Slashdot Mirror
Slashback: VIP, Makers, RMS
But who's counting? Martin Bogolmoni wrote in response to the report on the well-and-truly networked Dutch gaming fest called The Gathering, as mentioned here and praised for it's huge number of available gaming connections.
" The Gathering 99 -- 5300 switchports, but only 2,500 attendees (tickets). 2500 tickets has been all that can be sold for the last few years. TG01 was the first time that more than that have been sold .. 4,100. Also, for people coming from out of the Netherlands, (USA, England, etc..) there is no entrance fee. You are considered a VIP. -grin- Just a quick correction, since I love attending and working with The Gathering. (Not to mention speaking there...) "
Thanks, Martin :)
Whodunnit, really? A number of people emailed (some of them even politely!) to correct the story about the new eComStation, including Bob St John of Serenity Systems International, to point out that " the developer is not Mensys .. they are our distributor ... Serenity Systems is the developer."
Radu Trimbitas adds: "Mensys (like Indelible Blue in U.S.) is the main distributor of eComStation in Europe, among other things (Linux, BeOS, etc. distributors). They are very OS/2-friendly, so they made efforts to support this distribution, providing a web site with infos, support, etc."
Money may not talk but it has great facial expressions. Darren.Moffat writes "OSOpinion has updated their story and the OpenGroup also now mentions Apple this came from Daily Daemon News"
Space for me, and not for thee. csy writes "Dennis Tito returns jubilant to Earth. Meanwhile, John Glenn criticizes Tito's trip as a "misuse of a spacecraft designed for research". I guess space junkets by geriatric senators must count as research. Read the story on CNN."
And speaking of reactions, DelphiGeek writes: "There have been a plethora of stories on Microsoft's Mundie and his comments on Open Source. Postings of ESR, Linus and others rebuttals were posted here. However, I never saw anything displaying RMS' response. I find this odd seeing how the GPL was the license that was directly attacked. Here is a link to RMS' official response. Also on GNU there are several documents that are older that state his postion."
You'll note that RMS does not find "conciliatory" in his personal dictionary ;)
Nobody's opening any kimonos here, pal!
"Since the kimono has already been opened...RLX is going to be demoing the RLX System 324 Web Server at Networld+Interop. RLX is not on the show floor but if you want to see it, look on their website and call the number or email sales@rlxtechnologies.com to get the info and get into see it.
Just a few notes of what has already been done with these things. An initial 220 Node Beowulf Cluster in one rack in under two man days, just as a proof of concept. On that line, RLX has been working with Scyld, (people like Don Becker and the original Beowulf crew), on some real cool integration of Scyld Beowulf. Brings the time down for a beowulf from days to hours. The rumor is they will even have a small cluster using the Scyld stuff at N+I.
So yeah, that evil thought was part of Microsoft's business dealings back then. Whether they can legally do it again or not remains to be seen.
Putting a tourist into space WAS exploration, but not into astronomics: it was economics exploration. Missions that wouldn't have made sense as purely public projects, might now get accomplished with $20M of extra (delicate) cargo on board.
Americans everywhere should hang their head in shame; you've just been out-entrepreneured by the Russians!
Oh, you mean Reagan went over there personally and embezzeled the Russian Treasury? Reagan went out of his way to bankrupt the US, and the USSR, lemming like, followed, then passed us on the way to the sea. We may have slowed down slightly, but we haven't stopped.
:) I also fail to see why it (directly) relates to the human-rights committee.
You may wish to check your math; Reducing our population will INCREASE the ratio of pollution the US puts out (assuming pollution stays fairly constant). The problem is reducing pollution per person, or increasing our birth rate without increasing pollution much
"'Tis great confidence in a friend to tell him your faults, greater to tell him his." --Poor Richard's Almanac
Tito paid 20 million dollars for the trip. That covered the Russian Soyuz flight and maybe subsidized Russian space flight operations. However, station operations were basically shut down for that period. Since the ISS is a work in progress, that also meant that equipment was not installed, further delaying fully operational status.
The United states has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in this station. Because of budgetary considerations, plans to increase the crew capacity to six (from three) have been put on hold.
Could one make an economic case for building a multi billion dollar space station, and then renting it out to tourists for the cost of delivering them to orbit? No way! How would you pay for your multi billion dollar space station?
The ISS was obstensibly designed for research. Tourists are a distraction. If some idiot with cash to burn believes that there is a sustainable market for space tourism, let him build his own space station.
That's so well said it bears repeating. There's no better sign of impending victory than the frenzied confusion of an opponent who simply has no clue what to do.
An evil thought just occured to me...
I think Microsoft has a more hidden purpose to it's "shared source" initiative. Everyone who gets to look at their source code undoubtedly must sign an NDA saying that they'll never reveal the source to the public, nor use the code or ideas for any other project.
Every developer that agrees to it is now "tainted" when it comes to working on an open source software project. MS now has grounds for going after individual developers working on open source software, and has an indimidation tool for those just thinking about it. And as we know with legal stuff, it doesn't necessarily have to hold up in a trial, legal arguments just have to sound plausible enough for threats.
Ideally (from MS's point of view), everyone in the world would sign such NDAs, and thereby stifle open source software development.
I agree.. In fact, I have no problem with this whatsoever. Think about this: Tito has advanced the cause of research by giving the Russians something that they need desperately. Cash to build new parts for the station.
Does the idea of tourists at the station repulse me somewhat? Yes. Does the end of funding the station justify that means? Yes.
Ben
You've heard this before I imagine, but you can't see anything but the standard dualities.
And let me see, you're *complaining* that Stallman *only* got as far as writing a (1) compiler (2) some utilities (3) an integrated development environment that includes an editor.
So, are we getting any closer to a "B" ark?
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
The founding fathers of the US didn't like excessive taxation, but low taxes wasn't the most important problem. They saught Freedom.
--Ben
I attended The Gathering the first time in 1993, and it was actually more fun before there was a large network and a high speed internet connection, although I had a really good time in 1996 too.
I believe that Microsoft has concluded that they can't lose on this: every developer who peeks at Windows or Office code will have to live with the potential of being sued by a deep-pocketed litigator in the future if they should at any time work on a similar non-M$ product. At the same time, for every developer who considers this a bad idea and refuses access to M$ source, Chairman Bill can point to them and say, "See? People don't really want the source! Our research shows that 9 out of 10 developers don't need or aren't interested...." Kinda clever, in a Stalinist sort of way. :)
People will use free software as a proof of concept for starting out before someone with money backs the idea [snip]. Once the general public starts handing said person money for their concept, they can pay someone else money to buy commercial software.
.. software and technology has massive influence economic and social issues. It certainly ain't sports - you know what I'm saying?
I agree that free software can make inroads where people aren't ready to pay for commercial software. I also agree that once most managers are convinced of a need, they don't much count on the value of freedom.
However, a lot of what we "know" about the software "market" is about to change. Microsoft's defense of the status quo software market is pure hot air -- they know the jig is up, as evidenced by their behavior on EULAs and their movement towards subscriptions -- essentially a service model like Red Hat's, but more restrictive to the user and lucrative for them.
Up to now the situation as we know it has been dominated by exponential growth. This has attracted investment, which is going to prefer being able to control the product.
For many kinds of software (e.g. operating systems and desktop apps), we are now entering the thermodynamic heat death epoch -- the energy of extremely rapid growth is no longer available. Future growth for investors will no longer come out of capturing the largest slice of the overall market's growth. They can only take market share away from others, or extract more revenue from their customers.
Microsoft's position of pwoer in this situation is unstable, and the know it. They can't grow in the way investors expect by operating as if the status quo will continue forever. They can't grow in areas where they are dominant by taking market share from others. Instead, they are undertaking short term measures to prop up revenues (getting much tougher on EULA interpretation, for example) and long term efforts to move customers locked into their existing technologies to a subscription model and to use their areas of domination to establish beachheads in new areas of growth. It's very dicey for them and for once the famed Microsoft paranoia is justified.
So, I see open source/free software making inroads in the areas that have traditionally been MS dominated -- operating systems, development systems, LAN services, and office automation. This momentum might give it the credibility it needs to compete with Microsoft in new areas of growth.
Anyhow, this is a long winded way of saying that I do agree with your comment. I get tired of the blind supporters of either side
I don't think proprietary software is going away. It may be morally less admirable or technically less serviceable, but it serves economic purposes in many areas, such as vertical market software or areas of rapid growth where it can marshall large investments. But I think over the long run it is going to stagnate or lose ground in mature markets.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
None...they should be allowed to make all the drugs they want themselves for cheap. Millions of human lives, or MegaCo's "intellectual property"? Decision made.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
"RMS insults Linus by comparing him to Han Solo"
Hans Solo was the best character anyway...
"RMS's vision of community is about subverting the institutions of US democracy in order to advance the cause of socialism."
*Yawn* Oh no, the commies, socialists, run for your guns red-blooded Americans!! RMS's "vision" can be concisely stated as against exclusive intellectual property rights. Oh no! Society will crumble! Bleh. Patent and copyright in this country is blatently abused and exploited by large corporations. If your definition of capitalism allows for conglomerations of monopolies around absolute information hoarding, well, it's you that has the problem.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Heh.. I glanced at the topic and saw Slashback: RIP RMS at first glance. Woah!
How we know is more important than what we know.
common. We all know where Eben Moglen's agenda lies. I read a lot of his Anarchism stuff before I even heard of the GPL (but then again, that before I started looking for political arguments in software licenses).
How we know is more important than what we know.
John Glenn earned his place in space.
I believe in fair play. If we really owe him something, we should pay him back in full, and immediately. Then from this point on, we don't owe him a damn cent or privilege. (No, I haven't forgotten the S&L scandal.)
Personally, I think he received fair value for his contributions while in the space program. What were the terms? With all the volunteers, I'll bet the terms were something like, "You will work your ass off, and you might die. But you will get the chance to go into space and be a hero." I think he kept his part of the bargain, and in return he was paid back in full.
So... My question is, do we STILL owe Glenn something more, or has the check finally been paid in full? I really want to know.
As for Tito, he made an important contribution to the Russian space program. From what I understand, his $$ more than covered the actual cost of his trip (Duh! The Russians wouldn't take him up, just to lose money). Anyway, the profits the Russians made can help them buy more stuff they need.
I guess NASA just has too much money to even weigh the $20 million against the inconvenience of a visitor. Funny, this seems to be similar to the attitude of some businesses that hate their customers, view them as annoyances, and wish they would go away...
A dingo ate my sig...
Yes, it was research. It may not have been the most hard-hitting, or vital research, but comparing John Glenn to Dennis Tito is
insulting. John Glenn earned his place in space. He risked his life to be the first man to orbit the Earth in a capsule that was little
more than a projectile. He went back into space as a genuine hero to many Americans. Dennis Tito was nothing but a crass opportunist using his money to buy something he could never earn.
Bullshit. Whether or not Glenn "earned" it, it was still a joyride, so it's doubly hypocritical for him to call Tito's trip misuse of equipment.
Tito is a pioneer no less than Glenn: commercial exploration of space is going to be crucial in the future, and Tito's trip is an important early step.
Not only that, but they set a precedent that a (basically) ordinary citizen ( albeit one with a LOT of money ) can pay for a trip into space. For millions of people who have dreamed of going into space, but weren't astronauts, this is a GIGANTIC leap for mankind. I know that, for me personally, it raises hopes that in my lifetime I may be able to buy a trip into space as well. And I consider that to be a GOOD thing.
// TODO: Insert Cool Sig
How much money have you donated for AIDS drugs in Africa this year?
ostiguy won't hold his breath
Totally valid points; I hadn't thought about the fact that market saturation is getting closer. Although we have a long ways to go, if the OS-on-every-device thing comes true?
Garret
"Old man yells at systemd"
I like to think of it this way:
/is/ better than the commercial software; this is obviously judged on an app by app basis and obviously is true in many cases). Once the general public starts handing said person money for their concept, they can pay someone else money to buy commercial software. This earns them more sales people through third party sales, etc, a financial crutch should they need it (I'm sure we're aware of companies buying other companies just because that company was their best billboard and customer), and accountability for failure and fault (what I like to call the 'killer finger', in spirit of the term 'killer app'). Thusly, they never grow as big and rich as Microsoft, and consequently, not as evil either. Microsoft is the karma garberator for the technology age! ;)
.. personally, I see the balance of power as both integral to the pervasion and success of technology and inevitable. It's like jaywalking .. if we ALL did it, traffic would never go anywhere, but if no one did it .. well, see, that just never happens. =) The balance is struck due to the benifits society as a whole reaps from it. (Can you tell I buy into the whole ying/yang thing?)
.. software and technology has massive influence economic and social issues. It certainly ain't sports - you know what I'm saying?
.. makes me think of hemoglobin, which is funny 'cause Microsoft is the blood sucker, and RMS is with the Eben Moglen (okay, its a stretch, but say it fast :P)
People will use free software as a proof of concept for starting out before someone with money backs the idea (or where the free software in question really
People always seem intent on prooving that the only grass worth standing on is the grass on their side of the fence
Anyhow, this is a long winded way of saying that I do agree with your comment. I get tired of the blind supporters of either side
And Eben Moglen
Now Dance, Santa!
"Old man yells at systemd"
The Free Software Foundation is not anit-business
...
* In the sense of the FSF dissapproving of closed source software
* In the sense of the FSF dissapproving of Open Source interoperating with closed source...
* In the sense of many of its followers who generally misuse the term `commercial' to mean non free / Open Source (hah!)...
* In the sense of many FSF supporters and members constantly insistenting that `corporate interests (ie, business in general) and Open Soruce are mutually exclusive...
They are.
In my and many others opinion anyway.
As far as why we were voted off the Human Rights Commision, that is called payback. Payback for being critical of human rights abuses worldwide and not to mention a new administration with a 180 degree different viewpoint than the majority of socialist Europe.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Ahem. The US was voted of the Human Rights commission because
* It has steadfastly refused to apply any pressure to Israel to sign any UN anti-torture agreements that the majority on first world nations, including most of the EU, have signed
* It also refuses to sign any treaties banning the use of land mines in combat
* Various other bits and pieces that escape my mind because its currently overtaken by humor in response to your post.
Though I might back that up properly:
h tm l
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-world-notes.
There's more I'm sure, if you can be bothered finding the search button.
Glenn deserves to be insulted for this.
If age research was interesting why didn't NASA do similar research on Tito? I don't doubt for a second that he'd have been up for it. Instead NASA wasted the opportunity by insisting on acting like King Canute.
Glenn's response is nothing short of disgusting in light of his thinly veiled boondoggle on the shuttle. He was an all American hero, but I'd have thought posterity would have taught him a lesson about speaking on who should be allowed in space. Remember that it's John Glenn who, during the space race, testified before congress that the trained female astronauts shouldn't be allowed to fly, keeping space an all male club for decades when NASA had ALREADY trained a contingent of women. Now Glenn is even more hypocritical saying Tito shouldn't have flown. Tito will go down in history as a pioneer, and Glenn's comments will be yet another tawdry footnote.
NASA should hang it's head in shame, they opposed Tito's flight saying he was untrained, yet THEY are the ones who refused to train him with utterly inappropriate arrogance. Now Dan Goldin is implying Tito is unpatriotic for not buckling under to NASA's unreasonable demands, which ignored the RIGHTS of the other ISS operators. The more control of space we wrest from the paranoid beaurocratic nightmare that NASA has become the better off we'll all be. NASA's real concern here is that more people might realize what a state they are in. It's clear that NASA has been much too risk averse since the Challenger disaster. Thousands die on the roads each year, people die climbing Mount Everest each year, yet NASA is under the delusion that we must have virtually no risk exploring space. This is crippling manned flight and costing a fortune (which is spent elsewhere would save hundreds if not thousands of lives, if that asuages your conciense).
It wasn't just Garn, either. There was also a Congressman (Bill Nelson) who got a joyride, bumping a regular crew member to the next available flight. NASA's web site lists him as "Payload Specialist 2". More like "Special Payload 2".
That crew member was then killed in the Challenger explosion.
Tito paid his own money, took a seat that would have gone empty (the Soyuz has three seats, but normally uses only two for these missions), and helped keep some Russian rocket scientists employed for civilian work rather than freelancing in Baghdad. Garn, Nelson, and Glenn all got rides by calling in favors.
Why couldn't NASA just have accepted the inevitable, and maybe tossed in a few experiments for Tito to help out on? Hook up a gizmawhatchit to his dinguszoib and see how many froobits he trings per hour while in space.
Or whatever, ANYTHING to make it so he isn't just a waste of space. Hell, if I was paying my way, I think it would be cool to get to do some real live research too. Just feeding the friggen mice would be neat.
Instead, Tito spent a few days in space and NASA got NOTHING (nada, zip, zilch) out of it except a big PR cream pie in the face for dragging their heels on the whole thing. What a buncha short sighted people.
Yes yes, I understand that in the lawsuit-happy US of A they would be liable if he was an "official" crew member and something bad happened, but we didn't get into space in the first place by being a bunch of wimps. As long as he's already there, give the guy something useful to do and get something back. That's what waivers are for anyhow.
As for Senator Glenn, I respect him and his accomplishments more than most people but in this case he's chasing the past.
Tony
It was absolutely NOT research. NASA has a program where all current and previous astronauts that have flown get a regular checkup (every few years) to monitor the later effects in life of space travel.
John Glenn is one of the only astronauts who refuses to participate in this program. There is no good data for any researchers to use because unlike the rest of the aging astronauts (including positively ancient Story Musgrave), there are no data points between 1961 and 1997 on Glenn.
Anyone who thinks that Glenn was doing anything other then collecting on a presidential political favor is delusional and does not understand the true story behind his return to space.
Open Source Advocate Has Yet To Rebut Craig Mundie
Jeff Parns considers himself a model for free software advocacy: helping out at installfests, answering questions on the Central Kansas Free Unix User's Group mailing list, working in his spare time on a user-friendly graphical interface to cron. Why, then, has he yet to write a long-winded essay rebutting Microsoft exec Craig Mundie's recent remarks about open source?
Our crack interviewing team cornerned Parns in his home, where he was conspicuously not combing through the text of Mundie's remarks, just as he had not been in attendance at NYU's Stern School of Business on May 3 to hear Mundie speak. What justified this weird behavior?
"I really think there are enough rebuttals already, " said Parns. "I mean, have you even read all those things? "
Eric S. Raymond, whose two preemptive rebuttals sparked the craze, was pessimistic about the chances for a Parns rebuttal in the future. "Obviously, we can't force him to write a rebuttal to Mundie's wrong-headed remarks about open source," said Raymond. "However, it's possible that my new paper, 'How I Rebutted Craig Mundie's Wrong-Headed Remarks About Open Source In Copious Detail--And How You Can Too' will give him some ideas. In fact, there's sort of a little form rebuttal in Appendix C which he can sign his name to and get it linked from Linux Today."
"As a full-time programmer, my day is pretty busy," said Brian Behlendorf of the Apache Software Foundation, whose anti-Mundie remarks were picked up by Infoworld. "Yet even I managed to stop by Mundie's speech and make a few remarks to the press. I don't think this Parns is even trying. I mean, even Steve Ballmer published a 3000-word Mundie rebuttal. Sic transit gloria Mundie, I guess."
Even Parns' neighbors have begun to notice this gap in the open source ranks. "The way he helped me with my Red Hat install, I was sure he was some sort of hot-shot free software advocate," said Millie Leman, a local dominatrix and mother of two. "But I haven't heard one word from him about this Mundie thing. It makes a person wonder."
"Look, it's spring, my son's about to graduate from junior high, I'm trying to get KCron to 1.0," said Parns, shooing this reporter out his front door. "Just leave me alone."
Will Parns rebut? Already, rebuttals with his name on them have begun showing up, though he denies authorship. Watch for the rebuttal signed with Parns' Gnu Privacy Guard key, and keep reading Segfault.org for complete coverage of every Mundie rebuttal ever written.
Tomorrow: An in-depth look at the rebuttal that Mark Billings of London saved to ~mark/mundie.txt, but never showed to anybody.
(This 'story' was first shown at Segfault.org here, and was written by Leonard Richardson)
I always thought that it was Gagarin who first orbited the earth, not Glenn.
People ought to be singing Tito's praise for his generous contributions to science. Just because he got a few days in space doesn't make his contribution less noble. It's like the little trinkets they give you when you send money to PBS, if you sent in $20 million, they better give you something pretty damn spectacular.
The only "intuitive" interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
Please cite evidence
It should be self-evident that "copyleft" is the use of copyright (the institution) to advance the cause of a community that operates according to a more socialist economic principle.
Tracing evidence could become a full time job, but interesting little tidbits come to light now and then:
Example 1. It's long. Use your browser search function for "1%" (without the quotes) and you'll see that they are seeking taxation to fund themselves. It doesn't implicate RMS directly, just his close associates.
I just dug that up in a google search looking for information about RMS in Argentina. I had seen someone on /. saying that RMS had lobbied Argentina's government for the passage of a "Free Software only" policy. A requirement that major governments use Free Software is an obvious step on the road to socializing software. The next step is that the government will be maintaining the software. At this point, many people say that it's OK because the government doesn't have to release the software, but the political reality is that they will have to release it. Just like magic, the government will hold a defacto monopoly on software development because the existance of Free Software developed by the government will drive competition from the market. This is textbook socialism, with all its attendant problems, and it is occuring with very little debate because the public at large doesn't understand what's going on.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
And let me see, you're *complaining* that Stallman *only* got as far as writing[software listed]
As individual achievements they are outstanding. As a team effort under his leadership they are short of the original goal. That's what I meant to say.
OK, I'm done with this for now. Goodnight everybody.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
perl -e 's/Open Source/Free Software/gi' -p -i.bak *.html
perl -e 's/Linux/GNU\/Linux/gi' -p -i.bak *.html
I'm probably leaving out something. Anybody wanna help? Come-on, we can replace RMS and his lawyer with a Perl script. I just started playing around with Perl this week. I bet a real guru could implement a complete RMS in one or two lines.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
I guess space junkets by geriatric senators must count as research.
Of course it does. In a few years we'll be overrun with too many Baby Boomer Senior Citizens. We had to investigate to see if launching them into space was a viable plan to save the rest of humanity.
It's either that or suffer through a dark future where there's a worldwide shortage of Fixodent and the AARP manages to lobby Congress into making illegally parking in a handicapped parking space a capital offense.
NO CARRIER
Umm, it's not clear to me why Dennis needs to be morally assaulted for spending his own money by the senator who got a free ride on the taxpayers.
Tired of day trading with real money? Try Peak Trader.
The assumption that many people make, which your post failed to include, is that there are certain things that we attempt to place beyond the reaches of pure money and capitalism. Science is one of them. Another, love. And intelligence--I could go on... But the point is that NASA and our space exploration should be more about science, more about exploration, more about goodwill, and less about capitalism and greed and our other selfish human desires.
--
Have fun: Join D.N.A. (National Dyslexics Association)
Guess what, he went up in a RUSSIAN ship and had to sign a legally binding contract saying that he wouldn't touch anything on the American part of the station
I have news for you. The Americans PAID for the Russian module. Just goto google and do a search for something like "America Pay Russia ISS". As far as why we were voted off the Human Rights Commision, that is called payback. Payback for being critical of human rights abuses worldwide and not to mention a new administration with a 180 degree different viewpoint than the majority of socialist Europe.
Oh god, please no. Our population is aging, we already have more geriatic droolers than we can handle :/
Umm, yeah, that's how capitalism works. You work at the things you're good at, get paid, and use that money to buy the things you can't produce yourself because you lack the skills or capital investment to do so.
Am I a crass opportunist for purchasing socks made in a factory with my money? I don't think so. I'd say that by earning the money to spend on the purchase of something, I've become perfectly entitled to it.
Kornbluth never suffered fools gladly and his unabashed elitism and social Darwinism would have made him a high-karma /.er in very little time indeed if he'd had internet access in the 1950s.
Unless Tito went around flipping random switches (pretty unlikely) or ran into a personal medical situation (certainly a greater issue given his age, but mitigated by all the testing he probably had to undergo), whether or not things went to hell should be independent of his presence.
Furthermore, Tito was hitching a ride on a mission designed to make sure that, if things did go to hell, there'd be a means for them to escape the station. I don't know how economically shaky Russia's space program is (but in general, the country's a mess), so I really can't say how important the money Tito provided was to the program's continual operation, but it certainly couldn't be hurting things.
Finally, as long as Tito wasn't the one person who put them over capacity on a rescue mission, he doesn't up the cost of that mission. If everything went to hell, they'd have to incur the cost of either deploying the rescue craft or sending another shuttle anyway. Whether they rescue 4 people or 5 is irrelevant.
that's crazy. I'm in a high-performance computing
class with a 64-node beowulf of mixed Athlon 900's and 1.2's. We bought the PC's in pieces and it took each person about an hour to build one.
Man, there's something I haven't heard in about 8 years...
/tma
----
Garn's in-flight contribution to research was experiments on throwing up in weightlessness. He was flown into space because he was on the Senate appropriations committee that funds NASA. So Garn got a space flight for the exact same reason as Tito: money. At least in Tito's case, it was his own money, not the public's.
My take on Tito:
If NASA begins to support space tourism, they will experience a huge backlash against their organization and lose much of their funding. The novelity of space tourists will quickly wear off, and soon people will realize their taxes are going to a program that can only be used by the super-wealthy. At that point, any other lofty goals NASA has will be history.
If NASA wants to continue as an organization under its current mission, it cannot support space tourism.
Of course, the question is then: Do we really want NASA around at all? It seems privatized access to space is the only long term solution.
It's funny because it's true. The AARP leaders would be licking their lips right now if they weren't afraid of cutting their tounge on their dentures. Unfortunately, the leaders tend to be "age-impaired" as well and will thus be gone before their organization reaches the zenith of its power. But they will still lay the foundation for the glorious empire of the 2010 AARP!
Quick question though, with all these new seniors, won't Florida get a bit overrun? Sure, overflow is already spilling into Arizona, but will that really be enough? There is only so much desert you know. Perhaps the AARP should look into leveraging its future power to purchase a small island or the like (possibly Australia due to Senior-friendly climate) for providing overflow maintanence.
I'll have to check Rudy Rucker out assuming I can find a book of his anywhere :)
Thanks.
Yes, it was research. It may not have been the most hard-hitting, or vital research, but comparing John Glenn to Dennis Tito is insulting. John Glenn earned his place in space. He risked his life to be the first man to orbit the Earth in a capsule that was little more than a projectile. He went back into space as a genuine hero to many Americans. Dennis Tito was nothing but a crass opportunist using his money to buy something he could never earn.
Gates cracked under the strain of having two much money and developed a split personality. The RMS persona is Gates in disguise when the mood spectrum swings. (Check the glasses, they don't change.)
Besides, you never see them together, do you?
-----------------
www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance
The Gathering isn't meant to be so much a "gamer" party as it is supposed to be for the Demo Scene .
Good examples of what demos are are here if you have a win32 or DOS box around.
More parties like Mekka, Assembly, The Party and others exist.
"In the past, it was only in science fiction novels that you could read about ordinary people being able to go to space," Nazarbayev told Tito. "But you laid the foundation for space tourism." Wait, wasn't Christa McAuliffe an ordinary person? I guess this lays the foundation for ordinary people coming back from space.
"I have news for you. The Americans PAID for the Russian module." I have some history for you. The Russians wouldn't be in the state they are in where they can't afford moduals if it hadn't been for Reagan purposely bankrupting them. I realize that is a simplifacation but there is some truth to it. As for the UN, yes it is payback; not for critisizing human rights abusers, but for having a greater than 2:1 ratio of the % of world air-pollution we produce, to our percentage of the world population. We also catagorically refuse to sign any treaty to reduce said population. Our new administration is evidence that undermines Darwinean Evolution too, I don't even want to get into that though.
"A witty saying proves nothing." - Voltaire
You know, it occurs to me that every person in America with a conection to NASA (like John Glenn) really had a lot to say about Tito getting into space. I've even seen /.ers bitching about it. Guess what, he went up in a RUSSIAN ship and had to sign a legally binding contract saying that he wouldn't touch anything on the American part of the station. What gives anyone out of Russia the right to act offended? Not only did Russia get over $20 million dollars out of the deal (and do they ever need all the cash they can get), they set a precedent for a method of helping to pay for missions in space. The fact that NASA tried to block him from going up (they expected Russia to fold too) and that every damn politician in this country passed judgement on it and acted like it was an area in which they had supreme authority reeks of haughtyness. Maybe things like this are why the US was voted off the Human Rights commission for the UN as well as the International Narcotics Control Board a few days ago. Just something to think about next time we feel like giving orders to another country.
"A witty saying proves nothing." - Voltaire