tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post9070989848197005303..comments2024-03-29T00:39:31.629-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: Reach for the SkiesDavid Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger97125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-70157794262989877132018-10-26T08:27:46.649-07:002018-10-26T08:27:46.649-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.siskahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07076079736141144027noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-32782392686414525782015-05-08T08:13:15.954-07:002015-05-08T08:13:15.954-07:00I love how this delusion idiot lives in some delud...I love how this delusion idiot lives in some deluded lala-land. There will not be anything left of this planet in 50 years, you moron. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-16009163066840153972015-05-04T18:53:30.862-07:002015-05-04T18:53:30.862-07:00Sorry to jump in after Dr. Brin has announced the ...Sorry to jump in after Dr. Brin has announced the "onward" but no new thread has appeared...<br /><br />Alex, have you watched the video I linked to? We all have our time issues, but it is well worth an hour. Remind me when this school year is over to dig out the packets that came with my Great Courses CDs of Robert Sapolsky lectures. They have bibliographies full of studies on stress and income. In the meantime you might check out the Whitehall Study. Here's the Wikipedia link to get you started.<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitehall_Study<br /><br />Jumper, that blog on Jade Helm and Texas lunacy was funny. It's not likely the guy's head will explode, though. More likely he'll lose a heart valve or blow a major artery. Chronic stress weakens the immune system, too, which contributes a lot to cancer and a host of other problems - all slow and agonizing (and stressful, too!) Probably the worst of it, though, is what it does to your hippocampus...Paul SBnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-11944195479006202582015-05-04T18:53:23.680-07:002015-05-04T18:53:23.680-07:00Aside: Locumranch demands that millions of MarsOne...Aside: Locumranch demands that millions of MarsOne entrants render themselves homeless for a one-in-a-hundred-thousand chance to go to Mars, or else they are cowards. Of course, if they actually did something so stupid, he would hoot and glory in their suffering as if it too proved his point about civilisation's deserved decline and justifies his masturbatory fantasies about the destruction of society and the death of billions.<br /><br />Alex,<br /><i>"I just don't see asteroid mining as a profitable endeavor for platinum group metals."</i><br /><br />Not as a first product. Maybe not even a tenth. Any first product would need to be valuable <i>in</i> space, to replace supply from Earth. (Fuel is an obvious choice. Then air and water in the second wave.) After awhile, once the initial infrastructure has paid for itself, there might be enough spare capacity to cheaply ship some high value products directly to Earth. But it would be a long way down the track.<br /><br />I know I know, onward, onward...Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-45295654216608385442015-05-04T18:19:13.835-07:002015-05-04T18:19:13.835-07:00onward guysonward guysDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-63972592737602120122015-05-04T17:59:19.295-07:002015-05-04T17:59:19.295-07:00@Paul451. Cogent and persuasive arguments. I thi...@Paul451. Cogent and persuasive arguments. I think you are correct. (I just don't see asteroid mining as a profitable endeavor for platinum group metals).Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-63281932952929574532015-05-04T17:49:27.558-07:002015-05-04T17:49:27.558-07:00Robert,
"If you talk about colonizing asteroi...Robert,<br /><i>"If you talk about colonizing asteroids, people shrug. You talk about colonizing Mars or colonizing the Moon? They listen. And dream."</i><br /><br />Meh. In the '50s, people "dreamed" of shining silver space stations, yet most of them (even in the US) aren't even aware the US <i>has</i> a space station. Most aren't aware that there are 6 people in space right now. (Nor that there are always only 2 Americans but 3 Russians.)<br /><br />The Apollo program was "inspiring to millions", except that by Apollo 13 (pre-accident) the public was so bored, TV networks stopped doing live crosses. And the US abandoned the moon for 50 years. If the moon was so damn inspiring, why aren't we <i>there</i>? Counting on public excitement to justify a space program is a proven failed strategy, and has led the space advocacy community down many wrong paths. The shipping industry doesn't need people to "dream" about shipping. The multi-billion dollar per year satellite industry doesn't need people to "dream" about GEO comsats and weather satellites.<br /><br />That's the problem with the very core of your idea of a lunar (or Martian) base. It's based first around the idea of humans on the moon, then and only then do you cast around trying to find something for them to do. It's not based around the task first, and then trying to find the best way to do it, which just happens to be humans. It's entirely backwards. As such, you develop your infrastructure backwards, and you end up with facilities like ISS. It's first job is to be a "manned space station", but it's actual <i>purpose</i> for having humans in orbit is entirely an afterthought. And it shows. (Likewise Constellation/SLS. Their first job is to Send Humans To The Moon or at least lunar orbit. They don't have any reason to do that, so that's an afterthought. And you end up with hideously expensive, horribly unsustainable programs that have no purpose.)<br /><br />If sending humans to a place doesn't lower the cost of sending more humans, <b>you don't send humans first</b>. You instead first develop the infrastructure necessary to lower the cost of launching and operating humans in space to the point where it's cheaper to use a person than develop a bespoke robot.<br /><br />That's why I support SpaceX and concepts like CRS and Commercial Crew, that's why I'd support robotic ISRU missions to the Lunar polar ice, and it's why I support asteroids.<br /><br />Indeed, I support asteroid development. precisely because it isn't "inspiring". So it must have a reason to exist beyond "inspiring people". It has to be entirely pragmatic or it won't happen.<br /><br />[Even Catfish's idea is backwards. It assumes a series of bases first and then looks for a justification for each one. What if (manned) bases are not the best use for a particular step?]Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-35904267382261350472015-05-04T17:47:50.464-07:002015-05-04T17:47:50.464-07:00Robert,
"an International Moon Station (IMS)....Robert,<br /><i>"an International Moon Station (IMS). It is the first step toward corporate endeavors on the Moon. You have a central base from which a corporation can operate without using a huge amount of money (seeing that the base is being built by several nations working together). Once the corporate base is built, then the corporation can move into their new facility (probably having paid rent for working from the IMS). This new base can be used for research or manufacturing or whatever else."</i><br /><br />The experience of ISS begs otherwise. It was extremely expensive to develop, remains extremely expensive to operate ($3b <b><i>per year</i></b>), was designed as the lowest-common-denominator and remains extremely restricted in what it does. (Talk to many ISS scientists about doing artificial gravity research or spacecraft construction and expect to get shouted out of the room. The Japanese AG centrifuge module was grounded because other nations prioritised different research and was scared the centrifuge would interfere.) Recently, Russia wants to go in a different direction, but can't (possibly physically) remove its modules because the core functionality of the ISS still depends on them.<br /><br />A lunar base will be incredibly expensive (see Constellation), and incredibly restricted (see Constellation and ISS), and because it's international, it will be nearly impossible for nations (or meta-states like Europe) to do their own thing after it's established. It certainly won't be <i>allowed</i> to act as a core for corporate expansion, any more than ISS is. (There are a few at NASA who try to push such ideas, and occasionally something sneaks though the gaps (like CRS/CCdev/BEAM), but 99% of their efforts are blocked; if not by the agency, then by Congress.)<br /><br />However, multiple independent programs in competition can choose their own path, make their own mistakes. Everyone can learn from others' mistakes without having to pay for it directly.<br /><br />If we had an upgraded Mir (or MirII) and a smaller US station flying <i>simultaneously</i>, we'd have seen a lot more development than we did with ISS. (For example, the US would have had to develop their own crew capsule for the station, instead of relying on Soyuz, because the Shuttle couldn't stay on-station for longer than 2 weeks. So when Constellation was proposed, they'd have already had Version 1.0 of the crew module, and a man-rated version of one of the EELV launchers. That would have skipped Orion and Ares I entirely. Similarly, the US would have had to develop its own propulsion module, and refuelling system, that would have also helped Constellation EOR/LOR development.)<br /><br /><i>"people can tolerate lower gravity far better than microgravity."</i><br /><br />Actually we don't know that. We have no data between 0 and 1. Zero is bad, 1 is good. We don't know the shape of the curve in between; linear, exponential, asymptotic. That's one of the frustrations of ISS, the lack of research into that middle realm.Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-40369981668675617002015-05-04T17:47:02.395-07:002015-05-04T17:47:02.395-07:00Ioan,
"how are you going to keep the mass bey...Ioan,<br /><i>"how are you going to keep the mass beyond L1 from entering in Earth orbit."</i><br /><br />It's attached to the tether.<br /><br />The mass Earth-side of L1 is trying to pull away from the moon, that balances the mass below L1 that's trying to fall towards the moon. That's how the system stays under tension. <br /><br />That's the physics behind any space elevator. There must be more mass beyond the mid-point.<br /><br /><i>"For the Yarkovsky effect, I have a question. Just how long do you intend to have a base there?"</i><br /><br />As I said, it will take years to be measurable. There will be no "panic" because of a few metres-per-second change in orbit per decade.<br /><br />Locumranch,<br />You are the one mouthing off about "audacity" and "will", what are <i>you</i> doing that risks everything you have?<br /><br />Other than <i>"Talk talk talk: No self-awareness. Only cowardice."</i>Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-11618650008215970562015-05-04T14:16:11.927-07:002015-05-04T14:16:11.927-07:00I think there eventually will be a pattern where a...I think there eventually will be a pattern where at least the first base of a new environment -- asteroid, Moon, Mars -- will be at least partially governmental, to assist in bootstrapping. This is akin to how most early ventures by every far-ranging exploration were at least partially government backed -- and I am not being Western-centric here, the same was true of Islamic and Chinese expeditions. Having some public-private partnership to start greases the wheels. <br /><br />There might need to be some efforts to guarantee that the public gets a share of the profits (in taxes, use fees, royalties, or some other means) to pay for the initial investment and ensure that this is not merely a way for (parasitic) elites to socialize costs and privatize gains.<br /><br />Once you take this position, the question of bases becomes "in which order should bases be built and at what priority", not "should we build an X base". And that starts you thinking about how X base helps with other things. <br /><br />BTW, I agree with what someone else said that space resource extraction mainly benefits other space activities. But that is a feature not a bug. The long term goal of refining space operations, absent a space elevator, should be (and in many cases already is) providing such that humans and other items of complex biology are the only mass that must be sent up Earth's steep gravity well. Just delivering water to LEO would be a massive advance, not only for life support but also as reaction mass.Catfish N. Codnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-27097091953691918512015-05-04T14:02:31.494-07:002015-05-04T14:02:31.494-07:00"We would be audacious in countless ways, if ...<br /><br />"We would be audacious in countless ways, if we weren’t snared into lobotomizing-draining civil war".<br /><br />First, the phrase 'We would be audacious IF' implies that audacity is somehow conditional, yet audacity (defined as "daring, courage, boldness, defiance, nerve, cheek or chutzpah") is neither conditional nor consensual-dependent.<br /><br />Second, the so-called 'lobotomizing' civil war is just an excuse for inaction. Being risk-averse, the fearful individual (and/or group) repudiates individual moral agency and attempts to amortise (and/or 'shift') that responsibility to the collective.<br /><br />Again, the math is clear. If those 200,000 Mars One 'volunteers' actually wanted to go to Mars then no one could stop them from acting collectively, bankrolling this mission on their own and going. The same goes for climate change activism and the Blue Urban Agenda.<br /><br />The problem is those SJWs really don't want to act on their own. They want to foist that risk on the Nanny Collective; they want Daddy Defender to insure them against adverse consequence; and then they want to stick their Children with the bill.<br /><br />Only cowardice is stopping them from AUDACITY.<br /><br /><br />Bestlocumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-21012530988190753312015-05-04T13:03:16.206-07:002015-05-04T13:03:16.206-07:00In agreement with Dr. Brin, I advise against getti...In agreement with Dr. Brin, I advise against getting too addicted to anger as a personal motivational crutch but in Jim Wrigtht's case I am willing to give him a pass. I hope his head does not explode, however.<br />http://www.stonekettle.com/2015/05/jade-helm-insanity-that-ate-texas.htmlJumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-5621211410504555922015-05-04T12:57:03.586-07:002015-05-04T12:57:03.586-07:00@treebeard: Thank you. I've flagged your e-bo...@treebeard: Thank you. I've flagged your e-book to look at it later. I'm always on the lookout for non-standard perspectives.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-33300020382516836052015-05-04T12:31:10.072-07:002015-05-04T12:31:10.072-07:00I only know of one possible exception that could m...I only know of one possible exception that could make the Moon useful in the next century except as a source of gravity. If some of the inbound asteroids survived impact enough for there to be platinum group metals in high concentrations, it might be worth plunking down next to them, mining them, and tossing them back toward Earth. Other than that, I don’t see it being useful for more than its role as a slingshot and orbit perturber for some time. I feel the same way about Mars, but I’m not going to try to stand in the way of people who advocate for either location as a target for government money funded projects. Private money will know what’s worth doing, so I don’t fret what it does at all.<br /><br />Asteroid resource extraction has a lot more potential, but faces the huge hurdle related to the time cost of money. When there is a market for water to refuel vehicles we have up there, only then will it be worth considering.<br /><br />None of these things need a lot of people for some time, though. There is no sense plopping people on the Moon along with equipment and even less in sending them to asteroids. People (for colonization) will go eventually when the markets draw them out there and that won’t happen until there are intermediate trades to be made. For example, asking ‘What is the price of gold?’ is meaningless. Asking about that price in Zurich, London, or Chicago makes sense. Prices exist in the market. When someone ships platinum from an asteroid to London, the futures market is in London. When someone wants the trade to occur at the Earth/Moon L2 region, the market is out there even if the traders are elsewhere. Only then will the traders be tempted to have people out there.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-87243080388114266992015-05-04T11:53:52.490-07:002015-05-04T11:53:52.490-07:00@locumranch:
Talk talk talk: No self-awareness, n...@locumranch:<br /><br /><i>Talk talk talk: No self-awareness, no action, no audacity.<br /><br />Our decadent society is well & truly screwed.</i><br /><br />Meh. Speak for yourself. I gave 15 years to entrepreneurial efforts and 13 years beyond K-12 to getting the education I have. My Social Security record shows I somehow kept body and mind together during one of my school years on $3.2K, so between all that, I think I've given enough to avoid your accusation. I've seen many others giving of themselves too. <br /><br />We aren't screwed, but there sure are a lot of people who are seduced by the sweetness of gloom into thinking we are.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-58956273547654788842015-05-04T11:40:27.326-07:002015-05-04T11:40:27.326-07:00...and yes... the PongSat idea is brilliant. Some ......and yes... the PongSat idea is brilliant. Some of the stuff I saw kids doing with theirs gave me a lot of hope for the next generation.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-41451661005417136272015-05-04T11:36:06.524-07:002015-05-04T11:36:06.524-07:00@Alex: JP’s vision had a single stage vehicle maki...@Alex: JP’s vision had a single stage vehicle making it to orbit using a long duration thrust phase at very high altitude. My version had some intermediate steps that looked more like rocket-assisted flight of a frog that could skip along the top of the atmosphere using what little lift was available. Had I stayed I’m sure what would have actually happened would have been neither and both since we often flew test vehicles as part of our learning process. When you ask Creation a question and get a useful answer, it’s best to adjust your vision a bit and use Her advice. 8)<br /><br />Those were great years for me and I remember them fondly. JP paints a vivid vision, motivates his volunteers, and leads by example, but the whole team is amazing in each of its incarnations. What I remember most is the demonstration made year in and year out of what motivated people can do with or without money, facilities, and training. We could take people in off the street and get them productive in a very short time doing something that helped make their hearts sing. I’ve no doubt they can still do this.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-60409305958672625152015-05-04T10:45:01.971-07:002015-05-04T10:45:01.971-07:00@Alfred - I'm guessing it was pretty interesti...@Alfred - I'm guessing it was pretty interesting working at JPA, although I'm guessing it was a shoe string operation.Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-8443441248834068602015-05-04T10:38:55.054-07:002015-05-04T10:38:55.054-07:00Thanks for your input Alfred. AFAIK the idea was ...Thanks for your input Alfred. AFAIK the idea was to send the whole airship to orbit, using some sort of slow velocity buildup in a very thin atmosphere. But this assumes that the dynamic lift keeps the drag sufficiently low to allow this, which is not likely given the heat of reentry much higher in the atmosphere at 8km/s.<br /><br />As for using it as a early stage, I get that.<br /><br />I like their thinking outside the box (and their pong-sat program is cool), I'm just very skeptical that it has been thought through as explained in the book and can be seen on a YouTube video.<br /><br /><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4dsvreDTsI" rel="nofollow">Airship to Orbit (ATO). JPAerospace</a>Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-59675560450972148842015-05-04T09:57:18.118-07:002015-05-04T09:57:18.118-07:00@Alex: My departure from JPA was around the same t...@Alex: My departure from JPA was around the same time JP was writing his book, so I can’t (and shouldn’t) speak directly to what he was thinking. That he hand-waved a bit shouldn’t be surprising, though. He very much liked the idea and wanted to pursue it. Giving it away wasn’t part of the plan. 8)<br /><br />Obviously, one doesn’t exactly float to orbit. You have to come up with a lot of delta-vee along the way. What we were looking at (I was the physics guy on the team) was a different optimal path to orbit. The typical multi-staged rocket flight boosts the vehicle up a little bit to where the air is thinner and then pitches over to gain height and speed at the same time. You make the rocket pointy to cut through the thick air when going at a high speed. Max Q has quite a say on the design of the airframe. What we considered was the fact that we could start a whole lot higher by simply floating up there with some kind of ‘rocket’ that faced different design constraints. There was also the possibility that we could do a multi-staged vehicle too with only the lower portion capable of landing on the ground. The upper portion might stay aloft and dock with a high altitude port. JP’s vision is only part of what was going on at the time and it is neat enough on its own to consider, but if I talk too much more I’ll be guilty of describing my version of that vision instead of his which wouldn’t be fair to him.<br /><br />If it helps, try to imagine yourself as part of a civilization of deep sea fish. If you want to go to space, are you really going to build a rocket that can fly from the ocean floor up through the water at high speed? The sensible thing to do is float as high as you reasonably can and then fly. Extend that analogy to us and you’ll see what we were considering. If you have to carry fuel (as rockets do), why not use a zeroth-stage to make optimal use of it?Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-3107839389095017912015-05-04T09:04:57.520-07:002015-05-04T09:04:57.520-07:00@locum - DB answered you with this: We would be ...@locum - DB answered you with this: <b> We would be audacious in countless ways, if we weren’t snared into lobotomizing-draining civil war.</b><br /><br />What are you looking for, specific examples?<br /><br />Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-82183428488765882472015-05-04T07:45:06.369-07:002015-05-04T07:45:06.369-07:00I'm still waiting for someone to explain how &...<br />I'm still waiting for someone to explain how "it is cynics like (me) who undermine (your) audacity".<br /><br />Do you even know what 'audacity' means, or are you still waiting for some overwhelming consensus, or perhaps a deep-pocketed 'Silicon Valley bazillionaire', to validate your chosen worldview ?<br /><br />The sad truth is that most of you lack the will to put your money where your mouth is, quit your jobs, sell your homes, pool your resources or live out your various TWODA fantasies. Let's do the math.<br /><br />http://www.space.com/22758-mars-colony-volunteers-mars-one.html<br /><br />If the 200 Thousand Mars One volunteers (of which David, I believe, was one) were actually sincere in their desire to go to Mars and coughed up a measly USD $10,000 per person, then they would have 2 Billion dollars to realize their dreams (or 2 Trillion dollars if they sold their $ 100,000 homes), and the same goes for climate change mitigation strategies.<br /><br />Talk talk talk: No self-awareness, no action, no audacity.<br /><br />Our decadent society is well & truly screwed.<br /><br /><br />Bestlocumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-69711244397006449412015-05-04T07:44:30.802-07:002015-05-04T07:44:30.802-07:00@PSB - I am with you on the stress thing. It is i...@PSB - I am with you on the stress thing. It is increasingly documented that income and wealth inequality adds to stress even beyond access to resources. The current riots in Ferguson/Baltimore etc after decades of abuse by [racist] policing and lack of economic opportunity is perhaps a symptom of that stress. How much the stress alone is causing health and psychological problems I don't know, but I suspect studies have been done.<br /><br />BTW, harking back to the bullying. I saw that there was a Guardian article indicating that school bullying was far more mentally devastating than previously thought.Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-36517518298421227912015-05-04T07:39:47.652-07:002015-05-04T07:39:47.652-07:00re: Moonbase
Given that there are no proven commer...re: Moonbase<br />Given that there are no proven commercial space businesses to date, hoping that asteroid mining is going to be lucrative is a wild-assed guess and likely to be wrong. Asteroid mining will be more valuable to off-Earth industry. What the moonbase could provide is a reason to encourage commercial suppliers to the base, essentially providing the same convenience services tourists would want if the moon was a tourist base. This is analogous to the commercial services supporting teh various Antarctic bases today.<br /><br /><br />In some sense Clarke was prescient in his book "A Fall of Moondust" where Roris base was trying to find new tourist business to support its costs beyond the tours of the Sea of Thirst.<br /><br />I could see the cache for supplying the moon base as a reason for companies to provide services. The base could therefore act as a core facility that eventually attracts a tourist industry, and even possibly an manufacturing industry. This perhaps analogous to banking tax havens building a tourist industry around the core banking function.<br />Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-88209253708720861682015-05-04T07:30:05.373-07:002015-05-04T07:30:05.373-07:00Re Risk:
It depends on what risks we are talking a...<br />Re Risk:<br />It depends on what risks we are talking about. Yes, aerospace has become a lot less risk taking than it used to be. Interviews with test pilots indicates that the risks test pilots took back in the 1950-60s are no longer acceptable. That is echoed by the military reducing risks to the soldiers and cops operating on a "stay alive" mode and arming themselves heavily and using their weapons.<br /><br />OTOH, financing has become much more risk taking, with the emergence of VCs, Angel investors and now crowd funding.<br /><br />Social risk taking seems more common today, although it is hard to compare that to the risks the suffragettes took and teh violence they were subjected to.Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.com