VermillionStar

I live in the Rose City aka Windsor, Ontario, Canada.  We've got more things to do with the auto industry and skilled trades here then you can shake a fair sized stick at.  Little bit of urban blight here and there and smog warnings aplenty - not bad for a city of 250,000 or so I suppose...

I was wondering.  The part where the articles states:

does that mean it's like a railgun and the projectile is 5.56?

What is really a great part of these weapons is that you don't have to worry so much about interception as in the anti-missile missile systems.  Basically, if you can track the thing - once you hit the trigger you know whether or not you hit because your "projectile" travels at friggin light speed!

Completely spiff!  

If they can cut down tracking/seek times against incoming threats then one of these things could take out the volleys mentioned above.  In theory, you're only limited by how long it would take to lock on to one object, fire, lock on to next because you have "intsant" kills so to speak.

ICBMs with what I think is called Multiple Indepent Rocket Vehicle (or MIRV) warheads are the norm; however, the MIRV only becomes effective once closer to the target.  The ICBM needs to travel about half the distance to the target and into low Earth orbit before those systems can be deployed.

With the early warning systems the Americans have in place right now they can detect launches within a few minutes or so after liftoff, if that long.  If you can detect an ICBM and get the laser on it within 20 minutes (from launch to detonation it is about 45 minutes on average if you're coming from somewhere in northern Asia to North America) then you're still in good shape.  I think the whole point of having a cluster of these things in orbit would be to neutralzie the threat before it got a chance to spit up.

The fact that it exists at all is impressive.  I can't see it being out of the prototype stage at all, or if it is it's only the first in a series of models.

A battery of these things hooked up to an Aegis system could make a very effective screening/defence measure I'm sure.

That actually doesn't surprise me too much.  They could potentially be making a platform that would see a cluster of these things in orbit that, combined with the early detection systems already in place, could possibly destroy ICBMs and whatnot while still over the country of origin.

Personally, being from Canada, I rather like that idea because the current US plans to deal with attacks of that nature turns Canada into a radioactive debris field.  

...And know I don't think we should have to pay for that privilege.  Pat Buchanan is a complete ass - see this link to find out what I'm talking about.

Along with Split I'm on the leftish side of Authoritarianism, here's what they said:

According to your answers, your political philosophy is authoritarian.  Authoritarians want government to advance society and individuals through expert central planning. They often doubt whether self-government is practical. Left-authoritarians are also called socialists, while fascists are right-authoritarians.

I suppose I suspected as much of myself.  I really enjoyed reading Starship Troopers.  Think this result has a bearing on those political standings in the book?

I'd also like to add, for those interested, that I did in fact get a hair cut on the weekend.  True story.  

hehehe, one of the parties is afraid of the smallest things and the other is just an ass.  Perfect...

I can't bring myself to drink coffee anymore.  I was at about 2.5 pots a day and started to get a strange rash - that was about 3 years ago and I went cold turkey.

Though I'm not above a few cans of Jolt to keep up my supply of pre-morning petrol!

Anyways, it appears that we're getting closer to Star Trek all the time.  As this article shows, the technology of energy weapons is making certain progress.

I'm dead serious.  Take a look at this link.

What is also interesting is that recently a study from Rutgers University has shown caffeine applied topically to the skin significantly inhibited skin cancer formation in mice. The study also showed that caffeine was also active in killing cancer cells while leaving normal skin cells alone. After unleashing a fresh peppermint scent, caffeinated soap can also give you a fresh jolt while keeping skin healthy.  Check the study link for more specific info.

EMP in heavy dosages.  This is what I like to use against the borged out crazy PG.  As the rulebook states "...because you can't intimidate frack when your spinal column locks up."  Once you do this to them and have some punks come up, spray paint their names on the PGs back, take the PGs cyberarm to sell at the nearest clinic then piss on the PGs head for their trouble.  This could give you an overwhelming sense of humility or just kill the PG - either result is satisfactory to me.

To other PGs that aren't borged out, but are the "solo-from-hell" types, I go for the lowtech answer mentioned a few posts above.  Freeway encounters where they are stuck driving a vehicle are good.  Also, fire or Willy Pete grenades do wonders for a personality and are my favourites.

Lastly, there is the PG that is nothing special, just out to f*ck up your game.  I've found that having these PG one-upped by the other party members at every turn until they wise up is a decent solution.

It's just one of those things that everybody should be exposed to.

Kinda like the movie Yellowbeard.

I'm actually just coming off of a long DnD 3rd edition campaign myself.  I had a little hiatus from CP2020 and it was okay but I'm done with it now.    Hopefully they will be interested.

Well, I'm actually not a stone's throw away, maybe 5 stone throws - I'm on Partington.

In an acronym - OMG

HoL is something else to be sure.  I personally am considered The Man With No Name - or so my players say.  We could never play this game but it's truly something that every serious gamer needs to at least peruse.

BTW - My favourite special ability is from the kid template; the ability is "Fall from any height and only get scraped knees"

What's yours?

What they're worried about in North America is that just about all of the baby-boomers will be dead or in permanent care within 20 years.  We're on the cusp of a real population decline; but I can't say it's a bad thing.

I think the consequences of violating the licensing would end up in a discussion concerning the ethics of abortion.  Too touchy for me.    But as for the licensing part itself, I'll talk about that at the bottom.

Simeply put: You can't have complete freedom, and good safety/security.  The more freedom you have, the less individual security you have and vice versa.  The problem is finding the right balance.

Well, when I suggested licensing it didn't have anything to do with genetics, or social standing.  Similar to a driver's license, I believe there should be tests which will gauge your "parental" aptitudes.  Are you a caring individual?  Do you have latent homicidal tendencies?  Do you understand the impact having a child has on your life?  Do you have AIDS?

There should be a system in place to govern this.

Many people have no idea what they're going to do with their life beyond what kind of job (vaguley) they want; much less what turns their life will make in 6 months.  These same people (children basically) have no concept of the ramifications of having a child.  Can a 15 year old who just wants to be loved explain the facts of life to a 37 year old, parent of 4?  Absolutely not.  Children shouldn't be allowed to have children.  The only reason that happened before (here I'm speaking about anytime before say... 1900) is because in order to have a better then even chance of surviving childbirth you had to have them young when you could recover under minimal or no care.

What makes me upset about this stuff is that any wanker down the street can procreate, but I don't think s/he should be able to if s/he has AIDS (or some other disease that will xfer to the child) or doesn't want/know about the responsibility of being a parent.

</rant>

This just kinda proves my point for me.  Money doesn't have anything to do with whether or not you make a good parent.  I'm sure we can all think of several examples of people that we know that have children and shouldn't and vice versa.

Well, living for a really long time and living forever are two different things.  Also, I don't think the sex thing would be that big of a deal.  Procreation would be a procedure like it is in Gattaca or something.

<goes to birthing clinic>

 Well, I'd like it to have blond hair, be athletic but not overly large, with high intelligence....

Or maybe not quite that bad, but I also think that in this day and age people should have to get a license or go through some screening process to have children.

Ya, that's the only bad thing about long life that I've ever heard - all friends/family/loved ones will pass away and you'll be left alone.  But, if everyone lives as long as you then Bob's your uncle!

Well, there are many advances that could come about in the next 80 years to that could negate that end...

Dear lord above, sign me up if she has a sister even vaguely like her.

Is this a bad thing?  I mean, the idea that I got from your post was that you believe humanity (as it is now) would fail.  The point of evolution is two-fold - adapt/improve and survive.  If we can change the way things work in our society (the Singularity would change everything) and adapt ourselves to realize the potential of our minds and not the limitations of our bodies then while the end result would not be "human" as we know it now it would be better equiped to function and survive, to say the least.

Thoughts?

I guess when people start speaking about non denominational presents around mid-winter I get excited.  Unlike many others I tend to hear from, I quite enjoy this time of year.  

LOL - The Punk Kittens are excellent.

Although, nobody is quite as good as this punk band.

You can say that again.  Oh, how I loved a good Celtic with a pint of Tennents on a Saturday afternoon...