Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Idle

Submission + - Death Star is not economical: too much metal (washingtonpost.com)

Tablizer writes: Washington Post: "Should we build a Death Star? This debate picked up this year after some Lehigh University students estimated that just the steel for a Death Star would cost $852 quadrillion, or 13,000 times the current GDP of the Earth...Death Star is a bit misunderstood. It is primarily a tool of domestic politics rather than warfare, and should be compared to alternative means of suppressing the population of a galaxy. Second, as a weapon of war, it should be compared to alternative uses of scarce defense resources. Understood properly, the Death Star is not worth it.
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Death Star is not economical: too much metal

Comments Filter:

It was pity stayed his hand. "Pity I don't have any more bullets," thought Frito. -- _Bored_of_the_Rings_, a Harvard Lampoon parody of Tolkein

Working...