits) -- and treatment tends to follow definition. And ND is a lot more rural than Sweden; Minnesotans (comparable ethnically, slighly more developed) probably have the same LE as Swedes, all things considered. I'm betting most LE differences disappear if you control by ethnicity (blacks in the U.S. also suffer disproportionately from high IM, high cardiovascular disease, and other ailments, possibly due to Vitamin D deficiency owing to their tropics-adapted pigmentation).
But the statement to which I was responding was an assertion that the poorest Americans are better off than the average Swede. They're not.
Fair enough, that statement probably goes too far. OTOH, the median incomes in France and Germany do appear to fall near our bottom quartile. I'm not sure what the EU average looks like.

------------------------

Anyways, back to some semblance of topicality: the FRC vs Polywell situation is interesting. You have to wonder what happens with Tri-Alpha if the Navy orders a 100MW WB-9 reactor next year. I remember the Tri-Alpha guys saying their tech was "5-15 years" (iirc) from commerical application, which I believe puts them 3-13 years away now, assuming they are still working towards a reactor.

It's hard to imagine a 100MW fusion reactor flying under the radar to the extent PW has thus far...

Skipjack
Posts: 6051
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

OTOH, the median incomes in France and Germany do appear to fall near our bottom quartile. I'm not sure what the EU average looks like.
That depends on how you measure it, I guess. If you take the GDP (PPP) nominal, then Austria e.g. comes out on top of the US and Germany is only 2k USD behind. Norway even doubles the US in that list.

If you take just the GDP (PPP) per capita then Norway still beats the US, as do Luxemburg and Liechtenstein.
Austria is not fairing to badly with about 17% less than the US. Considering that we are a small, resourceless, (and on top of that) evil socialist country not that bad at all, I would say.
The Germans still have to deal with those reunion woes a bit, but things are improving slowly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... per_capita

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Post by TallDave »

Skipjack wrote:
OTOH, the median incomes in France and Germany do appear to fall near our bottom quartile. I'm not sure what the EU average looks like.
That depends on how you measure it, I guess. If you take the GDP (PPP) nominal, then Austria e.g. comes out on top of the US and Germany is only 2k USD behind. Norway even doubles the US in that list.
Nominal is almost meaningless. They do the PPP adjustment for good reason.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... per_capita
If you take just the GDP (PPP) per capita then Norway still beats the US, as do Luxemburg and Liechtenstein.
Sure, but they're tiny. The largest of those doesn't have 2% of our population. One could easily find equally tiny and rich political segments in the U.S.

But if you add up only the richest countries in the EU till you get to 300 million people, you find they're still well below the U.S.

Enforced equality always comes at a cost; the greater the forced equality, the greater the cost, which is why North Korea and Cuba are so poor and Eastern Europe still lags behind Western, while almost everyone lags the U.S. The evidence suggests most countries are still sacrificing too much economic growth in the name of equality, in terms of optimizing overall outcomes.

Post Reply